😵‍💫 Skitzocow Dan Cilley - autistic self-help guru/diet expert

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Here's a post from Dan's fan club. This guy sounds like a lolcow himself, though he'd probably say he's playing a character or pretending or whatever it is Dan's supporters usually say if you question them. I actually figured the pro-pedophilia stuff Dan's been saying lately would have gotten some notice even here on the Farms since that stuff crosses a line for most (Nick Bate) but I guess Dan's vids are just too long to sit through.


Cunt Blaster2 hours ago
She most likely wasn't thinking rationally at the time -- y'know, due to her condition, and all...

If Dan really is into pedophilia, then I can assure you, it's the kind of pedophilia where he isn't actually hurting anyone - where the child is a willing participant. I'm sure sex can feel good even to children, so I don't see the problem. Being asexual, however, I don't know what sex feels like, admittedly.

Dan would never hurt another human being.

ETA the follow-up, as this asexual "Cunt Blaster" cartoon is apparently a lurker:

Cunt Blaster
I'm not a lolcow.
 
Last edited:
strandedcastaway said:
Here's a post from Dan's fan club. This guy sounds like a lolcow himself, though he'd probably say he's playing a character or pretending or whatever it is Dan's supporters usually say if you question them. I actually figured the pro-pedophilia stuff Dan's been saying lately would have gotten some notice even here on the Farms since that stuff crosses a line for most (Nick Bate) but I guess Dan's vids are just too long to sit through.


Cunt Blaster2 hours ago
She most likely wasn't thinking rationally at the time -- y'know, due to her condition, and all...

If Dan really is into pedophilia, then I can assure you, it's the kind of pedophilia where he isn't actually hurting anyone - where the child is a willing participant. I'm sure sex can feel good even to children, so I don't see the problem. Being asexual, however, I don't know what sex feels like, admittedly.

Dan would never hurt another human being.

ETA the follow-up, as this asexual "Cunt Blaster" cartoon is apparently a lurker:

Cunt Blaster
I'm not a lolcow.
Click to expand...

This person is Colin Bender on Dan's FB friend's list. Not that it matters because he/she rarely posts anymore, but just FYI. They mentioned this once in their YouTube comments, but they just as well could be lying about that too.
 
rankmelon said:
This person is Colin Bender on Dan's FB friend's list. Not that it matters because he/she rarely posts anymore, but just FYI. They mentioned this once in their YouTube comments, but they just as well could be lying about that too.
Click to expand...

I believe this person is also posting as "Ali Sun" on DanCilley.com/social , I just made the connection because of the whole "asexual virgin" shtick.
 
Last edited:
In the Jan 6 video Kim gets upset at Dan angrily saying something like "You're a 30 year old going after 16 year olds". Dan responds with something like "You look like a 14 year old, that's why I like you. You look like you're in junior high". :P

Around that time Dan is talking about his upcoming trial about the "Child molestation/ annoying" charge. He says he will only lose if it's discovered he has an abnormal interest in young girls, which he claims he doesn't. He also says he wants to sue the police or whatever for the 'humiliation' they put him through (despite thoroughly enjoying the experience of being arrested and booked).

Dan makes an interesting observation that it was maybe the incident with the Dad (we talk about it on page 33 of this thread) that sparked the charge.
 
paperbag said:
In the Jan 6 video Kim gets upset at Dan angrily saying something like "You're a 30 year old going after 16 year olds". Dan responds with something like "You look like a 14 year old, that's why I like you. You look like you're in junior high". :P

Around that time Dan is talking about his upcoming trial about the "Child molestation/ annoying" charge. He says he will only lose if it's discovered he has an abnormal interest in young girls, which he claims he doesn't. He also says he wants to sue the police or whatever for the 'humiliation' they put him through (despite thoroughly enjoying the experience of being arrested and booked).

Dan makes an interesting observation that it was maybe the incident with the Dad (we talk about it on page 33 of this thread) that sparked the charge.
Click to expand...
Interesting that the police report posted here called it "stalking", but Dan is calling it "annoying someone".

If I can A-log for a minute, I don't think Dan should go to jail because he said hi to some 14-year-old, even if he did his pathetic flirting as he described. It's actually a shame for him that he turned off his camera during all recent "accosts" because he would have evidence that he didn't say anything wrong (if you believe Dan).

However, the fact that we have heard him say "it should be okay to finger a 6-year-old because they'd like it," (and then jerk off right after), his various justifications for dating minors, and how he continues to, well, cum on Kim against her will ALL VERY RECENTLY make me hope this will scare him away from approaching young girls. He's increasingly justifying his actions with younger and younger children and that does need to stop.
 
Last edited:
strandedcastaway said:
Interesting that the police report posted here called it "stalking", but Dan is calling it "annoying someone".
Click to expand...

Where was that police report posted? I thought we drew the "stalking" conclusion from the fact that bail was set to $50,000 and Stalking is a common charge that carries that bail amount. Another thing is, as ridiculous as "annoying a minor" sounds when Dan mentions it, that is actually a crime likened to molestation in California.

It's not just that Dan said Hi to a 14 year old. He actually said "You look really good today" and his entire motive was sexual. Though, there is a gray area in the law, being that you need to believe that the child is under the age of 18 in order to be guilty.

However, I don't think Dan would stop if a minor was interested, and therein lies the problem. The 14 year old might have been what triggered this, but there are countless other incidents with minors that Dan has found himself in.

Given the unnatural fascination with kids, how frequently he's found himself in these situations, and how likely he is to be motivated to continue if the court finds him innocent, I think it's important for dan to have some time away from society so he can possibly become rehabilitated, regardless of how far-fetched as that outcome may be.

Here's the law, give it a read. It's not that hard to understand.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=647.6.
 
it worries and saddens me to see where dan has reached. not long time ago dan was just that diet obsessed, cringe generating master accoster. now he's gone so far as to getting arrested. very sad
 
dancilleyfan said:
it worries and saddens me to see where dan has reached. not long time ago dan was just that diet obsessed, cringe generating master accoster. now he's gone so far as to getting arrested. very sad
Click to expand...

Mmm, I think there was always a risk of him getting arrested when he was in his accosting phases. I don't think he's really been doing anything different lately that caused him to be arrested.
 
Mr. Fitzpatrick:

upload_2017-1-11_12-17-11.png
 
ahyes said:
Where was that police report posted? I thought we drew the "stalking" conclusion from the fact that bail was set to $50,000 and Stalking is a common charge that carries that bail amount. Another thing is, as ridiculous as "annoying a minor" sounds when Dan mentions it, that is actually a crime likened to molestation in California.

It's not just that Dan said Hi to a 14 year old. He actually said "You look really good today" and his entire motive was sexual. Though, there is a gray area in the law, being that you need to believe that the child is under the age of 18 in order to be guilty.

However, I don't think Dan would stop if a minor was interested, and therein lies the problem. The 14 year old might have been what triggered this, but there are countless other incidents with minors that Dan has found himself in.

Given the unnatural fascination with kids, how frequently he's found himself in these situations, and how likely he is to be motivated to continue if the court finds him innocent, I think it's important for dan to have some time away from society so he can possibly become rehabilitated, regardless of how far-fetched as that outcome may be.

Here's the law, give it a read. It's not that hard to understand.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=647.6.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Dan has nothing else going on in his life that even remotely means that going to jail would seriously negatively impact his life, but jail time *might* just get him to stop his behavior. And when this behavior is likely to result in sex, perversion, and perhaps violence with minors, he needs to go to jail. Absolutely needs to go to jail. If that's the only way to get him to see that he can't do what he's doing, since moral and ethical appeals have zero impact on him, then, yeah, he needs to do time. Whatever sympathy I have for him is quickly replaced with sympathy for the woman/girl he encounters at the wrong time.
 
ahyes said:
Where was that police report posted? I thought we drew the "stalking" conclusion from the fact that bail was set to $50,000 and Stalking is a common charge that carries that bail amount. Another thing is, as ridiculous as "annoying a minor" sounds when Dan mentions it, that is actually a crime likened to molestation in California.
Click to expand...
I was taking it from what was on page 34 of this thread. The bail is $50K, that's the bail for stalking, so I assumed that was the charge and not "annoying".

WEEDle said:
Is he the blue hedgehog? Danichu?
Click to expand...
Yes, Andrew Fitzpatrick is on the left, sorry for not clarifying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom