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

Holy hell, time flies when you’re not having fun! I swear, I didn’t mean for nearly 2 months to go by before writing another post. I had a topic chosen and everything. Really! But I find time is moving strangely during this neverending pandemic. Likely, many of you are discovering strange feelings and experiences are entering your small viral bubble world, and you probably feel you don’t have much control over…, well, much at all. You are not alone, even if you feel you are.

But while later than planned, I am here now with the next post in the Alphabet Series.

H is for Hate

I was going to choose helplessness at first, and it is probably a good post topic for another time, but I was inspired by a post I read back at the end of March, written by a more mainstream, academic type of ‘feminist’ on the topic of whether hate crimes and hate speech apply to women as a class, and who decided by the end of her post that while women experience sex-based issues (she seemed almost loathe to call what women experience ‘hate’), the legal system is not the way to deal with it. The legal system works for all the other hates, but it would just create more problems for women (or more likely, she meant for men) than it could even begin to solve. And we can figure out why this might be true – a) crimes and ‘lesser’ harms done to women are constant, committed by most (if not all) males, and against most (if not all) females. I mean, seriously, every single male would go to jail for some period of time in his life if we actually had justice for women and girls. And let’s face it, there would be a shit ton of brainwashed fembots out there protesting holding men accountable for their crimes against women… But it tickles me to imagine males actually justifiably (i.e., being held accountable) living with a fraction of the fear that females unfairly (i.e., simply being born female) live with. And secondly, b) most women ‘consent’ to fucked up, convoluted and demeaning relationships with males. It is impossible to police woman-hate when women seem, on the surface, to say yes to so much of what is done to them.

Now, did this mainstreamer suggest what might work? No, of course not! She works for a university and is a white woman (a dangerous status today), so taking anything other than a milquetoast stance on women’s issues isn’t possible in this age of group-selective Western censorship. There was the obligatory hint that education might be the way to go… And I think it was at this point that I realized that my topic was going to be Hate, specifically woman-hate. You just CANNOT educate males out of raping, out of their innate violent natures, out of doing everything possible to make sure that females lose in every aspect of life and in every corner of the world. Myself, I am a nature-AND-nurture theorist when it comes to human problems, and I believe that to choose either one alone to explain our human world is just plain silly, and even ignorant. But, I regularly read different kinds of self-proclaimed ‘feminists’ who do take these irrational essentialist stances for several reasons, only one of which seems to be that I end up with plenty of stuff to write about. And if you’re wondering about the woman in question, I won’t name her as she is fairly typical of most liberal-leaning feminists out there, although more educated and articulate than the average one, and besides, I don’t believe in publicly shitting on women unless they are doing something really evil and need to be taken down. And even then, I am decidedly not an activist, but rather a writer and navel-gazer and educator. I write to add a perspective, rather than to try, futilely, to change the world.

But back to hell. I mean Hate. There was a nice assortment of h-words I could have chosen for this post. Like I said, helplessness was a tempting choice and you may see it in the future. As well, H is for honesty, hope, hetero/homosexuality, housewifery (definitely want to write about that sometime), homelessness, his/herstory, harmony (key concepts in places like China, but also with the Cult of Positivity crowd — “Why can’t we all just get along, waaaah…?!!?”), and harm. And there are tons more.

Now, if you’ve read further on this blog, you’ll possibly be aware that I already have an ongoing series called Love = Hate. Hate, in general, is a massive topic. It is the prime current (coupled with greed) that runs through and guides the course of all male-dominated societies (basically, every society on earth since the beginning of time), but that is often called love, justice, fear, retribution, morality, the natural order – everything but hate. But as this is a woman-centric blog, my focus is on woman-hate or misogyny. So I’ll stick this post in there in addition to here in the Alphabet Series.

My plan here is to address a couple of the thoughts I came across in the article on hate, or rather non-hate, where it concerns women. And I’ll try to reach a conclusion or at least a suggestion, where the other author couldn’t bother.

Domestic Violence Ruins Progress on Woman-Hate Issues

I’m going to re-word this as I certainly don’t think women deserve violence from males. Ever. But I do take issue with female’s willing ignorance when it comes to putting trust in males. We are swimming in evidence that males hurt females constantly, and that proximity to males vastly increases the probability that a woman or girl will be raped, physically assaulted, sexually assaulted, and/or killed. We know that at least 25% of hetero-partnered women experience severe physical violence at the hands of their loving male partner. But despite knowing this, mothers still groom their daughters for heterosexuality and for relationships where although they will probably live an economically better life and be vastly more protected from other males than women who don’t partner with men, they will have to endure some form of misogyny, including manipulative and consensual rape, in exchange. This is the heterosexual contract, and we all know this in our lizard brains, even if we refuse to acknowledge or accept it. In the situation where domestic violence happens and a woman manages to escape it, many will still jump back in the dating pool with this delusion that there is a ‘good one’ out there waiting for her. It is pure insanity, especially in places where women can freely choose to support themselves financially instead of being forced to exchange rape for a home and food. But it is a psychologically complex issue. And even in more progressive places, it hasn’t been all that long for women to have had this choice. Change in thinking takes time especially when traditional thinking and behaviour are always more rewarded.

So, if you boil it down to a single basic truth, heterosexuality is the problem. Go with males, and you are asking for trouble, and will ensure that the system never changes for ALL women and girls. So I’ll reword my header of his section to “heterosexuality ruins progress on woman-hate issues”. Until women reject heterosexual relationships with males, progress on addressing actual hate crimes against women, which I would argue MUST, for the time being, exclude crimes committed within a consensual relationship, will go nowhere. The fact that women consent to male abuse (and this is learned at an early age due to grooming for abuse by mothers, fathers, entertainment, schools, social institutions, etc) is the number one roadblock in sussing out what is going on in any reported hate crime against a female. If you look at all other groups who experience hate crimes, not a one of them is groomed from birth to consent to abuse from or seek abusive sexual relationships with members of oppressive groups. It is because of this that I believe that heterosexuality is morally wrong, irrational from a female perspective, unnecessary for human existence and the continuance of the species, anti-progress, intellectually, for the human species, and inherently violent and destructive to over half the population of the world. And of course, as I’ve said many times before, no one is born heterosexual, so this is a circumstance that absolutely doesn’t need to exist. If we stopped forcing girls into heterosexuality, male violence wouldn’t be the guiding force of human existence. But of course, preventing this is another matter altogether and adult females would fight tooth and nail against stopping the harm of their daughters, likely on the basis that isn’t fair to deny pussy to males.

Woman-Hate Isn’t Really ‘Hate’

One point the author danced around is the idea that all of the currently protected groups under hate crime legislation experience real hate whereas women experience, not hate, but the effects of male entitlement. The reasoning is this. The motivation for persecuting racial or religious groups (and even gays/lesbians) is to eradicate them, whereas males see a use for females, so don’t want them dead, but rather, subservient. So, I call bullshit here. In the history of the world, more women have died at the hands of males than specific racial or religious groups have at the hands of their oppressors. Currently, more women and girls die each week because of men and because they are female, than all persecuted groups combined in any given week. The woman writing is British, so if you look at how many non-whites are killed by whites due to racism in the UK every week, I think there is no comparison with femicide. And I think we’d find the same situation if comparing the prevalence of other lesser hate crimes, such as harassment. There have been what I’ll call ‘episodes’ or blips on the long timeline of human existence, where one group has tried to eradicate another group. There is nothing close to the comparitively short Nazi eugenics program for Jews today – in fact, they are generally, a very wealthy and powerful group now, and frequently show themselves to be effective oppressors of other groups, including women and children. My other favourite go-to oppressed group, American blacks were never targets for eradication. They were seen as a resource to be used and abused – kind of like how men have used women in the past and still do today. So the definition of hate as the desire to obliterate in total doesn’t work. Not all accepted hate targets are targets for elimination, and on the flip side, many males actually do want women to die.

I’d also argue, as I have in several past posts, that most, if not all, oppressions stem from woman hate, the reasoning being that males covet the vaginas and uteri of the females of their tribe, and any group (racial, ethnic or religious) that threatens these possessions and the bloodlines of their group are attacked. So males don’t want males from other groups raping or stealing their women and knocking them up, so they do what they can to take away the power of those ‘others’. So all racism is based in misogyny. Pretty simple to understand. With gays and lesbians, it is still woman-hate that fuels homophobia. Men are supposed to rape and possess women (instead of being penetrated like a woman), so gay dudes are a problem. Women are supposed to be raped and possessed by males, so lesbians are a problem as they are way too goddamned free and how dare they reject those who are superior to them? So how can groups that are persecuted on the basis of woman hate experience legitimate hate, while women are not truly hated?

Solutions?

Now, I agree with the author when she says that the legal system does not solve societal problems. The legal system was designed by men, for men. I think it can help racial groups and any group with males in it. And given what has happened, legally, to validate the trans, we know that male trannies are still male, no matter what the hell they’re wearing or what is going on in their Y-chromosome-filled brains. And it is for this reason that the law will not end problems specific to women. Women are not men, so the system doesn’t work for them. Males cannot conceive of being held universally accountable for their actions, even though they may throw a paltry few under the bus to keep up the appearance of ‘justice’.

But if you don’t advocate for the legal rights for women, and your only suggestion is education, which hasn’t produced any results in the millennia that women have been pleading with, and reasoning with, and educating males not to hurt them, then what hope is there?

Well, personally, I don’t think anything is going to change for women until they reject heterosexuality en masse, and that is NEVER going to happen. So my solutions are based on pure fantasy, meaning that they will never happen in the West or any place that pays lip service to human rights. Males would never allow women to take their power away, and there are too many handmaidens working against female liberation, human rights and dignity already to ever achieve a critical female opposition to changing the legal or social systems.

I don’t believe in system change, as I said, so any solution I would ever come up with would be grass roots or individually- or small-underground-group-run. I do, personally, like the idea of vigilantes working on behalf of wronged women. In Canada, our native people’s have some legal traditions for dealing with conflict in their communities, so why can’t women go further and develop their own justice system to deal with sex-based crimes? In my opinion, if a system doesn’t work for women, then they are justified in taking matters into their own hands. Males have done this many times in the past. Why can’t women? It can be organized, or it can operate more on a vigilante or extra-system level.

The Gulabi Gang founded by Sampat Pal in India is one of my favourite women’s vigilante groups. It started out very grassroots and individual – an single woman’s natural and justified response to a situation involving an abusive husband, and it has grown into a network of over 400,000 women. Women supporting women, armed with sticks and chasing down and beating the shit out of rapists. Not only would that never be allowed in the West, but I can’t even imagine Western women getting their thinking past the utter unfairness to men of giving them a taste of their own medicine. As an update, sadly, I found out that some of the Gang took issue with Sampat Pal over how she was running things, and turned on her, beating her with the very sticks meant for men, and she eventually got kicked out of her own organization. I think back to what I said in my last G post about women needing a few generations to heal before they could ever create their own high-functioning, woman-centric society.

Oh, and one last note, as no doubt someone is wondering why I haven’t talked about ‘misandry’, which is the current whiny accusation of Western males in response to feminism. Misandry – unjustified and pathological hatred of men – isn’t a thing. Males are oppressors and hate women reflexively for no rational reason. When women hate males, it is in response to the oppression and violence done by said males. It is therefore justified, not illogical or pathological or bigotry. This purported prejudice against males that is gaining traction in both testerical incel and liberal circles as something that must be addressed because of the increasing number of ‘poor suffering males’ doesn’t exist. The lies men tell are flimsy, but widely believed, and I’ll address this in my L is for Lies post. We all seem to like to believe males’ crocodile tears. But never fear, males are still on top, doing whatever the fuck they want, and they laugh, if they even notice at all, as women and girls suffer.

Again, this is part of the Alphabet Series as well as the Love = Hate Series

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