There are highs and lows in life. While you consume, work, play, and sleep, you also have to cope with discomfort. You have personal problems that make life more difficult than you would want, regardless of who you are or what circumstances you find yourself in. However, if you had never been born, none of this would be taking place. Raphael Samuel, a 27-year-old anti-natalist from Mumbai, India, believes that having your own parents is a reason to sue them.
Samuel’s divisive comments are causing quite a commotion on his Facebook page, “Nihilanand.” He frequently shares memes and videos supporting his belief that it’s unfair that your parents opted to bring you into this dysfunctional world and that you were born without their consent.
Some perceive him as being humorous. Some believe he lacks empathy. There are those who genuinely enjoy him. One thing, nevertheless, never goes away: people are still interested in him.
Even though Raphael Samuel might appear a little ludicrous in his disguise—especially when combined with his flamboyant remarks—he nevertheless stands up for the common guy while sporting his trademark false black beard and dark sunglasses. He never stops preaching that parents who give their children a life they didn’t ask for are self-centered and should not be respected.
He usually makes memes to draw attention to his concepts. He poses in front of vividly colored phrases in these pictures. “A good parent puts the child above its desires and needs, but the child itself is a desire of the parent,” reads one of his most recent quotes. #ParentsAreEmpathetic
Samuel oddly enough says he gets along well with his dad (DailyMail). He feels that he is not required to thank them for bringing him here, even if he doesn’t treat them disrespectfully.
Raphael Samuel claims in a video titled “Why am I suing my parents?” that although his father hasn’t accepted it, his mother has accepted his beliefs. “He’s getting used to the idea,” He deals with some really decent parents, for someone who says you don’t have to respect them.
Samuel approaches the possibility of suing his parents more and more as “Nihilanand” gains popularity and amusing online remarks. Through Facebook photographs that assert, “Your parents had you instead of a toy or a dog,” people are endorsing his beliefs and letting him know that he is making a “good point.” You have no debt to them. Their amusement comes from you.
Samuel has even gone so far as to liken having children to slavery (for the owner’s/parent’s gain) and kidnapping (because of the lack of permission). His main objective is to ensure that people are aware that having children is a choice, even though many of his ideas seem to veer more toward sensationalism and internet trolling. In a society where having children is practically a given, he wants to defy convention and show that there are valid reasons not to.
How do you feel? Is he trying to make a point, or is he just making fun of us all?
Angelina Jolie’s former security guard comes out with shocking allegations against her in Brad Pitt case
According to the documents, Webb was the “head of Jolie’s security detail for two decades, and he remained in that role for approximately four years after the couple divorced.”
Webb stated that Jolie “required him and his contractors to sign NDAs relating to various personal and professional details of her, and her family’s, life.”
After the couple filed for divorce, they had a major custody battle over their six children. According to the documents, Webb claimed he “received multiple calls from Jolie’s representative, who told Mr. Webb to remind his staff that they had entered into NDAs with Jolie and that if they testified in a custody proceeding, Jolie would sue them.”
Webb said that he had conveyed the message to his contractors, and both of them confirmed that they would testify if they were to be subpoenaed.
The documents further claimed that “one of them told Webb that ‘he would testify about statements he overheard that Ms. Jolie made to the children, encouraging them to avoid spending time with Mr. Pitt during custody visits.’”
The documents also stated that the “the two security contractors both testified” despite being threated with being sued and shortly after, Mr. Webb’s company was fired by Jolie.
Webb himself does not claim to have heard Jolie’s directive instructing the children not to interact with Pitt during custody visits. He now also works for Pitt.
Jolie’s attorney, Paul Murphy has since then addressed the media over this matter. He said in a statement, “Mr. Pitt’s continued attempt to equate common NDAs for security personnel and housekeepers covering confidential information employees learn at work, with him demanding an expanded NDA to ensure the continued coverup of his deplorable actions remains shameful.” “This case is not about NDAs in general, but about power and control. All Angelina has ever wanted was separation and health, with positive relationships between all members of their family, including Mr. Pitt. She looks forward to the day when he is finally able to let her go,” the statement further read.
The latest filing comes after over a month after Jolie’s lawyer filed documents claiming that Pitt had been physically abusive toward her even before the alleged infamous plane incident of 2016. That incident, according to documents, was the final straw in asking for a divorce.
The motion that Jolie’s legal team filed in early April, most revolved around the dispute over their shares of ownership in their French winery estate, Château Miraval.
Her legal team filed a motion asking the court to compel Pitt and his legal team to provide “responses” and “documents” that explained why the actor “suddenly conditioned his purchase of Jolie’s share of Miraval on her agreeing to a greatly expanded NDA now covering Pitt’s personal misconduct, whether related to Miraval or not.”
Jolie firmly claims that this move to demand NDAs was Pitt’s attempt to “cover up” the alleged abuse against Jolie and their children.
Pitt was never charged with a crime after authorities investigated the 2016 plane incident.
In contrast to what Jolie’s legal team is saying, Pitt’s lawyers allege that it was Jolie and her team who requested a “broader” NDA.
Leave a Reply