Category Archives: Misogyny
R is for Risk or R is for Russian Roul-het
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Back in the late 1930’s, Swiss-American pulp fiction writer, Georges Surdez, first popularized the term ‘Russian Roulette’ to describe a very risky game of chance involving a single bullet, a gun to the head, and the precious and fascinating male brain in the throes of excitement, fear, and stupidity. The writer had indicated in notes and interviews that the practice he had put a name to had begun with the Russian army, but like with many beliefs, especially about history, there is no irrefutable proof of origin. There are however, references to similar gun-to-head practices in Russian literature, namely in 1840 by Mikhail Lermontov and later in 1913 by Alexander Grin (Grinevsky). Following the American popularizing of the game in books and film, Russian Roulette became both a proof of masculinity and a frightening and strange method of male suicide. For the purposes of this article, the history is rather unimportant as is listing and crying about all the dumb-ass males who died as a result of engaging in gun-play. The take-away here, in my opinion, is that risk-taking, and especially high-stakes risk-taking, are seen as a mark of masculinity and even bravery. Russian Roulette is only one of many practices that males, including male children, concoct and carry out in order to prove they are male. They do it without a thought to outcome, especially that of cleaning up the mess in the aftermath, paying the bills for any damages, and taking care of them in a wounded or permanently disabled state when things go wrong. You just don’t hear stories of women and girls doing the kinds of dumb shit that men and boys do unless they are influenced by males and end up along for the ride to prove loyalty or love. Males risking their lives by doing dumb shit or even doing socially-approved dangerous stuff will often end up rescued and taken care of by females, so they don’t actually need to think about potential outcomes for their dumbassery. Women usually aren’t so lucky, though and perhaps that is part of why we don’t see them playing Russian Roulette, setting their farts on fire, or jumping off roofs into piles of leaves or snow, etc.
The assumption is that females are not risk-takers of either the stupid or the potentially big pay-off varieties, and females are almost never seen to be brave or heroic – the one major exception being engaging in pregnancy and motherhood, which is actually neither brave nor heroic. We just say it’s brave in order to keep women in their assigned roles as breeding machines.
But I’m going to argue here that women are, in fact, bigger risk-takers than men, that their biggest risks are far dumber than men’s risks because there are mountains of data to back up the odds of death and destruction, and that the biggest risks they take are part of their own special version of what I’ll call Russian Roul-het. The major difference between male and female risks is that males make up their own games, while females continue to engage in survival behaviour that used to be forced on them throughout history, but that isn’t actually required to survive anymore. And the fact that the risk-taking is no longer forced makes it the dumbest risk-taking of all.
So what is female Russian Roul-het? Well, it is the heterosexual contract that outlines the transactional exchange of female sexual and domestic services for male money and protection. The perpetual transaction underlies an entire lifestyle that today’s women willingly seek out, sign up for, and refuse to give up even after it goes horribly wrong. Men designed this forced contract long ago, and as a result, it is so ingrained in all societies that even as times have changed, this area of social and economic traditions has remained relatively intact. In the past, girls grew up knowing that they had no choice but to marry and essentially become a domestic prostitute, servicing one male. A paltry few might somehow find their way into spiritual and psychological prostitution to a god. And a significant, unfortunate minority ended up in public prostitution, servicing any and all males. And of course, there were anomalies every so often who didn’t fit into a lady-category and escaped all forms of prostitution. But of the three main categories, all but the first option usually led to poverty and the occasional rich courtesan doesn’t negate this rule, by the way. Marriage didn’t guarantee wealth and security, but the false belief was created that it did and that it allowed women to fulfill their true purpose – breeding – in safety. And of course, despite the complacency and acceptance of many caged birds all over the world, history is also filled to the brim with women trapped in dangerous, inescapable marriage prisons, unable to earn their own money; dead at the hands of husbands or in childbirth; or thrown into poverty after the untimely death of their owner. The stories and statistics have mostly remained untold and thus erased from history. It is easy for all to pretend it didn’t exist and that the heterosexual contract was largely good for women.
It is only recently that in most places, women have achieved the freedom to reject it all, live as adults instead of dependent halflings, and actually contribute meaningfully to society through paid work. Of course, despite this relatively new freedom and the ability to support themselves, most women still choose one of these paths deeply rooted in female slavery. It is the mark of the continued and very successful colonization and brainwashing of females that women haven’t come to understand their shared and tragic history and run screaming through the open doors of their cages. Many women do realize that is it harder in many ways to live separately from men and to reject the trappings of femininity, and will rationalize their lifestyle choices in a variety of ways in order to reap the benefits of heterosexuality and fit into mainstream society. Some will even pretend that women are equal now and will choose to financially support male partners while still providing the sexual, domestic and emotional services that women traditionally offered in a heterosexual transaction. So if you think about it, many men are getting more out of marriage now than they ever used to, except perhaps the ego boost or power trip of having a woman fully under his control in all ways.
Yet despite these changes to the fabric of society, female Roul-het is probably the riskiest and deadliest game around. It is confusing and frankly, a little boring to talk about domestic abuse statistics because no one is actually interested in understanding what they really mean or changing the system that supports male power. Yet, they are talked about constantly. Everyone knows what a women’s shelter is, even if they’ve never visited one. Every one of us has known an abused woman. Many of us come from families where violence, psychological, or sexual abuse occurred. And everyone accepts it. If we didn’t accept it as a society, we’d obliterate heterosexuality and marriage and perhaps even men themselves. Instead, we pretend male violence happens to ‘someone else’. Mothers pretend it won’t happen to their daughters and dream of weddings and grandchildren, and daughters can’t imagine that their future husbands would ever do something horrible to them. There are handfuls here and there around the world of mostly heterosexual women who call themselves feminists who pretend that male violence can be somehow eliminated through education and correct parenting and government programs. And then we continue to fund shelters, and rape crisis centres, and anger management programs for violent men. And magically the statistics never go down. Girls keep dating boys and women keep marrying men. And the police, doctors, and social workers are kept in business dealing with the outcomes of male love.
Let’s put this in perspective. If you play the male version of Russian Roulette, you put a single bullet in a gun’s 6-bullet chamber, give it a spin, put it to your head, and pull the trigger, you have a 17% chance of doing some damage to your head and perhaps even dying from it. If you play the female version of Russian Roul-het – in other words, get with a male though dating, common-law partnership or marriage, there is at least a 27% chance and upwards of a 44% chance (if you include more types of abuse) of experiencing physical, sexual and/or psychological violence in that relationship. Male partner violence is the leading cause of injury to women – more than car accidents and violent crimes committed by strangers combined. Now personally, I haven’t met a practising straight woman who hasn’t experienced abuse from a male, and included in this mountain of women are highly educated, highly independent, and highly intelligent people. It doesn’t make a difference. Myself, if I were a betting woman, and I’m not, AND I could separate the ick factor from the odds in both situations, I’d feel safer putting a gun to my head than I would getting intimately involved with a male. Them’s the data. You cannot argue with raw crime data, and even with self-report data that I believe are very low for obvious reasons. Regardless, they are available on numerous websites for any and all women and girls to see. But women stubbornly hold the false believe that they are safe with men, thanks to a lifetime of brainwashing through family, school, and entertainment.
Now you tell me, who takes more unnecessary and stupid risks: men or women? And here is an added bonus question. If you were to consider investing in the stock market, would you plunk your life savings down without doing research into the history of the stock, the rate of return on investment, whether the stock is high or low risk, etc? No, of course not. So why would you enter a potentially fatal and very possibly dangerous and soul-destroying situation without doing your research – or even worse, knowing and ignoring the risk based on years of historical data? It boggles the mind, but you have to admire the fact that the heterosexual lifestyle was one of the most successful schemes cooked up by men to this date.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Yes, he hit me
And it felts like a kiss
He hit me
And I knew I loved him
And then he took me in his arms
With all the tenderness there is
And when he kissed me
He made me hisHe Hit Me (And It Felt Like a Kiss) written by Gerry Goffin and Carole King for the Crystals in 1962
Q is for Queer
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
from Jane Siberry’s “Mimi on the Beach”, 1984, when ‘queer’ was still a slur in some places. Jane herself is a Canadian gay-lesbian musical icon, although she is not really a publicly declared lesbian, or rather, her sexuality is not part of her public identity. I admire her for this, as I have issues with sexual labels since we don’t understand much about women’s natural sexuality. I only care that she isn’t fucking dudes, and that is not the same thing as identity or labels 😉One girl laughs at skinny guys
Someone else points out a queer
Well, they’re all jocks, both guys and girls
Press the button, take your cue
I think it is interesting to follow issues across generations. Sometimes, feelings on a topic or event will endure across generations despite the young having no true understanding of or real connection to what has happened. For example, I experienced this when I lived in Nanjing, China. My students had a deep and aggressive hatred of the Japanese despite the atrocities committed in their city having occurred two generations prior, despite currently living in prosperity and despite most to all never having met a Japanese person in their lives. But there is a collective memory of the event that is kept alive across generations in places where the Japanese did their worst, so you don’t experience this anti-Japanese sentiment in other parts of China.
You can also witness the opposite – newer generations exhibiting neither understanding of nor sympathy nor empathy for past violence or oppressive acts and thus acting in a very dismissive or flip way due to ignorance. I suppose this can happen when the oppression or oppressed group is not taken seriously by society, there is no collective memory formed, and the impact is not conveyed across time through intergenerational discussion. A good example of this is the long history of the oppression of women. Women don’t acknowledge a shared worldwide trauma due to male violence, and often don’t even know their own class history. Instead, they promote collusion with and subservience to the male oppressor class to new generations of females and punish rebellion. Talk of reality is stigmatized as ‘too negative’.
Likewise with the long oppression of homosexuals. While that oppression still exists, how it manifests has changed in some, but not all, ways. The past use of the word ‘queer’ as a slur that folks from the Baby Boomer generation can still recall, doesn’t resonate at all with today’s youth as there is little to no acknowledgment nor intergenerational discussion of gay and lesbian oppression. And consequently, the slur has, with little consideration, been ‘reclaimed’ and turned into an identity used and abused by many who are not gay or lesbian at all.
So my questions are these: where is the balance between acknowledging and respecting the violence and inequality of the past and being able to move on and be better as a society? And with specific regard to the topic today, can and should historic slurs be reclaimed, and if so, who should be allowed to do so? And can reclamation be considered appropriation, if the ones doing the reclaiming are not members of the historically slurred group?
Now I do have my own opinion regarding the reclamation of slurs and other hate speech. But I’m not going to tell you what to think until the end, as this is a topic of debate and I’m not sure if there is an objective right or wrong answer. There are probably points to be made on the various sides. What I will say is that what is objectively true is that society is not uniform in the application of their opinion to different groups, and I think it is a matter of respect-giving due to the presence of males in oppressed groups. Groups focused on females only or mixed groups that don’t conform to patriarchal gender expectations are universally discounted, censored and disrespected, while racial and religious groups, which have macho males and compliant females within its ranks are respected and allowed to have and talk about a shared history. As a result, we are still dealing with supposedly reclaimed and repurposed slurs against women and homosexuals, while this is never an issue for racial and religious groups.
So, I’m not going to go through a whole history of queerdom here. This has been done elsewhere in numerous places, although not always very well. I’ll briefly touch on the whens and whys of the repurposing of the term queer, and I’ll spend more time talking about why queer identity might be so popular amongst younger people today even though they are not themselves the creators. And then you can make up your mind about the whole thing yourself.
The Reclamation of Queer
At the risk of oversimplifying a development in thinking that is needlessly convoluted, I’ll say the following: I believe the reclamation of ‘queer’ came out of the academic thinking on the ways of knowing and being posited by poststructuralism and postmodernism coupled with a typical, youthful, cultural rebellion against the norms of society. The former talked about there being no real truth. All reality is subjective. Everything is socially constructed and rooted in power dynamics and systems. Nothing, including words or language, has a singular meaning that we can all understand. And the latter did what all generational rebellions do – they challenged what was mainstream at the time and proposed an opposing way of living life and finding one’s place in the world. But remember that all rebellious movements end up the same way – in their efforts to ‘not conform’, they end up being very conformist. It is very much like how oppressed groups that rise up aggressively and even violently end up becoming oppressors eventually. We’ve seen both trends in counter-culture movements throughout time.
Anyhow, when applied to sexuality, we ended up with queer theory and the development of queer as an identity. It challenged the idea of ‘fixed identity’, especially fixed sexual, gender and sexuality identities, and it attacked the use of what was considered to be constructed binary categories, including male/female and gay/straight. Everything is socially constructed, even the things scientists know are biologically based and objectively true, so everything is open to interpretation and is fluid in its existence. Basically, nothing means anything, and we have nothing to anchor our understanding and communication.
But, the movement and theory offered people who didn’t feel they fit in the means and permission to create their own way of knowing and being that was unique and special and to house it under the umbrella term ‘queer’. Using the former slur to describe a new identity caught on in the 1980’s and 1990’s, and despite the passage of time, it is still as undefinable and hard to understand as it was in the beginning – perhaps even moreso with the development of more and more and more micro-identities and associated jargon and labels. There are million of examples of people trying to explain their queer identities online, and I’ll provide one here to illustrate how unuseful all of this is.
“Bisexuality it doesn’t encapsulate the nuance of my sexuality – Here’s what that means. While I find cisgender men attractive, I am not authentically me when I date them. For me, “bisexual” means being sexually attracted to all genders and gender expressions, but “homoromantic” means I only have romantic feelings in queer relationships. Because this is a little complex, I just say “queer.”
Okay, so I had to read that a few times, and in the end, I still didn’t understand who this person was, or not that I care, whom they are willing to date. I have found with the queer that ironically, in trying to ‘identify’, they end up being completely unidentifiable – in other words, extremely hard to pin down and get to know. How can you make a substantive friendship with someone if you don’t understand who and what they are and what they think and what the hell their words even mean?
Now, personally, I don’t care about people’s constructed identities. As far as I’m concerned, you can call yourself whatever you want in your private life, and I oppose constructed categories for women as a rule. With males, I’m fine putting them in a single box called ‘predator class’ and then staying the hell away from them as much as possible. But I am invested in females finding and developing their natural selves apart from male oppression. But postmodernism, queer theory and queer identities don’t solve this problem for women. Rather, they make the problem worse by taking meaning away from things that actually mean something historically, and politically, and sometimes, objectively. When you’re talking about things concerning historically oppressed groups, the personal is always political. So the actions of the so-called queer have had massive sociopolitical effects on those for whom the slur, queer, was originally intended: gays and lesbians. For example, queer studies has taken over gay and lesbian studies departments and courses, which were initially rather difficult to establish due to homophobia, and this has served to erase the long oppression of homosexuality and to refocus on the queer, many of whom are not oppressed or whose proclaimed ‘oppression’ usually just ends up being bullied because of having pink hair. Further, Pride and other extremely important cultural and political groups and events have also been infiltrated and taken over by the queer, which has served to alienate the very people who started the groups and movements. Gays and lesbians who refuse the queer label and who oppose the takeover of queers, institutionally and culturally, are then labelled exclusive, bigoted, phobic of one form or another, and experience, yet again, the censorship and even violence that they’ve struggled with throughout history. The ‘inclusive’ focus of the queer has served to erase historic oppression and to impose a ‘join or die’ ultimatum on people who have very secure and easily definable sexual identities and have fought hard to have them recognized.
The Rise of Queer Identities Among Youth
It’s interesting to note that queer wasn’t born during the Millennial or Gen Z generations, but has taken hold with them and is perpetuated, or maybe ‘marketed’ is the better word, through their social media personas. Why would something that came from from theory proposed by members of the Silent and Baby Boomer Generations, and peddled to members of Gen X – my generation – be so appealing to today’s young people? I’ll propose some thoughts and if you have any of your own, I’m happy to hear them.
- Queer has something very adolescent about it that hasn’t matured over the years. In essence, it comes across as youthful identity-seeking, which is a normal part of growing up. Every generation has its counter-culture. And if it weren’t queer, it would be something else. It actually doesn’t matter what the identity is, as long as it goes against the mainstream. And while a minority might actually understand the sociopolitical origins of this identity, most don’t and only cling to the identity to feel like they are opposing something bad, and perhaps to find some superficial pleasure in the required fashion and its shock value in the general public. In my generation, although queer was finding a foothold, the trendy, counter-culture identity was punk. Most punkers at the time didn’t really understand what the movement was about in a deep way, but revelled in the fashion, the reactions they received, and the false feeling that they were changing the world. And I think you can say the same about the queer movement. But regardless of counter-culture identity, all you need to do is to ask adherents what they believe, and you’ll find out where they’re coming from. Most will be unable to provide a coherent answer, a contingent will have memorized all the talking points and will come across as militant robots who will kill you if you oppose them, and a tiny minority will actually be able to speak with intelligence and nuance about their beliefs and their actions that support their beliefs.
- Coupled with 1), many people identify as queer due to social contagion, peer pressure and the need to conform and belong while ironically feeling like they are nonconformist and renegade. At this point, there is almost a cult-like recruitment aspect of the queer identity, and like a snowball rolling down a steep hill, it is hard to avoid getting caught up in the slogans and self-righteousness of queers pretending to fight along social justice lines.
- We are living in the most narcissistic period in history, and I don’t mean clinical narcissism, I just mean an overblown self-centredness or egotism. This current time period is marked by a need to be a) special and liked coupled with a need to publicly and widely advertise one’s real and, if need be, newly minted, oppressions. Queer is notoriously inclusive, which allows people with extremely easy lives the chance to take on an oppression identity and use it as a weapon against targeted enemies. The funny thing is that queer people with actual, but socially unacceptable, oppressions will often overlook or fail to acknowledge them in favour of a made-up oppression that is more fashionable or accepted. A good example of this is women who refuse to acknowledge that they are oppressed as females because the world refuses to do anything about this longest-running human rights issue, but will latch onto undefinable and meaningless queer identities that give them a highly supported whining oppression platform.
- It allows people to escape gender conformity without actually naming the real problem and suffering the consequences of truth-telling. The real problem is male domination of females, but it is much easier to shave your head or stop wearing dresses, call yourself queer and drop barrels full of shit onto radical feminists or non-queer gays and lesbians. You can’t make progress on social issues if you don’t understand why the issues exist to begin with and who is actually responsible for creating and maintaining them. So many rebellions and movements arise without deep analysis or understanding on the part of the soldiers fighting the war. This is nothing new.
- If you are a lesbian, you will get more approval calling yourself queer than lesbian. These days, many things that are seen as ‘exclusive’ are the target of eradication. Inclusivity, even if it erases small, but significant, oppressed groups, is the goal of today’s movements. And when we talk about exclusivity, let’s face it, we are talking about excluding men from women’s lives and allowing females to be free from male violence and oppression. Racial groups (except whites) are still allowed to be exclusive, of course, because males are still part of those groups and still run the show in all cases. But any group that excludes males is deemed oppressive and must be destroyed. This is a relatively recent development in Western culture and it represents a backward slide in human rights, in particular, women’s rights, and even more particularly, in lesbians’ rights. There are a few people still fighting eradication. The Get the L Out group based in the UK is one such group, and they are the targets of heaps of abuse.
- It still supports the established power structure while feeling like positive social change. Queer is a male-dominance movement if you strip it down and look at it honestly. A lot of today’s queer fuel comes from the trans cult, which is as pro-male, pro-gender, pro-female-submission, and pro-lesbian-erasure as any conservative or macho movement. I’m still convinced that groups that have sociopolitical power and make changes that happen relatively quickly are, under the surface, not changing anything at all, but supporting the existing power structures and systems.
Conclusion
To come back to my initial questions. I’m a big fan of balance, but I think it is really hard to find in this world. We either cling to the past with irrational, unanalyzed emotionality in order to maintain oppressive systems, or we erase the past and replace it with something looks different, but still doesn’t change those oppressive systems. What would it look like to actually acknowledge what is going on…?
Finally, with regard to slur reclamation, I’m of the opinion that we should treat slurs like any museum exhibit. Preserve the memory and meaning, and then leave it in the past, but under glass for all to see if they choose. I don’t think keeping something in active circulation strips it of its former power, and I think it is a mark of disrespect to attempt this. In the case of the queer slur-turned-identity, I don’t think anything has been achieved. While initial reclamation was by gays and lesbians in the 1980’s – the actual targets of this slur – today, it is used by people with no historic claim to it. I think that is disrespect and a demonstration of ignorance. But you can make up your own minds, of course. As I said earlier, this is a topic of debate, not a mathematical proof with a clear, correct answer.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
P is for Purity
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Okay, where to start… Well, first off, I’ll just say that the plans I had for the remainder of the P-posts went out the window today thanks to a confusing experience I had when I was briefly out and about this morning. I spent the rest of the day hemming and hawing, as I don’t like throwing out good plans, and I’ve been hesitant to name the country where I currently live. Not sure why – I named and wrote plenty about China when I lived there. But what the hell. I’ve already written a number of posts about my time here in the country of Georgia, and I’ve started to think of them collectively as ‘The Georgia Files’. If you want to check them out, there are below:
- O is for Ownership – Part I
- Tits Out: An Observation
- When a 5-Year-Old Boy Creeps You Out
- Sexual Assault: The Quintessence of Femalehood
- It’s Biology: They’ve Got “Surround, Terrorize and Destroy” Down to an Art at 12
- Cry Like a Boy vs. Cry Like a Girl: An Observation
I will write a more in-depth analysis of Georgia one day. I’m not ready. This place is very weird, and I’m still trying to figure it out, you see. The only two reasons – and when I say ‘only two’, I really mean that – that I continue to stay here is that you can stay visa-free for a year, repeatedly, and it is cheaper than most places. But that’s it. I honestly can’t think of anything else I like about this country, including the food, the infrastructure, the people, and the religion-infected culture. Despite the horribleness of China, there are actually things I do miss about it, and even in the midst of living there, I could name things that I liked about my life there. Here, I can’t. I can’t name a single thing I like. And yes, my goal is to find a way to leave, but it takes time. I don’t believe in whining publicly without making a serious attempt to solve your problem.
Anyhow, religion. It is because of that that I decided to rejig my Series plan. You see, few things rile me up more than the topic of religion. I am a militant atheist, and I get so sick of religious people of ALL faiths pretending that they are these innocent oppressed victims. Even religions that are legitimately persecuted are also ALWAYS horrible oppressors of various groups of people – women and girls, first and foremost, and every single one of these religions engages in acts of hate while at the same time preaching peace and love. And every single one of them demands religious tolerance while actively engaging in acts and policies of intolerance and even humans rights abuse. I’m sick of it. It also annoys me when women claim they are feminists and then go on to willingly participate in religion, which let’s face it, is one of the primary weapons of male society used to infect, brainwash, subordinate, and destroy females. I also get annoyed when so-called feminists demonstrate a need to cling to the fantasy of there being a supernatural creator despite no evidence or logic. I’m sure the need to believe in something stems from various childhood fears and family-based programming, but I see things this way: I’m a trained scientist and the default position of untainted scientific methods is to try to disprove the null hypothesis, which is the default. In other words, there is nothing until you can PROVE otherwise. Finally, I’ve had enough of religious people trying to wiggle out of their moral crimes by insisting that atheism is a religion too (it’s not; it’s just a simple rejection of belief, not an entire system of laws based on pure fantasy, fear and hate) or that Hitler was an atheist (he wasn’t; he was a pantheist who elevated nature to the status of a god of sorts). I’m not sure if I’ll do an R is for Religion at this point. I fear I’ll devolve into a bit of an R is for Rant, and I try to avoid that as there is enough of it on the internet already.
Sooo, today, I popped out to the corner shop to pick up a few things to put in my almost-empty refrigerator. The first thing I noticed was police officers directing traffic at the intersection near my apartment for no apparent reason that I could see. As I got closer to the shops, I saw a river of people in the streets. Kind of a strange place for them – they were moving along slowly to which destination, I couldn’t figure out. There were hundreds and hundreds of them. And I saw the Orthodox Christian priests in their long black robes, carrying their flags and crosses and portraits of saints. What the hell was going on? I thought to myself, “Not another fucking holiday…” We just had Mother’s Day, Victory Day, Saint Andrew’s Day, and Easter – all just in May alone. And we’ve still got Independence Day this month. So, I wove my way through the crowd, bought my stuff and then returned home so that I could hit the internet and find out the answer to “What now…?” And my search resulted in me writing this post and including it in my Alphabet Series.
Today is Family Purity Day. Just the name of the holiday makes me feel nauseous. But I wanted to find out what that meant, as the label comes across as some sort of euphemism for something unsavoury. I know how other religions define ‘purity’, and how other countries define their Family Purity Days, and approximately 100% of the time it has something to do with women being whores and menstrual blood making females into impure, disgusting, untouchable non-humans. Yes, I’m looking at all of you Muslims and those Jews on the stricter end of the religious spectrum. The Orthodox Christians also hate female menstrual blood, and women are forced to wear scarves on their head when they are menstruating in order to announce to the world that they are unclean. Buddhists are the same. Females are considered to be unclean and there are various spaces that may not be entered by females and certain objects that may not be touched by females. This may not be universal, but Tibet and Myanmar, for sure, bar women from full participation. No religion is immune from upholding the idea that it is females and not males who are unclean, and this doesn’t make sense to me in the slightest. All evidence shows us that men are filthy, smell worse, generate more filth, don’t give a shit about living in a clean environment, and carry and pass on all sorts of diseases to women through their ‘who cares’ attitude that derives from male privilege. But no, it is women and girls who are unclean. Now, imagine substituting a particular racial group for ‘female’ and imagine the uproar. This has happened in the past, and we see these events as dark days. Yet, these days, liberal Western tourists have no problem with giving money to religious organizations and historical monuments that advertise their misogyny in plain language on signs. Misogyny is still much, much more of a problem than racism today, and no one gives a shit.
But Family Purity Day here in Georgia is about another kind of woman-hate. It focuses on anti-gay and -lesbian action, which is rooted in misogyny, and upholds traditional, pro-rape, anti-woman, heterosexual, religious values. This day of hate was started in 2014 by the Orthodox Church as a ‘take that!’ reaction to the 2013 gay and lesbian rally commemorating the International Day Against Homophobia, which is normally held on May 17 around the world. Religious people and even the priests themselves had shown up and committed acts of violence against the gay community attending the rally – probably to express their peace and love and acceptance that is built into all religions. Following the bloodshed, Georgia was punished by the European Court of Human Rights for their violence demanding almost 200,000 Euros in payment (to whom, I am not sure – hopefully to the 30 people who were injured by the priests and other shitheads). Reminiscent of how Christian invaders in the British Isles colonized the Celts long ago by timing all their religious celebrations at the same time as the Celtic holidays, the Georgian religious fanatics decided that May 17th would be an excellent time to hold their Family Purity Day. Despite the violence of the past, the current government fully supports harm to gays and lesbians, and this year, has drafted an amendment to the constitution to further limit the rights and freedoms of homosexuals, including prohibiting them from working in education, government and cultural institutions. Some people here are worried that Georgia’s 2022 application to enter the European Union will be denied, and I hope to hell, they are cut off from that and much more. This is not a good country.
I feel it somewhat ironic that having lived in a few parts of Georgia, I ended up being drawn, and without knowing in advance, to the location where Anne Lister, the woman dubbed ‘the first modern lesbian’ died after a brave and adventurous life. She’d likely be saddened, but unsurprised, by what is happening currently in her place of death. But I have to admit, I’m not really surprised either.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
O is for Ownership – Part II
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
You don’t own me
Don’t try to change me in any way…And please, when I go out with you
from “You Don’t Own Me” (1963) – a woman’s point-of-view on what she wants, written by two men. How unusual… And women, including the original singer, Lesley Gore, consider this to be ’empowering’…
Don’t put me on display..
I sometimes wonder whether what we loosely term ‘feminism’ is just another distraction orchestrated by men to keep women busy and feeling like they are fighting for something, but actually accomplishing nothing substantive. Case in point, like the song “You Don’t Own Me”, so many of what women consider to be ‘feminist anthems’ were written or co-written by men, and the message is almost always “I want to keep serving you, but I have limits to the abuse I’ll take from you. So I’m gonna get mad and stamp my feet, and you’ll have to make some empty promises, so that I can keep telling myself that men are worth saving. Then, things will go back to the way they were, for the most part. But at least you don’t own me.”
Well, I’m going to save a discussion of lady-empowerment songs for another time, but the bottom line here is that women’s publicly aired anger at and frustration with men doesn’t mean a damned thing if, at the end of the day, they all still go back to sucking their dicks and accepting minor or temporary concessions or a few minutes of penile attention as proof of respect or love. The only thing men understand besides violence, is denial of service. And very few women are willing to take their anger that far, even though cutting off the gynergy fountain isn’t in any way a violent or extreme solution. Men allow certain feminist distractions, such as the pursuit of elusive equality between the sexes, but not liberation. But it is empowering to sing men’s words and pretend that they change our lives, I suppose.
But anyhow, let’s get back to the topic at hand: ownership.
It is clear, if you live in the world and are a thinking woman, that males and females define ownership (and many other concepts for that matter) differently. But it is always men’s definitions that matter, even if they are irrelevant or even harmful to women. Men define how we live, what we are allowed to have access to, what we think and say and do, and as I mentioned above, they even orchestrate our sociopolitical beliefs and movements. Many women end up going along to get along because it is easier, less dangerous, and more profitable. Those who dare to define their parameters or even to just question the male paradigm end up being outcasts and worse. So as a result, we still don’t fully understand what ownership means to women, just as we don’t understand female sexuality, female abilities, or female psychology. So in various senses of the word, men own women’s realities. I did a cursory look for any research on sex differences in the understanding of ownership, and I found one. It was authored by a man, of course, and it hails from Canada, and dates back to 1994. So obviously, this is a hot topic. Without going into a lot of detail, I’ll summarize dude’s findings with the following examples of typical male and female thinking on ownership:
Male: That shit is mine and mine alone. If you touch it, there will be repercussions because you’re violating my right as a man to have this shit.
Female: In owning this shit, I feel a sense of responsibility, pride and connectedness with myself, others and the world.
And it may be no surprise to you – and we see this in tons of psychological research on sex differences on a whole range of issues – that men are, generally speaking, simplistic, black-and-white, self-centred, entitled thinkers. Women, on the other hand, are deeper, more complex and nuanced thinkers. I can’t help but be reminded, yet again, of how male neglect and dismissal of women’s thinking and psychology has likely held back the development of societies around the world throughout history, and has hastened the destruction of the planet. If this conclusion pisses you off, please note that I’m not saying anything new here, although perhaps more bluntly than you’re used to – men demonstrate how they operate every single day, and their thinking is present in how every single society is structured and operates. Whether on a personal, local, or national level, ownership in the eyes and minds of men is an exclusive right to enjoy, use or abuse that which one claims as one’s own, at will, and to use force to defend it.
Ownership is a vast topic, and I’d love to teach a college-level course on it. Some of the sub-topics would include: the history of marriage, the slavery of women, and the concept of the body as property and a product to be owned, rented, marketed and traded. We could explore the limits of female ownership, especially the interesting contradiction mothers often post in asserting ownership of their children without interference from the government or the public, yet expecting society to foot the bills associated with this privilege. And then, we could explore other forms of human ownership – that of group slavery throughout history – which stems from male ownership of females, although the latter is generally NOT acknowledged as ownership for very obvious reasons. We could also talk about ownership in a political sense from the point of view of capitalism and consumerism, libertarianism, anarchism, socialism, and communism, and how poverty and some element of ownership are major issues in each of those systems. There is also the geopolitical issue of country-formation and border defence. The only reason we have countries is because of men’s need to own everything under the sun. And war is a direct result of men’s need to own land, culture and people. We could then get into more modern ethical issues of patents and copyright, and whether anyone has the right to own and control water sources or plant life or ideas or words. And there is so much more. I think it would be a fascinating multidisciplinary course, but I don’t think it would be allowed these days, especially if taught by a woman.
Now, I can’t address all of that here in this post, although some topics may appear in later Alphabet Series articles, but I’ll talk briefly about a few issues surrounding property ownership.
I remember when I was 17, my mother was studying to become a real estate agent, which was kind of funny because she’d never worked hard for anything in her life, including in her career as a mother and housewife, and she had no clue how much time agents had to put into the job if they wanted to build a profitable career. Needless to say, that job never panned out for her, but she was fine even following divorce – she did what works for many women, she was supported through alimony and child support that didn’t go to supporting children, and then went on the prowl for a wealthy man. She eventually found one, and luckily, he died after a few years and left her a pile of money. If you have a lazy nature and can stomach being a man’s whore, then this is the best and easiest route to surviving as a woman in this world. Be offended, if you wish, but I’m stating a blunt truth about how this world works.
So, one day, I was sitting outside the back of the family home with my mother and father who was still living with us, and mother said to me: “Here’s what you should do. You should buy a house and rent out the rooms to pay the mortgage.” Basically, an investment strategy, that is much more common now than it was in the 1980’s. I remember looking at her then, and I didn’t have a response. Well, I had learned not to have a response to anything she said because she was a clinical narcissist and any questioning or disagreement could lead to punishment and other insanity. But over the years, and still remembering that nugget of ignorant wisdom imparted to me, I have a response. First, I’d never qualify for a mortgage in Canada. Never have, never will. It’s difficult if you’re not a conventional person with a stable and high income. Second, despite my parents buying their first home only because their parents gave them money to afford it, I know my parents would NEVER have helped me. And I was cut out of all family inheritances by my mother when I was 20. Third, I don’t believe in buying things that I can’t pay for outright – debt is akin to imprisonment, in my opinion. I’ve been dirt poor, but I’ve never been in debt. And finally, over the years, I’ve come to agree with anarchist and communist thinking that landlords are a scourge, and as I see more of the world and note how fucked up life is becoming for poor people in so-called ‘privileged’ countries, such as my own, these beliefs have become firmer. I have no problem whatsoever with private property ownership, which I’ll talk more about below, but I have very specific ideas about how money should be earned, what should never be an income source, and the necessity for safe, affordable housing for all people.
No woman is safe. Owning property and having money helps and gives you options, which can be the difference between life and death in some cases, but it doesn’t guarantee safety or freedom from men. Ownership is the domain of men. It is the basis of their hierarchy of power – the more they own, the more power they have. Women don’t exist on the same hierarchy. We’re not allowed to own much, including our own bodies, although to some extent, women can own the children they produce. We are more likely to own property and things through orbiting males or gaining family help, including inheritance, but it doesn’t help us escape our sexual subordination in the world. I talk about this more in my post, M is for Mother.
Further, when you orbit a male, you, and by extension, everything you own, is owned by him. This is the history of the world. Once upon a time, a man could rape you and own you. In some cultures, you’d be dirtied and have no choice but to marry him. In other cultures – and this is still happening today in places such as Kyrgyzstan and rural China, a man can abduct a woman or girl, rape her, and own her because she has no escape. In many cultures, once the rape or abduct and marry scheme fell out of fashion, families mostly just resorted to selling their daughters to men. Sometimes complete strangers to the girl, sometimes, distant family members or friends of the family. And different cultures had different names and practices for this financial transaction. And any property or belongings women brought to the marriage became the property of the husband. The best part of this change of ownership is that it has been sold as a female invention, has often being described as a scheme to trap men, and throughout history has been bolstered by denying women access to education and the job market and leaving them dependent on marriage for survival. Cultures have evolved fairy tales and other propaganda that are fed to little girls to romanticize being swept away by Prince Charming, and to see their wedding day as the best day of their life. Over time, brides themselves have become the ones to plan their own slavery, to pour energy into organizing their wedding event, with males wasting no energy at all in an institution that was designed by them, for them. And even today, the wedding industrial complex is one of the most profitable patriarchal inventions on the planet, and women, despite being allow to participate in society and achieve financial freedom, still choose to be owned. Every married woman that I know – and there aren’t many anymore – is smart and capable except when it comes to her marriage or partnership. The men own their attention, energy and time, and it amazes me when an otherwise independent female friend will turn down or cancel a plan with me because she is afraid of being punished by her male partner for denying him attention. Slavery exists and it’s called heterosexuality, in my experience.
Getting back to property ownership, there are all sorts of facts and figures out there about how much of the world’s property women actually own. It gets confusing because surveys don’t measure how women get property. I’d bet that most of the time, women gain land through orbiting men and they either co-own, have the property put in their name, or they win it in a divorce, buy it with the money won in divorce proceedings, or their owner dies and they inherit land. Women may also inherit property from family or get help from family in making a purchase. What we do know is that never-married single women are the least likely to own property, and they are the only group of women with a sex gap in % of ownership compared to men. Married, divorced and widowed women in the US have closed the gap in property ownership over the last 30 years. When you don’t orbit cock, you still don’t earn as much as men and don’t benefit from a male salary.
It is interesting to look at property ownership internationally. Contrary to what many people think and the stereotypes they may have, property ownership isn’t more common in wealthier countries. Almost none of the countries with 80%+ home ownership is a wealthy country. If you look at the ratio of owner-occupied units to total residential units, you see a reflection of a combination of government policy, property prices, ease in getting mortgages, level of interest rates, and societal mentality on home-buying. Laos and Romania have about 96% home ownership. Ninety percent of Cubans and Chinese own their dwelling. Canada and the US sit at about 66%. And just over half of Japanese homes are owned. And speaking for my own country, up to 6% of our homes are owned by foreign investors currently. This has likely had a negative effect on lower-income, local, potential home-buyers, and I know that many younger people in Canada can’t even wrap their heads around the idea of trying to buy property. Myself, I remember working for a short, agonizing spell in a private kindergarten in China catering to rich people, and I met one mother who told me she had just bought a house in one of Canada’s most expensive cities over the internet. She’d never even been to Canada before. And the last time I was in Canada, I was renting a room in a house that was put up for sale. Chinese real estate agents were coming through the house doing a video tour with foreign buyers. Canada recently implemented a foreign buyer ban, which has been extended to 2027, but I think the damage to the housing market has already been done. And whether foreign or local, unlike in the past, landlords these days believe that renters exist to pay mortgages and should absorb the costs of interest hikes. Shameful.
Conclusion: You already know what I think about marriage and that I have a real problem with child ownership, as well, and there really is no solution to freeing women as a class if most are content with complaining about male dominance in their relationships, yet are still continuing to support them in all possible ways. Women could change the structure of the world if they stopped supporting traditional male ownership models, as promoted in a heterosexual lifestyle. It’s pretty simple, actually. The housing and property ownership issue is probably equally unsolvable as long as people support capitalism and believe in earning money for doing nothing. Housing is one of those basic needs like food, basic healthcare, and safety, that shouldn’t be something people struggle to achieve. And when I say housing, I mean safe, quality housing. Not the warehousing concept that became a problem under some communist regimes or that currently happens among the very poor in Western countries, and especially in places like Hong Kong, where too many people are forced to share an inadequate space despite being strangers. I also think women should be able to access housing complexes, neighbourhoods, and even entire towns where they can live free of men in safe, clean housing. I’d love to see what I touched on in my post: I Want My Own Vatican City. A country of women and girls, for women and girls, but without the religion 😉
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Rudmin, Floyd W. (1994) Gender differences in the semantics of ownership: A quantitative phenomenological survey study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 15(3), 487-510.
N is for NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) – Part 3
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
I was on the brink of turning 21 when I headed into one of the worst summers of my life. I had just finished my first year of university in a small city far enough away from my NPD family to escape casual family visits, and for the first and last time in my life, I returned to my hometown and my chief abuser’s house for the summer.
I hadn’t realized how much just 9 months away from a toxic environment would change me. I had hated high school, I had hated working full time as a secretary in order to earn money to go to school, but at university, my world had opened up. And more important, I finally noticed the extent of my mother’s abuse. Within 2 weeks of being back, everything fell apart. My parents had divorced when I was 17 and in the fall out, I threw myself into school, my younger sister quit high school, moved in with a drug dealer, and got knocked up, and my younger brother became invisible, although as a boy, he was the favourite child and was mostly left alone. But three years later, after I, the truth-teller and major threat to my NPD mother, re-entered the diminished family home, the shit hit the fan.
My brother and I had gone out with my father and his girlfriend and we got back to my mother’s house rather late at night. On the kitchen table was a picture my brother had drawn. My mother, who was nowhere to be found upon our return, had clearly found the picture and had left it out as a sort of warning. What she had discovered was a family portrait that included a woman that was clearly not my mother – wrong hair colour. Dismissing it, as it didn’t seem like a big deal to me, I went downstairs to my room to get ready for bed, but was interrupted by some shouting and door-slamming. I crept silently upstairs. The bathroom door was closed and I could hear my almost 16-year-old brother crying. Very unusual. And my protective rage flared up in me as I realized what had happened. And for the first time in my young life, I went on the attack. After checking on my brother, I walked calmly to my mother’s bedroom door and in a low and even voice, let her know what I felt. I used a few choice expletives – something she had never heard me do before. Then I walked downstairs. I didn’t get far as the dragon jumped out of bed, chased me to the kitchen and punched me in the stomach, screaming at me the entire time. I indicated that I was going to call the police since she had hit me, and mother countered with oh no, she was going to call the police because actually I was the one who had hit her. I didn’t have the insight or the language at this point in my life, but this was classic gaslighting.
Somehow, I ended up back in my room and I called my father, who immediately came to pick me up. I was emotionally frozen, not just because of my mother’s behaviour, but also because it was the first time in my life that I had stood up to her. I’ll leave out a lot of the detail here, but I’ll just mention that less than a week and a half later, I found out that my mother was going out of town, and I went to her house to pick up all my things and to drop off her key. But when I got there, I couldn’t find any of my things and my bedroom was filled with another woman’s belongings – in my drawers, on the unmade bed, and on the floor. In less than two weeks, my mother had replaced me completely, and not only continued to take the exorbitant child support that my father was paying her to NOT care for me – I didn’t live with her and I paid for most of my own education and living expenses even before this – but she was now taking rent from a complete stranger. It was at that point in my life that I cut off my mother completely, and over the next year, found a way to support myself financially 100% working several part-time jobs and going to university full time. My father wasn’t interested in helping me with money even though he made six figures a year, but he seemed to take immense satisfaction in now being in sole control of emotionally manipulating me. He was a narcissist himself, but had taken a back seat in the abuse while he was still married to my mother. My brother, whom I had defended, completely blamed me and sided with my mother – typical golden child. My sister, who hated my mother more than anybody actually, ended up siding with her in order to benefit financially after having her teenaged pregnancy. In the years following my break with the family, my mother went on a rampage contacting everyone I knew to tell them I was insane and every so often, she would recruit family members and whatever man she was fucking at the time to try to manipulate me by proxy in order to get me back under her toxic narcissistic control.
This is an example of the most extreme and difficult, but effective, way of dealing with narcissistic abuse. It is usually called ‘going no-contact’. It is the route most often taken by truth-tellers and scapegoats – those of us who are least likely to become enablers, even if we are highly empathic people. All ways to deal with NPDs are difficult, but I believe this one is most difficult because you will lose more than just the NPD relationship, if it is a family situation. Likely, you will lose most to all of the other family relationships because they are, for the most part, enablers and some receive financial and other perks in exchange for tolerating abuse. And I lost most of the people in my family in the aftermath, and deliberately went no-contact with my increasingly abusive narcissistic father when I was 27. Losing an entire network is hard. As a woman, especially if you aren’t straight, it will be even harder because the only way for women to gain any kind of pretend power or the pseudo freedom that money can bring in this world is to suck dick. Now, I didn’t get much financial support from my family, even as a child, so I was used to having to pay for what I needed. I started working and saving regularly when I was 12 years old. I’ve always been poor, but I learned frugality and financial creativity and resourcefulness out of necessity, especially because I knew from a young age that I never wanted to suck dick in exchange for food or a home. I was very clear that I didn’t want to end up like my completely useless patriarchal mother.
The other issue you experience with going no-contact is that you can’t talk about what has happened to you. Most people don’t understand what NPD is, and no one believes that mothers are abusive – despite what mothers claim. I learned very quickly to tell people the bare minimum – and a semi-lie at that – when they asked about family. My parents were dead and I was an only child. And honestly, these felt true in my heart. The bonus is that people feel awkward when they hear this and don’t ask any follow-up questions. This may sound harsh and this is really hard to rationalize as a truth-teller who values clear discussions of reality, but after a lifetime of gaslighting and shaming despite being the victim, you really aren’t interested in more of the same.
Now, I haven’t done what I probably needed to do to become a healthier person partly because I’m a loner and partly because, thanks to my father, I don’t really trust people in the helping professions, even if I see that they may have value for others. I didn’t learn about personality disorders in depth until I got to grad school in psychology and worked on a few projects with some clinical students. But I didn’t put it all together in my own life until my late 30’s. And actually, a lot of victims of narcissists don’t realize what’s going on until they are older and have lived through a few bad and repetitive abusive patterns and start looking for answers.
Myself, I spent a lot of time self-examining to figure out what was wrong with ME, thanks to how my psychologist father had pathologized me and my reactions to abuse. It wasn’t until I was in my late 30’s and met a woman like me at a youth hostel where I was work-staying. We had been talking about a scary domineering woman who had passed through the hostel and how we both had tried to avoid her and had felt some rather serious emotional reactions to being around her. This other woman gave me insight and recommended the web site Daughters of Narcissistic Mothers – it had helped her figure out why her life felt like a disaster and why she was so affected by certain kinds of women. I devoured the site wondering if it had been written about me. I had already read so much and even had a couple of degrees in psychology, although not clinical psychology, but I could never identify what I had experienced. But so much more work has been done on personality disorders since my youth, not all of it necessarily beneficial, I’ll add. But I now had a context for my experience. While it might have been nice to have had a support group at the time, just being able to identify the problem did so much for my healing process. I think I’ll always be vulnerable to narcissists, as a truth-teller and a woman – they are very good at targeting threats to their control and power. But I am now very good at identifying them and I avoid them when I can. I’m just not the kind of person who is able to employ some of the strategies I’ll talk about below as I’m a sensitive person and have a hard time compartmentalizing. I’m a resilient person, but I have my weaknesses and vulnerabilities. This is normal and it is perfectly okay to have weaknesses, but it is important to know yourself and what you are capable of dealing with. Personally, I don’t think we can overcome anything and everything. We can just manage problems. So don’t let anyone tell you how you should be reacting just because it works for them.
In my opinion, there are only a few paths you can take when dealing with NPDs. If you choose to go into therapy or if you live in a culture where family is sacrosanct, going no-contact won’t even be entertained as a possibility. For those in abusive romantic relationships, the vast majority of therapists will still promote heterosexual partnerships and the idea that there is a magical unicorn male out there who won’t abuse you. So, if you decide to leave a narcissistic male, don’t worry, there are still good men out there… But keep in mind my theory that NPD is just male behaviour on steroids. If you partner with males, you will experience a lot of the shit that narcissists inflict upon their victims, but to a lesser extent and in a way that is socially acceptable in heterosexual relationships. It is in the male nature to manipulate, parasitize, and gaslight women, even if they are not clinically NPD. In a workplace with an NPD boss or colleague, going ‘no-contact’ or in other words, leaving without looking back, is ideal, but for women, it is really difficult. But in all types of relationships, there are strategies recommended if you want to or have to maintain that relationship.
Therapy or Support
Like I said, clinicians and therapists make their money by selling hope. Not a one of them will ever tell you that you’ll never fully recover from abuse because no one would ever give them money otherwise. It would be more truthful for therapists to be honest with you and say, you will carry this deep wound until the day you die, but I can try to help you manage your damage. But that doesn’t sound so good, does it? Therapy also costs money, and not a lot of women can afford that. The cost, the potential for lies and false hope, and even gaslighting from the therapist him or herself are all risks that you need to think about before starting down that path.
Support is crucial, however. You can get it from different sources, whether a good therapist, a fellow truth-telling family member or friend, or a survivors’ group. The latter is probably becoming easier to find, perhaps moreso online. But just make sure that you see it for what it is. Most of these people have experience, but little to no expertise, in helping people with serious problems. Some of these people may be NPD themselves and are into manipulating the vulnerable. Be aware, don’t become enmeshed, and see it for what it is: a chance to talk about your brutal reality and share stories, relief at not being alone and realizing that you aren’t completely crazy (you still might be a little crazy, of course), and a chance to be listened to without judgment. You may also end up getting a few buddies who will offer support if the narcissist tries to re-enter your life and uses manipulative tactics to try to convince you that they’ve changed or feel some kind of remorse. Touching base with a supporter can help you see through the lies.
Compartmentalization
There is a tactic that is highly promoted if you choose to remain in narcissistic relationships, and some call it the ‘grey rock’ method. Essentially, you interact with the narcissist without engaging emotionally. In my opinion, this is compartmentalization. Somehow, you separate your feelings from what is going on. It is goal-oriented and it allows you to remain non-reactive, thus not giving the narcissist what they most desire: control and power. You stick to facts when dealing with them. They ask a question, and you give an informational answer instead of an argument, a defense, a counter-attack, crying or pleading, etc. If they make a manipulative and non-productive comment, you wave it away and focus on the productive.
Now, some people can do this. I can’t. I might be able to have a fact-based conversation, but it will be in my head and affecting my mental health and even my physical health long after the conversation is over. So for me, this is not a way to deal with someone long-term. It’s just not worth it. And it won’t work for other sensitive people either. And you don’t have to be ashamed about being sensitive. Our world really hates the emotionally sensitive – and I don’t mean people who create a victim status for themselves or need trigger warnings on everything. I mean people who have been chronically emotionally exploited and abused. You don’t heal from that overnight, and sometimes, it is just part of your personality to be highly attuned to and vulnerable to emotionality.
Healing from Abusive Women without Becoming a Misogynist
This is a really important topic for women who want to follow woman-centric paths. Patriarchy is about male dominance and the best way to keep men in power is to create division between women by isolating them, discouraging bonding and breeding distrust and hate. The role of mother in patriarchy is perfectly designed to do this. Unhealthy women are pressured and sometimes forced into breeding. They are isolated from other women, except perhaps other unhealthy women, and are focused on male needs and wants. And they are rewarded for breeding privileged sons and shaping damaged and heterosexuality-ready daughters. Many of us daughters are raised by mentally ill as well as patriarchally programmed women. We grow up learning how to treat other females badly in order garner valuable male support, and to expect insanity and cruelty from women, as well. None of this is natural, by the way, but completely normal and accepted.
But some of us come to see patriarchy for what it is, yet we have this lifetime of abuse by females. And of course, we continue to see it happen all around us every single day, even if we have managed to escape an abusive mother. So how do we overcome the abuse of our childhoods and focus on women without being overcome by loathing? I’ll tell you with all honesty, in the first few years after going no-contact with my mother, I sometimes fantasized about beating her badly just to dispel the pent up and impotent rage resulting from her dominating and destroying me in childhood so completely. It scared me as it felt so visceral, so deeply rooted in me, but did calm me down. And it was youthful anger – I no longer have those feelings and I never acted on them, I’m happy to say. But women don’t really have an outlet for their justified rage, and we are encouraged to suppress, accept and hope for better things. If women do act out, the most acceptable ways are to self-harm or to direct petty abuse onto other females.
Anyhow, I touched on this issue a little in my post, M is for Misogyny, Part II. Like with all problems, identifying what is going on and why it happens are the first steps in dealing with emotions and problems. I was able to see my mother as the daughter of a narcissistic mother herself, and a victim of patriarchy because she was a woman who was pushed into housewifery, non-contribution to society, and breeding despite hating children and being extremely mentally unfit to deal with anyone, let alone children. I saw her as enabled by a fellow narcissist, so much so that I still can’t tell who was truly pulling the strings in my family. And I am able to see all of this as a cycle I can break. I chose not to have children, not to support men, and to focus on promoting gynocentrism. I also choose not to pour my energy into patriarchal women or to forge relationships with women who abuse women. And that’s okay – I don’t have to love everyone. Ultimately, I know women abuse me because they see me as a threat to their comfortable addiction to suffering. Male domination hurts them, but the known, even if it causes harm, is always less scary than the unknown.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
M is for Misogyny – Part II
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Did you come back for more? Well, colour me impressed. This is dangerous shit I’m talking about here. Asking people to do a little self-analysis usually requires a bit of a cognitive walk on the wild side and can inspire a lot defensive anger in anyone whose personal operating system consists of the fragile schema demanded by patriarchy. This can include men, straight women, religious people, mothers, liberal feminists, and even some activists and self-proclaimed radical feminists. Anyhow, congratulations on coming back. I’m hoping that the crescendo built by asking the why-questions in the last post will find its way into some more concrete and problem-solving thinking or action-taking in this post addressing some how-questions. So let’s get started.
M is for Misogyny – Part II.
In the last post, I attempted to explain why the average woman hates herself, and by extension, other women. I suggested that early childhood programming to see females as the enemy and as less valuable by misogynistic societies and families; the development of an addiction to suffering; and the harming of other women as a proxy for self-harm and as safer targets for revenge than male oppressors played major roles in women’s interactions. In addition, for women claiming to live feminist lives, I suggested that their own acts of aggression and feelings of hate or dislike towards other women may stem from the blind spot that experience and awareness create, and the lack of agreement about what feminism is – in addition to the other reasons above. For the more self-aware feminists, realizing that one has seemingly misogynistic thoughts and feelings about some women can inspire feelings of angst, guilt and shame – or what we call cognitive dissonance. Then can come the why-questions – the ones that help with understanding one’s purpose, and the motivation and the mechanisms behind one’s own and others’ behaviour towards other women. And if, by this point, the woman in question hasn’t just ended up abandoning feminism altogether in order to make her feelings and actions match again, she starts asking the how-questions. How is about taking action or starting on a path. It’s about turning purpose into tangible goals and measureable outcomes.
So, I’m going to give this post a secondary title in the form of an important how-question:
How can I support women without becoming a doormat, a punching bag or a martyr?
This is a common point of frustration for women trying to figure out how to deal with patriarchy. And I think a lot of women start to get burned out after years of trying to help people who don’t necessarily want or feel grateful for female help. You may already have your own answers to this question and the others that I’ll include below. I’m going to talk about my own solution and how I have dealt with my own feelings towards the multitudes of women who make me angry and frustrated. Please remember that there is no single way to ‘do feminism’, and although many people will try, no one should be telling you whom to help, how to help, or whether you should even bother helping at all. Like I said in Part I, purpose is personal, and I’ll extend that by saying that how you pursue your purpose is also personal. Sometimes, those who think they are helping women and are shaming you for behaving differently are actually doing more to maintain patriarchy than they realize.
Here are a few other how-questions that may come up:
How can I call myself a feminist if I am selective about which women I help and feel little interest in knowing or even being around most women?
How do I know if so-called feminist activities are actually anti-woman?
How can I criticize anti-woman female behaviour in an objective way that doesn’t end up spiralling into misogyny?
How do I identify a definition of feminism that actually helps women when so much of what is out there just seems to be pro-male rhetoric designed to gain followers and male approval?
Yeah, tough questions, but the following guiding principles keep me grounded. I’ve thought a lot about where I fit in the feminist movement, and I’ve determined that these principles are the best way to women directly and indirectly.
Gynocentrism vs Feminism
If you ask around, or better yet, if you listen to what women say and then watch what they do, you will come to the conclusion that feminism is whatever the fuck you want it to be from moment to moment and place to place. I’m not exaggerating or joking. The label has lost most of its original meaning. This is confusing to people encountering feminism for the first time or looking for answers to why and how questions as they pertain to helping women. A lot of this so-called helping of women is actually helping men and hurting women (or specific groups of women)
If you actually give a shit about women, a good rule of thumb or place to start is this: Ask for or look at the mission statement. If a feminist or feminist web site gives you more than one sentence and if that sentence includes anything besides or instead of the liberation of females from male oppression, then you are not dealing with woman-centred feminism. There shouldn’t be vague or euphemistic language. There shouldn’t be a focus on anything other than female liberation. Feminism is not about fighting all the phobias and isms in the world, nor is it about the environment or animal rights. All of those have their own movements, and believe me, animal rights or any other activists are not including blurbs about liberating women from men in their mission statements. So why must feminism do this? It’s like trying to order high-quality food off a 12-page menu with 300 main dishes.
Of course, everyone has the right to abuse language and to change accepted definitions to suit political agendas. It’s a human right, right? So, while I use the word feminism, or even radical feminism, I actually no longer consider myself to be either of those things. They’ve become practically meaningless, and in many cases, just another word for androcentrism. If you’ve been following along on my site, you already know that I consider myself to be a gynocentrist and a female separatist. And I highly recommend reading or listening to my post G is for Gynocentrism to get the deets on that.
Gynocentrism is clear and simple in its principles or mission, and I think is it possibly what radical feminism was supposed to be before it began to over-focus on inclusivity and all the other side issues. Simplicity is how you stay focused and united in a cause. It is easy for people to know right away whether they agree with it enough to join. When you sign up for any of the feminisms, you can pretty much guarantee that there will be in-fighting, hierarchies, schisms, a focus on men, and the kicking-out of members who get too offensive or speak too much truth. These days, you can’t just be a woman in feminism. You have to bring all your other baggage filled to the brim with your wardrobe of identities.
The bottom line: give a group, individual feminist, book, or other material the old Occam’s Razor test. If you can’t see a clear focus on female liberation from males and from female self-harm behaviours, then turn around and walk away. Or maybe run.
Self-Preservation vs Self-Immolation
A lot of feminist activists tell us that we have to love all women even if they are the worst kind of patriarchy-supporting people, and that the sympathy and empathy must flow unconditionally. Kind of a love the sinner, hate the sin kind of thing. And I say stop. Feminism ain’t no religion, and I am no longer willing to be abusive women’s doormat, punching bag or token sacrifice. I do have a limited amount of empathy and sympathy for women who have suffered, and I don’t believe women and girls deserve what happens to them because of men. I’ve said before that I don’t believe suffering is a necessary part of the human condition. But I do hold women responsible for their decisions and behaviour, especially once they are old enough to be in charge of children’s well-being and to use their brains to regulate their own behaviour. Having a bad life is never an excuse for abusing other women or girls. I’ve been put into some very bad situations by women I was trying to help, and I finally came to realize that I was wasting my time, and my efforts weren’t helping women as a class at all. On the contrary. I was, in fact helping men by depleting my energy, by putting myself in danger, and by enabling and empowering woman-hating women. I realized that I, myself, as a woman didn’t deserve to be destroyed or abused by men or women acting on behalf of men.
The take-home message here is that like in an emergency situation on an airplane, you put your own oxygen mask on first. It is both perfectly fine and perfectly logical to put yourself first before you attempt any heroics. I think any of us women over the age of 40 can tell you what happens to your body and mind after decades of putting others, especially antagonistic, parasitical, or stress-inducing others, first.
Strategic Help vs Patch-Up/Clean-Up
Given that there are limited resources for women in this world, and that an individual woman only has a limited amount of gynergy to fuel herself and whatever other people she helps, it makes sense to be strategic. I used to be indiscriminate, running from fire to fire before I realized that it was both unsustainable and pointless.
Feminist attention and efforts seem very much focused on the women who already get most of the limited resources and attention available – mostly mothers and partnered straight women – and the fact that it never seems to be enough and seldom, if ever, solves any of the problems these women face, let alone women as a class face, should really be telling us something. It’s not working! We’re focused on the wrong things! We’re pouring our money and energy into a bottomless pit of neverending suffering.
The goal of activism, although no one would ever admit this, is to patch up wounded women and clean up the most recent messes that men make of women’s lives, and then send the women back into the world to do it all again. I see activism as sort of the ER of the healthcare system. The bulk of the work is reactive, not preventative. I’m sure there is the occasional small and underfunded feminist activist group that seeks to do preventative work, but it is not the norm. Prevention is sooo much harder and more long-term than putting on band aids and offering crisis counselling. Am I advocating for stopping all of this? Well, no, of course not. Short-term after-care is always needed. But I can’t personally participate in this because I see it as ultimately helping men and maintaining patriarchy, although I know activist women rationalize their contributions differently.
Myself, I help individually, spontaneously and strategically. I help women who both want and need help and who are on a gynocentric path, and whose needs won’t be addressed by The System or by feminist activists. By helping them, I believe my contributions make an actual preventative difference and ultimately help all women by empowering those women who don’t uplift patriarchy. That is the only action that makes sense to me. And it is these women who are more likely to pay it forward, which is how feminism should work, but seldom does.
Integrity vs Inclusion
I don’t think the majority of women can handle gynocentrism, or even weak forms of feminism. I’ve heard a lot of women in the scene say that feminism is for all women – it is inclusive. And I’ve never really understood that because no other movement welcomes people who don’t agree with the basic principles or who behave in ways that completely undermine what the group is trying to do.
One of the biggest problems is the inclusion of men in pretty much all feminisms, including radical feminism. Most feminists are partnered heteros, and many are mothers of sons. How can you see and accept basic truths about an oppressor class when you are willingly fucking one or more of them and acting as a servant to at least one of them in multiple ways? In any other movement, this would not be a question inspiring the kind of rage that women direct at people like me for simply asking them to self-analyze. Heck, this type of question probably wouldn’t even come up. Imagine someone asking the following: How can you eat a steak every night and work in an abattoir an call yourself a vegan activist? Well, imagine defining veganism as “whatever the fuck you want it to be”, and I guess these behaviours would be totally cool and the question would come off as irrational.
So like I said, there is no confusion about whether you are walking the talk if you adopt a clear and simple set of principles like in gynocentrism and female separatism.
Putting It All Together
I’m not going to give explicit answers to the how-questions listed above, but I’ll tell you what works for me in approaching these types of issues.
First, keep it simple. Simple definitions, simple principles, simple reasons. If you encounter things that include too much, involve complicated or vague or euphemistic language, or seem to involve reasoning that doesn’t jibe with what you are seeing happen, there is probably something wrong.
Second, anti-woman activities and behaviours are always more popular and approved of than pro-woman stuff. A case in point: my most watched video in the Alphabet Series has received 259 views. Make-up tutorials get millions and millions. Guess which videos are pro-male/pro-patriarchy?
Third, pro-male patriarchal women as well as pro-male feminist women do harm to women as a class by diverting time, money, energy and resources to men. Gynocentric and female separatist behaviour helps women as a class. Even if you are very selective in whom you help or associate with, your assistance ultimately helps women as a class. Never let any feminist or activist make you feel like you are biased or mean. You may actually be helping women more than they do, and besides, at the end of the day, your energy and resources are yours to allocate according to your principles.
Finally, you absolutely can be critical of anti-woman female behaviour without devolving into misogyny. You can also feel angry and disappointed with women who betray and harm other women, including you. Channel the rage into man-hate – they are the main reason these women are so damaged. Support your critiques, if you choose to voice them, with evidence and logical arguments. And don’t launch ad feminem attacks by calling women stupid, even if their behaviour may indeed be stupid. If you can, find other women you can talk to about your specific experiences. Most of the time, you’ll end up realizing that what you’re feeling isn’t true hate, but frustration. But frustration can fester without a healthy outlet and chance to speak freely without judgment. And that is why men put so much effort into isolating women and policing them when they manage to congregate. You see, they depend on keeping us feeling like we hate each other.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
M is for Misogyny – Part I
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
I want to send a shout-out of appreciation to a few of my commenters on YouTube as well as a good friend in China who helped motivate me to get this post out the door. I’ve been thinking about this topic for a long, long time. I wrote a few related precursors back in 2015 (see my post on Transitioning, for example), and I think about a year ago, I officially started writing a more specific article about what I’ll get into today. I had put the article on the back-burner, but revived it a few weeks ago following some YouTube discussion, and it will become a two-part post in the Alphabet Series.
M is for Misogyny, but let me clarify. This is not about men hating women. That is a little basic, I’m sure you realize, and besides, I’ve addressed it before in other posts. Rather, I plan to talk about something that likely every aspiring and even veteran feminist struggles with at least once during her journey. And that is the distrust of, dislike for, disgust with and/or disappointment in other women and trying to reconcile what feels a lot like misogyny with the desire to live and promote a feminist life. And yet no one really talks about it – at least not in a productive, objective, non-blaming, and problem-solving way. And as a result, I think we lose a lot of women who would otherwise make rather spectacular feminists. But they simply can’t find the support needed to understand and process feelings that make them question their status in the movement.
So I’m going to attempt a productive, objective, non-blaming and problem-solving discussion of feminist misogyny in two parts. Part I will be focused on the question ‘why?’ and Part II will address the question ‘how?’ and I’ll be more specific once I dig in. I find that so many women get stuck on the easier or more basic questions of who, what, when and where when confronted with patriarchal issues. They can barely accurately answer those. Why and how questions, which I’ll admit are my favourites, are downright threatening and terrifying to women because you can actually get somewhere and even begin to straighten out the twisted logic in your mind if you try to answer them. I think why and how are crucial questions to ask when developing critical thinking skills, which of course, we are not taught in either formal education or in daily life unless we are very lucky.
Anyhow, welcome to M is for Misogyny, Part I, which I’ll give the second and longer title of: Why do I seem to hate women even though I believe in feminist principles? The Monster Inside Me.
There are some other good ‘why’ questions that we should all think about, as well, including:
Why can’t I have a frank and non-judgmental discussion of feminist misogyny and bad female behaviour, in general, with other feminists?
Why does it seem like women are worse than men when it comes to how they treat women?
Why does female betrayal feel worse than male betrayal?
Why should I devote my time and energy to people who seem to sabotage themselves and their own class, and who seem specifically to hate women like me because we don’t fall in line?
There are tons of ‘why’ questions, and you should never stop asking them. But you’ll find that most people won’t want to put an effort into pursuing them with you. You can always discuss them with me, however – like I said, ‘why?’ is one of my favourite questions. And I’ve finally decided to open comments on my blog and on YouTube, so feel free to drop a line. For now, let’s dig into some of the things that might help to answer our questions.
Early Programming
It doesn’t matter what kind of household you were brought up in, once we leave our protective bath of amniotic fluid, we are all swimming in the same toxic sea of misogyny. Patriarchy is everywhere, and it survives by crushing our independent female nature, our confidence, and our intelligence starting at birth so that we have no inclination to fight back. Instilling self-doubt and self-hatred in females is built into every aspect of our system such that it is impossible to see it for what it is without a great deal of thinking, observation, testing, analysis, questioning, and discussion. How many girls and women are encouraged to do this? None. Like I said, male domination depends on keeping females off-balance, ignorant and isolated. If you manage to get to a place where you can see how things work and how they work against you and all females, you have accomplished a great deal. But your next monumental challenge will be to find others like you so that you don’t feel like you’re crazy or defective.
Self-hatred always involves self-harm, and this kind of induced pain and suffering can become very emotionally and psychologically addictive. While women do self-harm constantly and in countless ways, this punishment inevitably leaks out to other women and girls. And there is the bonus of feeling good for hurting the constructed enemy, who really is a proxy for the self. So hurting other females, hurts the self, and the satisfaction from addictive pain kicks in. Punishing those at the root of oppression – men – is far too dangerous physically, sexually, socially, legally and economically, so women generally don’t mess with men. And besides, we are trained to feel guilty when men suffer, even if they deserve it. The bottom line is that when women hurt you, they are doing it because it is a safer form of self-harm than hurting themselves or males.
Forms of Harm
If I think about my own life, I can see the differences in what males and females have done to me. Men and boys were and are responsible for all the sexual abuse, most of the physical abuse, and some of the psychological and emotional abuse. Women and girls did and still do the majority of the petty and less tangible shit – the minor physical assaults, the emotional betrayals, the aiding and abetting of male abuse, and the psychological fuckery. Males inflict the stab wounds, which are deep, but mundane and predictable, and females administer thousands of shallow cuts, which are cumulative, inventive and unpredictable. So, it can, without analysis, seem like females attack more often and attack you where you live – meaning your mind. I think this is common for all females in the world, and it’s easy to conclude that women are worse to women than men.
There are individual differences in experience of harm though. Some women, myself included, had especially abusive mothers and grandmothers who did an exemplary job of fulfilling the role of patriarchal mother figure. Destroying daughters is one of the prescribed duties of a good mother. And although my father did his part in killing my soul, he tended to flit in, drop his man-turd, and then flit out, while mother seemed to inflict a constant barrage of emotional/psychological bombs that left me struggling with identity formation and self-confidence.
The Blind Spot of Awareness
Do you remember your feminist awakening? You know, the moment you realized that the world was actually quite different from what you had been taught? Did it come on slowly in drips and drabs for years, lapping at your consciousness until your knowledge cup was suddenly brimming and then overflowing? Or did it feel more like a strike of lightening that imbued you with a sudden ability to see things for what they were – total awareness? However it happened for you, what likely also happened, even if you didn’t realize it right away, is that you had some expectation that other women were also awake. You forgot what it was like not to see and know. Repeatedly, you were faced with evidence that the vast majority of women didn’t realize that the world was designed by men for men, and that they existed in subordination, and for the most part, willingly participated in their own oppression and the oppression of other women and girls. And you couldn’t believe that women could be so weak and stupid or ignorant. You forgot that you were one of those women once upon a time. This kind of thing also happens with experienced feminists who get annoyed when newbies enter forums and talk about what they consider to be ‘feminism 101 issues’ instead of something radical or advanced or new. People tend to forget that you have to learn to crawl, then walk, and then run or even levitate.
This isn’t unique to feminists. I’ve also encountered teachers and professors who forget what it was like to be a student and as a result, fail to teach to their audience by making assumptions, skipping crucial steps, refusing to answer questions, and finally crushing the enthusiasm of learners. Feminism is much less organized than our education system, so it is really hard for women and girls to learn about feminism in a supportive environment. So, it can often seem that experienced feminists don’t practise the very feminist principles they claim to espouse.
An Incohesive Feminist Movement
There is no single understanding of feminism, and this is the major weakness of the movement and why women will never be free as a class. It has gotten worse more recently with the introduction of intersectionality, the validation of identity politics, and liberalism. No other movement is so disjointed and contradictory. Women are exposed to people, groups or material that hold the feminist label, but the messaging can be about almost anything, including male-centric nonsense, and I think a lot of women end up confused, abused, and ultimately turned off of pursuing feminism.
What’s important to remember is that all women are colonized and damaged, even experienced feminists. We are all trained to hate women, and it can take a lifetime to try to shed our misogynistic behaviours. I’ve discussed before that I think it may not even be possible to fully heal from patriarchal damage in one’s lifetime, especially because it is next to impossible to remove oneself entirely from all its influences and to find adequate support systems. Because of this, no one can claim to do feminism perfectly, and some groups of self-proclaimed feminist women can end up creating a hotbed of anger and abuse aimed at other women. How could this possibly provide an educational, let alone a healing, environment? I’m not blaming women for this – it seems inevitable when you put a pile of badly damaged and justifiably angry people together without objective guidance or agreement on a single uniting principle. All of this is to say that I understand why a lot of women who want to support feminist principles start to question why they would pour their energy into such a toxic mess. It is hard enough for some women to want to help non-feminist women who seem to hate women, but it is easier, in some ways, to make excuses for those who seem trapped or victimized.
I’ll close Part I with the following. Feminist principles are worth pursuing, but like with all things, I recommend entering it without unrealistic expectations, ideals or hope. Keep your eyes wide open and always ask yourself why something is happening before succumbing to the monster inside, completely giving up on women, and deciding to walk away forever. And finally, always know your purpose – “Why do I believe in feminist principles and why do I want to do this?” And no one can create this purpose for you. Purpose is personal.
In the next post, I’ll address the how’s of this important issue.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
M is for Mayhem
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
About a thousand years ago, when I was 29, I was living and working as an itinerant orchard worker in New Zealand. At one point, I found myself staying at a youth hostel in one of their fair cities – maybe Christchurch – and as is habitual with the 20-something nomad denizen, a group of us went out to a local watering hole. I don’t actually remember what we were talking about during that outing, but apparently I said something that warranted a comment from one of the males in the group. And the comment, which I do remember clearly, was designed to be a compliment. He said: “Wow, you’re an anarchist, aren’t you?”
I think I gave some sort of non-committal answer like, “I guess” because I really didn’t know what exactly it meant to be an anarchist other than the general stereotype that the majority of people believe: no leadership, no rules, random and unproductive violence, and total chaos. With the exception of a few minor violent acts of self-defense in response to assaults by males in my teen years, I didn’t consider myself to be a violent person, and I certainly didn’t see myself as an eco-terrorist or a violent Black Panther type. So what did it mean that I was an anarchist? As is likely no surprise to anyone, the public education system then and still today didn’t address the nuts and bolts of anarchy or feminism or why people seemed to deem movements like these necessary. You see, capitalism and female slavery are cornerstones of our world. We are not allowed to think critically about them, and we definitely don’t want children to escape indoctrination into willingly participating in these crucial foundational systems through exposure to anecdotal evidence, quantitative data, and philosophical discussion, do we? So anyhow, there I was in 2001, a highly educated and fairly well-read, yet still selectively ignorant, young woman who still hadn’t been exposed to some of the most important written work ever produced because of lack of exposure, access, and role models.
You’ve likely noted that I included anarchy and feminism in the same ideological boat, and some feminists have seen and still see a place for themselves in both movements. But today, I’m actually going to argue that as they have been and are still practised, neither actually does much for women either separately or together. I’ll then talk about what true anarchism might look like from an actual feminist, or more specifically, a gynocentric perspective.
So let’s dive into why M is for Mayhem.
What is anarchy? Well, long before it was established as a political philosophy in the mid-19th century, the term was, in fact, used to mean disorder and mayhem. The word gradually became linked with revolutionary acts in various places, and bubbled up among disaffected male ‘thinkers’ from all walks of life with too much time on their hands and comparatively little to complain about. To a man, they saw an inverse relationship between what they felt they deserved and what they believed they should be accountable for. They were also expert wordsmiths, twisting language to create a framework for a political environment they could abuse for self-interest, while appearing on the surface to champion freedom and equality and rationality. This shouldn’t be a surprise. If you look at any and all political ideologies that males have come up with throughout history, regardless of ‘wing’ status, they all purport to champion the same things. Freedom, equality, opportunity, security, and responsibility. But at the end of the day, these ideals are never meant to be accessible to all – and by all, I mean women. And this is simply because all males operate and thrive on dominance, control, entitlement and self-interest, whether they acknowledge it or not.
I’ll just mention a few of the basic tenets of anarchist thinking, in general. If you want to do a deep dive into anarchist thought, I recommend heading over to either The Anarchist Library or Dead Anarchists; both are dot org websites. Important to note is that over time several branches of anarchist thought have emerged, some more individualistic and some more collectivistic. What they tend to agree on, however, is that the State and state-sanctioned capitalism were and are the major sources of systemic violence, coercion, and exploitation, and strip men of the rights and freedoms they believe they deserve. Key to their vision of society included:
1.. Stateless and ruler-less self-organization. Anarchist males ignorantly and arrogantly believed that they could come together in a voluntary fashion, behave in a civilized and self-monitoring way, and engage in mutually beneficial arrangements without the intervention of a policing authority. In other words, anarchists wanted order and rules without rulers. It’s laughable to imagine males magically constructing a functional society based on cooperation and peace and somehow managing not to engage in the reactive and violent emotionality that is the hallmark of every male dominated society since time began. I just don’t think males are capable of this.
2.. Anti-capitalism. Anarchists rightly understood that capitalism is a source of exploitation and violence and that wealth determines policy. But they failed to understand that capitalism isn’t the root of the problem, and that removing capitalism doesn’t solve the problems of violence and exploitation. The root problem is males themselves. Every system they design becomes coercive and exploitative and hierarchical. It’s just which males are on top that changes when systems change.
Interestingly, many of these early anarchists profited immensely from wealthy benefactors and exploitative free or indentured female labour, including the father of anarchy, himself. I so often find that males who spend their lives philosophizing about, criticizing and rebelling against the system are usually the worst hypocrites, seldom practising what they preach. It is sometimes hard for me to understand why these men attract so many female acolytes; it is quite possible that most of these men are charismatic psychopaths able to manipulate politically or ideologically impassioned as well as socially and intellectually isolated women.
3.. Free speech. A lot of these anarchists opposed the control of the church and the censorship of the State. Men generally believe they should be able to say whatever they want, whenever they want without consequences. But they don’t tend to extend this form of freedom to women, especially those wanting freedom from male control or proposing methods of female self-governance or suggesting that consent isn’t possible for women due to an imbalance of power. This is as true now as it was then. Again, this demonstrates the hypocrisy of male philosophers and human rights proponents. Their underlying belief is always: “I oppose dictatorship, unless I am the dictator.”
4.. A non-coercive society. Everything about an anarchist society is supposed to be non-coercive or voluntary. For example, an anarchist would choose to pay taxes because they want to since they are using a service, not because they are forced to.
One of the problems inherent in a society without religion, capitalism, police, government or hierarchy, though, is how to get around the whole rape privilege thing and still have free access to pussy under the pretext of female free will and consent. Men realized that their right to rape was built into all of those systems they were fighting to abolish, and under anarchy, women might start to argue that they have the right to freely choose their participation, as well. No truly free woman would ever consent to what men do to women’s bodies, and all men know this on some level. And this is where the ‘free love’ movement came in.
Free love was a big part of the anarchist movement, especially among the women who joined the fray, and we saw this as an undercurrent in Second Wave Feminism and still today in the Slut Movement. It would actually have been more in line with true anarchism to refrain from engaging sexually with men altogether as the power imbalance is inescapable. But women fell for the male logic behind the movement – I think they would not have been allowed to participate otherwise. The male logic fail goes something like this. The only difference between intercourse and rape is this thing called ‘consent’. But consent is only possible between two equal parties. Women have never been equal, and cannot be equal in a world where men exist because men always hold the threat of rape over women even when the word love or equality comes out of their mouths. The exception to equality is payment. Compensating someone can be considered to be consent, so you can’t rape a prostitute or a wife since both are paid for fuck services. So how can you convince a woman to consent to rape without pay? Well, you tell her that fucking as many men as possible without compensation is the ultimate proof of female free will, bodily liberation and equality. And this constitutes the ultimate flipping off of religion, capitalism and the State.
This fooled and continues to fool a lot of anarchist and feminist women, unfortunately. But the reality was and is still that no version of free love has ever liberated women. Anarchist women were still servicing men, still getting pregnant, still dying from botched abortions and difficult pregnancies, and contracting even more venereal diseases than before, but now men didn’t have to pay for anything, they had more access to women’s bodies, and they never had to face rape charges because those existing in a state of perpetual willingness can’t be raped.
5.. Non-violence. Contrary to what most people believe, the majority of anarchists don’t support violent agendas. But this needs to be clarified, and I’ll use the Father of Anarchy, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, to illustrate. Proudhon, who only got a good start in life because of a devoted boy-mom and the generosity of capitalists, believed in a moral and ethical peaceful transformation of society. He criticized revolutionary violence. But he did not extend his beliefs to women. So much for equality… He wrote in his private notebooks, which have since been published, that violence should be used to subdue women, and he firmly believed that “Woman does not at all hate being used with violence, indeed even being violated…” While men tell us what they think all the time, what women see but refuse to believe is only the tip of the iceberg. We see this all the time when men’s private activities come to light posthumously or even accidentally while they are alive. The best policy, in my experience and opinion, is never to give men the benefit of the doubt – or ‘yes, all men’ – and to always question their publicly stated beliefs. I think that you’ll eventually discover that their words, actions and beliefs don’t match up. They tell you flimsy lies to get your labour, support, ideas and body. Supporting them is always a mistake.
A Word on Female Anarchists
For every male philosophy and movement, there have always been female supporters. They are always fewer in number than the males, simply because radical thinking is always more dangerous or risky for women. Because of their minority status, these women tend to be very pro-male and male apologists, even if they think they are arguing on behalf of women’s rights. They have to. The limited attention and support they do get never comes from other women as they are too afraid to rock the patriarchal boat. But the male supporters end up also being their abusers. This is the history of revolution, and I touch on this in my F is for Friendship post. Men get a radical idea and garner female support by mouthing words that women misinterpret to mean shared ideals. Women then devote endless hours of labour, emotional support, money, and sexual access to their bodies to the radical male movement, and then end up in jail, and/or financially destitute, and/or sexually violated, and sometimes in the end, disillusioned when they discover that the movement was aimed at male rights and freedoms, not human rights.
The anarchist movement was no different. Some truly amazing and brave women devoted their lives to male freedom from exploitation. I have very mixed feelings when I read about these women though. They were clearly cut from a different cloth and had so much potential to make a difference for women had they not been diverted and consumed by male whining and self-imposed suffering. Their life stories read like a never-ending schizophrenic episode filled with violence, sexual liaisons with parasitical and often mentally ill men, male apologism, and anti-woman activities dressed up by modern philosophers as feminism. Here are a few examples.
Emma Goldman, probably the most well-known female anarchist, was a Russian Jewish immigrant to the US, active in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. She was a formidable speaker and prolific in her activism, and she ended up jailed on multiple occasions. Eventually, she was deported from the US during her career of fighting for whiny men using targeted violence campaigns to stop state-sanctioned violence campaigns. A sad history with a misogynistic father and then a violent rape in her teen years did nothing to stop her from pursuing several subordinate and degrading relationships with men, and at one point, freely choosing to become a prostitute to help a male anarchist fund a ridiculous assassination scheme. She also refused to get involved with First Wave feminists, but put energy into birth control access to facilitate women’s willingness to engage in free love. She was an anarchist in the male sense of the word, but I don’t consider her to be a feminist. I wish she had learned from her early negative experiences with men and put her vast energy and intelligence to better use as a separatist.
Voltairine de Cleyre, an American and another misguided female anarchist, was also a formidable speaker and writer. Again, she had the stirrings of feminism, as evidenced in her lecture and essay, entitled Sex Slavery, where she attacked the institution of marriage and marital rape. But instead of following this problem to its root, she was a staunch proponent of free love, and suffered personally and constantly, as a result. She carried on with various mentally ill male anarchists and as her reward, she became pregnant on multiple occasions, endured a brutal abortion, carried out one difficult pregnancy although was smart enough to hand of the male offspring to the father and refused motherhood, and she contracted syphilis. In addition, one of her male students shot her in an assassination attempt, but she immediately and ridiculously forgave him. So, definitely not a feminist, despite what people might say these days.
Since these early years, women have continued to participate in anarchist endeavours, even pairing their anarchy with liberal feminism through the Second Wave and on into the punk music scene and the Riot Grrrl movement. I think these efforts haven’t done much for women for three reasons, primarily.
First, they have usually piggy-backed on male movements or served as adolescent reactions to adolescent male behaviour. Second, they don’t address the root source of female oppression – men – and even include men in pretty much everything they do, so the best they can achieve is more freedom for oppressed men and continued sexual slavery for women. And third, feminism on its own has become diluted and polluted by intersectionality and inclusivity, and participants spend more time infighting and launching racist-misogynist attacks on white women than achieving female liberation and solidarity.
Unsurprisingly, male anarchists who, as a rule, talk about equality, have always reacted negatively to women promoting feminism within anarchism. Many tried to gaslight women into subordinating their concerns to those of class struggle. Of course, what so many fail to realize is that all oppressions stem from female oppression, so the logical pursuit is actually to liberate women from men first. Then the road is open to all other struggles. But these men knew exactly what they were doing in gaslighting women, and many women capitulated, likely due to their sexual ties to males in the movement, instead of starting their own movement separate from male anarchy. Women generally won’t allow themselves to see that male anarchists are not interested in equality, despite what they say. They never have been, and never will be. To make women truly equal is to protect them from male access and usage, and no man would ever agree to that because he rightly suspects that he would lose many of the privileges he sees as rights, and that he would actually have to work hard for the first time in his life to achieve something.
Can Anarchy and Feminism Co-Exist?
The quick and dirty answer is yes. The longer answer is yes, but you have to be clear about what you mean by both anarchy and feminism, and really, as I define it, true feminism is in and of itself, anarchy. True feminism is gynocentrism and female separatism. It is not possible to live free of hierarchy, coercion and violence if you devote energy to men, and especially if you practise heterosexuality or pour your resources into boy children. Intersectionality also has no place in this mindset as you end up with an oppression Olympics that fuels censorship and blame hierarchies and a loss of focus on femalehood as a shared status. At this point, I am not sure if women are ready or able to be just women. Men have created a world of damaged women living in archetypal boxes and who are trying and failing to escape this cage by constructing meaningless portfolios of micro-identities. I’ll bet that simplifying and separating is the answer to this, but that is another post for another time.
I’ll conclude by returning to where I started. Am I an anarchist? I think at this point, I can say yes. I’m a female separatist and I live by my words, and I can’t think of a better way to express freethinking and feminist mayhem than that.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
K is for Kin-Keepers
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
To be honest, this is a term I have never before used in my life, and I hadn’t even heard of it until a few months ago when I read an article that referred to it. My plan here is to introduce the term and how it pertains to women briefly, and then to take on a part of the article that inspired the post. You can find a link to the article here. Please note that it is not a feminist article, even though its topic certainly warrants a discussion from that perspective. In the conclusion, the author even tries the whole ‘suffering makes us stronger’ and ‘patriarchy-compliant women are strong’ bullshit that is force-fed to today’s women to shame them into silence about real problems, and that I talked about in a previous post. It amazes me how often women dance around disturbing issues without actually naming the problem that underlies the entire mess. It is amazing, but not surprising. If women allowed themselves to truly see and acknowledge reality, their entire world would collapse. They’d lose the perks that they get from supporting men, and they’d become social outcasts with all the negative consequences that arise from not sucking cock literally or figuratively. To be honest, most wouldn’t survive, as heterosexuality strips women of their natural strength, and most women don’t realize what exactly is being exchanged when they engage in pro-male lifestyles.
So, what is a kin-keeper? Well, it is apparently a social role that exists within a family that is taken on primarily by women. It is thought to involve three primary duties: carrying out family rituals and traditions, organizing family reunions and protecting family relationships, and maintaining family records and narratives. Basically, I call it it glue. Without a kin-keeper, you don’t have a cohesive and loyal unit with a group memory or sense of history.
Now, women typically take on the role without necessarily being asked or forced, and I think they do it for a number of reasons. On the whole, a) women tend to have better social skills than men, so it is natural for them to put work into relationships, b) they need to have social relationships both to feel human and to make up for the fact that traditional het relationships strip them of valuable social connections and outlets, c) they need to do these activities to maintain the lie of happy and successful female heterosexuality, and d) if they are housewives, they need to find a way to justify their existence and to fill their abundant free time once children are of school age and older. For some reason, liberal feminism has started trying to pass off the role of kin-keeper as ’emotional labour’ deserving of pay, and that is probably why I haven’t taken much of an interest in it. I’m sick of being pressured into fighting for the privileges of women who wholeheartedly want to maintain patriarchy and who fear and hate lesbians, the child-free and female separatists with a passion. For me, true feminism is about the prevention of women’s oppression and especially of the punishment of rebels of patriarchy, not slapping bandaids on problems so that women can continue complying and forcing their daughters to comply and submit. It is the latter mission, however, that takes up most of the limited feminist money and labour available. And of course, this ensures that women will never be free or healthy.
The Family Who Suffers Together, Stays Together
Now, before I get into the third duty of kin-keepers, I just want to say that many, if not most, kin-keepers are enablers and expert liars, and I discuss both topics in other posts in the Alphabet Series. These are crucial skills for practising straight women so that they can successfully live up to their end of the heterosexual contract. Basically, they agree to take on a particular role in the patriarchal institution known as ‘family’, and a woman absolutely cannot do this well without being able to enable men and boys and to lie as if her life depends on it – and it usually does.
The sole purpose of family is to triumph over other families. You know – that survival of the fittest type of thing that people tell themselves, especially when they screw over other people. And to do that, a family needs a narrative. Every semi-functional family has one. The kin-keeper, as protector of the family memories and records, is key to maintaining the narrative. They hold the grudges. They appoint the scapegoats. They cover up the crimes and dirty secrets, unless it is advantageous to reveal them. They dole out emotional rewards and punishments. And they take photos, maintain their collections, culling when necessary. Family, as a patriarchal institution, is about the male journey to power and female support of that journey. So the narrative, for the most part, ends up being the history of the males of the family. We all know this is true. We see it in the records kept through the ages. And we also know that male stories and success depend upon the suffering of women and girls, and that this suffering must happen in silence. No one likes truth-tellers. They ruin the narrative and upset the balance of power. Revealing that a male family member is a rapist, for example, can ruin his life, and possibly the trajectory of the family. He probably just made a mistake – there’s no need to make a big deal out of it. The female victim, however, will build character and strength through her silent and required suffering.
Kin-keepers also like to hide facts about drug and alcohol problems, incest and domestic abuse, sluts who have children out of wedlock, gay aunts and uncles, extramarital affairs, humble economic origins, and really, it could be anything that might bring embarrassment to the family and destroy relationships.
Digging into the Past
While most wives and mothers tend to take on informal emotional labour following marriage and breeding, once traditional women are faced with having almost nothing to do, they often turn to doing actual research into family history, often with the help of genealogy services. And this is where the article I referred to comes in. The article asks whether digging into our families’ DNA pasts should come with a trigger warning. Basically, as I interpret it, most women’s stone cold realities are depressing as fuck, but they are so well covered up, we all grow up not knowing the horrors that women go through. We ourselves think we are alone in our suffering because we are not allowed to talk about it. So facing the sheer amount of collective female suffering can cause cognitive dissonance – or what the author of the article calls ‘distress’. On some level, we all know we are rape babies. There are different kinds of rape, but unless we are test tube created, we are all rape babies. But no one wants to acknowledge that, so it can be distressing to find out that family members have been raped or were disowned because of rapes. We may also find out that male family members were pedophiles or rapists. There are all sorts of skeletons that can be unearthed when one goes digging in one’s family’s past. Whether you can handle it is another story.
In my own family, we had a ton of skeletons involving rapey men and abused women, and I didn’t even do any research or take on the role of kin-keeper. I found out that my paternal grandmother became pregnant out of wedlock and her parents disinherited her from the family fortune and married her off to a poor salesman who ended up beating her for her entire life as if punishing her for her first bastard child and general whorishness. He raped three more children out of her, but he refused to buy her a wedding ring as an additional insult. She was an unusual woman and had a full-time job outside the home during what was a generation of housewives. She bought her own wedding rings with her own money, and today I have those rings. But she became an alcoholic and died a very broken woman. Her second son ended up being a chip off the old fatherly block and molested his younger sister, my aunt, for years. He luckily died in a motorcycle accident at the age of 18, but as a further slap in the face to my aunt, he was turned into the young, dead hero of the family. My aunt went on to marry an abuser, but became a social worker focused on battered women as well as helping incarcerated men. She would bring ex-con boyfriends to family gatherings. We’d find out later that the boyfriend of the moment was out of the picture after robbing her or something like that. My aunt’s second son ended up a classic abuser like his father. He got his wife pregnant and then left her to be with some American woman he also got pregnant at the same time during one of his business trips south of the border. My father, the youngest child and a psychologist, refused to let my aunt speak of the molestation and would belittle her in front of me when she tried to talk about it. My father himself was both a child psychologist and sex therapist who used to bring home movies filled with violent rape scenes for my mother and I to watch with him. I learned about male entertainment at an early age…
Interestingly, on that side of my family, there was an official policy that women weren’t allowed to be the family record keepers. After I put the whispered stories of abuse together with my father’s pro-rape approach to child-rearing, I understood why this was so… I also understand why I absolutely hate the concept of family, and was inexplicably anti-marriage from a very early age.
I leave you with this thought or question: what does the modern kin-keeper do with the shit she unearths about her own family? She is uncovering the true stories of women, the truth of heterosexuality, the truth of what men do to women. How does a straight, male-supporting enabler deal with her cognitive dissonance? Does she re-bury it in order to keep the peace and to maintain her comfortable life, denying knowledge to the girls of her family, and instead slathering her conscience with a healthy layer of hope? Or does she wake the fuck up and actually do what adults are supposed to do – protect girls from the shit men and boys have been doing to women and girls since human time began?
I think you and I both know the answer to that question.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
J is for Joy
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Are you the proud owner of a virtue name? You know, names that derive from religious ideas of moral behaviour. There are some names that are more commonplace and parents may not really think about the meaning behind them when it comes time to assigning names to their property, but a lot of parents actually do want their kid to live up to moral expecations and thus choose a virtue name that may be especially relevant to their agenda. It’s magical thinking though, and unfortunately, our world is not in short supply of that.
Now, it likely won’t surprise you that female babies are more often the recipients of virtue names than males. This is because female behaviour is more controlled and policed and punished than male behaviour. As well, girls and women are also seen as the moral gate-keepers of society, and when bad things happen, such as upticks in male violent crime or the perceived breakdown of the nuclear family, it is usually blamed on out-of-control, amoral females. You know how this goes – somehow, whether or not a girl crosses her legs when she sits in public has massive power over male self-control.
As well, the virtues that females are supposed to uphold are very gendered, and therefore mostly unrealistic and unnatural. We expect girls to be quiet and sweet and accommodating and careful and the perfect doormats. When males are virtue named, they are allowed names that will give them glory and public respect. And in some non-English-speaking cultures, parents will even go so far as to arrogantly give their boys the names of gods and prophets, which, in my opinion borders on breaking their own blasphemy laws.
You can find female virtue names in most languages and cultures. In English, our most common and obvious of the female virtue names include: Hope, Faith, Grace, Patience, Prudence, Felicity, Constance, and of course, our longed-for feeling of pleasure and happiness:
J is for Joy.
I don’t find it surprising that names like Joy are common in English-language cultures, especially the US and Canada. Anglo-North America is the land of forced displays of daily exuberance and the over-medication of widespread female depression. I’ve travelled through and lived in several places in the world, including where I live now, and I’ve never seen anything approaching the insane North American drive for women to display feelings they don’t feel. I’m currently living in a country where the women are positively allowed to be downright assholes, and there is no requirement to smile. Not that I want to be an asshole, but I certainly get sick of the Cult of Positivity back home. You may have some insights into your own culture or cultures where you’ve spent significant time, and I’d definitely appreciate any details you’re willing to share in the comments of the YouTube reading of this post. Happiness mandates may look different in different places.
Let’s talk about two aspects of forced joy: smiling and happiness.
Smiling
Say cheese. Smiling is mandatory in North America, especially if you are female, and even complete strangers will remind you to put your face together or will ask you what is wrong if you’re not smiling. On more than one occasion in the US, I’ve even had homeless men tell me to “Smile, honey. It’s not so bad.” as I walked by them on the street. I guarantee you that no one says that to men walking by. Your smile has to be of the right kind, however. There are unspoken rules about what a woman’s face should do in public. Not only have I been chided for not smiling, but I’ve also gotten into trouble for having what was interpreted to be a sarcastic smile – you know, the kind that has the power to emasculate men because they think you’re laughing at them.
Other cultures are not so neurotic. I remember when I was studying in France several years ago, our textbook did a little cultural comparison on smiling. They put public professional photos of American and Western European university professors side by side, and the difference was incredible. The Europeans either weren’t smiling at all or only had a slight upturn to their closed mouths. The Americans all had toothy grins. Were the American smiles and happiness real? Who knows? Most people can actually fake a Duchenne smile or what we call a ‘real smile’ with the eye crinkle. Perhaps the question is not whether the smile is real, but whether smiling is an indicator of joy or whether it is just a culture-specific behaviour without much meaning. The smiles may be disconcerting to outsiders, but I find the scowls of Asia and Eastern Europe to be off-putting as well, even if they, too, don’t mean anything.
Now, strangely, smiling is also a racist, sexist requirement if you work as a teacher in non-Western countries. White female teachers are absolutely required to smile constantly even if smiling is not a cultural custom. In China, I was reminded to smile and be positive, even while I faced classrooms of completely blank faces. It took a while for me to get used to this lack of response while at the same time, I had to over-respond, and to an introvert, it was exhausting to force energy into something I wasn’t feeling at all. My experience in Asia completely changed the way I compose my face and I wrote about this back in 2016 in “How I Lost My Smile“. I think I used to be more of a natural smiler, as far as women’s behaviour can be natural in this world. But Asia kicked it out of me; daily misery accompanied by forced displays of happiness brought my wasted energy to the forefront of my thinking.
Happiness
In North America, regardless of how we compose our faces, we women are expected to be happy 24/7. Interestingly, women and even girls are disproportionately overmedicated for depression, and we have drug, alcohol and over-eating problems that speak of the kind of escapism that results from deep unhappiness. I think there are three things going on here.
A. Inherited depression. The heritability of clinical depression is about 50%. For severe depression, it is thought to be higher. I’ve known a lot of depressed women, and I’ve seen a common theme in what they think will solve their problems. First, they think going to a new place will give them a fresh start, and of course, they discover that problems live within them and aren’t place-dependent. Secondly, so many women think that having a baby will make them happy. And of course, that doesn’t work either. I am of the unpopular opinion that people with mental health problems should not breed. I mean, I’m an anti-natalist as it is, and I don’t think any woman is either natural or healthy enough to affect a child positively. But if you have serious problems, you risk passing those problems on to your children, and you probably aren’t going to make a great parent anyway because of your issues.
B. Patriarchal depression. Even though the world acknowledges that females suffer from depression more often than males, it is written off as some kind of female weakness. It’s biological or something. Yes, major depression can be inherited, but what about the majority of women who seem to experience chronic, low-grade depression? You probably know what I’m talking about. This is not the depression that prevents you from getting out of bed. This is the general and almost constant feeling of being low, that there is something wrong that you can’t escape. It is usually just passed off as ‘female suffering’, but which I believe is wholly unnatural. I don’t think that suffering is a necessary part of the human female condition. I argue that Patriarchy causes widespread female suffering, forces women to accept it, and then forces women to pretend to be happy. And in countries such as the US and Canada, where the pretending has to be over-the-top and very public, what female wouldn’t be depressed simply because of sheer emotional exhaustion?
C. Misdiagnosis and pathologizing. This is a huge topic and other feminists tackle different aspects of how the medical industrial complex hurts women. What I will say here is that depression is often a symptom of something bigger, not an illness in and of itself. But, it is treated as an illness. Women and girls reacting negatively – and I would say normally and naturally – to Patriarchy are seen as sick. If you, as a female, don’t embrace your role as a male plaything with gratitude and joy, then you are sick. Instead of removing the XY, which is the parasite or infection causing the depression, doctors pathologize you and pump you full of medication. But the problem is never solved, and you can’t figure out why you are so defective. Personally, I think your depression is a sign that your body and mind are behaving normally and naturally to an attack. It’s just that you will never be validated, and the true problem will never be correctly named or dealt with.
In conclusion, I propose a new set of virtue names. Tomorrow’s girls shall be called Separatist, Emasculator, Truth, Judgment, Child-Free. Aren’t these valiant and idealistic qualities for our future-builders? And, while I jest, are these names any more ridiculous than calling a girl Prudence or Chastity or Faith or even Joy? And if you think they are, then maybe ask yourself why.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
H is for Hope
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
It’s the fluffy stuff of posters, platitudes, politics, and propaganda. It’s the product peddled by motivators, marketers, and movie-makers. And today, it’s the topic of yet another H-post in my Alphabet Series.
H is for Hope
This is a massive topic, and I know I won’t do it justice here. But the concept of hope is a major undercurrent in patriarchy and it is important to understand why this is so. It is also important to think about whether it is a useful concept for women or whether it does more harm than good. So, I’ll give it a rough outline and leave you with some questions, opinions and food for further thought.
Motivation for this topic came from an online conversation I had with an Indian woman I met on Saidit.net a few years ago in a more general and very blackpilled discussion of patriarchy and suicide. I had always been of the opinion, probably thanks to my long education in psychology, that hope was the driving force in keeping people keeping on. Basically, I thought, it was a good thing and should be fostered. My Indian acquaintance was of a different opinion, believing that hope was rooted in religion, which is essentially patriarchal and thus, anti-woman, and I found what she said to be so valuable that it inspired a complete rethink of my position. I haven’t encountered her since, but if she ever runs into me or my writing online again, I’d like her to know that I’m grateful for our short, but meaty, discussion.
Hope vs. Faith and the Link to Suffering
Now, I think religion is one of many symptoms or tools of patriarchy, and thus, hope is not rooted in religion, but just another symptom or tool of female oppression. You can see hope used as a tool in both religious and areligious male-dominated societies. But many often see hope as a religious concept and mistakenly equate it with faith and the non-thinking that goes with it. They do often go together and prop each other up as both require the withholding of critical thinking, but they are not the same. And faith doesn’t have to be religious either, of course. So, first, some definitions.
Hope: a feeling of expectation and desire for a particular thing to happen.
Faith: complete trust or confidence in something based solely on conviction rather than proof.
So why do these exist? Why is such a state of non-thinking so irresistible, especially for women? Well, my theory is this. Suffering is always present in patriarchy, and as a result, there is a need to explain it and to develop ways of accepting and coping with it. Required suffering is part of every religion and cultural mythology, and it is often explained that women must suffer more than men. It’s god’s plan and therefore women’s duty to accept a life of suffering. We are told to have faith, despite any evidence or rational argument, that there is a reason for what we endure, so instead of thinking critically and then realizing that fighting back is the only way out of it all (aside from suicide), we then develop hope as a means of coping and trying to survive. Religions and political machines often use ‘hope’ as a way of getting people both to accept suffering and seeing it as a way to become better and stronger. And there is a heap of guilting, shaming and morality policing done to those who don’t submit, accept and hope.
Here is an example of the effective use of hope in religion and political campaigning.
…we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
a close-enough version of Romans 5:2-5 NIV
Religious use of ‘hope’ to justify and almost eroticize suffering.
Political use of ‘hope’ to manipulate hearts and minds.
The bonus to men and to patriarchy is that if we accept required suffering as women, it opens the door to more abuse by men. They can do what they want and are allowed to repent and be forgiven ad nauseam, and we are only allowed to hope for things to improve. The reality is that suffering isn’t actually necessary to exist as a human, males are never sorry for what they do, and women can hope until the cows come home, but things will never get better.
Hope vs. Purpose – Is Hope Necessary?
I’ve had the privilege of working with a lot of young people in different countries, and I think this world is filled with people who don’t have anyone to talk to honestly or anyone to just listen to them. I’ve listened to a lot of youth, and if asked for advice, I try to give them the benefit of my experience without sounding like a finger-wagging old person. They get enough of that from family and society. The young seem to be preoccupied with the elusive concepts of success and happiness, and everyone seems to tell them to be positive and hopeful and focused on the pursuit of money and love. What a recipe for mental health problems. I have found that those obsessed with hope and happiness tend to be extremely unhappy, very confused, and even quite depressed. Hope is about expectation, and the youth of today seem to have a lot of expectations. I think the internet has had a hand in this, present lies as reality and telling young people that they can expect to have everything they see even when what they are seeing isn’t real. But it’s complicated.
Anyhow, in my experience, letting go of expectations, of hope and of this silly notion of constant happiness are key to navigating a patriarchal world without entering a downward spiral and considering killing yourself. Is this ideal? Of course not. But as there is no solving the Man Problem, you need to find a way to deal. And I don’t mean adopting an “if you can’t beat them, then join them” mentality. Sadly, that is what the majority of straight women do. Denial is a little more comfortable than living in reality, but you are still suffering even if you don’t realize it for a long time, usually after it is too late. I’ll write more about this when I get to the P’s of my Alphabet Series. No, what I mean is that you should conserve your gynergy and make your efforts mean something.
Here are some examples:
- Pick your battles wisely. If you are going to fight for something, then make sure it’s worth the consequences. There are always consequences when women go against men and their handmaidens. Even if you manage to accomplish something good for women, almost no one will thank you for it – probably the opposite actually. So fight for your higher principles and without expectations or hope.
- Live for ‘moments’. I’ve tried to help young people who are confused about why they can’t attain a constant state of bliss with the following. Enjoy small things. Notice details. Take pleasure in what is happening now without thinking past its ending. Myself, I actually am one of those people who literally stops to smell flowers. Once I started doing this type of thing regularly, I was freed from the burden of not being constantly happy. I have moments. A piece of chocolate. A good conversation. Taking an amazing photo of a bumble bee. No. I am not a member of the Cult of Positivity. I am skeptical, jaded, and have very low expectations of other people and of my own life.
- Find a purpose. Hope and purpose are not the same. Purpose has nothing to do with expecting that things will get better. They can be linked, but they don’t have to be. And I think that it’s better if they are not. Having a purpose is about doing something that has meaning to you. It could be about morals or principles. It could be about achieving mastery in something. It could be anything. And while it would be great if your purpose contributed positively to the world (i.e., it is a feminist purpose), you need to start with something that helps you sleep at night and helps you get up in the morning. I think most of the world is suffering from lack of meaningful purpose and so many bad things result.
In conclusion, I’ll say this. For women, hope is a useless concept. I think it only exists because suffering exists, and suffering only exists becuase men exist. Forcing hope down women’s throats serves men by keeping women compliant, accepting of forced suffering, and illogically believing that things will get better without questioning the status quo or fighting to change anything. Hope doesn’t float; it is the anchor that pulls you under the water and drowns you slowly.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
A Consistent Message
As if in preparation for my upcoming audio upload of G is for Girl, I’ve been presented with two more examples of the <<white female as international symbol of ‘public whore’>> phenomenon that I’ve noticed over the past few decades in the various countries I’ve visited and lived in. I’ve lived in the world more than most women, and unlike women who travel with male masters, I actually look around me with no filter and no protection. I don’t pretend, and yes, it is uncomfortable. It doesn’t seem to matter what the local dominant race is, white females are often the go-to exploitable symbol of sex, and by extension, the number one convenient target of blame and hate for the world’s problems. All women, regardles of race, are sexualized. Our bodies and our reproductive capabilities are the basis of female oppression.
Some people try to blame white women for setting impossible standards for beauty that the rest of the female world is supposed to live up to, but I maintain that women neither create nor want oppression, and without male existence, beauty wouldn’t be a thing at all. ‘Beauty’ is a cage, not a form of freedom, and isn’t based on objective reality. Beauty practices and the massive industry upholding them are time- and money-wasters, and destroyers of the thinking mind through distraction and the fabrication of a host of ‘lady problems’ that don’t truly exist.
Beauty doesn’t translate into love or respect – if it did, males would take it over for themselves. Rather, it creates a rationale for hate and justification for violence, not just for males against females, but among women and girls themselves. And we see the manifestation of hate in so many ways.
I present below my two latest everyday examples of what beauty means. Unless it is pointed out, no one every notices or questions it.
(1) This is a life-size, mutilated poster of an almost-nude white female found in my neighbourhood. This is not a local woman from where I currently live. You can see that a white, bikini-clad female was downloaded from Dreamstime stock photos, she was to be used to advertise one of the many, many ‘beauty bars’ in my community, and of course, some male went to town on her, scratching a thatch of pubic hair in the crotch region, and scratching away at one of the breasts, perhaps simulating bite marks. You may not be aware that males very, very commonly bite the women they rape. I used to work as a forensic data analyst and I know what males do to the strangers they rape. For some reason, the belly was also scratched – perhaps a little hatred directed at the reproductive organ region, which is what much of female control by males is all about.
(2) As I was preparing the graphic for my G is for Girl YouTube post, I did an image search for ‘tomboy’, and I got this pornified, young, blonde white girl in a string bikini, complete with a ‘sexy’ pose and an ‘ass shot’. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I swear there is something going on with the G is for G$$gle search engine algorithm. I’ve written a few posts on internet madness, in general, and strange search results on specific topics before (see: my post on the privatization of search terms to protect men and another post on how searching for ‘sexual violence’ brings you links for dating apps). You also get strange results when you look for racism and violence against white females, which I will write about in a future post.
Anyhow, today’s search engines are liberal male havens: pro-misogyny, pro-rape, pro-porn, pro-censorship, and anti-white-female.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again. If you are going to have a successful campaign, you need to be simple and consistent. This is one thing that men have got ‘right’ and why they successfully maintain a position of dominance over females. If women and girls can (and are willing to) learn anything from men, it should be this. As it is, women can’t agree on the basics of feminism, and often can’t even see their own oppression, choosing instead to fight amongst themselves, and ultimately, serving males.
[I’m including this post in the White Girl series.]
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
O is for Other
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Don’t worry I’m not like other girls
From the song ‘Not Like Other Girls’ by Melbourne-based Bares (fronted by Ella Sterland) – released on their self-titled album in 2017.
I’m a cooler better version than what you have heard
About what women enjoy and what they like to commit to
I’m not like other girls because you treat them like shit
And I’m not about that..
Once in a while, I go back and read old posts. I like to see if and how my thinking has changed over the years and also whether I can include links to past articles in my new ones. I vaguely remembered as I was preparing the current article that I had written something about Other before, and lo and behold, in my first month of writing back in 2015, I posted something called Otherfucker, a sort of tongue-in-cheek proposition to rebrand, but with an alteration, one of our best-loved female slurs (popularized in my generation by good old Samuel L. Jackson in the movie, Pulp Fiction). Note that I’ve never tried out this new word, probably because, believe it or not, I very seldom use cuss words in the meat world, unless I’m swearing under my breath in reaction to something really bad or someone has actually assaulted me and I decide to let loose on them.
Anyhow, today in O is for Other, I plan to talk about the following:
- Women Defending Men – aka Not All MenTM or Not My NigelTM or some variation on Unicorns are Real!
- Men Defending Themselves – the scourge we know as ‘male feminists’
- Women Pandering to Men – or what online misogynists have labelled ‘pick-me girls’
- Men Manipulating Women – à la ‘you’re not like all the other girls’
- People Silencing Women – e.g., ‘at least you’re not a Muslim woman’ or ‘other people have it worse, so shut up’
- Men Depersonalizing Women – or creating an ‘other’ for the purpose of punishment
- Men Dehumanizing Women – the basis of patriarchy, capitalism and porn culture
One thing you’re going to notice about all of these categories is that every one of the people who fall within seems to have an aversion to dealing with reality. Men don’t like reality because it would require them to take responsibility for their crimes and other shitty behaviour. Women don’t like reality because they know they would look very stupid because of their decisions and they’d realize how much of their energy and lives they’d wasted on males who approach relationships very differently than women do. Just a note to the women, it is very good to self-analyze. It is okay to realize you’ve made a mistake (or mistakes!). The important thing is to admit them and learn from them. Then you can get better and go on to help other women do and be better.
So, let’s start with a definition.
In and of itself, ‘other’ is a neutral word. It just means different or distinct. But it can take on a negative connotation in its adjective form, but especially when it’s used as a verb. To ‘other’ someone means to view or treat a person or group of people as intrinsically different from and alien to oneself. Othering can serve to demonize certain people and groups as well as sanitize. One hard, fast rule, though, is that in this game, women always lose and men always win.
1. Women Defending Men. 99% of women are desperate to believe that men are redeemable. They birth males, they let males fuck their bodies, and by and large, women have marginally better relationships with fathers and father figures than they do with mothers. As a result, they are deeply invested in looking for Good MenTM. These men are not like other men – the convicted rapists, the sexist bosses, the gropers on buses and trains. The bar is very low when defining ‘good’. All a dude has to do is not get caught raping a woman to pass as a stellar example of manhood. I’d bet that the average wife or girlfriend would be shocked (and then would rebound with denial and fierce defence of Nigel) to find out what her owner actually thinks and does without her knowledge. In reality, Good Men are unicorns – they don’t exist. There is no ‘other’. There is just a spectrum of shit. The awfulness of the smell is therefore relative.
2. Men Defending Themselves. Lots of men, even gynocidal psychopaths, believe they are special and innocent. They are not like other men. Some of the most dishonest and repulsive these days are what we know as Male Feminists. These are leftie, human-rightsy males who are the strongest proponents of female sexual power. You know, the power to inspire boners! They organize slut marches. They march at the front of Take Back the Night rallies. They attend and dominate the discussions at feminist events and in online discussions. They are super great at leading women and telling women how to do feminism, and more importantly, what they’re doing wrong. And not that they explicitly demand it, but if women want to show their gratitude by sucking their dicks, they fully support them because they believe that women have the agency to do so. See? They’re amazing! Very un-self-serving and humble and feminist. But. Yes, there is a but (if you actually need one). If you are a real feminist and astutely question or challenge this male feminist, you are in for a treat. You will discover a viciousness and misogyny under the surface to rival any MRA or trannie. He will let you know that he is not like other men, and you are unfairly victimizing him by acting like a man-hating, angry, hairy, crazy lesbian. He might express sad-feelz at your total stupidity and/or the obvious trauma you’ve experienced and haven’t yet gotten over. Bottom line is: Support withdrawn, bitch!
3. Women Pandering to Men. Pick-me girls. This is a real phenomenon, but of course, the labelling and awareness of the phenomenon has been influenced by American television and social media. Women have, throughout history, pandered to men out of necessity. When half of the population has the power of life or death, comfort or poverty, safety or vulnerability over the other half, then pandering and many more degrading behaviours result on the part of the oppressed group. You can’t blame the panderers for starting the whole thing, but pick-me girls/women do deliberately sell out their sex for the approval of males, and are thus accountable for their behaviour, especially in a day and age when it isn’t necessary at all for survival. They make a public show of not adopting standard gendered behaviour (such as applying make-up, dressing in a feminine way, or acting like a sexy child, etc) while appearing to adopt the stereotypical, gendered behaviour of males (such as liking sports, being unemotional, and over-eating without concern for gaining weight), and thus are not like the ‘other’ girls. And they publicly point out this otherness to males to show how they are better. Ironically, they are just as woman-hating and dick-sucking as the women they denigrate. All women who pander to males or the male gaze exhibit internalized misogyny. It is possibly even more pathetic than when a female thinks she is doing something ’empowering’, such as wearing make-up, but is actually perpetuating misogyny. But in the end, they are two sides of the same coin that ends up in men’s pockets. There is so much self-hatred and psychological trauma fuelling this behaviour. And despite their sabotage of women, they just end up used and abused like any other ‘heterosexual’ female. One day, these women lose their special ‘other’ status because no woman can be better than all the others forever. It’s not the woman, but the man that decides when she has finally joined the masses.
4. Men Manipulating Women. This is the male counterpart of the ‘pick-me’ female duo. Men have a lot of weapons in their arsenal for use in manipulating, using and abusing women (see my post: That’s Some Arsenal You’ve Got There, Gentlemen). The relevant one here is that of bestowing the backhanded compliment of ‘otherness’ on a target. You’ve likely had a dude try this on you before. He’ll say something like, “You’re cool. You’re not a bitch like other girls.” So he pays you a compliment, but he is also insulting you at the same time. You don’t have to be young, naive or inexperienced to fall for this hardcore manipulation technique. Most people want to be appreciated and loved for some special quality. The problem is that the specialness that so many men point out in women is that they don’t act like women, but rather, more like men. (Geez, just go get a boyfriend already, you closeted omnisexuals…). So males will praise females for being accepting of porn use, being open to trying anal sex, or for being thin while also eating as much as a man. It is hyper-misogynistic, but the love-starved female will eat up these pseudo-love-bombs. Her internalized misogyny will be reinforced, and she’ll doubly commit herself to not stepping out of line (i.e., acting human, rather than… god forbid, female). What she doesn’t realize is that one day she will fail. She may question her sub-human status or make a demand on the relationship that doesn’t suit her owner. Or she may not actually do anything different at all. All that needs to happen is that the man gets tired of her. All he needs to do is manufacture a fault or just notice that she is human, rather than an object catering to his every wish. And she becomes just like all the other girls. Again, such a waste of a human life.
5. People Silencing Women. This one, I’ve written about before. These days, it manifests as racist misogyny, it is a form of othering for the purpose of scapegoating, censoring and cancelling, and it is predominantly done to white women. It is a standard reaction to the perception of a group of women getting too much attention. There is always backlash when women get too powerful in the eyes of men and their supporters. In reality, the actual power achieved has been negligible. White women have never had and still don’t have power, have never been equal, and have never been over-represented or even proportionately represented in any line of work, despite what people need to believe. And like all women, they have only had a voice when orbiting the privilege of a male through marriage or male family members or speaking about issues that concern anyone and everyone but themselves. Anyhow, like mentioned in previous posts, calling up a handy acceptable victim group, usually brown or black women, is the fastest way to shame and silence white feminists, even if they are poor or in desperate need of help for rape or violence victimization.
6. Men Depersonalizing Women. As a woman, have you ever noticed that we have limited choices for our ‘identities’ simply because they tend to be discrete boxes or categories that don’t seem quite natural? You often feel like you don’t fit what’s available, and the choices available, as it is, seem equally challenging or unappealing. And if you are a WGTOW – woman going your own way, eschewing categorization – you face serious hardship, unlike men who are worshipped for forging their own path when they do the exact same thing. Men put us in boxes for a reason. Power and control. To create ‘us’ and ‘them’ or ‘other’. And in addition, it is easier to other and dismiss and move on to dehumanization when you can lump a bunch of things/people together. A group has no identity, no face. Without a face, you don’t need to see them as like you. They are undeserving of sympathy or empathy. So it is easy to apply stereotypes and use them as weapons. Men can demarcate the rules and limits for each group. They can judge and punish when a member oversteps or errs. They can designate certain groups as scapegoats and blame them for the very things they themselves perpetrate. Men have done this to the class of women known as prostitutes since the ‘oldest profession’ was forced into being by men. No other class of women has been so used and abused as convenient blame targets for problems that men have created. And many heterosexual, married women have piled on over the centuries, blaming prostitutes for men’s abuses, despite their actual roles as women not being much different.
7. Men Dehumanizing Women. This is the basis of patriarchy in general, and capitalism and porn culture, specifically. Dehumanization is the removal of human status or qualities from an individual or group. Men are human. Women are ‘other’. Sub-human. Non-human. Object. No oppressed group has ever been more dehumanized than females. We see this in language with the sheer number of slurs heaped on women, which include reducing women to body parts, objects and animals. No oppressed group has ever experienced the range and amount of dehumanizing language that females have. And females are still the most slurred and dehumanized group on the planet today even though we focus on every group BUT women. It is so pervasive and normalized that no one even notices it, and women are shamed if they call attention to it. Women and girls even adopt the language of their own dehumanization, which reinforces continued male use. “If women accept it and use it, then it is a-okay! Carry on, boys!” We also see the dehumanization of females in the use of ‘she’ to describe tools and machines. Cars, boats, and aircraft are among the many inanimate objects that are called ‘she’. Men also, throughout time, have referred to the manipulating and using a woman’s body as if they are playing of a musical instrument.
It is only when women are ‘other’, completely dehumanized, that we can be commodified. Women’s bodies are for sale and for rent, and it is the foundation of capitalism. Without the dehumanization and commodification of women’s bodies, capitalism cannot exist. What is even worse, however, is that not only do males consider it ethical to buy or rent a woman’s body, but because she is a thing, they also don’t acknowledge her suffering. Objects don’t suffer; they exist to be used. When a man adopts that attitude, he can justify anything he does to the object as it is his for the period he has paid for.
And I’ll leave you all with this final thought. Otherness is perfectly fine and natural in a world where human complexity allows for individual and group differences. Strict, unthinking conformity is seldom a good thing. Problems only arise, when otherness is forced upon others for the purpose of cruelty or blame, or when you adopt it yourself in order to claim a special or uber-victim status and to manipulate or silence others. It’s all likely easier to navigate if we try to understand where our own personal human rights begin and end, and when they start to trample others’.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Sexual Assault: The Quintessence of Femalehood
We’re taught not to catastrophize. Well, I’m going to have to qualify that, as simple statements, while desirable, usually aren’t true – or are partially true, at best. So, we are generally taught not to catastrophize. But. As females, we are mindfucked from birth, so there are times when we must catastrophize and call it truth and other situations where we must erase or minimize to pretend true things are false, or are part of a non-existent conspiracy, or don’t exist at all. Objectively speaking, catastrophizing is viewing an event or situation as worse than it actually is, but as females, we learn the following. We are supposed to catastrophize minor bad things (or even just neutral things) that happen to males in order to highlight their suffering and then to pour all of our time and energy into helping them survive, overcome, live and thrive. And to serve the same ultimate purpose, we are supposed to minimize even the truly catastrophic things that happen to ourselves and to other females. We are told that shining a spotlight on the bad things that happen to women is hysterical, unfair (to males, to perpetrators), hypersensitive, delusional, insane, over-serious, vindictive, straight up lying – you name it, our truths are not what WE say they are.
It is part of the intentional system known as patriarchy, where males must be allowed to unnaturally dominate and females must suffer and serve and pretend we like it – and to support males no matter what they do to us.
The number one problem for females under patriarchy is male violence. There are many, many problems that women and girls encounter in this system, but it all stems from male violence. None of the other problems female endure can exist without male violence and the threat of male violence. If you are a self-proclaimed or aspiring feminist and you are fighting to accomplish things that won’t put an end to male violence, then you are wasting your time. That is the truth.
Most of male violence consists of sexual assault. There is, of course, physical violence and emotional/psychological violence, but sexual violence is the cornerstone of patriarchy. It is something males do to females simply because they are female. It is a source of control and domination, as males seem to be extremely threatened by women, but also a source of enjoyment for males. Sexual assault is about BOTH power/control and sadistic pleasure, despite what liberal feminists say. Now, females typically don’t engage in this kind of behaviour towards males. Females can be violent towards males and especially towards females, but taking pleasure in sexual violence against anyone really isn’t a thing for the vast majority of women. And an aberration here or there does not negate this rule. Women certainly have never dominated the world or any documented society where males exist through sexual violence or any other means, for that matter. Oh and for the record, despite the desperation of equality feminists to assert it exists, there is no proof anywhere that females have existed in peaceful, equal bliss with males. If males exist in a society, there is sexual assault against females. We know it. We see it. That, we can prove. And I can’t imagine it being otherwise as there is no tangible evidence to suggest it is even possible. And women have tried. Oh, have they tried. But trying to ‘educate’ males out of raping and assaulting us is a futile pursuit.
So, despite a worldwide and millennia-long history of sexual assault against females by males, we still can’t really agree on what it is. Women and girls, for much of history, and still today, have had few to no rights compared to males. We don’t yet have full body-autonomy. We still are not allowed to say ‘no’. Our bodies are used against us in so many ways. Most of us, whether conservative or liberal, still buy into our male-defined slave categories, while trying to pass them off as duty, liberation, or some other such nonsense. If you can’t acknowledge reality, then you don’t really get anywhere in defining crimes against female bodies, nevermind prove that a crime has happened. I’m not even sure that we can define sex crimes against women as we a) still rely upon legal systems where men define the crimes they commit against us, and b) all of the crimes that fall in this category are completely dependent on the presence or absence of ‘consent’, which is a massively problematic concept. Consent is such a flimsy thing. It’s not tangible. It’s kind of a tree falling in the forest kind of scenario coupled with a serious vulnerability to manipulation, use of substances, coercion, post-assault threats, desperate circumstances and more. How can you prove consent, in other words, especially when it can be so fleeting and manipulatable and entirely defined by men?
Myself, I take out consent and ‘legal’ aspects of the definition of sexual assault. I consider the burden of proof to be upon the male, not the female. I think females should exist in a default state of ‘no‘. And assault should include the entire range of things males do to females from ogling and catcalling, to sexual touching/contact to outright rape (another crime that people have trouble defining, apparently). Oh no! Am I taking the spontenaity and fun out of heterosexual ‘play’ between males and females? Tough shit. What would be the more serious problem: out of control fear of and actual sexual assault (the current state of things) or males not being allowed to do whatever the fuck they want coupled with loser females’ feelings of being ignored and unmastered by potential manly men? I want women and girls to feel and be safe, first and foremost. This is what we call ‘human rights’. Feelings of deservedness are not human rights. I think these feelings wouldn’t exist if we didn’t brainwash girls into being completely dependent on having their very identities validated by misogynistic male attention. As it is, in the system that we have, girls figure out who they are because of the cumulative psychic weight (trauma) of the sexual assaults that make up their personal herstory. We are wrapped in our own – and our foremothers, through DNA inheritance – tapestries of sexual assault.
Apparently I’m Still Female
So anyway, three days ago, I was reminded that I was female. I was sexually assaulted. Again. For the hundredth? Thousandth? Millionth time? It is impossible to keep track of how many sexual assaults a female experiences in her lifetime – as mentioned above, partly because there are so many occurrences, partly because sexual assault is so poorly defined, partly because it is a female experience and thus is not taken seriously even when it is acknowledged that we were assaulted, partly because it starts before we are able to recall memory of our sexual assaults, and partly because we are generally not allowed to see what we experience as sexual assault. To do so would be to catastrophize. Or in plain and real English: to do so would be to tell the truth.
Three days ago, I finally moved into a real live apartment for the first time in over 3 years. It was momentous. I’ve spent so much of my life as one of the ‘hidden homeless’. My new landlord was going to pick me up and bring me to the apartment to give me the key and note all the things that needed to be fixed. I arrived at the meeting spot early – still light out, early evening, busy streets – and it started to rain hard. Luckily, it was a bus stop with a shelter. A construction crew stopped nearby and some of the guys got out to take care of a road issue. One of the guys came over to talk to me. I didn’t speak his language, and he couldn’t speak English, but it was clear that he wanted my phone number. I said ‘no’ repeatedly in the local language, and it was met with a laugh and ‘okay, okay’. And it started again. And then again. And again. Still pouring rain, and my landlord was supposed to arive in a car at any moment. Then all of the sudden, the man’s arms came up and he came at me, grabbed me and tried to kiss me. I went rigid and turned my head, with the kiss landing on my ear. It was puzzling and horrifying. I’m 50 goddamned years old and I look 50. I assumed this shit would die down. But even to a grown ass woman, no still doesn’t mean no. Luckily, the construction crew came back and off they went. Broad daylight… ffs.
Now the aftermath was weird. I knew I had been assaulted, but some old patterns from my early brainwashing kicked in, unexpectedly. I talked to my good friend in China later that evening, and it was she who brought me to my senses. I was sexually assaulted, she said, correctly. My mind had automatically labelled it a ‘fucked up experience’. I was reminded that even a female separatist who has been hating men officially for years for the rampant sexual assault forced upon sex class, woman, still second guesses herself and hesitates to label her experience correctly when she is inevitably sexually assaulted. And I was reminded of several other things. The assault reminded me that your age doesn’t matter. What you look like doesn’t matter. The time of day or location doesn’t matter. It reminded me that all women are damaged and even when you start on the path to recovering from heterosexual and patriarchal brainwashing, it may take you a lifetime to heal. It struck me that I will likely die still trying to heal. It also brought home that it is so important to have clear-thinking female friends with whom to speak frankly about our suffering and experiences because as recovering women, we can fall into self-harming patterns – the endless self-doubt and questioning about what is real. Our friends keep us on the path of truth and recovery. We must help each other with this. Most of us just don’t have it, or enough of it. Most of us just have people who gaslight us and tell us we are catastrophizing. We have a victim mindset.
Conclusion:
I’ve come to see sexual assault as the quintessence of constructed womanhood and girlhood. I think ALL females are sexually assaulted at least once in their lives, and most of us, thousands of times. The stats are BULLSHIT. We are taught to accept our assaults as part of life, part of womanhood. So we say nothing. Males need us to base our identities on being assaulted, to normalize assault, so that it isn’t assault, but identity. Life. Then we can’t and don’t even bother to try to separate sexual assault from who we are or who we could be. It is hard for me to imagine a life where I don’t feel threatened or fearful and where I am not regularly assaulted by males. I do know that I am likely one of very few women who thinks about sexual assault and how it limits my life, how it has destroyed huge parts of my spirit, and put me in a sort of psychological cage. And no lib-fems, I am not ‘allowing’ it to control me or labelling myself as a victim. I am stating a truth – I would be a different person if sexual assault weren’t a significant part of my life history. And I dare say you would be too, even if you don’t acknowledge (or even recognize/realize) what has happened to each and every one of you. You don’t have to identify as a victim (I cringe at those words) to acknowledge a lifetime of assaults and how they have impacted you. Stating truths, acknowledging reality is not catastrophizing. It may be one of the bravest acts you can commit to as a regular, average woman or girl living a regular, average life.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
N is for ‘No’
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Indulge me for a moment, if you will. Think about language, your native language and other languages that you function in. Think about individual words, specifically. If you could choose a word that is more important to you than any other, or falls within the top 10 important words in your life, what would it be? In choosing this word, consider those that give you a sense of or even actual freedom, safety, choices, closure, boundaries – anything that makes your life better. There is no right or wrong answer here; in fact, this may be something you’ve never thought about before. It’s not something we are ever asked to consider, as females. It’s selfish, you see. And if you are female, this might be an extremely difficult exercise simply because we seldom have control over the important things in our lives, especially the things that define and control us, namely language. We are also seldom asked our preferences or opinions on things that matter. Control over language and how the world works is the domain of men. As our creators -and I mean creators of the boxes we live in – they have always known us better than we know ourselves. At least they tell us that. It must be true. They define the experiences we are allowed to have, the crimes committed against our bodies, and what we are allowed to do, think and say as females.
Today, I’m going to consider an extremely important word, a word that is more important for females than it is for males, as we generally aren’t allowed to use it — without consequences. The result of using this word can range from simply being ignored, as if we didn’t say anything at all; to being misinterpreted, as if what we said was somehow different than what we really meant; to inspiring rage and violence in the person at whom the word was directed, as if by speaking our true minds and believing we are allowed to have boundaries, we are intending to harm others. It is truly bizarre and frightening, and it is a sex-specific phenomenon, meaning that males don’t experience it. It also has interesting sex-by-race effects and sex-by-trans effects that will be discussed below.
So, today, N is for No.
I think women don’t realize just how little they matter, and how little their opinions and speech matter. To men, but also to the women who serve men without question. Our erasure is so constant and normalized that we just don’t notice how often we must repeat ourselves, how often we give in to something we don’t want despite having expressed our opinion, and how often we decide to censor ourselves because subconsciously, after years of abuse and erasure, we know that what we say won’t matter or will lead to violence. But you have to wonder. Why is so much effort put into putting women in their place if they don’t matter?
Let’s look at some common scenarios. All females have experienced these many times, although most may not realize how often. As a regular reader of this blog, you are probably quite aware of how much power your ‘no’ has in this world.
Ignored
Women and girls are ignored all the time, but as ‘no’ is a very important word, this is a serious problem. As children, we are forced to endure touching, pinching and kissing from relatives and random strangers marvelling at how cute we are – even when we say ‘no’, or use body language that demonstrates ‘no’. It continues on through school. So many of us are bullied – it’s not oppression; kids are assholes, generally speaking – but for girls, sometimes the bullying can go on to become sexual abuse where we learn that it is pointless to say ‘no’ because nobody cares or pays attention. And on the rare occasion that a girl reports her abuse, she is usually ignored, or written off as an attention seeker or a liar. In adulthood, we are passed over for opportunities and promotions. We are ignored in meetings, and some of us wonder if school bullying was just preparation for the sex-specific degradation, harassment and sometimes terrorism of the workplace. We learn that saying ‘no’ has no impact. The workplace likes the ‘yes-girl’. The only way to get attention is to laugh at the rape jokes, the gay/lesbian jokes, and to pretend everything is great. The quickest way to fall off the radar as a serious employee is to say ‘no’ to what is going on.
Heterosexuality depends on women’s needs being ignored. We talk endlessly about compromise, but as many of us come to realize, men have defined compromise to mean: women sacrifice (i.e., shut the fuck up and submit) and men are catered to. Having had several, what I consider to be ‘normal’, relationships with men in my long-gone bisexual days, I realize, looking back, that my needs meant nothing. I don’t think I even knew what my needs were, as I was well trained to cater to males, see my needs as ‘selfish’, and ridiculously, to call it ‘equality’. If I did express myself, it was ignored or written off.
Deliberately Misinterpreted
When I was a teenager, there was an article in our local newspaper featuring a black and white photo of a couple of male university students at a hockey game holding up a hand-painted cloth banner that read “NO MEANS YES!!!” This was 1980’s-1990’s rape culture at its best. It wasn’t really anything new in the minds of males, but at this point in history, it had become a new ‘women’s issue’. But the males from the photo didn’t get in trouble or anything. Why would they? Men and boys have been raping women and girls with impunity and bragging about it since time began. Who cares? But it was an interesting, but simple, insight into male psychology and how they make rape okay in their minds.
There is this strange belief that men have and that men have been writing about for ages under the guise of ‘literature’ and ‘science’ that women secretly/actually want to be raped. Oops sorry, not raped – because that implies a lack of consent under male definition of their crime against our bodies. Men believe that women want to fuck. They want to be fucked violently. They want to be taken in animal-fashion and treated like shit. Women like to be hit and called all sorts of horrible things. We get turned on by this stuff. But to express these deep wishes goes against morality or something like that. So we have to say ‘no’. But see, when we say ‘no’, we really mean ‘yes’. We don’t want to say ‘no’, but we have to. So it is up to males to take the upper hand and see through our psychological games and just force us… I mean ‘help’ us to get what we truly want.
But do they really believe that, or is it just another bullshit male attempt to put the responsibility for their crimes on their victims? Some women have been convinced by these male arguments – convinced through faulty logic, gaslighting, and prude-shaming, rather than slut-shaming – and these women have become the sluts of the liberal feminism movement, which I’ll discuss below.
The whole ‘no means yes’ deliberate misinterpretation happens ALL the time for women. Whereas males need only say something once, and they are taken at their word, even when the word is ‘no’, females constantly have to repeat themselves to have a slight chance of being heard. I always have a sardonic chuckle when misogynists drag out that standard male reversal about women being ‘nags’. I would argue that men nag infinitely more than women, especially about sex and other self-serving wants and especially when a woman says ‘no’ to them. It is the basis of what I have termed ‘consensual rape’ – which is, at its most basic definition, the manipulation of a woman into saying ‘yes’ to penetrative sex that she doesn’t want. The ‘yes’ can be obtained through many means, including the deliberate misinterpretation of her initial ‘no’ (or multiple ‘no’s’) and protracted nagging, guilting and shaming.
‘Causing’ Violence
The first two reactions to a woman’s ‘no’ are bad, but this third category is very serious business. Men don’t understand and often make fun of female risk-aversion. They don’t understand female timidity in speaking up or acting out. In general, male speech is not met with violence or the opposition that the most innocuous of female speech and behaviours are frequently met with. I’ve described in other posts where males have reacted to my facial expression and/or my tone of voice with death threats and other threats to my safety. You see, I made them threaten me. I made them hurt me. All my fault.
Saying ‘no’ to males, and even some females, can incite riots, rapes, and murders. Not hyperbole, folks. I guarantee you that you know at least one woman who has been harmed after saying ‘no’ to a man. Not just no to sex – it can be absolutely anything. Men react poorly to female clerks in service businesses, to waitresses, to female flight attendants, and any female who cannot provide him with what he believes he is owed. And if a man pays money, it is so much worse. If he has laid out money, he believes a woman does not have the right to say ‘no’ to him. You see this with prostitutes, especially, but you can see evidence of this in any environment or industry. Men are much less likely to react violently to male workers. I believe this is partly the in-built woman-hate that all males have, and partly knowing that attacking a male can be dangerous. Women generally a) won’t fight back, b) physically can’t fight back as the playing field is not fair, and c) aren’t protected under law like men, the religious and racial minorities are.
Many women know all of this on a subconscious level and will self-censor or submit as a result. We see female workers frequently treating male customers better than females. This is in part because we know that males are volatile, and predictably unpredictable, and we have learned to submit to them and treat them with kid gloves, as governments won’t do the logical thing and exert controls over male behaviour. There are other factors that play into treating males better than females, but male irrationality, emotionality, violence, and poor self-control are the main reasons male customers are treated better and are less likely to meet with ‘no’, especially by female workers.
Further, within heterosexual relationships, many women learn that denying their partner can lead to violence. Saying ‘no’ can get you beaten, raped or killed. Long ago, in my bisexual days, that kind of shit sent me out the door faster than exposure to a bad odour, but many women trauma-bond with violent men, and then make increasingly bad decisions, including putting themselves in financial bondage to them and breeding with them. They learn to live with the violence and self-censorship, in other words.
Intersection
a) Sex x Race Intersection
I am NOT an intersectional feminist. It’s not that I don’t believe in interactional effects – if you knew the details of my educational background, you’d realize just how laughable it is to suggest that I am intersection-blind. I just think that intersection is derailing to feminism as it creates oppression olympics and blame hierarchies, and denies some women the right to be heard and to have boundaries. I’m going to highlight an example of intersectional misogyny that has been censored. I don’t centre it in my feminism, of course, but I do talk about it because it is an incredibly taboo topic.
If you are a white woman in a Western country, you will be very aware that you have to be nice and submissive and helpful to everyone. Otherwise, you are a bitch, rich, privileged – probably also a white supremacist, all kinds of evil. Many white women take this liberal-promulgated scapegoating to heart, feeling guilty for everything, and even virtue-signalling constantly and publicly to prove how repentant and unevil they are. It just makes things worse. As a result, white women are not allowed to say ‘no’, especially to people who are not white, and even writing or speaking about one’s own true and personal Twilight-Zone-esque, mind-fucking and degrading experiences of racist misogyny is called out as racist and is conveniently censored in order to maintain the perfect scapegoat. Note that white men do not experience this denial of the right to say ‘no’ and are 100% allowed to have boundaries. And women in Western cultures who are not white do not experience this either, at least to the same extent.
During the first 6 months I lived in the US when I was 24 – before Canada took liberal American social justice warrorism to heart – I had my first of many, many experiences with this kind of victimization: the denial of my right to say ‘no’ because of my sex AND race. I was an impoverished, foreign grad student teaching at a university catering to mostly wealthy undergrads and big-league athletic hopefuls. My first experience was with a black female student of mine who showed up unannounced at my office just as I was leaving for a meeting. She demanded that I see her then and there – outside my office hours and without an appointment. Pure entitlement. I said I couldn’t. But before letting me finish, she launched a high-volume, abusive tirade, the content of which I can barely remember as I wasn’t used to Angry Black Women that early in my stay in the US. As a woman from a race that is NOT allowed to say ‘no’, have boundaries or opinions, or even get angry without being slurred and shamed into oblivion, I actually believe this woman’s display and treatment of me was an act of privilege. After three more decades and a shit ton more of experiences like this one, I’ve come to understand that the privilege to get angry, even over nothing, is a black privilege, and of course, a white male privilege. I WISH I were allowed to express even half the anger that blacks and white males are allowed… Anyhow, if this racist misogynist woman had waited two seconds instead of immediately denying me my right to have boundaries and the right to say ‘no’, she would have been offered the chance to make an appointment with me. And you know what? I still gave her an appointment after I had to waste time calming her down, and I never did receive an apology.
b) Sex x Trans Intersection
I have almost exclusively interacted with females who identify as trans, and they are generally harmless as women generally are. Although I have always made sure to keep things light in the conversation department, as crazy ideologies can inspire violence and who knows if these chicks are on testosterone, which fucks with the brain and increases aggression. I have been in proximity to males who think they are women, and as a rule, I stay the hell away from them. They are generally mentally unstable, incredibly entitled as males and as self-appointed Oppressedest People Ever TM and in doing female parody, show themselves to be incredible woman-haters on par with men’s rights activists. Dangerous combination. We’ve seen the damage they do to women, especially to lesbians and feminists, however. Women are NOT allowed to say ‘no’, to have boundaries, to speak biological and scientific truths in public spaces, to speak truth about trans crimes against women, and lesbians are not allowed to say ‘no’ to sex with these men without being called murderers and bigots. I’m waiting for the day they are rightly seen as domestic terrorists. It is what they are.
Adventures in Cultural No-ness
I’ve said it before, and I’ll likely write a whole post devoted to it sometime later, I believe culture is just the set of traditions and rules governing how misogyny manifests in a socially acceptable way in a particular part of the world at a particular time. Culture is the stuff of both fantasy and religion-like obsession. It is protected and untouchable – unless it is Western culture, that is. It is the stuff of nationalism and army-building. But really, culture is bullshit. It is just local, socially-accepted woman-hate rituals and traditions at its very core. Think about it some, and you’ll find that all the quaint things you discover about foreign cultures all trace back to the control of women and girls. Modern uses of the word culture (company culture, sub-culture, counter-culture, etc.) still describe rules and traditions governing a group, but do not quite have the same sacrosanct importance that standard usages hold.
I’ve lived, studied, worked and travelled around the world, and I’ve seen and experienced a lot of fucked up shit all rooted in culture and misogyny! Let’s explore a few cultural curios with regard to culture, language and the use or non-use of ‘no’.
a) Sluts Can’t Say ‘No’ – New Depths in Western Misogyny
I get so tired of liberal, usually, but not exclusively, white feminists talk about how much better it is for women in Western countries. I disagree. As I said, culture is the manifestation of misogyny in a particular time and place. It changes over time, but it never, ever goes away. Unfortunately, the changes tend to confuse people, as change is a word that is so often mistakenly conflated with ‘improvement’. So in Western cultures, women have been hoodwinked into thinking that things are so much better. But are they? Things have been sliding backwards over the past few decades in the US (and leaking into other Western countries). I think things are worse in the West than they have been in a long time.
In an earlier section, I referred to today’s Western slut-feminists. It’s hard for me to put those two words together, but honest to goodness, there are women who believe that fucking as many men as they want is an act of feminist liberation. I met one in Canada two years ago. I think I wrote about her before; the poor thing was so confused that she was dating a man whom she met on some app, and he was ignoring all her ‘no’s’ to his sexual advances. At this writing, I have no doubt that she has been date raped, and she has probably reframed the event as a slutty, feminist success rather than truthfully as consensual rape.
When women say ‘no’ and a man keeps pushing and pushing and guilting and shaming and nagging that woman until he breaks her down, she gets tired, annoyed, or confused, that is rape. He will make sure that she remains confused afterwards, or even better, that he can convince her that she wanted it. And Western women and girls are falling for this. This is one of the pillars of liberal feminism. Saying ‘yes’, even if you start by saying ‘no’, or you are feeling ‘no’ inside but are too ashamed of or worried about looking like a loser or a prude by actually saying ‘no’, is liberation. Saying ‘yes’ is liberation. Even if you don’t want it. Even if you are worried about getting pregnant. Even if you are worried about contracting one of the male sexual diseases. Even if you end up hurt because it doesn’t end up just being penetrative sex, but a nightmare out of porn or the BDSM handbook.
But you can’t rape a slut. And that is what this is all about. It is male liberation, not feminism. You cannot rape a woman who says ‘yes’. And guess what, the oppressed women in Afghanistan and whatever favourite African nation you like to cite are not clamouring for this kind of female freedom…
b) The Country of No ‘No’
I’ve alluded to this before – there is no single, specific word for ‘no’ in Mandarin Chinese. I lived in Taiwan and China for many years and found this quite curious and frustrating. In addition, there is no single word for ‘yes’. ‘No’ ends up being more like ‘don’t want’, ‘don’t have’, ‘is not’, etc. You basically take the verb in question and put a negative in front of it. I found it much less impactful than a single word that you can use in any situation. But of course, as a woman, does ‘no’ really have much impact at all? I think, like in any country, it comes down to your anatomy. The language is developed around your anatomy, and language is inherently sexist as men control it. And the anatomy of the person using a particular word is more important than the word itself. So what passes for ‘no’ in Chinese has about as much impact used by a woman as it does in any country when a woman speaks her ‘no’ in her language.
c) The Country of the Impolitic ‘No’
I won’t say too much about this, as my experience is less with the country than with my relationships with people from the country. And that country is Japan. I dated a Japanese for a few years, and what I gathered from stories and interactions is that while there is an explicit, single word for ‘no’ in Japanese, it is impolite to come right out and say ‘no’. When dealing with the Japanese, they seem to be agreeing or saying yes to you, and at first you are amazed at how easy they are to get along with, but quickly, you come to realize that a game is being played and you do NOT know the rules. Japan has a very complex and confusing culture, and while seeming courteous on the surface, interactions end up feeling rather duplicitous and insane to an outsider who prefers a more direct and honest and time-conserving way of dealing with people. And conversely, they may tend to see outsiders as crude and rude. The Japanese I have known who refuse to live there tend to be social outcasts who can’t stand the hierarchy and intense social pressure to conform and kiss asses they don’t actually respect. And with all the brutal and cruel television game shows they have as well as the disgusting cartoon rape porn, you have to wonder what the fuck is going on there.
I like origami and Japanese food and the sense of esthetics that you don’t see in any other country or culture, but you couldn’t pay me enough to live in Japan. Nevermind the earthquakes and nuclear contamination…
d) The Country of Double ‘No’
I am currently living in an ex-Soviet country where not only do they have a single, explicit word for ‘no’ in their local language, but they use it constantly AND they almost always say it twice instead of once. I’m serious. I am learning a bit of the language so that I can function, and no matter where I go, I hear ‘no, no’. And I hear ‘no’ much more than I hear ‘yes’. And they have 3 commonly used words for ‘yes’ and I recognize them easily in conversation. I wish I knew enough of the language to know what they are talking about and saying ‘no’ to though. Why do they say ‘no’ so much??? I’ve never encountered this in any of the other languages I speak or cultures I’ve spent time in.
I have little experience with Russia or Eastern Europe, so I don’t know if this is part of what seems to an outsider to be a rather gruff and abrasive set of cultures. I worked with a bunch of Russians in 2021, and although they weren’t super friendly, I seldom heard the word ‘нет’ to the extent that I hear the word for ‘no’ here in this particular place where I am, so there is something going on that I don’t yet understand. More exploration is needed. But it is nothing like any Asian culture I have experienced, and the cultural rules are very different with religion being a heavy influence.
Okay, I’m starting to veer off the path, and that means that I need to end this post. But I want to leave you with the following thought:
Language is important. It is inseparable from culture. As a woman, you have no control over such an important tool for your survival. Think about the words you use and the effects they have on your ability to get what you need to stay alive and safe. Are you allowed to say ‘no’, how many times do you have to say it to be heard, and are there repercussions for defining your boundaries? The purpose of language is to get what you need, but men control language. What does that mean for women? For you? And finally, think about why men and their female supporters put so much effort into making sure women’s words aren’t heard. Perhaps, we matter more than we’ve been led to believe…
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
N is for Normal
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
In 2022, a 13-year-old boy I was tutoring told me in very plain English: “You are not a normal person.” My response was: “You’re right. I’m not.” On the surface, the comment didn’t seem to be meant to be an insult – trust me, I’ve been insulted all my life with regard to my non-conformity, and I’ve been called worse than ‘not normal’ – but kids tend to be blunt and honest, unless they’ve been abused or punished enough to have learned to keep their mouths shut, or unless they’ve just simply been trained to develop social skills and a filter. Boys tend to have a lot more freedom of speech, of course, and can pretty much say what they want without consequences. In this case, I found the comment to be a bit suspicious as I’d discovered in past classes, that at even at 13, this boy had already started tapping into his natural latent misogyny, and had developed a basic arsenal of male logic fails to use against females talking about fact-based male violence. So, I figured I’d turn this new and potentially misogynistic male brain fart into a multi-purpose ESL lesson. We’d indirectly discuss how not to put women into patriarchal boxes through an analytical and support-your-argument exercise, so I asked for more information about his dudely deduction. There was nothing unexpected in the conversation that followed. Basically, it boiled down to the observable mismatch between my age, thinking, and behaviour and the typical thinking and behaviour expected of a woman my age. The point I wanted to hit home was that not being normal didn’t equate to something bad. The male skull is thick, however, and the neurons so few and far between, so I doubt the exercise made much of a dent.
What I didn’t discuss with the boy, however, was that in some ways, I am completely normal.
Most kids can deal with talking to someone who isn’t normal. Most haven’t fully absorbed the incorrect belief that abnormal is dangerous. The average ‘normal’ adult is very threatened by people who think critically, who ask questions, who challenge commonly held practices and beliefs, and who poke at protected groups and systems. Fragile systems can crumble if you mess with them too much, and patriarchy is just such a fragile system. Both right-wing religious systems and left-wing ‘democracies’ depend on and protect patriarchy and do their utmost to keep women following the path of normalcy as they define it.
Whereas some kids actually really enjoy talking to someone like me, I find that I make most normal adults uncomfortable simply because I am not normal, and adults tend to be set in their rigid ways after years of being rewarded for conforming. When they meet me, they don’t know what male-defined lady-category to put me in. This can be scary to both men and women. Most women generally don’t trust other women as per patriarchal programming, and as a woman who so clearly doesn’t follow the rules? Well, let’s just say I’ve been on the receiving end of some nasty, petty and mind-boggling reactions – usually passive aggression, insults, infantilizing and outright shunning. Handmaiden psychology and behaviour are a major source of sadness for me. Some men will show intrigue at my ‘weirdness’ until they realize I am not into playing their fucking mind games based on antagonizing me – the game where men always win in the end and women submit and accept defeat.
I got interested in conformity and categorization and manipulation in childhood. When I was about 13 or 14, I wanted to be a psychologist. It was in my blood, but it was also a suitable discipline for both my personality and the way my mind works. I was already attending the occasional university psych class, and I was a question-asker, truth-teller, and analyst, by nature. One evening, at dinner, I asked my psychologist-father: “What does ‘normal’ mean?” My asshole-mother, a woman who devoted her entire existence to sabotaging my education and destroying any chance I had at developing self-confidence, visibly rolled her eyes at me, her clearly not-normal daughter, and my father preened at the chance to expound on his area of expertise. Despite my issues with my father, I did get a thorough answer – 10 different ways to understand what ‘normal’ means, although none having anything to do with feminism, specifically. So rather than listing these 10 definitions, I’ll talk about women and normalcy, and why it ends up being so important to patriarchy.
A Basic Definition
Just to put us all on the same page, we’ll define ‘normal’ very basically as deliberately conforming to or unintentionally meeting a standard, and thus, acting, thinking and looking like the majority. There are value-laden words associated with ‘normal’, so rather than just thinking that normal is just another word for ‘average’, it is also associated with lacking problems, being successful, and being free of disease or weakness or deficiency, etc. I’ll discuss an aspect of this a bit in the section on morality. We could also talk about statistical normalcy as well as cultural norms, but I don’t want to get into all of that in this article. Culture is going to be a separate post, and who knows, I may return to my roots and talk about statistics some time in the future. For now, I have a few points I want to get into below.
Pathologizing Women – Males are the Default, Dammit!
No matter where you find yourself in the world or in time, one thing is apparent. Males are the default – well, at least according to males. Instead of logically separating males and females and allowing them to exist on their own spectrums, males define a single spectrum where males are normal and females are not. When placed on this default ‘human’ (male) spectrum, women and girls are aberrations, pathological, incomplete men, lesser versions of ‘normal’, and you can express this lack of humanity in so many ways. It all comes down to women being a problem. This viewpoint is essential to patriarchal rule. It keeps women off-balance, second-guessing and hating themselves, competing with other women over crumbs of approval, and wasting their very limited money, energy and time on unimportant and distracting tasks instead of achieving anything that would make their lives and health better. For males, this tactic of abnormalizing females serves to keep them in power without having to work very hard or meet any kind of standards themselves, and to have a constant supply of insecure and approval-seeking slaves boosting their egos, keeping them clean and fed, and providing ideas and output to steal.
The idea that males are the default and females are abnormal and problematic infects all areas of life. Tools and machines are designed for male bodies. Health research is done primarily on males and then incorrectly and often dangerously applied to females. Things that female bodies and minds experience are turned into diseases and then either brutalized through medical ‘treatment’ or written off as imaginary lady-bullshit or crazy-talk. Psychological theories are developed to explain why female thinking and behaviour are pathological and inferior. Language is one of the most important ways to establish male standards and defaults to the exclusion and harm of females, to normalize hate-speech against women, or just to erase females altogether. Jobs and skill domains dominated by males are superior and well-compensated, but become devalued if women are allowed to participate and end up outshining males, which they always do.
It may come as no surprise that it is probably more accurate to see females as the more complete human given that the X chromosome is more robust and information-rich than the Y and all fetuses start out female. And I’m going to amend that last part after some online discussion on this topic that all fetuses start out ‘unweaponized’, and then male fetuses become weaponized as a sort of biological compensation for being genetically deficient or incomplete. Other biology-oriented feminists have written more extensively on what goes on in the womb, so I won’t go into the details of female completeness and of males as possible genetic mutations early in human evolution. Suffice it to say that there is a simple and clear purpose in painting females as abnormal and deficient despite the ridiculousness of the idea and evidence to the contrary. Males design and control things to deliberately put females at a disadvantage, and then use any resulting and expected female failure or non-presence in the male-dominated world as proof positive of female inferiority and abnormality. Perfect examples of confirmation bias: one of many male cognitive biases or logical fallacies used to maintain dominance. And this further serves to cover up and paint male inadequacies as perfectly normal.
Normal, Natural, Moral and Their Conflation
Many people conflate the terms normal, natural and moral. They can occur at the same time, but they are not actually related nor do they necessarily belong together. Here is what they mean, and where we run into problems. Remember here, we are talking about human thoughts and behaviours.
Normal means typical or something done by the majority of people. If you, your thoughts and behaviours are normal, you are likely fitting in and not standing out in any way. The best way to be normal is to follow rules, avoid analyzing or questioning things, joining acceptable groups, and keeping your head down.
Natural, on the other hand, is poorly understood, but can be summed up as something that occurs without effort, doesn’t need to be forced, and needs little effort to maintain. Think about what having a natural talent for something means. You seem to be good at it right off the bat, you need little training to become an expert, and you don’t need to work that hard to maintain your skills. You also don’t need an overseer to punish you and correct you every time you make a mistake because you’re generally getting it right on your own. Unnatural is the opposite. If something is not natural for you, first of all, you probably won’t gravitate towards it, and if your participation is considered important, people are going to put a lot of effort into forcing you to do it, and to do it correctly, and not to quit.
I believe heterosexuality in women is a prime example of the unnatural. Heterosexuality is harmful to females, but it is the foundation of male dominance, so it is crucial that all girls and women participate. Because it is unnatural, it needs to be enforced. Males and their handmaidens put an enormous amount of effort into grooming girls from birth for lives of accepted penetrative sex (rape) and subservient relationships with males, and females who don’t comply are punished in a variety of ways that can be extremely dangerous and isolating. Given this, it makes sense that homosexual males vastly outnumber lesbians publicly. Lesbians pose a much bigger threat to the system of male dominance than gay men do. So, for females, heterosexuality is normal because most women comply with their programming and following the rules, but it’s highly unnatural. If it were natural, males wouldn’t need their system of patriarchy, coercing, controlling, threatening, and hurting females in all possible ways. I’ve written more on this topic here. Unfortunately, most people call something unnatural natural and vice versa, and when biased systems of morality or ethics are applied, things can go horribly wrong.
Males, as a class, are violent predators. It is both normal and natural, in this case. They are born weaponized with violent tendencies that are highly noticeable early in childhood and it is generally accepted as how things are, à la ‘boys will be boys’ – male violence is considered normal and no big deal. Further, nobody is forcing them to try to dominate or behave in dehumanizing and sadistic ways – this is natural for males. It’s easy for them, and they are very good at it. Trying to force them through education NOT to rape and torture and kill females, animals and nature is unnatural and doesn’t work. Interestingly, people privately or subconsciously accept that both of these are true, but publicly and if questioned, many will try to pass off atrocious male behaviour as one-offs (aka not normal) or fixable (aka not natural, but socialized). In this way, we never have to deal with male violence as a pandemic requiring a real solution.
Sadly, mostly in the normalization process, which I’ll discuss next, and in getting females to accept unnatural conditions and treatment, the male dominance system relies upon the application of moral judgments or ethical arguments. Very basically, normal is good. Abnormal is bad. Shaming, guilting, and instilling fear as well as handing out intermittent reward crumbs can go a long way to breaking down a woman or girl’s sense of self and certainty and logical ability. As a result, we see a lot of hate- and fear-driven reactions to natural, but abnormalized, female tendencies, such as lesbianism and female separatism, and those reactions are likely as violent as they are because of the false morality that has been a major part of the heteronormalization process.
The Normalization-Acceptance Process
Normalization, or the process of making something accepted as normal, is done through repeated exposure, for the most part. The more you see and hear something, the more familiar and ‘comfortable’ (I use that term loosely) it becomes. It is a psychological process. And you can normalize just about anything, even truly horrible acts. Think about things you have learned when exposed to other cultures, for example, and if you’ve had the chance to live there for an extended time, the things that may have shocked you at first, start to become part of your daily experience and thus become normal to you over time. We also see this across generations as behaviours once thought to be scandalous or abnormal are accepted, every-day behaviour today. It is not necessarily a bad thing when norms change over time. Sometimes, this is called ‘progress’. But it can also be called ‘desensitization’ when repeated exposure to harmful practices becomes business as usual for society over time.
And this is what patriarchy depends on to maintain itself, and how it deals out backlash when women start making tiny forays into becoming human. For example, normalization is what we’ve been seeing in pornography since its inception. Of course, men have been sexually exploiting women throughout history, but with the advancement of technology, they have been pushing sadistic limits. It has been a gradual process, so most males probably don’t even notice that they need more and more visual violence against women to get off these days. One upon a time, a static photo of a naked woman was enough to inspire a boner and its nasty aftermath. But these days, many men need to see a female child beaten and raped by a group of men on video to get the job done. Normalization. And in this case, there should be moral/ethical arguments attached to this, as men have gone so far as to legally have this called an art form, fantasy, and freedom of speech. Not crime or human rights abuses. And contrary to what males say, these ‘fantasies’ that they have superhumanly managed to compartmentalize have translated not into more fantasy, but actual, increasingly violent sex with live female partners (see the British article to consensual violent sex in my sidebar). Porn does not cause violence against women and girls, like socialization essentialists erroneously believe. MALES cause violence and were committing violence before porn existed. But porn absolutely does normalize violence against women and girls, and serves as both a reward (orgasm) and permission to act out their rape fantasies on girls and women and to enjoy and feel entitled to the harm they cause, while pretending it isn’t harm at all.
The “New Normal”
This is an increasingly and annoyingly popular phrase that’s used in a range of situations to describe a new standard, and often, what your life is going to be like after some kind of nasty event. Interestingly, it is NEVER used when talking about rape and how women and girls are supposed to deal with that. I think there are a few reasons for this.
1) Rape is something almost all women and girls experience in one form or another (date rape, forcible rape, coercive rape, consensual rape, etc) at least once in their lives. It is part of our experience as females across time and place under patriarchy. It is quite possibly the quintessential female experience. And I guess if you haven’t had a dick put in you yet in your life, you are both lucky and abnormal – and I know how weird that sounds. So given that rape is a normal experience given that most women experience it, and we never consider normal to be traumatic nor something we have to recover from or suffer with, then we can understand why rape is treated as a joke or no big deal.
2) Rape is something only females experience, therefore, it is trivial because males have deemed females to be trivial. It really helps the system of male domination if an experience is sex-specific and thus can be written off as lies or crazy lady bullshit. But if that doesn’t work – and sometimes it doesn’t – males will do their best to undermine what is going on and to steal the experience and make it their own. Men have done this with rape in Western countries when women demanded attention to its prevalence. The whole ‘men can be raped, tooooo!!!’ movement, helped along by lib-fems and even some radical feminists, is serious mind-fuckery, and I’ve talked about this in other posts. Rape can no longer be treated as a hate crime thanks to men, and the women who cry for them.
3) Rape is both narrowly and nebulously defined by men at the same time. It is something that happens in dark alleys and in other exceptional circumstances. So it is a rare event, supposedly, and men tell us that women lie about being raped all the time. So we don’t talk about it except to fearmonger in order to keep girls and women in line. As a result, we don’t prepare girls for what they will likely experience at some point. It just happens to ‘someone else’, usually bad girls who deserve it. And these days, we even tell select groups of women that they both lie about rape and are privileged anyway, therefore rape doesn’t really happen to them. And if they do report rape, they are probably taking the spotlight away from other women whose rapes are worse and constant… Yet, despite (or maybe because of) all the male-controlled messaging, all women are afraid of rape. And ding, ding ding, hence the success of the forced heterosexuality campaign. The rapist class offers its protection services from all the other members of the rapist class to the rapee class. And this is in exchange for consensual rape. It’s flawed logic that most women buy into. It’s kind of like letting bank robbers guard the bank vault in exchange for skimming a little off the top, consensually speaking… The bottom line is that when you are eventually raped, you usually don’t understand that you’ve been violated even if you know something is definitely wrong. It’s ‘normal’ womanhood, after all, and you’ve been groomed for the experience your entire life. If normal means typical, then yes, being a rape victim is absolutely normal. You don’t talk about it, and therefore you aren’t offered a ‘new normal’, but are expected to function as normal-normal, which implies that nothing is wrong.
Conclusion
I’ve said this many times in past posts: female people have normal and natural designations forced upon them because that is what patriarchy is built on and depends on to keep chugging along. We have no idea what a natural woman looks like. The ‘normal’ woman is not natural – violence and threats are not needed when something is natural. Woman has always been a male construction, and as a girl, she was guided and punished into her role most directly by her mother, and then through school and various other public institutions via a moralistic and systematic process of punishments and rewards and lots and lots of repetition. You may ask, well we know what is normal for women, so what is natural? Honestly, we don’t know, although it certainly is fun to speculate.
The take-home is this: if you’re not normal, for whatever reason, enjoy it. It’s a wild ride, and it probably gives you your very best chance of discovering your true natural self, whatever that may be.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
J is for Joke
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Well, jumpin’ Jehoshaphat, I nearly lost my head there for a mo’. I had started writing my K-post, and then luckily realized early enough that I wasn’t yet finished writing my jeremiad – my J-post.
Anyhow, I blame it on the very recent, record-breaking heat wave we’ve had here in BC. I was living in a tiny, windowless room with debateable ‘ventilation’ from a pipe that supposedly brought in air from outdoors during a week of 40+°C (104°F for Imperial types) – it was a fucking oven, and my brain cooked. I hate Canada and the capitalism that operates under ‘socialism’ here. Money-grubbing and liveable conditions don’t go together. Anyhow (to nip a new jeremiad in the bud), welcome to the Alphabet Series, and today, J is for Joke.
Before I jump in, I did consider a few other J-words before settling on Joke. J is for justice (briefly considered in part of the last post I is for Innocence, where we find out by and for whom exactly the justice system is designed – and it ain’t women); joy (wait for my upcoming book, The Joy of Man-Hating!), judgement (or judgment if you’re American, although no matter how you spell it, all girls and women know this word and the whole ‘screwed no matter which of the equally shitty options I choose’ situation very well! If I feminize, I’m judged; if I don’t feminize, I’m judged. Ad infinitum.) J is also for… jism or jizz, which I wish I knew nothing about – one of those slang words of unknown origin, but which originally meant ‘energy’ back in 1842. Sadly, there is a Bollywood movie called ‘Jism’, which is apparently an erotic thriller, and I have no intention of seeing it, as much as I find the elaborate dancing scenes of Bollywood film to be entertaining and oddly come-join-innable.
I am not going to delve into the content of male humour too much in this post. Rather, I want to get into the ‘just a joke’ mechanism that men use as a get-out-of-jail-free card when they deliberately offend, intimidate, and/or threaten women, especially in public or the workplace. Don’t be fooled by the feigned ignorance and innocence that they pull following your negative reaction to their words or behaviour. All males know exactly what they are doing when they target women for abuse. If a woman dares to call out a male for some misogynistic comment or gesture, or blatant hate speech, he’ll just whip out the whole ‘Jeez, why are you so sensitive? Can’t you take a joke?’ stance. The woman always ends up looking stupid or crazy or troublesome, and can even be blacklisted in workplaces because she is being antagonistic or unstable or unprofessional. Most women will, as per their lifelong training, laugh along with the rape and cheap ho’ jokes, and the feminazi will find herself alone and ostracized.
This ‘just a joke’ mechanism works similarly to alcohol, and to a lesser extent, drug intoxication, where you see men-under-the-influence avoid responsibility for rapes and other sexual assaults they commit. You see, there is a whole series of safeguards built into our patriarchal social and workplace cultures that allow males to push boundaries and shift responsibility for their aggression, persecution and outright crimes onto their victims if they are caught. It’s psychological warfare, and it is effective in dividing and destroying women.
Having said that, what I really want to get at today is another aspect of male jokery. I want to use an example to demonstrate that even when males and females face, what on the surface, looks to be a similar issue, it is usually a much more serious problem for the females. And males, comparatively unthreatened, although possibly a little bothered or inconvenienced, will treat the issue as a joke. They’ll even go so far as to criticize women for taking the issue too seriously, and to turn women’s reactions to the problem themselves as an additional joke.
There are a million and one examples to choose from, but I’ll focus on one that comes from an article published earlier this year (in 2021) by The Right Scoop, an established conservative political and media news blog based in my own country, and that skates just below the edge of general acceptability for reliability and bias according to the Media Bias Chart put out by Ad Fontes Media. As a sidenote, I read all sorts of stuff, liberal, conservative, weird, wonderful, and truly fucked. You have to get out of your comfort zone if you have any hope of having something to write about. I’m not male, you see, so I don’t enjoy circle jerks 😉
I have a copy of the article and some of the comments you can access here on my site. If you want to see all the comments, google the magazine name and “gay campground” and that should get you where you need to go. I try not to link to sites like that directly for obvious reasons.
The basic points of the article – and it is basically a re-quoting of a Queerty article sandwiched by two tiny, original paragraphs – are a) to point out a ‘problem’ – that a small group of trans men (aka women who pretend they are men) got pissy for being banned from a gay-male-only campground, b) to criticize liberals and liberal politicking, and c) to make fun of the constantly devolving LGBXYZ community.
The comments following the article are, as often is the case, just as illustrative as the article, but perhaps from another angle. My link provides enough of the comments to get the point across, but if you love comments sections, google and head on over to the original article to get ’em all.
What you’ll notice from the Queerty article is that the gay male perspective on the trannie issue, while on the surface or without consideration might seem to be a general homosexual problem, isn’t. Gay men are not women and the issues they face with ‘trans men’ (again, aka women) are not the same as what lesbians face with ‘trans women’ (aka men). Gay males generally don’t take trans males seriously – I mean, they are women, and gay males don’t take any women seriously. We are jokes or usable objects, as it is. And women don’t pose a threat to men, on the whole. What the gay dudes see as the main problem is that a gay campground is going to be sex-oriented (big surprise, eh?) and they only want to see dick – REAL DICK – flopping about here and there. They don’t want to see pussy and they definitely don’t want some frankensteinesque frank and beans in their faces. Seriously, man! Come on! Men have problems! And this one is big and hard (or not…?)
The comments, mostly, but not only, by conservative men, turn the whole thing into a joke, even bringing in hilarious comments about lesbians and males in women’s spaces. Complete ignorance about what trans means to women, especially lesbians. There is the requisite reference to feminazis, and a few more rational comments about the gay community not being what it once was, sadly. But the general air is that this is a laughable issue.
Now, for women, trans identified males are a different matter. Lesbians and gay men do share one thing – forcing them to uphold ‘inclusivity’ is an infringement of their rights and freedoms as minorities. I don’t have a problem with closed groups, minority or not. This isn’t the same thing as preventing women from being in the workforce or paying women less than men (wait, that STILL is an issue – and we’re quibbling over the hurt feelings of trans banned from social groups!!!??? Jezus christ.) But that is where the similarities between gay and lesbian problems end. Women, lesbians in particular, have to deal with males who are trans-identified, and we don’t need reminding that no matter what a dude is wearing, he still has the inbuilt, violent, woman-hating, rapey, impulsivity and dominance problem. Tranny males are still super aggressive and scary fuckers. They also go tranny for different reasons than women do, and a lot of it for the males is sexually-motivated entitlement and perversion and mental illness and wanting to dominate. Their approach to penetrating women’s groups has been through aggression, threats, and outright violence. Trans men have not been beating up gay men or raining terror down on them. Trans women have been hurting and threatening and erasing women, however. We know from data, that their rates of violence mirror that of non-tranny men, despite any hormones they take or brain differences that they say they have.
So bottom line here is that like every shared problem that males and females may have, for women, there is always an extra threat of violence and danger, physically and sexually. And that is simply because males, regardless of whatever disadvantages they may have are all still members of the master class, the predator class, the weaponized class, the rapist class. And females are ALL members of the oppressed class, the colonized class, the prey class, the raped class – a dynamic that has existed since human time began. And you can apply this to anything – women are always more at risk than men. Homelessness – more of a threat to women. Death of a spouse in a traditional het relationship – more of a threat to women. Travelling alone. Surviving a natural disaster. Living in a warzone. Speaking out in public. All of these situations are much more threatening for females because of lack of social, political, economic and legal resources. And because of rape and the threat of rape. Yet, despite the fact that on some level, every person knows this is true, when women face problems, they are often joked about. Even acknowledged dangers and risks and possible outcomes become jokes. Rape is a joke. Even when not specifically talking about a political or social issue, rape and sexual violence against women are a source of yuks and bonding for men.
Some women may write off the joking in the same way that they write off men’s ogling and wandering eyes. They ‘need it’ or ‘they can’t help it’ or ‘they are oppressed’ or ‘they are visual people’ or ‘they cover up emotion and insecurity with jocularity’, or whatever fuckery they come up with to justify maintaining their cosy trauma bonds with oppressors. But it is because of this enabling coupled with what I would say is the predator’s natural inability to empathize, that women’s ‘issues’ will never be taken seriously, will remain a source of joke material and will continue to invalidate a class of people. I mean really, what could be funnier than watching a woman’s overreaction when you jump out at her and scare the shit out of her? When you don’t live with a physical and sexual threat hanging over you 24/7, like all females do, how could you not see their crazy reactions as laugh-worthy? If it doesn’t affect you, then it is funny. If it doesn’t affect you in a way that will hurt you physically, sexually, legally, or financially, then it is downright hilarious.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Just Call Her Crazy
Every so often, I get a flurry of traffic to this site (or more frequently, a particular post) from the manosphere. I don’t consider myself a mover or shaker in the feminist world, nor has it ever been my goal or expectation to be so. I’m not an activist, I don’t for a minute think I, or anyone else, for that matter, can make the world better. I don’t promote myself or advertise, and I don’t allow comments on this blog. I write for myself, primarily, and secondly, I’m out there for anyone else looking for reality-oriented, non-mainstream, woman-centred writing, especially that talking about issues NO ONE will touch because they don’t fit into today’s political agenda. There are very few true female liberationists these days, alas. So basically, I’m small beans, and that’s the way, uh huh, uh huh, I like it.
But, like I said, every once in a while, I’m found, and it tickles me. Sometimes, the referrees are proud, semi-literate, and rather low-intelligence misogynists, such as those from rationalwiki (site that tries to debunk pseudoscience, which I approve of, and to destroy feminists, which I don’t, but these are insecure males, so what do you expect…?) or kiwifarms (internet cretins of the ‘chan’ variety; mom’s-basement-dwellers). Occasionally, I’m referred to on more mainstream liberal ‘feminist’ sites, such as Feminist Current. And then every so often, I show up on some obscure political sub-thread on one social media site or another.
And I say welcome. I don’t personally care whether people agree with me or not because it is important to be exposed to other viewpoints. The vast majority of people don’t realize (or don’t want to acknowledge) that is not possible for a women’s liberationist to have a voice on mainstream social media. We are immediately censored if we don’t virtue signal, or support male agendas (especially if they are ‘oppressed’ groups of males), or suggest that women are oppressed – or these days, just state the most basic fact that women are human females and you can’t opt into or out of that category. So I suppose some are surprised when they head on over to this site and suddenly find my viewpoint, which they certainly won’t read anywhere in the e-homes (especially Reddit or Facebook) where they normally spend their time. And I think some of these folks are probably disappointed that they are not allowed to drop turds in the form of comments, letting me know that I am ‘wrong’ or ‘confused’ or:
CRAZY.
As well as your male-supporting mother and male-dominated society, including school, the police, entertainment, etc.
Yeah, crazy. Super logical argumentation technique that I call ad feminem (because it only applies to women, thus not ‘hominem’). People – men AND male-supporting, heterosexual women call women like me ‘crazy’ all the time. It isn’t anything new. Throughout history and across cultures, men have done a whole host of horrible things to women who haven’t fallen in line, who haven’t behaved correctly and like other women who haven’t agreed with everything males say, who have spoken publicly about the reality that everyone knows exists but won’t acknowledge, and ultimately who have scared them in some way. That has not changed in millennia. And it is effective. Women are the only group of people on earth who can have their entire existence dismissed with the application of a single word, a single categorization. She is ‘crazy’, therefore, you should ignore every single word she says or writes. Calling a woman ‘crazy’ can even effectively negate any victimhood she experiences, especially if it is a sex crime (hate crime), and especially if it is committed by an Oppressed Male ™.
In reality, very few women are actually what could be defined as ‘crazy’. And of the women who have been punished and continue to be labelled and punished, I’d bet you that few to none are clinically crazy. Frustrated, angry, questioning, yes. And outspoken. And that is what this really comes down to. Like I wrote in a past post about the criticism of female voices (see the Shrill section of Shrill, Bitter, Humourless, Prudish Man-Hater), it is all about trying to silence women who speak truth or who fight for female human rights. Things all males and all racial and religious groups are allowed to do and have and be. In Western cultures, ‘crazy’ women have fought so hard to win freedom from waterboarding on dunking stools, being forced to wear Scold’s Bridles (imagine wearing 14 lbs of metal fixed to your head with a spiked metal prong forced into your mouth for hours on end), stripped and paraded through town strapped to a dung wagon, etc. We aren’t taught about women’s slavery and torture through history in our own culture, so people assume that white women were born ‘free’. Nope. My foremothers – the craziest of the ‘crazy’, hated by all – are the reason the woman-hating, cock-sucking dudettes of today have the freedom that they DO have (and who still choose to be with men and criticize outspoken women…). And yet, women still aren’t free to speak. Women are still censored. Women are still called ‘crazy’. Often with no prompting at all, but especially when they dare to talk about women’s history, women’s current status, women’s liberation, rape statistics, the fact that 99% of violent crime is committed by men and that it might suggest that there is a biological basis for that universally observed fact, and more.
To not enthusiastically say ‘yes’ to men and everything they STILL think they deserve to take and have from women is to be crazy. And in all honesty, if you look at some of the shit these labellers believe in themselves, you start wondering if they themselves are the crazy ones.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
H is for Hate
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. ⚢
G is for Girl
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
I’ve been hemming and hawing for days now over which of my select g-words to choose for the next post of the Alphabet Series. But it was settled for me this morning as I was walking down a relatively empty downtown street and noticed a series of posters serving as advertisements for a convenience store. Each poster featured a larger-than-life head and torso shot of an individual consuming one of those disgusting slushie (crushed ice and flavoured sugar water and various chemicals) drinks. Different ages and races, and males/females were represented. And here is what stood out for me. There was a single poster that had been mutilated, and it was the only poster featuring a young white girl. All the other posters were intact – no non-white females of any age were mutilated and no males of any race or age were touched.
There is something about posters that gives them a sort of dog-whistle-like ability – a silent beacon, if you will – to attract the less intelligent and more passive aggressive of society. And it isn’t anti-capitalism activists who heed the call – it is assholes and the stupid. For some reason, they see a poster and the drive to destroy kicks in. Is it funny? Is it a safer and more accessible outlet than hurting actual people? Who the hell knows. I’ve never felt the call to vandalize. But I do notice the results. No blind eye turned here! I notice poster content first, and then I look for the requisite mutilation and, most importantly, who the targets are. Here is what I’ve noticed over many years.
- Females are targeted for mutilation most of the time.
- Males are seldom targets – even the poor Oppressed Black Male TM is seldom mutilated. (Could it be that black male lives matter more than women and girls’ lives…?)
- White female poster characters are more likely to be mutilated than non-white females. [An aside: White females are also more likely to be sexualized/pornified in posters – and I’ve seen this in non-Western countries as well as Western. And the more capitalistic the place is, the worse the white female sexploitation there is. I’ve documented a tiny sliver of the public portrayal of white females, including posterized females, in a few posts listed in my White Girl series.]
Now the big question here is whether girls are mutilated more than adult females… And so we get to the larger topic here.
G is for Girl.
Don’t worry, I’m not going to break out into song with Madonna’s “What It Feels Like for a Girl”. Super dumb song with super dumb lyrics – I mean, really, can you take seriously anything said by a straight (or whatever the hell she is calling herself today), super-pornified, proud sex-pozzie that has capitalized immensely off of peddling sexy, sexy slutdom to impressionable young girls? From birth, for the last few decades, girls have been bombarded by:
- mixed messages from adult women about womanhood,
- grooming for enthusiastic sexual servitude by adult women (see this post here as one small example if you don’t believe me, and be prepared to be creeped out and saddened), and
- evidence of the complete inability of adult women to understand the actual and more serious root (aka male domination) of whatever minor oppression they complain about when not actively engaged in sucking a dick.
And to make things much worse, these influential, ignorant and mindfucking adult women are, first and foremost, the very mothers of these little girls. Confusion or what! This is what it feels like for a girl – at least in Western cultures. No wonder there are so many bloody identity and confidence problems here. We’re all supposed to grow up to be honourable, sexual, innocent, slutty, compassionate, fierce, subservient, empowered, sexy bitches (don’t forget the bitches!!!) What an incongruent mix of incomprehensible, archetypal bullshit! Welcome to being a girl in the Wild West.
Anyhow, before I dive in in a more organized way, I’ll just say that I considered other g-words for this post, including: G is for gaslighting (one of the most important tools in a narcissist’s toolbox, and something ALL females experience), g-spot (it’s not the 1990’s anymore, so we don’t need to talk it about ever again, right?), gang rape, grief, gynocentrism (which I consider to be real feminism and of course, it is much criticized and), god/goddess (why is replacing an imaginary male with an imaginary female an improvement, btw??? Please join reality, ladies. Please.), and grooming (which I’ll talk about in this post).
And of course, the g-word that I wish I could garrote, then swing at with a machete and then hack at with an axe, and then finally shoot in the face 10,000 times just to make sure it’s dead: <<< G is for Gender >>> Some might have thought I would have chosen that one to focus on – it is extraordinarily relevant to female slavery, after all. But I’ve commented on it a lot in many past posts, especially those dealing with the trans cult. All that needs to be said is this: gender is a social construct designed to force females into the inferiority box and keep males running the show, violently with impunity; biological sex is an immutable fact and there are only two of them (sexes) contrary to the delusions of the psychotic (trannies) and liberal child-abusers. These are non-negotiable terms with long-established real meanings. And trying to reverse their meanings (which has been hugely successful – evidence that trannyism is an anti-woman movement) just smacks of a complete lack of intelligence and is embarrassingly and unacceptably anti-science in this day and age.
Anyhow, today, G is for Girl.
I’m going to be very careful here not to delve too deeply into mothers and motherhood or the process of brainwashing / grooming because the former is going to be my M-word in this series, and the latter is going to be the subject of an upcoming separate series and, to me, a fascinating subject. But I’ll touch on them because they are both crucial in completely breaking down and then reconstructing girls into the scary robot-monsters that 99% of adult women are today. As a disclaimer, I am a partially blackpilled feminist-type, and while I do believe males and females are born with different stuff that makes it easier for one to violently dominate and get away with his behaviour and the other to be dominated and to accept her fate relatively unchallenged, I also believe that sociological and psychological processes play a significant role in making sure things don’t change on a systematic level. They are interdependent. But unlike adherents of either camp, I believe that women can escape aspects of their biology and ALL of their socialization. You seldom see it happen though, because it will be an uphill battle with NO support. But it is possible.
Okay, let’s dive in. Keep in mind that I am writing from a Canadian perspective, so in your part of the world, you may see differences. But the thing that is similar for girls around the world is that they are treated as less than boys EVERYWHERE, and will be brainwashed to remain and accept being less in preparation for adulthood.
Let’s Get Real, So-Called Activists
There is no segment of the population anywhere in the world more vulnerable, abused, neglected, unprotected, and un-advocated for than girls. And by girls, (christ, I shouldn’t have to define this… but I realize science or logic or critical thinking aren’t cool or hip these days…) I mean XX-chromosomed (aka ‘female’) humans under the age of 18. Not ‘sissy boys’ who like wearing nail polish and masturbating while trying on their mother’s clothes. Not grown-ass men with mental health and sexual perversion and violence problems. Not even females 18 years of age or over. I don’t care about people’s self-developed or enforced identities that contradict biological facts. Thinking you are a donkey doesn’t turn you into a donkey (although, you may make a credible ass…), if you catch my drift.
Born to Submit and Whore
Girls have things stacked against them even before they are born. If you think about sex-selective abortion, a female is more likely to be scraped or sucked out than a male. And note here that I am not lamenting that abortion occurs – I am an anti-natalist – I just have a problem with the incomprehensible belief that males have more value than females… but I guess if you like weapons… If you look at Wikipedia, they say abortion is “most common where male children are valued over female children”. I laughed for a bit – clearly this was written by a male or cock proxy. There is no place on earth where male children aren’t valued over female children. So let’s reword Scrotalpedia’s error: it’s “most common where either a one-child policy exists or where the resources available to maintain familial dependents are severely limited”. Because let’s face it – if any ‘advanced’ or ‘rich’ country suddenly had a one-child policy forced upon it, guess what would happen??? Exactly. Female fetus abortion and female infanticide would suddenly be a thing.
The sexualization and genderization of females also begins before birth. First off, no matter how open-minded parents think they are, I guarantee you that almost all parents have expectations that their girl-child will grow up to be a nice little heterosexual breeding machine. She’ll go to school, meet a boy, get married, maybe have a job that doesn’t upstage the husband, and will have baybees. Most parents will have no problem with the idea that their daughter’s career will be put aside, maybe permanently. She’ll also take care of her parents when they get old. There will be some variations on the theme depending on where the girl grows up, whether religion is present in the house, and how traditional the family is. But no matter how free-thinking, no parents envision a life for their daughter separate from males, and they certainly don’t wish for lesbianism or a child-free life.
Parents who know they are having a girl child will often decorate baby rooms with cutesy shit and pink everything (or whatever colour that represents femininity and softness and sweetness in their culture), and fantasize about all the little dresses and bullshit they’ll put their sweet girl in. After birth, all people will say is how ‘beautiful’ the girl baby is. Boys will be allowed other compliments and predictions about his future success. But hey, guess what? All baybees, male and female, look pretty much the same for the first couple of years – guess why they colour-code the clothing… so they can tell which ones are girls and treat them accordingly – as future fuckholes – and will start planning her cutesy girl life with a focus on fashion and appropriate (feminine) extracurricular activities. All the toys will involve dolls and fashion and maybe cooking/cleaning/care-taking activities, regardless of what natural proclivities or talents the young girl shows. A few parents might consider ‘gender neutral’ toys, but by and large, there is still always a massive amount of unconscious parental grooming and socializing of the girl. She also almost always has heterosexual parents who model male domination styles, even if they don’t think they are doing so. There is no such thing as an ‘equal’ heterosexual partnership, so the messaging that is sent to girl children in a thousand and one ways is that mother does X and father does Y, with X always being the shit end of the stick. As I’ve said before, I plan to talk about hetero-female brainwashing in a separate series, so I won’t get into all the psychological mindfuckery parents inflict upon their daughters here. Suffice it to say that almost all parents successfully prepare their daughters to be future, unquestioning, pliant victims of men and male-dominated society. And the sad thing is that under the child-ownership, family unit model of raising children, many girls grow up with emotional, psychological, physical, and sexual abuse (much more prevalent for girls than boys) and no way of either reporting it or escaping it.
School, Teachers, and Other People’s Monsters
Parents get a good start on destroying their girls, but then the latter have to enter society in the form of school. And it is here where even girls with a relatively good start, family-wise, really get broken down. At the age of 12, in Canada, only a third of girls say they have self-confidence, and suicide is the third most common cause of death. By the age of 15-16, the percentage of self-confident girls drops to 14%, and suicide is the second leading cause of death. School-aged girls in Canada are 3 times as likely to be medicated for depression and related issues than boys, are hospitalized more than boys for ‘mental health reasons’, are self-harming in unseen-before numbers, and are twice as likely as boys to be cyberbullied. Sexual assaults of girls are common, but the numbers are hard to get a grasp on. Girls are NOT taught about sexual assault or harassment either at home or at school as a rule. They are also not believed if they are brave enough to report inappropriate behaviours or full on assaults. Girls are frequently punished for fighting back against boys who attack them, especially if they trounce the predator in question, and especially if a boy-mom gets involved in what will end up being a career of defending her son’s future rape and assault charges. And the social repercussions of reporting can be devastating as females are almost always blamed for what boys and men do to them. So it’s a no-win situation. Basically, they are fucked no matter what happens. They are punished first through the assault itself regardless of whether anyone finds out. Then, if it becomes known, they are punished for supposedly ‘causing’ the assault, they are punished for fighting back (especially if they win), and they are punished for daring to cause a fuss. I strongly suspect that as trannies are more embraced in schools and trannyism becomes part of the liberal educational curriculum, sexual assaults of girls by ‘trans girls’ (aka boys) will skyrocket. The interesting thing is that despite the constant violence and intimidation of girls, they still do better academically than boys. I am a long-time educator in multiple countries, and I’ve written about male student inadequacy before. The thing that bites here is that despite girls’ clear superiority, their childhood brainwashing, the continuous violence and intimidation they experience in school, and the universal societal hatred of females that manifests on every level of the system ensures that female competence won’t pay off, females won’t fight it, and that incompetent males will always be undeservedly rewarded and supported by everyone.
Myself, I remember being beat up by a group of boys for the first time when I was 5, my first sexual assault by a boy occurred when I was 6, and then it is a blur of being punched in the stomach, being punched in the pudendum, punched in the tit, and countless other violations by boy students over the years. We are always told that when boys do these things, it means they like us. So we learn early on that being female and being loved are about suffering and violence. If you don’t accept it, there is something wrong with you and you are going to end up unwanted and alone. If you were abused at home as a girl, this is an additional threat, as love was always conditional upon you accepting the abuse there, too. And if you got ‘loved’ it was always accompanied by suffering.
I had at least two male pedophile teachers. My grade 6 teacher (I was 11) was very touchy with me and other girl students, and there were endless sexual comments, bra snapping, prejudice and more throughout years of public school. Not once did I ever say anything to anyone. Not about the male students. Not about the teachers. So how can we estimate the prevalence of the breaking down of girl students through sex-specific violence and intimidation when even an above-average student won’t speak up? We know early on that we are in no way protected. Home isn’t always safe, school is seldom safe, and once you hit adulthood, you are fully groomed for large-scale systemic woman-hatred.
Oh, and as an aside, girls friendships don’t do much to help protect against systemic childhood misogyny. See my post on friendship for more on what girls can expect from each other.
Girls and Sexual Abuse
Much, much more attention is paid to the sexual abuse of boy children despite the fact that many, many more girls are sexually abused – and this is contrary to what boy-advocates would tell you (i.e., that girls get all the press). Why might this be? Well, my theory is pretty simple. Boys are not defined by their sexual attributes, while girls are only defined by their sexual attributes. Parents and societies do not build a boy’s identity on his sexual attractiveness. His success will never be dependent upon his physical looks. He is allowed to be smart, and talented, and good at sports, and strong, and social, and a whole host of other things that are allowed to full humans. Girls, from birth, are defined by how they look, and it increases as their bodies develop. By the early teen years, it is apparent (in Western culture, at least) that a girl is three fuckholes and a pair of tits. And every girl knows it on some level. If she has an attractive face, all the better, but even a ‘butterface’ (gross slang meaning that everything about a girl is attractive but her face) has some value as a fuck object only. So a girl is seen as little more than a sexual plaything for males. But, as I said, boys are human. If we pay too much attention to assaults against girls, then boys will somehow lose. And besides, we have to keep grooming little girls for what they will be required to accept in teen dating and adulthood dating and marriage. If you get girls to accept sexual assault as normal, they will make the perfect heterosexual adult women.
Pedophiles: Most pedophiles, are of course, male. And of course, there is a movement (like there always is when male violence and depravity have a spotlight briefly shone on them) to try to prove that there is a larger than life female pedo population. I call bullshit. I have never once seen a female teacher speak or behave sexually inappropriately with a child (except on TV…), but I’ve witnessed and experienced tons of male teachers do so. I’ve never, ever once met, overheard, or read anywhere a woman waxing on about sexy little boys (or even teenaged boys) they want to screw, but I have heard and read it literally thousands and thousands and thousands of times by men talking about wanting to fuck/rape/mess up girls. And there is the presence of deliberate violence in a lot of men’s words. But this makes sense to me as I don’t see male sexuality as separate from their violence. Having penetrative sex with women and girls is ultimately a violent act.
If you read the professional literature on pedos, we hear that roughly 1% of males are ‘true pedophiles’ (i.e., a ‘preference disorder’). But pedophilic fantasizing is present in 5% of males. I think that is very, very conservative, and the idea that fantasizing about raping little girls and teen girls doesn’t make you a pedophile is nonsense. Personally, I think if males knew for certain that they would never, ever, ever get caught, most would rape a child (mostly girls, but probably a few boys would figure in the mix too). I also think many would violate an animal, and of course, most men already stick their dicks in inanimate objects on a regular basis. (I’ve written about male sexuality before.) Males are born wrong, become more wrong through the sociological system they construct and fight to keep, and no one does anything about it except lament that life isn’t fair. Hmm, this isn’t exactly an issue of ‘fairness’.
I also wrote a post in the past considering how many female ‘beauty’ rituals are just ways of keeping pedophilic male tendencies focused on adult females.
Sex Trafficking: The only reason we have pornography and prostitution is because males exist. I firmly believe it wouldn’t exist if men/boys weren’t around. If you are a het woman who is reading this and are yelling at the screen that this isn’t true, I would suggest that you have been well and fully brainwashed and need to deprogram yourself. Many women have managed to escape from the porn-watching loop that males have introduced them to, and they tend to report being unable to believe they ever were able to watch it and pair it with love or female sexuality. Pornography, like prostitution, is dependent upon sex trafficking and forced drug addiction in females, so that they can make it through the pain, suffering and degradation, and then somehow stumble back for more. Most victims of the sex trade are female and almost all are forced into it as children (average age 12-14 years). They can be domestic and internationally enslaved girls. The former are very often runaways that end up in terrible situations that started out on the surface looking like protection. One might find it hard to imagine how a girl can be tricked into slavery, but it is quite common, especially when a girl is afraid, vulnerable, desperate because of poverty, and already the victim of childhood abuse. There isn’t a parent on the planet who talks to their daughters about trafficking (remember, girls are taught to trust males, not suspect them like a feminazi would…), and many of the girls who end up in the sex trade were fleeing sexual and other abuse anyways. They are primed for male ‘protection’ (abuse).
(The Internet Watch Foundation works to protect child victims of pornography – they remove 1,000 pages of child porn from the internet each and every week. And the porn never stops. Because of men. Never fear though – lady porn remains because women can ‘consent’ to their abuse, while children cannot. Fine line, imo.)
A Few Other Things To Think About
I want to close this long post, but before I do, I’ll mention a few other notes that are relevant to girls. First is infantalization and how it leaks into adulthood. I wrote a post on the topic here as a comment on how there is no true equivalent to ’emasculation’ for women because you can’t strip power from someone if they had no power to begin with. Women as a class don’t have power, so the closest you get is ‘infantalization’ – which is a way to prevent women from ever having power or even feeling they deserve to have any. The instilling of powerlessness in females starts very young. And this leaks into the next thing I want to mention: referring to adult females as ‘girls’. It is part of infantalization, and men don’t experience it. This is common in the West, but I’ve also noticed it as a common acceptable practice in places like China. Women refer to themselves as ‘girls’ and almost never as ‘women’. Woman refers not to a regular adult woman, but as a mature, matronly type – an older person, which no woman is supposed to want. Many young women even go so far as to call themselves ‘baby ladies’ or ‘baby girls’, which is this idealized, infantalized, but also desirable/sexy adult female. It is so bizarre and repulsive to me. But it is very common.
I also ran into the whole ‘girl’ thing when I was a young grad student in the US. I noticed a rather yucky poster one day on the wall in my department talking about girls and men, and I emailed the contact on the poster to ask them about the sexist language. I got a nasty, racist, elitist reply from a black woman, sorry – girl – who said the poster came from her black sorority that was, she was proud to tell me, filled with wealthy, prominent, black women. And this was the way they talked. So there. Well, fuck me. Rich, super-privileged black ‘girls’ promoting sexism, and expecting an economically disadvantaged, foreign-with-no-legal-rights, white female to support their leg-spreading cock-suckage. I love this world, and what constitutes oppression and who is promoting it and making sure it never dies… I don’t engage with racists or misogynists as a rule, so I didn’t bother answering this rich American woman. My personal philosophy is to refer to adult women as women to give them the respect they deserve, instead of infantalizing them in the name of supporting male pedophilic tendencies.
Conclusion
Now, like I said earlier and have said many times before, I am an anti-natalist. For many reasons, actually. I have been since I was about 10 years of age. I once, as an early 20-something, had a dream that I was holding a swaddled child and realized that I was preparing a bowl of dog kibble for it, and when I looked down, I had a puppy in my arms. That is my idea of having a child. I’ve since expanded my worldview to include cats… Anyhow, I’m an anti-natalist. I have a massive amount of experience with children throughout most of my life – probably more than most mothers who turn their noses up at the child-free – and I would say with honesty that I’ve helped many. But I wouldn’t say I have a general love of them. They are exhausting. I dislike boy children immensely, and find myself looking at them wondering when they will start raping and creating problems for more than just their mothers and sisters. I am a bit mixed about girls. I feel protective of them, generally speaking. I know they have no advocates or protectors; their mothers are often their biggest betrayers and earliest destroyers. But many girls start showing their future brainwashed fembot monster selves even in childhood, and although it isn’t their fault they are turning out that way, I cringe in revulsion at the child abuse that creates that sort of crafted persona. I don’t like tomboys much either. Yeah, really. I don’t like either end of the gender-spectrum, and tomboys and adult butches don’t solve anything for womanhood, in my opinion, as gender expression is constructed, not innate. But as long as they are not sexist or abusive to women, I don’t really care too much. They may not solve anything, but they generally are not the problem. I do, however, have a very soft spot for quiet, intelligent girls who defy forced gender streaming altogether – and are what I call ‘divergent’ (not to be confused with the definition from Veronica Roth’s book series, but the idea has some similarities). They aren’t masculine, they aren’t feminine, they are adaptable and versatile, and they are able to feel comfortable doing any number of activities regardless of for whom they are deemed more appropriate. It is also harder for them to find their community as they don’t fit into any kind of stereotyped box. These are my girls, and if I am lucky enough to find one, I’ll do anything to support and protect them.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
~~~
A few links with stats, etc.
Barriers for Girls – the Canadian Women’s Foundation
Child Pornography – A Few Stats – Children’s Advocacy Center
Why Am I More Balanced Without Men?
Oh, the lie that is gender. Before I start, let me get this out of the way. Men and women as sexes are biologically different. There cannot be a concept of ‘equality’ between males and females simply because we are biologically, sexually different. And let me clear that up. You’ll already know what I’m going to say if you’ve read further on this blog.
First, gender is a sociological construct that creates forced, FALSE differences between males and females with the sole purpose of keeping men in power and women’s necks under men’s boots and mindlessly devoted to (enslaved by) them. That is it. The modern idea of replacing the meaningful, factual designation of SEX with gender is nefarious and intentionally done to hurt women and girls. Period. It is part of the po-mo, liberal and trannie movements over the past few decades, with very harmful results.
Second, that males and females are biologically different means something different than the intention of purposeful differentiation of males and females using gender. When I (and all scientific, brain-using people) say that males and females are different, we are not saying (unlike the gender users) that males are superior or that males and females are complementary beings with skill sets that fit together like a puzzle even though ‘female’ traits are still less valued and inferior to males’. No. What I mean is that biologically, males are born with destructive, sadistic, violent tendencies. Biologically, females are not. There are exceptions (like in every fucking evidence-based theory in history). But thousands of years of factual evidence that males commit almost all of the violent, murderous, torture-for-pleasure-based acts in every corner of the earth makes a few exceptions completely irrelevant. What are NOT sex-based differences are valued and undervalued skills. Males and females are born with equally distributed potential for skill development (meaning that math or engineering are not inborn male skills, and childcare and cleaning are not inborn female skills). I do think that some personality traits are more inherent in women, such as empathy and both patient detail and big picture thinking capabilities, and other traits are more common in men, such as psychopathy and limited range, but deep and violent emotionality. And for this reason, women are more likely to accept abuse without violent retaliation, and men are more likely to act violently for little to no reason at all. And also for these biological reasons, women remain under the control of men and men rape, kill, and just generally destroy with impunity and without a second thought as to what they have done. Ha, unless they are caught, and oh the crocodile tears and fake remorse.
But let me get to the question in my title. I’ve probably already indirectly answered it in the previous paragraphs. But I’ll spell it out.
I can’t tell you how many women (never mind the men) who buy into this idea of males and females complementing each other, and thus seeing ‘evidence’ (not evidence in the real sense, but as defined by religion or patriarchal mythology) that males and females need to partner and work together, of course, with females subordinating themselves with their necessary, but inferior skills. I remember, in particular, this horrific conversation I had in China years ago with two brilliant, talented women, one older Chinese and one younger Russian. And both of them, despite their amazingness, firmly believed that women couldn’t do so many of the skills that men could do, especially math. I bristled. I was always top of my class in math, and one of my masters degrees is in a quantitative, statistics-heavy field. But man-fucking as a female requires this kind of brain-dead assessment and self-denigration and belief in incompleteness, I remembered.
I also remembered my days of cowardly bisexuality. The misery of it, feeling my wings clipped, forced into a cage of self-limitation and pretending that the male in my life wasn’t half of what I was a person intellectually, emotionally, and in terms of learning and skills achieved. I remembered the freeing feeling I always had when the relationship inevitably ended after some particularly misogynistic event, like when he ended up raping me, shaming me, taking me for granted, or threatening me. Being alone, single, I realized that I had everything I needed in myself. I was balanced, able to do what I needed. A male was the anchor manacled to my ankle dragging me underwater (I know, I know, I am mixing a bunch of metaphors throughout this post). In essence, ending the hetero prison made me soar in many ways.
Men don’t build you up. They don’t have inherent skills that are barred to you as a woman. You bar yourself from being whole when you choose males. They might initially give you a false sense of being essential in some incomprehensible, womanly way. But over time, you’ll feel the drag. You are no longer soaring through air or across water (pick your metaphor). You are sinking, and fucking exhausted, and wondering why.
You don’t have to be a full-on lesbian to be free. Celibacy or asexuality work as well. You just have to let go of this idea than you need a man to complete you. You are complete when you enter this world. A whole being just from being born female.
Men can’t say that. In fact, they tell us the truth about themselves in so many ways every single day. Hence the need to control us and use us for our innate wholeness, innate balance. They are the incomplete, unbalanced ones, and parasitical at that.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
An Evening Muse on Western Misogyny, Poverty, and Such
I have to admit I’m a little down lately. Despite being a person who expects little from people, situations, and life in general, I’ve managed to become disappointed and once again worn down by life in North America. If you’ve never read further on this site, the context for this comment is this: I frequently live and work abroad; I left a nearly decade-long stint in China at the end of July 2019; I spent a year in the US studying and trying to navigate a possible career change; and then the Virus hit, all my plans went to hell, and I was forced to return to my homeland – Canada – a country I thought I might never return to again other than to visit.
China is a really racist, sexist, and chaotic, but uber-controlled country. It was hard. But I adapted. I was employed, I cultivated a small, but excellent group of local friends, and equally important, I had an apartment that was all mine despite being black moldy and not very cosy. I’ve spent most of my adult life living alone, and I’ve come to see it as a luxury, even when my space is not optimal. I just don’t like living with people. And I especially don’t like living in places where I have no control over who else is living there.
The year in the US was pretty brutal in a lot of ways. First the culture shock – not sure if that is the right word – was kind of surprising. I think in the year and a half since leaving Asia, I’ve realized that if I am going to be an outcast, I need to be a full-on outcast that has no hope or expectation (by self or others) of ever fitting in. Even more than in early adulthood, I just don’t think I can fit into regular society here – and that seems like a simple and precious thing to say, but it is really complicated in a way that you will never understand unless you’ve lived outside your country for years and years at a time.
The US also showed me that women don’t have it better in the West. We are constantly battered with the idea that “women are equal now” and “Western (especially white) women are better off than all other women, so stfu.” But I have to tell you, no, the misogyny is just as bad here as anywhere else. It just looks different. And the less money you have, the worse it is. Because of the lifelong brainwashing, selective women’s history (if any) taught in public schools, and a general unwillingness to self-examine because it’s “too negative” or victimy, the majority of women just don’t see it. And I’d bet that in countries that Western women typically tsk tsk over, those women also don’t really see what they experience as anything other than “that’s life, the way it’s supposed to be”.
I had some good experiences during my year in the US. I was studying plants, for one. And then the Virus hit, which was actually a good thing in some ways – I was able to get some tuition money back after my male teachers decided they didn’t want to work anymore, and continued my plant education by myself outside the classroom by going on 5-10 mile hikes every day. But I spent way too much of my small, scrupulously accumulated savings on keeping wealthy people wealthy through overpriced accommodation. I also contracted a staph infection that has recurred 5 times, manifesting in massive, painful and disgusting abcesses. Antibiotics are NOT something one should be taking regularly, and I’ve had 4 hardcore rounds in less than a year. I swear, if you want to contract a brutal disease, go to the US, not a Third World country. But possibly tied for worst – I haven’t lived alone since I left China – the bad part being that I have lived with some of the most horrible and abusive men and women I have ever met, and paid my hard-earned money for the privilege. Ouch. Once the Virus was in play, housing became even more insecure. I was terrified of being kicked out with literally nowhere to go if I contracted even a small cough. The crazy landlady I lived with during the first few months of the outbreak forced one of the other tenants out when she got a cold. It was stressful.
But you know, despite some pretty seriously shitty stuff going on while in the US, my spirits were good. It was not until I returned to Canada that I started to get depressed. This country is about poverty for me. I spent most of my Canada-side adult years living in poverty, and being back is no different. I have no contacts or references here. I’m an overeducated, middle-aged female and white – all of those working against me in a city with 11% unemployment and a government focused on making sure immigrants have jobs.
And I’m still living with people. And it has been all about male violence. I just moved from a shared house where an older male verbally attacked me and threatened to physically attack me because I wasn’t looking at or speaking to him correctly (we all know what that means – he wasn’t getting the deference and respect he thought he deserved). I just moved out of that house in the burbs to a downtown hostel that accepts month-to-month renters. I had stayed here when I first moved to this city for a job 20 years ago. But things seem to have gone downhill with increased poverty/income gaps and with the stress of the Virus. In a week’s time, there have been two major violent male episodes – luckily not with me. But they were terrifying. One – a verbal screaming match between staff and a male who (as usual) didn’t think he needed to follow the Virus rules mandated by the hostel. The second – a male did something the staff didn’t like and they refused to let him back into the building to go to his room. It was a long ordeal, poorly handled by the staff, that escalated until the male smashed the entire plexiglass wall going from lobby counter to ceiling, and smashed computers and various things on the check-in desk. No cops ever seem to be called here. I took the least expensive room. It is in a hallway beside the lobby. It is a tiny, tiny room with no window. There is an immense amount of noise 24/7 due to people traipsing by or accessing a bank of METAL lockers right beside my door at 2 or 4 in the morning. They are raising the rent significantly next month despite being down season for travellers. It does have a bit of a half-way house feel to it. Or even a homeless shelter (given the male violence and the creepy, listless air of some of the male guests), except that I am paying for the privilege.
As much as I wanted to move on from teaching English to unmotivated, cell-phone addicted students, I’m almost wishing the Virus were over so I could escape Canada, take another teaching job, and have a job and a small private living space away from men again.
Bottom line: the West is just as dangerous and stressful for women as it is in other parts of the world. The income gap and access to affordable and secure housing issues are as serious here as they are in many places. The less money you have as a woman, the more exposed you are to dangerous situations caused by males. And yet Western countries are more and more obsessed with racial diversity and less and less focused on the fact that women are the most at-risk group STILL and face more challenges economically than men of any race.
Let’s hope 2021 brings a better year for us and that we all make it there unhurt by the men around us.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Misogyny in Academia: Nothing Has Changed
First, welcome to the douchebags from rationalwiki. Ladies, you know your feminist blog has made it when internet scrotal warriors with their self-proclaimed ‘rational minds’ (sorry, let me pause to laugh my ass off here, man-logic is anything but rational, but fuelled by emotional mantrums) have listed you as a ‘webshite’ and angry, privileged followers click on over to your site to become angrier. I’m sure between watching rape porn and eating the meals their mothers provide, they are raging online about how women have destroyed the world with their quest for human rights and not to be raped or to take the scourge of rape porn away. Nothing says ‘rational’ like not understanding the difference between rights and privilege. I won’t go on. Women will understand. Men never will (they don’t have to in this world). Only rational people will get it.
Anyhoo. I’m in the middle of escaping a violent male in a rental situation while unemployed (I talked about insecure housing for women in my last post). Luckily, but sadly, one of the other women in my house has been experiencing related terrorism and we finally ran into each other and shared our experience. We had thought we were alone and thus unable to be believed (he said, she said, he wins, she flees… or dies). The third woman in the house is straight, very male-identified, and will never get on board. She is one of those who is internet dating, currently has a male who is trying to access her twat, gets angry when she says no, and she is still hanging out with him and making excuses for him. You know this common, sad, but tedious, story. She will likely be raped in the near future, and she is in complete denial. There isn’t a straight woman on the planet who hasn’t experienced something along these lines, but most will never admit it because women are still expected to let men rape them and accept it as love and affection. And the excuses they make to have it all make sense… But long story short, the other woman and I have found places to live, and we teamed up and forced the landlord to let us out of our rental agreement. Seldom do women team up – as I’ve mentioned before, this is one reason we haven’t made much progress as a class in fighting our oppressors (see posts on the need for Old Girls Clubs in the professional sphere, female bonding in general, how intersectionality has destroyed the long lost feminist prime directive, and more). Nothing will happen to our abuser, and while we are lucky to escape, it is another example of women having to escape a space that should, by definition, be safe in order to survive. Women often have to leave secure housing and even jobs and school positions because of the threats of violence and actual violence that men pose and enact, while the men stay firmly and securely in place, untouchable, housing secure and careers skyrocketing without the competition that more competent women would normally present, and most important, without the fears that women live with daily at home, in public and in the workplace. I always wonder to myself how many women are destroyed professionally, economically and more because men threaten them. I’ve written a little about this before, and posit the need for danger pay for women in the workforce.
So we get to my topic. Academia. Now, interestingly, but unsurprisingly, educated women are some of the most hated women among feminists (partially addressed in my post on Isolating Women). You’d think that women would embrace and promote women moving into fields that could actually help the world and empower women. But no. I’ve read tons of posts and articles by or about academic women, and the sad comments sections that accompany them, where so-called feminists viciously attack academic feminists and women in general. Complicated stuff going on there. The attacks often fall along the lines of “this bitch has made it; why isn’t she doing more to help less fortunate women? Why is she capitulating?” And and think to myself, “why the fuck don’t you go attack some men? Yannow, the actual problems.” These self-proclaimed feminists have no idea what it takes to make it in academia as a woman. I’m tired of blue collar bullshit. And liberal bullshit. I’ve lived in multiple worlds – I class myself as ‘educated poor’ – and instead of hating other work classes, I suggest embracing women and fighting the men who keep archaic systems in place. It’s simple, logically, but you have to let go of lady-hate to do it… Anyhow, the women they are attacking are likely 10 times as competent as the men they share departments with, are paid less, are less likely to be promoted, are often forced into non-career-advancing busy work like planning parties, and taking on advising roles that would never be forced on men; are often sexually harassed, threatened and so on; and they are usually completely isolated from normal professional goings-on (especially with female colleagues), unless they support the male party line. To put forth a strong feminist agenda, even in a ‘Gender’ Studies department (the name change says it all – welcome to women’s non-rights in the 21st century) will destroy your career. I watched it happen in my own department in the US when I was a grad student. A committed single (sort of asexual, although not labelled) female professor, top of her field, prominent in the media, well-published and cited, yet treated like shit in our department dared to complain about sexual bias. She ended up blacklisted from academia and had to go to the private sector. Meanwhile, the male professor who would play with his crotch while lesbian grad students met with him in his office, and who threw away a week of lectures in our hardcore stats class because he couldn’t figure out what he was doing, is a full professor now. Untouchable. Further, all the non-white male lecturers got tenure; none of the females did while I was a grad student there. Well, one black woman – no white women nor the one aboriginal woman was promoted. Myself, I had the highest teaching rating of all the grad students. I was in line to receive a prestigious teaching award, but the female prof on the awards committee told me that they were going to give it to an Asian male with lower ratings. She said, “he needed it”. And I didn’t? Why did he need it more than me? He didn’t end up in a teaching career. I did. I needed that award. He is making 6 figures. I am unemployed. And I seldom earn above minimum wage, and that’s when people aren’t trying to force me into volunteer work or work-stay exchange situations (which are more likely to be forced on white women than anyone else, since we are all supposed to be the supported playthings of rich white males with time on our hands, right?)
But this was the 1990’s. Surely things have changed, right? Millennials and Gen Z’s I meet keep telling me that women are EQUAL now. They don’t face misogyny in universities, of course! Could it be? Have things changed radically?
Well, I spent a year in the American college system as a student during this past year, and no, things are not equal. Not in the slightest. Almost all the full professorships are still held by men. Women are taken on board on a casual lecturer basis, most often. I looked up the salaries at the public colleges I attended. One of my male teachers was making over $130,000 per year. He showed films all the time, frequently cancelled class, and I remember we had a quiz in class one day, and he announced gleefully, “Nap time!” Working hard, earning his pay! I had two stellar female teachers, highly committed to students, put in extra work, stayed after class, etc. My favourite, had a listed salary of $19,000 despite extensive expertise in her field. Never once yelled “Nap time!” for herself when we had tests. The other was teaching a double load at the College and University because she couldn’t get hired as full-time staff and had to make ends meet.
Canada is no better. No way. I’m currently exploring a possible PhD program as my two Masters degrees have been the worst professional decisions for my career possible, besides deciding to work in China. I would never recommend a terminal Masters to any woman unless she is already in a job that requires it for her to advance. As it is, I’m too educated for lower level jobs (I’m a risk because I’ll leave once I see something better!), but I’m not educated enough for the jobs I’m intellectually capable of. I also have a weird resume – my education doesn’t match my vast, but colourful, job experience, so that is seen as a risk too. (why aren’t I specialized or in management???) So I’m looking at PhDs as a possible option in these turbulent times. I’ve found a perfect program in Canada, and I’ve explored the faculty members thoroughly. Now as we all know, the current political climate is focused on forced diversity. What does that mean? Well, it means ensuring that non-white people populate the higher echelons, even if it doesn’t accurately reflect the local community. And this agenda has been successful all over North America. This department I’m looking at is mostly non-white, despite being located in a province that is over 90% white (try forcing diversity in any non-Western country and see how that works…).
Now what is blatant, but will never be addressed, is that there are no female core faculty members. I think there are one or two adjunct female lecturers. And it’s not a Physics department where you would expect that kind of misogyny. So I’m thinking to myself – what has been solved here? Why are Millennials and Gen Z’s so fucking deluded? This department is operating in a mainly white community where over half the population is female (the latter being normal in all corners of the world, of course). And they’ve populated their departments with foreign, non-white males, although white males are also present as they always are. And there is a huge immigration drive here. I agree with having foreign faculty in all countries – definitely! you need international expertise to boost your research agenda and perspectives – but I also believe you need to solve your problems at home first. And the problem that needs to be addressed EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD is this: woman are not represented. And it’s not for lack of intelligence, experience or education. Most of our undergraduate students are female. The majority of grad students are female in a growing number of departments. But conversely, in most departments, all or almost all of the tenured faculty are male (of multiple races). And no, the problem is not that women are just starting to get PhDs in 2020. Try decades of increasing numbers of female PhD graduates. So, something else is going on that keeps women out of jobs fitting their education and that pays them for the 8-12 years of post-secondary education they sweated through while living at poverty levels. Where is the drive to allow women into the halls of intellect, of power? How can we effect change when female students don’t see a place for themselves in academic institutions? Let’s stop taking tuition money from women and girls while not allowing them a chance to find economic freedom and influence in policy, research, and the realm of discovery. Everyone is happy to take our money, but we are still denied power. Education is, first and foremost, a tool, not a hobby for women.
Part of the problem in many Western countries with predominantly white populations is that in the drive for racial diversity, white women have been lumped in with white males. And established white workers are almost always male. White female jobs are ‘last in, first cut’. And if those jobs open up, white women are not usually considered ‘diversity hires’ even though they are vastly underrepresented and always have been. See, men only share with us when they are trying to shove some of the responsibility for problems (i.e., racism) onto someone else or to find a scapegoat to blame or punish. White women have never had a kick at the can of power. We have fought harder than most women to achieve rights, but are not actually benefiting our own selves from this hard work despite what non-white women say. We are still underrepresented in all areas of power, including academia, even when we are a majority in the local population. Yet we are told over and over that our ‘white privilege’, which actually is ‘white male privilege’, is unjust. Politically, in the West, it has gone this way: white men have dominated forever. They still dominate, but are slowly on the way out. (And they fucking hate it!) Diversity is the buzzword of the day. So the bottom line is: if a job is going to be a special population hire, white women, who are underprivileged, are ‘white’ and thus left out. We’ve never had our time and never will, in other words.
So is it worth it for me to even try? I’m already an undesirable because I’m middle aged. Second most invisible time in a woman’s life except old age. And men have hurt my career prospects so many times. I’ve been pinched, talked down to/mansplained to, micromanaged (among other psychological techniques used to push women out), sexually harassed, forced into lady-busy-work, passed over for awards and promotions and recognition, given heavier workloads than male counterparts, and threatened by colleagues and bosses and advisors. I’ve often had to leave. Fear. Frustration. Stagnation. Men don’t experience this, can’t understand this, and downplay or dismiss it as crazy talk if you even bother to explain. I don’t get the sense that anything has changed for the better for my demographic, even though I’m told over and over that women, in general, are equal now, and that white women, specifically, have all the power. Where is this actually reflected? I don’t see it. And trust me, I am looking hard.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Shits and Giggles During Day 11 of Forced Quarantine
I promise, like seriously, that I’ll seriously write a more serious post soon. In case I haven’t mentioned before, I recently repatriated to Canada – only because my visa ran out in the US and you can’t really fly anywhere else from the US due to American incompetence in dealing with The Virus. Anyhow, Canada has an effective, but weird (I’ll have to explain that in another place at another time), Virus Strategy. Keeping Americans and their fucking fucked version of freeeeeedom OUT has been a big part of that strategy. And it has worked.
So I find myself in a 2-week forced quarantine situation that all incoming people must do, although for the vast majority, they are residents and have a place to go that is deemed appropriate by the government. I don’t. Communicating with my government earlier, they told me that for someone in my situation (non-resident citizen with no family, home, friends, place to go, etc), they would house me in an appropriate place and supply me with food – paid for cuz this is a socialist country and all that – all to prevent me from potentially spreading the Chinese-American Virus to sweet little innocent Canadians. I arrived and lo and behold I am now in a designated location, but I get to pay for everything! Yeah! The Canadian government lies. But I knew that years ago and is why I try so hard not to live here. Anyhoo…
I’m on Day 11. No outdoors. No sunlight. No contact with people. No walking, except to the bathroom (significant considering I’ve walked 5-10 miles every day for the last 4 months). Very restricted diet due to expense and access. I’m actually doing pretty well, psychologically, except for getting distracted on the Net and finding unfunny things perfectly hilarious.
So I figure I’d share my favourite video so far. Let’s go back to the 1970’s – probably the most embarrassing decade in the last century. I’m proud to say I was born in and disco’ed my way through it with home-made terrycloth leisure ensembles, velour knickers (not the underwear, Brits – the half-pants you’d see on the likes of Little Lord Fauntleroy, yessirree), strange-patterned sundresses, and a bunch of other embarrassing outfits crafted at home out of financial necessity. Yeah, white girl not rich – must be an anomaly…
So enjoy the following sexist song performed by Caribbean band, Boney M: Rasputin. I love busting stereotypes, and this helps us see that not all black people have dance moves. I couldn’t stop laughing – they’re worse than me! Note that Bobby Farrell takes himself waaaay too seriously, like all dudes. One of the women also has those dead eyes that I associate with rape victims and porn ‘stars’. Hope that wasn’t what was going on here. And the outfits… cringe. Very ’70s. And the lyrics! Good lord. Note that the song was banned by the Soviet govt, but Russians still loved the band.
Enjoy! Ra ra Rasputin… lover of the Russian Queen.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
The Confluence of Two American Patriarchal Scourges
This post is part of a few series. Find it among the following:
Background
I’ve been to a few Prides here and there in various cities. I’ve gone even though I’m not so much into large group events, and even though I attend without knowing anyone since I move around a lot. I go for a few reasons. First, I like to check out the local scene. I find it extremely hard to meet lesbians, especially lesbians who are man-hating, pro-women, non-intersectional, and anti-natal. (Do they even exist???) And second, Pride is supposed to be a celebration of something that on any other day gets you hated and mistrusted by women and pornified by men. Pride came about to allow a seriously oppressed population the chance to feel normal of sorts among others who understood them and the daily challenges of not following the hetero rules of raping and impregnating bitches or being that raped and impregnated bitch. Gay men, of course, have always turned Pride into a bit of a sex-fest. That is what men do regardless of which holes they fuck; everything is sex to them. Lesbians: I think they just wanted to be acknowledged, accepted and then left to their own devices. Kind of a ‘we exist, thank you, now fuck off and stop raping us and demonizing us’ sort of thing.
I volunteered for Pride in the American city where I was living last year, but this time, it was a sort of Bizarro, alterego of Superman kind of Pride – very ass-backwards compared to the Prides I had attended long ago. For one, Pride is no longer peaceful. The gay men are still loud and proud and focused on sex, as per usual. But then again, the shit that has been happening lately is happening to women, not men. Gay men have the privilege and luxury of being able to focus on their own brand of fun as there is no threat posed to them. Their space remains intact and their bodies unassaulted. But for lesbians, there is an element of violence and aggression, and within-group policing and hovering threats that never existed before. I felt afraid sitting in my volunteer orientation. I was more afraid of the people in the Pride group than I was of potential violent nutjobs from the crowd. And I’ll tell you why.
Enter the trans. The cause of the violence and aggression and general feeling of unease.
I couldn’t even figure out whether there were any actual lesbians in my volunteer group. The word ‘lesbian’ wasn’t uttered a single time during my multi-hour orientation. But 30 minutes on pronouns and another 30 on triggering and another 60 boiling down to how, basically, it is not possible to have a comfortable conversation anymore, even with people you are supposed to be bonding with because they share your experience. There is nothing shared anymore (except perhaps for fear on the parts of lesbians). The sense of erasure and danger and WTF is going on? was heavy and knife-cuttable-throughable. All due to trans. So the peaceful factor was gone completely. Erase women and you erase any chance for logic and peace… Besides the trans, lesbians have further been erased and replaced by Generation Z(ombie) Queer Hitler-Youth types, ready to narc on anyone who doesn’t suck lady cock or admits they are just a plain old lesbian, or shhhhhh, they have a vagina.
But I digress. I’d like to talk more about my experience with my most recent American Pride, but that is for another post.
Look at Eldridge surrounded by naked white females wearing his dick pants. Always black guys with the ‘raping the white ladies’ fantasy.
I want to talk about trans2, one of the worst things to happen to America since… Larry Flint?… the incel movement took hold? … I don’t know. It’s hard to pick one horrible event as life as a woman is basically “Okay, what next, you fucking rapists?” But it gets worse. Imagine that the trans mindset melded with the BLM (Black Lives Matter – or what it really is: BDM – Black Dicks Matter) mindset, the latter also being one of the worst things to happen to America since MLK approved the rape of a parishioner or prominent Black Panthers member and convicted rapist, Eldridge Cleaver, designed his male supremacist ‘Virility Pants’. (I’ve written about Black Dicks Matter before.)
When you put trans and BLM’ers together you get a fucking insane group of lady-cock, race supremacist, history revisionist, white woman-raping, assholes. In many ways, they are worse than the plain old ex-military white trannies with their muscles and bad wigs. BLT’s are self-made uber-victims and are loving it. Like all trans today, they are transing dead gay men and non-conforming women and otherwise rewriting history. They are claiming that they started the Stonewall riots. In reality, the riots were incited by a LESBIAN, an XX, a WOMAN, half-white/half-black, Stormé DeLarverie, who had been assaulted by police. Now the black trannie dudes will not only ignore this well-corroborated fact, and insist that black trannies (i.e., men) incited and led the entire riot scene. They have taken GAY black MALE, Malcolm Michaels and turned him into a transwoman. Malcolm was at the riots, but didn’t start them. He also knew he was a MAN and GAY and a DRAG QUEEN. But he is dead, and dead men can’t argue or clear up lies and other bullshit. The trans have done this with numerous gender non-conformers throughout history to bolster their numbers. It is dishonest and dilusional.
To all those idiots who think white male trans are ugly and non-whites magically do lady-face right, look again. Sexy hot, amiright? And this is a model… Leaving names off, but you can figure it out yourself.
Now, I’m going to say one more thing about the so-called feminists who don’t support the trans takeover, but who have no problem with men of colour dominating all women. I have noticed in a lot of chat spaces that the urge to shit on white people is irresistible, and the common theme is that a) white males are responsible for the trans horrors, b) white males make fucking ugly ‘chicks’, whereas all the non-white trannnies seem to be so beautiful and elegant. And I have to put my foot down and say “stop and open you gd eyes.” It’s as bad as the trans making up stuff to fit their narrative. White people are not responsible for every bad thing in the world. Sorry. You want it to be true, but it’s not. Second, there are tons of ugly non-white trannies. Go online and do a search in your favourite search engine with the keywords ‘black trans’, and you will see some of the butt-ugliest dudes in dresses that you will ever see. And they don’t ‘pass’. They are so very clearly male, it’s not funny. And for the truly brave and those who have a high tolerance for yuck, take your safe search off, and do an image search for ‘ugly black trannies’. Then you get tons of porn shots of some of the butt-ugliest dudes with their dresses OFF that you will ever see. Put your ‘must fight racism against the poor, poor oppressed menz!’ and pickme urges in the freezer for a while. Reality is uncomfortable at first, but is a much less mindfuckable place to be in the long-run. And you are less likely to hurt women, too! Added bonus of accepting reality!
In short, this is a loud, violent, delusional group of males who benefit from two of the most powerful and supported man-centred faux-victim groups in the US. Don’t get sucked into supporting anti-woman policy because you are brainwashed into believing you’re evil because of your skin colour. You will never win. They are male and they will try to kill you eventually, physically or through policy. Unlike with white males, these guys will double-whammie you with “You’re racist AND transphobic!!” and there is nothing you will be able to do to assert your humanity as a woman (and you’ll be double screwed if you’re a white woman).
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
A Lone Woman in the Woods
I know if I read the title I’ve assigned to this post, alarm bells would go off. Rape. I’d be waiting for the rape story. I am a lone woman and rape has never been far from my mind since I was a teenager and was alone in most of what I did from day to day. I learned from an early age what it meant to be a female that did most things in her life alone – sometimes by choice, sometimes, not. Tracy Chapman, one of my absolute favourite folk singers, unfortunately grouped us girls into ‘good girls’ – those who moved around quickly in groups – and ‘fast girls’ – those of us who walk alone and who got raped and beaten and disappeared by men and boys. There is almost the implication that the latter are looking for trouble, and deserve what they get. I kind of hated her for that. I’m neither fast nor bad, and I certainly neither look for trouble nor do I deserve all the rapes and assaults by men of all races I’ve experienced as a lone woman and especially as a white woman. I love you, Tracy, but fuck you.
[Brief rant, get ready, or get out now while you can;)]
Many of you are likely partnered and you have no idea what it is like to have to do every fucking thing in your life alone. It’s not always a choice to be alone, but neither do I want to have to call someone every time I want or need to leave the house, ffs. [I was told endlessly in China after being stalked for weeks and threatened with rape by a black man on my university campus, that I should never leave my apartment by myself. Not possible, even if I wanted to, which I didn’t because I wasn’t the criminal.] The non-alone don’t know what it is like to have to plan every single thing you do around what could possibly happen to you because you are alone. If you travel, you are likely travelling with a male master, or children, or other family members, or maybe a friend or friends. Mothers bitch constantly about the struggles of being a mother, but they are so fucking protected by their brats. They have no idea #!$@ If a rapist or thief or kidnapper is going to target a woman, who is he going to pick – the bitch with the litter of pups with her or the lone female? Which will be easier to deal with? Men are opportunists, picking off the ones no one will miss. Breeders don’t know real danger even though they think they do or they wax poetic about how ‘dangerous’ things are for them. They’ve chosen to be mastered, to fit into society, to get the economic, legal and social tit squeeze and ass pat that society and their family gives them for spreading their legs, so the only real danger they experience is from the master they enslave themselves to. There is a lot of coat-tail privilege one gets when signing on for motherhood and/or hetero slavery. I say coat-tail because no woman is truly privileged. I stand by that. But you become privilege adjacent simply by orbiting a man or using your cunt the way it was ordained by males. When you are alone – whether it is because you know you aren’t mentally healthy enough to have a lesbian partnership thanks to years of mom-abuse and the subsequent distrust you have for women you make yourself vulnerable to, or whether you just never met someone you could envision partnering with, or whether you just don’t believe in the male-designed concept of long-term monogamous entrapment – you have a very different experience of the world. Despite what heteros and especially breeders say, lone women don’t have it easier. The so-called freedom comes at a massive price. You are economically much less well off than the average breeder and hetero enslaved. Jeez, I was looking at the median family incomes that idiot American liberals published a week or two ago to try to show how whites and blacks are different economically, and I was drooling at the median black income. I’ve never even come close – and I have 3.5 university degrees. Being white and female and not attached to a male always has meant fewer opportunities and less pay and more expectations that I’ll do volunteer work or work for free – I think the assumption is that all white women have husbands and don’t need to work (um, 1950’s much…?) therefore you don’t need to take them seriously in the job market. I probably have gotten pushed or guilted into working for free more than any non-white woman or any male, for that matter. (I just was told again recently that I should find some unpaid work. Why do I have to work for free but everyone else deserves a pay cheque???) Further, for some reason – probably the same one I just mentioned, I am always harassed for money by a segment of the population (all non-white men, and even some non-white women) that has more earning potential than me, even with less education. So being alone and a lez and white and a woman sucks the big one economically. And you are always a target for men and boys physically and sexually. Even indoors. Even in your own home or what passes for one. But outdoors??? It is always there.
Rant finished. Thanks for persevering.
So “A Lone Woman in the Woods”. For me, it smacks of a rape story, but today, no. This is a story of positivity, the beauty of simplicity, the power of a lone woman and the collective power of women through the ages – power that has been stolen by men – that that lies waiting in all of us still if we wish to harness it once again.
Today, I hiked a redwood and eucalyptus forest that lies a mile from where I am staying temporarily. I am Canadian and although I detest my country on so many levels, there is something essentially Canadian that lies in me that is tapped when I go to forests. Most of us don’t live near the ocean even though so much of our land is bordered by ocean. The greatest percentage of our population is lake- and river-situated. And we are tree people too. The forests define us. The ocean is mildly interesting, but inspires a healthy fear in me. It is a river or lake and the forests that typically go with them that speak to me on a primal Canadian and human and womanly level. Some of my relatives are freshwater (Great Lakes) fisherfolk, and I myself have spent much quality time travelling by canoe, camping in untouched forest land, and fishing. So entering this beautiful forest today was pure bliss. The thought of men and rape and intimidation and violence, as usual, entered my mind and settled in at the back, on the edges. But I allowed the smells and colours and textures and the history of women and my people take over.
Women have always been stewards of the forest, and nature in general, in the past. [Sorry, aboriginal North American peoples don’t have the corner market on nature stewardship, as much as modern Canadians and Americans are brainwashed to believe. Women from all cultures have always had a healthy respect for nature until men overruled them and ‘civilized’ them.] Before men stole medicine from my foremothers and banned them from knowledge, branding them witches and devil worshippers, imprisoning them, torturing them, tearing their female parts off or apart, killing them, and destroying or erasing years of wisdom, they were the Wise Women. The healers, the midwives, the abortionist-saviours, the repositories of forest wisdom, the herb and mushroom collectors, the pain relievers. Men became suspicious, then felt threatened, and finally said NO. Women are not allowed to have the independence of body and mind that exists separate from male control and that is deeply rooted in nature, the forests and water bodies. Men decided the forests were not to be cherished and guarded, but exploited – much as women’s bodies were exploited. Men brought death to the forest as they brought death to women through rape and endless pregnancy and ignorance and house-bound slavery. They cut the trees down. They burned down forests to deprive enemies of their bounty. They used women’s bodies and forests to fuel endless wars. To no end. Completely useless and pointless.
Much of that body of medical knowledge has been lost to Western women. Some groups of women were luckier. The knowledge they collected lived on in Traditional Chinese Medicine, for example. But the Wise Women of western countries were decimated and replaced by the male need to cut and bleed and dissect and drug, and although their modern ‘medicine’ lives on today, it creates more illness than it cures. Older cultures sneer at Western Medicine, but it is male medicine. Our ancient wisdom – our female wisdom was mostly erased. I’d bet that we did a lot of things better.
This lost history impressed upon me as I hiked unmolested through the forest. I breathed in the scent of trees and sun and wildflowers. I only ran across two people – both women – and I wondered if they felt the collective female history in the background. Probably not. Heterosexuality beats sensitivity out of you, in my experience. But I will be going to that forest every day for the next 10 days that I will be in this area.
Jane Siberry, one of my favourite Canadian singers, was the background music for my journey today. I’ve had the privilege to hear her sing three times in small venues in Vancouver back in the day. Two of her songs have been featured in the beautiful all-woman death-ritual scenes on the L-Word (Anytime) and Six Feet Under (Calling All Angels – thanks for the reminder, Radfemspiraling). The song I heard today in my mind and heart was Bound by the Beauty. It is such an essentially Canadian song and a song of woman-joy. And the nature-bonding is an aspect of Canadianism that I can get on board with. Enjoy the lyrics and videos (clear studio/audio version and a live version that is less clear) at the bottom.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
I’m bound by the fire
I’m bound by the beauty
I’m bound by desire
I’m bound by the duty
I’m coming back in 500 years
And the first thing I’m gonna do
When I get back here
Is to see these things I love
And they’d better be here, better be here
Better be here
And first I’m going to find a forest
And stand there in the trees
And kiss the fragrant forest floor
And lie down in the leaves
And listen to the birds sing
The sweetest sound you’ll hear
And everything the dappled
Everything the birds
Everything the earthiness
Everything the verdant, the verdant, the verdant
The verdant dream
A Karen to Dance To
Inspired by radfemspiraling‘s Friday music recs and recent post on Karens, and a song that came up through my earbuds while I was on my daily trek through the empty streets of coronavirusland.
Karen Carpenter. A literal Karen rather than what was talked about in the post referred to above, but hey.
So I’m marching around, enjoying relatively perv-ball-free streets, and into my ears flows the following, which I hadn’t listened to in years and years.
What do you get when you fall in love?
A guy with a pin to burst your bubble
That’s what you get for all your trouble.
I’ll never fall in love again.
I’ll never fall in love again.
What do you get when you kiss a guy?
You get enough germs to catch pneumonia.
After you do, he’ll never phone you.
I’ll never fall in love again.
I’ll never fall in love again.
You get enough tears to fill an ocean
That’s what you get for your devotion.
I’ll never fall in love again.
I’ll never fall in love again.
Sorry, the video is really just an audio version.
Well, I laughed and laughed right after the part about catching diseases from men. I wrote something to that effect recently. Now, this song was written by Burt Bacharach and Hal David, and being male, they originally wrote the lyrics with the sexes reversed. Poor hurt men – as if men can fall in love, right? And of course, women are the source of disease – like how they’ve always blamed prostitutes for venereal diseases. Anyhow, the song was made famous by Dionne Warwick, and she reversed the sexes – probably more out of not wanting to appear lesbian than fighting the power. And honestly, it makes more sense and rings truer when a woman sings it. Men don’t really love or cry over women, unless they are crying because their slave is gone, and they don’t want to go to the effort of procuring another.
Just because I felt like it, I decided to write a few of my own lyrics for the more modern survivor of male love and attention. I took the fall in love lines out to conserve space, but you know they’re there.
What do you get when you fall in love?
Stockholm Syndrome with a side of shame
That’s how it works in the hetero game
What do you get when you fuck a dude?
Chlamydia, AIDS, or a yeast infection
Knocked up, and finally, his rejection
What do you get when you deny the trans?
Death threats, rape threats, no-platforming
Loss of your space unless you confirm him
Feel free to come up with your own and then you can dance and sing along.
Let’s get back to Karen Carpenter. She was a superstar, but undervalued. Unfortunately more famous for her death from anorexia (what some racist, sexist black women have called ‘white girl disease’, even though it is very common among many Asian girls and women, as well) than for her amazing musical talent. What a lot of people don’t know, is that she was a kickass drummer – better than most of the famous male drummers out there. She was forced by the producing powers in her life NOT to drum, and to focus more on the lady-like singing. Women have always been cut out of most aspects of music due to the unseemly nature of playing an instrument that might require body movements or facial contortions.
Her joy was in drumming, however.
I include below, this incredible video of her in her element. You see joy in her that you don’t see when she sings. And it boggles my mind how her clearly decimated body is able to put so much power into communion with the several drum sets on stage. Please try hard to disregard the creepy, douchey brother presence. He can play the piano well, but there is something odd about him that I don’t want to examine too deeply.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
You’d Never Know It’s Women’s History Month
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am no longer in China. All of the options I’d been researching seemed better than China, each with their own challenges. I chose to apply for a student visa to go the US, commit to a year studying something I felt passionate about, and most important, get my mental and physical health back. China broke me down.
Well, it hasn’t really worked out like I had hoped. My savings has been cut nearly in half in less than a year. I have contracted a scary super bacterium, the likes of which I had only gaped at via online images in the whatthefuckisthat!? category. I think I would have been safer in China with the Coronavirus, tbh. I’m not joking. And sadly, I’ve encountered some of the nastiest and most aggressive women I’ve ever met in my life. I may not stay here after this semester ends. It has been a true nightmare. And I don’t recognize this country anymore – a country where I went to grad school 20-some-odd years ago. I’m left saying what the fuck is going on here? I feel like I’m living in a ‘shithole country’ that many Americans like to refer to when they talk about Third World countries or countries where women are treated like cattle (pot-kettle-black?) And can only conclude that it is part of the natural decline of a prolific and violent patriarchal empire.
So back to the topic I had in mind. I feel like this country has taken some steps backwards, especially with regard to women. It was poignantly expressed yesterday morning as I arrived at my campus. Black history month was last month – there were posters of MLK and messages posted everywhere to raise awareness. March – now – is women’s history month, and…..? Cue the crickets. Nothing. No posters. No acknowledgement. No empowerment. No history. I had expected it, but even when you’re ready for disappointment, it still bites.
But what does this mean, the failure to acknowledge women in America directly following a month-long fanfare for blacks? Neither liberals nor conservatives will support women, but for different reasons. Liberals want to congratulate themselves for being human-rightsy, but don’t want to take real power away from men. Supporting women would threaten the male power base. Conservatives are often pro-whatever-their-race-is, but will still support men of other races over women. It is this way in every corner of the world, but we’re talking about the US. So what might be some of the reasons for the no-comment on women’s history?
Liberals would likely say that women have achieved freedom and equality, unlike the poor black folks (men). I mean, women can vote and besides they are able to be prostitutes and sluts and pole dancers and shit. They have freedom now, dammit. Trying to call attention to themselves, especially right after black month, would be offensive and arrogant and would steal thunder. Make a big to-do out of nothing as bitches are wont to do. Why can’t they just accept that women have all the power?????
Liberals might also say that use of the word ‘woman’ is trans-exclusionary. Somehow, stating a fact (XX = human female) negates the existence of men in lipstick and stilettos who feel like totally puss-perfect and ready to do Woman correctly, nay, better! Putting up those celebratory posters might make 68.1% of trans try to kill themselves. And it would be all women’s fault! It is better to erase women and women’s history in order to keep the trans from throwing a typical male hissy fit at not having the spotlight. My campus is so pro-trans that I am partially surprised that they didn’t put up women’s history posters focusing on trans history… I suppose doing nothing is better than a trans take-over? Both are forms of erasure. Can’t win here…
Conservatives? Do they celebrate women? Not really – unless said women are really good at supporting their man. Powerful women are those who can scrub a skid-mark out of a pair of boxers or quell the family’s whining with a well-baked pie. So putting up posters at an institute of higher learning kinda goes against what they believe in. Education at least opens the door for female freedom. While many women do pursue the education, sadly enough, few walk through that door.
A few historical points about the US track record with women that most like to gloss over, make excuses about, just plain old don’t know, in favour of whatever the political climate is:
- The first slaves brought to the US were white women from Europe: wife-slaves, unmarried female children to be sold as wives, and female ‘criminals’ who were to be sold into marriage or prostitution. Europeans also rounded up girls (‘street urchins’) living on the streets to send over as rape fodder. This model has applied to all colonies in the history of the world. Women and girls are always the first and last slaves.
- Women were not included as people in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. Women have been trying for a federal Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution for decades. It is 2020 now, and nearly 100 years after women first drafted the amendment, there *might* finally be the 3/4 of the 50 states needed to officially add said amendment. It is being debated. People will fight it. It may be years until women are protected humans on paper. I’ve noted that white women as a class are the only US citizens not protected in any way under the Constitution. There are official racial protections, gay protections, religious protections, and of course, white men wrote the whole g.d. thing for themselves, so they are protected. But white women have been left out. White privilege applies to men, and a woman of colour can always fight her oppression on the basis of racism. Hopefully, the trans will not sabotage things for women and the federal ERA will go through.
- Black men got the right to vote in 1870. No woman was allowed to vote until 1920. There have been barriers to voting for both groups, but black men were accepted as adult humans well before ALL women.
- There has been a black male president, who despite being less experienced and qualified, was accepted more than once over an experienced and qualified white woman (or any woman, for that matter). Neither candidate was perfect, but enough already. I don’t really believe that the presidential office attracts the right kind of person, given how corrupt the system has become. I just don’t see a woman as President in the near future. When there finally is one, she will suffer and be sabotaged, and be held up as ‘the reason we don’t want women as presidents’.
In conclusion, I believe that all groups except women are fully supported for a few reasons. First, men are part of all oppressed groups, except the group known as female humans. I’ve written about this before to explain why hate speech against women isn’t called hate speech. Secondly, and equally important, a history of oppression is only acknowledged when the group in question is no longer enslaved. Women are the only group in the world, including and especially in the US, that embraces established female slavery institutions and welcomes new forms of female slavery. To talk about women’s history is to acknowledge that women were and still are oppressed – unless you seriously alter the facts; unfortunately, much of women’s true history has been erased as it is.
Anyhow, happy women’s history month, and welcome to my series on the American downward spiral.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Isolating Women
I’ve spent all of my adult life trying to foster sisterhood through various means in different settings. Despite it being something I have always craved and needed, it has always been, continues to be, and likely will always be a Sisyphean endeavour.
Why?
I’ve come to realize that not only are all females around the world trained from birth to mistrust, hate and betray other females in order to receive crumbs of power and affection mingled with abuse from males, but the vast majority of women have no interest in changing this sad and unnatural dynamic.
The system is such that any woman who seeks to fight against it is more likely to be destroyed by other women than by the masters (men) themselves. Men design the system and pull the strings. The women do the dirty work, destroying one another through isolation and the subsequent stripping of power that can only come through the strength in numbers that a sisterhood would offer. It’s a slick move on the part of men. Despite being the puppet masters, most men see the cock proxy evil that women do to other women as evidence of female cruelty rather than brainwashing and fear of repercussions. All evil regimes have been run this way. Nazis, for example, put Jewish representatives in charge of the day-to-day abuse of fellow Jews in the ghettos and camps to avoid getting their hands dirty and create mistrust among members of the group itself. Under any such regime based on fear and violence, the victims then focus on the traitors within their own class, learn to mistrust one another, seek to betray one another in order to gain favour with and avoid punishment from the master class, and all the while, the true powers that be continue to reap the benefits, tsk-tsk’ing over the pettiness and ‘innate’ nastiness of the underclass or slave class. I mean seriously, how often have you heard men comment on the petty cruelty of how women treat each other? And they are correct in so far as it is the only way women can interact with each other ‘safely’ under Patriarchal rule.
So, how are women isolated from one another? How is sisterhood discouraged? How do women pick on one another in order to curry favour with their be-penised overlords? In a system built on sex-based discrimination, isolation is tied to female deviation from sex-oriented norms. The less you follow traditional sex role requirements, the more you are isolated from other women and the less power and voice you have. Thus, not using your vagina or uterus, or following the rules that a god or nature men and men alone have laid out for us is grounds for dismissal and hate. Men already create isolation for women based on race, but of course, as we all know, race is a discrimination that arises solely from sexism and the male coveting and control of the pussy and uteri within one’s group and the punishment of men of other groups through the pussy and uteri that other group owns. It’s all about woman-hate and without it, there is no racism. Women bear the burden of racism and the blame for racism. Men of different races are more likely to bond over woman-hate than women of different races are to bond over rape and other woman-torture by men. Sisterhood across race is hard to achieve as a result. Thanks to patriarchal design.
But back to traditional pussy-use and the punishment of women who rebel by women who comprise the cowardly, brainwashed majority. And yes, there is no bravery in complying with what men want. Remember that. To chalk hating and destroying other women and engaging in pro-Patriarchy, anti-woman rituals and traditions up to ‘survival’ is bullshit and apologism at its worst. Call it what it really is: cowardice and ignorance through and through.
While ultimately, men are responsible for turning women into woman-haters, I do hold women responsible for what they do to others. Being abused is never an excuse for ‘paying it forward’ to people who don’t deserve your hate. I’d much rather see women attacking men than other women. But alas, that is not the situation.
Childlessness
Despite what you may think, there is no group of women more hated and isolated than the childless, especially the childless by choice. Non-breeding is the absolute worst crime a woman can commit in any society as it is a direct denial of the accepted definition of woman as Cunt-on-Legs and as Uterus. To refuse to use the vagina and uterus as traditionalists mandate is to somehow deny womanhood and scare the living shit out of men and the women who service them. The childless woman can be partially forgiven if she is physically unable to have children. Her crime is usually accompanied by constant pleas for forgiveness on the basis that she “wishes she could have children” and she “loves children so, so much”. But those women who choose not to breed for whatever reason? They are deemed deserving of unspeakable punishment on several levels, and this is true in all societies, all cultures and in every race. Her choice renders her not just sub-human, but non-human. Unnatural. Selfish. Demonic. Evil. Suspect. A destroyer of cultures and races. Someone who deprives men of their birthright. And an uppity bitch who denigrates the sacred, mystical, goddess-like status of motherhood. I can tell you from a lifetime of tedious, repetitive experience that the cruelty and dehumanization done to non-breeding women by breeding women is constant, even though breeding women often try to paint themselves as the ultimate victims. Breeding women have much more power and acceptance and social, legal and economic rewards than non-breeding women, even when they are horrible, neglectful and/or abusive mothers who became pregnant by accident, who hate children, or who had children because they want unconditional love from a powerless someone who can’t escape them (at least for a handful of years). I’ve experienced a lifetime of a parade of cast-iron pots calling a stainless steel kettle black.
Most non-breeders-by-choice also beg for forgiveness like the officially barren, but they also tend to have the mindset instilled in them through brainwashing from birth that they are selfish. I went through this myself. I used to apologize to breeders, if you can believe it, by telling them “I’m too selfish to be a mother.” I feel sick to my stomach when I remember these masochistic sessions where the breeder would look down her nose at me, and I would show my shame and embarrassment at my clear immaturity and general horribleness. I realize now that choosing not to breed is the opposite of selfish, especially because I am crystal clear on the many selfless reasons I have chosen not to breed. And further, life has been so much harder in so many ways that breeders cannot contemplate, and will make old age extraordinarily difficult. Data do show that single, childless, elderly women tend to be among the poorest and most in danger in any society. Men in the same predicament are almost always taken care of by some woman/women and are economically better off. Women either tend not to expect help (especially if they are brainwashed into believing they are selfish bitches) nor do they receive offers of help from men or women (especially if society believes they are selfish bitches). Men are always taken care of regardless of their choices in life or how much abuse they dish out and regardless of whether they ask for help or not.
Non-breeding women don’t benefit in the work world like breeding and non-breeding men do. They are still women, and are treated as such, but without the social, legal and economic rewards of motherhood and often marital status. They don’t get promotions or higher pay, even if they have more education or experience. They don’t get equivalent, paid time off, say, to take a class that breeding women get for maternity leave. I would love equivalent time off to benefit myself (not a vacation, but an academic sabbatical, say) in the way that breeding women do and have my job waiting for me when I get back. Data show that employers (especially female employers) don’t trust non-breeding women and don’t want to hire them as they are ‘unnatural’ in some way. I can’t count how many times I’ve shown up for a new, professional job only to be asked if I have children right from the start. No one asks me about my actual achievements, how hard I busted my ass for my stellar academic achievements, or my actual contributions to society. I’ve never received a pile of gifts or been thrown a party for any of my three university degrees or other real achievements or contributions to society. No, a woman’s vaginal ‘achievements’, even if they are ‘achieved’ when passed out drunk or done standing up in a bathroom stall, are the only important thing of note in the workplace and warrant gifts and congratulations from the workplace, family and society. My teenaged pregnant sister knocked up by a drug dealer managed to score years of government welfare as well as three high-yield baby showers. I never received a single gift for busting my ass during 10 years of university. My sister now owns a house in an expensive city, has four kids and a husband, and a sweet high-paying union job with a pension, and I make $12,000 per year, with no retirement or pension in sight… I will literally be working until I die, and that is not an exaggeration.
After answering the vagina question that I don’t have children, I am put into that “piece of shit” category. Non-breeding women are often given the harder and crappier jobs, and in some professions, the more dangerous jobs, as well as longer hours for the same pay as their lives are seen as valueless – no one is depending on them, therefore their lives are worth nothing. They are often expected to cover for breeding female workers when the latter take off to deal with child problems. The former don’t receive extra pay for doing extra work, and the latter don’t lose pay for skipping out for personal business.
To conclude, the very word ‘childless’ is itself discriminatory and isolating to women, as if not having a child means you are less, missing or lacking something. Child-free is a newly adopted term that women in this situation have reacted with. I’m not sure what the correct way of seeing it is. I’m not sure I care all that much. I just wish I were treated with as much respect as breeding women, and that these insecure and venomous people would realize that they live on the top of the shit heap where women are forced to live, but seem to accept.
Femininity and Attractiveness
When women eschew beauty rituals, they are punished. They are punished more by women than men. Honestly, despite what tabloids say, all women can score a man if they are not picky. Men will literally fuck anything. See this post if you don’t believe me. And weird fetishes are almost exclusively the domain of men. If you have something gross or weird or unappealing or embarrassing about you, there is a man or group of men out there who will get off on your issue and will fuck you silly. You do not have to be beautiful to get laid. There is no such status as ‘incel’ for women. Men talk loudly about perfect 10’s in order to keep women feeling insecure and distracted and diverting limited resources into stupid shit, but the reality is that as long as they are not expected to treat you as human or equal (and really, most women are willing to accept being treated as sub-human – that is how we are brainwashed), it really doesn’t matter what you look like.
So, if you are not complying with the perfect 10 femininity bullshit that men don’t actually care about, most of the punishment you will get will come from women who do comply. Even among feminists online, there are constant, insane and nasty wars between women who comply with femininity and who are ironically super insecure about their real appearance, and actual feminists who can’t believe so many women are still so brainwashed. The number of women who say they are feminists and that complying with brutal and degrading femininity rituals and submissive behaviour is a matter of ‘survival’ or (for fuck sake) an actual feminist act is saddening and maddening. These women, even feminists, will attack other women relentlessly for even questioning woman-hating behaviour. Honestly, men must laugh. Women spend so much energy punishing each other for things that in reality don’t matter that much to men. Despite what men might say, they’ll still make use your vagina even if you don’t shave your pudendum or your legs.
On a more serious note, women have made such an industry out of perpetuating femininity rituals, that little changes in places that matter, such as workplaces. If women could let go of this idiocy, women might actually move forward professionally with so much more mental energy to devote to their betterment than to stupid stuff that doesn’t matter to anyone. As a woman who doesn’t feminize, almost all of my punishment and abuse has come from women. I wrote a post on this type of situation here, where all of my female students criticized my appearance when asked for personal suggestions (note: I didn’t ask specifically for suggestions on my appearance). The male students, interestingly didn’t comment at all on my appearance, not that males are innocent. They have other things they do to degrade me and other women. Women just tend to be responsible for most of the petty punishments and criticisms and trying to force women to participate in their own slavery to men.
Lesbianism
It’s hard to determine the order of worst lady-offences. The worst one is easy, as I mentioned. Not having children is the absolute worst crime a woman can commit. Lesbianism is Number 2 as long as it is paired with non-conformity to femininity. A lot of lesbians are still huge woman haters and adopt whore-face (perform femininity). Some try to call it ‘survival’, which is lame bullshit or a ‘feminist act’, which is dumb bullshit. Seriously? Wearing lipstick and heels is not a feminist act. It is slave behaviour that gets you head pats, and if you are a lesbian, performing femininity is an act of cowardice that serves only to let you ‘pass’. I’ve read feminine lesbians who criticize bisexuals for the same issues that apply to them. Bisexuality – a label I clung to for years before realizing a) I am not attracted to men, and b) it was ridiculous in an age where sexuality is political, despite the fact that it shouldn’t be an issue at all – lets women ‘pass’ in a society that rewards heterosexuality, and gets lesbians raped, beaten or killed. You can be a lezzer when you need lesbians to approve of you and then switch over when you’re in danger. Whether you agree or not (who cares…?), it’s the equivalent of a political flip-flop. Lesbians who feminize are essentially doing the same thing. Femininity performance is a political decision in a world that rewards cock-pleasing, and that shouldn’t be an issue at all. The only reason sexuality and femininity are even issues, and political ones at that, are because men exist and women’s status (which is always on the slave continuum) is tied to the forced belief that their very lives are dependent on how and whether they conform on these issues.
Some lesbians can’t hide, even if they put a dress on (think k.d. lang, for example). I absolutely don’t like the term ‘butch’ as it often goes with a version of woman-hate that requires the same feminine/masculine dichotomy that men demand, but I’ll use it here as people know what it refers to. Butch lesbians and lesbians who can’t hide their gayness under a layer of whore paint and silk are punished. They are punished by men, but they are also punished relentlessly by women who cowardly conform and who serve men. They are excluded from how women describe the range of womanhood expression. They are held in suspicion and women will assume something is wrong with them because they aren’t sporting pumps and push-up bras and making out with dudes. They are excluded from television and film, except when serving as a joke or predator (2-dimensional roles served up by men and woman-hating women who desperately want a job in a male-dominated field). Women fear and hate their own vaginas, in general, so to be faced with a woman who so clearly doesn’t have the same fears and hates must be terrifying. But overt lesbians also remind us that heterosexuality is not natural for women; they hold the mirror up, and we react with fear of what we are missing (peace, safety, love) when we erroneously choose men and a life of consensual rape and servitude. We react to being terrified by lashing out, as long as the target is deemed safe enough to attack. Women seldom attack the true threat (men) because men are more likely retaliate (beat, kill, rape) than women are. Lesbians are easy to attack and punish. (More on this in this post and this post.)
Unmarried Status
Yet again this week, I found myself forced to defend myself to an incredulous young Chinese woman that I am not married. I don’t even bother mentioning that I’m not attracted to men at all, as brain matter would be sprayed around the room and I’d be forced to clean that up. It is China, where gay people don’t officially exist, and I don’t want to lose my high paying job… (ha ha) or be arrested by the police, which is a possibility. Several times a year, I am forced to answer why I am not married nor have I ever been married. I would sincerely love to retaliate with “Why are you content to be a whore?” or “Why do you love to suck cock?” or “Have you negotiated a reasonable price for the lifetime sale of your cunt?”, but in public, I am a ‘nice’ person and I need to keep a few pleasant and helpful relationships, even if they are all based on me wearing a mask. Don’t we all wear masks in some settings…? I’d rather force myself to wear my ‘nice’ mask than wear whore-face, especially in a tropical climate! I save my straight talk for my blog, and that is enough. I don’t claim to be an activist. I don’t have the support for that, nor do I have a martyr complex or a desire to be physically hurt more than I have been in my life.
But seriously, I wish cowardly, fake-straight-bitches would stop asking me why I haven’t sold myself to a man. I am sick of women who are too afraid to be real with themselves, to ask themselves serious questions, and to fight against brainwashing. China is, of course, brainwashing central. All traditional, pseudo-religious countries are, but even in more progressive countries, very, very few people are willing to answer questions honestly. Even in the more aggressive West, very few people are willing to honestly answer the question: why do we say women need to be protected (one of the number one justifications for marriage)? Almost no one will say: MEN ARE THE PROBLEM, THE DANGER, THE CAUSE OF ALL WOMEN’S FEARS. Even in the West, marriage is seeing a resurgence, and strangely, the average age of marriage is lowering. Not sure what is going on there, but it is creepy and weird. It feels desperate. We are living in an age where people are more heavily masked than ever before, I feel, because of social media, the desire to be famous, and stay young forever. Completely constructed. Little feels real among the young these days. Will we ever face reality? If not, straight talk like the problem with marriage cannot happen, and those who fail to conform will pay the price.
Education and Intelligence
A former professor remarked to me a few years ago that as highly educated women, we were considerably more alone than the average woman. Now she has boy children and she is fake-straight (there is no such thing as a naturally straight woman, imo), and she conforms to femininity, so she really has no idea how far ‘alone’ can become for a woman. Try being non-straight, non-feminine, and a non-breeder!!! Anyhow, not only are highly educated women hard to find in work environments (unless you work in a professional, female-dominated field), but the few that are there seldom bond with one another. Frequently, they engage in nasty behaviour with one another in order to climb what ends up being a much shorter ladder with smaller pinnacles available than that provided to men of all races in the same environment. In the rare event that a woman holds power in a work environment, she is often ‘in good’ with male colleagues and is less likely to help or even be fair to female underlings. Unlike with men throughout time, including today, there is no such thing as a girls’ club where women help each other achieve regardless of merit. Further, women are more likely to hate and criticize female bosses and other powerful, intelligent, accomplished and educated women than they are male counterparts. Instead of supporting one another, they tend to ‘cunt out’ on each other (see my post on my redefinition of lady-slurs – I’d prefer the words not to exist, but I’d like to achieve what black men have achieved with the N-word).
I remember this nasty, rich, black bitch in grad school in the US. I’m Canadian, so in my early 20’s, I had little practical experience with American racial dynamics. I was nice to everyone, and found the frequent nasty treatment by educated, non-white women pretty fucked up. Anyhow, I’d say hi to everyone in the hallways, just as a typical, friendly Canadian usually does. And this rich bitch would look down her nose at me and say nothing. Then one day, she showed up in my office and demanded I help her out with her statistics – she was a clinical psychology student (perfect for the profession, eh?) and she hadn’t learned not to piss off the statistics majors as we were the go-to experts for all the other majors when they couldn’t figure out how to deal with their research data. I looked at her and told her I was too busy. I do wish I could go back and explain what she had done wrong, thus teaching her a crucial lesson – don’t fuck over other women, regardless of race; we fucking NEED each other – but I was too young in my feminism at the time to help women learn fundamental truths. I was still learning myself! I have made up for it since, don’t worry. Sadly, this chick moved on to the black guy in my lab and turned on the pussy charm. She faked sexual interest in him and OF COURSE he helped her. This is how women of the patriarchy work. She ditched him after he did her work for her. And he was likely bummed out that she didn’t put out as payment for his help. She got what she wanted and she never spoke to me again. Now that is a cunt move that I’m proud to say I have NEVER pulled. Even when I was still claiming bisexuality. I have never screwed over another woman whether of my own race/ethnicity or otherwise, and I have never sided with a dude to screw over a woman. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve created ‘Girls’ Clubs’ wherever I’ve studied or worked. I’ve organized women’s events. I write letters of reference for female students if they need them and pass on contacts and connections for jobs. I make every effort to foster confidence in young women. But I have also learned to spot bitches and cunts (if you didn’t go back to my link, that means a women who DELIBERATELY hurts other women – it has nothing to do with hurting men, unlike how men have defined the word), and I avoid them like the plague of patriarchal brainwashing that they are.
I think women hurt each other at all levels of education, work and intelligence, but the higher up you go, the more men you are forced to compete with. Most women see an advantage in cozying up to men to get ahead, and thus developing a sweet little case of Stockholm Syndrome, and the few females that are around tend not to have enough direct and individual power to further another woman’s career. The men who have the power often put women into direct social and professional competition with one another. And so women begin to see other women as either useless or a threat, and as a result, they fail to bond significantly, even though it would actually be to their benefit in several ways if they did so.
Conclusion
It is no wonder that women have such volatile relationships with each other. Isolation is a significant threat that all women live with. Step out of line, fail to follow patriarchy’s demands, and they suddenly find themselves ganged up on by the majority of women who are too weak, brainwashed and cowardly to fight or even question the system. [I’ve since written a post on friendship that will also help explain why women end up isolated from each other.]
I wouldn’t say that ignorance is bliss, but it certainly makes navigating a violent and threatening system much easier. Just put your faith in the overlords that rape you with your consent in return for protection from the overlords who might rape you without your consent. And punish your fellow slaves who might dare to rebel through various means of isolation. You must. You see, they can only threaten you if they are allowed to bond and then grow too great in number to keep your comfortable life of servitude peacefully unchallenged…
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
A Tribute: To All the Boys I’ve Feared Before
I’ve travelled and lived around the world for more than 20 years, and pre-hetero-and liberal deprogramming, I dated and friended extensively among the non-white international male (and female) community. I can’t stress enough how men of all races and all stations of life terrorize, benefit from, and have immense power over women of all races and stations of life. Women, especially white women, who bleet on about how white men are the worst either live in very, very small worlds with limited exposure to the range of men out there, or they are in some serious denial of reality reinforced by current liberal ideology. Wake up, sisters. You’re speaking untruths. And worse, you’re hurting women with your propaganda.
Anyhow, it’s the end of the year and rather than make resolutions, I want to send out my gratitude to all the men and boys who’ve helped to shape my reality and to open my eyes to what all males are. I present a list of my firsts, the men and boys who first introduced me to an experience or concept and who chipped away at my innocence, confidence and naivité. Some of it I learned from you as a child, some as a teenager, and some throughout my adulthood. Thank you, boys. Collectively, you’ve rocked my world. Your behaviour makes feminism necessary, I hope you realize. And I know with certainty (unlike my liberal sisters) that not a one of you is better or worse than any other. You all capitalize off the fear and compliance you inspire in women and girls.
So here goes:
White French men introduced me to the idea that female prostitutes do what they do because they love to fuck, therefore, prostitution is okay. They also introduced me to the idea that if they pay for your drink or meal, you are not allowed to speak in public.
Mexican men introduced me to white female slavery as a modern reality, to female child abduction and to mouth rape.
East Indian men introduced me to relationship rape dressed up as ‘aggressive and exciting sex’, and to porn as sex education.
Native Canadian/American men introduced me to the idea of terrorism of girls and women in the workplace and the idea that all women, regardless of colour, will be punished if they react negatively to the terrorism. They also introduced me to the reality that men of colour have always done better and will always do better than all women in the workplace, and they are almost always rewarded for abusing female coworkers.
Jewish men introduced me to the idea that if men or boys can’t fuck you, they’ll cheat on you with your best friend. This kickstarted my thinking on the reality of coercive and manipulative rape as the most common form of rape and the single most common reason women (are forced to) consent to sex in relationships.
Cambodian men introduced me to the idea of paying a man to use me as a prostitute.
Muslim men (well before the recent events in Europe) introduced me to publicly conducted, race- and sex-motivated, group-coordinated attempted-murder of white women. They showed me that the Western world has no interest in preventing Muslim men from hurting, raping and murdering white women. They also introduced me to the Muslim male hate- and rape-fueling love of white woman porn; to violent relationship rape; to the treatment of my body as a non-consensual cum dumpster, and to the treatment of my body during my period as a filthy, untouchable, but still blow-job-giveable piece of garbage.
Taiwanese men introduced me to daytime, streetside sexual assault, and to daytime, unwanted racist propositioning for dick-servicing.
Chinese men and boys introduced me to racist sexual harassment and sexual assault of white female lecturers in the secondary and post-secondary classroom.
White British men introduced me to gang rape; to punishing rape victims; to violent rape-porn as a fun gift for one’s male mates; and to the idea that women should relinquish their names and the names of their children upon marriage.
Black men introduced me to racist and unpunishable stalking of white women for the purpose of rape, and to the idea of women only being allowed to have ‘sexual power’ – the power to inspire boners. They taught me that only men get access to economic and legal power. They also introduced me to the concept of military cock-servicing requirements when stationed abroad.
Homeless men introduced me to the idea that public libraries are extremely dangerous places for women and girls – workers and patrons.
Christian men introduced me to the idea that making Sundays into ‘holy days’ (non-shopping days) provides men with the perfect daytime opportunity to lay in wait for teenaged girls walking through deserted commercial areas trying to get to friends’ homes or libraries to study.
But it all started with my father introducing me to rape as the ultimate entertainment for male adults and male children.
What would life have been like if men and boys didn’t do what they do best – terrorize, enslave, and attempt to destroy women and girls? Unimaginable…
Happy New Year! I hope your holiday is rape- and fear-free.
[This is part of the Conversations with Men series and the Birth of a Feminist series.]
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
It Ain’t a Party Until Something Gets Broke
Language Corners. Phenomena popular in, but likely not limited to, China, most often take the form of loose to semi-structured informal events where people gather to practise speaking a particular foreign language. I have years of experience participating in ‘English Corners’. For many years, I was forced to organize and participate in Corners at the places where I worked. They were horrible. Students would come to be entertained rather than learn and participate fully, and to ask me the same boring questions about whether I could use chopsticks and if I loved China. But I’ve managed to live in a few large places where locals organize Corners for anyone who wants to participate and that aren’t dependent on the attendance of native speakers. Nanjing, former capital of China, has a long-running (well over 25-30 years now) and excellent English Corner that meets in a local park at night once a week and is attended by people of all ages and abilities and walks of life. It is quite fabulous.
The city where I currently work has a number of language Corners. Some are held at universities and some at public parks. I’ve attended several, and as might be expected, some are better than others. I once attended one that seemed to attract aggressive and annoying men seeking to perv on the young Chinese girls who attended and to engage in antagonistic and exhausting ‘conversation’ with yours truly. Mostly though, if I attend an English Corner at all, I attend the private one held by the enthusiastic students at my own campus. They’re good kids, and I’m the first person to preserve and foster any natural desire to learn and better oneself. You can’t buy curiosity, and it is hard to find in this world in this day and age.
Recently, I’ve been motivating myself for a major life change. I’m really thinking about moving to France as early as next year. It is a work in progress. I speak passable French and I can think in the language, but I have to admit, I am far from bilingual and years of disuse has done a number on my grammar and vocabulary. Years in China hasn’t helped. But I recently discovered a local multi-language Corner. The bulk of the participants attend to practise speaking English, but there are small groups of people there wishing to speak Korean, Japanese, Spanish, and as luck would have it, French. Needless to say, I am ecstatic. I made a pact with a friend of mine to attend every week with her- she wants to work on having more intellectual discussions in her already excellent English. And I need to reawaken and tone my French muscles.
The other night had a decent turn-out. Some weeks, there may only be one other person wanting to speak French, but there were three native speakers from Africa this time in addition to a few regular Chinese attendees I’ve gotten to know. Unfortunately, they were dudes, and to my great surprise and dismay, they were part of a large international group of special forces soldiers in China for a year-long training program. Creepy, scary, and weird. China is training the world’s elite, state-sanctioned rapists and murderers now!!! Anyhow, I stuck with the group until the Africans started asking the locals why there is no young Chinese pussy available to them. Apparently, everyone has a boyfriend!!! These black dudes may be here for military training, but they are definitely also here to fuck local bitches and possibly to find one to marry. Barfo. I am so not interested in heterosexual female slavery or men of any colour (sorry, liberal feminists, it isn’t just white men) whining about not finding a line-up of women on their backs, legs spread waiting for them.
I left the group to look for my friend among the ESL’ers.
And I found her in a weird situation. It was a small group, and a Chinese guy was lambasting her in an aggressive stance jabbing the air with his finger in an accusatory fashion. You know this type and this move. Very male, very threatening. So he notices me approaching, turns on me, and with no preamble, salutation, or welcome, immediately gives me a task. “YOU are going to settle this for us.” Now, I don’t like being told what to do, especially by men, but as my friend was involved, I asked what was going on instead of just turning around. From what I could gather, they had been discussing ‘single life’, which I think was one of the topics of the evening. I am not sure what exactly my friend had said, but dickface had gone on the offensive. I think she must have challenged his heterosexual assumption that women’s bodies were the property of men and that to be single was a female crime against humanity. He was speaking loudly and started describing her as a ‘gentleman-lady’, which was supposed to be an insult, in addition to insulting her intelligence and existence.
I stopped him and concluded that she had won the argument hands down. That made him mad. He looked for ways to put his natural violence and anger upon me. He accused me of being American (classic move for many anti-Americans as if it is some sort of point-scoring argument), to which I suggested that he wasn’t very smart if he was making stupid assumptions that ended up not being true. I’m not American. Then he started suggesting that obviously we were lesbians and should kiss. He kept saying that over and over, which I think was at the root of his original anger at my friend. It was positively immature and scary behaviour. It was also clear that my friend, whom I later found out had been further attacked by the other males in the group for other incomprehensible reasons, was forced into a position where she was trying to defend herself. I’ve been there. When you’re 21, and for most women throughout their entire life, you are constantly forced by males and some male-focused females to defend your human status. A few of us manage to learn that self-defense is futile. You can’t win nonsensical arguments. And men love the fight. They gain energy. You lose yours to them. You are derailed, and often, your small confidence is further shaken. You shrink and eventually give up trying to be human. And there is always the fear that there will be violence. Not just verbal violence.
So I decided to start the fucking party. I’m not 21 anymore, and I don’t believe men can or even want to end their violence. Every second you give them is a waste unless you are taking them down with certainty. I have various strategies for dealing with assholes. You have to be careful, though. You have to know who you’re up against and how dangerous they are. Sometimes you can you embarrass them. Sometimes you can intimidate them. Sometimes, you just have to walk away and find a safe place. But regardless of douchebag type, I always recommend never entering a pointless argument where you’re put on the defense. It’s like arguing with a religious person – they don’t come from a place of truth or fact, and have massive power behind them that will put society on their side if things get weird for you. So this guy? Stupid, a coward targeting a very young woman, and possibly violent if alone with him. But in a group setting, he needed to be controlled and dismissed. So I took the upper hand. I pointed out that he was rude and aggressive and not very smart, and that I wasn’t going to join a group discussion with a shameful person like him in it, and I moved to take my friend with me. He put himself on the defense, trying to negate my statements about him, which was exactly what I wanted, and he soon realized he couldn’t win against me since I wouldn’t engage. He walked away with a buddy of his. Lack of easy prey made English Corner much less appealing, apparently.
Now what made me really angry was that no one would speak up against him. Quietly looking on as he destroyed a young woman was apparently just dandy. This is very Chinese. People do not defend or help one another here unless they are family. Everyone else is persona non grata. I’ve seen it in countless situations, myself. But it happens everywhere, every day. A Chinese will literally let someone they don’t know die on the street in front of them instead of help them. And I’m not making it up. Every month or so, some embarrassing cell phone video or news story shows up online shaming all Chinese because someone let a child hit by a car die on the sidewalk without help, or some homeless old person dies of neglect despite pleas for help, or a foreigner ends up saving some local person drowning in a lake as a heap of Chinese look on apathetically. So, I was angry, but not surprised that an entire group of adult people said nothing while this man got progressively more aggressive and abusive with a young woman.
The guy walked away, and the group re-formed. And suddenly, everyone was telling me that they had seen him at another English Corner behaving in the same way. Ha! And the best part – everyone was insisting that he was not from China!!! Excuse much? Of course he was from China. I’ve met a shit ton of Chinese dudes like this one. Domineering, argumentative, aggressive, and mansplainy. And all I could think was ‘why hasn’t anyone stopped him?’ as this particular Corner is generally known for having some sort of decorum and civility thanks to the volunteer organizers supposed vigilance. But this happens to a certain extent in all cultures. We make excuses for men. We allow them to dictate proceedings. We allow their violence, their aggression, their abuse. They can’t help it, you see. Especially if their targets are women. Women are expected to shut up and put up. And to keep the love and support flowing while pretending that nothing is wrong.
I’m perfectly happy to break an ego or abusive cycle if the life of the party is a homophobic, racist misogynist.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
What about Women? Forced Sexuality – Part III
This is Part III in my exploration of the human obsession known as sexuality. The other parts are:
Part I: An introduction to male omnisexuality and why heterosexuality is even a thing at all.
Part II: The sex drive and sexuality – human obsessions and two misunderstood and badly abused concepts. Also a brief consideration of homosexuality, asexuality, and forced sexuality.
Part IV: Added a few years later: let’s talk about the second loudest (trans win for loudest… and craziest) self-proclaimed victim group forcing their way into the LG-alphabet soup. Bisexuals! Real or constructed?
Although their actual life-or-death needs are exactly the same as those for women and are exactly four in number – food, water, sleep and shelter – in their natural proclivity for violence, power and control, men have elevated ‘sex’ (defined as dick servicing) to a life-or-death need. It isn’t. No man has ever died from lack of sex.
Using standard male logic, men will try to argue that women should be made available to them, either through unpaid or unequal barter-based sex slave relationships (girlfriend, wife), or through paid rent-a-sex-slave situations (prostitution) because without it they will a) become more violent and agitated, in general, b) will lose control and rape, and c) it is magically ordained by some sky-god or by Nature. The conclusion (threat) that follows from this (non-) logic is: “let us rape you or we will rape you harder, and cause lots of other problems as well.” And a lot of women will believe this ‘men have needs’ illogic and give in to what, in a nutshell, is coercive or manipulative rape. There is all sorts of mindfuckery that accompanies the threat so as to paint rape as an expression of love and to paint women’s reluctance or denial of service as some sort of cruel punishment or selfishness or prudery. Coercive or manipulative rape, the most common and least acknowledged form of rape, will be discussed in another post.
Simplicity vs Complexity: Men and Women
Men are easy to understand. Get a handle on understanding the motivations of power, control, selfishness, violence, and high emotionality within a limited range, and you’ve pretty much got them down. Even their omnisexuality and why they choose to gravitate, for the most part, to declared heterosexuality (despite what they do behind closed doors) is very, very easy to understand.
Women, on the other hand, are much more difficult to pin down. And there are a few very good reasons for this. Part of it may be that we are more complex beings to begin with. Men often say this as a criticism, but that only speaks to their inability to understand complex systems and their failure to control us completely. Our inner lives are deep and rich. We understand things on so many more levels. We are detail-oriented as well as big picture thinkers. We think both concretely and abstractly. We are connected with nature on a fundamental level and yet our minds and spirits soar beyond all horizons. We are more in touch with our instincts, and at the same time, have the capacity to override our lizard brain gut reactions and act with logic, compassion, empathy, and compromise. Yes, we are complex beings, and in this way, are usually hard to put into the categorical boxes that men design for us.
But there is another reason women are hard to pin down. Unlike men, women are not allowed to be natural. I wrote a whole post on the interaction effects of nature and nurture and how only women are not allowed to realize their natural selves, forced instead into a male-defined, simplistic, discrete system of stereotypes and categories. Our exploitable natural qualities are reinforced and used against us, while the natural abilities and tendencies that threaten the male dominance structure are punished and suppressed. In reality, we have no idea what a natural woman is. We don’t know what female power looks like. We don’t know exactly how strong female energy burns. What we do know is that the way men force us to define ourselves is not only inadequate, but completely unnatural and self-destructive. And we do know that the natural woman has not predominated because we are not violent by nature. You can’t fight natural male violence with reason, logic and intellect despite what many feminists say.
So What About Female Sexuality?
I have a young, female friend here in China who suggested to me recently that all women are lesbians. She is 21, she has no sexual interest in men, she is not sure if she is sexually interested in women, and she is trying to figure out what she is. This is what everyone who doesn’t succumb to hetero brainwashing wrestles with. What are they? You MUST be sexually attracted to something. It is mandatory. But what if you aren’t? When I talk to my young friend, I know she is drawn to women. She feels comfortable and safe with them. She likes to experience a rich, deep perspective on the world that only women can give. She has, at an enviably early age, discovered the joys of reading women’s writing – mostly from other countries as Chinese women don’t have much of a voice in Chinese literature. Like myself and other women, she has realized that men’s writing offers little. It has no depth, no nuance, no intellect, and too much literal and figurative violence. You cannot recognize yourself in male writing if you are a woman who has escaped or started to escape your heterosexual programming.
So, is my friend a lesbian?
Unfortunately, we are forced to define ourselves through our sexuality, thanks to men and their simplistic way of thinking. It can be very confusing to those who don’t fit into boxes and those who haven’t embraced their programming completely. So using male language and self-concepts, being a lesbian primarily means you get sexually turned on by women. You can still hate women, hate yourself, support harmful gender parodies, and be completely unable to connect with women on all levels but a sexual one. You can be a complete misogynist and still be a lesbian as long as you lust after girls. And ironically, you can connect with women in many ways, but be excluded from the lesbian team if you don’t connect sexually with women. Although I don’t think men are smart enough to have engineered this sad situation, through their violent sexual machinations throughout history, this genital obsession and sex-based club formation has become the perfect way to divide women and keep men supported.
In order to really examine women’s sexuality (if it exists naturally), you have to remove the male voice from the equation entirely. Nothing a man does, says or thinks ever truly helps women understand their natural selves or their needs or desires. I have never, ever, ever met a male who doesn’t include himself, his ‘needs’ and his desires in his plans, opinions, reactions and interactions. Men cannot talk about female sexuality without thinking about themselves, even if they cloak the language in something that seems objective on the surface. Women are too quick to hand out blow jobs to male people who pay some kind of faux lip service to women’s ‘choices’ and ‘freedom’. Men are not objective. Remember, they have too much to lose from women discarding them and discovering their natural selves and their true freedom. And as predators, men are expert manipulators. So, to explore women’s natural state, you have to remove male influence, the male voice, and the male threat. It is very difficult to do. We are not taught to think about ourselves, and male people of all ages have a way of tapping into the altruistic and/or sympathetic parts of our natural selves and derailing us from taking care of ourselves.
To explore natural sexuality, you have to examine needs. What do women need? Forget those asinine women’s magazines which are basically outlets for the male voice. Women don’t need to feel sexy or beautiful. Women don’t need a closet full of clothes or the right colour lipstick. Women don’t need the ‘right man’ or flowers on her birthday or a special night to focus on her orgasms instead of sucking her master’s cock.
First, women need food, drink, sleep and shelter. Those are the basic survival needs. After that, we start talking about needs related not to survival, but quality of life. Women need love, affection, human connection, acceptance – all of those things related to human interaction and relationships. And to escape from male language control, when I say love and affection, I’m not talking about sex or orgasms. I’m talking about feeling loved and appreciated and having emotional exchange, all free from threat, duty and coercion. I suspect all men and most women don’t truly understand what this means as we have been so corrupted by male thinking on what love and relationships are.
Women also need dreams, goals, confidence, aspirations, inspiration, motivation, hope, and empowerment. Again, these are needs related to quality of life – those things that make life worth living, and that make having consciousness make sense. These are not related to the material world or to sex. And while no one dies from lack of love or lack of empowerment or dreams, they will likely live in a depressed state with plenty of physical and mental health problems. This is how most women currently live, and I’d argue that it is because of forced heterosexuality and living in the male system that relies upon it. Forcing women to submit to men deprives them of those needs that make life worth living. And all of their energies instead are poured into ensuring that men not only achieve all of these personal needs, but they also have an abundance of them to draw from any time they wish. Further, introducing a sexual element to a relationship, especially, but not only with men, redirects energy away from women having their own quality-of-life-based needs met and into ensuring the male partner is well cared for and sexually catered to.
The best friendships I’ve had with women have been those that tap into quality-of-life needs, and those friendships, if they break down, are always because of the intrusion of a demanding parasitical male. Hetero-programmed women are hard to be long-term friends with, I’ve found, for this very reason. There is always a parasite lurking, whether it be a husband, a new boyfriend, or a male child. Marriage and breeding paradigms – systems invented by men to support male supremacy – have always served to divide women, break down female friendships, and redirect female energy into male goals and success.
Friendships with men, regardless of their age, have never genuinely addressed affection needs or empowerment needs. Males in friendships have their needs addressed, as they siphon female energy. And I can’t think of a single friendship with a male that didn’t end up destroyed by sexual propositions or downright sexual harassment, sometimes after years of supposedly platonic interaction. By design, I currently have very few males in my life. One of the last remaining ones, a former student here in China, 21 years my junior whom I’ve kept around only because I have had some success mentally desexing male students and seeing them only as ‘students’, just ruined our two-year, ongoing interaction last week by announcing that he is ‘in love with me’. It was so utterly disappointing and confusing, especially because I am open about not being interested in men, and I stupidly thought I was immune from most sexual predation from men because I’m 45 and I don’t feminize. I’m not sure if there are mommy issues going on or the idea of converting the possible ‘lesbian’ was irresistible. Regardless, the teaching point here is that there is no such thing as an exception when it comes to men. They are all predators. They make everything about sex. And no woman is safe. Ever.
Oh and in case you are snarking, “What about gay males? They are basically women…” Don’t worry, they are all male, and thus, they are predators and consumers of women, too. I personally had a gay male friend in college who eventually told me in all seriousness that he would try to go straight to be with me. Weird, and believe it or not, I didn’t take him up on the offer… Nevertheless, while that may not be a normal scenario for all fags, they still do their best to steal female emotional energy, treat us as verbal punching bags (aside from blacks, fags are some of the worst hate-speakers towards women), use our bodies (to determine gayness or as rented baby factories), and to fight their human rights battles (think the AIDS epidemic), while not returning the favour, especially for lesbians. So fuck them, but not literally 😉
So back to the question: what about female sexuality? Are women sexual beings? I suspect this wouldn’t be an important question if men didn’t exist. I don’t think sex would take on even a fraction of the importance it has now if men didn’t exist. I don’t think relationships would form and break up on the basis of sexual activity and attraction if men didn’t exist. I think without men, women would take physical pleasure in each other, but it wouldn’t form the basis of relationships, and wouldn’t be the stuff of obsessions. Life would be rich, complex, layered. As it is now, everything is sex. People kill themselves and each other over it. Half the population is enslaved because of it. Without men, there would be so much less pain and destruction. With men in the picture, women are not naturally heterosexual. Nothing about heterosexuality is naturally good for women; it is destructive. If women were naturally straight, programming would not be needed. Violence would not be needed. There is so much effort (violence, threats, propaganda) put into turning women into men’s willing sex and labour slaves, it is impossible to argue that heterosexuality is natural for women. I think women are naturally drawn to women, but I would define ‘lesbian’ differently than it is currently understood in system of male dominance. There may be a sexual component, but the affinity is based on more complex things that override any kind of central sexuality.
In short, I don’t think male language and thinking are adequate for describing what women are naturally. Categorical male thinking and vocabulary – heterosexual, bisexual, queer, homosexual, asexual – may be fine for describing men (I prefer omnisexual as a more accurate description of what men are), but not for women. Ideally, women need be released from male control and male demands for sex so that they may discover what they need and to realize and embrace the quality of life no woman has yet achieved, but so very clearly deserves.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Can Anti-Woman Slurs Be Eliminated?
I seek to address problems that make people uncomfortable, and I talk about issues that even most feminists won’t address. I plan to do the same here. I’ve been wanting to write this one for a long time. It is an exploration. Stuff to think about. Impossibilities, likely.
The Question:
Is it possible for women to achieve what racial and religious groups have – to make discrimination a no-no; to achieve federal human rights protections; to have crimes against them designated as hate crimes; to eliminate group-targeted slurs from daily public, media and entertainment usage; and to legally make language used against group members into hate speech?
Men Succeed, Women Don’t
Unfortunately, the group we call ‘women’, despite being the largest and longest oppressed group on the planet is missing something crucial that every single other group has had and that has worked to their advantage. Men. All oppressed groups in history, except for women, have had male members. And note that men who think they are women – trannies – are not women, but oppressors of women and mentally ill men. They don’t count among us despite what they force us to call them, and they should never be included in the class known as women. They are a class of men, and they are oppressors, not the oppressed. We know they are men because of their XY chromosomes, of course, but we also have evidence that they are men because we see how quickly they have changed policy to destroy and further oppress women. No group of women ever has achieved or ever could achieve what trannie men have. In fact, no actual oppressed group that includes men has ever stayed oppressed for long. We know the ‘why’ (because men have power and women don’t), but it is not entirely clear ‘how’ (how do men exert power so effectively?) this can be. We can consider some of the following possible explanations for how men succeed in overcoming oppression while women don’t.
1) Men tend to resort to violence to get what they want. Women tend to cower and submit when they are threatened. Programming from birth ensures that boys’ aggression and violence is deemed natural and acceptable, especially when acting in self-defence, while girls’ aggression is punished and any self-defence is absolutely NOT allowed and often turned around to appear as unnatural, and even persecutory aggression.
2) Men are more respected, in general, regardless of group affiliation, and it is easier to get what they want because of the normalized and universal respect for cock, even oppressed cock. Having a cock automatically gives you a voice in public. Vagina is universally hated – you can’t respect what you hate, and consequently, most believe on some level that you can’t oppress what you hate because they deserve what they get, and so women’s progress is barely measurable. It further helps that male hate is often called and accepted as ‘love’, so they can argue that their oppression of us is actually a demonstration of love. Note that having a vagina automatically disallows you a voice in public unless you are a cock proxy – directly supporting a male dominance agenda, in other words.
3) Men are very good at getting on board with self- and group-serving agendas and can achieve a sort of strength-in-numbers kind of situation when they perceive themselves to be oppressed. Women, on the other hand, very seldom support one another, let alone push for policy that would benefit themselves as women. Feminists have never achieved a critical mass, as a result. It is hard to win freedom from men when some of the most aggressively opposed are women themselves. It has nothing to do with an inability of women to organize en masse. No, women are actually better able to plan and get organized than men are. Rather, women are programmed from birth to support males and hold females under suspicion. Women will fight to the death to keep men doing the horrible things they do with impunity. But ask a woman to support a feminist? Get ready to have your head cut off and paraded on a pike. Even some feminists eat their own.
4) Men tend to expect others to sacrifice for them, are very protective of their own perceived rights and freedoms, and have a very strange conception of compromise. Women tend to compromise easily. They also tend to sacrifice, but instead call it compromise just as they have been taught by their male-serving mothers and male culture, in general. In this way, rather than stand up for themselves, women are more open to propaganda, guilt-tripping, and oppression. Expecting rights and freedoms as women is seen as selfish and greedy and uncompromising.
5) Oppressed men, with very little effort, tend to collect numerous fawning women to support their cause, doing grunt work, sacrificing their bodies in violent situations (cannon fodder), acting as warning systems, spies and saboteurs, providing free food and cleaning services, bolstering and building male confidence and egos, and acting as free prostitutes to service the troops. Men, on the other hand, don’t support women’s fights. Superficial supporters always have their own agenda (getting laid, scoring political points, etc.). Most actually tend to suppress any female efforts to liberate through violence, threats, abandonment in relationships, denial of free speech through no-platforming and refusal to publish, and denying female activists a place in academia and other influential areas.
6) Giving men rights and freedoms doesn’t hurt other men or affect economies detrimentally. The world economy we have known throughout history has, on the other hand, been completely dependent on female slavery. Male freedom (which isn’t an ethical freedom, but debauchery and inhumanity) requires female slavery. Capitalism cannot exist without female slavery and neither can communism as men have envisioned it. To give women rights and true freedoms and an escape from male tyranny would require a complete rethinking and reconstruction of the world economy. This scares men of all colours, who for all of history, have called their male privilege their god- or nature-given rights.
Personally, I believe that as long as males rule within the system we call ‘patriarchy’, a group that doesn’t contain males cannot succeed in achieving human rights and freedoms or be taken seriously politically, legally, socially and economically. But while lack of male membership is a major factor in continued female oppression, there is one other significant contributor: any oppressed group that supports, colludes with, and literally sleeps with their oppressor will never be set free. And no group save women has ever done this. I mean, can you seriously imagine blacks joining a neo-Nazi group and calling it freedom and equality and contentment – the natural order of things?*** And there isn’t a single underprivileged group, save women, that would be denied the right to live apart from oppressors in their own community. These days, even women’s associations and events are attacked and forced to accept either infiltration or disbandment. But women are brainwashed from birth not only to ignore the dangers men pose to their well-being and contentment, but to embrace rape and slavery and humiliation and call them something else entirely. For those few who reject male domination, there is absolutely nowhere on the planet that is safe and free of men, male influence, male violence, male domination, and of course, the colluding, cock-sucking henchwomen who attack them for saying ‘no, thank you’.
***I did know a super-scary black dude in high school who joined the local skinheads, but that was only so he could beat the shit out of gays and lesbians as part of a cowardly group at every opportunity instead of as an individual – it wasn’t to support a white agenda.
In short, as long as the majority of women agree to unequal rape-based relationships with men and to breeding male children – and note it that isn’t true agreement since they are oppressed and programmed, and thus don’t come to the table on equal footing with men – ALL women will be oppressed by men. And it is this fact that keeps male power in place. If men can argue that women agree to their circumstances, then there is nothing wrong with it at all. To men, and to brainwashed women, agreement means free will/choice. And of course, no two things could be more falsely equated. Remember that brainwashing, programming, and social influence are powerful tools, especially when they are implemented at the most vulnerable stages in one’s life, such as in childhood or in desperate situations involving poverty or serious illness/injury. [Brainwashing, programming and social influence within the patriarchy will be dealt with in another post.] Those who manage to escape their programming, such as separatist, asexual or lesbian, non-breeding feminists, are very threatening to the system, and so the silencing of these opponents through several means is swift and brutal.
Lady Slurs Are on the Rise
If you listen to music, watch films or television, tune in to any kind of hard or soft news outlets, read magazines or other material – basically live in the world, in other words – you *may* have noticed that brutal language attacking women, including slurs (i.e., bitch, cunt, slut, whore, pair of tits, broad), denigrating comments (i.e., run like a girl, acting like a woman, bitches be shopping), and callous jokes (the various iterations of the 10-dollar whore joke), are on the rise. More than likely, like the majority of people, you’ve just become desensitized to it. It’s much like not noticing that the violent, sensationalized content of public materials has escalated. Interestingly, racism in the media is on everyone’s radar – racial slurs produce a very physical ‘cringe factor’ in most people – but the woman hate has not only escalated, but has become business as usual, accepted and parroted even by the targets of the hate. And the abuse comes from people of all races. In music, blacks are the worst perpetrators, but in television and film, everyone participates. Interestingly, but not unexpectedly, the targets of the violence and hate, especially in television and film, are more often than not, white women.
Blind as most are to escalating woman-hate, many people might respond to valid observation with something like:
- what’s the big deal?
- they’re just words – they don’t hurt anyone
- women are too sensitive
- women use them tooooooo!
- you’re exaggerating (crazy, bitter, stupid, or some standard dismissal of female truth-telling)
- you’re a man-hater, obviously
And my response is: if it really is no big deal, then why are slurs against all other groups termed ‘hate speech’ and have been removed from all public media and entertainment and can get you into serious trouble if you’re caught using them in public? Why is it legal to use a female slur in a business name, but not a racial slur? Why do some American television stations bleep out the F-word, but not the word ‘bitch’? What might it mean that women have internalized woman-hate and use the hate-speech themselves against themselves and other women? And why is pointing out real examples of woman-hate itself an example of women hating men??? Logic fails, all.
See, slurs are a big deal. Words have meaning and power, and a tool of control. Those who control language, control everything. And throughout time – and today is no different than any other time period – men control language and thus control women. Male hate speech against women poisons every aspect of women’s lives. Hate in language translates into hate in behaviour. When hate is condoned or written off or normalized, women suffer. Do you want to be interviewed by some man who sees you as a bitch and a cunt and masturbates to violent rape-porn? Do you think he compartmentalizes? No one is capable of separating the messages they internalize from how they treat others around them. And the fact that the hate is escalating, as evidenced in the language we hear and use, is very worrisome for women, indeed. It is a very big deal.
What’s on TV?
Media and entertainment are important propaganda machines existing under the guise of relaxing fun-times. People are much more likely to absorb messages, if they are delivered with humour or drama.
I was just watching a British television show that had been recommended to me by one of my more advanced Chinese university students interested in socio-technology (or techno-sociology, you pick). In the very first episode, the man who is playing the Prime Minister calls one of his white female employees a ‘stupid bitch’ and then proceeds to try to strangle her and then punches her in the face in front of a male employee. And I thought American entertainment was bad. Nope, woman-hate comes from all countries, all races, all religions, all ages. Some of my weirdest memories of blatant sexism during my childhood hetero-bitch programming years came from horrible British television (The Benny Hill Show, anyone?). But they are not alone.
On the American side of things, in the 2017 season of Veep, a political comedy starring Julia Louis-Dreyfus (whom I enjoy as an actress, but who saddens me in this role), was an episode entitled “C–tgate”. The episode partially revolved around the female president trying to figure out which of her staff had called her a ‘cunt’. In 28 minutes, the word cunt – probably the worst, most demeaning, single-word slur in today’s usage and possibly in the history of slurs – is used 15 times. Note that never once in the 6 seasons of this show has the slur ‘nigger’ been used, nor any other racial slur. Liberal, or conservative for that matter, television doesn’t use the big bad, notorious, racial slurs. Never once is the Chinese-American presidential candidate ever referred to as a ‘chink’. Never once is the Mexican-American woman who eventually becomes president ever referred to as a ‘spic’ (or even a bitch or cunt, for that matter). Cunt and bitch are words to use against women, primarily, but not exclusively, white women. And it is hard to imagine an entire television series devoted to a bumbling black president who is constantly undermined and continually racially slurred. Can you imagine an entire episode called ‘N-rgate’? It would NEVER happen. On the rare occasion that a racial slur is used, it is to call attention to racism and to use it as a teaching point about respecting men and women of colour.
Go back a few years, and take the American series ‘Boston Public’ which followed the work and personal lives of a bunch of teachers working at an inner city high school in Boston. In the first season, the white female teacher is called bitch constantly by everyone, and a violent, racist, misogynist, black male student spray paints ‘bitch’ on her blackboard, calls her bitch in public and then SPITS DIRECTLY IN HER FACE, none of which he is held accountable for. But the woman – the actual victim – is called racist, of course, and she spends the rest of the series feeling white guilt and accepting abuse and slurs from all the black characters as well as the white males on the show. Misogyny, which is more common on that program, is never addressed as a ‘teaching point’. It is just what women should accept. And white women are expected to accept abuse for what white men have done in past generations. THAT is the teaching point. Men are violent. Women pay the price so that men can continue enjoying the good things in life.
If you want to get your ‘bitch’ on in an older, but immensely popular series, watch the 15 seasons of ER like I did during a short, but intense period of boredom and misogyny research this summer. It was brutal. I don’t think I’ve heard the slur, ‘bitch’, used so frequently in a television series. Interestingly, there was only 1 official racial slur used in the entire 15 years of programming. A white supremacist used a Latino slur ONE TIME. For jokes, everyone was fair game, but the bulk of the jokes were about women, then gays, and a few racial jokes tossed in here and there. There was a shit ton of sexual harassment as entertainment. If you think women don’t internalize this hate, you are dead wrong. Now that my own eyes are open to patriarchy and brutal misogyny, every time I hear slurs, rape jokes, and sexual harassment, it is a slap in the face. It blows my mind that every single girl grows up swimming in this shit. And most girls and women never understand why they hate themselves so much, why life seems so much more difficult than men’s. Why they have no confidence. Why depression and PTSD occur much more frequently in women than in men. Why they are afraid and feel like they need protection. The propaganda serves to weight the chains around our necks and bodies and primes us to accept abuse from all men around us, and even to call their hate ‘love’.
The Slurs and What Men Mean When They Use Them
A little while back, I wrote a post on where the bitch and the whore came from. Let’s explore a little further to find out what men mean when they use the most common slurs. Note that anti-woman slurs are often used to insult men. The men aren’t really being victimized – simply being called a woman is a bad thing. Even men who ‘love’ women hate to be called or compared to a woman. That’s love and respect, right?
Slut
Honestly, this isn’t a word that I have much connection to or use for. I don’t recall ever hearing the word used when I was in high school. Skank, yes. But I never heard the word slut used. My parents never used it either, despite their frequent use of colourful language. The word has supposedly been around since 1450 to, very basically, describe a woman who behaves exactly the way men always have and always will without consequences. It is the essential representation of sexual double standard. I’m not sure there is a another word that captures the double standard like ‘slut’ does. Use of the word has led to ostracism, poverty, rape, beatings, and death for millions of women across time. While men designed the word to hurt and control women, it has also been used to drive a really fucked up wedge between women by essentially putting them into categories of ‘good’ (marriage-rapeable) and ‘bad’ (prostitution-rapeable and the unmarried stranger-rapeable). The term has been applied by men even to ‘virtuous’ women out of revenge or sadism to serve the male agenda. And even women themselves have used the term against other women, sometimes out of jealously of a perceived, but false, freedom or power of another woman. The simple application of the term to a women has had, in the past, the power to destroy her life completely. You really can’t say that about any racial slur. No one has ever been destroyed by words quite like women have.
Sadly, when women embrace this word, it changes something in the brain’s logic centre. Women who see themselves as sluts, proud or not, suddenly don’t know what to do when they have been raped. Can a slut be raped??? What is rape? Does he have to hit me since I seem to fuck anyone who expresses interest? Am I allowed to say ‘no’ since I have embraced the word ‘yes’? There is no handbook for women trying to navigate the liberal male agenda.
Every once in a while, you hear the word applied to men. ‘Male slut’ pops up once in a while, but it really has no impact on men, their reputations, their relationships, their jobs, or anything. Men might even laugh if they hear it, and it is doubtful they would find it offensive. It is a clear demonstration of who holds the power when you cannot reverse the offense with the same negative outcome.
Personally, I don’t see any use for this word, even if redefined or attempts at reclamation are made. I think we focus too much entirely on sex and sexuality, and would love to see this word fade away because of lack of use rather than repurposing. But after nearly 600 years of use, that ain’t gonna happen any time soon.
Whore
Prostitute is a rather recent and slightly more narrow term for a woman who sells her body to men. ‘Whore’ has been around in several languages (e.g., hore, hora, hoer, huora) for centuries (likely 16th century) to describe prostitutes, sluts, and women with very apparent sexual desires. The shortened ‘ho’, most likely from black American male slang, has been popularized as a way to refer to women, in general. It is most often applied today in the way that slut is. You also sometimes get constructions used to insult men, such as ‘son of a whore’. It’s actually still an insult to women, but men love playing the victim whenever they can.
Bitch
This slur is used so often, I’m beginning to think it is a new replacement term for ‘woman’. In fact, I think the trannie dudes have taken over the word woman, and actual women have now become ‘bitches’. Black American men did a great deal of damage in repopularizing the word as a slur to use against women (circa 1990’s).
Bitch has a lot of usages. You can call anyone a bitch, yet it is still an insult to women. The term comes from female breeding dog and it was specifically used to insult women, dehumanize, and to designate one of her few allowed roles. Today, it can mean:
- woman or girl, in general
- woman or girl you don’t like or have anger towards
- a woman or girl who has stood up to a man and pointed out his privilege, unethical dealings, crimes, etc
- a woman or girl who is confident and does something that a man or boy might do but would not be insulted for, or even would be commended for
- a female boss, or woman in any kind of position of power
- someone forced to do your bidding and who will remain under your control
- (in prison) a weak male who will be forced to submit to sexual assault
- a man who displays emotion and who makes other men (and sometimes women) uncomfortable (e.g., “Stop crying like a bitch.”)
- ‘son of a bitch’ – used on men to mean something like asshole, it is still a slur on women above all else
- (verb) to complain – the implication is that women complain and should not, even if it is warranted
- ‘bitch slap’ – physical abuse to be used by men on a woman who is not acting the way he wants her to
- a thing you don’t like (e.g., “That was a bitch of an exam.”)
Cunt
Probably the worst thing you can call a woman. It is not as popular (yet) as bitch, but it is on the rise. It is an abusive slang for vagina, but when used as a slur, it has similar meanings to that of bitch. It is generally not used on men as a female slur, however. Less commonly, it can be used to describe a situation that isn’t liked (a cunt of a meeting). The British and a few of their colonies unfortunately use the word, but in a non-negative way to refer to one of their dude-bros, as they might use ‘mate’ or to a random dude.
As mentioned above, the American series, Veep, will likely have a normalizing effect on this slur, thanks to devoting an entire ‘humourous’ episode to calling their first female president ‘cunt’ over and over and over and over…
Like a Girl
If a girl or woman is behaving naturally, then there is nothing wrong with what she is doing. There is nothing wrong with how girls run, throw, speak, walk, think, etc. If they are acting naturally (i.e., not gender-programmed into looking stupid or under-performing or trying to be ‘sexy’), then their actions will be efficient and effective. With behaviours that require skill, both boys and girls might perform poorly without training. The thing is that more effort is put into training boys. When equally trained, both boys and girls are effective. So the insult to males about performing like a girl is more about the very female-hate that prevents girls and women from being trained or even accepted as different than male people than any kind of natural ineptness. It also highlights the universal insistence that male performance is the default and thus the correct way, even if it isn’t correct at all.
Note that many of the ‘like a girl’ or ‘like a woman’ insults are actually projections. For example, ‘stop crying like a little girl’ (or screaming or tantrumming) doesn’t make sense because boys cry as much, if not more than girls. They also throw bigger tantrums and make more fucking noise than any girl I’ve ever encountered anywhere on the planet. And plenty of other claims like failing to use logic, or being bad at math – all of these are projections as well. Women tend to be better at logic than men and are equally good, if not better at math.
Body Parts and Animals
Female slurs are the worst in the world simply because women tend to be dehumanized more than any other group. They are reduced to their body parts, and they are referred to as animals. It is how women are treated both verbally and non-verbally in daily life and the workplace and in marriage, and it is how women are represented in language. Women are referred to: ‘a pair of tits’, ‘tits and ass’, ‘broad’, ‘cunt’, ‘pussy’, ‘fish’, ‘twat’, ‘legs’, ‘sugartits’, ‘piece of ass’, ‘cow’, ‘bitch’, ‘sow’, ‘heifer’, ‘filly’, and much more.
Black Men Succeeded
Some time ago, black men reclaimed the term ‘nigger’ and made it their own. The slur, rooted in Latin, Spanish and French from the word for ‘black’, lived for a short spell in a limited geographical region as a negative term for black people. It is no longer accepted or acceptable for use in public or in entertainment. It tends to be used only when a racist character is portrayed or when black dudebros are talking to each other. I won’t attempt to explain who gets to use it, or how, or why, or in which circumstances. I’m not a black dood, and mostly, I don’t really care about the intricacies of what men do to and with each other. All I can say here is that black men successfully got ‘nigger’ removed from the entire Western consciousness except as a term with punch-in-the-gut impact and out of mainstream derogatory use, with the support of the liberal white community. That speaks of some pretty serious social, legal, and political power. You can’t claim you lack power or status if you are able to get a slur thrown out of the public consciousness and usage. I mean, seriously, do you truly understand the implication of this? Controlling language is the ultimate evidence of power. But we’re talking about men here. And likewise, there isn’t a single racial or ethnic group that hasn’t succeeded in getting racial or ethnic slurs put on the chopping block – in Western cultures. But those groups contain men, and all men have power. Women of these groups benefited as well, which is probably part of why women of colour seldom side with white sisters under feminism. On some level, they understand they’ll achieve more power hitching a ride with men, even if those same men are making their lives miserable, acknowledged or not. White woman have no power, and neither do women of any other race, so gravitating to male people makes sense to those who don’t think, won’t think, or can’t think in more than a limited, short-term, very concrete way. If women could get over cock and band together, they’d be a force to be reckoned with in their discovery that unified female power can conquer anything and is a long-term solution to rape and the threat of rape. Why do you think hetero-brainwashing is so intense…?
So we come back to the question: is it even possible for women to eradicate female slurs from public usage and consciousness in the way that all racial and ethnic slurs have been tarnished and banned? Women are universally hated and feared – even by themselves! What would have to occur to instill the same cringe factor into even hearing (nevermind using) the words bitch, slut, whore or cunt to take down a woman? As it is, hearing or using those words generally brings power to the user, and I would argue, a feeling of smug satisfaction at denigrating a woman who is the recipient of those slurs. I would further argue that the power and satisfaction are even greater if they are hurled at or heard directed at a white woman.
But let’s get one thing straight. There are more slurs directed at women than any other group in history. And the slurs against women have a longer history than any racial/ethnic slur. Further, slurs against women have carried more damage to women than any racial/ethnic slur has ever had on a racial/ethnic group member. And another thing, all slurs – racial, sexual, religious, anti-gay – were designed and defined by men, the controllers of language. Not women. The origins of all harm lie in men. Use of slurs can bring satisfaction to women, but they benefit men most of all by their continued use.
Possible Solutions?
1) Eliminating Usage of all Slurs and Offensive References
As I said, those who control language hold the power. To be able to change an entire culture’s treatment of your group speaks of massive social, legal, and political power. It is actually quite impressive and astounding how completely racial and religious slurs have been completely removed from English-language entertainment and public usage. I’m so often puzzled at those anti-racism warriors who speak of their lack of power. They live in far-off decades or centuries, methinks. They haven’t performed a modern-day reality check and taken a look at who really has power. And just as important, who really doesn’t. Women of all colours are the powerless. And so many of those ‘oppressed’ men hold massive power over women of all colours. They are often some of the worst perpetrators. How could women possibly go about removing from public and common usage an entire vocabulary of hate that is larger than that any other oppressed group has ever been attacked with? I suspect it is not possible. No group of women has ever had the political, legal, economic, or social power to control language, let alone achieve basic human rights. And I doubt they ever will as long as women keep sleeping with men – those creatures who slur them, demean them and hurt them in the name of love.
2) Criminalizing Usage of Slurs and Offensive References
Men tend to get their pubes in a twist when women even hint at criminalizing male bad behaviour. The idea of women defending themselves and forcing men to be held accountable for their actions is taken as some kind of irrational attack on male ‘rights’. All men believe they have the right to rape, demean, threaten, slur, harass, molest, objectify, and kill women and girls without anyone batting an eye, and to live freely to do it all again the next day. Actual cops have been known to admit that if they prosecuted men for all the horrible things they do to women, most if not all men would be in jail. Racial, anti-gay, and anti-religious crimes are easier to deal with as they are much less common, because men belong to those groups, because these groups are ALLOWED to live separate from oppressors, and because men fight back, while women don’t (and aren’t allowed to anyway). Crimes against women happen all day, every day, to all women. They are so frequent that even the victims accept their victimization as ‘just another day’ or ‘business as usual’ and trudge on burdened by fear, depression, PTSD, and other psychological problems that manifest as pain and debilitating disease. And while sticks and stones break bones, language is still the most powerful weapon out there, able to dehumanize and demoralize. If language didn’t have power, hate speech would never have been created to protect the religious, the non-white, and gay males. As it is, women will never succeed in achieving enough power or respect to warrant protected legal status with regard to hate speech, let alone bodily autonomy.
3) Redefining the Offending Words
I think it is safe to say that anti-woman language isn’t going anywhere. I’m curious to see whether women can achieve what the all-powerful black man has achieved: to take possession of offensive language, redefine it and keep it within their own group, likely to eventually fade away with increasing educational opportunities. To successfully take control of lady-slurs, we’d have to do something to the language to give it the cringe-factor that, say, the word ‘nigger’ produces in all people. For women, this is a near impossible thing to achieve, I believe.
Slut: A small, but vocal, contingent of liberal, white women in Western countries (and the men whose dicks they suck) has tried, but failed, to reclaim the word. While their basic premise is correct – women should not be judged differently from men when it comes to how many or few partners they have – the way they have gone about it has served to hurt white women (not women of colour – white women) and to keep the liberal male agenda securely in place and with more ammunition. You see liberal men, who also want to control women, have told us that our freedom lies in fucking as many of them as possible, and for free!!! The shame lies not in eschewing virtue, but in withholding our pussies from the world, from being prudes! And this small group of young, brainwashed, white women has enthusiastically swallowed this self-serving male agenda and proudly call themselves sluts. And by embracing this male philosophy, men can say that ‘well, women don’t seem to have a problem with the label, so I guess it’s okay, yuk yuk yuk.” Notice that more men will support a slut walk than an anti-pornography protest, and the reason is that a slut walk is as pro-male as the very problem these women think they are fighting, while the latter protest is pro-woman, anti-slavery, anti-violence and at its very core, feminist. I’m not sure that this slur can be repurposed as it cannot be separated from it’s original meaning and to do that, you’d have to end heterosexuality, which would effectively render the slur meaningless and it thus wouldn’t require reclamation.
Whore: Like the word ‘nazi’, this word has become overused and misused through people’s ignorance, rather than effectively repurposed or redefined. ‘Whoring’ yourself in order to get ahead at a traditional job just sounds wrong, and smacks of ignorance and dismissiveness of the sexual slavery women have had to endure since time began. The slanging of the word, thanks to black American men, into ‘ho’, has not helped women at all, but rather, increased its casual, demeaning usage in everyday life. The word, like ‘slut’, was created specifically to hurt women through classification and shaming. I’m not sure that it can be redefined. And when men make demeaning changes or redefinitions to words designed to slur women, it achieves nothing for women. Often quite the opposite.
Bitch: This word wasn’t originally created to slur women, so there may be hope there. There has been some redefinition by women that I would argue isn’t that effective. Calling oneself a ‘bitch’ in a proud sort of way has sometimes come to mean ‘badass’. [Here is a prime example of this usage – skip down half-way through.] I can’t imagine calling myself a bitch in order to convey bravery or guts. Whenever I hear a women use that term to describe herself, there is this weird implication of sluttiness or sexiness that goes with it that is really repulsive. I think it is also a bad idea to retain the word ‘bitch’ to describe a woman who stands up to men because it can still be used by men easily to slur women for behaving normally (i.e., unprogrammed).
I think a good repurposing or redefining of a slur should have at its goal, the fading out of its usage. It should have a definition that men don’t really understand as it isn’t connected to them in a simple and concrete way. If they don’t understand it, they will be less likely to use it (one hopes). And it should also feel bad to women if they use it to describe themselves. It shouldn’t be a source of pride.
The way I understand a bitch (I have redefined it for my own understanding) is as a woman who serves men and male agenda, and who hurts women. The former is actually one of the less common male definitions (a submissive object), but what should be stressed is that a bitch hurts women. These are the women who ditch their female friends for the boyfriend or husband. Women who give birth to sons and make sure they grow up to know their privilege. Women who feminize themselves and their daughters. Women who support marriage. Women who blame and/or don’t believe rape victims. Women who oppose lesbians and asexuals. Women who hate the feminists who fight for their rights. These are bitches.
Most women don’t really think about how they treat other women. They probably can’t articulate that they hate their sisters – except for those clueless, but dangerous, women who say ‘most of my friends are male, and I’ve never really gotten along with women – but they are trained to do so from birth, despite it being a completely unnatural thing. I really believe that if women were made aware of their woman-hate, they would be shocked and might be motivated to self-examine and to change their outlook on sisterhood.
Cunt: This word is much less used than bitch, but it is on the rise. I think it can be repurposed in the same way that bitch can. It is a more extreme version of bitch. A cunt is a woman to purposely tries to hurt other women and girls. A cunt is a mother who abuses her daughter. A woman who turns a blind eye to a daughter-molesting husband, boyfriend or relative deliberately or in willful blindness. A woman who defends a rapist son or family member and heaps blame upon his victims. A woman who holds a girl down while her clitoris is cut off in the name of Allah. A woman who calls herself a feminist, and then in her personal definition of ‘woman’, commits ideological genocide when she tells us only women of colour are women because the percentage of white women in the world ‘isn’t large enough’ (try using that argument with Native Americans when defining ‘person’ or ‘human’ – their percentages are lower than that of white women). Women who physically attack the women their husbands are cheating with instead of getting rid of the husband. These are cunts. Is there any help for these women? Unlike bitches, they are likely aware of their actions and their actions are often deliberate and cruel. There is no excuse for hurting another woman unless she is physically trying to kill you. And I believe in holding attackers accountable. Change has to happen in the language and cognitive processes of all women first. Perhaps, if women become more self-aware, we can eliminate newly-defined words altogether. But really, who knows if women can ever transcend male hate and the internalized woman-hate they are inundated with from birth.
4) Juxtaposition as a Tool to Highlight Misogyny
This is especially relevant for media and entertainment, but can be used in every day conversation. Now, this one would be hard to implement in media simply because it opposes the male and liberal agenda, and thus won’t be allowed to happen. Women don’t run media or entertainment outlets for the most part, and those few that do tend to be liberal and completely on board with male-defined ‘female freedom’ policies. Implementing this experiment in daily life would prove hard and would likely get women killed because misogyny is an accepted part of how the world runs. But just to explore the possibilities, here goes.
For every anti-woman slur or reference made, a racist slur or comment or violence against men must also be made. So when you hear “run like a girl”, which is a nasty way of putting a male down by calling him some sort of subhuman, you must also use “run like a chink”. Or, for example, when the black male character says to the white female police officer, “hey, bitch cop”, she can respond with “hey, nigger rapist” and then shoot him in the head. The anti-black slurs are probably the best to use because blacks have been the most successful oppressed group in gaining political, legal and social power. Slurs against them will stand out immediately in juxtaposition to every anti-woman slur that is used. Where no racial slurs can be used, violence against men can be used. For example, a slur against a woman is used, and a man or boy gets kicked in the head or balls. The point of this exercise is to pair every denigration of women with denigration of a highly respected group (racial, religious, male) to question the necessity of the anti-woman material.
The big risk here is that people are too stupid to get it. Non-whites are respected infinitely more than women and girls. All races and cultures hate women and girls and embrace patriarchy and misogyny. All cultures have only flourished by enslaving females, forcing heterosexuality, and making sure that female persons learn very early in life to hate themselves and to accept abuse. To use racist slurs (or religious slurs or violence against men/boys) to highlight the frequency of anti-woman slurs may not work because stupid people or willfully blind liberal people would likely see the contrast as evidence of racism, anti-semitism or ‘islamophobia’ or ‘manhating’ rather than a highlighting of how much women are hated. Never underestimate how stupid and/or ignorant people are.
Conclusion
Will women ever control language or, at the very least, have enough power to stop male abuse of language and subsequent control of women’s lives?
Upon a great deal of consideration, I conclude that it will never happen as long as women accept and practise heterosexuality. You can’t be pro-women and sleep with the enemy. And if you need evidence, look at how every other oppressed group on the planet has broken free of their circumstances. They don’t live with, sleep with and fuck their oppressor, have their children, coddle their feelings, and support their policies. It really is that simple.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
A Special Welcome Back – Chinese Style
Unlike in English and other languages spoken in Western countries, there is no word for ‘racist’ or ‘racism’ in Chinese. There is a cobbling together of characters to form the following phrasal options:
种族主义者 – which roughly translates to one who righteously serves as lord and master breeder of one’s race/clan. If you plug it into a translator, you get ‘racist’ on the English end. But it is not clear for me whether this has a negative connotation if used to describe someone. Whereas ‘racist’ in Western languages has nothing other than a direct, negative meaning, in Chinese, I would strongly suspect that it doesn’t. Race supremacy is strong in China. It is something to be proud of. They do not like mixing the gene pool, but they often barely tolerate physical proximity to non-Chinese (unless they are sexually assaulting a white female) or mixing outside their cultural circles when they emigrate.
民族主义 – not a single word, but a phrase that refers to the first important principle of the thinking of Dr. Sun Yat Sen (the father of modern communist China). It is kind of like nationalism, but it also can be roughly translated as something like racism – an equation which makes sense in a monoracial, monoculture or country as race and culture are kind of inseparable. Nationalism can exist in multiracial countries, but it isn’t so much race as culture that is being used as the prejudicial segregation or exclusionary criterion.
The lack of a single word to designate ‘racist’ as a negative term also makes sense to me having lived in China for the better part of a decade and learning early on that there isn’t a single shameful or monstrous behaviour or event in Chinese history for which they take responsibility or over which they feel shame/guilt. Seriously, over the years, I’ve had numerous conversations with people of all ages and parts of the country, and there is no shame or guilt for anything. Depravity is swept under the carpet and not talked about, or there is fierce denial. I was once ganged up on by a group of educated Chinese who mansplained and Chinasplained to me that a) the racist-sexist violence I have experienced never happened, and that b) Chinese people aren’t racist – they are shy and curious. Um, yeah…
There is one major exception to the feeling of shame and guilt – it is that which is present in most young people thanks to their parents and that is a crucial part of the brainwashing into the version of mandatory heterosexuality and breeding that you see here today. It is standard procedure to make sure one’s children know that they are a huge burden on their parents. Most young people are wracked with tear-producing guilt (seriously!) about their very existence and know full well that the pound of flesh will be taken when they are older. But that is it. Individuals may have their own specific neuroses, but as a culture, the Chinese have clean hands and consciences. Conversely, though, they are the most impressive faux-victims I’ve ever met (except for men from any and all cultures and ages). In all of the disputes they have with a whole pile of countries, they are the victims. Righto.
It’s mind-boggling to me as a Canadian, to be honest. I’ve had Western shame hammered into me all my life for things I haven’t done, that didn’t happen in my lifetime, that didn’t happen in my country or by my compatriots, and that men from eras past have initiated, maintained, and forced women to participate in via hetero slavery. There is also the shame all women are brainwashed to feel from birth about being female, guilt for being female and having needs, and that lady-shame-and-guilt can often co-mingle with the general Western shame to produce a paralyzing, messy mindfuck of a state. Shame and guilt, for me, are truly second nature and have actually become so psychologically crippling that I’m finally trying to deprogram myself. It’s quite fascinating once you start examining brainwashing mechanisms and how they have turned you into a person who has learned how to negate true, personal victimization experiences because you have been told over and over that everyone absolutely has it worse than you, apparently, and it is your fault somehow, and this manages to diminish your pain and injuries and serious tragedies. It also turns you into a woman who feels she deserves nothing good in life because everything is your fault, and you end up sabotaging opportunities as a way of punishing yourself. Your life ends up being a lot worse than those of so many of the people that supposedly have it worse than you. So, my point is to meet people who don’t have shame and guilt beaten into them for things that have nothing to do with them (and often even for things they are directly responsible for) is truly bizarre.
~~~
So, the last two months have been incredibly busy and risky and expensive as I am actively on the look out for somewhere to move and work next year. Somewhere that is not China, and not Asia. I visited four countries to talk to immigrants and local people, find out about job markets, and just get a general ‘vibe’ of the places. It might sound unscientific, but my gut and inbuilt vibe-detector seldom steer me wrong. I can sense, underlying societal misery, nastiness, violence or aggression, happiness, carefreeness, community, civility, etc, etc, usually within a day of being in a place – sometimes within moments. And it is not often that my first impression of a place changes with more experience. Occasionally, there are surprises, but not usually. But I won’t get into that so much here. There really is much more to write about, and some of it will make it into posts. I want to mull on the fact that AGAIN I was assaulted by a Muslim Arab male – luckily, not a rape or an attempted murder like my other experiences (although I could have easily been maimed or killed through his actions – and all of this while his lady-slave looked on apathetically) , but it was still aggressive, racist, sexist, and shit-scary. And I want to talk about it because of course, we are not allowed to talk about Muslim racist-sexist terrorism against white women. We have a serious problem, and nobody wants to address it, name it correctly, and do something about it.
As well, during my time away, I met a few, although not quite enough sadly, excellent people who were thought-provoking. But, it was a hard journey all in all, and although I was dreading to return to China, I actually felt ready to get back to my regular job and have started trying to line up some possible part-time job interviews so I can earn slightly more money, scrimp and save, and get the hell out of here for good.
I got back and what was waiting for me? Well, the brutally hot weather first and foremost. Then there was the aggressive, and sometimes violent, over-crowding conditions on public transit that you only really see in overpopulated places like China or India. But what was it I missed the most?
The racism.
And I wasn’t disappointed. I got back to my campus where I live. It was 37°C (about 99F), and I was dressed for about 20°C (about 68F). I was exhausted and carrying some moderate-weight gear. I’ve lived at this campus for over 4 years. I am the only white female there. I stand out and not in a good way. I experience a lot of racism every time I step out of my apartment. Neighbours still cringe against the wall if they have to pass me in the stairwell. I cannot go out in anonymity. Ever. So when I got to the gate beside the staff accommodation, all I could think about was stripping down, dumping the gear and guzzling cold water. But no. The guard at the gate wouldn’t let me in. Demanding to know who I was. Yelling. Now, notice that I am a resident there. Frequently, people who DON’T live there enter and walk around our campus, never checked or turned away. Delivery dudes on motorcycles sometimes have to sign in. But generally, if you are Chinese, you are free to do as you please. And none of these Chinese was accosted today either. But I am not Chinese. Not human. I was treated like a criminal instead of a university lecturer, which, although seriously underpaid, still demands some respect in this country.
I ignored that racist fucker – mostly because I was too hot, tired and overburdened to defend myself in the step-and-fetch / dancing monkey way that all Western people are expected to adopt in order to keep the mood light and let the Chinese know they are in charge and can continue to feel superior. I also wasn’t in any mood or state to consider that he could physically attack me and no one would defend me. I just kept moving, and I think it was the fact that he was just not used to that kind of defiance and didn’t know what to do that I got away and headed quickly to my residence without looking back. I don’t know what I’ll have to deal with tomorrow as I go out and come back from a small shopping trip to the market. He might be more prepared to deal with the ‘white devil’ (racial slur used here). I really don’t want to have to deal with violence.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
More of a Law than a Trope
There is something that happens on feminist blogs, and it is such a common and reliable phenomenon, that it is more of a law than a figurative device. It happens even if it is moderated and you can’t see it as a reader. It is a phenomenon in the tradition of Godwin’s Law (the longer an online discussion becomes, the more likely a hyperbolic reference to Nazis is), but whereas Godwin’s Law can be seen operating in any discussion of any topic, this other pertains to feminist discussions or discussions where women are defending tiny patches of territory known as ‘women’s rights’. The reference that becomes likely falls into the category of “not all men…” Further, the likelihood of this reference occurring is less related to the length of the discussion, but to the strength of the ideology being expressed or the steadfastness of those expressing the dissenting opinion.
More specifically and succinctly, the purer or stronger the feminist ideology being expressed in a blog post or online discussion, the more likely it is that someone (male or female) will show up to:
- defend the ‘good’ men who somehow don’t benefit from or perpetuate Patriarchy, or
- put himself up as an example of how unlike other men he is, or
- give an example of a special, non-rapist, laundry-doing Nigel, or
- wax on poetically about how beautiful penises and male anatomy are, or
- serve up a graphic story of a sex act with a man which somehow disproves the existence of female slavery or systemic victimhood of women at the hands and dicks of men.
Although the Not-All-Men Law is common on heterosexual feminist blogs when the slightest criticisms of men may happen, it is especially true on male-critical blogs heavily populated by and possibly even run by lesbians. What typically happens is this: the topic of the post will generate some normal feminist commentary – what men and cock-identified women will call ‘male bashing’, but which is actually a statement or statements of reality/truth/facts – and as things heat up, you will inevitably get a defensive straight woman (followed immediately by a supportive pile-on of other, lurking, defensive straight women and occasionally and strangely, non-feminist lesbians) proudly announcing that she thinks “penises are beautiful things, imho”. There may be variations on that (sucking cock is awesome/cock-centred activities are feminist acts, men are just as victimized by Patriarchy as women, etc). The declaration will be seconded, thirded, etc., men might join in, and there may ensue more and more detailed, graphic descriptions of various heterosexual, dick-centric bedroom activities – unless it is shut down immediately by a lesbian moderator interested in preventing graphic derails of the original feminist topic of the post, or in preserving a hard-to-maintain woman-focus and/or lesbian interests.
I’ve seen it time and again, and this kind of stuff serves to dilute feminism, silence radicals and separatists, and divide feminists. Some women believe that you can’t put women first and willingly serve Dick/dick at the same time, so to see declarations of penis-love on a feminist blog is anti-feminist. Men don’t need defending. They run the world and every system (politics, economics, law, medicine, psychotherapy) within it. A better thing to do for those women compelled to defend men is to ask why the need to defend those who have all the power?
Oh, and by the way, with regard to Godwin’s Law and the whole braindead Nazi reference thing, there is something that he left out (he is a man, after all). It is an absolute given that if you are a feminist who dares to speak, you WILL be called a Nazi, and often a ‘feminazi’. There is no escaping that and it has nothing to do with length of discussion.
Woman speaking = Nazi takeover.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Lab Work: A New Job Choice for Men
I get annoyed – although that is not quite the right word – when I hear men and their fembots talk about how prostitution and other rape-oriented work is really a fantastic work option for women. They rename it ‘sex work’ to take away the rapey, violent aspect of it and to diminish this kind of slavery so that it is on par with flipping burgers.
I get further annoyed listening to men say they are ‘jealous’ about women’s options. How they wish they could rake in the cash by doing what women are lucky enough to be able to do with their natural attributes and talents. How prostitution is ‘easy money’. How using prostitutes and strippers and watching porn is ‘contributing to the economy’.
It’s fucking gross. And ignorant. And it’s horrible to hear women parrot what these men say.
Given that it doesn’t look like we are going to change that culture and belief system any time soon using rationality and appeals to morality and human rights – like men give a shit about that, right? – I propose a more effective method.
Men generally only understand problems when they affect them. Self-centred creatures, you have to hit men where it hurts. Raping women doesn’t hurt them, but maybe experiencing something analogous would. Maybe…
Anyhow, here is my proposal.
I think we should open up a new job category that is only open to men. It’s called ‘lab work’. Here’s how it works. I am against animal testing, and I think all beings should be able to choose the type of work they do. Currently, animals don’t have that right. So I will free them. Instead, men will be able to choose to have chemicals and drugs tested on them in exchange for money. In fact, teen-aged boys can choose to do it too.
There is potential for ‘big money’ – or at least, that’s the rumour/promise. It will be a good choosey-choice for men who would otherwise suck from the government cock (aka ‘welfare kings’), or be homeless, or have to resort to finding a sugar mommy. It can help young men pay for their college education. And some bored men – from househusbands to professors – can even choose to do it as a sideline and then act as poster boys for the ‘happy lab rat’ when people try to critique this important, empowering job choice.
They will be provided with comfortable cages in view of other men. Drugs will be available to make the work even more palatable. We can even groom boys from a young age to see this type of work as a good career option.
Why is this work so important? Well, you see, women have a god/nature-given right to safe cosmetics, hair products, household cleaners, and properly tested medications. We can’t provide that safety guarantee unless we test them. Men provide the best test subjects – men tell us all the time that they are better than women at everything, so naturally, they are totally and naturally made for this job. And it is a good match anyways – everyone wins. Women have their rights satisfied and men make a good living! Women will contribute to the economy and help men stay employed and feel empowered. Besides, if men don’t provide this needed service, women will likely start illegally testing the chemicals they need on the men in their lives. And we all know that that isn’t good for society. We need to protect the virtuous men. And the others, the unspeakables, are better suited for lab work, anyway. All in all, we reduce random violence against family men by legalizing lab work.
Agency, empowerment, choice, free will, economic stability, men’s rights. That is what this job is all about.
Oh, and by the way, if you think you have any right to criticize this proposal, think again. I will shout you down as a gynophobe, a misogynist, a communist, and worst of all… a LWEMRA (Lab Work Exclusionary Men’s Rights Activist). And I’ll probably just throw in racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, and a few other terms I’ll make up along the way, just to get you to shut the hell up and let men choose their choices with agency and dignity!
~~
I’ll add these as I see them – cases that support the implementation of this kind of work. It is especially relevant when MEN create dangerous products for WOMEN. They should absolutely be tested on men first so that their safety can be vouched for.
Forgiveness is a Plot Device
The heterosexual romantic narrative in all cultures is boring and stinky as shit and as transparent, fragile and scary as an ultra-ultra-thin condom.
And yet so many people buy into it.
Boy meets girl, usually showing himself to be a playboy or outright misogynist. Girl is intrigued: “Boy is an asshole, but I can’t. stop. thinking. about. him”. Boy shows some tiny vulnerability which serves as the ‘hook’, the thing girl remembers years down the road when wondering “what the hell did I dooooo?”. Boy eventually traps girl in holy matrimony, abuses her, and then keeps her there through enforced pregnancy and by mouthing the word love before penis-insertion and after slapping her around physically or verbally or psychologically. Well, this general progression forms the plot of most het lives and most of the rom-coms and steamy novellas out there. And not just in the West.
Part and parcel with selling this garbage as what women want is the programming of feelings: acceptable and unacceptable feelings.
In the romantic narrative, as girl begins to question why she is with boy, in come plot devices – the preferred feelings allowed to girl. You see if these plot devices weren’t employed, the story would end. Girl would leave. Girl might not go down the garden path in the first place. Unacceptable feelings, the effective ones that are programmed out of us at an early age and through the reading and viewing of acceptable film and literature out there, are the feelings that might actually save us from sexual slavery and throw a wrench in Patriarchy.
One of the most popular Patriarchy approved feelings or plot devices is FORGIVENESS. This device, the lack of which would end a romantic story toot sweet, says that no matter what boy does to girl, she must not retaliate or exit stage left. She cannot kill a boy who rapes or tries to kill her. She must forgive him. She must not adopt an eye for an eye mentality. She must forgive him. She must not get angry, take the kids and run. She must forgive him. She must not challenge his rape-supporting porn use. She must forgive him. She must not divorce him because he cheated on her. She must forgive him. And on and on. Several basic events revolving round the same theme.
We are told forgiveness is a virtue. Hmm. I’ll tell you, forgiveness does have some merit – when a woman forgives herself for ‘being so stupid!’ in believing a man has her best interests in mind or makes her a priority or sees her as an equal and free human. When a woman forgives herself for making the mistake of blaming women instead of men for her oppression, forgiveness has merit.
But forgiving men for abusing her, raping her, denigrating her, not fighting for her liberation and humanity? Nope, then it’s just a plot device.
That’s all folks!
Not Afraid of the Bears
I hate the city.
Sure, there are moments. Moments when you realize that there are certain things only a city can offer you. Like you’re tired of the ubiquitous Chinese food where you live and tired of your own home cooking, and crave some semi-authentic food from another part of the globe. A large city can provide you with that. You are also more likely to find open-minded people who like to use their brains and who eschew traditionalism and religion. That is harder to find in smaller places.
But I still hate the city.
I grew up in Canada. I have lived in most of the largest cities there. Having lived in large Chinese cities, and spent time in Los Angeles, New York, Tokyo, and London, these ‘tiny’ Canadian cities are villages in comparison.
I’ve also lived in plenty of smaller places. I deliberately chose a small, relatively isolated, Canadian town for my undergraduate experience. It was mostly for research opportunities and to get the hell away from my abusive, NPD mother, but I have to admit that the kilometers of forest, lakes, and fresh air called to me.
Similarly, when I went to grad school in the US, I chose a very small town – still for the research opportunities – but there were mountains and forest in close proximity.
I’ve also lived in the Yukon in Canada’s North. Pristine rivers, lakes, forests. Pure air. Silence. Anti-intellectual and cliquey, but nature reigns supreme there.
In all of these places, hiking and other outdoor activities were a given – one of the perks of living there. But I didn’t take advantage of the locations as much as I could or should have. Afraid of bears or other wild animals? No, actually. There are plenty of things you can do to co-exist with animals that, for the most part, aren’t deliberately looking for you.
In all these places, I was afraid of the men. The existence of men, and the threat of attack or rape is what kept me out of the forests and hiking by myself. Men are the only animals that will deliberately hunt you down or opportunistically target you, and hurt you for pleasure.
I remember, as an undergraduate, one day enthusiastically heading off onto the hiking trails in the forest behind the college. There had been reports of bears, especially at that time of year. But my thoughts weren’t on them at all. Within minutes of starting my hike, I was plagued with doubts about being in the forest alone, and then, as if reading my mind, out of nowhere, men on mountain bikes took over my trail. Scared the shit out of me. Men, in a group – scariest thing on the planet. A panic attack resulting from knowing that they could do whatever they wanted to me with impunity turned me around towards the safety of my research lab.
At that time, I forgot that there is no safety indoors either. Like all women, while I’ve experienced a lot of harassment, violence and sexual assault in public, all of the violent rapes I’ve experienced have happened in my own bed at home or indoors while travelling. This is women’s experience, women’s reality.
Will there ever come a day when a woman can leave her home and not have to feel afraid? Will there ever come a day when a woman can stay in her home and not have to feel afraid? Just the threat of what can happen is unacceptable. The threats are based on reality and they have power. They do.
It’s not the bears we have to worry about.
Heroes and the Penis Prerequisite
A handful of years ago, I was teaching a small class of really motivated, super-smart Chinese girls. I’d just spent a hellish year teaching high school – one of the worst years, if not the worst year, of employment in my life – in the Chinese countryside. I tried to wash away that year in a seaside city at a small, private language school with small summer classes. This group of young women was a salve on a wound that unfortunately still hasn’t healed.
We were doing a short unit on heroes and role models. We were using a crappy textbook produced through some Western-Chinese collaboration, and I hated it. It was sexist and as with any and every book trying to teach Western culture to non-Westerners, it did a piss poor job. Anyhow, as I didn’t like the discussion of heroes in the book, I decided give my own rendition. You see, all the book’s examples were men – men of the Western persuasion – and not a one of them was interesting or heroic. But then, throughout the world, we celebrate men for mediocrity and often, overlook atrocities they commit to celebrate that mediocrity.
So I did some research and looked for women in China, current and past, in a range of domains, that could be put up for nomination as heroes. I chose human rights activists, political leaders, anti-censorship advocates, athletes, actors, even a warrior.
And the girls, smart though they were, only recognized a few of them. I was first shocked, then unsurprised, then saddened. Just like in the West, women are not only barred from public life, but they are barred from recognition, from history, from memory, despite being the ones who actually keep this world running. Throughout the world, we celebrate the mediocrity of men over even the most amazing of women.
Fast forward a little to the years I’ve been teaching college and post-graduate students. Every semester, either through speech-giving assignments or through class discussion, I get students to talk about role models and heroes. And here are my data.
Out of hundreds and hundreds of students in four years of doing this, only two students have provided a woman as a role model or hero. And those women were the students’ mothers.
Many of the male heroes have been killers/soldiers. We’ve had notorious Western rapist athletes nominated. Mao Ze Dong, the great brainwasher and killer of millions. Winston Churchill, the man who perfected the concentration camp and had thousands of South African women and children starved, raped, or killed. We’ve had a few capitalists. Writers. Lots of fathers. Male humanitarians or social justice warriors are never mentioned as heroes – there aren’t that many of those comparatively, I suppose. Plus, activism is still frowned upon and frequently punished in China.
In China or elsewhere, I can’t figure out what makes these nominees heroes or role models other than possessing a penis. It’s not just that women have been barred from doing ‘great’ things. The fact that so many people see fathers as heroes or role models indicates that it is the penis and the qualities that only a penis-wielder is (incorrectly) believed to possess that are important in defining heroism or role-modelship. It has little to do with the accomplishments themselves. If we had a scale with men on one side and women on the other, and we had the ability to see who actually did what (i.e., we could see through stolen ideas, credit-taking, silencing, etc.) and you added weight for objectively positive accomplishments (creating and improving life and knowledge), and subtracted for objectively negative, destructive things (war, cruelty, immorality, development of weapons, greed, etc), women would, hands down, be the greatest contributors, the heroes, the role models. I truly wish there were a way to uncover truth, to reward merit, to encourage positive contribution.
We can’t do that under male rule. Merit will never be recognized under Patriarchy.
Fists and penises used to win the power, (later) the money and the ability to write history. Once money and power were firmly in the hands of men, it became just the threat of violence that has continued to erase women and keep the definition of heroism out of more objective hands.
In short, whom we honour and reward in our global society has little to do with good works or positive accomplishments or contributions. As with everything, it is all about dick. And I’m so very tired of worshipping violence and lies.
That’s Some Toolbox You’ve Got There, Ladies
Those familiar with the self help world will know immediately what I’m talking about when I refer to one’s ‘toolbox’. It is a metaphorical toolbox that contains a variety of tools and techniques that one can use to cope and protect oneself. To run with the metaphor, basically the contents of one’s toolbox will allow the building of a fort or wall behind which one can stay alive and survive. The better the tools and techniques, the more protected one is.
The Defense
Protection from what, you might ask? From seeing, questioning, defying, attacking and breaking free from Patriarchy, of course. To face Patriarchy head on is a very dangerous business, so women are encouraged to accept it. Unfortunately, it is hard to accept slavery without some defensive strategies in place.
Girls are provided at a very young age with a starter toolbox and examples of how to employ the contents within. The message that accompanies this gift is: Sorry. You’ve had the misfortune to be born a girl. This means you are worthless. But we need you to do a few things. You’re here to serve, submit, take abuse, and erase yourself. All in the service of Patriarchy and its prize citizens – boys and men. In order to help you accept it, affirm male dominance and violence, sing the praises of this system, and even ask for it, we are equipping you with the following tools and techniques. Now spread your legs and enjoy the ride. It will suck. Or rather, you will.
With this bright and shiny toolbox (with more sophisticated tools added over time), many women remain blind to their maltreatment and complicit in their enslavement; men are not forced to take responsibility for their actions and keep on doing what they do best – destroying; and the Patriarchy machine bangs on. Anyone with a background in psychology will recognize many of these tools as ‘defense mechanisms’. Let’s look at how they are employed by women under Patriarchy to ensure that they remain the slaves they were born to be.
Tools and Techniques (aka Defense Mechanisms)
Denial
The most unsophisticated of tools, denial is probably the most frequently employed mechanism women have. Very simply, it is the refusal to accept reality, even in the face of bald facts. Women may even deny having experienced something quite serious.
Example: A woman returns home after being raped by her date. Despite her bruises at the time and years of nightmares and PTSD, she refuses to admit she has been raped. In her mind, it is safer to pretend it didn’t happen. A lot of women also deny that Patriarchy even exists despite soaking and swimming in it every second of their lives.
Repression / Suppression
Both mechanisms serve to keep thoughts or memories out of consciousness. It can be done without realizing it (repression) or deliberately (suppression). The problem is that the memories still have influence even if we don’t realize they are there.
Example: A woman who was molested by her father as a child may have blocked out memories of that time, but ‘inexplicably’ has a hard time in relationships with men, especially regarding sex. She will be labelled frigid, but really, she is just repressing memories of horrific abuse.
Displacement
Anger and frustration are taken out on less threatening objects or people than the actual source of these feelings.
Example: A woman works in a male dominated office under a highly misogynist boss who pays her less than the men, never promotes her, disparages her ideas and work, and makes sexually suggestive comments. The woman says and does nothing so as to keep her badly needed job, but goes home and verbally abuses her children following particularly tense episodes. We also see this commonly with the transgendered and with women who belong to other minority groups when they attack other women instead of men who are the true oppressors. Women are just less threatening and more easily attacked.
Sublimation
A technique where unacceptable behaviour is refocused into something acceptable.
Example: An economically desperate women may find herself with few options but to turn to prostitution, but faced with shame or other morally-derived feelings, may grasp at marriage (publicly acceptable prostitution) to survive.
Dissociation
The creation of seemingly separate representations of the self in order to survive ordeals. It can lead to a disconnection of self such that painful feelings don’t intrude for periods of time.
Example: Women who enter stripping or prostitution or even who are married may retract their feelings and personalities and thought processes while performing mandatory sexual servicing of customers or husbands. Outside of these servicing situations, they will maintain a different or a main identity.
Projection
The act of taking one’s unacceptable feelings towards someone and ascribing those feelings to them.
Example: Fully enslaved and compliant women may hate feminists for forcing them to realize their slavery. As a defense, the enslaved will believe that the feminists hate them, despite clear evidence to the contrary. This is the number one cause of the creation of the term ‘feminazi’. Feminists have absolutely NOTHING in common with nazis, but it is easier to project your hate onto people who just want to help you free yourself.
Rationalization
A mechanism that allows one to avoid the true reasons for a behaviour and instead come up with something that provides an intellectual or logical explanation.
Example: Instead of holding men accountable for rape culture, women will say things like ‘men are naturally aggressive’, ‘boys will be boys’, ‘men have needs’ or something thoroughly incorrect, but seemingly ‘rational’ on the surface. We also see arguments supporting the Patriarchal system using ‘God’s word’ (from the Right) and ‘natural law’ or evolutionary psychology (from the Left). These arguments are rationalizations.
Reaction Formation
Expressing the opposite feeling to that which you actually feel.
Example: Women, especially, are encouraged to show love to those who would do them harm rather than to address any justified anger that comes from being abused. It is a way to partially explain why battered women not only stick with men who routinely beat and rape them, but to insist that they love these men. The defense mechanism assists, but does not wholly explain, survival in a very complex, psychological situation.
Stockholm Syndrome (Identification)
This refers to supporting and even adopting the views and behaviours of someone who has power over you or is abusing you and whom you fear/hate.
Example: This is the mechanism underlying all “What about the men?” and “Not my Nigel” arguments put forth by heterosexual women. Instead of identifying with their oppressed sisters, they see weakness in and feel hatred towards them in much the same way the men they are supporting would. It also plays a heavy role in keeping submissive women in the BDSM scene enthralled (with a little rationalization thrown in for good measure).
Keep in mind, seldom does only one defense mechanism account for a woman’s participation in Patriarchy. The toolbox is one where all the implements can be inter-attached, and work together seamlessly. It is so incredibly hard for women to throw off the chains of slavery for this reason. There isn’t just one thing keeping women down – even if you stop denying reality, you may be engaging in other coping strategies. It also doesn’t help that few women have support in freeing themselves.
—
Stay tuned for “That’s Some Arsenal You’ve Got There, Gentlemen“.
Atheist Men Hate You Too
When I was younger and more naive, I held out some hope for the atheist movement. When all you see around you is conservatism, religious violence, and traditional male arguments for why women need to be kept down, atheism can, on the surface seem like a fresh, clean wind blowing from a freer, more rational place.
I’ve been a non-believer all my life. My somewhat moderate parents installed me in an Anglican Sunday school when I was five, but when the brainwashers started teaching me my parents were evil for consuming wine, I was pulled out immediately.
I was saved because my parents were borderline alcoholics.
There was some occasional religious sputtering in school. The Lord’s Prayer was a morning ritual in Ontario where I went to school. At some point, that stopped. I can’t exactly remember when it stopped in my particular school since it was meaningless to me. We mumbled for years without understanding. Today, all children in public schools in Canada are free from this form of brainwashing – prayer in schools is disallowed under the concept of Freedom of Conscience thanks to our rights and freedoms charter. I do recall one particularly nasty Christian fanatic teacher who forced children to take home and prepare class lectures from the picture bible she kept in her class (not part of official curriculum), but again, the exercise was so meaningless as to have no lasting effect on my intellect. The same can’t be said for the few Jewish students that that same asshole teacher punished for, you guessed it, being Jewish (although, I, like many others, would argue that children are not religious – they are just the children of parents who are religious – too bad they’re punished for their parents’ beliefs).
As a high schooler, I had friends of different denominations, and I did visit their places of worship to find out what was going on. Each time, bad things happened. At one place, we were treated to a couple of hours of terrifying and repetitive ‘going to hell’ dramatic skits, and afterwards, the adults held a friend and me captive for an hour trying to wheedle our addresses and phone numbers out of us. We managed to escape. At another place, I was taught that one of my parents was evil for practising hypnosis on their psych patients who were trying to quit smoking. Yeah, there was no convincing me of the merits or sense of religion. All I saw were lies, manipulation, and cruelty – even what I would consider law-breaking.
As an adult, I got to know of the prominent atheists – all were men, of course (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, to name a few). Women seldom are given recognition in this world for anything unless they are flashing their tits or doing something *evil*. And then it is notoriety rather than respect or recognition.
As I was becoming a militant atheist, I was also developing my radical feminist standpoint. Initially, I had felt some hope that atheism would help women, liberate them from mandatory, submissive sex roles. But I realized something. And it was a true downer.
Atheist men, including those famous nutsacks I mentioned above, hate women just as much as right-wing, religious or traditional men do. They just put a different spin on it. Some of them use sexist language and outright dismiss anything women have to say, but most of these dudes are wily. They manage to get a few women on board (aka fun-feminists) by supporting abortion and women’s ‘right’ to fuck as much as they want. But the motivation is not to support women’s true freedom. It is to maintain current privileged male access to women’s bodies. If women can have abortions, they’ll fuck more. If women fuck more, they’ll do lots of men for free. So it is more sexual power for men spun as ‘women’s liberation’. And fun-feminists gobble it up like indentured girls do a blow job in a porno – humiliated, and pretending to like it. There is an illusion of freedom and an illusion of male support. But true freedom and true power are still not accessible to women under the atheist and/or left-wing male agenda. And the easiest way to expose a male atheist for the misogynist he is is to a) refuse him sex, b) threaten to take away their porn/hookers/lap dancers, etc., or c) continue fighting for women’s real freedom in economics, politics, etc. You’ll get called every name in the book, receive rape threats, and have support rescinded.
You see, men don’t get behind women’s causes unless it benefits them in some easy-to-understand way that supports the existing power structure. Even though feminism benefits men much more than any domination-submission standpoint ever has or will, it is dependent upon men giving up violence and the power that comes from it. In a feminist world, men don’t get to rape, beat, murder, harass or otherwise dominate women. And to most men, including atheists, they don’t like that scenario.
Atheism is a good, good thing. Necessary for moral advancement. And necessary for female liberation. I stand by that. The problem is that any movement in the hands of men will continue to support the male agenda. Men can take any movement/proposal that has the power to liberate the oppressed and turn it into something that benefits themselves and the existing power structure.
So yes, be an atheist. Intellectual freedom is only possible if you let go of fairy tales. But do it on your own terms. And never go for atheism that doesn’t embrace radical feminism. Otherwise, it’s pointless.
Well Read and Willfully Ignorant
You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.Ray Bradbury
I’d go a step further with that quote. After all, it was said by a man, so he doesn’t see the whole picture. I’d say, the best way to prevent a group of people from existing, from contributing to a culture is to prevent them from writing and/or being read. Most people don’t read or take seriously those women authors who are allowed to be published. And most women are not allowed to be published unless they are willing to tell men’s version of the truth. So essentially, the world doesn’t get to read what is not allowed to be there. And that is the story of women.
There are tons of people who don’t read. They can read, but they just don’t. Can’t be bothered. It’s too much work, and requires too much sustained attention, I reckon. I was watching a documentary about the future of reading, and I recall a PhD student commenting that she had to retrain herself to read proper articles in a focused and analytical way after her modern immersion into social media skim-reading. I imagine that an actual work of literature must seem a sisyphean task when you normally spend your day ‘reading’ Twitter and Facebook feeds.
Even among the supposedly superiorly educated Chinese (according to people who’ve never been to, let alone worked in, China), reading non-mandatory books is not common. Last year, I brought in a pile of English language books from my own collection of modern literature to my writing class full of English majors here in China. I’d told them that to become a better writer, reading was a requirement. Only two of my students borrowed books. No one else even attempted to look at the books. Disappointing. But unsurprising. Only occasionally does a Chinese student tell me that they both read and enjoy reading non-mandatory books. It’s all about texting and reading other people’s constant status updates – just like in the West. How is this interesting?
Regarding documentaries, I know plenty of people who’ve never watched even a single one. And those don’t even require a fraction of the attention that a book requires!
But of those few who do read – and I’m talking about great works other than Fifty Shades of Shit or Maxim (seriously, I once dated a British dickface who told me with a straight face that Maxim was the ‘thinking man’s magazine’) – they are still woefully and willfully ignorant of topics and authors who should be a required part of school curricula. The tired old classics are standard, and those classics are written by penises for penises. For most school children and college students, women don’t exist on paper or in politics.
Women authors of literature and feminist philosophy and politics are unsurprisingly absent from school curricula all over the world. Dangerous thinking relegated to Women’s Studies programs, I suppose? As I mentioned, the classics are priapic, but even the edgy or avant-garde have a phallic bent. For many students, misogynists, J. D. Salinger and George Orwell and their social and political commentary have possibly appeared on school reading lists, but who but an English major in Canada has read Margaret Atwood (who is actually a better writer than both of those men)? And everyone knows who Karl Marx is, but Andrea Dworkin’s vast collection of work remains in obscurity in danger of complete obliteration.
But all of these works are available in the public domain, at least for now. There is no reason not to read, not to know.
There is something I find very interesting. I think about my liberal-minded male friends, the few of them I still keep around, and I know they read. They watch documentaries. They learn stuff. They know stuff. They can talk about a number of topics with a level of understanding. And they have one thing in common. They know zero, nothing, nada about women, women’s struggles, the women’s movement, the status of women today. About the movement that concerns half of the world’s population directly and the other half in an important way – they know bupkis. They can talk about other social movements. They know something about racial struggle.
Some of these men, once they come into contact with struggling groups, go out of their way to learn about what these people go through. One friend in the American TV and film business, upon meeting Albanians who had fled their country’s turmoil, went out of his way to learn about the history of their country and plight. But when he was casting actresses for one of his films, he couldn’t figure out why they made sexual overtures to him (other than the idea that all women are sluts always looking to service men). The idea that the film business requires female actors to ‘consent’ to rape in order to get jobs and how that came to be (female subordination/male domination) was completely beyond his educated mind. He got angry when I tried to tell him what many people have said about ‘his business’, the film industry, as an outsider. Yet, while I don’t work in entertainment, I am better read about the plight of women in film than he is. I’ll bet you money that he hasn’t read Rose McGowan’s recent whistleblowing of Hollywood’s widespread sexual assault of its female acting population. He doesn’t have to know about it. He benefits from women’s slavery and to know about it means he has to take responsibility and change the way he does business.
This is the willful ignorance of supposedly intelligent and educated men. The one group all of these men actually live in close proximity to, and sometimes in the same home with – women – they know nothing about. They can’t be bothered to learn about what their close female friends and loved ones have endured and continue to endure. Women don’t matter except when they stop delivering that which is taken for granted. They are objects. They serve men and men’s struggles. The struggle of men is assumed to be the struggle of women. There is no struggle outside that. The concerns of racial groups, religious groups, and gay people matter because men are members of those groups. Women aren’t men, so their continued slavery does not matter.
But these knowledgeable men do know about what the fun-feminists are doing. Oh yes, they are well aware of topless events in the name of political reform. They do know about slut shaming and the movement to embrace sluttiness as a defiant, ‘feminist’ response. They know those powerful ‘feminists’, the Suicide Girls. And by knowing about this kind of stuff, they think they have their fingers on the pulse of feminism. Women just want to fuck more! That’s all. And men don’t need to know more than that. They don’t need to explore the history of struggle. To look for real information might push them out of their comfort zone. Fun-feminists have given ignorance their stamp of approval as per historic male agenda.
Willful ignorance is dangerous. And it comes from failing to read. That failure to read starts at the school level with the censorship of books written by and about women. And it continues through college and into the world of work and survival. We destroy our culture by promoting willful ignorance, by de-emphasizing reading, and especially by negating the contributions of women writers. After all, you can be well read by today’s standards, and still incredibly ignorant by choice.
If You’re Blind, You Can’t See
Statements of the obvious. Who doesn’t love those? And yet, in our world, the blind lead. The one-eyed are not queens, and the fully-functioning two-eyed are trampled and enslaved and silenced and over-worked.
We worship our blind leaders. The men.
Confused, yet confident at the same time, men design solutions to problems they can’t truly see. We’re lucky if they acknowledge a problem at all. Often glaring problems are spun in a way as to seem natural or inevitable or something that will be worked out in the end or, my favourite – a necessary evil.
Example: Overpopulation
Let’s look at overpopulation. Women are blamed for this time and again. And the finger pointing comes from men. “They should stop getting pregnant.” “They should take birth control.” “They should stop having babies.” “They should get abortions.” There may be comments blaming women for their poverty. “Poor, uneducated women have too many babies.”
No where in the world are women in control of their bodies. In most places, marriage is mandatory. In all places in the world, women must provide sex to men, free or paid. There is no choice to refrain from hetero-sex without serious consequences. Men have designated penis-centred sex as MANDATORY. Most women don’t have access to birth control or abortion or safe spaces free from male pestering and abuse. Men have no interest in inconveniencing themselves with condoms, vasectomies, or masturbation-instead-of-sex. Women and girls get pregnant. Babies are born. The fault lies with men and the the penis-sex they force upon women. Stop mandatory fucking and give women education and opportunities (i.e., reduce dependence on men) and you will lower birth rates (and rape, and STIs, and female death, and female poverty, and and and).
But men won’t acknowledge that they are the source of the problem, so they point the finger at women, and it is, as usual, up to women to shoulder the blame and clean up. But it can’t be cleaned up until we get to the true source.
Example: Prostitution
Ah, the world’s oldest profession. WRONG. The world’s oldest form of slavery. Prostitution is not a profession. Like marriage, it is a direct manifestation of male dominance and female submission and slavery. Prostitution is not a choice, it is a last resort, an act of desperation, or enforced slavery (for many). For a few, it might be a misguided attempt at sexual liberation (as defined by men, of course).
Men may acknowledge it is a problem, but a women’s problem, in that either a) women are spreading diseases, b) contributing to the moral decay of society, or c) aren’t accessible ENOUGH for their liking. However, most men don’t really see prostitution as a serious problem. It doesn’t affect their daily lives, and for many, satisfies a ‘need’ they feel they are entitled to. They may even rationalize that prostitutes save ‘real women’ from the bulk of men’s demands and violence. They are a necessary evil.
But women are not the problem. The fact that prostitution exists at all is the problem and a symptom of vast inequality between men and women. The fact that men believe they are entitled to unfettered access to women’s bodies is the problem. The fact that men dictate women’s available economic options is the problem. The fact that this so-called job affects the status and safety of ALL women, including first and foremost, the prostituted, is the problem.
Women have shouldered the blame and do the bulk of the clean-up. Unfortunately, there is a growing movement of anti-feminist / pro-penis / pro-abuse women seeking to make sure prostitution is here to stay. And it will stay unless we get to the root of the problem: male dominance and entitlement.
Example: Poverty
Systems of currency are based on hierarchy. Hierarchy is a male invention. Capitalism, the ultimate currency-based system of hierarchy tells us that some of us have more value than others and deserve more than others. It also tells us that those of us who cannot survive under this system deserve what we get. Failure to survive is explained away by the men on top (and even men lower down on the hierarchy) as the simple result of ‘natural’ competition rather than bias, disadvantage and just plain unfairness due to misogyny, racism, etc.
Since before the invention of currency, women have been forced into a dependent role by men. The development of currency hurt women even more deeply and reinforced sexual servitude. Not permitted to work for currency, women were forced to assume roles as slaves to men. Women’s labour, even to this day, is primarily unpaid or underpaid. Prohibited from competing on a fair playing field, women have always been vulnerable – their fates tied to male whim and male mortality. Disobedience towards a man, being discarded by a man, or left alone following the death of a father or husband, have left women on the streets destitute and unskilled and in danger from the rest of male society, with very few options for survival.
And so we have poverty.
Men choose to blame the problem of women’s poverty on the women themselves. Women are lazy, vain, focused on their looks, stupid, unable to compete, baby machines, weak, etc. You name it, men have used it as the reason why so many women live in poverty, why women should be kept out of paying jobs, and why poverty exists at all. They’ll never see themselves at the root of the problem.
Male dominance, enforced female dependence, and reliance upon an unfair currency system that over-rewards penised-people for doing unremarkable things are the problems. But until we can name the root of the problem correctly, poverty will continue. Women will shoulder the blame, and will form the bulk of the unpaid/low-paid clean-up crew. Men, meanwhile, will pontificate, design ineffective solutions or ignore the problem altogether.
The Bottom Line
The ‘problem solvers’ who tend to get attention and funding and political support are almost always male. Women are only included when there is blame to be doled out or grunt work to be done on implementing solutions. Women are scapegoats and free labour clean-up crews. Always.
When you don’t approach a socio-econo-enviro-political problem from a feminist perspective, you will never be able to get to the heart of the matter and solve it. Enough with the blind kings, already.
Why It’s Important to Fight Western Misogyny
From all corners, we are exposed to the patronizing tsk-tsking, mansplaining, and of course, much more aggressive threats, from men who think Western women need to shut the fuck up over their imagined oppression. Like all men who think of themselves as intellectuals, they like to trot out Muslim women as examples of the truly oppressed. In mansplainy fashion, they try to derail Western feminists by telling them they should stop whining and focus on helping these poor Muslim women in far-off places – to not do so is anti-feminist or something like that. Of course, not a single one of these offended men helps (or likely even knows personally) the Muslim women of whom they speak. Not one of these men assists at local women’s shelters, let alone marches/petitions to stop honour killings or FGM, donates money to feminist causes abroad, or volunteers in war-torn countries to help oppressed Muslim women. Rather, like the men in the cultures they are criticizing, they are simply using these Muslim women, and easily throw them aside and forget about them once they are finished their tirade against uppity Western bitches and their whining about the imagined harms of pornography or strip clubs or pervasive rape culture. The ‘Muslim women have it worse’ trope is a convenient and oft-used tool to shut feminists up about valid misogyny.
But there is a lot to fight against at home, and it is at home that one always should start because fighting what you know and experience gives you your best chance at success. Success is important if one is to provide an example to the world at large. And if the above male response to Western women speaking out isn’t evidence enough that there is work to be done at home, then we can easily find other things to fight against. And one could start with the current, media-friendly, sexay-fun image of faux-feminism. To those examining feminism for the first time, a false image can be quite confusing and damaging.
Pornsick lefty ‘male feminists‘ and libertarian chest-beaters along with their choice-feminist pole-dancing bimbettes (aka Third Wavers or fun-feminists) are lockstepping American women and girls (and unfortunately other Western-world citizens infected with the americo-virus) towards the other extreme of female sexual slavery: 24/7 pussy with a side of empowerment and cheeky smiles. It’s the porn/prostitution/stripping are feminist choices crowd. These days, Western girls are trained in the basics of sluthood (or How to Be a Modern Girlfriend) before they learn Intro to Algebra in school. And the grown-up, self-actualized, I’m-a-slut-so-what feminists are getting right pissed off when someone like me suggests that they’re hurting women as a global class, regardless of how free they feel as individuals to have made their ‘choices’. Yes, individual choices can hurt groups.
It’s all just misogyny taken to one extreme on the female sex class continuum.
I can just imagine all the tired, repetitive, indignant comments I’d receive from those who choose to miss the point to stave off cognitive dissonance (being offended feels soooo much better), which is one of the reasons I don’t allow comments here. They are a waste of time to read and respond to. Deprogramming is a long process, and a comment war on a blog is not how to go about it. Plus, I don’t have the patience to deal with the deluded and the willful ignorant. I’m better with those who truly wish to help themselves. Suffice it to say that I am pro-human rights, wish that all women were free from brainwashing to conform to male demands, and believe that sex and how it manifests could be decided freely between parties outside a structure of dominance. We don’t have that situation now. Not sure we ever will given how few women are really interested in standing up for true liberation. We don’t have the critical mass.
Why is it important to fight this ’empowerment’ and ‘choice’ nonsense that some so-called Western feminists insist they have? Well, when women on other points of the female slavery continuum, such as those who are forced into marriage or who are forced to cover themselves up to hide their filthy female bodies, take what fun/choice-fems do and say as freedom and feminism, they often don’t see the appeal. They don’t necessarily see them as free and don’t see Western freedom as a great alternative to what they endure currently. They may, in fact, see fun/choice-fems as the real slaves (or possibly sister-slaves on the continuum). And when one doesn’t like the alternative to one’s current situation, one is not likely to fight against the latter and will remain oppressed as per local custom.
That’s not good.
Unfortunately, nowhere in the world is there an example of what true freedom for women looks like. I mean, there are radical, Western feminists who are walking the talk and going about it in a way that makes sense. We can tell who they are because they are not receiving the enthusiastic male support that the pole dancers are. And that should tell us something. Men always go along with shit that maintains or increases their privileges. But as for a healthy model we can point to to demonstrate what female liberation and true feminism looks like? It ain’t there. I think we’d need a separate planet for that – Patriarchy wouldn’t allow a separate, liberated society to exist unmolested, unattacked, unraped in such close proximity. There may be small pockets of women’s communities, such as this small separatist community of rape survivors in Kenya who are going strong after 25 years. How unmolested are these individual communities by angry, insecure men? I can’t tell you. But in general, and on an individual level, there are serious consequences for women who cry out for liberation and/or separatism – hell, just voicing an opinion in public can bring on merciless attacks from men as well as their handmaidens.
Western women are nowhere near free or safe, but we do have a little more freedom to speak out than do our sisters in more oppressive cultures. Men may still hate us deeply and will fight us viciously to keep their right to hurt us with impunity, but we can and do find public platforms to speak out against the misogyny and Patriarchy that we live with. And our successes will fuel movements and individual rebellion in other places.
That, at least, is the idea.
A Young Chinese Woman’s Exposure to the World
As a university instructor in China, I take great delight in mentoring young women who venture outside the traditional ‘women are property’ box. Planting seeds of personal rebellion is my specialty, as is providing validation for the stirrings of feminist thinking that normally get stamped out by controlling parents and concerned friends.
One of my young protégés, a lively English major who took my writing class last semester, had an exciting summer. We had lunch last week and I heard all about it. She had joined up with a volunteer organization that brings young people from different countries together to teach children. I’m not quite clear on what they teach. I thought it was English, but most of the people who came to China to teach were not native speakers of English. Maybe culture? There were young men and women from Vietnam, Indonesia, Russia, Egypt, Tanzania, and the US, in addition to the local Chinese.
But I was less interested in the teaching experience and more curious about my former student’s exposure to people from around the world. On the whole, I think it was a good thing. But there were several alarming elements.
First, it becomes quite clear how sheltered and naive the Chinese are. All of the foreigners, save the Vietnamese and the Indonesian, spent time teaching my young friend English slurs and general swearing. And most of it was woman-hating, of course. She learned how to say cunt, bitch, fuck you, retard, etc. And she also got some odd, inaccurate advice from the non-native English speakers. Apparently, “Screw you!” is a very polite form of “Fuck you!” Huh? I worry about a) ESLers, and b) 19-year-olds, teaching the intricacies of language to the impressionable. So, we had an in-depth discussion of nasty words and who they hurt (usually women, and other oppressed groups), and by the end, I think she was much less enthusiastic about hurling insults at people. But swearing is the number one thing most people want to learn when they are first exposed to a new language. I just give a different perspective on it – I do, after all, swear a lot, and put a lot of thought into why and who gets harmed by it.
Second, the poor thing ‘fell in love with’ the young Egyptian dude in the group. She thought he was awesome. Luckily, he was crushing on the properly diminutive and dainty Vietnamese girl and wasn’t interested in my more outgoing Chinese friend. I got to watch a few videos she took featuring him posturing in his macho way, and I wasn’t quite so taken with him as she was. Personally, I don’t find Egyptian men or Egyptian culture all that progressive. The country is, after all, in full support of female genital mutilation – over 90% of the current female population has lost their clits and/or had their fuck holes sewn up in the name of ‘respecting women’. I personally have had way too much experience with the rapeyness and violence of Muslim men (both strangers and a man I had the misfortune of dating) in a few different countries, and I worry about non-Muslim women who get involved or find themselves trapped with men of that persuasion. Men are scary enough on their own, but when they are religious, there is a whole nuther layer of justification for woman-hatred present.
Third, my young friend got an instructional dose of the ‘female dichotomy according to men’ care of the young Tanzanian man. The viewpoint certainly isn’t limited to Tanzania or to black men – it’s universal. But the dude laid the viewpoint out quite clearly and matter-of-factly. And my friend, being young, female, Chinese and naive, didn’t see anything wrong with it. The viewpoint goes something like this:
There are two kinds of girls: the ones you have fun with and the ones you can take home to your parents and marry.
What my friend didn’t understand, because Chinese girls are not educated about sex, was that ‘the ones you have fun with’ translates into: bad girls, the ones you can fuck, but don’t have to ‘respect’. She didn’t see that men have this thing called privilege where they can place value on women. You fuck the trash and then throw it away when you’re done, but you marry the pure. And both types of women are objects. You are a whore one way or the other – either a public whore (the bad girl/slut – girlfriend material) or a private whore (the pure, wifey-wifey material that you can only rape after marriage).
I made sure to explain all of this.
Do I do young women a favour by telling them how the world really is? How men will always enslave us? I don’t know. As a Chinese woman, she doesn’t have options. She must get married. Her parents definitely don’t want her marrying a foreigner – that is just racist, Chinese culture talking. But marrying a Chinese isn’t going to be any better than marrying a foreigner – they are all men, and marriage is the slavery of women. So is it better to go into female slavery naively than going into it with wide open eyes? I don’t know. I’d like to think that being prepared is better than being bitterly disappointed that the fairy tale that girls are force fed from birth isn’t true.
I was much less naive when I was 20 and a budding feminist to boot, but I do so wish I’d had an older woman in my life to open my eyes to reality. It would have saved me a lot (not all) of the grief I went through in navigating a world of woman-hate.
~~~
Addendum written after leaving China. That young woman never spoke to me again after that lunch. Not an isolated incident, in my experience. Most women don’t want reality. The rape-coloured glasses fit way too well and make life shiny and fun, at least if you don’t pay attention to detail. Some women will tell people like me that we are too ‘negative’. Presenting facts is ‘negative’, logic is negative, and we just can’t have negativity around us, right? I call it realistic, but ya know… Most women are just weak. They know what I say is true, but they also know there is immense punishment involved in holding men responsible for what they do. For example, she (and 99.9% of women in the world) socially punish me and women like me for speaking out through isolation. As well, this woman will get married and be financially better off than me – that is the financial punishment a woman like me experiences. And there is so much more.
It’s not Our Fault Your Boy-Child is Stupid
Oh men. When girls and women wise up to your bullshit and beat you at your own game, you give the table a good ole spin. It’s a tired, long-used tactic and we ain’t buying it no more.
The game goes like this. Men predominate in a domain of work or academics. Women are grudgingly granted access. Access with serious conditions like harassment, lower pay, rape threats, actual rape and other violence, exclusion, lack of promotions and opportunities, etc. Yet despite all these unfair and criminal conditions, women not only excel in said domain, but exceed the ability and performance of men. Men flee from said dominion in droves, tails between their legs. Men find excuses for their failure, relegating the domain to the ‘feminine’, lowering its value, denigrating the new experts, and implying strongly that there is something wrong with the domain since women are good at it. It would be funny, if it weren’t so fucking pathetic and horrible, especially since salaries and respect for those jobs tend to go down once men dismiss them as women’s work. But we’ve seen it time and time again.
Education
And so we come to the newest domain of disdain. I’m referring to the growing reality that boys can’t handle school. When they’re faced with actual competition, that is.
For hundreds of years, education was artificially made the domain of males. Men, afraid of the demonstrated potential of female intelligence and power, put a stop to any and all possibility for actualization. Girls and women were banned from school and condemned to lives of marital rape, mandatory pregnancy, cleaning, cooking and shopping. In some cultures, wealthy girls were given educations in music, sewing, and languages, although not in a to-be-taken-seriously way that would allow them to escape from men. In many cultures today, girls are still barred from school and from many professions, and can be killed for attempting to learn. Even in China, where I live, impoverished families will choose to educate boys over girls. The girls get to stay home as slaves. In some countries, the girls will be sold into prostitution so that the family can eat and have one fewer mouth to feed.
Only very recently in human history have girls and women been allowed (in most countries) to walk the hallowed halls of schools, albeit under constant misogynistic threat of violence and actual sexual assault and rape; routine dismissal of credibility; exclusion from ‘boys’ clubs’ and opportunities; and exposure to male-centric learning materials and environments. Despite all this, girls and women have soared academically, achieving in decades what it took boys and men centuries to learn. It makes you wonder how much further we would be as a society if girls had been allowed to study centuries ago. It is truly sad that men will sacrifice global human well-being to keep their dicks hard.
Anyhow, fast-forward to today. The majority of men as well as handmaidens who have spawned boy-children feel threatened and angry. We’re seeing something interesting in schools. Unlike during most of scholastic history, boys actually have serious competition now. Girls. And the boys aren’t measuring up. Despite the violence and dismissal girls still face even in First World countries, they are kicking boys’ asses academically. The possibilities resulting from girls and women succeeding finally in education are very positive.
Girls and women tend to do positive things with their education – giving back to their communities, sharing their knowledge online and on the ground, starting pro-social projects, and contributing fewer children of their own to the world’s overpopulation. Males on the other hand, tend towards more selfish, destructive and violent goals when they are given education and opportunities. Women use their education to help lift everyone’s quality of life, while men generally will use their education to maintain dominance structures that hurt girls and women. So, more educationally successful girls and women means a better world for all – including boys/men.
But we have to figure out what to do with the growing number of angry violent boys, moron’s rights activists (MRAs), boors’ (boys) rights activists, and handmaidens who are threatening the positive change we are seeing in girls’ status and the potentially positive future of our communities.
The kinds of problems we’re seeing in boys are nothing new, but when set down beside girls’ success, they indicate a possible and very serious problem with male mental deficiency that has likely always been present. When faced with a slightly more level playing field, boys regularly:
- can’t read
- especially can’t read books with female characters
- can’t pay attention
- can’t refrain from violence
- can’t treat others including the teacher with a modicum of respect
- can’t deal with more inclusive learning materials that treat girls/women as human
- can’t work cooperatively
While this is being commonly reported in the US and other Western countries, I see this among my male Chinese university students. I maintain that it is nothing new. What is new is the availability of comparison data. We are finally seeing data on girls in the West, and they are doing better even with the threat of violence, actual violence and pervasive misogyny that has always been present. In places like China, those data aren’t in yet. Chinese girls still have enormous pressure to underperform AND with the shortage of girls (40 million girls should exist that don’t due to selective abortion and female infanticide), there is massive pressure for even the ‘ugly and unmarriageable’ to marry and breed instead of pursue higher education, and when they are allowed education, they’re relegated to girl-acceptable professions. I teach science and engineering students primarily, and there are usually no more than 2-3 girls in a class of 50. It has nothing to do with intelligence or aptitude. But in China, men MUST be smarter than the women they marry, and they MUST make more money than women, so there is a lot of faking it going on on the part of girls and a lot of relegation of girls to low-pay professions.
I remember reading a post on this phenomenon in the last year, where some clueless, American mother was lamenting over the fact that her mentally deficient son wasn’t able to read any children’s books because all the new books had female main characters doing “implausible things”. It was bizarre. Girls have been raised on books and films (still are, actually) featuring puffed up males doing impossible things. Yet, they are kicking ass in school. How can girls manage, but boys can’t…? This mother certainly wasn’t doing her son any favours by enabling his deficiency and privilege.
The ‘Feminization’ of Education?
It has been suggested by the angry and stupid and privileged that this magical failure of boys (again, it is not anything new, it just shows up when boys have to compete with girls and the intelligence and talent bars are raised) is due to the ‘feminization of education’. This is a new term that has been designed by MRAs as an excuse for male ineptness. I’m not even really sure what they mean by it – their descriptions are usually based on lies or there isn’t actually a problem from an ethical point of view. They see a problem with girls being protected from rape and sexual violence and intimidation in the classroom. They see a problem with equal opportunities for girls. They see a problem with taking away historically unfair advantages from boys. They see a problem with a merit-based system and prefer a penis-based system. What is ‘feminizing’ about addressing human rights abuses? Nowhere in education are boys being treated the way girls have been treated throughout history (and still today). These loud, angry types are deluded.
In fact, it is a matter of adaptation vs privilege.
Girls, in order to survive in a world that hates them, have always had to adapt to their surroundings. Finding that their proclivities for learning or greatest interests are routinely dismissed, they find a way to get through, learn, and succeed. This is the way women and girls have always survived. Adaptation.
But boys have never had to adapt. They have always been catered to. But that is changing, luckily, and we’re seeing how well they are dealing with having their privilege challenged. Taking away an unfair advantage (privilege) is not taking away rights. This is the key thing that MRAs and handmaidens don’t get. Ever. An equal playing field is the best way to find the best students. And while the playing field is still not equal and still is biased in favour of boys, girls are showing themselves to be very successful, nonetheless.
Instead of resorting to threats and violence and hand-wringing and changing policy to hurt girls yet again or dismiss education as some ‘girl thing’, I suggest that boys learn to adapt and work hard for the first time in history. Adapting is a basic learning skill. It is basic humanity. And it is necessary to survive as a being. If you don’t adapt, you die out. That’s what happens to things that have outlived their purpose or have no purpose. And I have no problem with useless, and especially violent, things dying out…
What You Won’t Find in Discussions of Syria
I’ve been reading about the latest nonsense in the Syrian saga and refugee crisis, and one thing strikes me – not as odd, but as typical.
There is no mention of the fact that only in a world run by men is this kind of horror story possible.
With men in charge, you get dominance paradigms. You get religion; you get female slavery; you get baby-overproduction through enforced pregnancy and rape; you get guns, bombs, tear gas; you get human trafficking; you get war, war, war.
None of the articles I’ve read has mentioned the word Patriarchy. Neither has any criticized the disgraceful, violence of Islam. Everything is couched in political terms that takes responsibility away from men as a group. It’s the government elite or radicals/fanatics, not men, not religious men.
Neither this nor any other ‘political’ problem will ever be solved until we can get down to it and call it what it is: a direct result of Patriarchy, religion and the enslavement of women.
But without men shitting all over the world on a daily basis, what would the media write about? War and violence make money on so many fronts. We’re addicted, and peace under rational equality and freedom would take all the fun and adventure out of life.
Naiveté, Stupidity, and Ignorance
Let’s take a look at a few terms that get confused often. I will reference men and privileged people, but my end goal is to ask a question about religious goombas of all flavours.
Naiveté
Naiveté is a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment. It implies innocence or a lack of sophistication about how the world works. It is a word that can usually be applied to children that have been fortunate enough to miss out on serious abuses of one sort or another.
Naiveté is neither good nor bad – it is just a typical stage people who have not yet had exposure to a wide range of experiences go through. But it often implies a value judgement when it is applied to girls and women. In this case, it blames or insults the person in question regardless of whether she is naive or she is not (i.e., a naive girl is a stupid girl, and a girl who is not naive is a slut or seductress). Girls and women, can never win in this world, and this is just one of many examples that show the damned if you do, damned if you don’t rule of ladyhood.
Nevertheless, with age and life experience, most people lose their naiveté and find themselves in another state of being.
Unfortunately for some, naiveté can morph into willful ignorance with age either as a coping mechanism (for women) or as a maintainer of privilege (with men). For example, regarding the latter, a good friend of mine is a 47-year-old man who was shocked to find out from some recent news story that a huge number of men use online dating sites advertising hot women in order to cheat on their wives. What appeared to be naiveté was really a willful ignorance (see below). How can a middle-aged American man not know that men are shitheads? Because he isn’t on the receiving end of misogynistic abuse every day of his life, and he has no reason to give a shit about what women experience. Because he hasn’t been forced to open his eyes, he is not responsible for anything. And that’s how men can look innocent/naive with looks of horror on their faces when really they just can’t be bothered to notice how their lives are better than women’s. Note that men, once eyes are opened (honestly, I do believe they know exactly what is going on in the world, but just feign innocence), still don’t do anything to end the hurt done to women.
Ignorance
Ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge or information. Every single one of us is ignorant about many things. It is impossible to know everything even if we devoted every waking moment to learning. Thus is cannot be a blameworthy state on its own. In certain contexts, however, it might be suspect. For example, it can be sometimes surprising when a young, supposedly educated adult or group of adults appears to lack basic information in a number of rather important and basic areas of knowledge. We’ve heard this said frequently of the current, young, American population – most university students can barely deal with a map of their own country, never mind a world map. The comment on their ignorance is one of blame, although how much of it is the fault of the young people rather than their parents, the government, and the education system that they are so woefully ignorant of what is going on around them?
Stupidity
Stupidity is a lack of intelligence, understanding, or ability to reason. Some believe that stupidity is a biological limitation of the brain, much like height is a limitation of physical stature, that one is born with, and that cannot be overcome, even with great effort to learn or improve. Like with height, some believe that there is a range one is limited to at birth and that the conditions one lives in determine the point within that range that one will achieve.
While limited intelligence in and of itself is not blameworthy, when coupled with privilege and especially willful ignorance, it can be very dangerous. It doesn’t take great intelligence to be able to understand basic human rights for all, you see.
Some people use the term stupid to refer to behaviour, especially harmful (to self and others) and cruel behaviour, which of course invokes blame. Whether stupid behaviour results from privilege or from biological stupidity, I’m not sure. But note that most behaviour that could be categorized as stupid is committed by boys and men. There are tons of movies and television programs devoted to celebrating stupid male behaviour. Also note that girls are more likely to be called stupid, especially when they do things that make it easier for males to hurt or take advantage of them. I am somewhat loathe to call females stupid when males hurt them, moreso when the female is young and truly naive to the sheer horrors of what males perpetrate every second of every day.
Willful Ignorance
Willful ignorance is the decision to ignore evidence and information that contradicts one’s beliefs or that may lead to a loss of benefits. This kind of behaviour or way of thinking/being often results from and maintains a state of privilege (e.g., being male, being religious, being straight, being a breeder, being non-white in a Western country these days, etc.) or as a coping mechanism in women who might find themselves in danger if they allow themselves to fully absorb the reality of their slavery.
To admit one is wrong or deliberately ignorant requires one to be humble, to take responsibility for one’s behaviour, and to give up things no human should do or have (e.g., control or ownership of another human). For women, to admit reality can be very difficult and requires some serious decision-making regarding one’s slave state as a woman. It is decidely easier in many ways for a woman to maintain a state of willing ignorance than to live in reality.
While one may understand the psychology of willful ignorance, it is still the most blameworthy and shameful of states to be in, and it is a state occupied by a lot of men and by religious people (especially religious men of all races). Note that I place much less blame on women who are willfully ignorant of their slavery (Note – 2021 – although my views have been changing a bit on this issue over time as 6 years have passed since this post was originally written). Some women have little choice to escape without risk of death, rape, beatings and/or stalking/harassment, and pretending all is well is sometimes a necessary way of surviving. Yet, at the same time, there are plenty of women who don’t risk death, but who just don’t want to deal with reality or making hard decisions. Unfortunately, these women’s choices affect ALL women negatively. As someone who has rejected happy-fun-lies and made some hard grounded-in-reality choices (out of the limited choices men allow me as a woman), I can tell you that while I have attained more freedom in my mind, there is a lot of pain and vulnerability associated with my choice to face reality and act on it. I blame the men and the shitty slavery system they have created and maintain. Women shouldn’t have to escape reality and tell themselves lies just to exist.
Final note: one can be willfully ignorant and very stupid at the same time. And those folks are dangerous.
A Question
A question that often gets batted around both online and in the meat world is: Are religious people stupid? My knee-jerk reaction is a resounding ‘YES!’ But let’s consider a little.
I think religious people fall into all of the categories discussed here. The children are naive. The fact that they are brainwashed into the major religious cults is child abuse. I wish Richard Dawkins hadn’t have backed down when he was confronted during an interview by a Muslim male breeder. Said Muslim asked Dawkins whether he – a religious father – was a child abuser. Dawkins, of course, said ‘no’. I guess it’s hard to tell people to their faces that they are in fact doing something horrible to their children.
Many religious people are ignorant. And I blame this on their families, idiocy on the parts of certain governments, and dreadful education systems that place religious teaching higher or on par with the teaching of science, philosophy and logic, for example.
Many religious people are biologically stupid, and I think early religious training limits how far people can push their brains within our given personal ranges of intelligence. But don’t take my word for it. People are researching the link between religion and intelligence. For example, a meta-analysis of 63 studies does indeed show a strong correlation between religious beliefs and intelligence. Lower intelligence is related to higher religiosity. And smart people just tend not to be religious. Nevertheless, it isn’t news to me. These are obvious correlations, although having data to back them up is necessary, of course.
Religion is just magical thinking that preys on fear and reinforces fear-based misogyny. Intelligence allows us to work logically though fear and adjust our world views accordingly to become better people. With low intelligence, easy, bullshit non-answers are appealing and soothing. Hate is justified and requires no personal responsibility. No effort required.
Lastly, I think most, if not all, religious people are willfully ignorant. To see reality would be to reject religion for the hateful, backwards, dangerous nonsense that it is. Clear-thinking and humility are incompatible with religion. To be willfully ignorant, one has to feel that there is something to lose in accepting reality. Like men with their privilege over women, so too do the religious have the same things to lose – comfort, political power, money, sanctioned violence, and that smug sense of superiority that you see in most religious people. Give up the privilege and you just have to accept being… human.
Perverting Herstory – A Slice from China
As is well understood by women, the history of humankind is the story of men. And it is a boring story of repetition: rape; war; rape; the stealing of women’s ideas; rape; denying education to women; rape; the development of various economic/religious/political systems of dominance favouring men; rape; war; more rape, ad infinitum. Boring. And the story is pretty much the same no matter which culture or part of the world you drill down into. And there is no end in sight. History is written by the victors, and men are always the victors. History is written to get men off, not to regret, not to learn, not to become better beings. It’s just the stuff of boners.
I’ll provide one teeny tiny example.
A few years ago, I lived and worked in Nanjing, China. For those who know little to nothing about China, Nanjing is famous for a few things. For one, it is a former capital of China, and secondly, it was the site of one of the most brutal mass rapes and mass murders in history. Over a period straddling December 1937 – January 1938, Japanese troops occupied Nanjing and rained atrocity down on the women and other citizens of Nanjing. I’m not going to recount the whole history here – you can check out Iris Chang’s book, “The Rape of Nanking”, to avoid being forced to swallow a male point-of-view. Men tend to focus on how off-duty Chinese soldiers were executed – as if that was the highlight and greatest tragedy of the whole disgusting mess.
Anyhow, modern-day Japan poured money into the building of a memorial/museum in Nanjing. And I went. It is a spectacular building.
I did, however, feel there was a cock-centric over-focus on soldiers being killed. Personally, I couldn’t give a shit about soldiers. They sign up to kill and be killed. Many of them rape local women/girls and/or use prostitutes, which demotes them to non-human status for me. So fuck ’em. War is a man’s invention. Not women’s. You make your bed, you sleep in the damn thing, men. I just wish women could be left out of the whole business since it has nothing to do with us.
Now, out of the whole museum, there was one wall that also included a corner, detailing the whole rape business, which for me was the centre of the whole multi-week siege. I think it would have been over sooner had there been no women there. The display consisted of all sorts of large photos and text describing what had happened.
But I couldn’t read any of it. Why?
Because I couldn’t get close to it at all. There were 200+ Chinese men all pushing and shoving each other, including me, trying to get close enough to see the naked photos of the Chinese women. Unfortunately, for the men, there were no actual mid-action rape photos – just dead women with bayonets sticking out of their vaginas, and naked, devastated, brutalized women lined up for viewing, crouching, cowering, crying. Still, titillating stuff for China (where porn is illegal). These fucking turds were excited by the idea of what had happened. No learning going on. No tears shed (except mine). Just excitement. And hatred for the Japanese, but also excitement.
Naked, brutalized women. Very, very cool stuff.
By the way, there was no pushing or over-crowding or excitement at any of the other displays. And there were no women pushing or shoving to get close to the rape display. Actually, the Chinese women visiting the museum avoided that whole corner for the most part.
But this whole phenomenon is not unique to China. Men all over the world love depictions of rape. Love seeing women degraded, hurt, brutalized. Even if they don’t consider themselves rapists (ahem…), they can live vicariously through those who do.
And women don’t fantasize about rape (please read that again American porn-dogs). Women who claim they do have been socialized/trained/brainwashed by the Patriarchal ‘romance narrative’ into believing that seduction and sexayness need to be violent. There is nothing healthy or ‘natural’ about getting hot about the idea of rape. Sorry.
I appreciated the memorial and museum very much, but I was disgusted. Nothing ever changes no matter how much time goes by. Men still love to hate women. And we still accept it.
Story Ending Never 
You must be logged in to post a comment.