TJ Kirk Humiliates Deceased, Disturbs Bereaved With “Memorial Fundraiser” Benefitting No One Involved

Update 05/22/17: Heather Anable’s family has set up a GoFundMe to cover her final expenses. Donations will cover Anable’s funeral costs and any debts the family uncovers as they settle her estate. Since opening the fundraiser, the family has raised $2,100 of their $10,000 goal. Excess funds will be given to charity. In the spirit of giving credit where it’s due, I also note that TJ Kirk shared the family’s fundraiser on social media and donated $100 to the campaign. 

Two days ago, Aleksandr Kolpakov, who calls himself “Russian Deadpool” on YouTube, was arrested for allegedly shooting and killing Heather “Ivy” Anable,  his girlfriend and co-host. The two were collaborators on “The Skeptic Feminist” YouTube channel, along with a third woman who calls herself “Harley Quinn”, who was not present at the shooting.

Alt-right skeptics, atheists, and their fellow travelers had a mixed reaction to the news. Armored Skeptic and Mundane Matt decried the violence and sent heartfelt condolences, but some of their peers were unable to conceal their mirth about the news. Vee organized a live stream on his channel featuring Sargon and KT responding to the death and demise of The Skeptic Feminist channel with two and a half hours of crass jokes and wild speculation. Vee called this monetized hangout a “Tabloid discussion speculating about the skeptic feminist”. Now it would seem the Amazing Atheist wants to be on the front page of that discussion.

The Amazing Atheist, aka TJ Kirk, responded to the news of Heather Anabel’s death and Kolpakov’s arrest by releasing this video, titled “Fëminist YouTuber Murdërs Co-Host/Lover (Exclusive Details) – Heather Anable Memorial Fundraiser“. This video and the counterpart memorial fundraiser have a very melodramatic tone:

“Heather Anable was a feminist YouTuber who was murdered by her lover and fellow YouTuber Aleksandr Kolpakov (AKA SkepticFeminist). Aleksandr, who according to my sources may have been a veteran who suffered from PTSD, was doing shrooms with Heather on Saturday night, when he became obsessed with the notion that Heather was trying to kill him and that she had poisoned him. Feminist Laura Athena, another member of Aleksander’s polyamorous harem, was apparently skyping with Heather and Aleksandr during their mushroom trip, when Aleksander started freaking out and making bizarre accusations against Heather. Both girls attempted to calm Aleksandr down, but he was inconsolable with fear and rage. At around 9:30 PM, the skype call dropped. Shortly thereafter, Aleksandr shot Heather Anable multiple times in the neck and chest. With fresh bullet wounds, she fled from her apartment, still scrambling to escape—but she didn’t make it far. She collapsed in the parking lot and died scared and alone there, bleeding on the cement.”

TJ goes even further in the video, and presenting this whole story about a ring and Aleksandrs’ desire to make “their relationship more serious and possibly more exclusive, moving away from their polyamorous lifestyle” in the style of a sanctimonious radio preacher, suggesting ‘polyamorous jealousy’ led to Anable’s death. This seems salacious and gratuitous, as if TJ’s real purpose here is to humiliate the deceased by embellishing the most lurid details of her killing. TJ’s eulogy for Anable is comparatively short and glib compared to his accounts of her drug use and the intrigues of her relationship with Kolpakov.

None of these details – the drugs, the ring, or the jealous-lover angle were covered in the Denver Post. TJ says he knows this wealth of “exclusive details” about the killing because one of Anable’s friends told him. Indeed, if you believe TJ he knows more about the killing than the people most affected by it, to the point of knowing Kolpakov’s state of mind during the murder. I’m not sure how TJ could know that any more than he could know the innermost workings of Kolpakov’s relationship with Anable, regardless of who his source is. However, TJ Kirk seems enormously concerned with making his account of the murder the most credible one, to the extent that he’s accused “Harley Quinn”, the channel’s 3rd collaborator, of lying to protect Kolpakov.

Given the pitch video’s intense focus on Anable, her relationship with Kolpakov, her behavior on the night of her death, and her sex life, it seems cheap to me that TJ didn’t designate this side show’s proceeds to go to her burial. For now, whatever money is raised is being given to the National Coalition on Domestic Violence. I would call this a sour grapes fundraiser: TJ’s motive to hold it is to spread rumors about Anable and Kolpakov’s relationship in the wake of her death, and collecting funds for domestic violence prevention is a means to that end. Sargon of Akkad donated 100$ to it, perhaps to clear his conscience / buy an indulgence for laughing it up about the killing on Vee’s live stream the day before.

Meanwhile, those who actually knew Heather Anable in life, disturbed by the sensationalistic and gruesome tone of this fundraiser, have repeatedly asked TJ Kirk to remove her name and image from it. TJ responded by saying Anable’s a public figure, and he has a right to use her name and likeness to raise money for charity. TJ has spent a lot of time positioning himself as morally superior to anyone who disagrees with this fundraiser, on the grounds they don’t care about domestic violence prevention. (TJ Kirk, OTOH, apparently cares so much about domestic violence, he will meet you in Seattle and fight you.) So what we have here is a “memorial fundraiser” which humiliates the deceased, disturbs the bereaved, and which benefits a cause TJ the Rager can’t quite seem to abide by. This is why I question the sincerity of his motives.


Currently the proceeds of TJ’s memorial fundraiser total about a thousand dollars. That’s a trifle compared to his previous, more successful sour grapes fundraisers. Extraordinary People: Daring to Actually Help Women, raised $100K for women’s health care in developing countries. According to reports from when he ran it, TJ seems to have set up “Extraordinary People” in response to Feminist Frequency’s then-new “Ordinary Women” series. Apparently, TJ heard Anita was going to release some new videos, so he felt the need to belittle her project and responded by doing this.

But you know what? It would trouble me less if TJ Kirk spent the rest of his days raising enormous sums for worthy causes by indulging his obsession with Anita Sarkeesian with the brainless insects on his channel. It’s exploiting people he’s never met on the occasion of their deaths for comparatively piddling sums of money that I find truly objectionable.

Edit: Added additional background to the “Extraordinary People” event, 1 sentence to p 5


Bread and Circuses of Outrage


Carl Benjamin: selling a hateful ideology

Well, Sargon of Akkad is at it again. In an 11-minute video suggesting that all feminists have autism, and that feminism and autism should become synonymous, Carl Benjamin generated another big splash of attention, just like he did when he told Jess Phillips “I wouldn’t even rape you.” 

However for this particular drunken rant, Carl seems to be recycling his own material. In a two-year old video titled “Feminism is a mental illness”, Carl said “Feminism is a mental disease, and anyone who is a feminist, has this disease! O you liars, you outright flat fucking liars! That’s it, it’s a lie, feminism is a bunch of liars, and if they believe this that means they are mentally unhinged! I think we should start a petition, saying feminism should be classiffied as a mental illness, because it exhibits all the symptoms.”

Carl basically re-did a 3-minute video from two years ago into an 11-minute video, just to reframe his ideology with a Kiwi Farms/Encyclopedia Dramatica meme that anything bad & contemptible is “autistic”. Carl’s promoting that whole groups of people should be labeled mentally ill & marginalized on the basis of their political beliefs – which contradicts the libertarian ideology Sargon says he wants to promote.

Thankfully, the idea itself doesn’t work  – for example, Sargon’s petition to suspend social justice courses doesn’t even specify which courses should be dropped. The ideas themselves are more like fantasies than plans to change anything. Carl’s selling his viewers a fantasy of a world where feminism is a mental disease, but it also threatens western society. Carl’s fantasy feminists are easy to fear and hate, and he invites his viewers to see them as “Orwell’s nightmare come to life.”

The fantasy Sargon sells must be a compelling one – according to his Patreon, 630 people donate $1500 per video to hear more. I wonder if they know the activism is bunkum, or if they think that Sargon’s petitions and public tantrums accomplish something. The only notable thing Sargon has done so far is select individuals for abuse. So it may not matter that his goals will never be accomplished; that two years later he’ll release a longer video, saying the same things, not from a place of conviction but to increase his yields. If his audience only wants to scream along at Sargon’s fantasy of what feminists are like, I suppose it doesn’t matter that Sargon’s ideas are so impracticable.

At this point I think it’s safe to say Carl gets drunk and says knowingly vicious things because he wants the publicity. Ultimately it doesn’t matter to him that his ideas aren’t going to work (feminism isn’t going to go into the DSM-6, women’s studies is still being taught at uni). Because saying outrageous things like that gets him publicity, and because the attention of publicity means more subscribers to his Patreon, Carl will keep doing it. But it isn’t just Sargon of Akkad who’s doing this – look at Milo Yiannopoulos’s behavior, or look at Donald Trump’s rallies. They’re doing the exact same thing as Carl does, to even more spectacular results.

“I wouldn’t even rape you”: A Feminist Analysis

A couple of days ago Carl of Swindon, aka “Sargon of Akkad”, the full-time #Gamergate ideologue and professional victimizer, tweeted this comment out to his thousands of followers:

I wouldn’t even rape you, .

Wow. The result of Carl’s tweet was a firestorm of similar abuse from his fans, with scores of people weighing in on whether or not they would rape this particular female politician. Yet there’s a lot to unpack in his comment – about Carl’s beliefs about rape and how Carl himself perpetuates rape culture.

Now, I don’t believe Carl is himself a rapist. But he seems to want to have his cake and eat it too when it comes to rape – to belittle and minimize female fear of rape whilst also reminding women that rape’s still an option in the male toolkit. And in this moment at least, he was certainly willing to invoke rape rhetorically as a way of asserting his dominance over this MP, who’s on the record discussing her own experiences of being sexually assaulted as a teen.

It sends a message. Carl’s got the ear of hundreds of like-minded fellows, who pay him handsomely to act as the full-time MC of a virtual pillory. In this role he enjoys some power and influence – perhaps not of the same caliber as a member of Parliament, but much more than he would if he were still just some schlub in a pub. Saying he “wouldn’t even rape” a female MP is red meat for this crowd, and I suspect Carl knows this. In fact, I suspect he said it to get attention and further build his brand on the notoriety.

The central thesis of “Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape” states: “Rape is a conscious process by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.” This seems like the kind of statement Carl would scoff at, but it might be closer to the truth than he would like to admit. After all, Carl knows he need not be a rapist to cash in on the terror rape inspires – he merely needs to invoke it to make his point. What Carl doesn’t seem to realize is that in some substantial fraction of men are indeed rapists, and to them this public discussion of whether or not certain rape victims are worthy of a second assault normalizes and supports their pro-rape outlook. Carl does seem to get that he could “trigger” some rape victims with this kind of talk. Again, that kind of thing is red meat to his channel.

This isn’t the first time Carl’s staked out positions that seem indefensible to me. He also defended Elliot Rodger’s killing spree, and in that instance he seemed to accept that mass shootings were an inevitable (if regrettable) resolution to incel ennui. To me, that bodes poorly for Carl’s internal compass. After all, if some men will inevitably start mass killings because they feel lonely, doesn’t it follow that some men will inevitably rape?

Carl’s been defending this comment because it’s phrased in the negative, but this seems insufficient. In fact, the whole thing seems like sour grapes. After all, Jess Phillips isn’t banging Carl’s door in looking for ravishment. He’s offering this comment apropos of nothing – so it’s similar to catcalling, except with an implicit threat of violence. If you’re not planning on raping anybody, why the fuck are you bringing it up at all? To call attention the fact that you could rape, if you chose to? To remind a sexual assault victim of a previous trauma? To build your channel and make a bit more money? Do tell me, Carl – I am sincerely interested to know.