In the suicidal white West, white women are drawn to men who will mutilate and kill them

(Note, April 20: Karen from England has reflections on the meaning of the case, followed by my reply.)

Can something be deeply emblematic of a society, yet totally unmentioned by that society? That would require that the society be somehow unconscious of its own nature, wouldn’t it?

I ask the question because in today’s Mail we see the latest enactment of an iconic but never acknowledged “script” of the modern West. Katie Cullen, a 35 year old nurse, with her fair coloring, ethereal features, and naive, idealistic, and self-pleased expression, was a classic Eloi female, of whom her bereft but apparently still utterly clueless mother says, “She saw only goodness in everyone.” A 35 year old woman living in hyper decadent, crime-ridden 21st century Britain who saw only goodness in everyone? You just can’t get more Eloi than that. So, seeing only goodness in everyone, Katie got involved with a seven-year-younger Iranian “asylum seeker” (meaning most likely that he was illegally in Britain). Seeing only goodness in everyone, she didn’t think that a man who was illegally in Britain might do other illegal things too, like steal money from his white English girlfriend. Being an autonomous modern woman, she had never heard of sexual jealousy and the violence it produces—or, if she had, she didn’t care, because she didn’t think it could happen to her. And being an Eloi, she never read the papers, certainly not the Mail, and certainly not the stories of, e.g., Amy Leigh Barnes and Katie Piper (maybe if she had read the Mail she wouldn’t have ended up in the Mail), and had no idea that black and Mideastern men are much more likely than white men to become sexually jealous and violent when they are rejected by their white girlfriend.

Let’s let the Mail take it from there.

Jealous ex-boyfriend murdered nurse by stabbing her 130 times after she began new relationship

A nurse was stabbed and mutilated to death in a frenzied knife attack after arguing with her jealous ex-boyfriend.

Katie Cullen, 35, a senior hospital sister, was knifed repeatedly in the face and neck by asylum seeker Iman Ghaefelipour, 28.

Iranian-born Ghaefelipour was furious when Miss Cullen dumped him for stealing more than 3,000 pounds from her bank account.

But when his plan to win back his former lover failed he fell into a violent rage and stabbed her more than 130 times.

Violent rage: Iranian-born Iman Ghaefelipour stabbed his former girlfriend
Katie Cullen to death when his plan to win her back failed

After she had died Ghaelfelipour gouged out her right eyeball and attempted to sever her right hand with the knife.

He was today jailed for a minimum of 23 years after he pleaded guilty to her murder at Manchester Crown Court.

The jury heard Miss Cullen, a highly-respected senior sister in cardiology at the Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, began dating Ghaelfelipour in 2008 after attending a number of salsa classes at a nightclub.

Initially the couple had been close and he was introduced to her family and they talked of moving in together.

But the six-month affair soured when Miss Cullen discovered her jobless boyfriend had been stealing money from her bank account.

She initially went to police but decided against pressing charges after he vowed he would pay the money back in instalments.

The pair continued to communicate by text but the court heard Ghaefelipour failed to make some of his repayments.

Graham Wood QC, prosecuting, said: ‘There is evidence of affectionate communication in text messaging right to the end of 2008 although Katie was describing him as possessive and very controlling to her friends.

‘In the early part of 2009 communication began to become more businesslike and a relationship of boyfriend and girlfriend ground to a halt.

‘The repayment arrangement which they had agreed upon was to be her downfall because in the months ahead it provided him with an excuse to keep in regular contact with her. It is plain his affection for Katie had not diminished.’

In June last year Miss Cullen began a relationship with another man and Ghaefelipour attacked him in a jealous rage when he saw them together.

On October 20 last year Ghaefelipour went to his ex-girlfriend’s home on the pretext of discussing the outstanding money he owed.

Shortly after his arrival neighbours heard a scream and loud thudding noises coming from her terraced home in Stockport, Cheshire.

Ghaefelipour, of Urmston, Greater Manchester, fled and later went to hospital where he claimed he had been mugged and was treated for cuts to his hands.

The 28-year-old was later arrested by police officers as he boarded a bus though he initially denied her murder.

Judge Ernest Ryder told Ghaefelipour: ‘No-one could have known that the misfortune she had in meeting you at a salsa dancing class was going to be the trigger for her untimely death.

‘There was nothing in her blameless life of public service which could have predicted what happened to her at your hands.

‘Katie’s family are bereft, devastated and haunted by the circumstances of her death and the brutal and senseless way you took a valuable life.’

After the case her mother Diane Cullen, who is also a nurse said: ‘Katie was a very special daughter and sister and we are completely devastated at her tragic death.

‘She saw only goodness in everyone and had a generosity and selflessness that made her special. She loved people and enjoyed life and was warm-hearted, compassionate and sincere. The feeling we have that we were unable to protect her will haunt me for ever.’

[end of Mail story]

- end of initial entry -

Here are two of the e-mails that alerted me to the story.

Peter G. writes:

I think this happened last fall. There just seems to be no shortage of white women exposing themselves and their loved ones to these characters. I’ve often wondered if this lusting after foreigners and abandoning your own is conscious play by women of liberal autonomy theory. Additionally, on some level these women must perceive their actions as a repudiation or humiliation of their white male counterparts. Whether it’s simple lust or a triumphalist demonstration of female power we’ll never know from her—there’s always a pathological assumption of impunity until the inevitable explosion of extreme violence. Why would a well educated white woman seek out a swarthy bum?

Endeavoring to do some research on this phenomenon for historical parallels.

Karl D. writes:

Here is a story from the Daily Mail. A very attractive and educated 35 year old nurse gets romantically involved with an Iranian asylum seeker seven years her junior. She tries to break it off with him after she caught him stealing from her bank account and he stabs her to death over 100 times in the face and neck. I just don’t get what is in the minds of these women? Is it really just overwhelming liberal/ ideological tendencies that draw them to men whom they should know will do nothing for them then bring probable heartache or even death itself? It just kills me when good men like myself and some of my friends remain (unwillingly) single while women seem to throw themselves at characters such as this guy. I would almost expect it from a young girl in the liberal West. But a 35 year old? It is all very frustrating and just takes the wind out of one’s sails.

Andrew E. writes:

Peter G. writes:

“Why would a well educated white woman seek out a swarthy bum?”

and Karl D. writes:

“I just don’t get what is in the minds of these women? Is it really just overwhelming liberal/ ideological tendencies that draw them to men whom they should know will do nothing for them then bring probable heartache or even death itself?”

We traditionalists need to come up with convincing answers to these questions because there are legions of young, single men in America thinking the same thing and the Gamers are ready and standing by to give them what they want. The Gamers will say it is inherent to woman’s nature to seek danger and excitement and male dominance rooted in biological evolution, so learn to be dangerous, exciting, and alpha, or else you are doomed to a miserable, single existence. At the very least, this is a coherent, rational sounding explanation to the average guy, and it has some truth to it, notwithstanding the broader materialist/nihilist worldview to which it appeals. With the Gamers confidently announcing exegesis on these types of phenomena we can’t be left scratching our heads.

April 20

Karen writes from England:

There are several things that are striking about this case and they all demonstrate how liberalism has reduced whites to naive and passive idiots who lack even the most basic sense of prudence and caution. It is a tale of an educated and professional white woman who falls in love with a primitive-looking, apparently uneducated [LA notes: according to the Manchester Evening News (see below), he worked as a pizza deliverer], and criminal man from an alien Third World country. He is the symbolic Other in terms of culture, race, and religion. In her infatuation and lust for him, she suspends all sense of judgement, idealises him, and becomes blind to all the warning signs of his dangerous behaviour, which, in all fairness to him, he did not conceal. It is her emotions and infatuation that lead her to place herself in danger and to her ultimate death. Was it not Denis De Rougement who said that the Western Romance myth was always linked to death? And the murderer was a Muslim man who understood that myth and how to play it to his financial advantage, most likely to keep a wife and family back home in Iran.

If we look at the comments of the judge and the mother of the victim, we can get some sense of how liberalism has rendered its victims naive.

The judge, Ernest Ryder, a man who should show greater objectivity, detachment and independence of judgement, said to the suspect on sentencing:

“No-one could have known that the misfortune she had in meeting you at a salsa dancing class was going to be the trigger for her untimely death. There was nothing in her blameless life of public service which could have predicted what happened to her at your hands.”

Now why does this judge think the murderer, a Middle Eastern Muslim illegal immigrant, was going to Salsa dance lessons? Surely he cannot believe that Ghaefelipour actually wanted to learn to dance? It is obvious that he was looking for a victim whom he could scam for cash and use for easy sex and he figured, correctly so, that the salsa class was good hunting ground. And the nurse was not so blameless. Why did she form a relationship with an illegal immigrant, a man engaged in manifest criminal activity? As a responsible person engaged in public service, she should have shown more prudence with whom she socialized. And having found an easy victim is it not likely that a man who is already involved in crime will react in a volatile and aggressive manner when he has been found out and the money flow cut off?

Then there’s the mother, who says of her daughter:

“She saw only goodness in everyone and had a generosity and selflessness that made her special. She loved people and enjoyed life and was warm-hearted, compassionate and sincere. The feeling we have that we were unable to protect her will haunt me for ever.”

Classic liberal remarks! If she had taught her daughter that no one is wholly good and people must not be taken at face value, she would probably still be alive but she shows no insight into this fact.

And now Katie Cullen herself:

The jury heard Miss Cullen, a highly-respected senior sister in cardiology at the Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, began dating Ghaelfelipour in 2008 after attending a number of salsa classes at a nightclub.

Initially the couple had been close and he was introduced to her family and they talked of moving in together. {

But the six-month affair soured when Miss Cullen discovered her jobless boyfriend had been stealing money from her bank account. There is evidence of affectionate communication in text messaging right to the end of 2008 although Katie was describing him as possessive and very controlling to her friends

In June last year Miss Cullen began a relationship with another man and Ghaefelipour attacked him in a jealous rage when he saw them together.

On October 20 last year Ghaefelipour went to his ex-girlfriend’s house on the pretext of discussing the outstanding money he owed.

Why does a responsible person pick up an illegal immigrant, about whose background she knows nothing, in a salsa club? And when she knew he was an illegal, why does she become close to him, thereby aiding and abetting his crime and even introduce him to her family and consider moving in with him? And why did she give him access to her financial information, making it easy for him to steal her money?

After this gross irresponsibility, she realises that he is “possessive and controlling” and saw him fly into a rage when he saw her with another man. If she was in any way normal, she would have realised that he was dangerous and cut off all contact. But she doesn’t and she allows him to come to her home, enter the home and kill her. Her heart over rode her head, she suspended all logic and was killed, an outcome not entirely unpredictable given his previous behaviour.

LA replies:

Karen says: “Why did she form a relationship with an illegal immigrant, a man engaged in manifest criminal activity?” At the time she met him, he was apparently not an illegal immigrant. In the initial entry, I said that the Mail’s bare description of the killer as an “asylum seeker” probably meant that he was illegally in Britain. But we don’t know that. It may be that he showed up at an airport, requested asylum, and the authorities admitted him into Britain pending resolution of his asylum request. It is galling that the Mail gives no information on this. At the very least, his status in Britain was not yet resolved when he met her and he might have to leave. Also, we don’t know that Katie Cullen knew of his unresolved status. At the very least, based on his subsequent extreme criminal behavior including stealing 3,000 pounds, we can assume the following: he decided he wanted to get to Britain, travelled there without a passport, claimed falsely that he was in danger in Iran, and asked for asylum.

Now, as for Katie Cullen’s knowledge of him, we do not know that she knew anything about his legal or illegal status when she took up with him. Let’s assume he told her he was an asylum applicant, and had permission to be in Britain pending the determination of his claim that he was in danger of political or religious persecution in Iran. However, after they had been going together six months, Cullen discovered that he had stolen 3,000 pounds from her bank account and she reported it to the police, then declined to press charges and instead gave him the chance to pay her back by installments. At this point she knew that he was a criminal who had betrayed her in a most terrible way; therefore, any reasonable person in her situation would have concluded that his claim of persecution in Iran was also fraudulent, and that his presence in Britain was on a false basis. But instead of cutting off all personal contact with him and filing charges against this criminal who had lied his way into the country, she maintained personal contact with him and made an agreement with him that he would pay her back by installments. She thus left him at liberty to defraud other women the same way. That, at the very least, was not upright and “blameless” behavior by Katie Cullen.

Then there’s this:

In June last year Miss Cullen began a relationship with another man and Ghaefelipour attacked him in a jealous rage when he saw them together.

The story doesn’t tell us what this “attack” consisted of, was it physical or verbal? Still, Cullen knew at this point that Ghaelfelipour was not only an illegal alien who had lied his way into the country and a defrauder and a major thief, she had to realize that he was dangerous as well. Yet she still didn’t make out charges against him. Nor did she take any steps to protect herself from him. Finally, as Karen points out, Cullen allowed him into her house and he proceeded to kill and mutilate her.

I looked for other articles on Ghaelfelipour. All the coverage comes from the Mail’s story, except for a story in the Manchester Evening News which gives the family’s statements on the impact Katie’s murder has had on them and mentions other details, some gruesome, not given by the Mail.

Also, when I did a Google search for “Iman Ghaelfelipour,” the Mail came out at the top of the Google results page, and this present entry at VFR came out second. Which means that there is so little news media coverage of this case that a one-man blog has the second highest readership on it in the world.

Karen writes:

You wrote:

Karen says: “Why did she form a relationship with an illegal immigrant, a man engaged in manifest criminal activity?” At the time she met him, he was apparently not an illegal immigrant.

Anyone who has a reasonable amount of contact with the general public knows that a genuine asylum seeker in Britain is like a needle in a haystack. 99 percent of them are illegal economic migrants and a high percentage of them are involved in other scams. And asylum seekers are not allowed to work at first until their status has been established, and so he is likely to have been working illegally in the fast food industry which loves such workers to keep down costs. All in all, he was highly suspect from the start and the nurse was reckless and irresponsible. Her murder was a tragedy but one which a little caution and wisdom would have avoided.

April 21

Ferg writes:

In re-reading the story of Katie Cullen I have come to wonder if there may be another dynamic at play here. Maybe what we are witnessing is an expression of a suppressed maternal instinct. Here we have a woman, now almost in her middle years, not yet married, no children. She seeks out (perhaps unconsciously) a younger, homeless, non employed kind of helpless man-boy in need of being taken care of. He is of the disadvantaged “other” which makes him even more needful and more attractive. She takes him to her, shares her finances with him, discusses having him move in with her where she can mother him on a more continuous basis without actually marrying him. She herself is the classic woman child (from her picture), coming upon the years of life that are going to rob her of her child like quality, so she needs to fill up her life soon with that boy child she never had. She offers him the home and asylum he can not get from the state. She will guide him into as he grows into full manhood. If this is somewhat accurate, then it is one more reason for women not to put off marriage and child rearing until their middle years, but enter into it in their early twenties as nature intends. They would then be safe from this kind of foolishness and the real dangers it brings. They would also find the fulfillment that an empty and sterile career life denies them.

April 25

Daniela writes from Romania:

I’d like to reply to Peter G. Women of a certain ethnic group dating men from another ethnic group comes from two reasons. The first is the myth that there are no differences among groups, and the second is the weakness of the men in her ethnic group. For example, I’m disgusted by how spineless the average European man is—heck, I’m trying to make some of them to man up and explain to them how women think related to mate selection, but they just tell me that I’m wrong and that for instance, the number of sexual partners of a woman is irrelevant or that it’s not that much of a problem to raise another man’s child (being a cuckold is probably the worst thing that can happen to a real man). Also, there’s something related to altruism here. When a group does out-group altruism to the extent that whites do (and it’s mostly white men), the evolutionarily sound decision is to have the children of the members of the group that your group is altruistic towards so that they will benefit from both groups. I was having this debate on Gates of Vienna with another commenter about non-discrimination (which is why this happens, discrimination would lead to a woman who does what this woman did to be slightly excluded), and he said that policies that help minorities be represented better in the work force are good (I use this part of the debate as an example). As a woman, in the reproductive setting this means that if I will have his children, they will be discriminated against both by the other and by his own ethnic group. If I have the children of the other, they will benefit from both my ethnic group and his. To make my answer short, white women date outside their ethnic or racial group because white men not only tolerate it, but they encourage it (usually indirectly). Basically what is happening is what always happened—women having the children of the victor.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 19, 2010 05:48 PM | Send