Julian Assange's Online Dating Profile Leaked

Ponca City writes "The Telegraph reports that an online dating profile created by Julian Assange in 2006 has been unearthed from OKCupid disclosing that the WikiLeaks editor sought 'spirited, erotic' women 'from countries that have sustained political turmoil.' Writing under the pseudonym of British science fiction author Harry Harrison, Assange described himself as a 'passionate, and often pig headed activist intellectual.' Assange said he was seeking a 'siren for [a] love affair, children and occasional criminal conspiracy' adding that he was 'directing a consuming, dangerous human rights project which is, as you might expect, male dominated' and added enigmatically: 'I am DANGER, ACHTUNG.' Among Assange's listed interests were the 'structure of reality' and 'chopping up human brains' – although he added the caveat '(neuroscience background)' lest the latter put off potential admirers. 'I like women from countries that have sustained political turmoil,' Assange wrote. 'Western culture seems to forge women that are valueless and inane. OK. Not only women!'"

Comments

Hmm...

[Pojut]

That actually sounds like a fairly accurate representation of the man. Honesty in an online dating profile? Whodathunkit???

Re:Hmm...

[IICV]

I don't get it, actually - the profile seems to almost be a parody of itself, and the article says absolutely nothing about how they know the profile is actually Mr. Assange's. How do they know it's his, exactly?

(I've been wondering the same thing about the diplomatic cables honestly)

Re:Hmm...

[fishbowl]

What are the average dimensions of the women in your coven?

so what?

[digitalsushi]

Wow, someone who's brave enough to stand up for what he believes in is also brave enough to say what he wants in a woman. We're pissed because sometimes he succeeds, apparently.

BTW, this slashdot story is an example of the things media is doing wrong:
http://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/there-is-something-to-see-here/

"....Julian Assange is not that important. Don’t give him a Nobel Prize. Don’t demonize him. Don’t line up in solidarity behind someone who may or may not be a serial rapist. Don’t demand the conviction of someone who is only accused of a crime, and needs to be presumed innocent until he is convicted. Demand justice for him — and don’t pretend you know what that is, unless you’re one of the three people who do — but don’t fall into the trap of thinking his conviction, in the long run, has very much to do with the whole host of really important issues that the Wikileaks revelations have brought up. Don’t make him more important than he is.

Wikileaks is only a single part of something that is, on its own terms, very important. They’ve given us a great deal of knowledge about exactly how the American state actually acts, proof that many of the state department’s secrets are simply a way of avoiding democratic oversight, that our diplomatic corps secretly does horrible things in our name. We already had a lot of knowledge of that, but now we have a lot more, and much of it utterly and uniquely damning. Julian Assange is a smart man who’s done some brave things in service of a good cause — and we owe him a debt of gratitude for the gift he’s given us. Thank you, Wikileaks. But that’s all we owe him, and them.

Which is why I want to say this, as clearly as I can: it’s exactly because Assange and Wikileaks are relatively unimportant (compared to the gigantic scandal of the anti-democratic security state in which we now live) that the media has made him into a superstar, has tried to make the entire story about Wikileaks and a single eccentric and interesting character, rather than about the United States government’s actions as a system. The more we focus on him – and I’ve contributed to that, which is why I particularly want to write this post — the more we take attention away from the real story, the substance of the things Wikileaks has revealed....."

Re:so what?

[jpapon]

Unfortunately historical recounts often reflect far more about the author than the events in question. In this case though, because the historian is in no way an author of the events, but merely a means through which they are transmitted, I feel that neglecting the contents of the message for ad hominem reasons says more about the reader than the author.

Re:so what?

[Saint Stephen]

Just what in the god forsucken world is this huge scandal that is supposed to have been discovered??? Face it: you ALREADY believed the us was a police state or whatever the fuck Yippie shit were selling, and then X was leaked, having nothing really to do with that, and you take it as proof of what you already believed !!

Would you nimrods please shut the motherfuck up!!!

Re:so what?

[modecx]

It's obvious that what he considers damaged goods are those who share the all-too-common traits of Womanii Needicusmoniescus, also known as Ninjacus Bitchicus, i.e. selfishness, neediness, superficiality, a tendency to manipulate, etc. Someone, strike that, anyone from Jersey Shore could be the ultimate example of this subspecies. This disease comes in various strengths, and it's rare to find someone naturally immune to it. Maybe he figures political turmoil and other adversities act as an inoculation?

The very fact that you consider a woman from a country undergoing/emergent from political turmoil "damaged goods"--well, it really says more about you and your world view than it does about any of Assanges' proclivities. When I see that profile, I see someone who knows what he likes, and is looking for a partner, someone with whom he can share mutual respect, someone with whom he can see himself growing old.

You used the word "partner"...that word doesn't often have have the same meaning to a western woman that it does to a woman from an eastern European culture. The Russian equivalent to partner truly has the connotation of partner, someone with equal stake in a relationship. In the US, it has degenerated to "spouse" and even now it's hanging on the precipice to becoming little more than "roommate". No, strike that as well... This quality is in fact not limited women at all.

Really, how can you care so strongly about what people find attractive in their mates? To me, this is a much more interesting neurosis. If someone really digs transgendered Inuit-Filipinos, fictional though they (probably) are...How can that possibly be such a big deal to you?

Re:Riders & The Media

[Anonymous Coward]

The Media? The same Media that leaked the cables is doing that? Ahh you probably want a special kind of media, one that does your bidding. Right!!! Crawl back to the wrong side of History where you came from, dude.

Re:Concocted?

[Applekid]

Comparing the private sexual desires of an individual to wholesale deception and fraud of unelected government goons in the name of the people with the intent of changing lives of those who aren't even aware of the backroom dealings isn't close to the same thing.

Not even a little.

What's wrong with this profile?

[joh]

Really. Online dating is not rare or anything, this profile is actually quite funny and honest, so what's wrong with it? I'm pretty sure that many Assange-/WL-haters have profiles on such sites and many of them would be more painful to read.

So get over it.

Come on, you can do better than that!

[AftanGustur]

The world's top intelligence agencies are all hard a work digging up dirt on the man .. and they come up with ... his DATING profile ??

Re:he's a douche, that's all that matters

[synthespian]

...and meanwhile, the leak that Amir Karzai gets money in suitcases to release drug lords is not important.
      Or that the Saudis asked the US to bomb Iran.
      Or that Hillary asked diplomats to steal credit card info from fellow colleagues.
      Or the leak (with video) about US Army personnel not complying with the rules of engagement and killing Reuters reporters.
      None of that is important.
      What is important is who Assange fucked.
      Put a condom over that enemy combatant!
      Oh well, blame the feminists who never thought about the consequences of going to the police because of a condomless one night stand. You heartless bitches.

Is it real?

[Junior J. Junior III]

has there been any confirmation that it's actually his profile, or if it's a parody or fake?