Category Archives: Patriarchy
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
P is for Pills
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
I’ll admit that I’ve been both threatening and looking forward to writing this post for a long time. I’m going to attempt to do a brief navigation through the various groups that you’ll find online and in the meat world if you’re looking for a drug of choice that soothes your patriarchal suffering and that may attempt to address women’s issues or even feminism. The problem is that so many of these groups, especially the ones where members say they are feminists or where the word ‘feminism’ even appears in the name, have little to nothing to do with real feminism. So newbies can find themselves lost, confused, and sometimes abused if they enter a group and start asking legitimate questions.
Please note that I’m definitely not going to cover every single group or movement out there, so if you see something missing that you have had experience with, please throw it in the comments. Likewise, please feel free to share any experiences you’ve had with any of the groups I mention. I’d be very appreciative, and I know some readers would as well.
I’m going to give this post a slightly longer title: P is for Pills, Pablum and Pretenders, so that I adequately cover the range of groups I’ll get into. I’m also providing an article published by the Anti-Defamation League that looks at a number of ‘pilled’ groups run by men. It is important to understand that male groups and female groups, even if they use similar jargon, are always different, especially when they are labelled ‘extreme’. All extreme male groups are violent and often engage in domestic, international or online terrorism of target enemies. Women’s groups are sometimes labelled extreme even by other female-oriented groups, but they are never violent or actually extreme, objectively speaking. And they don’t target innocent ‘enemies’ the way all men’s groups do. These women’s groups are called extreme for the exact same reasons that women are called ‘crazy’ or ‘illogical’; males are threatened by female ideas that speak truths about the male nature and behaviour, so they try to discredit them, and women are smacked in the face with cognitive dissonance brought on by the truths about men and female complicity with patriarchy, and they react with denouncement. But here’s the thing: most, if not all, of the groups I’m going to talk about have been banned on at least one social media platform. Men’s groups are seldom, if ever, banned – even if they talk about rape and other violence that women apparently deserve. But women talking about women’s issues are a threat to society and must be silenced in a community that values free speech.
And with that, let’s jump in. We’ll start with the pills.
While males like to refer to being either blue-pilled or red-pilled, and it applies within a political context and among violent incels who all want women to die after some serious raping, within women’s circles, the pills have nothing to do with violence.
Blue Pill
This isn’t really a thing, but I’m including it as sort of the default heterosexual woman state. This is the ‘ignorance is bliss’ approach to life. Question nothing, accept everything or at least pretend it doesn’t exist, especially if it doesn’t directly affect you.
Red Pill
Some people equate this to what is known as Female Dating Stratey. Red Pill males are incels who are violent misogynists who believe that the world operates to benefit women and they need to do what is necessary to turn that around. For women, there is no violence involved. Women know that men are garbage, but they still, for some reason, need to get themselves one. They prioritize themselves, develop a ‘queen’ mentality, seem to acknowledge that their cunts have value, and focus on finding a high-value male to match their own high value while minimizing the harm males do to them. It is super gross. They are in no way equal to the red pill incel mentality, but I can’t understand these women at all. And needless to say, this is not feminism, even if today’s libfem might call it female empowerment.
If you really need to know more about this, there are women who have written handbooks on the topic including here.
Pink Pill Feminism
Pink Pill, by itself, is used by men to refer to the female version of incels (or involuntary celebates), called femcels. But while online groups of these women exist, and even do call themselves femcels, they are nothing like the males. I’ve cruised through some of their group discussions and the content just makes me feel sad. These women claim they can’t get men for sex or dating, but unlike the men, their frustration is turned inward and they go on and on about being too ugly. They live in a deep fog of self-hatred and depression, which is so completely unnecessary. The men, on the other hand, blame women for all their problems and fantasize about doing horrific things to women.
Pink Pill Feminism, on the other hand, isn’t true feminism, but a forum for mostly heterosexual women to come together and document straight male bullshit without an element of ‘Not All Men!!!’. They were banned from Reddit and at one point the site Pink Pill Feminism was set up, and to sign up, you had to confirm your female status through Zoom, to prevent infiltration by males. At this writing, the site appears to be down. I’m aware of another site, ThePinkPill.co, which looks like it is under development and you can enter your email to be updated when and if something happens.
Black Pill Feminism
I’ve spent considerably more time in this community and I’ve met some awesome, intelligent and no-bullshit women through discussions. However, I am not 100% with the tenets, even though they consider me to be a classic Black-Piller. Black-Pillers believe everything is biological – both male violence and female subservience – and that the latter has been bred into women and there is no escaping from worshipping males and letting them dominate. I am a firm believer in a Nature-Nurture intertwining. Males are biological wired to be violent and that can’t be changed. But they have developed a sociological system that rewards them for their violence and that rewards women for submitting and punishes them brutally for rebelling. I don’t in any way believe women are biologically wired for subservience.
This group is considered to be ‘extreme’ and was banned on Reddit. A small group started up and currently barely exists on Saidit.net. I don’t consider it to be real feminism, and it can attract some rather woman-hating and angry women (if they are women, that is – it is anonymous, of course…), but some of the more interesting and honest discussions I’ve encountered have happened in Black Pill circles, and you never encounter ‘Not All Men!’.
Gender Critical
This is not a group I typically hang out in, as I don’t consider it to be feminism. If you consult Scrotalpedia, they equate it with Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminism. It is absolutely not radical feminism, and group members are generally not truly opposed to gender, especially if you are critiquing women’s performance of it. Rather, this group is opposed to and focused on the Trans Cult and its encroachments on what is typically seen to be the domain of females. You don’t actually have to be feminist to oppose the trans, and many of the members are practising straight women who also hate homosexuality. They really should rename themselves ‘Trans Critical’.
Real feminists are not gender critical, but gender abolitionists because they see the major role gender plays in forcing women into subservience, discomfort, and an infantilized, but hyper-sexualized state – all pandering to the oppressor class.
Socialist, Communist and Anarcha-Feminism
These are related feminisms that agree on one point: that patriarchy and capitalism work together to exploit and oppress women. They focus on unpaid motherhood (which it’s not) and reproductive rights, which means that heterosexuality and breeding are centred and a growing number of women, including lesbians, the celibate, and the child-free are completely alienated. Also, since the primary focus is on economic class, what is neglected is the most serious patriarchal problem that affects all women in all corners of the globe: male violence. Giving women more money doesn’t solve male violence and the fear that women are forced to live with. You can be rich or middle-class, and that won’t save you from being raped or murdered, in other words. In my opinion, this is one of the major problems with women piggy-backing on male movements. Instead of taking a social issue and then injecting women into it, you never really get to what is most important. You need to start with women and then analyze their issues instead of the opposite.
More detail on socialist feminism.
Eco-Feminism
Like the previous splinter group, eco-feminists hold patriarchy and capitalism responsible for female domination and the destruction of the environment. I remember sitting in a college class in Environmental Management a few years ago, and there was a tiny blurb in the textbook on eco-feminism, and the male prof launched into a diatribe on the ridiculousness of feminism. Despite never once announcing to the class that I was a feminist, people started shooting glances at me. I am such a non-descript person, yet there is something about me that just screams militant man-hater… One of the military females in the class gave me the side-eye and started yelling out, “I hate feminists!”, which didn’t surprise me in the least as I can’t think of anything more antithetical to femalehood than the military. Needless to say, I didn’t say a word, but sat there with as neutral a look on my face as I could manage.
Anyhow, while I agree with some of the issues eco-feminism addresses, these women frequently partner with men, and they are still piggy-backing on a male movement. Many of these groups don’t go far enough in holding men responsible for the destruction of the planet. The other issue I have, and I wrestle with it constantly as it can’t be solved, is the opposition to meat-eating. I’ve been vegetarian, and it nearly destroyed my health, especially during a period of very difficult manual labour. I’ve since done a lot of research, and have come to understand the following. First, it is likely that humans were mostly only able to develop such complex brains because of eating meat-based proteins. And second, there is a great deal of research, including long-running observational and case studies that demonstrate that cultures that almost completely consume meat, fat, organs, etc. don’t show the cancers and heart disease of high-carb cultures. But here is the thing, we are vastly overpopulated due to long-term male domination. I firmly believe that we were never meant to live in such large numbers. And the only way to support a massive and growing population is to create exploitative and land-destructive processes. We should be hunting and gathering and fishing with limited farming as opposed to destroying our oceans, soil, and mutating plants, and torturing animals with abandon. A female-only society would look very, very different, although we are well past the point of no return on our planet.
Oh, I have to mention one other strange, and hilarious and sad thing. I learned a new word when I went a-browsing for eco-feminist groups online. Harvard’s Women’s Centre put on an eco-feminism workshop, and in their description, they put the following:
“This philosophy emphasizes the ways a patriarchal society exerts dominance over both gender-minoritized people and nature…”
Gender-minoritized??? Ah, trannies. So the feminism that Harvard espouses has nothing to do with women’s oppression, but that of trannies. Didn’t Harvard used to be a respected, world-class university at one point in time? New depths in education. It really is an embarrassment
Liberal Feminism
I’m going to resist going into a lot of detail because this is an established on and offline mainstream feminism. My nickname for liberal feminism is ‘slut feminism’. These are mostly heterosexual, highly feminine, male-identified women who pursue equality and allow men to participate and even dictate feminist policy and events. They champion the ‘not all men’ movement and believe in socialization as the primary way to explain why males here and there managed to do horrific things to females. They also believe that males are harmed by patriarchy. They fight for small things that can’t possibly make a dent in the mountain of women’s problems. They love jargon and slogans so they don’t have to do any critical analysis. They are into empowerment, agency and sexual liberation, including porn and prostitution, so pretty much everything they think spells sexual freedom for females is actually primarily beneficial for men, and they end up accepting a lot of violence and degradation that men have sold to them as healthy and freeing. Needless to say, they do a great deal of harm to women and girls, and it keeps men doing what they do best.
Radical Feminism
A lot of women call themselves radical feminists, but aren’t, so this can be very confusing to those wondering what they are about. They are also the primary target of the Trans Cult – after lesbians, that is.
Radical feminism used to have a very basic definition, which is key to a potentially successful movement. They said that females as a class were systemically oppressed by males on the basis of sex. Male violence and sexual violence were a key feature of that oppression, and it was necessary to abolish gender in order to eliminate the class system.
Unfortunately, over time, radfems adopted intersectionality and inclusivity as ruling principles, and the movement no longer focused on women as a united oppressed class. Today, there is all sorts of in-fighting and purity testing and posing and Oppression Olympics and the censorship and blaming of different groups of women. Women like myself, eventually got turned off and have turned towards less messy affiliations in order to return to the true roots of feminism.
Lesbian Feminism, Female Separatism, Anti-Natalism and Gynocentrism
I’m not going to say a lot here. I have an entire post on Gynocentrism, which I think is the truest, clearest and least messy form of feminism. These four perspectives can work together, but they don’t have to. For me, they do. I am a celibate lesbian, I believe in existing apart from males as much as is womanly possible, I believe that humans need to stop breeding, and I believe in a focus of all resources and energy and care on women and girls only. Many women would consider these principles to be extreme, but I truly believe they are the truest path to health, safety, love, support, community, and self-actualization for women. It is the only way to find one’s natural self, and to reclaim the energy to help other women and girls, so that they can pay it forward. Patriarchal society functions in the opposite way, with men and boys parasitizing women and girls and forcing them into the most unnatural and harmful lifestyles and ways of thinking possible.
So I’ve come to the end of a long discussion, and here is my question for you. What will be your approach to living in the world of men? Do you want to take the blue pill, do you want to drink one of the of kool-aids, or do you want to get off the meds altogether?
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
P is for Permission
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
So imagine you’ve had a stressful day. It could be good stress or bad – a good performance review at work vs being sexually harassed on the street. The body doesn’t actually differentiate between types of stress, even if your conscious mind does. So your body tells you to deal with the stress by doing things that have comforted and consequently rewarded, you in the past. If you’re lucky, these are positive and healthy things like relaxing at home or going out dancing. But for many people, our stress reactions don’t truly help us and can even take the form of an addiction. For those actively trying to conquer bad habits or compulsive behaviours, stress can trigger a crazy-making inner dance that involves giving or denying ourselves permission to indulge in self-soothing and/or avoidance. For me, personally, my only true addiction is to sugar, a problem I developed in childhood to deal with a stressful family environment. And it is a lifelong struggle that is triggered by both positive and negative stress. The permission-granting process is basically a series of rationalizations involving being deserving, being kind to ourselves, making promises about quitting, minimizing negative effects, and the like. We all know this inner dance, and if we’re lucky, the stress reactions aren’t too harmful, but for many of us, they are. And they can be anything from overeating to using drugs and alcohol to allowing abusive people back into our lives after liberating ourselves.
Everything we do is governed by rules. Even in the scenario above, the rules are informal and self-created, even if we don’t realize we have them. Some people are really good at following rules, especially if they are societally policed. A minority of people are exceptionally good at self-control in these situations where we are both the rule-makers and the potential rule breakers. Sometimes it is because they are extremely goal-oriented or purpose-driven or they haven’t experienced a lot of trauma requiring self-soothing or they have had good mentors to help them develop healthy ways of dealing with stress and staying focused.
People break formal and informal rules for a lot of reasons, and in this article, I’m going to explore different kinds of rule-bound situations, and why different people may seek or fail to seek permission for breaking rules. I’m going to say right off the bat that I believe that women and girls struggle more with rules, rule-breaking, and requiring permission to do things than males do. First, as is typical of all male-dominated societies, more rules are imposed on females, and as a result, girls learn to start policing themselves and creating even more nonsensical rules to follow for themselves. This manifests in a great deal of self-sabotage, low self-confidence, and the development of neurotic, self-policing behaviour and associated guilt, shame, depression, and physical and psychological suffering. Males on the other hand, grow up with fewer rules and less punishment for breaking rules, and of course, biologically and intellectually as members of the predator class, I think they are less capable of feeling empathy, shame, guilt or of engaging in self-analysis. So let’s take a look at how permission and rule-breaking factor into different areas of our lives.
Self-Control and Rules We Create for Ourselves
As mentioned in the introduction, we wrestle with the many informal rules we make for ourselves every day. Some of these rules are internalized over a lifetime of programming by parents, school, television, religion, etc. Some of them are developed on our own as we try to control our lives and our natural impulses and learned bad habits. To reference what I have come to call the Freudian Cerberus, a famous, but simplistic and silly, male theory of personality that will be repeatedly rammed down your throat like a forced mouth rape if you are a psychology major, it is a battle between the id, ego and superego. Giving into your impulses or stress-induced bad habits is a permission granting that takes the form of rationalization. You allow yourself to procrastinate, to binge eat, to drink or take drugs, or to allow the abusive ex-boyfriend back into your life to make yourself feel better or to avoid dealing with reality and stress.
Family Rules
The family is the first place we encounter actual rules in our lives and it is where we develop healthy and unhealthy patterns when dealing with life stress. These are the people who lay the foundations for our addictions and determine our mental health path. If we’re lucky, our parents are mentally healthy people with a reasonable and consistent moral compass and an ability to teach rational and critical thinking. Most of us aren’t that fortunate, however, and we end up repeating parental mistakes, and dealing with arrested development. Depending on the roles we’re cast in within the family system, we end up being rule followers and authority respecters, or rebels (usually without a cause). And then there are the outliers who forge their own paths and systems of morality, picking and choosing which of society’s rules have merit and are worth respecting, and which don’t and aren’t.
It is within the family that we see our first sex-based differences in rule establishment and permission denial and granting. Girls will usually discover that compared to any of the males in the family, there is a more complex and vast system of rules for them, that ‘no’ is a more common reaction to the asking of permission to do something, and that the breaking of rules is more harshly punished for them. We see the results of this unacknowledged misogyny in how girls develop in all societies. Compared to boys, girls are risk averse and more conservative in their aspirations, they are less confident, more submissive and rule-abiding and predictable, and they are more accepting of denial of permission, punishment for rule-breaking, and to atone for perceived and real wrong-doings. I suspect none of this is natural, and almost wholly the product of social conditioning. It reminds me of the story of the chained elephant and is a form of learned helplessness. I see the way most girls are raised as a form of child abuse. But what happens in most families is preparation for what happens at large in the world. As women out in the world, girls will continue to face more rules, more denial, and more punishment than men. Girls who rebel as children end up being the ‘bitches’ of the world, labeled as such by all males and compliant, but miserable women. Boys who rebel, on the other hand, often end up respected for breaking rules and even committing crimes, and often are touted as heroes or ‘great men’ making their mark on the world as males are supposed to do.
Unspoken Rules
There are tons of environments where there are rules, but it is sort of a cultural understanding rather than something written in stone. There are still punishments for breaking these rules, and there are more rules with more punishment for females than for males. Females are more likely to be punished and denied permission than males are as well. These environments include marriages, workplaces, schools, social groups and on the streets.
One of the most common and most universal unofficial rules is that concerning breeding – and this is almost completely a rule forced on women and girls. I am not aware of any country that makes it illegal NOT to have children, but every single country in the world pressures women to breed, and the subliminal messaging starts in childhood. There is no true way to gain permission to be exempt from this unwritten rule and still enjoy the perks and respect of motherhood. You can get a semi-pardon if your plumbing doesn’t work and you are unable to have children, but you won’t attain the highest level of female human status. Males don’t experience anything like this and can either breed uncontrollably or not at all without a dent put in his social, financial, or legal status. Fatherhood isn’t tied to primary identity for men. This is solely a female burden.
What’s more, despite world overpopulation, many countries’ leaders are becoming testerical over the large number of non-contributors compared to taxpayers that has resulted from baby boomers aging out of the workforce and today’s youth having fewer children. Many countries are offering women and heterosexual couples numerous incentives to breed, including cash, maternity packages, pardoning of jail sentences for women, and eliminating the requirement to pay any income tax at all. I was speaking to a close lesbian friend in China the other day, and she mentioned that the propaganda mill has been put into overdrive to pressure women into having children, and she is extremely worried that the next step will be to punish women who refuse to breed. And I’ve heard similar sentiments echoed by women in other countries. There is even a conspiracy theory that the recent American overturning of Roe vs. Wade was a step made to force an increase in the birth rate in a country where women are breeding fewer children or not at all. I keep envisioning a dystopian world like that envisioned by famous Canadian author, Margaret Atwood, in her book The Handmaid’s Tale, where women are reduced to baby factories and hating each other – not men, who enjoy all the perks of this world – passionately.
Now, another, but related, unwritten rule in 2/3 of the world is that concerning homosexuality. Like all oppressions, homophobia is rooted in misogyny and male domination, so it makes sense that when men fail to rape women and women fail to seek out rapists – aka the heterosexual lifestyle – male domination is threatened and the world as we know it teeters on the verge of collapse. While 65 of our world’s countries criminalize homosexual behaviour, and 12 countries, including Northern Nigeria – completely or predominantly Muslim, of course – put gays and lesbians to death, legally, there is no country in the world where a homosexual lifestyle is free from the threat of attack, sometimes even fatal attack. Even in the most liberal countries, gays and lesbians are not permitted to walk through the world with the safety and acceptance that their straight counterparts take for granted.
In middle-of-the-road countries where homosexuality is not illegal, but still is far from acceptable, governments will engage in covert methods to shut down groups and render invisible gays and lesbians. When I lived in China, my university went to great lengths to discourage homosexual activity. For example, they reorganized many academic departments and locations of student housing to different campuses to spread out the much smaller female student population so that males could have access to them and to discourage homosexuality. Before this, the majors women tended towards were mostly housed on one smaller campus where I lived, and instances of gay male activity had been noted on the main campus where few women were to be found. Stupidly, the administration didn’t understand that moving women around to provide male student access to suitable rape objects wouldn’t change homosexual tendencies in males. All they achieved was to put ALL the women in more danger by thinning the bit of safety they had due to strength in numbers. I heard many times from my female students that they didn’t feel safe walking around on campus at night, and I myself, was the target of a black man who stalked me for weeks for the purpose of raping me. He made his intentions very clear, and according to him, Chinese women don’t put out for free like white women do, so he didn’t require permission to assault me. I reported the problem, but the university refused to do anything except encourage me not to go outside after dark…
Rules Governing Human Interaction
There are a lot of social rules that don’t have explicit, written law linked to them, but it is understood that permission governs everything. We can sum this up by the following: your rights end where mine begin. There is a two-part problem, however. First is that males and females don’t exist on equal footing. Males understand themselves to be full humans and any transgression they perceive against their body or property is akin to a crime. And females, as they are defined and dominated by males are understood to be partial humans that exist to serve males. Even the most liberal of males does not see a female as his equal, even if it is just on a subconscious level as his words may reflect all the politically correct stuff. His inner predator still sees you as something he can take advantage of in some way, and your permission is granted by default, especially if you have granted it at least once before.
Second, males and females see permission in different ways. Let’s use a well-known saying to illustrate the difference in thinking:
It is better to seek forgiveness than to ask for permission.
Various sources1 and wording, one version dating back to Agnes Strickland’s 1846 work, Lives of the Queens of England.
When males and females go ahead and break a rule and then go back to ask for forgiveness, they do it for different reasons. Males usually don’t give a shit if they do something wrong, even if it harms another person, especially a female. As they grow up, they are imbued with a sense of deserving and entitlement as males, so it may not even occur to them that they need to ask permission to do what they want to do. And as they inevitably break rule after rule, they accumulate a lifetime of forgiveness from females – mom, sisters, classmates, teachers – and learn that they can get away with anything, especially if afterwards, they pretend remorse or use the ‘love’ word, or shower their victim with gifts. Some men do know that they are doing something wrong, although most will feign ignorance and put the onus of their education on their female victims.
When females dare to break rules and then go back and ask forgiveness, they usually do it because they know they will be denied permission. And most of this rule-breaking usually isn’t about sexually harming others. It could be trying to do something at work or school, or trying to obtain something they wouldn’t normally have access to. Girls are used to the word ‘no’ from an early age, so if they are daring enough to risk punishment, they know they might have a fighting chance of getting what they need or want if they just go ahead and ask for forgiveness later.
So as we can see, males tend to be more selfishly motivated, while females are usually just trying to avoid being stopped from achieving something simply because they are girls and they face more barriers than males do. Unfortunately, males are much more likely to break rules, even if they know they are doing something bad. As I mentioned before, girls get used to having more rules, hearing ‘no’ more often, and being punished more frequently and severely, so they tend to risk less and self-sabotage or self-censor more.
Rules Governed by Law or Something on Par with Law
Males have designed all the systems that we use to govern society. This includes the rules written into law and the acceptable and expected behaviours that they believe are allowed by religion, nature, and science. Religion, of course, is a male creation used to control the population, and cement male domination. Nature doesn’t really have ‘laws’ although men like to think it does when it suits their purposes. And science, although just a methodology for seeking answers, has been elevated by some men to a series of ‘laws’ and they use them as such to control women and give men power. The legal system, natural law, and science have all been badly abused throughout history to justify taking rights away from women and girls and to give males blanket permission to commit violence and other atrocities, to justify feelings of entitlement and superiority to all living creatures and the earth herself, and to make up nonsense about what females are and to strip them of their humanity and right to control their bodies and lives.
To conclude, I suspect the crazy dance we are forced to do with men to negotiate our lives and safety in a world catering to their dominance and bent on our subservience, and the crazy dance we do with ourselves in order to deal with the stresses of living in a patriarchal world wouldn’t be an issue in a woman-centred society. I doubt we’d spend even a moment trying to figure out whether we have permission to live in freedom, whether we deserve to be unencumbered. Self-actualization can only occur when there are no barriers to success.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
O is for Offensive
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
It seems like these days
~ John Rich, from his dumb song “I’m Offended”.
No matter what ya say
Someone’s losin’ their ever lovin’ mind
It’s like they’re lookin’ for a reason
To have their fragile feelings
Hurt every single time
No offense John Rich, but your song is kinda dumb and a bit reductionist. The first few lines, which I included here, have a ring of truth to them, probably by accident, but I don’t believe that this is a recent phenomenon – and I’ll get into that later. I didn’t include the rest of the song, but I’ll just say that I think Johnny-boy missed something crucial. It is entirely possible that he doesn’t know what ‘offended’ means – I mean, it’s country music, which notoriously caters to simple thinkers and religious hypocrites, and he is a male, which means he’ll never be censored, even if he is truly offensive (which he is – don’t watch the video for this song). And besides, his man-solution is to pour beer on the entire problem, so how seriously can you take this song anyway? In my experience, alcohol makes everything worse, especially in combination with an emotional male.
So what does ‘offensive’ actually mean and is there some kind of objective universal standard for determining whether you should be offended or whether you are just oversensitive?
As a basic definition, to be offensive means to inspire feelings of extreme anger, insult or disrespect in another person or group of people. The offensive content could be as casual as a comment or behaviour, or as official as an article or book, a piece of art, or a policy. Note that offending a single person in a private setting and offending people, usually strangers, publicly are a little bit different, even if the word used is the same, and I’ll get into both of them later. For both situations, however, I’ll say here that offensive status is subjective – feelings are subjective, by definition, as we all know. But for general public offense, it is the public majority that defines that which is offensive. Note that even if the majority believes something is true or moral, doesn’t make it so. So a person who offends the general public may in fact be correct in what they say, highly moral, and contributes more to the greater good. The majority may rule, but it doesn’t necessarily make them good people or correct in what they believe and do.
So let’s break this down into giving offense and taking offense.
Giving Offense
Intentional Provocation. There are those in this world who enjoy riling people up by saying inflammatory things. These are mostly men and say, the occasional NPD woman – those who need to antagonize in order to feel a sense of power and control over others. Males are generally untouchable when they say things to deliberately hurt people, and interestingly and unsurprisingly, they also comprise the vast majority of people who tend to comment on and complain about people being offended. Men often comment on their victims using terms like ‘oversensitive’ or having ‘fragile feelings’, and this is typical of people who are untouched by oppression and who lack empathy and insight. Personally, I don’t think oppressors and perpetrators of crime should be defining the offensive acts and actual crimes they commit. For example, rapists shouldn’t be defining what rape is and is not, and males should not be dictating how females react to offensive and antagonistic male comments and behaviour.
Unintentional Offensiveness. Every single one of us offends at least one person some time in our lives without meaning to. That seems to be the nature of complex human interaction, and it is usually due to either misunderstanding, ignorance, or just a difference of opinions for the average offended reaction. And of course, we all know actual oversensitive people – yes, that does exist – so it is always possible to say something innocuous and have it offend someone who is reacting based on a personal trauma or mental health issues.
The important thing here is to deal with the offense you’ve given in an appropriate way. If you actually said something inflammatory out of ignorance, then the best policy is to apologize and learn from it. But much of the time, the unintentional offense-giving is not worth that much attention, especially if you’re a woman. Like I said earlier, people can get offended at just about anything, so unless you either want to shut up completely or to spend your entire life apologizing for everything you say and do, it’s best just to put on a brave face and hold your ground. The best policy is to be aware of whom you’re speaking to, and only speak about things you know about. This tends to be a big problem for men, as they tend to bullshit and make things up in order to cover up their insecurity, gain control over situations, and garner admiration from other people. Hint to all men: you have two ears, but only one mouth. You seldom use the former and overuse the latter. Please fix.
A note on offense-giving. Sometimes, it is not the content, but the speaker that makes the material offensive, and this is shown most clearly in reactions to male and female speech. A male and female can say the same thing, and only the female will inspire offense. Female speech will provoke a greater and more violent reaction than will male speech. A female will experience more serious consequences for less provocative speech than will a male. If you cross even slightly provocative speech with female status, not only will people be offended, but threats and other violence can ensue. We see this all the time with women who call themselves feminists. Feminists are universally hated, and are always considered ‘offensive’ by the majority of the population, although ‘offensive’ is the very least of what they are called and what is done to them.
Taking Offense
The Legit. Yes, offense is real, but as I said, there is no objective standard. It makes it difficult to know whether your feelings are legitimate, and of course, it is therefore easier to be manipulated by the more powerful if you choose to let people know your feelings. If you’re offended by a person you know, this is little easier because you should have some defined parameters of mutual respect within your relationship. It might, however, be difficult to address your feelings with the person, especially if your relationship involves a power imbalance. If you are offended by public material, there is not much you can do about it, especially if you are in the minority. For example, the majority of people may accept femininity and the assorted practices women adhere to religiously, but you, as a gynocentrist find femininity rituals offensive because they force women into a position of subservience and humiliation. Even if you are 100% correct in feeling offended, you are in the minority. Voicing your opinion will bring a rain a heterosexual shit down on you, mostly from women who enjoy their slavery, sadly. So what can you do? Well, you have a choice. You, of course, can do nothing – just accept that which you cannot change and keep doing what you’re doing. Or, you can voice your opinion without giving into the majority. Write articles, make videos or podcasts. Ignore those who will try to take you down and provide logical arguments for why the material is offensive. You may actually help a few people, even if you can’t take the offensive practices down.
The Woke. I hate this word with a passion, but it is what it is… I’m talking about politically and socially motivated people who feel a need to react to everything. Sometimes there is a kernel of reality in their feelings and reactions, but then they take things too far. I’m talking about people who, one day, for whatever reason, start to see reality, but then they start to colour everything with their new political viewpoint. They muster up offense, tears and anger for absolutely everything, and start attributing causes and motivations for these things, where often none, or something completely different, exist. They may have started with good intentions, but they end up getting caught up in looking good instead of doing good. Unfortunately, a lot of these types have set their sights on feminists in recent days and have done a lot of damage in erasing feminist material on the internet.
The Oversensitive. Unfortunately, there are truly fragile people out there – people who suffer from a mental illness, or who have been deeply traumatized in life. But also unfortunately, these people often like to hang out in public forums where they are exposed to all the garbage the internet has to offer. Now, men will tell them that they should get the hell off the internet if they can’t handle the turds that men drop. While I don’t agree with this and think it is disgusting that men dictate the environment of the net, I do question the desire of a fragile person to put themselves deliberately in places where they know damn well they will be hurt or ‘triggered’. Anyhow, legitimately fragile people tend to be offended regularly, and when they choose to enter feminist circles, they can do a lot of damage when they lose control. I wrote a little about this in a post on Oppression Olympians.
The Cognitively Dissonant. These are the folks who can’t handle the truth, and I myself tend to fall prey to them as I am an unrepentant truth-teller. They tend to claim offensiveness when really, they are just having a hard time dealing with the fact that their beliefs and actions don’t match or they feel guilty about something they do. Note that there is a difference between telling an unnecessary truth in order to harm someone (for example, something men do to women all the time to take them down a notch), and telling a truth because it is really important for the dissection of faulty thinking, lies, and misleading information. A lot of gynocentrists and even liberal feminists fall victim to accusations of disrespect and offensiveness when they dare to question a patriarchal practice, when really, all they are doing is pointing out a truth that makes people uncomfortable.
Are We More Fragile?
I’m going to say yes and no here. I think it is quite possible that people may have been more easily offended in the past. I can’t speak for cultures outside the West, but it seems that there were so many more social rules in the past than there are now, and you could cause offense and destroy your social standing by simply wearing the wrong outfit or addressing a person in the wrong way. But of course, these days, we are all very socially aware, and it is equally possible to be destroyed by very simple words or actions. So while standards of acceptable behaviour have changed, the ‘fragility’ of our feelings probably hasn’t.
But of course, it seems we are more fragile these days, which is why so many people, especially men, comment on it. Like with many social phenomena, loneliness being one that I’ve commented on before, I think media and social media have helped to highlight both the phenomena and the things that we are supposed to care about. And of course, with media, and social media especially, what we hear about is very sensational and misinformed. Things get blown out of proportion and people get emotional because they are told that they should in order to be a good citizen or on the right side of history or something like that.
The take-home message here is that offense-giving and offense-taking are real things, and it is a normal result of complex human relationships and communication, and sometimes, power imbalances. It’s probably a good idea to sleep on something that offends you before you decide to react to it. And finally, it is also a really good idea to question why you are offended by something. Is it an issue you have that is triggered or is it a legitimate social or political issue that requires you to speak out?
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
New Survey on Experience with Narcissistic Personality Disorder – Participants Needed!
I’m preparing for an upcoming post on Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a feminist context. Anonymous votes as well as comments would be appreciated ♥♀
Please answer based on dealing with people who are ‘regulars’ in your life, rather than one-offs, randos, or people who exist on the periphery. Most NPDs don’t have an official diagnosis simply because they tend not to admit they have a problem – everyone else is the problem. You’ll know you’re dealing with one of these folks because your relationship revolves around their constant need for praise or acknowledgement and huge sense of self-importance, as well as bullying, antagonism, lying and rewriting of reality.
L is for Living
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
My mission in life is not merely to survive, but to thrive.
Maya Angelou
First off, thanks to all of you who heeded the poll call. I’m closing the poll on my blog, but if you still want to vote or comment, it will stay open on my YouTube channel (for as long as I remain uncensored 😉 )
Initially, I was going to devote a separate post to each of the categories in this whole life satisfaction thing, but I’ve changed my mind on that, especially upon seeing the results of the poll. As you may have guessed from the title of this post, the majority of respondents reported that they feel they are ‘living’ – nothing more, nothing less – and I’ll get into what that means in a bit. But first, I want to give a little clarification on what this post is and isn’t about.
Life Satisfaction, Happiness, and Quality of Life
These are different, but not necessarily unrelated, things. Both life satisfaction and happiness are cognitive and emotional self-evaluations, and thus completely subjective. The former is more of a long-term feeling about one’s status on several life factors, while the latter is an in-the-moment feeling that is both spontaneous and unexamined. Unfortunately, happiness is something we are taught to believe should be a constant state, and that there is something wrong with us if we can’t achieve that. I wrote about happiness in my J is for Joy post, and I’m of the opinion that the pursuit of happiness is pointless and often leads, ironically, to misery and obsession. Quality of Life (QoL) is a little different. It can be defined using standard indicators, allowing for relatively objective comparative research across time and place. However, some individuals have their own definitions of QoL to help with personal goal-setting, cognitive-emotional evaluation and subsequent course correction.
Today, I’m going to talk about life satisfaction.
Who Is to Blame for the Obsession with Satisfaction and Happiness?
It’s a chicken and egg question. Which came first: our great dissatisfaction with life or our obsession with it? I suspect that people didn’t really think much about how they felt until societal change and human rights became possible. After that, our feelings and obsession with them probably fed off one another, so much so that men developed an entire psychological discipline centred on life satisfaction and happiness. We even have something called the ‘World Happiness Report’, which includes a 10-point, self-reported life satisfaction scale. I’m including a link to an interactive world map where you can check out how your own country ranks on self-reported satisfaction. It’s interesting to note that Canada has lost half a point in satisfaction over the last 10 years, while China has gained over a whole point in the same amount of time – these are significant changes on a 10-point scale, and I’d bet that increased poverty in the former and increased wealth in the latter have played a significant role here. Anyhow, believers in this type of evaluation have even gone so far as to happy-slap the dead, much in the way that TRAs have transified dead homosexuals. We are told, despite lack of evidence on what is a wholly subjective measure, that people were happier in the past, with some eras being more ecstatic than others. What a shameful abuse of authority to draw these impossible-to-draw conclusions.
The satisfaction and happiness movement was an outcome of humanist psychology originating in the mid-20th century and its spawn, positive psychology, born in the late 1990’s. All I’ll say about that here is that if you’re interested in a host of rich, mansplaining and obnoxious white dudes telling you what to do to achieve bliss, you can boil it down to this: don’t regret the past, be happy and grateful in the present, and be hopeful for the future. To me, much of this is what I consider to be toxic positivity worthy of cult status, and if you’ve been following along on YT or my blog, you know what I think about happiness and hope.
So you might be wondering, hey Story Ending, you seem really critical of this topic, so why did you create a poll? Yeah, good question. See, this is a bell that cannot be unrung. We see from research that life satisfaction is linked with mental and physical health, although I think this is an interdependent relationship. Being unsatisfied makes you feel unwell and being unwell makes you feel unsatisfied with life. So, there really is no way back to the acceptance of suffering and lack of change of the past. Us modern folk have grown up with the idea that having expectations to improve and change, and even being deserving of something better are human rights.
Measuring Life Satisfaction
The World Happiness Report I talked about earlier uses a measure of life satisfaction called the Cantril Ladder, a 10-point scale ranging from ratings of hopelessness to prosperity and grouped into the satisfaction categories: suffering, struggling and thriving. Hadley Cantril, very briefly, was a researcher of propaganda and social influence and a developer of public polling methodology, and he was known for uncovering hypocrisy in the beliefs of the American public and examining the role of authority in causing public panic.
Now, in my poll, I created four categories, with an extra one thrown in to catch liars, the deluded, and the victims of life coaches or the Cult of Positivity. Luckily, no one endorsed that category 😉 I asked respondents to consider all subjectively relevant areas of their lives. These areas could, but did not have to, include: financial situation, career/job status, relationship quality, physical and mental health, living environment, feelings of safety and stability, sense of purpose, level of personal development, etc. My scale went like this:
A) Suffering: significant hardship in one or more areas of life.
B) Surviving: my head is above water, but it’s tough.
C) Living: I’m getting by better than some, but it’s underwhelming.
D) Thriving: Things are going well; I look forward to each day.
E) Transcending: I have a blessed life filled with wonder and joy.
Note that this was a single-question poll, and I didn’t ask people to report their sex, age or location. These are descriptive data and no causal conclusions can therefore be drawn. My only assumptions were that most to all of the respondents were female and that people responded honestly.
‘Living’ was the most endorsed category, and I’ll talk briefly about what this could mean. By and large, women feet they are getting their basic needs met. Things are ‘ok’ or quite average, but perhaps they could be better. There may or may not be a lot of emotional satisfaction in the process of getting by and getting things done. I see the main differences between thriving and living and as being anticipation rather than commitment to the daily grind, and a feeling of growth or forward movement rather than running in place. I didn’t get any comments on this from thrivers or livers, but I’m happy to learn if I’m missing something here.
Another thing I wanted to mention is that these are not fixed categories. As life is unpredictable, you can easily find yourself skipping around through your life, with the possibility of experiencing all four scenarios. I myself have experienced all but a feeling of thriving, and the most terrifying thing for me is that you can go from living to suffering in the space of a month. Without personal experience, I can only imagine that feeling that you’re thriving instills a sense of stability. I’ve never felt that before.
Is There a So-Called ‘Thriving Mindset’?
The quick and dirty answer is ‘no’. You cannot will or hope or pray yourself into financial success or excellent health. Conversely, being a realist or even a bit on the negative side won’t magically destroy your opportunities or outcomes in life either. Sure, to some extent we are all captains of our own ships, but a lot of you probably know damn well that you can do absolutely everything right in your life and still end up struggling in one or more areas. And while we might be able to work hard, eat well, develop great relationships and stay active of our own free will, envisioning success or joining the unofficial Cult of Positivity is not a magic bullet that will take care of everything else.
The ‘yes’ answer – that there is a Thriving Mindset – was likely concocted by the psychotherapy and life coaching professions in order to make money off of blaming and shaming you for your lack of prosperity and getting you to sign up for an expensive course of treatment or goal-setting program. One of the worst pieces of propaganda-slash-pseudo-intellectual-malarky I’ve seen out there comes from Class A misogynist, Friedrich Nietzsche: “To live is to suffer; to thrive is to find meaning in suffering.” Again with the suffering, right? I swear men are obsessed with pain and suffering – as long as it’s women who bear the brunt of it. The fact is that no one in the world has the one-size-fits-all model for how to thrive. There are many factors involved, many of which are completely outside our control, and some of which are completely controlled by men. As a result, I think it is difficult for women to achieve a state of thriving in this world. Two major things we see over time and all over the world in the data on various measures of prosperity is that women as a class experience significantly more poverty and significally more chronic health issues, especially depression and inflammatory diseases, than men. While men are more likely to die off earlier everywhere, women tend to develop issues that keep them alive, but suffering in multiple ways for very long periods of time. And this suffering has nothing to do with mindset and everything to do with being an long-oppressed class of people. You just can’t think or hope your way out of this.
What I’d really love to see is all women and girls thriving in life. I’d like to see a world where ‘experiencing challenges’ isn’t a euphemism for suffering, but rather a process of working hard towards a goal and having it pay off in the end. I want a world where living a life doesn’t mean just trying to get through it all only to find that there’s nothing waiting at the end, but to enjoy each day for what it brings. But that just isn’t possible in a world of male dominance and their female-suffering-based systems of capitalism, ‘we do it because we can’, and survival of the fittest.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
New Poll on Personal Circumstances – Participants Needed!
This poll is closed now, but community input was incorporated into my Alphabet Series post L is for Living. Thanks to all who participated and please subscribe to this site or to my YouTube channel to participate in future polls and surveys.
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. ⚢
Tits Out: An Observation
I live in Eastern Europe/Western Asia – not really sure how to define it. All I know is that it is a surreal part of the world that I didn’t learn anything about growing up, and I certainly never fathomed ending up here when I became aware of it. But as rich foreigners increasingly infiltrate Western countries, single, childless women – especially those without financially-supportive family – are increasingly forced to look elsewhere in order to survive. I meet more and more women like me every year, and I think it’s only going to get worse. Indeed, I work online 7 days a week, and I still can’t afford to live in my home country of Canada, so off to other places I must go. Verging on digressing, I know, but everything I discuss here today is all about misogyny, whether it is being a disenfranchised, lone woman, or an ‘owned’ heterosexual woman exchanging sex and service for orbited privilege. Only men win in this world.
So yesterday, I ventured out into this weird little city that I’ve been hunkered down in for over a year to pick up some vegetables, and on my way back, I was met with a sad and sort of shocking scenario. Normally, I don’t pay much attention to what people are wearing. It’s not that I don’t appreciate style, it’s that I don’t really care. One of the few things I like about where I live is that it is one of the most unfashionable countries I’ve ever been to. I’ll amend that a bit – the women think they are fashionable, but they really aren’t, and I get a lot of disgusted, head-to-toe-to-head looks from the local women when they pass me on the street – me and my no-nonsense trousers and modest accessories. Funnily, no matter where I live, I never do ‘woman-face’ correctly.
But yesterday, here is what happened. So I’m trudging home with my bags of onions, garlic, mushrooms, zucchini and tomatoes in 35 degree heat (it hits 45 in August, ugh), and I vaguely registered an old man passing me with a blanket wrapped around his shoulders. I pay little attention to males in public other than to know exactly where they are in my personal space orbit, and whether they pose more of a threat than any and all males do at any given moment. A few seconds later, several paces behind him stumbled an old woman with a very vacant look on her face. Women, I pay attention to as fellow humans. It took me a moment to process what I was seeing. She was wearing colourless rags, and I couldn’t really figure out the individual pieces of the ensemble, but I realized, to my great surprise, that she was mostly naked on top, one withered breast exposed to the world. I stopped in my tracks to take in the scene and to see what other locals around us would do. A few people noticed and did nothing – perhaps this kind of thing is normal around here? Haven’t seen it before – naked homeless dudes in other countries, yes. Women, not so much. I turned and saw that the man had already stopped a woman on the sidewalk. He must have been asking for money. His female companion caught up to him.
What struck me is that no one seemed concerned that the woman was exposed, including the woman’s owner. And this is an extremely religious country with lots of rules about women’s evil body parts, what should be covered and when the covering should occur. But note here that I’m not talking about being offended by naked breasts or that women’s bodies are problems or something. What I’m saying is that women are vulnerable in this world because of their bodies and because of the fact that males have designed every corner of this earth to punish women for having female bodies. A naked female body is an invitation for one kind of assault or another, either to punish her or to use her or both. Heck, you can be very modestly dressed and still be the target of male assault, but complying with feminine clothing as well as public nudity are generally seen as permission and an invitation for male attention. Women don’t understand this, generally – the relationship between compliance and male violence and that actions have real implications and don’t exist in a vacuum. To assume that you can do what you do for ‘other’ or ‘personal’ reasons doesn’t divorce you from male attention. They don’t care what your intentions are.
Anyhow, I watched the scene for a few moments and felt reasonably sure that nothing immediately bad was going to happen. This was likely a homeless couple, possibly suffering from age-related cognitive problems. I have to assume that, being such a religious country, the church provides some kind of assistance to the needy. The government situation is a bit of a mess. When I run into stuff like this, I am of very mixed minds. I don’t help men – ever – and I am very picky, based on past bad experiences, about the females I assist. I know there are those who would disagree with me about selectivity, and that is fine. I am just very economical about where I spend my very limited gynergy.
Needless to say, this was a sad scene that left a very bad aftertaste. Owned heterosexual women, generally have great potential for perks in life that single women and lesbians never have, but I also think that the depths to which hetero women can sink are far, far greater. Heterosexuality, for women, is like a high-reward, but very high-risk investment opportunity. Every day, I more firmly believe that female separatism is the only way to female dignity and freedom.
I is for Infantilization
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Although I’ve touched on this subject in other posts, I thought this would make a nice companion piece to E is for Emasculation. Emasculation is testosterone-fuelled hyperbole where men pretend that having their rapey privileges taken away or even just questioned is akin to the removal of their biological weapons of mass destruction: their cocks and balls. All men see their privilege to harm women and girls as a god or nature given right, and to even question that is a crime against manity. It’s puzzling and frankly, pathetic – if you lose your entire identity when it’s even suggested that you’re not allowed to do violence, what does that say about you and your class of creatures?
In my post, The Female Equivalent of Emasculation, I discuss whether women experience anything like what men do. My conclusion is ‘no’. In order to feel a stripping away of privilege or power, you actually have to have privilege and power, and even more importantly, you have to have them AND feel like you deserve them. Females don’t have privilege and they certainly don’t have any power, and most women don’t even feel like they deserve them, thanks to a lifetime of patriarchal brainwashing. So no, women can’t and don’t feel this unjustified and irrational rage that men often do. But they do experience something that absolutely ensures that they never will gain rights and power, let alone privilege or the feeling that they deserve anything but the suffering that is doled out in the name of male love.
So today, I is for Infantilization.
To infantilize is to constantly, and even systematically, treat women as if they are children or as less intelligent and capable than they are. It involves a whole host of language and behaviour patterns, is carried out by both men and women, and is often helped along by other patriarchal tools such as gaslighting. I’ve suggested before that infantilization is closely related to feminization, the enforcement of unnatural, gendered stereotypes that place females firmly under the male boot, ready to serve unthinkingly.
So let’s talk purpose and methods.
One could easily devote an entire book and even an entire research career to this topic. It is an international problem for over half the population, and generally seen as acceptable, if it’s noticed at all. Many men and women, including women claiming to be feminists, even consider infantilization to be sweet or sexy. But, infantilization is all about 1) transcending and erasing the boundaries of women and girls, 2) denying them power, intelligence, agency and recognition, and 3) breaking down their confidence. It starts in childhood when girls are more susceptible and vulnerable to harmful messaging. It is possible to infantilize a child by treating her as younger or less capable or less intelligent than she actually is. Boys are given free reign in all areas and bestowed with the idea that they are smarter and more talented than they truly are, while girls are protected and punished and denied the most basic freedoms and acknowledgement. By the time girls reach adulthood, they are well used to being treated like naive and even stupid children and often don’t notice that not much changes despite moving into a new phase of their lives. They are primed for heterosexual relationships and for mistreatment in the workplace.
More on the methods.
1) Transcending Boundaries
Girls are taught early on that their bodies are not their own. They are for public consumption. They see it on television, in advertisements, in the places where their clothes are bought. The entire world comments on their physical manifestation. But it comes from parents, too. The girl is over-protected and punished for things that boys can do freely. She is taught how to make her body small, to lower her voice, and silence her wants and needs. She is dressed to be consumed, not to consume or just exist. Mother presents her daughter to friends, family and relative strangers, and the girl is expected to accept being touched, held and fussed over. She is not allowed to say no as it’s rude or defiant. Denying her agency and body-privacy, mother infantilizes and thereby grooms her daughter for her future role as a compliant heterosexual fuckhole. By the time she reaches her teens and early adulthood, the average girl has little confidence, doesn’t know how to look at herself through her own eyes, and seldom holds or presents herself in a natural way in public. Out in the world, boys and men talk too much and take up more than their share of space, and she accommodates their privilege by silencing her voice and making her body smaller. Males touch her in ways they themselves would never accept, and she sees the attention as tender and loving instead of infantilizing, invasive or degrading. Males grip, and lead and force, and she goes limp, and follows, and accepts.
2) Denying Power and Capability
There are a million and one ways in which females are denied power and any acknowledgement of their achievements. I’ll discuss a few of them here.
The number one way to infantalize a woman is to focus on the physical. It might sound strange at first, as sex and sexuality are supposed to be mature or adult subjects, but in actuality, focusing on female appearance and women’s dichotomous status as either a mother or a child-free non-human, serves to infantilize women and completely ignore their achievements and actual contributions to society. Beauty is decidedly not an achievement. It is subjective and has no relevance, meaning or true value. If it had real, objective value, then men would have taken it over and made it the focus of their own lives. So it serves as a distraction and even obsession for so many girls and women, completely infantilizing them, depleting their limited finances, and turning their brains to mush. As manipulatable as children. A focus on the physical also blurs the lines between adult maturity and childhood in a sexual way, giving outlets for male pedophelia. Girls are pushed to become sexual beings and adult women regress under pressure to become more childlike and youthful in appearance. Women who eschew all things beauty and fashion-related are demonized, ostracized, and banished to a circle of hell that even Dante couldn’t conceive of.
All societies also focus on mother-worship, another non-achievement-based focus on the physical, yet considered the pinnacle of female success. The rewards women reap for getting knocked up are legion. You probably do better financially and socially if you become a mother and wife than if you go to university, and I’m not kidding. But I mean, let’s get real. How is motherhood the number one human female achievement if even cockroaches, giraffes, and mice can do it? This is infantilization – essentially, the childlike having children. And all the while, mediocre males have their career paths preserved, working mothers get maternity leave and baby showers in the workplace, and child-free women are ignored, held back, and denied opportunities and respect.
Women are also infantilized through language, either by being denied existence or by having their female status called out deliberately. The use of man, mankind or manpower is still in wide use and women are supposed to accept being adjunct, but unacknowledged, members of that group. If the tables were turned and we used ‘woman’ to describe all humans, males would start World War T (testosterone) and whine about emasculation and the pussification of society. We also refer to female doctors, but not male doctors, and on American television, female law enforcement is most often called ‘bitch cop’, which is not only infantilizing, but dehumanizing. My modern British ESL teaching materials still include words like ‘mailman’ instead of postal worker or letter carrier. And in North America, we still call female parking enforcement officers ‘meter maids’. In addition, women are regulary denied their titles that denote achievement, such as Dr. even going so far as to refer to esteemed women by their first names only. Instead, we become irrationally focused on titles denoting physical ownership status, namely Miss and Mrs., and frequently bestow diminutives, such as hon, sweetheart, beautiful, and my dear, on adult women, even in professional settings. The British even refer to elderly women, patronizingly, as ‘old dear’, while there is no infantilizing equivalent for old men.
When women demand that they be called Dr., there is often angry backlash, especially from other women. I find this puzzling as female achievement makes it easier for girls to develop professional goals and dreams and to actually have a chance at success. Higher education is a positively gruelling process, rife with misogyny and degradation, and women who have not gone through the process seem to think that educated women breathe refined air. I can tell you, as one of those educated women, that academia was in many ways, more misogynistic than other work settings I’ve experienced. I’d even go so far as to suggest that formal higher education is not necessarily the best option for women these days, unless there is a clear requirement for a specific degree. And I further suggest keeping one’s mouth shut if you are completely ignorant on a topic, especially when what is coming out of your mouth is shit directed at another woman. Anyhow, regarding language, there is no reason in the world where we need to be either linguistically sexing jobs or erasing the female sex entirely from our vocabulary. Language problems are soooo easily remedied, which makes it clear that there is a different motive for keeping things as they are. Yes, infantilization and disempowerment.
Men also constantly use their big mouths to infantilize women in another way, and this is mansplaining. I wrote a short post on this phenomenon a while back, so I’ll keep it brief here. Basically, men feel the need to talk at women. Teach them. Show them. Explain to them. But the problem is that most of the time, the woman or girl being talked at already knows. The female can be educated, skilled, intelligent, and experienced, and the male can be uneducated, unskilled, stupid, and inexperienced. And he knows all of this. But he still explains – or mansplains. It is the ultimate act of infantilization. Every single female on the planet has experienced this, usually thousands and thousands of times in her life. I’ve even had boy children do this to me. I’ve had Chinese male students try to mansplain my own language to me – even more significant as it is a very disrespectful thing to do to your teacher in Chinese culture, so there was an element of racism in there along with the infantilizing misogyny. I’ve also had a Korean man try to explain to me what arithmetic is despite the fact that I have a masters in statistics. These are only a few examples, but there are literally thousands of incidents in my life. And the more educated and skilled you are, the worse it is. Some women just accept it à la ‘we have to coddle the fragile male ego’. But I don’t. You have to be really careful though. Males are used to being able to say and do what they want to you, so reacting rationally and not in a childlike way – meaning that you challenge them – can lead to violence, and as I’ve experienced, you can lose your job and career opportunities if you dare to correct the situation.
3) Breaking Down Confidence
Research has shown again and again that females constantly underestimate their skills, abilities and intelligence, while males vastly overestimate what they can do. This is known, proveable, and we see it all the time. It is likely the number one determining factor in career success, or possibly number two, after connections (as in nepotism and Old Boys’ Clubs). We know that education and experience aren’t nearly as important as people tell us. But how well you can sell yourself, even if it’s all a lie, is. And while confidence is not always appreciated in women in the same way it is in men, an employer will still usually choose a confident woman over a hesitant or unsure one. Our world prefers shiny lies over quiet truths, so it is no wonder that men get the jobs and promotions and opportunities and recognition, and higher salaries.
It is also unsurprising that women will not only underestimate themselves, but the capabilities of other females. A woman will usually throw her support behind a demonstrably mediocre male as a potential, promising leader, than a proven, superior female. And not only is there no confidence in the women in question, but capable females will often be criticized and torn down by both men and women. You even see this in so-called ‘feminist’ communities where women discount a female voice because she is confident, outspoken, educated or appears to have a better-paying job. This is an attempt to infantilize a woman who so clearly breaks the rules about female success and confidence.
My general rule of thumb when evaluating male and female claims is this: take anything a male says about his abilities and cut it in half, and take anything a female says about herself and double it. It amazes me how many stellar, intelligent, capable, multi-talented, and over-educated women I’ve met who are barely getting by financially or who are working jobs that vastly under-utilize and under-value their skill sets. But this impacts single women and lesbians much more than married women because the latter have a husband’s income that keeps them from poverty. They don’t notice the problem unless the heterosexual contract doesn’t end up working out for them.
I can say the exact opposite of males – so many of them land well-paying jobs with opportunities for advancement and recognition despite average intelligence, laziness, lack of experience or education, and a lack of skills and capability. I believe a good part of this is due to the building up of confidence in males and the breaking down of confidence that a lifetime of infantilization inflicts on females. There are other factors that work in tandem, of course. Patriarchy is a multi-front assault on the female psyche.
What’s It All Mean?
As mentioned above, infantilization is a mechanism that serves to prevent women and girls from having power and rights and even believing that power and full human rights are possible for them. To give a female agency, confidence, and a complete sense of power over her body and life throws a wrench in the male privilege machine. Even liberal males want to maintain the illusion that some kind of equal exchange is going on, even when they know on some level that there is a power imbalance. Feel free to test this out by watching the rage flare up when you suggest to a liberal male that the so-called sex that he is having is actually consensual rape since unequal people cannot truly give consent. Men need women to depend on them for guidance, approval, and protection – the very things children require from parents. I argue that heterosexuality depends on the infantilization of women and girls, and I think it’s high time to stop dreaming about screwing your dad or grandpa. It’s time to grow up.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
I is for Individualism
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
So, one winter, five to ten years ago, I found myself at a communal breakfast table of the youth hostel where I was staying in Washington, D.C.. Generally, I’m not a fan of big groups of people I don’t know, so I tend to keep quiet, and just listen and observe the dynamics in these situations, kind of like the meat world equivalent of lurking in an online community. On this particular morning, I noticed a conversation between two women at the other end of my table – an American and a woman from South America. The latter had been reminded of and was recalling her experience at a group breakfast at an international conference she had attended a few years before. I think the breakfast she described had been a serve-yourself type of set-up and this woman had immediately taken on the unrequested and unnecessary role of dishing out food or coffee to all the attendees. Apparently, a Scottish woman had come up to her and told her that she didn’t need to do that and that it wasn’t women’s responsibility to take on serving roles at this conference. The South American woman had become quietly offended, and I think she had bridled at what she had correctly seen as a feminist attempt to invite her to join the group and eat some breakfast instead of missing out and serving. The South American explained to the American that in her culture, it is normal to volunteer to serve the group selflessly, and it had nothing to do with male domination. No way! Couldn’t possibly! But did she bolster her argument by adding that the males at the conference had also immediately jumped in to serve and clean up? No! Of course not! Because they hadn’t and they never do, and yes, this IS due to male domination. Culture is the very definition of all the ways in which women are subordinated to and by males in a particular time and place. The American listening to this story immediately did what all good little white Western women are supposed to do. She bowed her head in self-deprecation and shame, and lamented that her culture was soooo individualistic and selfish. None of this was about patriarchy, but about how Americans only think of themselves and their aggressive pursuit of fulfilling wants and needs at the expense of others. Fuck other people! I’m actually surprised that the American didn’t shit on the Scottish woman for imposing her feminist opinion on the situation. I can’t remember whether I had decided that breakfast was over at that point and I ended up missing the attack on feminism. Regardless, the whole thing was pathetic to listen to and frankly, incredibly reductionist, as all discussions of culture tend to be. But years later, I still remember this little scene so well, as I’ve always had a bone to pick with the whole over-simplified, high school debate topic – Which is morally superior: individualist or collectivist societies?
So, today, commune- and island-dwelling sisters, I is for Individualism.
I was still living in China when I witnessed this conversation, so I had been doing a lot of thinking on this topic, China being the so-called collectivist culture that it is. And I’ll say one thing right off the bat. I think if you’ve never spent significant time living in both individualist and collectivist cultures, you really aren’t qualified to make comparisons or draw conclusions about which one is better. It makes me think of another set of morally infused opposites: capitalism and communism or socialism, and how so many Americans seem to have really strong and judgey opinions about the latter without really knowing anything tangible about what it is.
The second thing I’ll say is that I don’t really prefer either type of society, and that some of the things we are told are present in one, are actually equally or more present in the other. I want to discuss a few points about both models of culture and then I’ll conclude with a note on patriarchy and what that means for women.
The Family as Individual
One thing I noticed after nearly a decade in a collectivist culture is that individualism is actually the undercurrent, but the unit is different. The individual is not the person, but the family. It really clicked for me when a student of mine was telling me about some Western soap operas she was watching. She said they were very different than Chinese shows. The characters in Western shows each had their own story line in addition to whatever was going on within a family. In China, all the story lines involve the family as a group. The members are not individuals living their own lives within the context of a family. I also, in the role of unofficial therapist for so many of my students, listened to countless horror stories of young people being horribly abused by parents while accepting the fact that they would never, ever leave and would even financially support their abusers for their entire lives. They believed and accepted that there was no escape. Individual suffering is meaningless in light of the well-being of the family. So, in collectivist cultures, you are not separate from your family. Everything you do affects its status and reputation – you function as a unit, an individual, essentially. So I consider collectivism to be almost a subtype of individualism, but incorrectly painted as morally superior. In reality, it can be colder, more dishonest and more open to abuse than any true individualistic society ever could be.
The Selfishness, Ruthlessness and Hypocrisy of Collectivist Cultures
It’s funny, so much of what is criticized about individualistic cultures is actually more true of the collectivists. It is said that individual success is not worshipped like you see in individualistic cultures. This isn’t true. Individual heroes are often created as examples to be followed, and you are more likely to see the development of personality cults among leaders within collectivism. I think without a rallying point such as a successful person, people tend to stray off the accepted path in order to create their own purposes. As well, volunteerism, as in choosing to do volunteer work, instead of being forced into it is virtually non-existent in collectivist cultures, despite it being essentially a selfless, group-benefitting act. I remember a conversation with one of my closest friends, who is Chinese, about volunteer work. She is a really smart and considerate person, but she told me she couldn’t truly understand why one would ever do volunteer work and was quite awestruck with the many stories of volunteerism that the various Western travellers she has met had. She also couldn’t believe that many so-called individuals even plan their travel around volunteering. But it is a fundamental and even moral imperative in individualistic cultures, although moreso among women than men, as males tend to believe that they deserve compensation for any work that they do. The same moral approach exists towards charities and charitable donations. In the US, data show that poor people frequently donate money to charities – it really has nothing to do with wealth, unlike what people assume. It is a moral choice, not a financial choice. Charitable giving doesn’t really exist in places like China, even among the rich. There is no drive to help strangers that I have ever seen, despite the claim that it is the faceless masses that you don’t know that are more important than you as an individual. I remember back when the Philippines suffered devasting losses due to a typhoon about 10 years ago. China as a country donated less money to relief efforts than the company IKEA. And the Philippines is both their neighbour and poorer than China. It seemed to me that collectivism has some very well-understood, but unspoken limitations on who belonged to the collective. It is very ‘in group/out group’. And indeed, collectivist cultures tend to be very, very exclusive. You don’t help anyone outside your tribe, and for many, even outside your family – the individual. You also don’t share, you don’t allow migration into the group, and you erase those who try to leave. Collectivist cultures tend to be very racist, very sexist, very censorious and rule-bound, and very unforgiving and violent, despite the ‘for the good of all’ mantra that you tend to hear. These are not the shiny happy people that communists and collectivists claim they are.
When Individualism Creates Weakness Rather than Strength
If collectivists are about grinning and bearing it in the name of sacrifice to the group, then individualists are supposed to be about survival of the fittest, and I’m referring to Herbert Spencer’s essentialism here. Individualism has done some good things for society. It has inspired creativity, some progress in human rights, critical analysis of religion and more. But it has also moved a lot of people away from contributing to the well-being of society and legitimizing some really shameful and anti-social pursuits. And while introducing the idea of human rights, it has also created a lot of confusion over the differences between wants, needs, rights and privileges, often elevating a frivolous or delusional wish to the level of a matter of life and death. Instead of creating the type of strength that would come from being forced to adapt to frequent change or normal human societal challenges, in the way that Darwin saw evolution and progress, highly individualistic societies seem to have created a population dependent on validation and being rewarded for mediocrity and even failure. We now see division and strife that can put individualistic societies in precarious and unstable situations over relatively insignificant issues. And this serves to distract from more serious problems facing our world.
Conclusion
Well, I’ve managed to shit all over everything, eh? Actually, I like some aspects of both types of society. My problem is that no reasonable system can function the way it is supposed to if men run it or even exist in it. In a collectivist society, the male drive to control and conquer will override the sharing and altruistic goals that are supposed to flourish. Female altruism and empathy end up abused and devalued, and everyone ends up suspicious and cold. In an individualistic society, male greed will create horrors and suffering for those without power and resources, and who end up forced into desperate arrangements in the name of survival. I’d love to see and actual collectivist society that acknowledges some value of the individual. It would have to be a small-scale society with clear goals, and the key element – or rather, missing element – would be the interfering destructive sex that has tended to ruin everything it touches. You know who I’m talking about 😉 But for now, if you are going to criticize a culture, remember that is it not individualism or collectivism or capitalism or communism that are the root problems, it is patriarchy. And that should be the basis of your arguments.
♀️ 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. ⚢
Reissuing of ‘Called It’
Sorry, folks, I messed up on this latest post, and I thank Minka on YouTube (you know who you are) for letting me know. Cheers on that. I really shouldn’t write these things late at night and especially when most of the media is referring to this person as she and by a female name, which isn’t allowed in our current sociopolitical climate. So, I automatically and wrongly assumed that that this was a male in a dress and wig. I was WRONG! So let’s give this another go.
Round 2
Yep, I really did. The first trannie school shooting. And I am going to indulge in a little smug-face for a second…. Okay, that felt good. But seriously, back on March 1st, 2016, I wrote a little post on male violence, which ended up with a consideration of how trannies distort the sex ratio of violent crime stats. I predicted that it wouldn’t be long before they’d break into school shootings (Waiting for It: The First Trannie School Shooting). I’m actually surprised we had to wait so long. But there is a twist that I didn’t predict…
“And I really think it is only a matter of time before one of these social-outcast, mentally deranged, confused, damaged, gun-home-residing boys comes to school in a dress and a mask and toting a metal penis gun, and shoots the fucking place up.“
From my 2016 post. I got a few things wrong – the trans is a 28-year-old former student of the school, not a kid. And this shooter is a WOMAN. She is a FtT or trans-identified female. The police are calling her a ‘she’ and this will likely be listed as a female crime – the first or at most one of the very, very few solely female school shootings.
“And he’ll shoot girls, primarily.“
Almost. Girls and women. And we’ll say ‘she’ instead of ‘he’ because that is what she is. Four of the six murdered were female, including two 9-year-old girls, a substitute teacher and the head of the school. Perhaps it is because all this happened in Tennessee, in a hard-core Christian community and because the perp is female and thus not feared or respected in the way actual men are, but people are using her ‘dead name’ and referring to her as a female. It may be the first time in history that Christians are actually dealing with reality and speaking truth!
I present Little Orphan Annie Audrey Elizabeth Hale. The proud owner and user of a semi-automatic rifle and two handguns, as well as a death wish.
And like all female trannies, she got what she wanted; an attempt at male privilege. Now, as I’ve said before, most female trans are just self-haters who don’t want to have to deal with the shit that women have to endure, but are generally okay to deal with. But Audrey took things a little further. Her quest for male privilege resulted in female destruction and possible martyrdom. TRAs will likely be milking this event for years as an example of how the system failed this woman.
Luckily, this piece of shit was shot dead at the scene. Basically, a suicide (death by cop). It is rare to see a woman take down a bunch of other people while on a death wish. Perhaps this was a quest for the ultimate male privilege. Murder-suicide is a male game. I tend to feel a bit bad for women who are so messed up that they try to become males, but the internalized misogyny stops me in my tracks every time. And if part of your woman-hate involves killing little girls, any sympathy I might have evaporates.
I will say this. Male trans are respected. Female trans are not. In the media, on TV, and by the public at large. If you want any more (like do we need MORE?) evidence of the absolute misogyny that runs through Western society, it is this. This woman is being roasted as a woman, not a man. Society needs to prove that women are bad too, so a female trans will be called female, and a male trans will be called female. If this shooting had been committed by a male in a dress, he would have been called ‘she’, would not have been ‘dead named’ and if taken alive, would have been housed in a female prison.
Oh, and as a side note, apparently there is a ‘manifesto’, and I can’t wait to get a look at that.
I’m including this post in the series, USA: The Downward Spiral.
♀️ 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 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. ⚢
M is for Mother
I’ve been avoiding finishing what has been a partially-written post for months, but I’ve been inspired to action thanks to an unsolicited advertisement reminding me to worship at the feet of the most sacrosanct patriarchy-perpetuating, girl-destroying women on the planet: mothers. In addition, I really want to cut this albatross loose, so today is the day I finish and publish. Plus, I really want to move on to some juicy P is for ___ posts in this Alphabet series. So, let’s get started.
Today, there is a small set of taboo topics that is considered ‘dangerous’ – so dangerous that bad things can and do happen to the speaker or writer. The topics in question concern realities – truths, if you will – both subjective and objective, both relevant. Highly observable and measurable, hard to deny, and universal across time and place. What, pray tell, are these dangerous topics? Unsurprisingly, they are those concerning women’s status as human beings and the role males play in preventing and/or controlling that status. When these topics are talked about honestly – and they seldom are as it is dangerous to do so – shit gets real very quickly. Males get scared and angry and aggressive for being named correctly as the predator class. The males issue threats and commit actual violence, and they rally support for the male sex class, often painting themselves as victims. As well, many females get scared and angry and defensive on behalf of males, but also themselves as enablers who keep the shit show going. Females issue verbal threats against female truth-tellers and provide unanimous support for whatever male violence ensues.
Much of what drives these illogical female reactions is that women are not supposed to speak about their reality unless they are parotting the male version of female reality. Women’s reality is what men say it is, and even then, women are not supposed to talk about it publicly, at least in an analytical or critical way. So when a female person decides to speak publicly about female reality in a ‘no bullshit’ or even slightly critical way, you are almost always hearing about information that has been, throughout history, censored, erased and denied. And the speaker and the information will be attacked relentlessly, with attempts made at further censorship, erasure, threats of violence and other (social, political, economic) punishment, real violence, outright denial and various means of discreditation and silencing, such as ‘crazifying’, making false accusations of some -ism or -phobia, and application of bullshit lables such as ‘fundamentalist’ or ‘man-hater’, etc. Only females as a class experience this, and the attacks are always gang bangs with a lot of fellow females joining in to quell their cognitive dissonance and to keep socially and financially benefiting from staying on the path of least resistance (aka sucking dick, literally or figuratively).
Also note that the more important the subject matter is to upholding patriarchy, the more dangerous it is to talk about it. My post today addresses one of these taboo topics and is probably one of the most ‘dangerous’ a woman can address. Its official title is Aiding and Abetting, but as I am including this as part of the Alphabet Series, it gets a second special title:
M is for Mother
Lest anyone start reading this and then deliberately miss the point by focusing on an imagined ‘tone’ problem – something that ALL women who talk about ‘dangerous’ topics are accused of (in addition to being crazy or bitter or ‘phobic’ or hairy man-hating dykes or prudes or fundies, etc.) – I’m going to state right here that there is no sarcasm going on. This isn’t an ‘attack’. There is no intended sneering, no condescending tone. It is straight talk. There may be positing or hypothesizing here and there, but this is not satire or parody or fun-poking or whatever genre of writing you want to explain it away as. It’s just an un-sugar-coated description of how things work. Note that the point of this post is not to blame mothers for all the problems in the world, which is how many readers might wish to interpret this. It is a critique of the system and the role or archetype of Mother that arises from that system that are so crucial to keeping men in a position of power and to keeping women and girls utterly destroyed inside and thus, controllable. It is also a criticism of how thoroughly women have embraced their subservient role and of the role they DO play in making sure our daughters stay shackled and victimized and accepting it without serious resistance. After men, mothers are the next biggest whiners about martyrdom and victimization and their unsung heroism of toeing the party line, so deliberate misinterpretation of what I say is expected.
Now, I don’t for a second believe that women cause the majority of the world’s problems – seriously, why the hell would women ever devise a system that oppresses and dehumanizes them??? – BUT they do allow problems to continue in various ways, and critique and criticism are therefore warranted and necessary. But, men are the problem and the chief beneficiaries of the system they run and the roles that come out of that system, period. This post, however, is neither about men nor about biological motherhood, but about the male-created role or archetype of Mother that women both willingly and unwillingly take on and groom their daughters for, and how these women, as a result, keep the cycle of female oppression in place and never-ending. The whole point of creating boxes for women and girls to live in is to control their behaviour, to ensure that this behaviour supports and perpetuates male freedom to control and brutalize, and to make it impossible for women and girls to discover their own true freedom and selves.
Also note that I’m not writing this preamble to apologize in advance – something ALL women are not only required to do when they speak publicly, especially about taboo topics, but are criticized for doing by those self-appointed analysts/critics of women’s ‘inferior’ speech tendencies. I apologize for nothing. Speaking about reality is not akin to doing something wrong – again, something all girls grow up learning in order to keep them silent and compliant as adults. So, if you start reading this and you find you can’t handle it, here is my suggestion. Move on. Go watch a cat video. Go suck a dick. Just don’t stay here and dare to think deeply about this timeless, universal and highly problematic issue. (Okay, there was a little sarcasm there, but it ends here.)
So, what was I saying? Oh yes, M is for Mother.
This truly is a massive topic, but I’m only going to cover the bits that are relevant to my thinking at this point in time and try to break this thinking down into the following categories that make it easier for your to follow.
- Motherhood: A Relationship, Not a Job
- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Mother)
- Welcome to Shit Mountain: The Woman Hierarchy
- Martyrdom: The Blame Game vs. Responsibility
- Boy-Moms
- Mommy Dearest: Narcissistic Mothers
- The Future of Humanity: Redefining Motherhood
1. Motherhood: A Relationship, Not a Job
One of the major complaints that is getting more and more play among mothers these days is that motherhood is a ‘job’ and compensation should absolutely be required for said ‘job’. I find the whole discussion bizarre, to be honest, and for a few reasons. I want to comment on a) compensation and b) what ‘job’ means. I also want to discuss choice briefly.
a) First, by and large, mothers ARE compensated for being mothers. If you go the housewife/mother route, and you enter the heterosexual contract, then this is what you have agreed to: you exchange your domestic services, including childrearing, cleaning, cooking, and male ego-building, as well as lifelong access to your cunt for a home, food, clothing, entertainment and spending money, as well as protection services. I have never worked a job where I get accommodation, food, clothing, spending money and safety. If you are a mother and you are not getting these things, then you fucked up. You don’t have an understanding of the hetero contract and you fucked up. Sorry.
I would not have survived financially if I had not had a child.
Private conversation with a single mother in Canada (May, 2021) where she told me that her child was, essentially, her ‘meal ticket’ and her protection. She got subsidized housing, more nourishing food, financial assistance, and more – simply for being a single mother. For women, motherhood is the fastest and easiest way to stay alive. And men designed it to be this way.
There are also some societies – Canada is one of them – that will provide various compensation to mothers for doing nothing other than popping out a kid. The quote above comes from a much longer conversation I had with a single mother in Canada last year. I was stunned at everything she was given and that she had access to. She, of course, commented at how unfair it was to men that she got better quality food than everyone else, but she couldn’t see that the single, childless women living in poverty were the most vulnerable. During that same time period, I also briefly lived with a social worker who told me stories of lone women living in homeless ‘hotels’ run by the government where they would wake up in their beds mid-rape after homeless men had targeted them and broken into their rooms. Safe, subsidized housing NEVER goes to these ultra-vulnerable women. Sometimes, they end up in shelters with predatory trannies pretending to be women, as well.
b) It is a little off-putting when mothers see their role as a job. There are several things that distinguish motherhood from an actual job. First, for such a ‘skilled’ and life-or-death ‘job’, there are absolutely no standards required for candidates. Literally anyone can breed. There are no qualifications needed, no intelligence or skills required. No social skills. No references are demanded. No experience. No proof of competence. As a teacher, I’ve had to do multiple RCMP, fingerprinted criminal record checks to prove I’m not a child rapist or abuser. Mothers? Nope. Never. You also can’t be fired from being a mother. Very few children are ever taken from abusive mothers, especially the kinds of abuse that are just commonplace or that don’t involve broken bones. You can destroy a child from the inside out over the course of your lifetime, and never lose your ‘job’.
c) Finally, and on a related note, motherhood is a choice. In most parts of the world, and increasingly so in more and more places, there is no gun to a woman’s head. Women are allowed to earn their own money, even in strict, religious countries. Unlike jobs, motherhood is not required for survival, but it is certainly the easiest route to survival for a female if you don’t want to have to compete and suffer and truly work hard in the real world. Motherhood is a choice, it is a relationship, and it is a privilege that raises your status in society (among women). You bring a creature into the world without their consent, which means this is a completely selfish act. Acting like the child is forcing you to care for them is pure delusion, although this is a common way of thinking in places like China, where parents regularly make their children feel guilty for existing and taking up family resources.
2. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Mother)
Only if you define and break down the role of Mother in the patriarchal sense, can you understand why there are so many problems for women. Mothers complain endlessly that they are held up to impossible standards or that they are blamed for everything in society where children are concerned. Note that they don’t see breeding and serving men as the root of the problem, and if you can’t see the root of a problem, that problem can never be solved. When we talk of motherhood, we are not talking about biological motherhood, we are referring to the role or archetype that has been created as a category for women. Social categories or archetypes for women are lose-lose situations. No woman ever truly wins in a society where she doesn’t have the freedom to be fully human. When men define our roles, it is not for our benefit, even when they paint it as such. Let’s look at what being a ‘Good Mother means in male-dominated society.
You know we live in a male-controlled society because the expectations for men are much lower in all possible senses, if expectations or standards exist at all. Being a ‘Good Father’ is almost meaningless. At most, it means having a paying a job so that his property can eat. Fathers don’t have to talk to the kids, spend time with them, help them, nurture them, teach them, cook for them, or anything requiring time and attention. They just have to pay the bills. I’ve seldom seen men deemed ‘Bad Fathers’, even when they run out on the family, don’t provide money, or even abuse the children or wife/whore. But I’m not criticizing this as it’s pointless and a common pastime of hetero breeder women who aren’t really interested in fighting to change a shitty system. And this system has been in place since marriage was invented by men. To be a Good Mother, you have to possess a whole host of supposedly innate female characteristics and skills, including nurturing, cleaning, cooking, empathizing, worrying, nagging, being sweet, self-sacrificing, mamma-bear-fighting, advice-giving, being omniscient, forgiving. And I could go on. The thing is that if you list the entire host of skills and characteristics that make up a Good Mother, you’ll find a lot of contradictory stuff. And a lot of the characteristics and behaviours that Good Mothers are supposed to exhibit are exalted one minute and then criticized or made fun of the next minute. It’s designed that way for a very specific reason. Male dominance is about keeping women off-balance and insecure, always faced with catch-22’s and constantly questioning whether they are measuring up to impossible or contradictory standards.
Reality: if you get past the long and strange list of what mothers are supposed to be, there really are only a few requirements. a) Good Mothers breed sons and ensure they are made well aware of their male privilege from Day 1 (to be discussed more in the section on Boy-Moms), and b) Good Mothers break down their daughters psychologically and groom them to accept eventual heterosexual victimhood as rape-slaves (wives) and mothers. Bad mothers produce gay sons, or even worse, lesbians or asexual daughters who decide not to breed. No mother wants her daughter to hate men and she certainly won’t teach her daughter about rape and how self-respect and serving males don’t go together. (Delve more into the destruction of girls in G is for Girl.)
3. Welcome to Shit Mountain: The Woman Hierarchy
In our patriarchal world, hierarchy exists. Males are very much about domination, and you should hold suspect any male who claims he is an ‘equalist’ or any kind of communist, socialist or feminist. Men, despite what they say, don’t believe in equality between the sexes. They may believe that males can be equal or at least have the ability to rise above their station, but if you have the skill to really pin a man down with regard to what he truly believes, you’ll find that every one of them has caveats and conditions that prevent females from attaining and deserving the very freedoms he believes he, as a male, is entitled to. So, males and females exist on separate planes. I’m going to describe them in the following way. Men exist on a ladder. They can rise above their station, and they can also fall. Their hierarchy is based primarily on wealth/ownership. In the distant past, physical strength may have been more important in attaining power, but in these modern times, this is not the case at all. Power is all about ownership.
It is a different scene for females.
Picture, if you will, a massive shit heap. It stinks, it begs cleaning, but cleaning doesn’t work, the shit is not just stuff to clean, but also physical and sexual danger as well as poverty, and the contributors to the pile are mainly those who oppress you – males, whose ladder hangs above you out of reach – or women who are benefitting from the oppressor class slightly more than you are. All women live on the shit heap – a hierarchy that is based almost exclusively on sex – or in other words, how you use your vagina and uterus. The easiest way to climb shit mountain is to sell your vagina to a wealthy male and to pop out some kids. The air is a little fresher near the top, you are safer with more money, and you can shit on women beneath you and feel smug about it. The surest way to the bottom, where eventually you will realize you cannot move up at all (given that sex is tied to age for women) is a) not to have kids, and b) not to let men rape you with your consent (aka you’re a lez or asexual) in exchange for protection, a home and more buying power.
It should also be noted that those lower on the hierarchy always do more to support those above them, especially those who hurt them. Interestingly, we are always told the opposite. Rich males somehow provide jobs to those lower down. But think of this. Who pays for all the male criminals in prison, keeping rapists alive so they can go out and rape again? Women’s tax dollars go into keeping alive the men who instill fear in them. All men benefit from rape – men who don’t rape indiscriminantly are ‘good men’ and can also offer their protection racket to women who fear being raped, for example – so their tax dollars are an investment. Further, there is a disproportionate, and unreciprocated, amount of lesbian labour, threats to safety, and money put into heterosexual and breeding women’s issues, such as birth control, abortion, domestic violence shelters and more – issues that are seldom, if ever, an issue for these toiling women. Lesbians also devote a disproportionate and unreciprocated amount of time and money into gay men’s (and these days, tranny dudes’) issues. Again, the lower on the shit heap you sit, the more you support your oppressors and better-offs.
Conclusion: mothers do NOT sit at the bottom of the shit heap, despite their claims that they do. Following society’s rules gives you a leg up, not the opposite. If you are breeding and suffering as a result, you likely don’t understand how heterosexuality works and failed to play the game correctly. You may not be able to save yourself at this point, but you can make sure you save your daughter(s) from forced heterosexuality and some of the evils of the world. But you won’t. Of course.
4. Martyrdom: The Blame Game vs. Responsibility
All female archetypes or roles created by men are designed for a) usage/consumption, b) control, and c) convenient scapegoating and shaming and playing us off against each other. Despite what you may want to think, I am not a denier of the fact that men have tended to blame mothers for all sorts of shit throughout history. Males in the psychological domain have been some of the worst offenders. I’m a defender of the reality of psychological mechanisms and such, but I also don’t believe males have any business working in any of the ‘helping’ professions. Male help almost always ends up further damaging women who are already damaged thanks to men and their handmaidens.
Having said that, mothers do a shit load of damage in this world, especially to daughters, and they SHOULD be called out for their often complex roles in destroying girls and building up future rapists (sons). As mentioned earlier, very few females are qualified to parent children due to a lack of standards for the ‘job’ of motherhood. Our world acknowledges that there are many problem parents, but gasp in horror if you suggest that there are people who just shouldn’t breed. Just standard patriarchal thinking, where we protect those who should know better and punish the innocent who have no choice in the matter… And I verge on digressing.
I want to mention two things mothers SHOULD be called out for in the blame game. First, they are quite happy to take responsibility for the role they play in the successes of their children, but are magically innocent and ignorant when their child ends up as a failure, screw-up or, worse, a monster. It’s just not possible to have such selective effects on behaviour. Either take full responsibility, or take no responsibility or get a clue about the extent of your sphere of influence.
Second, mothers have always protested being blamed more than fathers are for things that happen to their children or how their children end up. At the same time, they use the argument that they are the primary care-givers in custody cases. The vast majority of the time, it is the mother who is present 100% (or significant percentage) of the time for the first 5 years of a child’s life – not the father. Many fathers spend little to no time with kids, and when they do spend time, it is often ‘fun stuff’, not care-giving. And women enter breeding relationships with this understanding – if they don’t, they are definitely not qualified to breed… If you are the primary influence, then you bear the brunt of the responsibility for the shit that happens to your kid. Period.
Bottom line: if you want to want to take on the role that can be one of life or death for a minor, then you also have to be willing to take responsibility for your fuck-ups. You can’t be an adult and refuse responsibility at the same time. Don’t play the martyr.
5. Boy-Moms
They have always sat at the top of the lady-hierarchy. Even though the most blatant girl hatred manifests differently now, son love is still a thing in all cultures. As mentioned above, it is the job of a Good Mother to make sure her sons walk the planet with a distinct and internalized sense of their deservedness and privilege as males. The boy-mom of today is an uber-enabler of their son(s). Like a good mother is supposed to do, she will love him unconditionally, and will even cover up his crimes, including the most grievous woman-hating of them. Mothers rally behind a rapist son, and will go so far as to attack or censor his female victims.
As much as these women make me ill, I have to admit a fascination with the truly fucked up psychology any woman who breeds a son must deal with. You have to do mental gymnastics to let a dude fuck your body, but to create and birth a son and to watch him inevitably go from innocent, sexless baby to what so many young lads turn into, and to make the endless excuses for him over the years? To me that is just endless mental trauma to constantly have to deny reality. I’ve talked to and watched tons of boy-moms deal with the shit that comes out of their sons’ mouths. Even in the last few months, I got to know a boy-mom whose 7-year-old was constantly displaying what I consider to be budding psychopathic tendencies. She showered him with kisses constantly, while at the same time not being able to explain why most of what he talked about was hurting and/or killing people. Personally, the kid gave me the creeps, not just as someone who used to work in forensics and personality disorders, but as a woman with her eyes wide open and with no emotional or biological ties to this mini-monster-boy-child.
Advice: I’ve said this in the past and I’ll say it again. At the end of the day, boy-moms are no friends to women. They are more trauma-bonded to males than any other group of women, and when push comes to shove, they will destroy any innocent woman or girl who threatens the privilege of their son, even if that son is a killer and rapist. These women also tend to be worse to daughters when there is also a son in the picture. I’m speaking from experience, and I’ve heard enough personal anecdotes to give credence to the theory.
6. Mommy Dearest: Narcissistic Mothers:
Most of why I so wish women had freedom from forced heterosexuality and forced breeding is because of the young female victims that result. Girls are relentlessly conditioned from birth to hate themselves, and by extension, all females. So how can an adult female with a lifetime of such abuse possibly be an adequate mother to a girl? I mean, as explained above, this is part of playing the patriarchal role of Good Mother. Your job is to destroy your girls so that they make good, subservient, heterosexual victims and breeders in adulthood.
The average, ‘normal’ mother is dangerous to daughters. But what happens when your mother has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)? These women will abuse boys, but they will absolutely destroy their daughters, psychologically. I experienced this, myself. And unfortunately, my father was co-dependent with narcissistic tendencies and a mental health professional, on top of that. It was a bad situation to grow up in (understatement!) and I went No Contact at the age of 20 (!), so let’s just say I understand manipulation and abuse on an expert level, and have a bit of a saviour complex when it comes to girls with abusive parents, especially mothers. Breeding just wasn’t even an option for me – can you imagine how selfish you’d have to be to potentially put a child at risk after growing up abused and also potentially exposing that child to abusive family members? You have to stop cycles like these.
Narcissistic mothers are often children of narcissistic parents. The thing about personality disorders is that while we may be born with certain traits, our environments can certainly make things so much worse. It isn’t a cut and dry nature-nurture situation.
Konstantin: “And your mother?…? …? No, Villanelle.”
Villanelle: “She deserved it.”
Konstantin: “Of course she deserved it. Everyone’s mother deserves it. But you’re not supposed to do it. You were supposed to grow up and realize she isn’t actually evil. She is just insane.
From the series, ‘Killing Eve’. Conversation following Villanelle’s return from Russia after killing her abusive, NPD mother.
If you are female and believe your mother was/is NPD, I have a great link in my sidebar to a site called Daughters of Narcissistic Mothers. It was recommended to me years ago by a fellow traumatized woman, and it helped me a great deal. You can spend most of your life feeling like you are insane or imagining things in this horrible and bizarre parental situation. You’ve stopped telling people because no one will ever believe that your mother is abusive – mothers are more likely to be lionized and defended than blamed, despite what mothers say. And it is really hard to describe narcissistic abuse to people who have never experienced it before. You do end up sounding like there is something wrong with you.
7. The Future of Humanity: Redefining Motherhood
I am a staunch anti-natalist. I don’t support human breeding. I don’t believe it is possible for humans to continue on a positive trajectory as long as males exist, as I don’t believe women can be free if males exist. I don’t believe males can redeem themselves, and women exist as male-defined social constructs. Things aren’t getting better socially, politically, demographically, environmentally, economically, and they won’t.
I like to spend time thinking about three human scenarios that seem positive to me and that most people find scary, mostly because most people are self-centred and human-centric and are often infected with male-created religious values, which are anti-life (ironically, given what they say they believe in).
a) VHEM – the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. This is based on the idea that humans are a failed experiment of sorts. More males than females sign on to this ideology, which makes sense to me, as women tend to buy into male-defined roles, and thus cannot develop identities outside of being sex objects. The idea of not breeding, like men have told us we must since time began, strips so many women of their identity, sadly. Anyhow, male believers in this ideology typically and erroneously like to share blame for the state of the world with women. Myself, I acknowledge that males have created overpopulation and all the shit that has resulted from that. I have no problem with humans just stopping and giving the world over to the remaing creatures who absolutely are able to control their populations simply because they don’t have the ‘intelligence’ to fuck with the system. Human intelligence in the hands of men means that male irrationality reigns and we live unnaturally.
b) A New Model of Motherhood. If we were to continue the human race, one option is to eliminate males, put breeding firmly in the domain of women, who after recovering from slavery, would rediscover their natural biophilia. Multiple options would exist to continue the species. Parthenogenisis or use of artifical wombs coupled with a female model of population replacement rather than the male model of out-of-control growth would allow humans to downsize to a small unobtrusive population, replenish and maintain healthy resource levels, and remove biological child ownership from the mix and surrounding all children with multiple sources of love and learning. Humans can live more like similar mammal species instead of necrophilic zombots.
c) Hybridization. I’m a big fan of human transformation. Male elimination, as in the previous category, is a given and is necessary for healthy evolution, and the best traits of humanity could be blended with say, plants. Plants are incredible and responsible breeders, and I’d be perfectly keen seeing how other human systems, such as communication, would be improved and simplified with a different kind of connectedness such as use of a plantesque root system.
Conclusion
There is so much more that could be said on this topic, but I’ll end here with the following. I would truly love to see what humanity could and would look like if women could live completely separate from or without the existence of males. Nothing but horrors have resulted from male domination, and the world is certainly not thriving because of it. Our accomplishments are not true accomplishments, especially when held up against the widespread suffering of all species. I would love to see motherhood defined differently, or not at all. I would certainly love to see women and girls free from being forced to define themselves in terms of their uteri and vaginas. Queer theory does not address this problem by erasing women as a category. The problem is not having female body parts, but the fact that we are oppressed by males because of them.
If you want to be part of the solution, don’t breed (if you haven’t done so yet). Support girls unconditionally and believe them and believe in them. Stay away from male-identified, toxic females if you can. And don’t devote your time, money and energy to males if that is possible for you. And finally, remember that we women exist publicly, and often privately, in male-defined categories. It’s best, but hardest, to fight against this categorization. Remember that almost all women you meet gave in a long time ago. Hold them responsible for their actions, but not for the creation of these limiting boxes.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Addendum
For those who would like a wonderfully done audio version of this post, please head to Radical Ramblings’ Youtube channel.
Men Dream, Women Labour, Men Take Credit
A man with dreams needs a woman with vision…
Alternate verion: A man with dreams needs a woman who believes…
various scrotals take credit as their sex is wont to do, but original source unknown
Better and truer version: A man with dreams needs women’s unquestioning faith, undying and undeserved devotion, and endless free or underpaid labour to bring the dream to life… but it’s probably just better to put him down in the permanent sense, so that women can be free to pursue their own damned dreams.
Story Ending
Woman, I could get used to this quote reinvention thing! I might go down in history – kind of like Weird Al Yankovic with his song parodies! No matter. I’ll put this in the Conversations with Men series, although I’m writing of a general, repetitive, lifelong conversation that all women have with all men. I’ll give a few examples from my own life, but honestly, I see this form of male dominance in everything I experience. Women are just so used to it (and by my definition, exhausted by it) that they don’t realize all the time they end up devoting to men’s brilliant ideas and/or cleaning up after numerous failed experiments.
So the other day, after escaping from my most recent foray into exploitative work – wait, let’s call it what it actually was: work-based imprisonment of a foreign person through legal means – I started researching the country where I’ll be spending at least the next couple of months. Okay, let’s be honest here again, I was researching food because I like food, especially local specialties. And I noticed something. Most of these dishes and snacks and local basics that are must-eats when in this particular area have a man’s name attached to them. Men made famous by the creation of some spectacular edible. In the few cases where a woman was considered responsible for the dish’s creation, we have no idea who she was – some faceless, nameless wife. The story behind the dish often has the quality of a general myth: a woman wanted to please her new husband, sorta bullshit.
Anyhow, I started thinking about this, and it didn’t make sense to me. Given that throughout history, and continuing today, women have been the ones in the kitchens, the ones improvising dishes during hard times, the ones creating deliciousness out of 3 ingredients because hubbie has spent all the family’s money at the local watering or gambling hole or whorehouse – why is it that men are the only ones supposedly creating the famous, local, traditional foods? This doesn’t ring true for me. What I think has happened is that some opportunistic male who couldn’t get anything in his own life going, took his mother’s or his sister’s or his wife’s amazing creation and attached his name to it. Woman be damned. We’ve seen this happen countless times throughout history in the art world, in the scientific world – in every world and in every culture. Men steal. They steal from women. They steal their ideas, their labour, their inventions and discoveries, and they take credit in the form of recognition, money, future opportunities, and more. This is HIS story. She is erased. He lives forever. So I know the traditional foods I end up eating no matter where I go in the world have originally come from women, anonymous women.
I thought about the process of stealing. I thought about all the Great Men in the world, and the lesser men who have dreams. I thought about my own experiences with these ‘idea men’ thoughout my life. There have been so many. When I was younger and more naive and energetic, I fell prey to many of these guys. Sometimes, they have good ideas. But here’s the thing. Most of these men are not that bright, and are the laziest fuckers you’ll ever meet. They have grown up having their mothers do everything for them, and coupled with their inborn aggression and need to take, mom has nurtured and reinforced a sense of entitlement and deserving. By the time he reaches adulthood, the great man is well used to girls and women working for him to make his path easy, to make his dreams come true, to provide an endless well of ideas from which to take, and to give him some kind of legacy that they and he believes he deserves as a male.
You have, no doubt, encountered at least one of these guys in your life. It could be dad, but it could also be a teacher or mentor, a friend, a boyfriend/husband. You’ve been well-trained from birth to see males as insightful and brilliant, and you fall for male aggression or charisma really easily. Once charmed, you’ll do anything for them. They are soooo smart and creative and supportive of your desperate need to be a part of their crusade! Of course you want to sign on and help him realize his brilliant idea to change the world! See my post on friendship – specifically the section on Types of Friendship – to get some insight into how women get sucked into parasitical situations like this – hint: males see friendships with women differently than women see friendships with men…
I’ll give a few of my own examples. Note that I don’t fall for male bullshit anymore. I don’t give free labour to men anymore. Not that I’ve tried this yet, but I’d now go so far as to suggest that women steal men’s ideas and make them happen without sharing credit. Time to turn the tables, don’t you think? That’s for you to decide, of course. But I’m tired of promoting playing nice with our oppressors. We still aren’t free, but dammit, we’re ethical and sweet!
There is a male I’ve written about before. He is a standard lazy, useless, wannabe Great Man. He has spent decades generating ideas and then rallying gaggles of energetic and enthusiastic women to do his bidding. I was, at one point, one of them, until I saw the writing on the wall: I wasn’t getting anything but longer-lasting poverty from his project. And he got all the credit for the work I did. Not all of this guy’s ideas were bad, and he is actually aware he is a lazy user, and that it is women he almost exclusively exploits. But he talks about it laughingly, as all males do when they acknowledge bad parts of themselves (hahaha, I’m a womanizer; lol, I have a weakness for raping prostitutes for money; teeheehee, I just can’t help ogling women while you’re in the middle of telling me about your childhood incest). I eventually escaped this guy and moved on with other stuff. But I lost months of my life.
The most recent example of male dreams shaping the women they use and abuse came out of the recent job I accepted and just escaped from (alluded to above). Now, I was only able to escape because I’ve wised up to male tactics, because I don’t fully trust how Muslim males treat women (especially white women), and because I was put in a very dangerous legal situation that potentially could have seen me arrested, heavily fined and/or deported (yes, stupid liberal Americans, this shit happens to white people, too). Now, I’m not big on rules, as a rule, but I don’t actively fuck with governments. The school for whom I was working had told me weeks ago that they had finished the paperwork for my work visa, but had refused to take my passport – and you need the visa put INTO the passport to show legal status – even after I asked several times, and as the expiry date of my tourist visa approached, I wasn’t given any information about the status of my visa or the need for me to do a ‘visa run’ to a neighbouring country in order to remain legal. The only conclusion that could be reached was that a) they intended to put me into illegal status and thus control my movements since I couldn’t do anything without ID and proof of legal standing or b) they were holding my paperwork hostage, which was in fact finished, in order to control my movements. Without legal standing, one can’t leave the country, travel within the country on public transport, or even stay at a hotel within the country while on a school break. They were trying to hold me prisoner, in other words. This on top of the fact that I was forced to work 7 days a week, was faced with racism and xenophobia every day, and was dealing with growing anger and resentment from some of the women working at the school as I don’t act like a Muslim woman or even one of the non-Muslim hetero breeders or breeders-to-be. Needless to say, I was fucking depressed, constantly ill, and paranoid about being illegal.
But let’s get to the male dream – female slavery part of things. So the head of the school told me about his ‘dreams’ on a few occasions. He was thrilled to hire me as I am highly educated and experienced, and so, squarely on my shoulders, he placed his ridiculous and frankly impossible dreams about the future of the school. Honestly, I had better ideas for the school, but I wasn’t hired for my ideas – just my apparently endless female capacity for labour. So deluded and power-hungry as he was, he couldn’t believe it one day when he asked me if I had been out of the city to enjoy some of the beautiful scenery of the area, and I told him that it wasn’t possible as I was working 7 days a week, including nights. He looked at me suspiciously – I’m legally barred from working more than one job – and he asked where I was working. I looked at him incredulously and told him I worked 7 days a week at the school – days, nights, Saturdays, and full Sundays grading and preparing the hours and hours of lessons I had to teach. He ended the conversation right after that as reality is never part of a Great Man’s dream. He is responsible for ideas, and he doesn’t think about who has to suffer (women) in order to make these dreams come true. He had even admitted to me on a few other occasions that he was likely to move to a different school in the system in the near future, but he expected me to stay for at least 5 years to make his great dream for the program come true, and he definitely wanted to get credit for that!
Fuck that. I’m too old and open-eyed to fall for male abuse anymore. I almost wish I could go back in time and take back all the months and years of my life I devoted to furthering men’s careers and fattening their pocketbooks at the expense of my own career and bank account. All I can do now is to prevent it from happening to me again, and to put my story and warnings out there for younger women (or older women who haven’t figured out why they feel depleted and used and impoverished), so that they can avoid all the pain and focus on holding their own ideas sacred, and focusing on making their own dreams come true.
A woman’s dream should never be to let a man step on her in order to reach the top.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
L is for Lies
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Women lie about their age; men lie about
their incomeeverything else.William FeatherStory Ending
I know, I cited myself, and that is tacky as hell. But I’ll give the cop-out that it isn’t a full-on self-quote, but rather, an improvement on something dumb that some dumb man said. Even so, the improvement isn’t quite accurate either. I actually believe that women lie quite a bit more and are more accomplished liars than men do and are. Does that sound sexist? Don’t worry, I’ll get into it. What I’ve said is more a comment on who holds the power in this world and the role that psychological survival mechanisms play in the power game rather than any kind of attempt to tar and feather women.
As you may have deduced, today’s sweet little topic – the next in the Alphabet Series – is L is for Lies.
I considered other L-possibilities, of course. I felt rather hellbent on L is for Liberated! (complete with an exclamation point) for a while, and it is a topic that is worthy of discussion if you’re interested in how the women’s liberation movement gradually devolved into the mess that is male-centred, (L is for) liberal feminism, today. L is also for lesbians, which I’ve talked about here and there already, labels, love (see my Love = Hate Series), and language (and who controls it). But for some reason, lies rang true for me when I really thought about it. I’m not sure whether it was Annie Lennox’s “Would I Lie to You” popping up randomly on my playlist or accidently running into sexist, racist, nails-on-chalkboard-voiced Chris Rock’s comment on lying and sex differences. But I knew I’d met my topic du jour.
So let’s dig down into societal prevarication and get down to the reality that is life.
I’ve often felt that the world men have created is like a house of cards. It is fragile, susceptible to attack, like a card house, which necessitates a shitload of ammunition in the form of literal violence and anti-woman language, and an even bigger shitload of lies as protection or mortar to prop the whole damned thing up. [See my post on Censorship (truth-blocking and lies of omission, essentially) to get a sense of how dictatorships stay in place.] Question the lies and the physical and linguistic violence kicks in.
The system of lies is so well constructed that women are often the most active in keeping it going, believing it (or pretending to) and policing the behaviour of other women and girls, especially their daughters. They have the most to gain from demolishing societal lies, and thus the barriers are high in fighting against them. It is easier to believe, follow and perpetuate. And it is for this reason that I say that women are the most adept liars and lie most frequently. It is not that they are natural liars, it’s that lying is a survival mechanism that men don’t need. Men lie, and all women are aware of it, but because men hold all the power, they can lie unconvincingly and get away with it as there really aren’t any consequences. Telling the truth or failing to accept lies can have dire consequences for women and girls.
Now interestingly, research confirms this: women lie more than men. But they don’t really tell us why this might be, and that’s where I come in. What they also tell us is that men are twice as likely as women to believe that they are good liars (typical male overconfidence that you see with every ability they self-assess on). They are also much more likely to tell self-serving lies (to get laid, sympathy, money, etc). Women are supposed to be more likely to lie on behalf of others. But I would bet you a million golden feminist turds that women are more likely to lie for MALES (especially sons, male family members and male friends) than for females, and in this way, the lies are self-serving. Serving the master gets them handmaiden benefits or simply allows them a better chance at survival. In the same way, I would bet my riches that women are more likely to believe a male’s lies than a woman’s, and both males and females are more likely to believe a male’s lies than a woman’s truths.
Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance a special type of lying, common in all humans, but necessary for women who choose not to question patriarchy. It is basically the situation where a person is faced with evidence that they hold contradictory beliefs or they behave in a way that conflicts with their beliefs. The cognitive dissonance is the discomfort, guilt or shame one feels upon realizing there is conflict or a contradiction. Dealing with the discomfort can lead to all sorts of fun behaviour, including rationalizing or covering up the discrepancy – essentially lying to oneself and others. The thing is that many women don’t realize they have conflicting beliefs and behaviours. This is especially true of most women who call themselves ‘feminists’. The vast majority of ‘feminists’ say they support women, but then centre males in their feminism. Liberal feminists have managed (in their minds) to get around potential discomfort, say, by pretending that tranny-dudes are women, when in fact, they know that it is NOT possible to change sex (note that they know damn well that we can’t change race, but magically sex is mutable???), and especially by attacking women who speak the truth. Focusing blame on truth-tellers removes the discomfort of their own conflicting beliefs and behaviours.
But seriously, the vast majority of women live with their heads in the sand and make willing and practised ignorance an essential part of their existence so as not to experience cognitive dissonance. I’d bet more of my valuable feminist turds that the women who are the most antagonistic towards other women are the ones who do actually experience finger-wagging dissonance. The antagonism is a defense mechanism and a way to relieve themselves of the discomfort of realized inethicality. Keep that in mind when some patriarchal henchwoman attacks you for speaking truth about men.
Let’s take a look at my take on the top 10 lies that women believe (or pretend to believe). Note that unless willingly ignorant, women who believe these lies will experience cognitive dissonance and will react accordingly in some woman-hating way.
10. Sacrifice is a virtue. But strangely, only for females, and women who adopt this thinking spend a lot of time pressuring and criticizing other females for not sacrificing their humanity, time, identities, careers and sanity for males and children. It is a mark of a truly miserable person to pick at others’ behaviour, while cherry-picking the elements of their own lives to highlight. These folks are often massive hypocrites, and when aware of it, they end up shifting focus onto other women’s ‘selfishness’.
9. It is better to be with a man than to be alone. This is the pathetic dirge of the so-called femcel, the anti-lesbian (and anti-woman), the weak, and/or the traditional. Now that I’m back in a traditional country, I’m hearing a lot of educated late-20-somethings wax on about needing to get married. I always ask ‘why’, as that is my favourite question in the world, and passionlessly, they monotone about not wanting to be alone or musing that they should have some kids. And of course, we need to attach ourselves to a penis if we want a brat. A pile of lies here. At least none of these traditional women goes on about ‘love’ and the lie that men can love women in a way that is different from loving a tool or a sport. The lie of male love is predominant in non-traditional cultures.
8. God/Goddess exists and has a plan for us. One of the (many) major criticisms that men have of women is that they are more likely to believe in a religion than men are. It is seen as a weakness of mind rather than a symptom of colonization or slavery, which is what any system based on lies depends on. There are many things that explain how religion takes hold in the mind of a person and why that person might not overcome their early brainwashing in catechism. Level of intelligence, amount of education, and training in science are only a few of the explanations. Poverty, desperate circumstances, poor health, and the threat of community/family ex-communication are also major factors. Given that women are more threatened and susceptible to violence and poverty in this world, and that they are still the only colonized people who haven’t fought back against their oppression in a major and organized way, it makes sense that systems of lies and illogic become ways to rationalize their oppression. Religion provides a framework for women to make sense of why they are put into the shitty positions they find themselves in, as well as constant reminders of the punishments they will suffer for breaking the rules of their ‘justified’ oppression. Males just aren’t oppressed like women are, so they don’t need to take comfort in irrationality. Men tend to take religion seriously when it gives them moral carte blanche to go to war or to hurt women (another kind of satisfying war).
7. Women are biologically wired to seek out and enjoy subservience, abuse and other sexy mistreatment. This lie is becoming more and more common in Western cultures (and perhaps Japan and other First World countries), and I see it as another attempt at backlash from men against women seeking to free themselves. Previously underground and alternative lifestyles that were seen as deviancy or perversions are becoming ‘cool’ and mainstream. I’ve spent time online in research mode in BDSM communities, and I’ve had the most bizarre conversations with men trying to convince me that not only is female slavery fun and sexy and natural, but that it is actually the slave that has all the power rather than the Dom. At first, I thought these guys were putting me on. I mean, it sounded so scripted and unbelievable, like the dialogue in a typical porn film. I’d laugh my ass off at these incredibly obvious lies, but over time, I came to realize that it was much more sinister, and so many women were falling for it, strangely and pathetically. And it reinforced to me that men are really terrible liars, and they don’t have to be good because only the weak and powerless have to be skilled, so as not to get killed.
6. There is a ‘good one’ out there… somewhere. This lie is hilarious, and I think women tell themselves this in order to hold out hope that the Prince Charming of childhood fairytales exists. It is such a commonly held belief, and it is probably gaining strength thanks to the Cult of Positivity and adherents of “The Secret” and other deluded types who think that the universe will deliver your deepest wishes and make your lies come true if you just put it out there. Note that one women reach adulthood, the bar for ‘a good one’ is set very, very low, and it gets lower as she gets older and more desperate. It has to be. I mean, can you imagine men having to meet the standards that women and girls have to live up to in order just to be ‘average’? I’ve never met a woman who claims she has one of the ‘good ones’ describe him in a way that convinces me that he is anything special. Half the time, women are lying about the feats of amazingness of said male, and are withholding details about the shit he does the other 99% of the time. Not only is it a lie that there is a good one out there, but women have to continue lying to themselves once they have procured the amazing specimen in order to avoid dealing with their cognitive dissonance-related discomfort.
5. Motherhood is a job. I’m going to try to restrain myself as I have a separate post devoted to mothers. I just want to say here that motherhood is not a job, but a RELATIONSHIP that is chosen. Motherhood is rewarded by society and women are already compensated by male partners, despite women claiming that they are not. If you are smart enough to have the kid with a male master who actually has money and resources, you will be compensated well for your services. At the very least, you get a free place to live, food on the table, a clothing allowance, and entertainment funds. For the wealthier, you won’t even have to do anything except fuck in return for your payment because less fortunate women will be rented to take care of your offspring. If you don’t understand the game, then you have probably married a poor dude or a complete loser in some other way, and you really shouldn’t be complaining to the world about how your poor choices or your ignorance about how heterosexuality works are somehow society’s fault or responsibility. Let’s just say that complaining that you should be paid by society for choosing to bring a completely helpless and dependent creature into the world is ridiculous. Unlike with a real job, in the filial relationship that is motherhood, you can be stupid, unlettered, incompetent, lazy, and reference-free, and you can’t be fired even after you inevitably abuse your daughter and release another rapey boy into the world. Women who work actual jobs live under the constant threat of being fired, even when they are at the top of their field and especially when they are threatening to male egos in the workplace.
4. Killing a pedophile, rapist or woman-killer doesn’t solve anything and is morally wrong. You just sink to their level. First, eliminating a rapist or femicidal man can in no way be equated to raping or killing women because of male privilege. To sink to that level, you’d have to have some kind of power over a group – for women, that would be children or animals, perhaps – and then to sexually assault them (women cannot physically rape – rape is solely a male crime) and/or to kill them for no reason except that they are children or animals. And women generally don’t do that kind of shit. Rather, killing predators of females – which all species of creatures EXCEPT HUMAN FEMALES are allowed to do and actually do – solves a few important things, including removing a dangerous monster from the streets and preventing more innocent females from being destroyed by said monster. I think these two reasons alone more than justify execution. You don’t, however, solve the problem of general, biologically wired, malicious male violence. To fix that, you have to remove the entire male sex to allow women and girls the peace and safety they deserve. The morality argument? Yeah, I love this. It’s better for an innocent female to be raped or killed than it is for a male monster to be eliminated. While males came up with this illogic, many women wholeheartedly support the idea that a male monster has more value than a female victim. More females than males take to the streets to keep a rapist alive and certainly more people rally to support a rapist than a rape victim. Again, the mark of the colonized and enslaved in service to those who control them.
3. Males can be educated out of raping. This is what ‘logically’ follows #4. You can’t kill the fuckers because it is morally wrong, so we just need to teach them not to hurt us. If we just educate men enough, they’ll see the error in their ways. But wait, haven’t we been doing this already and we know it doesn’t work? Well, I guess despite thousands of years of males raping and killing females and women begging males not to do it, women just haven’t found the right way to get the message across. So either we haven’t found the exact right way to access the tiny learning centre in the male brain, or…. MALES ARE BIOLOGICALLY WIRED TO RAPE AND DESTROY WOMEN. It’s not the G.D. porn! Rape has been going on forever and internet porn? – a blip on the human timeline. I mean get real. Some problems in the logic department for that one.
2. Women lie about rape. A lie about lying. Fun times. Statistics actually tell us that for all crime, including rape, the rate of false reporting is about the same – quite low (I think it is around 2%, if I remember correctly.) I’d actually bet you more of my sweet ass golden feminist turds that the rate for falsely reporting rape is lower than that for other crimes as there is no stigma or victim persecution for crimes that men experience too. Truthfully reporting rape hurts you further, and this phenomenon occurs because rape is the only crime that happens ONLY TO WOMEN AND GIRLS. The victim of a murder is not blamed for being murdered. The victim of a carjacking is not blamed for being carjacked. The victim of a pickpocketing is not blamed for being victimized. All women and girls are blamed for being raped. They are also disbelieved. So, why would you falsely report knowing that you will be persecuted and disbelieved, and knowing that in past cases when women have reported real rapes, their rapists have seldom seen courtrooms and are rarely convicted. Let’s put it this way: a woman is much more likely to deny being raped or to frame the assaults as consensual than to make up a fictitious story about being raped. If you are wondering how you can help women and girls in this world, start with this one thing: always believe them when they speak out about being raped.
1 Heterosexuality and feminism are compatible. Yeah, I said it. The biggest and most accepted lie on the planet. If you’re fucking dudes, your so-called feminism is compromised. No other oppressed group on the planet actively seeks out intimate emotional, financial and biological ties with their oppressor. Heterosexuality is the only oppression on the planet that keeps males in power, and if women said ‘no’ en masse, male dominance would crumble, althought I suspect they wouldn’t go down without a fight that would likely destroy the planet altogether. So to avoid this harsh reality, women embrace a complex web of lies about their needs and wants and purpose, with the cherry on top being that all of this subservience is the source of woman-power.
Attempts to shine a light on female oppression usually don’t name the problem in its entirety, and end up subverted anyway. For example, in all countries that bother to pretend to care about women’s history month, it is usually either a month of silence or more concerned with racism or trannyism than misogyny. And it very seldom addresses uncomfortable truths or addresses the slavery aspects of women’s history or the slavery of women is taught to us as a romantic or patriotic or ‘natural’ thing. This is not how other groups are taught about their oppression, and it is because women are still colonized, still enslaved, still groomed from birth to serve and submit, and as a result, they still say yes to, make sacrifices for, and compromise with the oppressor – men. Imagine, if you will, that black Americans had said that they would continue to work the fields for white males, as long as they could have better accommodation and, I don’t know, sick days. Do you think they would have achieved as much as they have by continuing to accept most of the trappings of slavery, but making minor superficial demands? Of course not. Yet women think they can get somewhere significant or different while continuing to serve the very people who have oppressed them and continuing to participate in the very system that has always enslaved them (marriage, hetero child ownership models, etc). Arguing for minor concessions or for more slavery dressed up as liberation also doesn’t achieve anything. I think it’s like slamming your hand in a door repeatedly and then complaining that you keep breaking your fingers. Why would you expect different results? Remove your hand from the door jamb. Basic logic.
Conclusion
In short, lies are what make the world go round. They are what keep men in power and women continuing to suffer and then complaining about it in willing ignorance. Face the truth. It might be painful at first, but there will be so much less tragedy and agony in the long run.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
K is for (Mr.) Kaplan
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Greetings one and all. Did I not promise a post sometime in the month following the last one? Well, I’m delivering. Kaboom! To be honest, I am writing this to take a break from the massive amount of work that I’m currently immersed in. Writing is relaxing to me. Teaching is not. So, I’ll do a little segue here before launching into my main topic.
After years of teaching university in the poorly paid, Chinese public education system, and after a pandemic-inspired, lengthy, unemployed period that was awesome for my physical health, but not great for the soul or pocketbook, I managed to land a job in a high school back on the Asian continent. Now, I haven’t taught high school in over a decade and there is definitely a reason for that… But the world has been closed, jobs have been nearly impossible to get, and Canada is one hell of an expensive place to live when you are a deliberately single female – and especially one without children and the myriad financial benefits that go with that. So, after hundreds of applications and then being dicked around by a few potential employers and then again by several abusive online companies looking to pay experienced, educated teachers $5.00 an hour, I felt lucky to land a job at all. I felt lucky even though anything below university level is usually a nightmare simply because outside the Western world, teachers actually have to work harder than the average worker, and certainly harder than any Western teacher. I’m talking 6 teaching days a week, including evenings and Saturdays, and then all the prep and homework/test grading that always ends up leaking over into most of your Sunday.
But here I am. It’s not all bad. I think the hardest part is being a seriously introverted (although feigning extroversion) person forced to be ‘on’ and interacting with people for hours and hours and hours at a time. A true introvert may actually like people, but their energy comes from non-social sources and they can be seriously depleted and weakened with prolonged interaction. Introverts forced to deal with extroverts may come away feeling ‘vampired’. Energy-sucked. (I made the mistake of spending 8 hours with a major extrovert who was a straight breeder, male apologist, and BLM-supporter on top of that, this past spring. I had to spend much of the next day in bed recovering, I felt so horrible.) So let’s just say, that after a week-and-a-half of classes and being forced to spend my non-classroom hours in a teachers’ room used by 60 teachers, but that only seats 25, I’m feeling like absolute shit, energy-wise. But it’s a job, right…?
Back to the topic at hand, though. The next post in the Alphabet Series. Interestingly, and not planned in any way, I could have used my newly adopted region as my K-word, but I don’t know enough about the place yet to write anything truly interesting. Maybe in the future if I ever get time out of what feels like a new cage…
But for today, K is for (Mr.) Kaplan.
I considered a few uninspiring options before settling on the great topic of Mr. Kaplan. Who could forget ‘Karen’ – a racist, sexist, ageist slur and silencing term used against middle-aged white women who dare speak out about anything, including their own rapes. I’ll refer you to RadFemSpiraling who does this topic justice in a way that I haven’t and who, in my opinion, is the de facto leader of the unofficial celebratory Karen Klub. Rock on. K is also obviously for kill, something men like to do to women often after raping them or just because they are throwing a mantrum and can’t handle their own blatant obsolescence. K is for kink, now mainstream rather than an ‘alternative lifestyle’, and used as a weapon to shame women into consenting to sexual abuse, torture, and rape by men so as not to appear boring, prudish or a goddamn lesbian of the non-man-fucking variety (!) K is for kindness, one of the new obnoxious, finger-wagging words used by the Cult of Positivity to shame women into accepting abuse by men and their bitches and into keeping their mouths shut to prevent their ‘toxic negativity’ (aka truth-telling) from spoiling the illusion that everything is hunky dory in the world. K is also for knowledge – the barring of the accumulation of which is a cornerstone of slavery – prevent education and slaves don’t realize they’re slaves. Finally, k is for kitchen, as in “get back in the”.
But let’s get to Mr. Kaplan.
Many of you may be wondering who the hell this is, and may have noted that this is one of the rare times that I’ve written about a person using their name. Mr. Kaplan is, despite the honorific, a woman, and she’s entirely fictional. She, in and of herself, isn’t that important, and it doesn’t really matter whether you know who she is or where she comes from. It is what she represents that is important here. She’s a supporting character on a way-too-long-running American television show.
She’s fictional. She’s in her 60’s. She is neither especially masculine nor feminine, and is what society would call ‘plain’. And she is a lesbian. One of the few on television, and certainly one of the very, very few who is over the age of acceptable fuckability. In fact, there are so few older lesbians portrayed on television that there isn’t even a stereotype for what they should look like.
Mr. Kaplan, aka Kathryn ‘Kate’ Nemec, played by the spectacular Susan Blommaert, is the highlight of, and dare I say, the only reason to watch a series called The Blacklist. In a nutshell, James Spader (the lead actor) plays an international criminal who turns himself into the FBI to get close to a young and silly female agent for unknown reasons in exchange for helping to catch major international criminals. It’s not the most interesting of premises, and I feel like we’ve seen this theme before many times. Mr. Kaplan is the Spader character’s ‘cleaner’, and we get to know her gradually over the four seasons that she is allowed to exist, including how she came to adopt the nickname ‘Mr. Kaplan’ and how she came to be forced into the employ of the Spader character. In my opinion, if you feel you need to watch the show, you can stop when she is killed off; there wasn’t much to stick around for after that.
As you may have guessed, I don’t actually recommend The Blacklist. It is a misogynistic vanity production – James Spader is not only the lead character, but also one of the Executive Producers, which may explain why such a show managed to stick around for 10 excruciating seasons. I’ve read male commentary on the show and found it hilarious and typical how ‘versatile’ they think Spader is as an actor. In reality, he’s pretty 2-dimensional. Since his youth, he has continuously played weird and aggressive, often psychopathic, males with some sort of inexplicable sex appeal. Whatever looks he may have once had disappeared long ago, but he still embarrassingly tries – unsuccessfully, I might add – to pull it off in his older years. Even in one of his last major television roles as the narcissistic psychopathic CEO of Dunder Mifflin for a season of The Office, he was almost a carbon copy character of what he does on The Blacklist. It’s a role he does well, but it is only because he’s a bit of a one trick pony despite the undeserved kudos males give him. And it is actually rather easy and natural for males to play narcissists and psychopaths for obvious reasons, and I don’t credit male actors with much talent when they manage to pull off a convincing bad guy. Anyhow, The Blacklist exists to give the flagging Spader a platform to monologue endlessly, especially about unbelievable sexual exploits and to give cameo appearances to other ugly old male actors with waning careers. It also helps that the female lead is not only poorly written – a standard post-year-2000 stupid smart girl who gives an abusive male 1001 chances to stop abusing her – but she is also sadly played by a rather untalented actress, Megan Boone, who spends more time striking a pose than delivering convincing lines. But for men to shine as actors, they must surround themselves with greater mediocrity than their own and prevent the real talent from showing up. Boone makes Spader look good, relatively speaking.
To get back to Mr. Kaplan, she does have a major flaw, and I blame this on male and straight female writers. She has this bizarre devotion to other people’s children. Despite being medically trained with graduate degrees, ability in multiple languages, talent and intelligence, she devotes her life to being a nanny and subordinate of glorified housewives and tantalizing, slutty, bad girl-mommies who order her around and treat her like shit. I guess this is supposed to sit better with the ignorant, lesbian-hating, American viewing public. If you must have a lesbian character at all, and especially one who isn’t young or hot, then you absolutely must make her obsessed with children as the poor dear clearly laments not being born a straight breeder – a true woman.
But despite this flaw, Mr. Kaplan’s final season as a live character is worth watching as she finally grows a pair of ovaries and takes her revenge on the Spader character for his years of bullshit. But even that comes to an acceptable end in the eyes of the American public when the male-powers-that-be decide she has to be killed off for being too interesting and multi-dimensional. Seriously, she is infinitely more interesting than the Spader character, and we couldn’t have that now, could we…? Curiously, the creators of the show initially wanted Mr. Kaplan to be played by a man. But I guess men can’t play nannies… unless it is supposed to be a joke. And this character wasn’t created for comic relief. Nevertheless, I can’t even imagine Kaplan as a male now – they did such a surprisingly good job of casting Blommaert in the role. Really, she was the only really interesting thing about the series.
So I conclude with this: Will the portrayal of an existing and significant, but largely deliberately ignored segment of the population open the door to more lesbian characters, especially of the non-stereotypical variety? Probably not – at least not in the way that gay males and even male trannies have been embraced by television writers. But perhaps slowly, over the next thousand years, if we still have television and haven’t completely destroyed the planet and our couch potato lives, we’ll have a few more interesting lesbian characters to follow.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
F is for Friendship
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Well eff me, it’s another post in the Alphabet Series. So many great f-words to choose from – some are obvious picks, some, not so much. You mighta thought I’d have gone for the word ‘feminism’, and trust me, I am going to do a post on the various feminisms and ‘pills’ that are confusing the hell out of everyone – but not at this time. I do have an ongoing series exploring my Birth as a Feminist, if you’re interested in development and evolution in the ways of what men and their lib-fems call ‘man-hating’.
F is also for ‘fuck’ and all its various offshoots – another obvious target and subject of some debate regarding usage in feminist circles, and I’m not talking about that today either. Same with F is for Freedom! which I will address in another post as it is something I want to explore in depth – it is just one of those words that means something different to each person around the world, and is the subject of an annoying lie and source of propaganda churned out by Western countries in order to finger-wag at countries outwardly proud of their racism, sexism and dictatorships. As well, F is for the fight-flight-freeze-fawn set of reactions to threats; fantasy (check out my ongoing Year of the Fantasy series); feminine vs feminizing (an upcoming post); forgiveness (part of the Enabler toolbox and also addressed in a 2015 post here); and family (a fragile, but crucial, cornerstone of patriarchy and female oppression and isolation. Family will come up a little bit today as it is hard to talk about the actual topic without addressing family.
So, we’re going for something different, and on the surface, seemingly juvenile – well, it is, in the sense that it starts in childhood and shapes the trajectory of adult lives. But in reality, this topic is an extremely serious issue for women and girls, and one that is seldom talked about for a few very obvious reasons that I’ll get into.
F is for Friendship.
As ‘friend’ is one of those words that can be a bit of a catch-all in that it can mean everything and nothing at the same time, I’m going to attempt to define it first, with the aid of some categories that describe different functions of friendship. I’ll mention a few differences in how males and females see friendship. And then I’ll get into why friendship is the most important kind of relationship for women, despite not being treated as such, and why it just isn’t possible for women to achieve authentic friendship as long as male dominance and compulsory heterosexuality (they are inseparable, actually) go unquestioned. Finally, I’ll fantasize a little about what female friendship could be.
What is a Friend?
The concept of friendship has been around and written about for millennia, and I won’t delve into the history here because it is vast and has been written about extensively by researchers of human evolution, sociology, philosophy, psychology, and cross-cultural studies. In addition, I’m a little more concerned with the here and now as well as the meaning and mechanics of friendship for women, specifically. A lot of the writings focus on men and how fucking awesome they are (or how deprived they are, the poor dears), and often, tsk-tsky articles are written about female pettiness and bitchiness towards one another without examining why or how that may have come about.
So I’ll start with a simple definition and jump off from there. Briefly, friendship is supposed to be a bond of mutual affection or genial affiliation between two people on equal footing that exists separately from sexual or familial ties. Friends are supposed to enhance your life and provide benefits that you don’t typically expect to get from lovers or family. And it is in engaging in friendship that you are supposed to have the most choice in members and freedom to be oneself – compared to family and other forced or ‘necessary’ ties, that is.
For many people, even today, friends have ended up being neighbours and classmates and (for men for all of history; women only recently) colleagues at work, simply because they were convenient, necessary for survival, and may have had something in common, even if it was only living on the same street. However, as life has become more global, with more migration and travel, and of course with the onset of the digital age, many things have changed, including the possibilities for and definitions of friendship. Traditional childhood friends still exist, especially if one is a person who stays in the town they grew up in, but many people now have ‘friends’ who are random digital strangers who have connected with them through Facebook and who ‘like’ their cat videos. There may, in fact, be no conversation, ever, and they will never meet in person, but they are called ‘friends’, nonetheless. Another modern development in friendship has come with the breakdown of the traditional family and with the gradual disconnect of parents from the lives and health of their children. Increasingly independent of their family, friendship has, for some people, become more important than family relationships, so much so that people may choose to spend holidays with friends rather than family.
There has been some hysteria over the last decade or two about a ‘loneliness epidemic’. Some of you may have seen one of those freaky documentaries about the Japanese and their widespread self-isolation and lack of social connections. You’re left with the impression that Japan is a country full of rape-cartoon-loving, capsule-apartment-dwelling people who pay strangers to eat meals with them because they have no friends. And then you’re wondering whether it’s going to spread around the world because porn is taking over, and more and more of our lives are lived online (especially in light of this never-ending pandemic bullshit). Never fear. First, documentaries, while I love them dearly, aren’t about normal people. How boring would that be, right? The Japanese are a social lot, well-travelled, and rather adventurous. Every country’s got their incels and their extreme social anxiety sufferers, though. Some live in basements, and others live in teeny-tiny apartments, depending on the culture and space available. If you look at the research (here’s an example), there is no actual evidence of widespread loneliness when you compare generations now, or the same age groups across time. One study, in fact, found that today’s teens report less loneliness than those in the past. That’s not to say that the quality of human connection hasn’t changed over time, but people are not really any more or less lonely than they used to be. They do have other issues that arise from an increase in social media involvement, however. I suspect the hysteria over loneliness is just propaganda designed to a) shit on ‘rich’ countries, b) encourage traditional values and heterosexuality by falsely equating being alone with loneliness, and c) to try to prove that the digital world leads to fewer real friends. Let’s just say that this is a massive and complicated issue.
Types of Friendship
I’m a psych person by training, so I sighed and settled in with familiar discomfort in my search for how the ‘experts’ define types of friendship. Everyone needs to put their own stamp on things, so there is a ton of stuff all basically saying the same thing in different ways. I combed and combined what I found into roughly four accepted categories.
- Friendships of Utility: which exist between you and someone who is useful to you in some way
- Friendships of Pleasure: which are maintained between you and those whose company you enjoy
- Friendships of the Good: which are based on mutual respect and admiration
- Friendships of the Right: which are bonds based on shared values, morals, or ethics.
Now, that is what I saw, but I take issue with the first category. Friendships of utility are relationships, but I am loathe to call them ‘friendship’. There is no affection or geniality there, which is basic to the definition of friendship. I strongly suspect that this category was posited by males, because this is generally how all males see people and things. “How can I use that thing/person?” “How is that thing/person beneficial to me?” And if it has no use, it doesn’t exist. If it does exist on their radar, males usually want it destroyed. Basic male psychology. Follow that easy rule, and you will have a much, much simpler life with much, much less agony. Now, males also make use of category two, and if there is pleasure, there is always utility. This describes the whole ‘friends with benefits’ scheme that males cooked up and sold to women as modern female liberation. No commitment or investment from men, but they can use and take pleasure from women. Why buy the cow when you can have the milk for free, right?
Friendships of utility are also the most common connections that straight and breeder women have with other women. Once a woman is committed to a male and especially after she has popped out a kid, she only sees other women in terms of how they can help her or fit into her busy and crucial-to-society lifestyle. Even though she chose her situation, she still feels burdened and believes it is other women’s duty to pitch in for free or get together to listen to her endless complaints about her choice for a shot at a privileged life, especially if these ‘friends’ are less burdened and less ‘woman’ in her mind (e.g., lesbians, singles, and the child-free). It is extremely difficult to maintain friendships with women once they go off with a male and go into breeder-mode.
The third category of friendship doesn’t exist for men in relation to women. No male admires or respects women regardless of the line he uses publicly to appear like a Nice GuyTM. Don’t listen to the words, observe his actions, especially the ones that he assumes aren’t being watched. Likewise with the fourth category, which is a common ploy used by men to get women sexually, and which is extremely common in activist and religious groups. Nothing gets an activist female doing free labour or spreading her legs like believing a male shares her world-saving agenda.
Also note that most women are incapable of seeing their ‘friendships’ with men clearly and accurately. The male will have a friendship of utility with a woman, while she is feeling respect and admiration for and possibly shared values with him. And she usually assumes it is mutual. It is not. Even with a friends-with-benefits situation, women will generally assume there is some kind of mutual respect going on, while it is actually completely one-directional from her to him. It is pure delusion, and eventually, the willingly ignorant woman encounters evidence to show her the truth. But she seldom accepts what is going on, choosing instead to remain used and often abused. Or she’ll assume it’s a one-off and move on to the next Machiavellian mister, who will respect her for sure, she assumes wrongly.
Hetero Pair-Bonding and Friendship?
How often have you heard a straight woman say “my husband/boyfriend is my best friend”, and did you manage not to laugh? This is a very, very recent development in hetero relationships. I strongly suspect that is is part of the velvet backlash against feminism and female economic freedom. For many years, ‘protection’, ‘romance’ and ‘love’ were the hooks/promises/lies used to keep women marrying men, but most recently, friendship has been sold to women as a great reason to keep spreading their legs and diverting their newfound financial resources (still much less than men’s, but still enough to live on) into male consumption rather than actual female freedom. Of course, men make better friends for women than other women! How could you believe otherwise? Today’s male is emotional and sensitive and a great listener. Males and females are EQUAL now (a requirement for friendship). He does half, nay! more than half, of the household chores. He wishes he could be the one to become pregnant and put his career on hold and cut ties with his friends and lower his IQ by engaging in baby-talk most of his waking hours for numerous years. Now that is friendship! I’ve never personally met one of these awesome friend-men, but hey… But, of course, it is friends with benefits. So you still have to let him fuck you, and you have to do it. No male is going to stay with you if you say, “Hey friend, let’s stop having sex, ‘kay?”
So, it’s not really a friendship. Males and females, despite liberal protest, are NOT equal. It’s still a sex slavery relationship, but this time, you’re choosing to be a subordinate instead of having no options except public prostitution, nunnery or suicide like throughout almost all of women’s history. And by the way, best friends are usually good for sharing secrets. For hetero women, that means having someone to bitch to about what your owner does to them that annoys or even hurts them, or how marriage isn’t what they expected it to be, or jeez, he really changed after getting hitched… Are these chicks seriously telling their hubbies that they’re sad they get one orgasm for every 50 that he gets and that porn makes them feel sub-human? I wonder to myself, in the absence of an actual friend to talk to, whether these women just live in more denial than a 1950’s housewife… As a long-time student of psychological warfare, I truly admire the husband-best-friend campaign as a smashing psychological success in maintaining female slavery despite the cage door having been sitting wide open for several decades now. Well done!
Same-Sex Friendships
It is really hard to find modern research on friendship that doesn’t address sex, sexuality, romance, or dating. The more ‘free’ societies and people supposedly get (meaning distance from religion & magical thinking and the embracing of science, human rights, social justice, etc.), the more that fucking, sexuality, identity, and the objectification and abuse of women (and the justification of it!!!) seems to be a part of absolutely every aspect of daily life. Men have always polluted society with their sexual deviancy throughout time, but we are living in a time where it is in your face 24/7 and has been normalized. And friendship has not gone unaffected by this. In traditional societies and in the traditional past of Western societies, female intimacy was common and relatively unstigmatized. But today, in ‘free’ societies, women are afraid of friendly intimacy with other women for fear of appearing to be lesbian – the absolute worst thing you can be labelled as a woman anywhere in the world (possibly worse than being called a prostitute).
In traditional China, where I spent many years, it is very common for women to walk around holding hands. And it is not strange for same-sex (both male-only and female-only) friends to be very physical with one another. I remember tutoring a small group of 14-year-old boys at their home one time, and one of the boys was giving his friend a calf massage. Hilariously, I was relating this information to a ‘trans man’ – aka a woman – I was forced to live with last year, and her comment was “that’s weird”. Yeah, women holding hands is weird, but a woman taking hormones and pretending she is a male isn’t weird at all… fucking idiot. Traditional societies are homophobic as hell, but physical intimacy that doen’t involve genitals is not necessarily seen as sexual in same-sex situations. Likewise in the past in Western cultures, adult female friends could share a bed and cuddle one another and it wasn’t polluted with sexual accusations.
I suspect the stigma against non-sexual, friendly, female intimacy is part of the move to keep women serving men and having it ‘make sense’ as I mentioned above. Women today are supposed to focus on finding a single male friend who will eventually become a best friend and then a husband and sperm-donor. Becoming too close, especially affection-wise, with female friends is a strong indicator of lesbian tendencies, which is only cool if you still fuck men the majority of the time and bring the friends home for your male partner to take advantage of.
Let’s explore same-sex friendships more.
Male-Male Friendships
Male friendships have been celebrated and described in literature for millennia and in film since its beginnings. These bonds are rich and layered and they form a very important psychological part of male identity. Men are able to bond over so many things, and seem to be able to forgive one another anything (especially if they can bond over blaming a woman for whatever is wrong). Although I’ve never seen this myself – ever – it seems to be a commonly held belief that males can solve a disagreement by punching each other out and then moving on. I don’t know if that is true. Like I said, I’ve never once seen evidence of this. Males generally don’t compete with one another over that much, and when something goes wrong, there is always a convenient female to gang up on and blame.
But boys and men have always been allowed to have rich lives of freedom compared to females. Able to go anywhere they please with few threats to their safety. They are also given a lot of freedom and forgiveness as children, so they learn that to take and demand are their rights. They aren’t forced to deal with limited freedoms and resources, and are not forced to compete to survive or get attention, so friendship between males is, on average, much easier than that between females.
Female-Female Friendships
One of the most disappointing and angst-producing things in my life is my lack of quality female friendships. Coming from an abusive home with a domineering and severely mentally fucked up mother, and then eventually going no-contact with the entire narcissist-enabling family horde in very early adulthood, I’ve always taken friendship more seriously than most. But from an early age, it was hard to relate to other girls and to deal with the constant, bizarre betrayals. I am neither overly masculine nor feminine in behaviour or appearance, so I didn’t automatically fit in to either the male or female camp and my friends fit two categories. Misfits or outcasts of both sexes. And abusive girls. Both probably stemmed from child abuse patterns I was living. I had a damaged identity, so I couldn’t find a community, and in addition, was a ready-made target for domineering females resembling my mother, until I figured out what was going on and learned to avoid these kinds of people. Once I got to grad school and had a gay community, which, in the 1990’s was blessedly before the trans popped into existence and destroyed everything lesbian, I was in heaven as no one was really what they were supposed to be and revelled in it. But childhood and the teen years were pure hell. I was always a bit of a community surfer – and have remained that way as I fit in less and less, especially in an increasingly lesbian- and reality- and woman-hating world.
With age, experience, and growing feminist awareness, female friendship got even harder. I lost friends to marriage and children and traditional, small, stay-in-place lives. I moved around the world, lived a simple, low-income and portable life, and realized how easy it was and still is for males in my situation to make same-sex friends in any culture. It’s much harder for women no matter where they are in the world. While I can meet child-free women my age in Western countries (although most of them are still hetero, male apologists/enablers, and liberal morons), in a traditional culture, it is next to impossible to create bonds with women who are all married by 25. Even if they are working outside the home, these jobs and potential friendships take second place to family duties. Friendships, if they have any, tend to be long-time ones and they certainly aren’t looking for new ones.
If you are a non-traditional woman and not a man-chaser, finding even partially like-minded women in the meat world is really, really difficult. I’ve learned to let go of any and all expectations of substantive friendship, and I focus on compartmentalized, shared interests. And I don’t seek to push the acquaintance beyond that interest. Female friendships just feel so fragile to me. And there are many reasons for this.
As I alluded to above, most females are forced into sensitivity mode from birth. We’re criticized, micromanaged, punished, and forced into adopting submissive and apologetic behaviours in order to get along in this world. It doesn’t work for all females; some just have the right combination of attributes to withstand brainwashing, and they end up stronger and freer as a result. But if you’ve ended up molded because of this brainwashing, you learn very quickly to be on guard. You’re never really safe. Criticism is a comment on your whole person, your value, your identity. The effects of this are even more pronounced if you have experienced narcissistic abuse as a child. So to be blunt and frank in a friendship is a risky business. You have been taught to accept male aggression and not to stand up to it, but at the same time, you expect other females to be like you. You have been groomed to keep the peace, and to withdraw if there is a hint of war. So what does that mean when you have a relationship between two sensitive people (i.e., two average females?) who are afraid of rocking the boat? You have a very fragile friendship. Misunderstanding is rife.
Add to that the competition for scarce resources and attention that males don’t experience, and you have a recipe for constant war between women over very little. It comes across as petty and bitchy, but it is the natural outcome of repeated punishment and grooming that all girls go through. Males just don’t experience the punishment and deprivation as a class that females do, so they don’t turn out the same way, and they certainly aren’t capable of understanding this kind of psychological slavery.
What ends up happening as girls get older is that there is always the natural draw to other females, but because of the hetero brainwashing, women and girls become ‘placeholders’ instead of real friends. ‘Friends’ are there until they are not needed (meaning a male comes along who needs servicing). It’s like putting the salt and pepper shakers away after eating a meal. You take them out when you need them, then you put them away and forget about them. And in the case of women, friends are there for emotional support, especially after the male master enacts his privilege upon his servant. Women also provide free labour, financial support, entertainment, a safe haven, and the like to their female friends. And when the male snaps his fingers, the friends are put away. Forgotten until needed again.
Of the women who are born with the types of attributes that lead to resistance to brainwashing, and are fortunate enough not to be abused as children, things can go a few ways. Some become very devoted to women, especially if lesbian. If they are lucky, they can find a community, and friendships become more like those men experience, although much richer and more valuable. Frequently, though, many girls who are considered tomboyish as children get turned off by the nonsense that girls get herded into. They may tend to say things like “most of my friends are male” or even “I’m not like other girls”. This is a red flag for me. These are deeply misogynistic women. I mean, I get it. They didn’t fit in with the average female trained idiot and were probably frequently treated like shit by girls as a result. Why would you beg to be let into a club you don’t fit in with or are abused by for petty things? Males treat females like shit in different ways, but it is easier to navigate, and if you are a tomboyish female, the boys will treat you differently. Not equally, but they may not treat you blatantly like a cunt on legs like they do to more naturally feminine girls. The incorrect assumption these girls make is that males respect them as they do other males. Wrong. You may not end up getting raped like a feminine girl (or you might; you just don’t know what males will do), but you will never be one of the boys.
What Could Female Friendship Look Like?
It IS possible for women to have high-quality, lasting, satisfying friendships. I believe it. Truly. Is it going to be common any time soon? Hell no. You need a certain set of conditions in order to allow women to have the qualities necessary to make friendship work. I’m mostly working on fantasy here, but I will say that I have one friend who is as close to ideal as is possible. I’ll describe what we have, and then I’ll talk about necessary conditions.
My closest friend is more than 20 years younger than me. We are from two very different cultures. We don’t agree on everything, and we each have life experience the other can’t relate to. We have had a couple of big arguments, and have recovered pretty easily. We have travelled together. We have helped each other out of a few pickles. She feels like what a sister should be like, but is nothing like what I had with the disaster of a sister I grew up with. We have bonded over a few things: we both have horrific, NPD mothers and suffer similar shit as a result. We both enjoy reading and philosophy and travel and independence. We love animals and don’t want children. Neither of us is interested in men. We can talk about any topic and dig into it, argue about it, theorize, argue some more, and then come to some sort of conclusion (unless it is paused for continuation another day). We comfort each other and offer both serious and funny and sweet support. She is the best hugger I know, despite not coming from a hugging culture. And as of going on two years now, we live more than 10,000 km apart, which kills my soul and hurts my heart. Often. Luckily, we chat online a few times a week. Except for the geographical distance, this is what female friendship should be. It has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with intimacy on multiple levels.
So what conditions do women need to foster this kind of incredible friendship? No heterosexuality, no demanding males in the picture. Preferably no kids, although I’ll say no boy-children for sure. Compassion. Empathy. A firm grip on reality. No enabling behaviour – you should be able to be supporting and critical (meaning, able to point out stuff without being an asshole). Acceptance. You don’t have to agree on everything, and you should know and accept their imperfections. And BOTH people have to be this way. Equality is the key to friendship. Otherwise, you end up in some co-dependent shitfest.
Finally, and ideally, a female friendship is a combination of categories 2, 3 and 4 that I talked about above. Pleasure in another’s company, respect and admiration, and shared values. Utility is for tools, not friendship, and the only human tools are male 😉
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
It’s Always about Poverty: COVID Has Finally Hit My Flophouse
This is a rant. I have a few of them in the queue, and I had planned on another topic for publication today, but things move quickly here in Canada. So if you’re in rant-reading mode, buckle up…
It was only a matter of time. I’ve been waiting for it, and frankly, given the living situation and how things are managed here, I’m surprised it hasn’t happened sooner. I came back to my windowless micro-room in the shithole in which I’ve been forced to live due to poverty in my shithole country (Canada) that punishes women for being ‘old’ (among many other things) only to find a note on my door informing me that we’ve been infiltrated by one of The Infected, but that the management will not be taking it seriously.
What?
A little backtracking since you may not have read further back on this blog. I’ve been unemployed for more than a year-and-a-half now. Part of that was planned as I transitioned from a paying job in China back in July 2019 to a full-time studentship in the US, the idea being that I would use the time in the US to make connections and work my way into some employment. Everyone knows that getting jobs isn’t about your education, qualifications or competence, but about who you know and being in the right place at the right time. I’m 48 and this is how it has worked my entire fucking life. This is how men still dominate the job market despite their inferiority. Men help men, and sometimes the women they are fucking or want to fuck. If you are a woman on the outside (smart, gay, old, etc), things are very difficult, so you have to be good at networking.
Anyhoo, the pandemic hit, and suddenly I was stuck in the US with a shut-down educational program, an insanely expensive place to live and nowhere to go. Literally nowhere to go. I have no family, few Western friends who actually do more than say hello electronically and who certainly won’t help me in a time of need, and no home base in my home country of Canada. I hadn’t lived there in a decade. But finding a job in my former field (teaching ESL) in a foreign country was out of the question, so with more than half my small savings depleted, I repatriated to Canada with dread in my bones. And I was right to expect the worst. After being lied to by the Canadian government (they officially told me after a formal inquiry that they would pay for me to quarantine due to having no home to return to) and being forced to stay in an expensive and very specifically designated ‘COVID’ hotel with no affordable food access for 2 weeks, I moved out to a city I had lived in about 20 years previously. I found a ‘cheap’ place to stay in an overpopulated house full of very strange people in the sticks via AirBnB for a few months, but had to flee due to an abusive male who threatened my life because I looked at him in what he decided was a disrespectful way. And given that without a job, you can’t get an apartment, there was nowhere to go but a downtown hostel that did extended days (meaning month-by-month rentals), but functions more like a flophouse, centred as it is in the dangerous homeless- and drug-addict-ridden area of town, and strangely still accepting random travellers from all over the place despite COVID restrictions. I had stayed at this place in a 4-month extended stay 20 years previously when I first moved to the city for a job. It had gone downhill a bit, attracting a lot of really weird, listless and creepy men in addition to people who are flying in from hard-hit Virus areas of Canada as well as other countries. The worst thing about hostels, even in non-COVID times is that you always have to share kitchen and bathroom facilities – hotbeds of germs and disease even under normal circumstances. I know for a fact that the males who share the bathroom closest to my room don’t wash their hands and leave disgusting messes all the fucking time. This is well known because of social research on post-bathroom hand-washing, but the more fucked up the population of men, the dirtier they are. And the cleanliness standards of this place are dubious to me. They don’t clean door knobs. The toilets aren’t cleaned properly, and the showers might get sort of cleaned once a week. Maybe. I had applied for a part-time cleaning job here, but wasn’t even given the time of day. Over the past few months, I’ve noticed the only ones getting the cleaning jobs are people under 30, and there is a whole parade of them, constantly changing staff. I know for a fact that I clean better than any of those fuckers. I’m a Gen-X’er who grew up in a time where children, especially girls, still had household chores starting at a young age. And as the eldest child with a completely useless mother and a mostly absentee father, I had girl jobs and boy jobs. I am a cleaning master. And I know I’m physically stronger than all of the females they employ in this joint. Further, I have more hostel experience than all of these young people put together spending most of my adult life working and moving around abroad as I have. But this is a sexist-ageist world. I can’t get hired for anything to save my life. If I were male, my age wouldn’t matter so much. But I suspect there is a connection thing going on – millennials and Z’s make sure their friends get jobs.
So I get the notice of infection today, they detailed a few things about when the Infected arrived and what their activities were after arriving and when they left. The person was staying in the same area where my room is, which also means we shared a bathroom. The hostel has indicated that it is no big deal. The only thing they are going to change is that they are going to stop taking randos off the street for short stays – but it won’t be implemented until March 1st???!!! How is this helpful? We’re going to continue putting you at risk for another 3.5 weeks. Whatevs.
Now, this particular region where I am living is one of the least affected COVID areas of Canada in a province which has done much better than many of the other provinces (which I attribute to there being a female physican in charge of regulations here), and this is good considering it has a large population. We are on an island, which has helped to limit much of the traffic that would normally pass through a large city. So to have a case show up here speaks to what happens when you have poorly managed (aka ‘money grubbing takes primacy over public safety) congested housing with low-income people, especially males, who generally don’t give a shit how their actions affect other people. Our national media has only focused on the effects on poor immigrants, but there are tons of poor locals who are as affected by disease and poverty as idiots who come here illegally or who come expecting to find streets paved with gold and government hand-outs for people who haven’t contributed to the tax base (trust me, this is a common perception of Canada and why many, many foreigners come here). Poverty is rampant in Canada and it affects all races and citizenship status. But liberalism has its agenda…
I’m pretty sure I had COVID early on while in the US before anyone was taking things seriously, and I really don’t want to come down with the dangerous new strain that has made its way to Canada from the UK. I will say for certain that I think China did things correctly – not the withholding of information from the world part and failing to help the world in a significant way after infecting us – but their local policy implementation of locking everyone down and enforcing strict policies on comings and goings at the community level. They nipped it in the bud before COVID could destroy their economy. Chinese nationalists (according to my former students) are laughing at us Westerners with our fucking ‘freedom’ talk and our limp dick approach to letting people do whatever the fuck they want and thus spreading the disease everywhere and destroying many people’s economic lives (including my own!).
I’ll never be a communist (or a capitalist for that matter), but when I can finally get out of here, I won’t have any problem moving back to a country living under dictatorship. It’s not ideal, and the racist sexism is always there, like it is here, but at least I can be employed and any crises will be dealt with swiftly without entitled shitheads ruining it for everyone. I hate all male political systems, but after going through this pandemic business and coming face-to-face with the rabid anti-woman liberalism that is a worse infection than COVID ever could be, I’ll take the dictatorship, than you very much. In an ideal world, however, things would be male-free and the system would look very, very different in every possible way and this blog would not be needed at all.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
B is for Bisexual
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Didn’t think the alphabet would make it past ‘A’ (see A is for Antagonism here)? Not to worry, B is here, baby. I had a bit of a hard time choosing the b-word, and I ended up choosing and then rejecting a few possibilities, which is probably why the post took a little longer to get out than I had planned. There are so many good b-words to choose from, and no doubt, they’ll end up being the topics of other posts. For example, b is for bitch (the obvious choice, but I’ve written about this slur before here and here, for example), backlash, butch, breeder, brutality, BDSM, brainwashing (don’t worry, I’ve got a series on this delectable topic coming), bullshit, blow job, bias, and more.
But today, B is for Bisexual.
To be honest, I am not sure why I haven’t written about this before. I did a little triptych on sexuality in the past, and I really should have discussed bisexuality within its confines, rather than just acknowledging it as one of the boxes men put women in when rating our level of humanity and dictating options for our identities. Perhaps the goddess of writing intervened and knew I’d need a topic for my alphabet series. Who the hell knows. Point is, I’m doing it now, so buckle up. But if you want to pause and gear up with some light reading from the sexuality writings, and to get the gist of my perspective, the relevant posts are as follows:
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 III: Women and forced sexuality. A discussion of female needs, the fact that nobody acknowledges them and why that is the reason we don’t understand the first thing about female sexuality still to this day.
If you don’t feel like veering off at this point, then I’ll just summarize my foundational thinking as follows:
For women, sexuality as we know it now and have known it throughout time and place, is completely constructed. Constructed by men, and embraced by women through their programming. Constructed female sexuality has mostly been categorical, meaning that women are put into boxes according to what men want to do to us and what they want us to do. Men have constructed ‘rational’ / ‘scientific’ and religious explanations for the boxes they put us in to prevent us from figuring out what we actually are naturally, and to inspire us to hate the few women who reject categorization. In reality, our sexuality, if we have any (the true question), should be based on our own self-defined needs, rather than our anatomy or what men need and want. No woman has ever been able to do this outside the influence of male dominance, so my argument is that we haven’t a clue what natural female sexuality looks like at all. Even lesbians are strongly influenced by hetero programming, and I believe they don’t behave completely naturally either. I’ve discussed what natural means in another post, and my opinion is that if you have to construct an entire, rather brutal system geared towards keeping women in line and servicing men ‘happily’, then heterosexuality in women isn’t natural at all. Nature happens without force, intimidation, or indoctrination. Honestly and truly. So men construct our reality and they construct a system of lies and half-truths to support female hetersexuality as being natural. There is a lot of evidence to the contrary, however, which I’m not going to discuss in this post. I will say I’ve been reading some of the scientific literature that clearly demonstrates that despite how women define themselves, the vast majority have sexual reactions to females (google it yourself). There is plenty of work to be done there – I still think you can program sexual reactions to anything (basic learning theory in action), which is constantly evidenced in the development of weird sexual fetishes, and I’d argue that women are trained from birth to react sexually to males and violence. The sexual reactions to women that scientists see are likely a mix of natural proclivity and the result of a constant bombardment of female sexualization coupled with the modern day rewarding of female compliance with male sexual fantasies.
But let’s get to bisexuality***. If you try to look up this term/category, most human rightsy sexuality web sites will try to turn it into some long, drawn out definition, almost as if trying to set these folks up for some uber-victim status with a little mystery and sexay-ness thrown in for good measure. “Look at us. We are so hard to define. We break all the sexual molds. No one understands us and we suffer from so much prejudice and bigotry. The alphabet soup acronym should START with B, although in public, we’ll say T is most important… Whine, whine, blah, blah, blah, I want to look at tits while I suck this dick, goober goober.” And it’s usually women who are the whiniest about this oppressed bi status, and there is a good and legitimate basis for that (not the whining, but the sex bias), which I’ll get into later. But bisexual people are a perfect example supporting the theory I have that the loudest victims and victim-groups tend to be non-victims or comparative non-victims with a lot of power (economic, legal, etc.) and free time. Other examples of loud non-victims also include male trannies, rich white males, rich black males, males in general, the religious right in any country, etc., etc.
***[And note that I am writing this from the perspective of a woman who for most of her early adult life used the category ‘bisexual’ privately, and sometimes publicly, until I accepted the fact that I’m not sexually attracted to men. I’ve never been ‘heterosexual’, so I can’t understand what that is like. If I am forced to ‘identify’, I use the terms ‘lesbian’ or ‘gay’. I have found that many people, even those who define sexuality very simply in terms of sexual attraction, still can’t resist injecting their definition with political and social implications. I think you can’t get away from that in this world, and as a result, no definition can adequately describe what women likely are born to be, naturally.]
For an easy definition of bisexuality, just think ‘bi’ = two and sex = attraction to. Many seem to include actual sexual engagement in this definition, probably because it is so much easier to offer up as proof of a sexuality. Attraction is hard to measure unless you hook someone up to a machine. So according to today’s definition, bisexuals basically are interested in and get it on with both males and females. There is some talk of ‘pansexuality’, but this is a bullshit made-up liberal term based on the idea that there are more than two sexes – WHICH THERE ARE NOT.
Male Bisexuals
A quick word about bisexual men. Nothing about this surprises me. As I said above, I believe males are born omnisexual, which simply means that men get turned on by and will penetrate anything and everything unless something or someone stops them. The only reason most males (publicly) gravitate towards heterosexual designations is because of 1) woman-hate; 2) innate power and control issues; and 3) servitude/extra perks. First, the idea of ‘taking it’ like a woman (aka being penetrated) is an insult because men hate women, so being gay or bi means you are like a woman and that is unacceptable in all cultures because women are garbage. I’ve unfortunately spent a lot of time with men from different cultures, and I can tell you that even the most adamant of straight males from both liberal and very conservative places are curious about and even obsessed with anal sex, although most will insist that their own buttholes are off limits. I suspect that to most men, for a woman, a hole is a hole is a hole, so a female’s anus and vagina are just things to be filled by men. So they can see see themselves as heterosexual while still engaging in what is seen by the world as a ‘gay’ act.
The second part – power and control – is more complicated. Men like easy victims who won’t fight back or rat them out. Inanimate objects are ideal for male masturbation, but men don’t get the satisfaction of controlling or overpowering say, a sock or a hole in the wall or their kid’s stuffed toys. Animals give the sense of overpowering and control that men like, but they can fight back and hurt their rapist, and as well, men don’t get any servitude from them other than say, a dog fetching slippers. Children, like animals, are easy targets, can give the satisfaction of control and power over them, and while they usually won’t bite or fight like an animal, there is the possibility they might report the assault to a grown-up. And no servitude perks. But women? They make the perfect masturbatory devices for men: raping them allows men to enact their hatred of them upon their bodies and minds; they are controllable and over-powerable physically and mentally; they seldom report rape (and are not believed if they do report); and they are easily programmed from birth to accept slavery as desirable and the way things are supposed to be.
The third element of heterosexual gravitation in men is that women will also provide cleaning services, baby factory services, emotional services, intellectual services and more – all making men’s lives easier and ensuring the greatest possible chance of male success in the world. So while men will screw all of the above in private, there is the most to be gained from publicly proclaiming hetero status. Bisexual men are slightly braver in that they are willing to admit they do men too, but they also get the status that owning a woman allows in all societies. But generally, it isn’t men who whine about bisexual prejudice as men never suffer as much as women, regardless of the bias involved.
Female Bisexuals
I’m going to come out and say this as bluntly as possible, and it will be offensive to some and that is more than perfectly fine. There is no such thing as a truly bisexual woman. Omnisexual men, yes – I’ve explained this already. But I don’t believe women are naturally wired to want men. I believe female heterosexuality is nearly 100% constructed / programmed / conditioned (pick your term). So bisexuality doesn’t make sense either, especially given that pretty much all bisexual women mostly latch on to men (I remember some feminist I read quoted a study that the typical bi-female sexual stable constists primarily of men. And I believe that that is standard hetero brainwashing kicking in rather than anything natural, as materially, there is so much more to gain from being male property than to have an equal relationship with a woman.) I also think there are a few kinds of bisexual women, and I’ll discuss two primary categories.
- Brainwashed women whose hetero programming didn’t work perfectly
So as was mentioned, most bisexual women have more male partners than female ones, and usually end up having a primary or significant-other relationship with a man. Women are usually ‘side dishes’ that don’t provided the economic, legal, and social perks that relationships with men do, but that provide emotional and sexual satisfaction that is missing from the typical hetero relationship. Bisexual women are, somewhat understandably in our rape culture, generally massive cowards who will hide behind hetero life when it suits them (e.g., to avoid sexual or physical danger, to get jobs, to have a higher standard of living, to appear ‘normal’ in social situations, etc.) and trot it out when they want to look cool or liberal or advanced or open-minded or ‘above’ heteronormativity (even though they are still exceptionally heternormative themselves, ironically). Or just to temporarily satisfy their natural attraction to women.
2. Brainwashed women who use other women to pick up men and get hetero cookies
Bisexual men don’t make out with each other to pick up women, but ‘bisexual’ women often try to pick up men this way. Do you not find this curious? If you are a hetero or bi woman reading this, do a little self-examination at this point. Do you regularly watch gay male porn? Do you regularly masturbate while imagining dudes fucking each other? Do you get off on the idea of inserting yourself into a gay male sex scenario and announcing that your pussy is there and things can actually get started now? If you say yes, you are a liar and are likely being contrary on purpose. Women – hetero, bi or lesbian – do not cream their shorts at the idea of infiltrating a cock party. And gay men aren’t sitting around wishing for some pussy to spice up their sex lives. So why do so many bisexual women feel the need to put on a show for men?
Well, first there is no bisexuality going on there. These are thoroughly programmed hetero women who are just trying to please men in the only way they know how. I wonder to myself whether these women actually enjoy what is going on. I really think that most women don’t fully experience what they are doing or analyze what’s going on. I think most women’s brains are trained to see themselves through men’s eyes.
Oh, in case you are wondering, when I called myself bisexual back in my early ears, I fell into category 1. However, I know I was less successfully brainwashed than the average woman, as I woke up relatively easily, I think, and realized that I hated men on a fundamental and very natural or primal level. The in-depth self examination I had to do in order to deprogram myself was painful and is ongoing. It’s interesting to realize that all my childhood crushes and attraction (I hesitate to say sexual) experiences were with other girls. I see the time I spent dating both males and females as an experimental phase, much like I’ve experimented with drugs, and eaten things like calf’s brains and dog, but of course, much more complex and psychologically fucked up. After I started training myself to live in my own body and mind and to experience things from my own perspective, it was overwhelming to realize that I saw myself, went through experiences, and even had dreams through male eyes. Being back in your body and mind is a really disarming thing at first. It affects everything you do, but you realize that hetero sex, (aka intercourse, aka rape) is a horrible thing to endure, absolutely pointless from a woman’s point of view, and more than that – extremely dangerous to your body and mind. You look back on what you did in the past, even in the name of experimentation, and it is hard to understand how you participated, if you can call it that. I think you have to dissociate as well as outsource your validation needs in order to allow males to use your body and to keep going back for more. This is a longer discussion, but the point I’m trying to make here is that bisexuality is just another male construction, or possibly even a female construction, that allows one to follow one’s natural tendencies a little while still remaining acceptable to patriarchal society.
A Few Major Bisexual Complaints
Bisexuals have a LOT of complaints. I’ve read a lot of bi commentary, and I don’t understand most of these complaints, even having spent many years as a bisexual. I’ll address a few here.
1) We don’t fit in anywhere. Heteros hate us and gays/lesbians reject us.
Any prejudice you experience is because of woman hate. The heteros hate you because you are not upholding patriarchy – you males are not raping women enough, and you women are not being raped enough. Gays and lesbians might reject you because of your hetero privilege, which you still have because most of the time you are being hetero. Lesbians especially, who live at the bottom of the human shit heap, are not interested in having male diseases passed to them by careless bisexual women, nor are they interested in investing in someone who will fuck them and then prance off when she has a chance at an economically attractive and socially acceptable hetero lifestyle opportunity if (when) it comes along (especially if said bi wants to breed). It is not possible for a powerless and ubiquitously hated group (lesbians) to have any kind of power over you or dictate your freedom in the world. It amazes me how many self-indulgent articles there are on bisexuals blaming lesbians for everything wrong in their lives. You may experience bias rooted in woman-hate, but you also perpetuate it. Self-examination needed.
2) People tell us we don’t exist.
Remind you of anything? The trans pull the same shit. Nobody is denying your existence. You are human, you exist, and you can believe whatever the hell you want. I am likely one of very few people who will say that I don’t believe that bisexuality is a thing. Males yes (although, like I said, I call it omnisexuality). Women aren’t wired to put their bodies at risk or enslave themselves. Sorry.
Do you deserve more attention in the LG-alphabet group? If so, why? You have the best of both worlds, really. You get to CHOOSE what and who you do. Gays and lesbians who are committed to a publicly displayed sexuality are so much worse off than you and are more based in reality (and less whiny) than the bisexual community. While gays and lesbians might be able to pass in hetero society based on appearance, they certainly can’t pass socially unless they show up solo to events or never, ever speak about their personal lives. So, in my opinion, I wouldn’t include you in the gay-lesbian activist groups, just as I would exclude the trannies and the queer, Hitler-youth brigade and any other post-modernist bullshit “I’m different! Look at me!’ groups. Make your own fucking group. And stop trying to force lesbians to accept you. Nobody should be forced to fuck you. That is called rape. (Hint, this applies to trannies too, who keep trying to force lesbians to be with them.) No one owes you a fuck in order to validate your claims of specialness or outsiderness.
3) People assume we are pedophiles
This one is legit, but like with the most valid complaints, the reason they happen is because of woman-hate and the anti-gay sentiments that exist everywhere. You aren’t assumed to be a pedophile because you are bisexual. So-called straight men, who comprise the vast majority of pedophiles in the world, are never assumed to be so. Gay men are. Lesbians get this too, to a certain extent. In reality, there are very few true female pedophiles. The same 1-2 weird incarcerated female high school teachers with teen boy student lover docu-dramas, coupled with tons of television sitcom episodes focusing on this topic are covered to death to promote the idea that women are equally likely to be pedophiles as men. Not even close to being true. This is a whole nuther topic. But suffice it to say that if you are lesbian or a female bisexual, you may experience fear on the part of women with children. Not so much by men – men will sexualize you for THEIR sexual purposes rather than assume you are going to attack children. Myself, I experienced this with my sister when I confided in her that I was bisexual in my mid-20’s. She had a 4-year-old daughter at the time, and after my quiet announcement, she never let me be in a room alone with my neice ever again. I’ll repeat that it was not the bisexuality that was the problem in my sister’s mind, but the lesbian part of it which was the motivator for the irrational and hateful reaction.
Conclusion here. Bisexuals can be very touchy and defensive. And loud, if they are ‘out’. Like the trans. Much more so than you ever experience with gays and lesbians. While the latter tend to be much more secure in their sexuality once they’ve chosen to come out, bisexuals’ reactivity is more likely to be a product of a constructed victimhood, hard-to-pin-down identity, and comparative privilege (I hate that word, but I don’t have a better one right now) over actual victimized groups. Their predation within oppressed groups (i.e., trying to force lesbians to want them sexually) likely creates a little cognitive dissonance concerning whether they are more victim or predator or both.
Anyhow, like with the whole silly, but scary, trannie movement, I wish this one didn’t take up so much retail space…
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Happy and Safe Christmas Greetings
Trust me, I have more heady stuff in the works, but I wanted to send out a short message to all women on this Christmas Eve. I don’t normally send Christmas greetings, but I’m working through my complicated feelings about the holiday. Mother made it miserable in childhood with her covert narcissism and materialism. Father destroyed any cultural enjoyment in early adulthood as over-compensation for and white guilt over existing in predominantly British Canada, with British traditions, when he married a Jewish woman. And then it has been years of aloneness at a time that is expressly devoted to families, coupled with living for years and years in a non-Christmas culture (Asia). Normally, I was working on Christmas Day. I didn’t have to think about it.
Last Christmas, I was in the US, abandoned by all housemates and thus alone. This year, I’m in Canada in my weird, asocial hostel situation. Interestingly, most of the people sending me greetings are my Chinese friends and former students, the sweethearts. But I acknowledge that despite my aloneness and mild loneliness, AT LEAST there are no male abusers ruining everything. But I divide my thinking as follows:
a) it is okay to observe cultural rituals as an atheist, and Christmas is as much a cultural holiday as it is a religious one. Christmas is Pagan in its origins, taken over by Christians, bastardized by capitalists, but there is this really nice cultural aspect of the holiday that non-capitalistic, history-enjoying atheists can revel in or at least observe with appreciation. I’m in the long process of healing from the Christmas mangling of narcissistic parents as well as white liberal race- and culture-shaming, and finding my own associations to the holiday. It is interesting. And welcome. I’m sick of being part of the only cultural group on the planet pressured to deny my culture.
b) Equally importantly, I think about all the women and girls in forced family situations, especially during this weird COVID time, doing most of the work, engaging in unwelcome interactions, stuck for days with unlikeables and keeping a brave face. Holidays can be tense and stressful at the best of times for many people as one deals with rituals that are forced rather than cherished, and coupled with drinking, it is not always a fun time. Myself, I removed myself early on from family abuses, but not all people are willing to take such drastic steps to preserve mental health because it is hard to weigh which will end up being worse – being completely alone, isolated, silent and unwanted; or being abused, but belonging to a group. What a choice, huh?
Anyhow, I’ll end this by wishing you all a Merry Christmas and hoping you get through the holiday safely and remembering that any gaslighting or manipulation or general nastiness you may be exposed to by toxic family members is not about you at all.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
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. ⚢
Small Children, the Mentally Deficient, and… Men
Likely, everyone is sick of hearing about The Virus and everything Virus-related. Just as I write this, it occurs to me that it has been on my personal radar since it hit China. I have so many contacts – friends, former students and former colleagues – back in China, that I was in frequent contact with during Chinese New Year – before it was a serious thought in the minds of most people in the rest of the world. Myself, I got hit with a brutal illness at the very end of December that lasted until the end of January, the cough even longer. At that time, everyone was talking about an unusually nasty flu season, but this was like no flu I had ever had. I’ve never had a cough accompany a flu before, and I’ve never had a fever and chills and debilitating weakness with a throat infection. But there was no testing in January, so who knows what the hell it was. But I caught it shortly after riding a Greyhound bus inbound from Seattle on its way to L.A. And there was one super sick dude on that bus who was coughing all over the rest of us on the bus…
Fast-forward 10 months. I’m safely harboured away in Canada on an island region of about a million people – we’ve had a total of about 200 cases since it all began. Pretty good. A significant number of those cases came from a single house party of drunken idiots, luckily in a small up-island community and not adjacent to the larger southern metropolis and thus pretty isolated. And this has been common around North America – drunken house parties and congregating in bars seems to be the number one way to get The Virus (also the number one way to get raped, if you’re female! And alcohol isn’t a dangerous drug…!) People are generally pretty hard-core about following protocols in my region. There is a large proportion of elderly people here, for one. Also, and this is significant, my province is taking direction from a smart, rational, and surprisingly well-liked female doctor. Leadership is key in managing crises, and it is always better to put a woman in charge. We are just better at strategy, planning, taking threats seriously, and reacting rationally and without brutality. And this is in evidence around the world and throughout time. Now if you want death, destruction and general mayhem, by all means, put a man in charge.
And speaking of men, just an anecdote. When I got out of quarantine following my arrival from the US, I immediately headed to the ferry terminal for my crossing to the islands. You are supposed to wear face masks on board and they are keeping car people in their cars and walk-on people have a limited run of the passenger area of the ferry. Sensible. Now, as I was watching people disembark from an arriving ferry, I heard the din of shrill male voices. Two men were having the following conversation:
Dudebro 1: Well, it was great to have met you, brah. I can’t tell you how great it is to meet a rare fellow free-thinker these days.
Dudebro 2: Yeah, man. You can tell the free-thinkers – we’re the ones not wearing masks, guffaw, guffaw.
Dudebro 1: Right on. Like the rest of the sheep... Goober goober, scrotal babble drifting away on the wind and out of earshot.
Men truly tickle themselves at how smart they think they are. Constantly self-labelling as ‘rational’, ‘logical’, ‘free-thinking’, and you name it. I mean, there is a shit ton of research out there showing how men, without fail, overestimate their abilities, competence, intelligence (and conversely, how women without fail, unless afflicted with a personality disorder such as narcissistic or antisocial PDs, underestimate their intelligence and abilities). So it follows that they are also deluded about their thinking style. Mistaking selfishness and stubbornness for free-thinking is just one of many examples.
Anyhow, it was just a reminder that while Canada is more level-headed as a country than many, including the US, there are still men there and they are just as stupid and arrogant as they are anywhere else in the world.
***[I guess I’ll put this little side note here. We are still in a place where no one is entirely certain of the entire host of behaviours that can lead to you becoming infected with The Virus. I am a supporter of scientific methodology, and I stand by science as a tool, even when men misuse it. Some women see male abuse of science as a sign of a bad tool, but that is not true. Men abuse ALL tools. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, or something like that. I think generally, wearing a mask in enclosed spaces around other people is a probably a good thing, as is washing your hands PROPERLY and regularly, and not putting your tongue down other people’s throats… So not following these basic protocols, is just kind of stupid and selfish – not free-thinking. We don’t have all pieces of the puzzle yet, but we’ll get there. Part of the problem is that some behaviours are required, but so many other behaviours that may be problematic are unregulated, so many people start to question authority and refuse to do anything.]***
But let’s get a little more local, and more to the topic of this post.
In my particular city, it has become mandatory to wear face masks on public buses, and there is limited seating. But there are people who are exempt from the mask thing. The transit authority has a blurb on their website outlining who doesn’t have to comply. It is very bizarre. Some of the people on the list include:
- Children under 5. Why don’t parents have to mask their toddlers? Kids tend to be disease super-spreaders as they touch everything and don’t tend to self-regulate coughing or where their drool or snot goes. I suppose this a breeder privilege thing…
- The mentally challenged. I don’t understand this one either. If a mentally retarded person can manage something so complex as riding a bus, then they can certainly figure out how to put a mask on.
- People with limited mobility. I’ve seen evidence of the first two on the bus, but I think most people who can’t really move either take a parabus option or just don’t travel by bus. If you can’t manage a mask, then taking a bus would be extraordinarily difficult.
- Emergency personnel responding to emergencies. Self-explanatory and hard to imagine – the bus isn’t typical transport for say, a paramedic on the job.
Now there is one other group of people who seem to be covered by the exemption, but they are not included in the list of the super-challenged. And in fact, I’ve seen more of these offenders than any others on the legit list. Wait for it… you know what I’m going to say!
MEN
Yeah, I’ve noticed an inordinate number of men – of any and all races – getting on the bus without a mask. Every time I ride the bus, there is at least one adult male without a mask. And these guys are mobile, not under 5, not emergency personnel, and not overtly retarded. And yet they saunter on and sit their in their scrotal privilege unmasked, while the rest of the Canadians use the only uncovered part of their faces to full effect, shooting them dirty looks (Canadians are super good at passive aggression!) And remember, like children, men tend to be super-spreaders of disease (which has been true throughout time).
Now, also in the transit regulations is a note that while mandatory, the mask rule is not enforceable. In other words, the bus drivers have not been tasked with getting into altercations with angry males who refuse to comply – because we all know that’s what would happen if you tried to encroach upon a free-thinking male’s sense of FREEDOM. I agree that bus drivers should not be put in more danger than they might already be in, having to deal with the large number of behaviourally unpredictable drug addicts we have here on the West Coast, but what is the point of a mandatory rule if it only applies to a minority of the population…?
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
A Dangerous Woman
When you write about feminist (and I really mean female separatist) issues, you know you are writing about truth, the subjective truths of individual women and the objective truth that is living as a woman in a male-dominated society. Sometimes, you are writing about things that happened to you or other women in the past. Sometimes, you are writing about current events. Sometimes, you are writing about theories, fantasies, and things that could be possible or are definitely not possible in the world as it exists.
When you are out in the real world, you have a mask on. You can’t really talk about what you write or experience or observe. You’ll be gaslit by all men, and the vast majority of straight women. You’ll be verbally and maybe physically attacked. You’ll lose opportunities for jobs, social connections and other things you need to survive. You are a ‘dangerous’ woman, despite how vulnerable you feel. It is possible to be dangerous and vulnerable at the same time. But here’s the thing, the danger you pose is not a real danger like the danger that all men pose to women and girls. It is a perceived danger, and only ideological at that. When you question the status quo – that males run the show and women and girls exist in a state of subservience and suffering at the whim of males – or if you present data that confirm that the status quo is what you say it is, you threaten the male power base. Danger to males means not being able to walk the planet able to do whatever they please with impunity. It is not the same as how females understand danger – bodily harm, sexual threats, isolation, poverty, starvation, death – although males try to equate them or even elevate their idea of danger in importance.
If you’re lucky, you can wear the mask in public and then come home to a place where the mask comes off and you can be yourself and live in relative safety. If you are straight and have chosen to live with a male, you may still wear the mask at home, but I’m tired of people talking about straight women, and the privilege they orbit, and how it can go wrong. If you choose to swim with sharks and you get bit, why are you surprised, ffs??? I mean, we have been bombarded by d.v. data for decades, and women still choose to ignore it. Complicated issue and reasons for ignoring reality, but not going to be addressed here. No, I’m talking about the brave women who reject cock, are punished for it on many levels, are forced to wear a second mask in public because they are deemed even more dangerous than an outspoken straight woman, and then because of poverty, are forced to wear the mask at home because of lack of choice in living situations.
There is little worse than being a poor lesbian or asexual who tries to stay away from men, but is forced to share living space with male strangers because she can’t afford anything else. I’m talking living in hostels, living in houses with multiple rooms rented out (where the renters are chosen by a landlord who doesn’t live in the house, not the renters who have to share the space), living in women’s shelters or prisons where violent male trannies posing as women are allowed in. In these cases, the women must wear multiple masks in public and then wear at least one at ‘home’. To take the mask off in a space where you are supposed to be safe also shows you to be dangerous, and then your ‘threat’ becomes exposed to the straight women and men living with you. Your housing becomes further insecure since you have become a perceived threat, especially if you complain, and you sense that your very life may be in danger because one thing is true: unlike women, when men get scared and threatened, they turn to violence and lash out. They target the perceived source of their fear – a woman who doesn’t literally or figuratively suck their cock or any cock, for that matter; a woman who doesn’t pay them enough attention, attention that they deserve as males; a woman who is a lesbian; it could be anything as no one needs a reason to attack a woman – and they try to take back the power they think they deserve and that they think has been taken away from them (aka ’emasculation’).
I firmly believe that financial independence is crucial for all women so that they may have safety and choices in life, and to help eliminate forced heterosexuality. Women are only dangerous because men say we are, and as we all know, in the he said/she said game, what he says goes. Always.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Better Seen, But Not Heard
I’ve never really understood why people get so obsessed with actors. They are basically glorified memorizers, some of whom are able to sell a lie. We worship this? Okay.
Well, once in a while, there might be someone with real talent; they are seldom recognized as a) we celebrate all male mediocrity, so the most famous male actors aren’t really that talented, b) women are chosen for their looks rather than acting ability, so most female talent never makes it to the big screen, c) most writers are male with a few male-identified women thrown in, so the roles for women are limited and usually supporting roles and/or caricatures. Female talent seldom gets to shine, even if they have been noticed.
But one thing is true, no matter the talent or lack of talent in the acting department; these folks aren’t really special in any other way. So why do their opinions on serious issues matter so much to the hoi polloi? I mean, most of them aren’t especially intelligent or worldly. Even if they’ve managed a university degree, intellectual work, thinking, analysis, etc., wasn’t the primary goal. Jobs geared towards fame and fortune tend to attract people who want attention, so the narcissism factor tends to run high. So I ask again, why would we place such value on the opinions of self-centred, out-of-touch, I lie-for-pay types? Does everyone really need a hero, and the loudest asshole wins the role?
Who is Daniel Radcliffe? Feeding-hand-biter. Misogynist. Mediocre actor. And bit of a tosser, really…
Again and again, we follow the uninformed political rantings of ridiculous screenies, and not to beat a dead horse, but the latest is the schlock coming out of the mouths of wand-wavers, Daniel Radcliffe and his cohort. [Jeez, I told myself I would never write on this, but the topic just won’t go away…] Please stop talking. Please stop attacking the woman who made you rich and famous. You aren’t even touched by the trannie issue. Women are. Let women who are on the ground dealing with this shit day to day take the lead and put the issue in its place (the toilet). Your opinion means less than nothing. Go back to your mediocre acting. I, for one, am boycotting all future films put out by tossers like this one.
So tired of the trannie issue, but it is far from being done, and the worst is yet to come for women who dare to trust established science and defy the crazies by speaking in public.
♀️ 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
The Three Douchebags of the Coronapocalypse
Three apocalyptic heroes: Trump, Xi and Putin. Who needs a brain when you have a penis?
Just an intro
Sorry so silent. There is so much to write. And this is the perfect time for writing. There is nothing to do, and I’m trapped in a true shithole: America. Luckily, not New York – I feel bad for those fuckers. Truly. That shit storm could have been prevented. And it is getting worse. And it is entirely possible, given the true lack of leadership, brain power, and coordination between states, that the US is going to see even harder times during what was fast becoming a serious problem due to income disparity, housing shortages, climate change problems, and a low point for women. Perhaps my new series on the American Downfall, which had been brewing in my mind for a while was aptly timed.
But let’s get into some particulars. I want to take a look at three very special narcissistic psychopaths who have more power than anyone deserves and who run completely unopposed in a way that matters.
China – President Xi Jinping
Luckily/unluckily, I have a shit ton of experience with the Chinese, how they think about things, how they operate, and how they destroy people from the inside out. I lived there in a surreal hell cumulatively for nearly a decade – a hell where you constantly feel like you are fucked no matter what you do or what you say. They are masters of psychological punishment and retribution, and experts on ‘spin’. As I have mentioned before, I had a Chinese leader at a college I worked and lived at look me in the eye and say with a straight face that they locked us in our building at night for our own safety.
Throughout history, the Chinese government has perpetrated numerous crimes against humanity – often unhidden crimes spun as ‘for your own good’ measures – and haven’t ever once taken responsibility for a single one, even when the hard cold truth is laid out before them. A thousand years of foot-binding is never talked about – it is suppressed women’s history, after all. Who cares? They also don’t teach their children that China bought and owned African slaves for hundreds of years. My students often like to talk about Americans like they are evil for their history of slavery, but the fact is that black flesh was bought and sold by Arabs and Asians long before even white Europeans and later, American men, got in on the action. And speaking of criticizing Americans, please note that while the US is good at incarcerating people, the Chinese are best at incarcerating and killing people. China kills more prisoners per year than all the other countries of the world combined. They don’t talk about it, though. Suppressed information. It is impressive, this ongoing cover-up of history and facts, but you definitely want to admire it from outside their sphere of influence.
It is not possible, however, to live outside their latest influence because the sphere is the entire globe – the COVID-19 pandemic. They may not have deliberately created this situation, but they certainly facilitated it. And they are squarely in denial mode, and are still spreading lies throughout their population that the virus didn’t start in China. I have several former students checking in with me on Chinese social media to smugly inform me that a) the virus actually started in Italy or the US (or whatever the rumour of the day spread by the state-owned media is over there), and b) China is superior at containing the virus. What they don’t say to me is that China has been superior at exporting the virus. And they have also been superior (as they have been for years) at hiding information, failing to report data, and intimidating and punishing people who have tried to expose the truth or criticize the government (which are seen as the same thing over there). Like everywhere, there are good, honest people in China, but they don’t survive well under an oppressive regime.
Looking at China’s recent history, what is happening now is nothing new. The previous president, Hu Jintao, was a typical Chinese leader now famous for suppressing information about SARS for over a month, holding the doctor who leaked the information to the world in prison for 45 days. Luckily, SARS only spread to 26 countries. I lived in Taiwan, a hotspot, at that time – 2003. And I was continuously told that the US had concocted the virus and deliberately infected China with it. Same Chinese tactics – blame someone else, refuse all responsibility.
Xi Jinping has followed suit, but he is a hell of a lot worse than President Hu. Admired by the populace as a president “working to stamp out corruption”, he has ended up implementing measures to reduce government accountability and transparency (not that the Chinese government was ever either of the two), and ensure more corruption. Xi named himself lifelong dear leader recently, and showers his cronies with rewards. He is possibly just as powerful as former notorious Chinese dictator, Mao Zedong. Xi has managed to wage a war on Canada due to the Huawei debacle, even killing an incarcerated and already sentenced Canadian, as revenge for Canada arresting the multi-millionaire Huawei CFO and keeping her under house arrest in Vancouver (she has a few million-dollar homes in my country). As a professional bully, Xi has also forced several international airlines to stop saying that Taiwan is a country. American Airlines, Delta and United, Lufthansa and numerous other airlines have kneeled to suck Chinese dick. Pathetic. In the last little while, he has imprisoned over a million Chinese muslims in concentration camps – sorry ‘reeducation facilities’ – Islam is seen as a mental health problem (I think all religion is a mental health problem, but incarceration or conversion can’t fix that problem…). Xi has cracked down even further on free speech, especially on the internet. He employs millions of people to police the internet and thousands are arrested every year for saying the wrong thing. The online presence of a gay and lesbian group at a university where I was living was recently shut down, students were interrogated. And now he has become the man responsible of the spread of the Coronavirus to, let me check… 180 countries (as of today, April 1st – and that’s no joke). Note to President Xi: you can cover up rape and murder in your country, but you can’t hide an epidemic, no matter how many scientists you arrest.
Classic Chinese thinking (Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Geng Shuang)
“China didn’t start it. China is not responsible for it either.”
Oh, and by the way, speaking of Chinese power and free speech suppression, we have: the Spanish flu, German measles, Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and more, but we can’t call COVID-19 the Chinese flu or Wuhan flu, despite the fact that China, and specifically Wuhan, is the origin of this disease. Stop coddling the psychopaths. It reminds me of Saturday Night Live – long-running American comedy show notorious for making fun of almost anyone and everything. I grew up watching it. I have noticed that President Xi is the only major political leader who is off-limits, and China is never joked about. As I’ve been predicting for years now, China has begun its empire, and the US is on the way out.
USA – President Donald Trump
And Trump is helping the US on its bizarre downward spiral. Only in the US, a country that claims to uphold freedom like no other country in history or in the modern world, can someone like Trump be freely elected. Only in the US, a country with the power to impeach leaders, can someone like Trump remain in office. This is a stupid man. An ignorant man. A man who doesn’t understand much, let alone science. A man who cares more about Twitter and his television presence than actual politics and the people he has been elected to protect and serve. A man who was recorded making rape comments about women and who has been accused of raping, attempting to rape and sexually assaulting numerous times since 1989. His rape comments have been recorded and made public and still he remains. Women have been surprisingly complacent about what this man stands for. Knitting fucking hats for fuck sake. Instead of demanding the recall of this human excrement. You poor brainwashed women. You’ve allowed men to shut you up, derail you, and make you believe you are free when in fact you are no better off than women in other woman-hating countries/cultures.
Rapey Trump quotes:
“I moved on her like a bitch.”
“Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”
To me, that is his worst quality, and I think he should be put to death because of rape – like any and all men in the world. But if his deep-seated misogyny doesn’t move you, there is plenty of other shit to make you question his ability to lead effectively.
The man is stupid. I was flying within the US a few years ago, and an elderly American couple that was sitting beside me asked me what I though of Trump. Now, being a Canadian, I am pretty polite and mild-mannered, and I gave some non-answer meant to keep me unassaulted. I am so used to dealing with crazies and I am so used to being verbally (and sexually and physically) attacked for being a lone white woman (WWWW – walking while a white woman), that I just try not to rock the boat (or plane) unless I know I can escape. Long story short, the couple ended up being anti-Trump, and I finished our Trump discussion with an analysis that I though the man saw what he was doing as some sort of game. He is used to being on television where nothing is real and everything is drama. And I really think he extends this little fantasy life into the real world. The presidency is just one more game to him. But he is also stupid. I can’t say this enough times. Seriously.
I am not sure why he is allowed to speak in public. His own party is starting to distance themselves (see this article, from The Atlantic, written by a Republican). And following every statement that he makes, it seems like member of his entourage needs to go back and do damage control, placating the enraged, correcting erroneous ‘facts’, and dialing back fantastical promises and predictions. I mean, history is riddled with insane and/or stupid MEN with too much power doing and saying stuff and people having to clean up after them. And often these types of leaders, if left unchecked, can spell the downfall of a society.
If you want a clear sign that the US is falling, this is it. I would argue that two terms of Bush Junior was the writing on the wall – I mean seriously, he was dumb and aggressive and offensive and did huge damage to the reputation of the US, but Americans wanted him not once, but fucking TWICE. [Does everyone remember that hilarious, but significant, televised press conference where that Iraqi journalist threw a shoe at Bush’s head??? If that doesn’t say dunzo for America, I don’t know what would…] The acceptance of Trump doesn’t surprise me one bit, and the complacency exhibited by ignorant Americans is just a death rattle in my ears. Americans, I’m embarrassed for you, but you made your bed.
Now, getting to the virus. Trump has made the mistake of turning this virus into a blame game with Xi. They are both narcissistic psychopaths with testoterone poisoning. Xi began the coronavirus pandemic when he suppressed vital information about what was going on and thus releasing the virus out into the world at large. He is 100% responsible for that, but Trump has devastated America by behaving ignorantly, ignoring medical professionals, putting on his “We’re number one!” dumb American act (this virus can’t touch us, we’re so fucking powerful routine), and failing to take necessary precautions. So now, at this writing, the US is the most infected country in the world with nearly 204,000 cases. And it will get much worse. And Trump is fully to blame for this. My own country, despite sharing the longest border in the world, is weathering things well. We paid attention to past epidemics, we are responding intelligently and promptly. I just hope that American ignorance doesn’t destroy us too and that Trudeau doesn’t decide to suck Trump’s dick. Myself, I am stuck here in the US. I can’t go home, and if I could, I don’t know if I would at this point. Travelling ups your chances for infection, and I’d hate to import and infect my fellow countrywomen. I’ll write a different post on the shitty treatment a legal foreigner faces in the US at this time…
Honestly, now that I’m back in the US, I don’t see a lot of differences between the Chinese and Americans. They share so many qualities. The leaders do too. Both places are terrible for women. Both places perpetuate ignorance, but as I’ll write about in another post, I really feel that Americans celebrate ignorance on a whole different level in comparison to the Chinese or anyone else on the planet, for that matter. Ignorance is entertainment and it is accepted. Chinese just pass the buck, or the RMB, I should say. It’s an excuse machine.
Classic Trump:
“It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear”
Russia – President Vladimir Putin
Where the fuck is Putin? And what is actually going on in Russia? Now, I’m going to admit that I don’t have much experience at all with Russians, and I have never lived in, let alone been to Russia. So I can’t speak to the Russian mind or way of doing things. They do have that same bizarre, bastardized, communist mentality that you see in other places like China. But Putin has put out a different image than Xi. But I included him here because he is a major player, and he is a narcissistic psychopath like Xi and Trump, regardless of his politics.
So, what is going on in Russia? Does anyone know? If you go by the little that Putin has said, he is behaving like a typical communist leader. Everything is rah-rah-rah. The government is fucking amazing. Everyone and everything is fine. Black out bad news that paints the government in a bad light or that might force the leader to take responsibility for their actions. If I look at my trusty Coronavirus map, there are only 2,777 cases in Russia. This seems odd in a country that borders 14 other countries, including China and with populated areas close to virus-overrun Europe. They also have 144 million people. How can they have so few cases? One explanation is that this is how communist regimes work. Cover up the truth, etc. But Russia also has a crappy health care system, and word is starting to get out that things are much worse than reported. One of the major problems with Russia’s data suppression moves is that Russian travel has not been restricted. They aren’t seen as a risk zone, they haven’t been quarantined or put on flight ban lists. And the result is that the general feeling among the population is that Putin is a hero and the virus will sidestep Russia because of it.
The common Russian view:
“I don’t believe in coronavirus.”
Now, it just came out yesterday that a doctor who just tested positive for the virus met with Putin unprotected. They shook hands. Moscow has been put on lockdown for a week (actually a week-long paid vacation), and the government has implemented a ID system similar to that described to me by my former students in China. They will have to register and show ID if they want to go out to procure food. But unfortunately, much of Russia is either doing business as usual or only has partial lockdown. Let’s see what happens.
Andrei Kolesnikov, political analyst, Moscow:
“It’s a clear message that we are better equipped due to our political system. [Putin] is sure that he is more efficient and this is a case to demonstrate his superiority in that sense.”
Conclusion
Can we fuck off with the politics and just work together to solve the problem?
No, a resounding no. This is how men work. May the best psychopath win!
Stay safe and smart, ladies. And stay away from men if you can. They are always filthy germ-carriers, no matter the disease. We know this from personal observation and from published research. As an example, among educated people in the workplace, “only 31% of men and 65% of women washed their hands” after going to the toilet. If you are going to catch the C-virus, it will likely be a man infecting you. What’s new?
♀️ 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. ⚢
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. ⚢
How I Lost My Smile
I hope I won’t meander too much here. This isn’t a straightforward little Aesop’s Fable with a sweet little bottom line. It’s involved, layered, and there is no clear conclusion. Just something I’ve been thinking about for years and that I continue to think about as I experience more and more and find myself further down that downward spiral that is life as a woman.
Let’s just start with this: Canadians are miserable fuckers. I’m saying this as a Canadian and one who tries to spend as little time there as is humanly possible. As evidence, despite my great boredom on ‘holiday’ here in the US from China, and despite the fact that I have a piece of business I need to take care of up North, I’ve decided not to cross the border. I just hate the place. A small part of it is that Canadians are miserable fuckers. Various data/polls even show it. I remember a comparison poll I once read about done by the airline industry on the differences between Canadians and Americans, and they found that the number one thing American airline passengers hated was fellow passengers who brought too much carry-on luggage. Canadians? The number one hated thing was strangers sitting next to them trying to talk to them. Yeah, miserable fuckers.
But it’s all relative. Canadians are, for example, much, much friendlier and more helpful than the Chinese who are some of the rudest, most selfish, emotionless and humourless assholes on earth. But we’ll get to that.
And I will say this, having disparaged my fellow countryfolk, friendliness varies depending on where you are in the country. I’ve travelled a fair amount in Canada, and I’ve lived in four of the 13 provinces/territories. Having grown up in one of the nastier parts of the country, it was a breath of fresh air to move to the West Coast. I’d say that about American geography, too. I’ve lived on both American coasts and also travelled through 25-30 of the 50 states. While Americans are much friendlier than Canadians, in general, the West is waaaay friendlier than the East. And I’m talking basic friendliness, not politics or ability to think, etc.
Living on the West Coast, and in particular, on the various islands is a different world. People look each other in the eye. Strangers say hello to one another on the streets. You strike up conversations with people at bus stops. You help your neighbours. And people smile. Could be the weather. I really do think better weather makes for more easygoinginess, in general. It’s not that simple, of course, but I think it plays in. So when I moved out there in my later 20’s, I felt myself relax, connect more easily. And I smiled a hell of a lot more.
If you don’t think about smiling in particular contexts and the meanings it can have, you can make the blanket statement that smiling is good for your health. I have felt that, and still do to this day. Exchanging an ‘unloaded’ smile (I’ll get to that in a moment) with a stranger can change your frame of mind and put a different spin on whatever is going on in your mind.
But then there are the ‘loaded’ situations. This is where men come in and ruin things for women like they ruin every fucking, innocent, positive thing on the planet with their filthy minds and need to humiliate and dominate.
It is dangerous to smile at or around men. It is also dangerous not to smile at or around men. Nothing is safe, but a blank look – the kind you see on rape victims or women destroyed by working in porn – is best. Smiling at or around a man can, TO HIM, mean, that you want him, want sex, want to be approached, are submissive and friendly and compliant, and are the perfect victim/prey. Not smiling, and even scowling, may invite sexual harassment, belittling requests for a smile (“Smile for me, honey. It’s not that bad.” Um, yes it is. Now that you’re talking to me.), or the seeing of you as a threatening bitch in need of punishment. Women are required to smile in order to make men feel like men and to help them get what they want from you. Fucking fuckers.
But having said all that, it is not Western men who made me lose my smile, although I will say that now that I have been permanently affected and my eyes are fully open, I don’t waste smile energy on them anymore.
No, I lost my smile due to long-term immersion in Chinese culture. And it took only a month for the first changes in my behaviour to occur.
I still remember my very first month in Taiwan. I’d gone directly from the West Coast of Canada – happy, smiley territory. I was bright-eyed and pleased to be working in a foreign land once again. Until I got there. Despite having a machine gun held up to my face by an aggressive young man on the second day I was there, I still remained my smiling self. But I realized something. Not only did the Taiwanese not return my smiles, ever, the only thing I ever saw were blank, robot-like faces, or just plain old disgust. It was bizarre, and very disheartening. Chinese culture discourages emotion. Emotion = bad, weak, out of control. Even fucking smiling.
Even the children don’t smile. Even most babies!!! Back in those days, in between my regular teaching, publishing, editing and writing jobs, I took on some private language-teaching sessions with the children of rich families. I had one weirdo kid – an 11-year-old boy from a very rich family – who had a freakish interest in out-moded English vocabulary and whose mother would enrol him in adult-level film classes (um…). And oh yeah, the kid refused to smile or even laugh because he thought it made him ‘look ugly’. I got him to engage in some tailored, fantasy/comedy-based murder-mystery story-writing centered on the strange-looking photos of the authors of one of his English books. His stories were hilarious and I laughed my ass off. The kid would start to laugh and then deliberately choked on it to prevent himself from getting all ugly. But I pushed and pushed and finally one day he started laughing and couldn’t stop. Every time I came by his home after that, to his mother’s confusion, the kid would spend the first five minutes laughing hysterically before exictedly whipping out the next instalment of his who-dunnit.
Jezus fucking christ. My biggest accomplishment in Taiwan. Forget the textbook I published, I got a fucking little kid to learn to smile and laugh. Pathetic.
I spent a couple of years in Taiwan, found myself changed fundamentally in a negative way, but not entirely smile-less. I returned to Canada for about 6 years. And then I went back to a culture I said I’d never return to, and I’ve been in Mainland China almost solidly for the past 6 years. The Mainland is even worse than Taiwan, which might be expected given the history and the sheer terror that communism wreaked on the country for so long. And having been there so long, I’ve had a lot of time to study and reflect on the culture and how I have adjusted to it and been mostly destoyed by it.
China killed my smile. It’s not that I am incapable of smiling. I do it a fair amount when warranted. It is much less automatic or natural though in these situations. But in public, outdoors, it never happens. Never in China. And while it has a significant effect on how I feel inside and my outlook, in general, it helps me dissociate, which is necessary when you are a white woman in China. It also saves me a lot of energy. I was quite surprised actually, when I began to analyze the effects of the implemented changes to my public demeanour in China. I used to try to be ‘present’ when I went out, and it was exhausting and demoralizing, especially because there was never any reciprocation from the Chinese. Once I started behaving like them, things became, I don’t know… streamlined? Energy-efficient? Self-centred? I’m not sure what the right word is. I mean, I absolutely hate the way it has changed me, but at the same time, I don’t feel exhausted every time I finish an outdoor ordeal. Going outdoors is always an ordeal. The funny thing is this: I know from feedback from some of my students, that they think I look angry or they are a bit afraid to approach me. But the thing is that I look exactly like them, expression-wise. Blank face. ‘Chinese face’ is what some of them call it. But as a Westerner, and especially as a woman, I am expected to be the kind and entertaining dancing monkey. Double standards. But it saves me energy and I don’t have to be concerned with how I appear when I don’t waste time on distorting my face into something I’m just not feeling. I want to feel nothing, so I put nothing on my face. It becomes easier and easier.
The double standards happen in the West, too – only for women though. We must be the happy slaves at all times. Men can wear whatever the fuck they want on their faces including murderous rampage or disgusting, rapey perv. They’re fine no matter what. Not so for women. Now that I’m visiting the US, I have relaxed a little, but I am much more economic and mindful of my smiling. Tons of women have smiled at me, and I smile back. No problem, and it feels good. I like women. I like the solidarity and energy I feel when exchanging a smile with one. But I don’t smile at men anymore. I try not to even look at them. I’m mindful of where they are in relation to my person, but I don’t look at them. And I don’t scowl. I adopt blank, trauma-face. It is the safest. And so far, so good. I am hyper-aware without perhaps appearing to be so. I come across perhaps as on a mission, hopefully ‘not prey’.
I hate that men and male culture have destroyed something so simple as smiling and relating positively to people. I don’t feel natural, comfortable, easygoing, or healthy. Thanks, China. Thanks, men. Thanks, international Patriarchy.
♀️ 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!
Update on the Chinese Stalker
I just posted on my interaction with a young Chinese male potential stalker. I tried to talk him down for two reasons.
- First, and most important, I was concerned about the woman he was interested in stalking. If I can prevent harm to a specific woman or girl at the hands and dicks of men, I’ll do it. We are constantly in danger from both male strangers and especially the males we know. Men act, first and foremost, for selfish reasons, and if a woman is destroyed in the process of a man getting what he wants, nobody gives even half a shit. I give a shit. I give the mother lode of shits.
- Second, if I can shape the thinking of a single man, I stand the chance of saving scores of women and girls from future harm. It’s along the lines of that old proverb: “Give a person a fish and she’ll eat for a day. Teach a person to fish and she’ll eat for a lifetime.” Big picture. Strategic thinking. Preventative medicine. All that.
Anyhow, I do keep in touch with many of my students through a Chinese-based chat program and I heard from young dude last night. There were some positive things said, but I am not clear about whether he still intends to stalk his ex-girlfriend. There was some ambiguity at the end. Here is the exchange:
Dude: Today you said that happiness comes from our inside heart. And I half agree with that as I believe that our beloved ones are the source of half our happiness. Sometimes we still have to lay half of our happiness on the outside world like our beloved ones
Me: It is important for each of us to decide what it is that makes us happy. And then to set out to achieve it.
Dude: Thank you for teaching me that “if one side wants it, but the other side doesn’t want it, then the relationship cannot happen.” It gave me courage. And I have finally decided to let go of my ex-love.
Me: That is difficult, but good news. It is hard to see things when you are feeling pain. But with time, you’ll see that something better will happen for you. You are making a good, strong decision by letting go.
Dude: If possible, I still hope I could have a chance of reunion with her.
Me: That may just be a dream. But I would suggest letting it go. When a woman says no, she must be respected.
Dude: Thanks
—
Argh!!! I was feeling positive about him letting her go until I read his last statement. “if possible” “I still hope”.
Fuck! Let her go man!
Well, I tried.
Conversations with Men: Talking Down a Wannabe Stalker
In China, stalking of women by men is a standard and highly accepted part of the romantic narrative.
I’ve (unfortunately) been privy to countless examples of this. The wearing down and terrorizing of a woman by a man in order to ‘prove’ he loves her is more common than you might realize.
I can still remember back to 2003 and acquiring my first data point. A Western (male dickface) colleague chuckling over having his adult ESL class interrupted by a petulant Chinese man who had been harassing and stalking a female classmate with whom he was in love. He interrupted the class to throw a tantrum since the woman had not yet submitted to his displays of (immaturity, misogyny, entitlement) love. I was disgusted by the whole thing – had it been my class, heads would have rolled.
And over time, I’ve heard more and more stories. Sometimes from the lovelorn themselves looking for advice on why their stalking behaviour was not working as planned. I think most of the time it works. The poor young woman is beaten down through relentless unwanted attention and forced to give in. Yeah! A boyfriend! How long can one be terrorized and remain sane in a place where stalking and violence against women isn’t taken seriously?
And so today, it happened yet again.
I had parked myself in a huge mostly empty classroom reading Andrea Dworkin of all things, waiting until it was time to make my way to my own classroom in another building. I suddenly became aware of someone sitting beside me, but across the aisle. It struck me as strange as the classroom seated about 200 and I was one of maybe 4 people in the room.
I realized it was someone who wanted to talk to me.
Okay, what the hell. I was tired and having trouble focusing on reading. It turned out I had met the student before about 6 months previously. I could barely remember, to be honest. There are 45,000 students at my university. Luckily, it was a business English major, so he had better English, and thus was able to have a higher level conversation with me. And we talked about a variety of things which were actually interesting to me.
But one of the topics we covered was how he could ‘persuade’ his ex-girlfriend who had broken up with him that she should take him back.
I tried to tie my answer to one of his previous questions, “How can we be happy?” I could have said, “Overthrow Patriarchy,” but most dudes don’t have the capacity or intelligence to begin to comprehend what that means. But, to be honest, I haven’t a fucking clue how to be happy. I think we obsess about it too much, and spend too much time trying to find and force happiness, which, in my opinion, is the surest way to be thoroughly unhappy.
So instead, I delved into the idea that trying to get, take, or receive things is not the way to be happy. But that is what most people (especially men) try to do. We try to get a partner in love, we try to acquire money and possessions, and we want people to give us their loyalty, love or respect. None of that really works. What I suggested is that he stop focusing on taking or getting or expecting, and just try to give. I said that happiness comes from inside ourselves and when we give without expecting something in return, we are more likely to feel happy and free.
And I waited for it… He jumped in with: “But I want to give love to my ex-girlfriend.” And I countered with: a) Don’t give people what they don’t want or need. If the girlfriend broke up with you, she doesn’t want your ‘love’ (I suspect he wasn’t giving love, but rather, control and unreasonable demands). And b) you can’t give something and then secretly expect something in return. You’ll never be happy if your motivation for giving is ultimately selfish.
That gave him some stuff to mull over. I am not sure if it will sink in. Most guys can’t comprehend the notion of selflessness or understanding others’ (especially women’s) needs and wishes. But he seemed to think about what I said.
And then again, I might be completely full of shit about all of this happiness nonsense. But I hope I at least put a damper on his stalking potential. I am pretty sure that is where his obsessive thoughts were taking him. I’ve seen this a million times before.
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“.
Death by a Thousand Cuts
I read a lot of feminist blogs. Most of them are ‘small’ blogs, by which I mean they don’t pull in the thousands or millions of hits per day that porn sites do. But, in my mind, they are significant and vital to my life. I’m pleased to say that the many blogs I read and/or follow are just a tiny fraction of all the ‘small’ feminist blogs out there. I believe that strength does indeed come in numbers, and I’d rather scores of small voices sending the same radical message than one or two well-followed voices singing a weak and confusing song.
Most of the blogs I read do a few things. First, they talk about ideas. They may do this through an essay on theory, theory in practice, the relevance of themes, commentary on political or social events, etc. The other thing these blogs may do from time to time is to talk about personal experience. The experience may be provided as an example of an idea, or it may just be the relation of a personal story that is of significance to the blogger. Whatever the motivation, I enjoy both. I like the former because better writers than me may help clarify my thinking on things or may put a different spin on something I believe, or may introduce me to something I’ve really not thought about before. I enjoy the latter because I see the human in the writer. I sometimes find I’m not alone in having experienced something. I find ways to put words to the horrors that are womanhood under Patriarchy.
One thing I’ve noticed is that most radical feminists have done things and still do things that are decidedly anti-feminist whether they be acts of femininity adoption or subjugating oneself in a multitude of ways in a heterosexual relationship in order to preserve it. And there can be a lot of shame and guilt in the knowledge that one has capitulated. Shame and guilt for being a woman and then shame and guilt for giving in to femininity mandates. And then there is shame and guilt for not giving in to femininity requirements and hurting a poor boy’s feelings. We often end up giving in by apologizing for our militancy. Can’t win.
I like it when feminists write about these thousand daily humiliations. Confession is good for (I don’t believe in the soul) our social and intellectual development. I think by writing about them, we become more mindful of how we survive. We can measure our awareness and progress. Self-analysis of how we think and how we compromise our beliefs (or hold true to them) is important to the evolution of a being and a feminist.
To all writers of ‘small’ feminist blogs who wonder why you keep writing – you matter. You matter to your own personal development, and you matter to your audience, no matter how large or small, who are looking for validation, inspiration and kindred spirits and a reason to go on and/or start their own confessional.
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.
A New Topic: Conversations with Men
I spend a lot of time – too much time – wondering why, as a society or even a global community, we aren’t further ahead than we are. I wonder why we still don’t have basic human rights for the majority of people in the world. I wonder why we still have so much war and violence. I wonder why religion still has a stronghold despite the development of real tools of knowledge development. I wonder why there is still so much opposition to the simplest social and technological advances.
And I find that it really boils down to one major roadblock. Men.
Under a male system based on dominance, which all societies are, we can’t truly advance. Any real advances are made at a snail’s pace. You see, you can’t truly advance when the underlying motivation is greed, power, sex and dominance, rather than peace, unselfishness, and the betterment of ALL people. The former tends to fuel the male quest for ‘advancement’.
If I want a reminder of why things are the way they are, I just sit down and have a conversation with a man or group of men. I’m often disappointed, disgusted, unhopeful about the future, or some combination. There is a reason I have fewer and fewer male friends as I get older. They tell me nothing new, make me feel sick, and waste my very precious time.
So I figured I’d dip into my deep vat of slime in the form of conversations with men I’ve known, and record them here for… posterity? A personal warning? A reminder of why I mostly dislike talking to men?
~~~
Rewind to 2011: an outdoor table at a small Muslim noodle shop in Haikou, the capital of Hainan province in China. I was having lunch with a middle-aged Spanish dude from my Chinese class.
For some reason, dude was pontificating. Don’t they always? He had gone through some blah blah blah about the sweet young Chinese thing he was fucking, and then moved on to the pontification – he was seriously trying on an air of wisdom and depth, and failing miserably. He said: every time I ask an older person what they regret most, they always say the same thing. They wish they’d had more sex.
Sigh. Of course they did. I’ll bet you money he always asks men, and men are typically obsessed with their virility, their legacy, and their conquests. If his poll were true – and it either was, or he selected the answers he liked best in order to affirm his own personal reckless abuse of women – it is a sad thing indeed.
I like to ask people ‘deep’ or introspective questions too. Women tend to say things like: I wish I’d not gotten married. I wish I’d not had children. I wish I’d had the confidence to [insert career-related action]. I wish I’d done more to change the world.
When men look back on their lives and wish they’d done more fucking, I know why our world sucks so much. Power and pleasure, rather than true selfless impact, is what fuels the privileged class. And it’s why we’ll never truly advance as a society.
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.
Story Ending Never 
You must be logged in to post a comment.