Well i at least know what i'm doing.
Going on his channel and report as many of his videos as i can.
Hopefully YouTube will do something about it.
Edit: Reporting comments as well because they're horrid as well.
Edit 2: "Please don't tell me she's already 10" View attachment 9022994
Is 10 really too old for this guy? What?
Here's a half phonebook because Idk about email reverse search:
Email: bullybreedgurl@gmail.com - this must be the most obvious sign this is the same person btw. If anyone have any helpful info on this really be greatly appreciated it & helpful.
Name: Vicki Hyde
Location: New Haven, CT MySpace / GhostA/ ArchiveIs
Def not 50 haha, But i give her to someone that mentally braindead and unstable like 25 or 29. specially given on how many gooning have towards shotas calling them twinks just to overshadow the pedophilic intentions for whatever non-sense or zoophilia or the desire to be raped because I guess little attention or lack of ethics given on her childhood.
Thanks a lot for your hard work really appreciate it.
It's very possible the MySpace account belongs to someone else with the same username. Keep in mind the MySpace breach is from 2008. Breach results with that email also show the password "roxruckus1".
It's either a false positive or she looks and acts much younger than she really is. Until something solid comes up linking the two I will assume this email belongs to somebody else and "Victoria Hyde" is likely a faildox.
It's very possible the MySpace account belongs to someone else with the same username. Keep in mind the MySpace breach is from 2008. Breach results with that email also show the password "roxruckus1". View attachment 9024127
It's either a false positive or she looks and acts much younger than she really is. Until something solid comes up linking the two I will assume this email belongs to somebody else and "Victoria Hyde" is likely a faildox.
Because i covered this whore 2 time many pages ago, Here's a 3rd coverage but this time for the sake of it including a face phonebook for the sake of it.
Basically this whore supports pedophilia and normalize sex with young boys & childrens even.
Can't find email to do a decent research, but even the discord it's full of the nasty content which is by no surprise of anyone because of being a e-whore.
Wish the worst could happen to these pieces of shit instead of being put into the victim chair just because of being a female.
Pedos must be treated equally and given the same punishment for it.
I don't understand. She looks like the kind of women who can get any man she wants. Why does she choose kids? And why does she hide an overly sexualized VTuber avatar? What is this mental disability? Does this behavior stem from some kind of childhood trauma? These are legit questions?
It should also be noted that he bookmarked and admitted to bookmarking a page that was selling a child sex doll, and it's visible in a video he posted.
Phonebook confirmation:
SenseiCorrGroup, which Giovanni may have been part of, has also deleted their Xitter account (presumably due to the Snarky Snappy's persecution).
It should also be noted that he bookmarked and admitted to bookmarking a page that was selling a child sex doll, and it's visible in a video he posted.
I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. Lolicons make it hard.
Let's feature a new specimen, Siri or @Sirikamiloli. Siri has a thread defending lolicon with a bunch of sources and information. You can read it, if you'd like.
It's filled with the standard lolicon arguments. Let's examine one of them: Archive
He says elsewhere: Archive Archive
He uses an image to demonstrate this. It is a real woman.
(Overlay is my edit)
However, the head is made noticeably bigger. While you could call this an "artistic exaggeration", I'd call it part of the fantasy. If you do any comparisons between loli OCs and actual Japanese women (without growth disorders) that are extremely short, you'll find that the actual women have significant smaller heads relative to their body. It's pure gaslighting to pretend otherwise. Siri realizes this. Archive
He's done a neat magic trick. Petite women are not the same as children. Head to body ratio and big eyes doesn't immediately signal that a character is a child. And being attracted to a character who's a minor doesn't necessarily make you attracted to their age in particular. By tackling each of these arguments separately he can safely put it all together and then say that all of these have 0 correlation with (fictional) children.
The TRUTH is that all that is irrelevant, even to him. Why? Because he will condone any sort of sexualization of (fictional) minors, regardless of how much they're inspired by real children. He will then play dumb or deflect when pushed into a corner.
Let's go to exhibit A- Link
This post is gone, and I don't have an archive. But Siri did archive it for us.
Archive (Censored the title but it's in the archive)
The tweet doesn't state WHICH page @Ultimat3dge posted a screenshot of, but I can help with that. It was a screenshot of this text:
They're in elementary school, putting their age somewhere between 6 and 12. We can be good faith (we shouldn't be) and say that these xeets Archive Archive Archive Archive
looking for the original source are expecting the body of a short Japanese woman.
(You'll have to take my word on this, but there were more xeets when the post wasn't deleted that expressed they wanted a source for the porn or thought the idea was hot.)
The body type of the character is shown in the source (SFW),
and the character clearly has no pubescent features. Maybe these lolicons disliked it? These xeets imply otherwise Archive
(TSKR is Japanese shorthand for "bless you") Archive Archive
and there's no evidence I can find that there was any surprise at this not being a short Japanese woman.
Two things are established here: this character has no pubescent features and is between 6-12. We can safely say that these people aren't attracted to a short Japanese woman with an undefined age, but someone who is definitely a (fictional) child.
How did Siri respond to this obvious logical inconsistency? By accusing the person of oversexualizing everything. A total deflection. Archive
As far as I can see, none of the lolicons in the comments cared either.
Maybe this is a particularly poor showing from Siri. We have to be good faith. Unfortunately he does it again here: Archive
When shown an image with clear and direct parallels to what real children wear, he deflects once again. "No stalkerchild, it is YOU who are in fact the pedophile." He does this multiple times, and devoutly professes that there are 0 similarities between these two images.
Archive Archive
He can even look at a drawing of a foot and say "it's not a foot, it's a drawing of a foot." A very Vaushian argument.
This is pure and undeniable sophistry. Any evidence is meaningless when he can deny all parallels and similarities between art and the real world.
Defending Mimi with whataboutism, and lies about what Mimi actually did. Archive Archive
What's a little scary is that he fantasizes about buying a realistic Kasane Teto sex doll. Kasane Teto isn't a loli, but ethically I don't see why he wouldn't be willing to buy a loli sex doll. Archive
Tell me, is a sex doll fictional or reality? I really can't tell anymore.
He has so many xeets within this month ALONE, all defending lolicon of course.
TL;DR Guy defends loli as petite Japanese women, but doesn't care if people jerk off to fictional pre pubescent elementary schoolers. A real character.
Oh yeah i know Siri, another freak who couldn't handle a Twitter feud with me.
Also this is a complete lie and he knows it given all the defenses he gives for sexualizing kids.
Holy freudian slip. Is he sure THAT'S the hill is willing to die on? Notice he didn't say "random children".
Sentences like this just make him appear more like a pedophile. How is it weird that people own normal photos of children? Every adult was a child once or has child relatives Siri. It's not weird to own normal ass photos of your childhood, your children, your relatives or group photos were children just happen to be a part of.
These people can't fathom the thought of ever looking at a photo of such nature because their minds are thoroughly corrupted and perverse. They assign sexual undertones to purely innocuous photos, which is why you have ChibiReviews defenders doing obscure things like going out of their way to censor a simple baby photo from a musician's album cover when trying to screenshot KF threads for Twitter.
really appreciate it.
They're in elementary school, putting their age somewhere between 6 and 12. We can be good faith (we shouldn't be) and say that these xeets
and the character clearly has no pubescent features. Maybe these lolicons disliked it? These xeets imply otherwise
en.wikipedia.org
