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

It’s a thin line between love and hate…

from the 1971 song of the same name by The Persuaders

Now, it’s a funny thing. This song was written by a couple of dudes and one of their complicit females warning other dudes that women can be crazy bitches. The gist is that women are happy to be used by men because that’s what women were designed for – but only up to a certain unknown point. And if you manage to reach your woman’s limit, watch out! She might maim or even kill you! This is a tired variation on the ‘hell hath no fury as a woman scorned’ theme. And most men and many women believe this stereotype to be true. But the reality is that women seldom, if ever, take revenge upon men, even if revenge is the least that men deserve after committing relationship atrocities. If women take any action in an abusive relationship, it is most often just fleeing – with a suitcase, if she’s lucky. See the craziest thing that women actually do is not taking revenge upon men, but bothering to get involved with them at all.

The song title, in actuality, is a much more appropriate description of the male approach to relationships with women, but with one major difference. Males don’t need to be abused or even have any kind of real excuse to snap and get violent. So often their love is violence of one sort or another. All women know this on some level as we are all told as girls that boys show us that they like us by antagonizing us or hitting us. But there is this expectation that they will somehow grow out of it – maybe after death – and besides there is a good one out there somewhere, right? So, women end up accepting that male love can look a lot like hate, and an expression of male love can turn into an expression of hate as if at the flip of a switch. Male emotionality is shallow, but intense and volatile. Let’s just say that male love is to human emotion as azidoazide azide is to chemistry. Personally, I think that ‘crazy bitch’ is a much more apt description of a man. And PMS actually stands for Permanent Man Syndrome. You see, Man, not Woman, is the wildly unpredictable, violently hormonal, nutjob breeding machine. And it isn’t monthly and temporary, but constant and forever. And in my tradition of mutating scrote-quotes, I say “Hell hath no fury as a man in love.”

Anyhow, despite the beginnings of this post, my purpose here is not to scratch the surface of heterosexual dynamics to reveal in shock and horror the countless examples of how men express their love for women. I have a whole Love=Hate series for what men do inside and outside relationships with women. And to be honest, straight woman problems are not only completely preventable, but their repetitiveness is boring as is women’s insistence on going back for more and more. I’m sick of hearing about them, and likely, some of you are as well. I think it’s very easy to become psychologically addicted to suffering – living it, complaining about it, reading about it, and ultimately doing nothing about it because pain has become your constant companion and what would you ever do without it? But that is a different, although related, topic, which I won’t get into today.

What I want to talk about is why humanity seems to be obsessed with love and pretending it is something other than it really is. It is treated as though it is the reason for our existence, and it seems to be much more of a distraction than even happiness or scheming to get rich. Why do I say this? Well, look at what passes for entertainment in the human world. There are more novels, songs, poems, fairy tales, artwork, and films about love than about any other topic. And of course, the bulk of this entertainment is created by males. But while it is superficially aimed at women and girls, everything is ultimately designed to serve males. I remember back when I was a teenager when it struck me for the first time as I was watching television that I was not actually the intended audience, and the messaging was not intended to lift me up as a female. I gradually came to realize that all creative material was that way – mostly designed by men for the male gaze and the male brain, but also designed to distract and brainwash women consuming the content. None of this entertainment, including television, is supposed to be analyzed from a female, let alone feminist, perspective. Even analysis of literature and poetry seldom gets feminist critique, and in this way, deeply misogynistic work, even if it is pretending to be empowering to women, can still get two thumbs up and win literary awards. Love ends up being defined by men, but obsessed over by women, even though men and women experience love fundamentally differently. I find that so many of our vaunted love stories would be more aptly categorized as ‘hate stories’. Yet women embrace them, and men profit from them.

Despite love being the central theme in entertainment, and thus making us believe that love is the most important thing in life, you need only to look at works of non-fiction to see what men really believe in. I’m going to borrow from the American experience to illustrate this, because as leaders of the so-called Free World who fought so hard for their liberation, what they say matters and often guides fledgling democracies. And besides, after dictatorships, no country does sloganeering and propaganda like the US.

If you go back to American beginnings, men define what is important in their Declaration of Independence: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. This is the foundational American slogan, and men still quote it today when outlining their rights as men and as Americans. Note that there is no love there. It’s not important. The inclusion of ‘the pursuit of hapiness’ was actually a replacement for the right to own ‘property’, which Jefferson did out of respect for black Americans (although remember that men could still legally own women), and is thought to have little meaning other than a subjective one. Male happiness could include drinking whiskey with abandon in a saloon, raping a prostitute and then going home and raping his wife, or killing animals for sport. And all of these could technically fit the definition of male love as well, I suppose, as vice, violence, glee and love seem to get twisted in the male mind. Women weren’t included in these important life elements – property, by definition, has no life, no freedom, and may not define their own happiness – but we know that males have always defined female love as sacrifice, devotion, loyalty, service, and suffering in silence. These are the themes of love stories, the propaganda men design to define female existence.

I leave you with this question and my opinion. If women, and I mean female separatists, of course, were ever to write their own declaration of independence, would they include ‘love’ in the list of rights? I think not, and I’ll tell you why. Under patriarchy, love is a tool of manipulation designed to keep women in line, distracted, focused on fantasy and hoping, and constantly feeling off-balance and insecure. Only patriarchal women cling to the pursuit of love and obsess over it, puzzling over the fact that expressions of male and female love look very different. Outside of patriarchy, I think love would be an outcome of female freedom, not a pursuit. Without men in the picture, love would not need to be listed in the rights and demands of women because it would just exist outside of context and wouldn’t be a bargaining chip used in power plays. I think relationships would look very different, as would artistic expression. And it certainly wouldn’t have any connection with violence.

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