Monthly Archives: March 2021

F is for Friendship

This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀

Well eff me, it’s another post in the Alphabet Series. So many great f-words to choose from – some are obvious picks, some, not so much. You mighta thought I’d have gone for the word ‘feminism’, and trust me, I am going to do a post on the various feminisms and ‘pills’ that are confusing the hell out of everyone – but not at this time. I do have an ongoing series exploring my Birth as a Feminist, if you’re interested in development and evolution in the ways of what men and their lib-fems call ‘man-hating’.

F is also for ‘fuck’ and all its various offshoots – another obvious target and subject of some debate regarding usage in feminist circles, and I’m not talking about that today either. Same with F is for Freedom! which I will address in another post as it is something I want to explore in depth – it is just one of those words that means something different to each person around the world, and is the subject of an annoying lie and source of propaganda churned out by Western countries in order to finger-wag at countries outwardly proud of their racism, sexism and dictatorships. As well, F is for the fight-flight-freeze-fawn set of reactions to threats; fantasy (check out my ongoing Year of the Fantasy series); feminine vs feminizing (an upcoming post); forgiveness (part of the Enabler toolbox and also addressed in a 2015 post here); and family (a fragile, but crucial, cornerstone of patriarchy and female oppression and isolation. Family will come up a little bit today as it is hard to talk about the actual topic without addressing family.

So, we’re going for something different, and on the surface, seemingly juvenile – well, it is, in the sense that it starts in childhood and shapes the trajectory of adult lives. But in reality, this topic is an extremely serious issue for women and girls, and one that is seldom talked about for a few very obvious reasons that I’ll get into.

F is for Friendship.

As ‘friend’ is one of those words that can be a bit of a catch-all in that it can mean everything and nothing at the same time, I’m going to attempt to define it first, with the aid of some categories that describe different functions of friendship. I’ll mention a few differences in how males and females see friendship. And then I’ll get into why friendship is the most important kind of relationship for women, despite not being treated as such, and why it just isn’t possible for women to achieve authentic friendship as long as male dominance and compulsory heterosexuality (they are inseparable, actually) go unquestioned. Finally, I’ll fantasize a little about what female friendship could be.

What is a Friend?

The concept of friendship has been around and written about for millennia, and I won’t delve into the history here because it is vast and has been written about extensively by researchers of human evolution, sociology, philosophy, psychology, and cross-cultural studies. In addition, I’m a little more concerned with the here and now as well as the meaning and mechanics of friendship for women, specifically. A lot of the writings focus on men and how fucking awesome they are (or how deprived they are, the poor dears), and often, tsk-tsky articles are written about female pettiness and bitchiness towards one another without examining why or how that may have come about.

So I’ll start with a simple definition and jump off from there. Briefly, friendship is supposed to be a bond of mutual affection or genial affiliation between two people on equal footing that exists separately from sexual or familial ties. Friends are supposed to enhance your life and provide benefits that you don’t typically expect to get from lovers or family. And it is in engaging in friendship that you are supposed to have the most choice in members and freedom to be oneself – compared to family and other forced or ‘necessary’ ties, that is.

For many people, even today, friends have ended up being neighbours and classmates and (for men for all of history; women only recently) colleagues at work, simply because they were convenient, necessary for survival, and may have had something in common, even if it was only living on the same street. However, as life has become more global, with more migration and travel, and of course with the onset of the digital age, many things have changed, including the possibilities for and definitions of friendship. Traditional childhood friends still exist, especially if one is a person who stays in the town they grew up in, but many people now have ‘friends’ who are random digital strangers who have connected with them through Facebook and who ‘like’ their cat videos. There may, in fact, be no conversation, ever, and they will never meet in person, but they are called ‘friends’, nonetheless. Another modern development in friendship has come with the breakdown of the traditional family and with the gradual disconnect of parents from the lives and health of their children. Increasingly independent of their family, friendship has, for some people, become more important than family relationships, so much so that people may choose to spend holidays with friends rather than family.

There has been some hysteria over the last decade or two about a ‘loneliness epidemic’. Some of you may have seen one of those freaky documentaries about the Japanese and their widespread self-isolation and lack of social connections. You’re left with the impression that Japan is a country full of rape-cartoon-loving, capsule-apartment-dwelling people who pay strangers to eat meals with them because they have no friends. And then you’re wondering whether it’s going to spread around the world because porn is taking over, and more and more of our lives are lived online (especially in light of this never-ending pandemic bullshit). Never fear. First, documentaries, while I love them dearly, aren’t about normal people. How boring would that be, right? The Japanese are a social lot, well-travelled, and rather adventurous. Every country’s got their incels and their extreme social anxiety sufferers, though. Some live in basements, and others live in teeny-tiny apartments, depending on the culture and space available. If you look at the research (here’s an example), there is no actual evidence of widespread loneliness when you compare generations now, or the same age groups across time. One study, in fact, found that today’s teens report less loneliness than those in the past. That’s not to say that the quality of human connection hasn’t changed over time, but people are not really any more or less lonely than they used to be. They do have other issues that arise from an increase in social media involvement, however. I suspect the hysteria over loneliness is just propaganda designed to a) shit on ‘rich’ countries, b) encourage traditional values and heterosexuality by falsely equating being alone with loneliness, and c) to try to prove that the digital world leads to fewer real friends. Let’s just say that this is a massive and complicated issue.

Types of Friendship

I’m a psych person by training, so I sighed and settled in with familiar discomfort in my search for how the ‘experts’ define types of friendship. Everyone needs to put their own stamp on things, so there is a ton of stuff all basically saying the same thing in different ways. I combed and combined what I found into roughly four accepted categories.

  1. Friendships of Utility: which exist between you and someone who is useful to you in some way
  2. Friendships of Pleasure: which are maintained between you and those whose company you enjoy
  3. Friendships of the Good: which are based on mutual respect and admiration
  4. Friendships of the Right: which are bonds based on shared values, morals, or ethics.

Now, that is what I saw, but I take issue with the first category. Friendships of utility are relationships, but I am loathe to call them ‘friendship’. There is no affection or geniality there, which is basic to the definition of friendship. I strongly suspect that this category was posited by males, because this is generally how all males see people and things. “How can I use that thing/person?” “How is that thing/person beneficial to me?” And if it has no use, it doesn’t exist. If it does exist on their radar, males usually want it destroyed. Basic male psychology. Follow that easy rule, and you will have a much, much simpler life with much, much less agony. Now, males also make use of category two, and if there is pleasure, there is always utility. This describes the whole ‘friends with benefits’ scheme that males cooked up and sold to women as modern female liberation. No commitment or investment from men, but they can use and take pleasure from women. Why buy the cow when you can have the milk for free, right?

Friendships of utility are also the most common connections that straight and breeder women have with other women. Once a woman is committed to a male and especially after she has popped out a kid, she only sees other women in terms of how they can help her or fit into her busy and crucial-to-society lifestyle. Even though she chose her situation, she still feels burdened and believes it is other women’s duty to pitch in for free or get together to listen to her endless complaints about her choice for a shot at a privileged life, especially if these ‘friends’ are less burdened and less ‘woman’ in her mind (e.g., lesbians, singles, and the child-free). It is extremely difficult to maintain friendships with women once they go off with a male and go into breeder-mode.

The third category of friendship doesn’t exist for men in relation to women. No male admires or respects women regardless of the line he uses publicly to appear like a Nice GuyTM. Don’t listen to the words, observe his actions, especially the ones that he assumes aren’t being watched. Likewise with the fourth category, which is a common ploy used by men to get women sexually, and which is extremely common in activist and religious groups. Nothing gets an activist female doing free labour or spreading her legs like believing a male shares her world-saving agenda.

Also note that most women are incapable of seeing their ‘friendships’ with men clearly and accurately. The male will have a friendship of utility with a woman, while she is feeling respect and admiration for and possibly shared values with him. And she usually assumes it is mutual. It is not. Even with a friends-with-benefits situation, women will generally assume there is some kind of mutual respect going on, while it is actually completely one-directional from her to him. It is pure delusion, and eventually, the willingly ignorant woman encounters evidence to show her the truth. But she seldom accepts what is going on, choosing instead to remain used and often abused. Or she’ll assume it’s a one-off and move on to the next Machiavellian mister, who will respect her for sure, she assumes wrongly.

Hetero Pair-Bonding and Friendship?

How often have you heard a straight woman say “my husband/boyfriend is my best friend”, and did you manage not to laugh? This is a very, very recent development in hetero relationships. I strongly suspect that is is part of the velvet backlash against feminism and female economic freedom. For many years, ‘protection’, ‘romance’ and ‘love’ were the hooks/promises/lies used to keep women marrying men, but most recently, friendship has been sold to women as a great reason to keep spreading their legs and diverting their newfound financial resources (still much less than men’s, but still enough to live on) into male consumption rather than actual female freedom. Of course, men make better friends for women than other women! How could you believe otherwise? Today’s male is emotional and sensitive and a great listener. Males and females are EQUAL now (a requirement for friendship). He does half, nay! more than half, of the household chores. He wishes he could be the one to become pregnant and put his career on hold and cut ties with his friends and lower his IQ by engaging in baby-talk most of his waking hours for numerous years. Now that is friendship! I’ve never personally met one of these awesome friend-men, but hey… But, of course, it is friends with benefits. So you still have to let him fuck you, and you have to do it. No male is going to stay with you if you say, “Hey friend, let’s stop having sex, ‘kay?”

So, it’s not really a friendship. Males and females, despite liberal protest, are NOT equal. It’s still a sex slavery relationship, but this time, you’re choosing to be a subordinate instead of having no options except public prostitution, nunnery or suicide like throughout almost all of women’s history. And by the way, best friends are usually good for sharing secrets. For hetero women, that means having someone to bitch to about what your owner does to them that annoys or even hurts them, or how marriage isn’t what they expected it to be, or jeez, he really changed after getting hitched… Are these chicks seriously telling their hubbies that they’re sad they get one orgasm for every 50 that he gets and that porn makes them feel sub-human? I wonder to myself, in the absence of an actual friend to talk to, whether these women just live in more denial than a 1950’s housewife… As a long-time student of psychological warfare, I truly admire the husband-best-friend campaign as a smashing psychological success in maintaining female slavery despite the cage door having been sitting wide open for several decades now. Well done!

Same-Sex Friendships

It is really hard to find modern research on friendship that doesn’t address sex, sexuality, romance, or dating. The more ‘free’ societies and people supposedly get (meaning distance from religion & magical thinking and the embracing of science, human rights, social justice, etc.), the more that fucking, sexuality, identity, and the objectification and abuse of women (and the justification of it!!!) seems to be a part of absolutely every aspect of daily life. Men have always polluted society with their sexual deviancy throughout time, but we are living in a time where it is in your face 24/7 and has been normalized. And friendship has not gone unaffected by this. In traditional societies and in the traditional past of Western societies, female intimacy was common and relatively unstigmatized. But today, in ‘free’ societies, women are afraid of friendly intimacy with other women for fear of appearing to be lesbian – the absolute worst thing you can be labelled as a woman anywhere in the world (possibly worse than being called a prostitute).

In traditional China, where I spent many years, it is very common for women to walk around holding hands. And it is not strange for same-sex (both male-only and female-only) friends to be very physical with one another. I remember tutoring a small group of 14-year-old boys at their home one time, and one of the boys was giving his friend a calf massage. Hilariously, I was relating this information to a ‘trans man’ – aka a woman – I was forced to live with last year, and her comment was “that’s weird”. Yeah, women holding hands is weird, but a woman taking hormones and pretending she is a male isn’t weird at all… fucking idiot. Traditional societies are homophobic as hell, but physical intimacy that doen’t involve genitals is not necessarily seen as sexual in same-sex situations. Likewise in the past in Western cultures, adult female friends could share a bed and cuddle one another and it wasn’t polluted with sexual accusations.

I suspect the stigma against non-sexual, friendly, female intimacy is part of the move to keep women serving men and having it ‘make sense’ as I mentioned above. Women today are supposed to focus on finding a single male friend who will eventually become a best friend and then a husband and sperm-donor. Becoming too close, especially affection-wise, with female friends is a strong indicator of lesbian tendencies, which is only cool if you still fuck men the majority of the time and bring the friends home for your male partner to take advantage of.

Let’s explore same-sex friendships more.

Male-Male Friendships

Male friendships have been celebrated and described in literature for millennia and in film since its beginnings. These bonds are rich and layered and they form a very important psychological part of male identity. Men are able to bond over so many things, and seem to be able to forgive one another anything (especially if they can bond over blaming a woman for whatever is wrong). Although I’ve never seen this myself – ever – it seems to be a commonly held belief that males can solve a disagreement by punching each other out and then moving on. I don’t know if that is true. Like I said, I’ve never once seen evidence of this. Males generally don’t compete with one another over that much, and when something goes wrong, there is always a convenient female to gang up on and blame.

But boys and men have always been allowed to have rich lives of freedom compared to females. Able to go anywhere they please with few threats to their safety. They are also given a lot of freedom and forgiveness as children, so they learn that to take and demand are their rights. They aren’t forced to deal with limited freedoms and resources, and are not forced to compete to survive or get attention, so friendship between males is, on average, much easier than that between females.

Female-Female Friendships

One of the most disappointing and angst-producing things in my life is my lack of quality female friendships. Coming from an abusive home with a domineering and severely mentally fucked up mother, and then eventually going no-contact with the entire narcissist-enabling family horde in very early adulthood, I’ve always taken friendship more seriously than most. But from an early age, it was hard to relate to other girls and to deal with the constant, bizarre betrayals. I am neither overly masculine nor feminine in behaviour or appearance, so I didn’t automatically fit in to either the male or female camp and my friends fit two categories. Misfits or outcasts of both sexes. And abusive girls. Both probably stemmed from child abuse patterns I was living. I had a damaged identity, so I couldn’t find a community, and in addition, was a ready-made target for domineering females resembling my mother, until I figured out what was going on and learned to avoid these kinds of people. Once I got to grad school and had a gay community, which, in the 1990’s was blessedly before the trans popped into existence and destroyed everything lesbian, I was in heaven as no one was really what they were supposed to be and revelled in it. But childhood and the teen years were pure hell. I was always a bit of a community surfer – and have remained that way as I fit in less and less, especially in an increasingly lesbian- and reality- and woman-hating world.

With age, experience, and growing feminist awareness, female friendship got even harder. I lost friends to marriage and children and traditional, small, stay-in-place lives. I moved around the world, lived a simple, low-income and portable life, and realized how easy it was and still is for males in my situation to make same-sex friends in any culture. It’s much harder for women no matter where they are in the world. While I can meet child-free women my age in Western countries (although most of them are still hetero, male apologists/enablers, and liberal morons), in a traditional culture, it is next to impossible to create bonds with women who are all married by 25. Even if they are working outside the home, these jobs and potential friendships take second place to family duties. Friendships, if they have any, tend to be long-time ones and they certainly aren’t looking for new ones.

If you are a non-traditional woman and not a man-chaser, finding even partially like-minded women in the meat world is really, really difficult. I’ve learned to let go of any and all expectations of substantive friendship, and I focus on compartmentalized, shared interests. And I don’t seek to push the acquaintance beyond that interest. Female friendships just feel so fragile to me. And there are many reasons for this.

As I alluded to above, most females are forced into sensitivity mode from birth. We’re criticized, micromanaged, punished, and forced into adopting submissive and apologetic behaviours in order to get along in this world. It doesn’t work for all females; some just have the right combination of attributes to withstand brainwashing, and they end up stronger and freer as a result. But if you’ve ended up molded because of this brainwashing, you learn very quickly to be on guard. You’re never really safe. Criticism is a comment on your whole person, your value, your identity. The effects of this are even more pronounced if you have experienced narcissistic abuse as a child. So to be blunt and frank in a friendship is a risky business. You have been taught to accept male aggression and not to stand up to it, but at the same time, you expect other females to be like you. You have been groomed to keep the peace, and to withdraw if there is a hint of war. So what does that mean when you have a relationship between two sensitive people (i.e., two average females?) who are afraid of rocking the boat? You have a very fragile friendship. Misunderstanding is rife.

Add to that the competition for scarce resources and attention that males don’t experience, and you have a recipe for constant war between women over very little. It comes across as petty and bitchy, but it is the natural outcome of repeated punishment and grooming that all girls go through. Males just don’t experience the punishment and deprivation as a class that females do, so they don’t turn out the same way, and they certainly aren’t capable of understanding this kind of psychological slavery.

What ends up happening as girls get older is that there is always the natural draw to other females, but because of the hetero brainwashing, women and girls become ‘placeholders’ instead of real friends. ‘Friends’ are there until they are not needed (meaning a male comes along who needs servicing). It’s like putting the salt and pepper shakers away after eating a meal. You take them out when you need them, then you put them away and forget about them. And in the case of women, friends are there for emotional support, especially after the male master enacts his privilege upon his servant. Women also provide free labour, financial support, entertainment, a safe haven, and the like to their female friends. And when the male snaps his fingers, the friends are put away. Forgotten until needed again.

Of the women who are born with the types of attributes that lead to resistance to brainwashing, and are fortunate enough not to be abused as children, things can go a few ways. Some become very devoted to women, especially if lesbian. If they are lucky, they can find a community, and friendships become more like those men experience, although much richer and more valuable. Frequently, though, many girls who are considered tomboyish as children get turned off by the nonsense that girls get herded into. They may tend to say things like “most of my friends are male” or even “I’m not like other girls”. This is a red flag for me. These are deeply misogynistic women. I mean, I get it. They didn’t fit in with the average female trained idiot and were probably frequently treated like shit by girls as a result. Why would you beg to be let into a club you don’t fit in with or are abused by for petty things? Males treat females like shit in different ways, but it is easier to navigate, and if you are a tomboyish female, the boys will treat you differently. Not equally, but they may not treat you blatantly like a cunt on legs like they do to more naturally feminine girls. The incorrect assumption these girls make is that males respect them as they do other males. Wrong. You may not end up getting raped like a feminine girl (or you might; you just don’t know what males will do), but you will never be one of the boys.

What Could Female Friendship Look Like?

It IS possible for women to have high-quality, lasting, satisfying friendships. I believe it. Truly. Is it going to be common any time soon? Hell no. You need a certain set of conditions in order to allow women to have the qualities necessary to make friendship work. I’m mostly working on fantasy here, but I will say that I have one friend who is as close to ideal as is possible. I’ll describe what we have, and then I’ll talk about necessary conditions.

My closest friend is more than 20 years younger than me. We are from two very different cultures. We don’t agree on everything, and we each have life experience the other can’t relate to. We have had a couple of big arguments, and have recovered pretty easily. We have travelled together. We have helped each other out of a few pickles. She feels like what a sister should be like, but is nothing like what I had with the disaster of a sister I grew up with. We have bonded over a few things: we both have horrific, NPD mothers and suffer similar shit as a result. We both enjoy reading and philosophy and travel and independence. We love animals and don’t want children. Neither of us is interested in men. We can talk about any topic and dig into it, argue about it, theorize, argue some more, and then come to some sort of conclusion (unless it is paused for continuation another day). We comfort each other and offer both serious and funny and sweet support. She is the best hugger I know, despite not coming from a hugging culture. And as of going on two years now, we live more than 10,000 km apart, which kills my soul and hurts my heart. Often. Luckily, we chat online a few times a week. Except for the geographical distance, this is what female friendship should be. It has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with intimacy on multiple levels.

So what conditions do women need to foster this kind of incredible friendship? No heterosexuality, no demanding males in the picture. Preferably no kids, although I’ll say no boy-children for sure. Compassion. Empathy. A firm grip on reality. No enabling behaviour – you should be able to be supporting and critical (meaning, able to point out stuff without being an asshole). Acceptance. You don’t have to agree on everything, and you should know and accept their imperfections. And BOTH people have to be this way. Equality is the key to friendship. Otherwise, you end up in some co-dependent shitfest.

Finally, and ideally, a female friendship is a combination of categories 2, 3 and 4 that I talked about above. Pleasure in another’s company, respect and admiration, and shared values. Utility is for tools, not friendship, and the only human tools are male 😉

♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢

E is for Enabler

This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀

Welcome to another post in the Alphabet Series. So many great E’s to choose from. E is for excuses, egocentric (and a bunch of other ego-related words), emasculation (check out my Emasculating Shears. Oh, I’m just joking or it’s just fantasy or satire or art or free speech – don’t be so sensitive, boys… sheesh), education, equality, eggshells (as in ‘walking on’), etc. But I’ve chosen to take a little dive into a world so many women know well, both as a player of the role and as the victim of our E-word.

Hold on tight because E is for Enabler.

I’ll define it and a few other jargony words first, so we’re all on the same page – dang it if psychologists don’t love their effing jargon. Next, I’ll talk about the Cult of Positivity – my little moniker for those sunny, but vicious, defenders of the world as it looks through rose- and usually penis-coloured glasses. Then, I’ll get into the machinations of enablers in two specific contexts a) male domination–female servitude (patriarchy), and b) Narcissistic Personality Disorder. And finally, I’ll provide some examples of things enablers love to say to victims of the abusers they support.

So let’s all think happy thoughts with the goodest of intentions and get on the train bound for the Land of Reality Denial!!!!!!

Enablers: What Are They and Where Did They Come From?

Compassion and empathy – concern for and an ability to understand the suffering of others – are good things. They are a uniquely human quality; marks of an advanced intellect; and of course, devalued because they are much more biologically common in females. Because of the way males are biologically wired for sadism and violence, compassion and empathy are quite rare to find in a pure form in them. So, in a world run on male violence and manipulation, these qualities end up being vulnerabilities, rather than strengths, highly exploitable and twisted and weaponized through patriarchal socialization. As a result, for women who are biologically wired for compassion and empathy, being raised in patriarchy means that these qualities are used to maintain the system through supporting the masters (males) and using them as weapons against their fellow oppressed (women and girls). If one knows how to manipulate the naturally compassionate as well as how to falsely play the victim, one can do an enormous amount of damage and keep a steady supply of real victims at the ready for one’s own personal use.

Very simply, an enabler is a person who supports or facilitates (aka ‘enables’) harmful behaviour in another person. The behaviour being supported can be self-harm or it can be harm towards other people. And the support can take a number of forms such as providing substances or tools used in the harmful behaviour or a whole range of psychological support that protects the abuser from taking responsibility or paying consequences for abuse. A lot of people immediately think of those in co-dependent relationships with substance abusers when they hear the word ‘enabler’. But these folks exist in all sorts of abusive relationship dynamics. Sometimes, enablers are completely unaware of what they’re doing as they’ve grown up with abusive and dysfunctional family members and are just living the patterns they’re used to over and over and over. But there are plenty of enablers who have more going on than a twisted version of empathy in the mix in addition to their history of abuse. Some of these folks have an idea of what they’re doing, couldn’t give a shit that they are doing harm, and may themselves be narcissists or psychopaths with their own host of enablers.

Co-dependent: Enabling is part of a co-dependent relationship, which is what you’ve got when one person is very needy and has a very weak sense of self-worth and identity. The co-dependent requires outside approval to feel loved or valued, is in poor touch with their emotions, has trouble making decisions, and is willing to completely subordinate themselves to a seemingly stronger (but in many ways, just as weak and damaged) persona in order to feel of any value or have a sense of purpose. These are people who’ve been emotionally abused as children and gravitate to relationships that are familiar abuse-wise. There is usually a sense that they are helping, even when they are facilitaing harm.

Flying Monkeys‘ – as much as I hate this stupid term, it is very commonly used when talking about narcissism (which I’ll get into later). I wanted to define it to differentiate between these folks and enablers, although it is possible to hold both roles in an abusive relationship. A flying monkey – a term that comes from The Wonderful Wizard of Oz – refers to people who do harm on behalf of an abuser, just as the flying monkeys did evil deeds on behalf of the Wicked Witch of the West in the book. These people are a sort of proxy or stand-in with their own sense of nasty power, while the enabler is a bit of a cum rag wiping up after the abuser. Now, like I said, a person can act as both an enabler and a flying monkey, both covering for/propping up and dishing out shit on behalf of their overseer. It really depends on personality (disorders) and history.

The Cult of Positivity

Have you heard the term ‘toxic positivity’ before? Well, don’t worry if you haven’t; I can guarantee you that you have met at least – at LEAST – one member of the Cult, and likely, if you tried to have a real conversation with them, the encounter left you wanting to shake them, at the very least.

These are the folks who wax on about forgiveness and bliss and gratitude and cultural sensitivity and everyone having good in them and sending positive thoughts out into the universe and why can’t we all just get along???!!! They also have a whole fuckload of annoying platitudes that they trot out when you attempt to talk about REALITY that say nothing, but are designed to shame you, guilt you, and shut you up. It is impossible to have a real conversation with these people, and if you have bothered trying, at some point early on, they are going to call you ‘negative’ or ‘toxic’ or make some passive aggressive, superior comment about it being really difficult for them to be around negative thinking (meaning you and your cloud of doom). Note that talking about reality and problems are not negative thinking – they are essential to raising awareness and developing strategy for solving problems. Let’s look at an example illustrating the difference between how different approaches sound:

Cult: If we just try hard enough and send out our positive intentions around the world, global warming will be like over! I’ll knit some owl arm bands for solidarity and start a prayer circle for polar bear luv on Facebook! What doesn’t kill us makes us stronger!!! Grrrrl power!

Realist: At our current global effort, the effects of global warming will take a greater and greater toll on both human and animal species. I do my part so I can sleep at night, but I don’t have much expectation that everyone will do what’s needed to make a difference.

Toxic, Negative Thinker: Humans were doomed before they even started. There is no point in even trying to solve global warming, so you may as well do whatever the fuck you want. Drive your SUV to go to the corner store ten times a day! Bring back aerosol hairspray cans! After you’re dead, are you really going to care?

Okay, that was fun, but what about enablers? Don’t worry, I didn’t forget. Well, you will find an army of these folks in the Cult. Enablers don’t like to face reality – it is very threatening to them. They have been taught from an early age that talking about problems or having a complaint will inspire anger and punishment in people who are supposed to love them unconditionally. They learned to keep the peace at home by keeping things light and happy and non-threatening. And for most, it persisted into adulthood. Pure avoidance and people (abuser) pleasing. As a result, they end up letting bad people get away with things and hurt actual victims by silencing them. They are weak people, but you still may want to hit them when they gaslight the fuck out of you when you try to talk about something bad that happened to you. Stay away from them. You exist on two different planes of reality, and they will always support an abuser over you, while telling you to forgive and give people a second chance and that so many other people have it worse than you.

Enablers and Patriarchy

I don’t have data on this, but I would strongly suspect that most enablers are women. Females are abused psychologically, physically, and sexually more as children, they are the ones groomed for subservience to males through heterosexual programming, and as mentioned earlier, they more often are born with the capacity for empathy. And all of this abuse, grooming, and exploitation and twisting of a good, but vulnerable, natural trait serves to give males a free pass for the disgusting shit they do to us. And it’s not just blindness to or acceptance of the shit, it is the excuse-making, the rationalizing, the forgiveness, the second (50th, 100th, millionth) chances given, the actual victim-blaming and prey-policing, and the whole range of enabling behaviours that are taught to young girls so that they have mastered male bolstering in time for marriage. Most women enable men. They are not all Cult members, but even the most skeptical, negative Nellies will give a male a free pass when he hurts women.

Now, if you consider yourself to be a Black Pill type, you’ll think that females are born to do this. I have to completely disagree. I’ve talked about this extensively – I see nature and nurture working together in complicated ways – and I don’t think people realize how ubiquitous pro-male programming is in the world. So let’s put it this way. If it were natural to enslave ourselves to men, men wouldn’t need to brutalize us, or punish us for rebelling or fighting back, or threaten us with rape. Remember that the natural needs no forcing. It just happens. And if you really look closely at what little girls are exposed to – the way they are pushed and taught and punished for natural behaviours that don’t serve the male agenda (over and over and over), you can see that there is nothing natural about the behaviour you see in adult women. They are as programmed as robots.

But you can get out of it. You can deprogram. You can stop enabling males. It is just really hard, and living in the world post-programming is freeing, but demoralizing, and really, really fucking isolating.

Enablers and Narcissistic Personality Disorder

If you grew up with an NPD parent or parents, I’m so sorry. Truly. I know what you have gone through, and how you feel now as an adult. Both of my parents were narcissists, different flavours. My mother was the chief NPD. Father was her enabler, a psychologist, and NPD himself. It was an absolute fucking nightmare, and it took years and years to figure out what I had gone through, and to name it, as both parents were abusive in different ways, and the psychologist-enabler-dad did a really good job of making me feel like I was the one with the problem. And when a ‘professional’ is telling you that you have a problem, should you doubt it? When you’re a kid and you don’t know anything except that you’re doubting your sense of self, your very identity and experience of reality? Well, I’m still working through it all decades later – not sure I’ll ever heal completely, but I know what’s what now, and let me say, I’m an expert on NPD and mindfuckery, and sadly, how to effectively destroy a child from the inside…

So yes, enablers can be male. They can make excuses for narcissists who are male or female. The husband-wife / father-mother tag team where the female is the narcissist is a common dynamic. I can’t remember how many times I heard from my father (moreso later in my teens and early adulthood) that my mother loved me, despite all evidence to the contrary, despite some of the completely fucked up shit she did to me. Parent enablers are sort of trying to keep the peace (at least they think they are), but are actually making things worse in the long-run by allowing abuse to continue for years and years and years. And those years are crucial in breaking down the identity that is supposed to be forming in a child. From the child’s point of view, the enabling parent’s key feature is under-protection. And when you are not protected as a child, you grow up never expecting to be safe or even knowing what it means to be safe.

You can also run into enablers of narcissists in your adult life, especially in the workplace, and although you can escape this more easily that you can in a family situation, it can make life difficult. If you have grown up in an NPD family, you have been groomed for this kind of abuse and will mostly likely find yourself in relationships of this sort without meaning to. It will be familiar to you, but still damaging. If you didn’t grow up with narcissistic abuse, you will be thrown for a loop and wondering what the hell is going on. How you deal with the narcissist will depend on a whole host of personality factors stemming from your biology coupled with how you learned to deal with problems growing up.

Some of the things enablers of narcissists will do (and all involve elements of gaslighting) include:

[1] The enabler uses some excuse of victimhood to explain away abusive behaviour.

You’ll be pressured to forgive, negate your own victimhood, give second chances, etc. The narcissist doesn’t mean to abuse you or they can’t help it – they had a rough childhood, or have a lot of pressure at work. Result: You feel guilty and feel like you are the one picking on the abuser.

[2] The enabler reinterprets the intention of the abusive event.

“They didn’t mean it.” or “I think you’re misinterpreting what happened.” Or some variation on this theme. This gaslights you or paints you as oversensitive or crazy or just plain wrong. Result: You question your experience of the abuse.

[3] The enabler tells you that no one else has had the problem/abuse you are claiming to have.

It is clearly not true. The narcissist abuses many people – even the enabler themself. But the enabler isolates you and implies that perhaps it is you who has the problem. Result: you feel alone and unsupported, and start to question whether it really happened to you.

[4] The enabler tells you that everything will get better soon.

Cult of Positivity anyone? This is a clear denial of reality. Abuse doesn’t have an end date, so the implication here is that there is no pattern of abuse, what happened is not serious, and that you are blowing things out of proportion. Result: you hesitate to speak out again because what you think is serious is being dismissed as temporary or a glitch or that you are too sensitive or paranoid. The temporary abuse of course, ends up going on and on and on.

[5] The enabler tells you things aren’t so bad.

Immediately, the abuse is minimized, and this false sentiment may be coupled with another silencing statement that other people have it worse than you. They may even try to tell you how privileged you are. Result: you question your experience of the abuse as you haven’t been validated – clearly you must be oversensitive or seeing something that isn’t there.

[6] The enabler tells you that you are making too much of a fuss.

There is nothing like complaining that someone is complaining to make them shut up. Sometimes, this is accompanied by a listing of the narcissist’s positive contributions (especially if you benefit from them) in order to excuse the behaviour in question and to invalidate your complaints. After all how can such an amazing person be so bad? Result: you feel guilty for complaining, and wonder if the narcissist can really be that bad if they are doing so much for you. Likely, you are some kind of princess used to getting your own way.

Conclusion

There is a ton more I could say here, but this is just a blog post to help you understand what you may have experienced and to validate your feelings of helplessness when you encounter people who minimize or negate your reality. Enablers can be just as dangerous as those they enable. Many of them don’t realize what they are doing due to their own personal trauma, but I’ve never been one to excuse bad behaviour because of a sad personal history. My advice is to avoid enablers if you can, as they will screw with your head and can’t have a frank conversation with you anyhow. And while some believe ignorance is bliss, it is ultimately healthier to live in reality. Wait til I get to talking about psychosomatics 😉

♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢

D is for Diversity

This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀

And so we are on to D of the Alphabet Series, and though my posts are usually helped along with a little bit of D is for Drinking, I’m doing this one stone cold sober. And I’m choosing a different D word. There are so many delightful words to choose from. To name a handful, D is for disease, dick (and all the fun words you can make with it), deprogramming, double standard, delusion, domination, degradation, danger, death penalty, doormat, double D’s, damsel in distress, death, and more.

But no, I’m choosing one that, if I had a shit list for overused and obnoxious words from the year 2020, diversity would be on it and near the top. And at the rate things are going, it’ll be on my 2021 shit list as well. Oh, hell, who am I kidding – I DO have a word shit list. It’s on my About This Site page that I wrote back in 2015 when I started this blog, and which I’ve been updating over the years as I find yet more people I have no desire to interact with. There, you’ll find a word/phrase shit list (under Reason Number 2 why I don’t allow comments on this blog) made up of liberal / po-mo goober-speak. And my d-word has been on the list for a few years now.

D is for Diversity.

Now, I don’t want to give the impression that I think diversity is a bad thing. Not at all. But like with most things, I embrace the natural, and abhor the forced. Natural diversity is an awesome thing, and I’ll spend a little time talking about that. Then I’ll get to the problematic shit: the forced and unnatural (intentional and unintentional) diversity. If you’ve read anything from my sexuality series, you’ll know I believe that the human male, in his need to control and destroy in the name of love, creativity, and curiosity (but which is really just arrogance, ignorance, selfishness, sadism and a quest for power at all cost), has ended up forcing a lot of unnatural conditions. Diversity is only one of these situations.

So let’s get to it, and in the name of flowers and sunshine and happy stuff, let’s talk about the positives, first. Natural diversity.

Natural Diversity

During the second half of 2019, while I was embarking on the risky adventure of leaving employment in China for unemployment in not-China, I found myself enrolled in a community college Bachelor transfer program in the US. I’m not going to get into that whole bizarro experience in this post, but looking at it now, a year after the school thing fell apart due to the pandemic, I regret choosing the US over France, which was the other option I’d had at the time. But there were glimmers of excellence – there always are, even in the shittiest of circumstances. One of these glimmers was the fall semester I spent in an Ecology course. I’ll admit that I only took the class because I was forced to take electives – don’t get me started on one-size-fits-all models of education… – but luckily, the instructor was stellar and loved her subject area, and ecology, at least, was related to my major. It’s actually a subject everyone should study at the very least online and for free (I highly recommend Coursera for free courses in many different subject areas. And while there, do a quick search on ‘ecology’ to see what they have going on.)

One of the key concepts in ecology and related disciplines is biodiversity, which very basically, means variety of life (species). Biodiversity is the hallmark of a healthy ecosystem, meaning the greater the number and variety of species naturally cohabiting in a region, the healthier the area, ecologically speaking. Greater biodiversity equals better adaptation to threats (e.g., human fuckery, natural disasters, etc.) There are several well-known, and mostly poorly conserved, biodiversity hotspots around the world – I’ve pulled a map and legend from the World Wildlife Fund (I’ve enlarged it – and you can click it for the full size) that shows unique and/or rich biodiversity zones around the world.

Rich and/or Unique Biodiverse Regions, source WWF
(Click to Enlarge)

The key thing to remember is that when we talk about biodiversity, we are talking about the natural. Things grow where conditions are optimal for their biology, and Nature has her way of keeping populations in check. The forager-food / predator-prey foodchain is one of these common systems of balance-keeping. Adaptation is another effective system – change to accommodate things happening in the environment, or die out. And these natural balancing mechanisms work extremely well with all but one species, and I’ll give you a billion imaginary dollars – golden feminist turds, if you prefer – if you can guess which one 😉 Which brings me to the less-pleasant-to-contemplate portion of this post.

Unnatural and Forced Diversity – Male Greed, Ignorance and Hubris

It is natural and biological for human males to brutalize and destroy. They do it in the name of creativity, problem-solving, exploration, and they even try to explain it away as ‘survival’. Very few call it what it really is: the quest for power and control.

So, building on this, let’s say you have a beautifully functioning system. I’m talking about natural, bio systems primarily, but you can apply this to any system you can imagine. Then you introduce human males into the system. In less time than it takes to say “hot mess of the scrotal variety”, you will find a massive dick-shaped wrench thrown into what was originally a well-oiled machine. And while some systems (biological ones, especially) will work things out over time if left alone, they NEVER get the chance to do so for two reasons. First, it is written into male DNA to mess with things, even if told not to in no uncertain terms. They fiddle, they diddle, they poke, they prod, they take, and they kill, and then they shrug it all off. And while utterly self-congratulatory about this fiddling, diddling, poking, prodding, taking and killing, they NEVER actually make things better. And second, males are always trying to deny their obsolescence – in other words, instead of making things better for the majority, they deliberately create problems so that they have something to fix or to ‘overcome’. If there are no problems to apply their maniliness to, then why the hell do they exist? Males dictated long ago the purpose of Woman – to breed and service men, and most women are too afraid and brainwashed to question this MANmade cage – but males have never really answered their own existential question. And this is what every single one of them wrestles with over the span of his life. And we all know what happens when males lack purpose and develop angst. They get really insecure and emotional, and take it out on women and the planet in the worst way they can manage. Sometimes, this destruction becomes a ‘purpose’. After all, for some, even god has a violent plan, right?

So, let’s dig deeper and look at intentional and unintentional unnatural diversity next, and then we’ll finish by addressing forced diversity and its evil twin: inclusivity. I’ll also address forced lack of diversity or forced uniformity. This won’t be comprehensive, but I’ll provide examples to illustrate what I’m talking about. Likely, people will become offended for one reason or another, even though I am just outlining observable phenomena and sometimes the personal experiences of myself and others. Try to hang in til the end.

1a) Unintentional, Unnatural Diversity

One of the best ways to illustrate this type of unnatural diversity is through the idea of invasive species, and despite not intending to cause problems, humans (most often men) are usually the reason it happens. Increased global travel over the centuries, and especially in the last century, has meant that travel vessels as well as import-export goods and shipping containers have been exposed to plants, sea creatures, insects, and animals in one place and then have moved on to another place. Plants, critters (and their offspring), and the various diseases and microorganisms that depend on these larger beings can ‘catch a ride’ and suddenly find themselves in a new ecosystem. Organisms that manage to survive the voyage and then find themselves undiscovered, released into the wild, AND without any natural predators to hunt them down can easily begin to take over the local flora and fauna. Ironically, an invasive species, while initially increasing biodiversity, technically, usually ends up causing a lack of diversity, and in some cases, serious ecosystem destruction.

On the human diversity side of things, I’d argue very strongly that complete denial about how racist, sexist, religious men operate coupled with lax border control and weak liberal politics over the last few decades in Western Europe have led to the massive influx of aggressive, but ‘oppressed’, Muslim male migrants and refugees of various ethnicities. This tidal wave has resulted in a diversity situation with unintended, semi-“invasive species” consequences. And note here, that it is not women who are the problem. The majority of refugees are female, as women are always the majority of victims of war, and they must be supported – although, I’d prefer only to allow their daughters to accompany them – not sons, for obvious reasons. Males, on the other hand, regardless of whether they are migrants or refugees, are always problematic and bring their local brand of misogyny and violence with them to the countries that welcome and support them and allow them to practise their woman-hating religions freely. One of the major problems is that young, single males visit a heap of sexual assault on local and tourist white women. And likely, out of fear of being labelled ‘islamophobes’, no one does anything about it. It’s only women being assaulted after all. Not humans.

***One prime example was the rash of sexual assaults of white women on New Year’s Eve in 2015 – including a volunteer policewoman – by gangs of Arab males in a Cologne, Hamburg and Frankfurt, Germany. Videos taken by locals of the events were pulled off YouTube within hours of upload and mainstream news delayed reporting on what amounted to about 120 reported sexual assaults, including one confirmed rape. Who knows how many ACTUAL assaults occurred – the speed at which white women are deemed racist these days when they report sexual assault by men outside their race defies logic. To add insult to literal injury, the mayor of Cologne, a woman, even laid the blame on German women, and instead of deporting the offenders, suggested that women keep strangers at arms length. The implication was that they were behaving like standard white Western sluts deserving of rape instead of like proper Muslim women who should be helped and pitied.

I myself have been physically and sexually assaulted by Arab and sometimes black males in every single European country I’ve been to except Czechia and Greece and on all but one trip I’ve made to Europe since 1996. Belgium, Germany and France have been the worst, by far. I wrote about a violent gang assault I experienced in Belgium when I was 24 – the first time I’d ever been strangled – where I thought I was going to die. So to me, and other white females I’ve talked to, and who, by the way, like me, have never reported their assaults – because what’s the point? – ‘invasive species’ is an apt analogy. When illegal and non-citizen males are given free reign to assault the local or a targeted race of women, the victims have no power to fight back, and when there is no one ‘predating on’ or exerting control over the interlopers, you have a near-definition of an invasive species. It may not have been intended, but the unnatural and unplanned diversity is highly problematic to females – not males, who ironically, tend to be the most vocal in opposing liberal policy on immigration. Women, stupidly and just like they’ve been trained to do, welcome diverse expressions of misogyny in with open arms and then are shocked when something inevitably happens to them. Why isn’t female safety a human right? Well, we all know the answer to that one. Only penis is human – even a raping penis.

1b) Intentional, Unnatural Diversity

There are times when men deliberately introduce species into foreign environments to serve selfish human purposes or add ‘variety’ to local options, and the results are unpredictable, but usually a problem. Other times, a desirable species from another place is brought in for labour or human comfort as we see with many domesticated pets and farm animals. There are often problems with deliberately introduced species catering to human selfishness. I’ll address food crops, and leave the pets and domesticated animals for now. Let’s explore.

When human males started exploring the world hundreds of years ago, they began to bring back the exotic to their homelands. New foods and spices, plants, animals made their way into local taste and customs providing an unheard of variety of flavours and experiences. This is part of every culture. All cultures have things they use that originated elsewhere, but that may have become ‘traditional’ after years of assimilation. A funny example from China – and I use China because I know more about their culture and their silliness than other foreign cultures, and also they get very superior and snobby when it comes to their culture. Food is an especially annoying area of snobbery. But did you know that the crucial ingredient to the important Szechuan (Sichuan) and Hunanese cuisines – the hot pepper – isn’t native to China? Indeed it is not. The Chinese have the Spanish and Portuguese of the 15th century to thank for introducing oral fire power, originally from the Americas, to their precious traditional food. Likewise with the regularly consumed peanuts and corn – and did you know you can get corn-on-the-cob at McDonald’s in China!

It has been reasoned by Russian plant researchers that the place with the greatest diversity in food crops indicates their origin (i.e., you’ll find more varieties of chili pepper in Central and South America than anywhere else because that is where they are originally from). Logically, as crops move to foreign lands, local peoples will select the varieties that taste and grow best, thus immediately increasing diversity in their diet, while decreasing diversity in plant genetics over time. And today, all around the world, we are seeing much less crop diversity – even in places where plants are native! – due to human meddling in genetics, industrialized farming and the loss of local, small-scale farmers who traditionally planted very local varieties. This doesn’t bode well for the food system at all. And yes, if you trace this problem back to its roots, it is because of male dominance, female slavery, the resultant overpopulation problem and male expansionist tendencies for appropriating resources from other lands and increasing their economic power. It always comes down to something along those lines if you are willing to examine modern problems honestly and in depth.

Check out the food origin map. Click to enlarge.

2a) Forced Diversity (and Inclusion)

Ring-a-ding-ding! As you may have guessed, this sub-topic is the one I’m most interested in from a political standpoint. It stains the entire political landscape in the modern Western world, and it represents a world of illogic, unfairness, sexism, racism, doublethink, and censorship, all wrapped up in a faux moral superiority / virtue signalling shit sandwich. It is, in short, one of the major accomplishments of modern male supremacists dressed up as anti-racism warriors.

All across North America and possibly even extending into Western Europe, you’ll find signage with slogans telling the world how wonderful (forced) diversity and its nasty sibling, inclusivity are. But when you’re forcing something to happen that isn’t natural, it ends up being kinda fake and giving privileges to some while trampling the rights of others. I’m not talking here about making white males mad because they don’t get all the available promotions through nepotism and old boys’ networks anymore. White male supremacy is forced exclusivity, and is thus unnatural. And I’m also not talking about making sure the sub-populations that are already present are represented in their communities. Organizations need to reflect the communities in which they operate – that is natural diversity and a matter of fairness. What I am referring to is deliberately hurting people for characteristics that they can’t change (race and sex), and forcing diversity where little to none may exist to begin with. Just as we don’t look down upon parts of the world where plant species aren’t as diverse, we should not do so with less naturally diverse human societies. And just as shipping a bunch of tropical plants to the tundra isn’t going to achieve anything, forcing human diversity has no objective value or purpose, which is to say that political agendas don’t necessarily have much value or meaning outside of winning popularity contests.

The basic premises of liberal Western diversity measures are that:

a) All white people are evil and racist and should be blamed for everything wrong in the life of a person who is not white,

b) A city or region or group that is unintentionally predominantly white MUST be injected with people who are not white – otherwise, it is not ‘diverse’, has no cultural value, and is therefore, evil,

c) Females are no longer permitted to call themselves women to the exclusion of non-females, and must allow their boundaries and privacy to be invaded and colonized by males. Not to do so is anti-diversity and literally [sic] akin to murder, and

d) Straight, bi or ‘queer’ are okay. Gay or lesbian are NOT. If you have to be homosexual, then you must still fuck people of the opposite sex (even if you have to pretend they are the same sex), because not to do so is not inclusive. Besides what is ‘biological sex’ anyways? Biology is not a science, but rather, a state of mind. Yes, a feeling. And stating facts is discriminatory and anti-diversity. So male is female is male is… wait, what? Well, you know what I mean.

The forced diversity gang (and it is a gang) runs on all sorts of bizarre anti-science, anti-evidence, anti-logic, catchy sound bites that are designed to rally approval-seekers, and to prevent women from talking about interracial oppression and crime, and preventing lesbians and other women from talking about having their rights as women taken away by men pretending to be women. I see the words diversity and inclusivity, a word meant to paint opponents as racist, anti-male, or anti-trans and to silence them, everywhere I go. On front lawns of private homes, on web sites, in store-front windows, and on public school billboards. It is creepy – like the communist propaganda posters you still see in China. You are likely familiar with some of the following:

Never heard of this day. I think it is only celebrated in the minds of liberal Americans. No one else pretends to give a shit.
Welcome to America, the home of liberalism, lies and love. Like the religious right, they will love you as long as you don’t question them.
The ‘sexual diversity rights movement’ in symbols. I know the first two, and the rest are just WTF?! There is way too much going on in Gen Y and Z’s heads. Yet, so little of use. What a waste.

Forced diversity means that women still aren’t getting ahead. Women are more than half the population everywhere, except where they are deliberately killed off by men and their handmaidens, and yet they aren’t included in this political push for diversity. They are still pushed aside so that males can take jobs, awards, and recognition. It is more important to change the natural composition of a local society for no logical reason other than racial guilt, than to ensure natural diversity is upheld (i.e, including women). [Hint: there is no guilt over misogyny since women will still fuck men regardless. No reparations necessary!] So this means that white women pay the price economically, legally, and socially for what white men have done in the past, while the white men remain untouched and highly employable. It might not be such a big deal to a straight white woman married to a safely employed and highly paid white male, but single white women get thrown under the bus in a number of ways, including being excluded in diversity mandates. And of those added to the mix, they tend to be male as well. Like I wrote in a past post, while looking at a PhD program at a university in a region of Canada that happened to be predominantly white, I looked hard at the composition of the department. I’ve had plenty of experience in departments where I’m not represented, and felt way too old to go through that again. I noticed that the department had no full-time female faculty, despite the field not being particularly male-dominant normally, but they had plenty of foreign males of other races and ethnicities, as well as the requisite stable of white males. I noticed that the university patted themselves on the back for upholding ‘diversity’, but if they truly embraced diversity, that department should have been half female. Forced diversity hurts women, and I’ve never seen an affirmative action program fix anything.

2b) Forced Homogeneity/Uniformity (and Exclusion)

Let’s finish off with the opposite of forced diversity. You know the words ‘pest’ and ‘weed’? Well, these are relative terms. In reality, all species of plant and animal has an equal ‘right’ to go about its business on the planet, and all have a place and purpose, no matter how small. It is only when humans decide that they are more important than all other living things that different species are valued or devalued. Some problematic species are easily managed through hunting or trapping, as in large game that venture into urban areas and kill innocent children, livestock or house pets. Usually, the problem isn’t the wild species; it is the fact that humans have taken its living space and it is hungry with limited access to food sources. Very quickly, species can become endangered if fear of them is high and if their bodies, body parts or body coverings have value. But sometimes, species are hard to manage solely through these means. One brilliant idea, especially with small critters, evasive critters, or critters living in large areas is to introduce what humans consider to be a ‘natural’ predator. Usually, it isn’t local, and the idea is that it will serve the intended purpose – eliminating or just managing unwanted or ‘dangerous’ species – and then either just die once the food source is gone or just blend in and chill. But that seldom happens.Very quickly, the target pest can become endangered, and you may even find out exactly what important role they played in their ecosystem. You also may suddenly find that the introduced species (which has no local predator itself) becomes an invasive species.

On the solely human side of things, we’ve seen many examples of this throughout time in the form of ethnic, sexual and religious genocide. Men of all ethnicities have sought to eliminate other ethnic and religious group, especially women and girls. It isn’t new, and it certain wasn’t a white invention, despite what people are saying these days. But it was and is male. Very, very male. Personally, I don’t understand the drive to have everyone look like you or to relegate a group to a sub-class. These days, race and ethnicity issues are probably more of a problem in countries that are fairly mono-racial and nearly to totally immigration-prohibitive than they are in most Western countries. But they are front and centre in the West despite the fact that the true need, the one that is being sadly neglected, is women’s progress. There seems to be a recent drive to erase women completely as natural beings – a sexual genocide of sorts. Pornification is a form of genocide, I believe. One thing to remember: there is no natural predator for the males in control… And unless there are males in the prey group, there is no hope for fighting back in a way that will work.

Conclusion

Natural diversity, good. Forced diversity, bad. Male meddling, fiddling, and diddling always backfire. I truly suspect that we wouldn’t see any of these issues if men didn’t exist. And if humans didn’t exist…? Well, check out the documentary: “Life After People” (stream for free here) to think about the idea that we wouldn’t be missed at all 😉

♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢

*** addendum, with regard to my discussion of the mass Muslim gang attacks of white women in Germany, please note that the number of assaults and rapes reported varies WIDELY. The numbers I cited were at the low end. Various sources indicate that there were upwards of 1,200 sexual assaults from all over Germany, including at least 50 rapes. We will never know the exact number because a) most white women don’t report rape and sexual assault, especially when the attackers are not white, and b) the Western world doesn’t take rape seriously, especially when it threatens multiculturalism policies. It is shocking, but unsuprising, that while it is internationally acknowledged that these attacks happened, nothing has changed to keep women safe. It is more important to protect male privilege, rapist privilege, and Muslim privilege, and guess what? White women aren’t human either, and our rapes certainly aren’t taken seriously. Sorry, liberals.