Thursday, June 26, 2008

More fun with Cheryl

Left: Presidential candidate Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff (aka Heart) on SEX-TV, with two of her eleven children.


Heart, aka Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff, now has five websites (!) to talk about how wonderful she is. (two more linked below)

After she announced she was "running for president"--I did a demolition piece on her, which I think said it all. Until now, I had little to add to that. People told me I should lay off her, that the worst thing you can do to a pathological attention-seeker with Narcissistic Personality Disorder is to keep feeding the "LOOK AT ME!" jones. So, I stopped mentioning her. She gets kind of boring after awhile anyway, as most narcissists do.

And now, I find a Technorati link to my blog from her newest website, titled FIGHT THE LIES. Apparently she has already removed the link, which is good, because I DO NOT WANT HITS from her wacky Ellen Jamesian faction. Nonetheless, I will respond to the page she obviously claims was inspired by me.

First of all, is there no END to the self-aggrandizing "I'm suffering for women!" chatter from this person? In my piece linked above, I chronicled Cheryl's so-called (ha!) shift from extreme Christian fundamentalism to extreme Second-Wave feminist fundamentalism. I am still struck by the similarities--the love of suffering, the tireless claims of martyrdom, the endless passing of the collection plate (more about which in due course), the hagiography and colorful twisting of the (extremely suspicious) biography, the various poses with her 11 children as props (bringing to mind the saintly and ever-maternal expression of the Blessed Mother in Roberto Ferruzzi's MADONNA OF THE STREETS) and the continual rattling on about her hard work and self-sacrifice, all she does for Jesus... oops, I mean WOMYN.

Meanwhile, the viciousness towards women who are not like her, continues unabated. In fact, FIGHT THE LIES (the title sounds exactly like the name of a Jack Chick comic or religious tract, doesn't it?), seems directed to those of us who have already been duly banned from her site and have therefore found it necessary to defend ourselves against her false accusations in our censored absence. FIGHT THE LIES is basically a Calvinist-feminist attack on heretics... it is the equivalent of her own church's excommunication of HER: Oh goody, now I get to do the same thing to other people! (NOTE: Heart probably doesn't have anything nice to say about that old sexist, Friedrich Nietzsche, but when he said "In destroying monsters, we must take care not to become monsters ourselves"--he was talking about fascistic, fundamentalist zealots like Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff and their total lack of self-awareness.)

Like the Quiverfull faction that created her (and that's the link to her second new blog, BTW) Heart writes like she is always under attack by the Dark Side. It's a war between Good and Evil, and Heart is always on the side of the angels. AND HOW DARE YOU SUGGEST OTHERWISE, you cynic! Heart freely and proudly admits that she perpetually passes the collection plate, because she dedicates her LIFE (like a missionary) to covering issues for womyn. Interestingly, she recently asked for money to get a fallen tree moved out of her driveway, for instance, saying it was the only way off of "her land"--neglecting to consider that many of us don't own any land at all. I am not sure how this tree-removal benefits all women, although I realize, it benefits Heart, which to her is one and the same. She assures us she is not a millionaire, although she DOES admit she won a very large settlement from the Calvary Chapel fundies, who are therefore bank-rolling her whole enterprise. (Now, there's an interesting thought.) But how much, she assures us, is none of your business! (The net accounts say it was over a million; I assume the lawyers took their share.)

Heart doesn't seem to understand: She is an offensive, intolerant, judgmental, nasty, vicious, exclusive fundamentalist, only this time it's for her version of (rather zany, sometimes amusing) radical feminism. She was Wild-for-Jesus, now she is Wild-for-Womyn, and she hasn't missed a beat in the transition. Her very patriarchal, top-down approach is stylistically exactly the same. The finger-pointing, the judging, the slut-shaming, the sneering at the womyn who do not measure up, is the same as it ever was. If Heart can't be Quiverfull Queen, she will move on over to Valley of the Amazons (waves at AntiPrincess!--a favorite book of ours!) where she can brag without commercial interruption, and refuse to use the preferred pronouns of transgendered people in PEACE AND QUIET.

Cheryl has traded in one uncompromising, dogmatic philosophy for another one, and that's all she has done. She has not appreciably changed since being a devoted Quiverfull wife, traveling the country and speaking at podiums for Dr Dobson.

What Cheryl/Heart really needs to do is go back to reporting on women around the world, as she does on Womensspace, and cut out the self-aggrandizement and the self-centered gibbering about her greatness. These days, there seems to be less and less actual news about women on Heart's website (which is something she did do very well, when she could keep her fundie sensibility out of it) and more, more, more about her self, self, self. This dorky-assed "presidential campaign"--for instance. Just another way to preen and pose, whilst endlessly burbling about how much she does for THE WOMYNS!!!!!!!

But I gotta say--do her Ellen Jamesians know that she is on SEX-TV? If not, let me give them the heads-up. I have rarely seen anyone do the Madonna of the Streets thing as well, particularly on a SEX blog!

Strange bedfellows! But Heart, who easily reconciled Andrea Dworkin and Dr Dobson back in the day (she claims), knows all about that.


queen emily said...

She's not doing for the womyn, she's doing it for the lulz (ours).

Next meal on her ideological buffet: 4chan haxor!

That'd be genius.

belledame222 said...

-snerk snerk snerk- yep, all of that.

and yeah, to give the dorkus her due, as long as she sticks to actual not-often-covered stories, she's, well, plausible (the commentary is often another question). But I mean--well, asking her to cut out the ego is, well, really unlikely, I think. With most of her posts, even the ones that aren't ostensibly about her, I always kind of hear the theme music from Gone With The Wind or something similar playing in the background.

"As Goddess Is My Witness, I Will Never Be Patriarchal Again!"

'k then.

and before that: Aimee Semple MacPherson. It's like, not only did she go from one fundamentalist orthodoxy to another, she went from one in which women aren't supposed to openly lust after power and individual attention to another. How else do you explain someone who can straightfacedly disavow any approval of "power," inability to be punitive of her kids or even her sheep (I forget the exact post, no doubt moar slander here, but it was lulzy as I recall), but still puts in a bid for POTUS? well, I mean besides "aliens made her do it," "too much fluoride," and all the other obvious ones.

belledame222 said...


can't watch it right now, but the video is on something called SEX TV?!


ArrogantWorm said...

That's a helluva lot of blogs for one individual to talk about themselves.

I've 3, but one is regulated for selling art as a source of income (haven't figured out how to take decent pictures of said art yet, methinks it'll be a while) one's a general blog and the other is a site devoted to the learning and encouraging of reading, speaking and writing. Since everything is new for someone, it's a bit of a long haul, but inching forward all the same.

Anyway, her behavior seems to be escalating, s'disturbing. That or she's just moved out of all those private boards that're constantly mentioned. You'd think she'd want to stay there to preserve her righteousness of belief from the verbal sticks us peons would hurl at her theories, but no.

I'd also be interested in reading about this reconcillation between Dobson and Dworkin. Hallelujah, a miracle!

Daisy said...

I meant "reconcile" as in, she seemed to reconcile their ideas, not them as people, don't think.

Then again, you never know!

Heart claims she read Andrea Dworkin way back in the 70s and that Dworkin's anti-porn arguments words made sense to her even as a Quiverfull wife.

That's probably true.

Renegade Evolution said...

to be fair, Heart has never censored any comment I've made on her cite. Allowing me to get attacked and saying nothing after doing so, sure, but she has published the few comments I've made there. Once, she, em, chastized me for the truck comment (no link), then kinda used my bad night at work for her own reasons in a fashion (with a link), but yeah, she's never not published my comments.

I do note though, more than a few times, she's posted something with the whole "what do the pro-pornies think of THIS?" line, and as well, the only, actually, self identified PRO-PORNY in the whole class, I answered, with links and everything....yet, no...dialouge.

I dunnae understand why people ask questions they apparently don't want answers to. Shit, when I ask a question, answers are GOOD things...

but yeah, I'm whacky like that.

WRT to the tree, what, in all her Womyn Power Training...she never learned how to use a chainsaw? Shit, when the revolution comes, women are gonna have to know how to use chainsaws. Change tires too, which is why my feminism stresses women learn to do those things. No way we can beat the pat with no cars or chainsaws! Shit! See what my all male and me shop class did for me? I can move trees land?

I can't wait to see what I'm accused of's like the lottery!

Daisy said...

can't watch it right now, but the video is on something called SEX TV?!

Yeah, with a lesbian couple going at in in the margins on the first page I clicked on.

I dunno for certain, but they look like patriarchally-identified lesbians to me!!!!


Gollee, I hope her campaign contributors don't find out.

thene said...

WRT to the tree, what, in all her Womyn Power Training...she never learned how to use a chainsaw?

Word. Colour me confused too...neither she nor anyone in her womynly gift economy owns & can use a chainsaw, but gender doesn't exist so that's totally not about gender or conforming to stereotypes of femininity or anything like that. It's just, errr, oh GIVE HER MONEY why don't you, PLEASE? She needs it so desperately! Chainsaws have boy-cooties.

GallingGalla said...

This being the first time I've seen a photo of Ms. Seelhoff, the thing that strikes me: she's ... so ... femme!!

I thought the radfems were all about the Dangrz of Beeng Femme "Ur under the thrall of Teh Pat if you wear a dress"...

belledame222 said...

to be fair, I'd probably be nervous around a chainsaw too, being fairly Private Benjamin-ish; then again, I also think, what're eight kazillion kids and grandkids and InvisiHusband -and- Community Of Wymyn -for-?

oh btw, I actually think I've been more vicious-er toward her, or at least as, as the other way around, at least -personally-. I don't doubt she probably would've just ignored me if I hadn't taken her on; thing was, I took her on in the first place precisely because she was being a gratuitous fuck toward some of the other -women- (without qualifications, Heart) on that list.

personally, though, ftr: I'm Not Bovvered. even if/when she does try to go after me directly or indirectly; it's like being savaged by a dead sheep.

belledame222 said...

GG: isn't she just, though? but, she wants to -do away with gender-, does Mrs. Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff. can't wait for it.

belledame222 said...

Yeah, with a lesbian couple going at in in the margins on the first page I clicked on.


Daisy said...

And the video shows her with her loving husband Rick; he is stirring soup in a concerned way. So, you see? Men can be NICE and HELP WITH COOKING and be generally unoppressive, right, Heart? Otherwise, why did you include him in the video? (Where are your diehard lesbian-feminist compatriots? You couldn't find a single lesbian who wanted to be in the video?)

The surprises just keep on coming, pardon expression.

GG, yes, it's interesting, isn't it? She's allowed to wear dresses and be feminine, but if a transwomyn wears a dress, she is somehow "appropriating" dresses!

Or something like that.

Kristin said...

Did y'all note that she's got what she calls a new comments "policy" up?

It's actually about two single spaced pages long with multiple policy points. I'd need to reread the whole damn thing every time I wanted to comment... If I were going to comment. Note that it's "no one else's soapbox," except her own of course. Not sure why she gets to call it "Women's Space" since that's the case, but... Oh RIGHT, her soapbox speaks for ALL OF US. Or something.

I mean, look... Anyone who feels she's important enough to warrant TWO SINGLE SPACED PAGES of comment policy deserves our full mockery.

ArrogantWorm said...

She's going to need to censor herself then, cuz she's transphobic as hell. I also see, seventh comment down, that "White Feminists" are in quotes. So, uh can't exist as part of a label, or group of people, or what? Because it sure ~looks~ like part of a label and part of a group o' people from this direction. Fifth comment down means Heart should probably not post on her own blog. She's going to need to rewrite her comment policy if she actually wants to attempt to abide by her own new rules.

Drakyn said...

Daisy, apparently you is a liar for saying Heart has attacked other bloggers. (lie #4)
She only attacks "rapists, predators, warmongers, sexists, misogynists, pimps, pornographers, murderers, men who sell women down the river or throw us under the bus, of course."
So I wonder which headings Little Light and Bint Alshamsa fall under?

belledame222 said...

And the video shows her with her loving husband Rick; he is stirring soup in a concerned way.

O'Rly. And this video was made, when, exactly?

yeah, my browser doesn't like their video player apparently; it sounds Special, though...

belledame222 said...

So, uhhh, Heart, this "Sex TV" that is promoting your video: I take it they are -not- pornographers or pimps? Just checking, you know...

nexy said...

i usually avoid commenting on posts that involve heart. i'm really conflicted.

i don't believe heart is transphobic. i do believe she calls out some of her commenters with less force compared to the force she uses on commenters who exhibit "phobic" comments on other issues.

that said, i no longer comment on her blog because she edits my comments, and has allowed her commenters to derail the focus of threads that involve trans issues, which seem to shift over to a direct attack on me and my trans-ness,

at one time, i believed that her intelligence and fairness would allow for a constructive dialog between trans people and rad fems. i no longer believe that to be possible, at least with her doing the moderating.

Lisa Harney said...

Yeah, that would be due to her transphobia. I don't disagree with you a lot, but I have to on this one.


* Heart has explained that if a trans person has sex with a cis person without disclosing trans status (specifying trans woman with a lesbian woman, for example), that this is rape.

* Heart defends Mary Sunshine, Lucky, etc. and their use of transphobic language, in the thread about little light's "Seam of Flesh and Scales" and Robin Morgan's "Monster" poem.

She also indicates that she does not believe that trans women are subject to the degree of bigotry we have to deal with.

She also makes it clear that she does not consider trans women real women.

She also makes it clear that trans women do not belong in women only spaces.

She's a transphobe, she just tries to sound nice about it, whether she truly believes she's not transphobic or whether it's for the sake of plausible deniability.

She also makes a point of stressing that trans women's lives separate them from real women, making a litany out of it: "Women, born female, raised from birth as girls or women," and that sort of thing - just so we're clear.

She also insists that trans women have male privilege and benefit from the patriarchy. She implies that the patriarchy goes out of its way to accommodate trans women because they're "factually male."

She refers to trans women as "factually male."

Please, go read the entire Robin Morgan post. It's very enlightening.

nexy said...

yeah, like i said, i'm conflicted.

totally agree with you about her defense of transphobic language. i was trying to be diplomatic.

and yes, she does make a distinction between cis woman and trans women. and you know, so do i. though she and i probably see that difference through an entirely different lens.

and yes, she supports women-only space, and supports trans exclusion. on that point, i support the right of anyone to make space as they see fit, and to exclude anyone they want, for any reason.

regarding the whole "real women" and trans women have male privilege thing, yeah, her semantics can suck when it comes to trans people. in the conversations i've had with her, in a one-on-one basis, i just never got that from her. maybe when she's talking with a real person, she tempers her views.

and the factually male thing, ok, you got me on that one.

and i've read the robin morgan post. i've been trying to block it out of my mind ever since.

Lisa Harney said...

I don't mean a valid distinction. I mean a hierarchical and bigoted distinction in which trans women are clearly and distinctly labeled and defined as false. Where we're accused of "appropriating and colonizing womanhood" if we try to say we have similar experiences to cis women.

She defines trans women as outside womanhood, as taking no part of womanhood. It's a huge concession on her part to acknowledge that trans women actually experience sexism (which she's done), but she tries to ease that by insisting that trans women have more privilege in society than women, by positioning trans women as part of the class that oppresses women - as men.

As for the women-only space, it's not "women-only space" if it excludes trans women. It's "some women-only space." Or "cis women-only space." It's discrimination and segregation.It's constantly shifting the goalposts so the definition of "woman" conveniently excludes those of us who are trans to best keep us out.

And then she gets to frame our desire for inclusion as "males invading women's spaces," which she then directly relates to men invading women's spaces.

It's the same as white and male supremacy - most people who say and do racist or sexist things aren't blatantly vicious about it. They try to sound polite, try to make it sound "reasonable" or "logical." They make arguments that people of color or women are just oversensitive when incidents of racism or sexism are pointed out. Most of it's subtle cruelty, stuff that the privileged can say "Well, maybe that's not what was really meant" or "She didn't really mean any harm."

But it's not just that, it's explicit at times.

Like this comment here in which Heart says this about a trans woman complaining about suffering sexism on a bus:

"Which of us would EVER tell some random man on a bus he can sit next to us! And why don’t we? Because he may well sexually harrass or assault us. As Satsuma says Mexico City joins a growing list of cities worldwide which have woman-only coaches, and why? Because women do not want to be accosted, assaulted, raped, riding the bus! We are not “flattered” that some perv thinks we are female. We do not write blog posts like this pornographically detailing our experiences of sexual harassment."

But the really juicy part is only six days later, when Heart posts this:

"How disgusting is it to have to worry not only about being groped, harrassed, assaulted, treated rudely, subjected to sexist commentary while commuting – last week during my own bus commute, I was subjected to a male passenger’s loud, obnoxious, animated, misogynist descriptions of his visits to a strip bar and his complaints (directed to the entire back section of the bus like he was a fracking entertainer or something) that he always manages to show up on days the “ugly girls” are working — we also have to worry about being surreptitiously filmed with the films posted to youtube for the enjoyment of perps, rapists and misogynists everywhere!"

What the hell? I mean seriously, what the hell?

If Heart complains about being groped or harassed on a bus, then oh my god stop the presses, it's horrific sexism that must be stopped. If a trans woman describes how she's harassed on a bus, it's pornography, it's her own fault for letting a man sit next to her, it's just downright not her place.

I just don't see how there can be any question as to whether Heart's transphobic. Everything she says that sounds remotely nice is also condescending and highly conditional.

Drakyn said...

Daisy, I sometimes forget that others don't see Heart's bigotry and bullying tactics. I was first introduced to her when she derailed BFP's "fuck you" to Twisty's crowd on the Lipstick thread, and was only re-introduced through her attack on Little Light. I never saw her as a good feminist or read any of her posts before that.
Recently in another community there was a whole post (originally about her bid for pres) that was pretty much taken over to educate others about how transphobic she and feminists like her can be. There were several links throughout the post and other situations were mentioned. Like when she copy/pasted one trans*woman's account of harassment to make fun of her and other trans*women for the amusement of her commenters.
Something I see as nothing more than a transphobic and transmisogynist attack on a completely uninvolved and innocent woman.

Lisa Harney said...

Just to be clear, I do think harassment on buses is abusive, sexist, and must be stopped. The difference between Heart and myself is that I do not believe that whether one is allowed to perceive this as abuse is determined by whether one is trans or not.

Lisa Harney said...

Okay, The Margins membership policy:

The Moderators of these Boards, Heart and Char, have made a decision concerning the boundaries of The Margins as women-only space.

As the members know, these Boards have always been women-only space. In the past, when men have posted on these Boards they have been asked to leave. Designating this space as women-only was always meant to accomplish several things: To provide a sense of community among women. To provide a unique and exclusive focus on women. But it was meant primarily to afford ourselves, as women, the opportunity and freedom to self-define -- ourselves, our issues and, perhaps most importantly, our own space and boundaries. At the inception of these Boards, it was unclear if the women-only policy would include trans, either transsexual or transgender individuals. Thus, these Boards have, for the most part, been open to trans people who have posted here. After a great deal of thought, discussion, and interaction with the "trans debate" here, at the Ms. Boards, and in other online forums, Heart and I have reached a decision that women-only space means what it says. Only women may post here. This does not include trans, either transsexual or transgender, individuals. We will not go into tortured "theoretical" dissertations on who "is" a woman, who may "self define" as woman, what a woman "is", the presence of certain chromosomes or not, the presence of certain genitalia or not, or the fact of surgery -- or not. Nor will we attempt to "justify" this decision on the basis of something like "female energy" or "women's unique spirit" or whatnot. We find these "debates" largely ridiculous, antithetical to feminism and/or women's interests, and diverting of the purpose of these boards. And we reject in whole the theory that underpins the idea and practice of trans, both transsexuality and transgender. We find any form of trans or genderqueer to be little more than more gender enforcement, more purveying of gender stereotypes, and more confining and disrespectful of women *as women* rather than less any of those things.

We believe it is legitimate and necessary that we, as women, define our our space in ways that meet our needs. We do not believe that doing so constitutes anything like bigotry or prejudice.

We respectfully ask that our definition of our own space be respected.

Char and Heart
Margins Boards

Full stop, this says trans women aren't women, period, end of discussion, no debate.

She's not saying "We only want women who were born female posting here" she's saying "We only want women posting here, and trans women aren't women."

That's transphobia.

When Heart says she's not transphobic, she's lying through her teeth.

Lisa Harney said...

And I like that bit toward the end:

"We do not believe that doing so constitutes anything like bigotry or prejudice."

Of course, everyone knows you get a free pass for your blatant, unapologetic bigotry if you say you're not really being blatantly, unapologetically, bigoted.

queen emily said...

I'd never seen that policy before. Bloody hell, that's surprisingly blatant for her.

Normally it's *smile* *smile* *slip in the knife*.

Daisy said...

"Only women may post here. This does not include trans, either transsexual or transgender, individuals. We will not go into tortured "theoretical" dissertations on who "is" a woman, who may "self define" as woman, what a woman "is", the presence of certain chromosomes or not, the presence of certain genitalia or not, or the fact of surgery -- or not."

That's all pretty damn funny, considering she DID just proclaim who a woman is, by stating who can or can not post on her site, now didn't she?

She announces "only women may post here" and then pointedly excludes transwomyn? I'd say that's right in your face.

Disgusting bigot.

Renegade Evolution said...

See, I remember Heart Ripping on AP and LL, then, there was this charming episode as well

Safe space for women my ass...women who are trans, or into BDSM, or "pro-porn" or whatever? Nah, not them. And she does very little to reign that shit in. People on "the right side" can attack and free will and she says very little. Yep, sure enough, people get attacked on my blog, but I never claimed to run a safe space FOR WOMEN, you know?

belledame222 said...

I'd never seen that policy before. Bloody hell, that's surprisingly blatant for her.

Normally it's *smile* *smile* *slip in the knife*.

yeah, but every once in a while the mask slips. mostly i think when she's VERY ANGRY, (Marvin Martian voice), VERY ANGRY INDEED.

belledame222 said...

DAisy: well, there's the fundamentalist coming out hard. We will not entertain debate: THIS is the TRUTH, and the TRUTH is the TRUTH. period, end. the mystical ineffability of Woman, which mumble yes obviously comes with the biological package, but she's not even gonna argue about that part anymore, because then someone might argue back, and then it might not be so obvious that the TRUTH is just the TRUTH.

So sayeth the Heart.

belledame222 said...

in a one-on-one basis, i just never got that from her. maybe when she's talking with a real person, she tempers her views.

Maybe she does. Most people do, if they're at all politic, which she is.

Just speaking for myself, in general: I've met people who've said the most appallingly homophobic (if couched in oily weasel terms a lot of the time--not always), but were capable of being perfectly nice and friendly on a one to one basis.

"can smile and smile and still be a villain."

Or, okay, if one doesn't want to think of them as a "villain:" "can still cheerfully throw me under the bus, still smiling and maybe even making moues of regret that it had to be so."

Personally, I don't have time for that shit. It's a wide wide world, and there are plenty of decent, even wonderful people who'll love and accept me; I do not need to keep any sort of relation with spiritual misers and fair weather 'friends,' even if they do play "nice" on TV once in a while. Life is too short, and they're not my table, sorry: I don't owe them anything.

nexy said...

yeah, there's no argument to that. i stand corrected.

Anonymous said...

Um, this is her son. and i was just wondering if you could take down that picture of me? Im just not very comfortable with it on there like that.


DaisyDeadhead said...

Dear "son" who writes like an adult: Do children your age write "um" now? Pardon my skepticism. How old are you? What grade are you in? Homeschooling has been very very good to you.

Have your mother write me an email and we'll chat. I don't take orders (or requests) from people posing as minor children on the net. In fact, I think such a ruse is pretty damn transparent. I didn't print your name, and nobody knows what it is, "anonymous"...

DaisyDeadhead said...

BTW "anonymous", how'd you feel about being on SEX-TV? Are they taking down your video and photo from there too?

Anonymous said...

thats okay. i just typed "um" cause thats just usually how i type on the internet, anyway. i see your point and its okay if you keep it on there. i was just wondering

Anonymous said...

by the way. im 14 and i am in 8th grade.

Anonymous said...


It's so fucking funny how you're ranting and complaining on and on about someone...that you don't even really know. You don't even know the HALF of who she is. What she rants and complains about is nothing you have to go and talk shit about. You don't have to read or listen or talk to her. This is your little way of getting attention, haha.

The fact that you do this, shows how immature and impolite you are, it shows who you really are behind your fake fucking personality and your fake anything. You probably have a fake smile, too. Don't blame you. Everyone does. No one is really real anymore.

But, that's getting off the subject.

What right do you have to go talk shit about someone's daughter, mother, grandmother, aunt...? Does it make you feel like your the best thing when people agree with you and when people cheer you on? It's pathetic, honestly, it is.

You're a rude, impolite, unfeeling person. I really despise who you lead on to be.

And, I couldn't help but read the comments her son left. All I have to say to you is...what the hell is wrong with you?
"Dear "son" who writes like an adult: Do children your age write "um" now?"?
Who the fuck DOESN'T write like that now?
Love, not all 12, 13, 14, or 15 year old's are stupid. Some actually QUITE mature, if you ask me.
But, that would just be me complimenting, or not complimenting, myself. Because I am 14 as well.
Home schoooling? What's wrong with it? Why are you so immature? Why are you sooo into making OTHER people feel like shit? What does that give you? It really annoys me. And this probably seems pretty stupid coming from a child, right?
Well, I couldn't contain myself. It really, really bugs me. Not to mention disturbs me.

You make me feel sick to my stomach, you make me want to cry. Really, you do. What you say and how you act really, really sadden me. It really makes me upset, and it makes me feel like you...are a non compassionate, non sympathetic person.
It's sick, and morbid, and twisted.

Do you think of the impressions you put on people? On her? On yourself?
If I was doing this, and I thought about it, I'd be crying. I would.

And, by the way, smartass. A lot of kids write well now. It's a pretty "in" thing. Haha:)

Uhm. Yeah, I guess the last thing, and the most immature thing I have to say to you is: I really, really despise and loath you.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Heart: I really, really despise and loath you.

Same back atcha, Heart.

BTW, you didn't answer the question. Did you take the photo and video down from Sex-TV or not?
All that self-pitying blabber, and you still can't answer a direct question? That's how I know it's you and no one else. People always give themselves away with their habits like that.

Boo fucking hoo. Please fuck off, Heart. You convince no one with your bizarre, narcissistic personality disordered routine, except that maybe 4chan needs to visit your website again. ;)

And hey, didya see what you inspired? Thankfully, I did, and I was therefore prepared for your attempts at bullying.

"Now, be gone, before somebody drops a house on you too!"

Bryce said...

D - its still on SEXTV because I just looked it up. i guess cheryl isnt worried about perverts (like me) seeing her son there so i wouldnt take this bs too serious.

a *little* obvious!

Anonymous said...

Not a little obvious, Bryce, a lot.

"And, I couldn't help but read the comments her son left."

ROFL. She's lost her fucking mind. Maybe if we're real lucky she'll blow her brains out and stop wasting natural resources. But there's those 11 puppies she popped out so her carbon footprint is the size of New Guinea.

"If I was doing this, and I thought about it, I'd be crying. I would."

And if your son actually finds this post some day and realizes his mother is pimping him, then what? If I wantonly pimped my son and lied about his emotions, I'd be crying. I would.

ROFL. What a walking sitcom.

Renegade Evolution said...

"You make me feel sick to my stomach, you make me want to cry. Really, you do. What you say and how you act really, really sadden me. It really makes me upset, and it makes me feel like you...are a non compassionate, non sympathetic person.
It's sick, and morbid, and twisted."

Wait, wait, wait, you OBVIOUSLY have me and Daisy confused in your mind. Daisy is one of the nicest, coolest, most understanding and willing to listen people out there. I'm the twisted one...speaking of twisted though, because hell yeah, I know it when I see it...

Let's talk about "Heart"...

She's a meglomaniacal asshole, to put it bluntly. She calls people out, attacks them, allows them to be attacked, hacks apart any comment (or outright censors them) that the called out parties try to make, even if they are completely civil, because that way woohoo, heart gets to look like hero and everyone else gets to look like a monster! Or wait, she makes threads where supposedly the voices of women who are now or have been in the sex industry are to be heard, but NO, apparently only the voices of those women who agree with heart are important enough to be heard...anyone else, even If They Have Been A Victim of Forced Sexual Labor, Torture, and Imprisonment...well shit, they don't matter and get censored or edited. SHOOT, even when her own flock ask questions and demand answers, well, fuck, if those who are not Hearts chosen women try to reply their words never see daylight! EVEN when they are totally civil.

You want a goddamn taste of Heart's fairness and compassion and love for all women? Here's a taste, cupcake.

and there is plenty more where that came from.