Recommendations of the Editorial team
Collien Fernandes again made serious allegations against her ex-husband Christian Ulmen on Thursday (March 26). In a post spread across several tiles called “Christian Ulmen and the Deepfakes,” she writes:
“What he confessed to me: He had developed a sexual fetish that he couldn’t stop. A degradation fetish. It makes him horny to humiliate me and present me in my professional environment in a way that he knew I would find terrible. That gives him a feeling of power. Power over me. Over the last ten years or so, he has created various fake profiles under my name on social media. He has contacted male users – strange men as well as men from my professional background Environment. He sent a story that he found erotic (more on that in my post from last Thursday). He sent pornographic videos and erotic photos.”
And further: “It was important to him that everything seemed credible and that the material seemed private – as if I had secretly filmed myself having sex and recorded myself naked. He had an intensive online affair with around 30 men under my name, including telephone sex. He promised sexual meetings and canceled them at short notice. He wrote to far more than these 30 men – not everyone agreed to it.”
Little quiz as a bitter punchline
Then Fernandes gets around the drama with a thought game called a “little quiz”: “If men who were in contact with “Collien” tell me that they have seen a gangbang video of me – of me (!) and not of women who look like me – then there are two possibilities: Option A: A camera was running during my last gangbang. Or option B: It’s a deepfake, a montage or whatever. So now guess what’s more likely.”
General settlement with the press
This is followed by a general reckoning with the media: “I curse the press for receiving 30-page questionnaires every five minutes, which I would like to answer as quickly as possible. I can’t keep up anymore. I can’t do it anymore. I also have other things to do. And if I don’t manage all of that, a conspiracy theory will be knitted out of every unanswered question. Why don’t you ask the perpetrator questions? Two very simple ones: Were you violent towards your wife? Did you do it in her name? Ms. created fake profiles and sent pornographic material under her name? Yes, no. And what was the problem so far? Why is the reporting so “one-sided”? The perpetrator does not want to testify under oath. Nothing at all. Me, yes. Just think about why.”
Christian Ulmen has not yet commented on these allegations. The presumption of innocence applies.
