Category Archives: Research
P is for Pedo
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Whoa, oh, oh, young girl
So hard to choose just one… lyrics from one of many classic pedo-fantasy songs. This one, Young Girl, is by Gary Puckett. A common element to all pedo songs is that some to all of the responsibility for the rape fantasies is placed on the child herself for being a deliberately tantalizing slut… And notice that there isn’t a celebrated playlist of female pedo songs, despite female pedophilia being a ‘thing’.
Get out of my mind
My love for you is way out of line
Better run, girl
You’re much too young, girl
Back in 2017, the beginnings of a wave rippled on the surface of the internet. From the depths, had come wild claims of political and criminal wrong-doings. It quickly became a movement, with a rapidly growing body of wild suppositions and predictions, and garnering wackadoo men from across the US and even abroad. And once claims of there being an elite international cabal of pedophiles was put out there, women started joining. A lot of women will get caught up in completely batshit crazy male-driven movements because of a superficially altruistic message or mission and/or because they have been scared out of their wits – in this case, protecting children from sex predators. Men tend to be more motivated to join groups in order to gain power and wealth, for the opportunity to mete out extra-system violence and revenge for imagined transgressions, and/or to get recognition or gratitude.
So anyhow, this was QAnon, and as quickly as it was built up, it has since lost much of its steam. Personally, I think it wasn’t a genuine conspiracy theory, but rather what inevitably happens when you have the perfect storm of capitalism, the internet, testosterone, and religion. The best conspiracy theories – or, rather, the most worthwhile to consider, if you’re interested in such things – have actual plausibility that can be fact-checked, and QAnon really had little going for it other than a call to violence appealing to political extremists.
Now the pedophilia focus of the group was strange. It may just have been a ploy to get women involved, because really, you can’t take any men seriously when they start accusing other men of sex-related perversions and crimes. Pot meet kettle, etc. etc. Pedophilia is an everyman phenomenon, not the domain of the rich and famous. It has nothing to do with wealth or education or race or culture, and it has been going on since human time began. And it is perpetrated most often, not by faceless strangers waiting for kids in a swimming pool change room, but by the men and boys a child knows: family members, teachers, community religious leaders, and family friends. This is the same mistake that everyone makes about rapists of adult women: they are more likely to be a friend, family member, co-worker or other male you are familiar with than a complete stranger. But believing in the evil stranger props up the myth that good men exist, that women and girls should trust and get involved with at least some men and boys, and that one’s own male family members are innocent by association with you instead of enabled and given sexual carte blanche by you and other females.
So I want to get into a couple of things here. I’ve touched on related issues in other posts in the past (see the links in the post throughout). First, I’ll get into male chronophilia, and pedophilia specifically. I’ll briefly talk about women who molest children. Then, I’ll talk about how women aid and abet male pedos through self-feminization as well as the grooming of their daughters for heterosexuality. And although these seem like opposite-purpose behaviours, they actually work together unintentionally.
Chronophilia
This was a term used by creepy Kiwi sexologist, John Money, to refer to male sexual preference for and fixation on specific age groups. Philia is Greek in origin, meaning a friendly affection type of love, and sometimes, it is just that. Think of the word Anglophile, for example, which refers to someone who really likes the UK and everything British. But not all philias are safe and innocent, and those involving what men’s minds and dicks get up to are anything but. Personally, I think male sexuality, regardless of how socially acceptable or undisordered it is, is the root of all of women’s and girls’ problems. I see the penis as a weapon of mass destruction with the capability of killing and causing great suffering. And you can disagree all you want, but you can’t argue with the statistics on rape and its myriad physical and psychological damage, unwanted pregnancy and its various outcomes, venereal diseases, PTSD, and a whole host of other problems resulting from females having to deal with males’ dicks.
There is some debate about whether all males are chronophiles. Personally, I don’t think this is that important, but if you’ve read my sexuality series, you’ll already know that I consider males to be omnisexual. In other words, all males have at least a tickle of attraction to all sorts of stuff, including children. What they choose to act on and what they choose to suppress and even repress depends on a whole host of factors. There are males who’ll do anyone or anything, anytime, anywhere regardless of age, species, or animate status without a distinct preference. And there are other males who exhibit a socially acceptable range of age attraction, and others still, who have a very narrow range of targets whether socially acceptable or not. The problem is that many males are attracted to age groups that are under 18 while they themselves are adults. While all male-female relationships are inherently power imbalanced, and are thus not truly consensual, it is much worse when there are age differences and one of the parties has an underdeveloped brain and body. Men don’t seem to see a problem with attraction to teenaged girls, otherwise known as ephebophilia, and have built an entire rape-based industry called pornography and prostitution to legitimize this belief. I have a problem with it, of course, as I think intercourse causes physical and psychological damage to females regardless of age, but especially when young. And then we enter the realms of hebephilia and pedophilia – attraction to early teens and pre-pubescent children, respectively. Hebephilia was acceptable for most of human history, and still is in some cultures, the reasoning being that if a girl is menstruating, then she’s fair game for ownership and raping. These days, you still see online discussions among men about whether it’s ‘okay’ to be attracted to a 14-year-old girl. I don’t personally understand adult attraction to teenagers and children. It is really hard for me to get into the headspace of a male that sees this as desirable. But if you understand that everything that men do is about power and control, then you can see why dominating the helpless might be desirable. And with that, I’ll get into the next topic.
What’s a Pedophile, Anyway?
Now, I learned a few things here as I was digging into the boner-brain connection. The most interesting, but perhaps unsurprising, thing to me was that only about half of males who sexually molest children can be diagnosed as pedophiles. Pedophilia, unlike most of the other chronophilias, is a clinical diagnosis of a sexual preference disorder. In other words, being attracted to children is kind of a problem. Yet 50% of child molesters aren’t sexually attracted to children. At first, I reread this finding and thought, WTF??? But then I remembered that the penis is a weapon and that, for men, sexual activity is inseparable from acts of violence, hate and degradation, and a means of exerting power and control, and on some level, ALL males know this. I don’t think that any sexual act that a male carries out with unequal parties – meaning women and children – is devoid of power and control and hate and degradation, even if he dresses it up as love. So after that initial WTF? moment, it made sense. Males assault children to get off and feel power even if they are not attracted to them, just as men sometimes rape adult women they aren’t attracted to, but to get off on punishing them for being female and a threat to their ego in some way.
Researchers tell us that about 5% of the male population are pedophiles, but these data are based on surveys, so I would have to assume that the figure is higher as some men aren’t going to admit what they like if it is criminal. Likewise with rape. Survey-based studies of college age males indicate that a quarter of men would rape a woman if they knew they weren’t going to get caught. That number is likely much higher because a lot of men aren’t going to admit to something criminal in nature. The message here is that it is impossible to know how disgusting and dangerous men truly are because we rely upon incarceration data and self-report data. And only a minority of sex offenders are actually caught and convicted. I remember visiting a friend in L.A. once time, and for kicks, I decided to look up the neighbourhood on the sex offender registry to see how many rapists and pedos lived around me. It was shocking how many red dots appeared on the streets around where I was staying, and then I realized that those dots were only the convicted and released men. Remember only about 5% of male rapists are ever convicted. Anyhow, liberal men have criticized society for pedo-hysteria, and have even created entertainment – the British animated series, Monkey Dust, is an example – that pokes fun at those who worry about what men do to those with much smaller voices. While I don’t believe in persecuting people without cause, I think women and children should ideally have the option of living apart from males.
Of the men who molest children – girls and boys – over 80% of them live heterosexual lives. Some LGB researchers argue that you can’t really identify sexual orientation in pedophiles, but I don’t agree 100%. Girls are much, much more likely to be sexually abused than males, and that difference would not exist if pedophiles did not have an orientation. It may not be an entirely sexual orientation – sex and harm go hand in hand for males – but it is certainly an orientation that involves hurting girls. Twenty percent of girls are molested, compared to 5 percent of boys. I think it’s probably higher in females as girls are groomed from birth to accept sexual attention from males, so they are less likely to see what is happening to them as a crime and to report it.
While homosexual men are not the group to worry most about, there have been a few gay male pro-pedophilia groups, such as NAMBLA in North America and the Krumme13 (or the Crooked 13) in Germany that have advocated for adult-child sexual relationships, decriminalizing child porn, and the like. They are not embraced by the gay and lesbian community, but have perhaps made an impression on simple-thinking right-wingers who may possibly be more likely to be pedophiles than the people they demonize 😉
There has been some effort by left-wingers in recent times to increase the publicity of and search for female child molesters. They are really hard to get a grasp on though for a few reasons. They are far, far less common than male sex offenders, the entire world protects mothers from being seen as perverts and abusers, and child victims are less likely to report sexual abuse from their mothers and female caregivers. So, sample sizes are generally small, and typology models are still under development, but from the data available, two primary types of adult women sexually abuse pre-pubescent children: the male-coerced type, where women assist a male partner in the sexual assault, and the intergenerational predisposed type, where women abuse their own children or children close to them. And these women appear to be almost universally heterosexual mothers or care-givers, although they sexually abuse females more than males. The behaviour seems to be less sexually motivated, and more a reenactment of sexual and physical abuse they themselves suffered as children. Interestingly, female sex abusers tend to be more physically brutal with female victims in addition to the molestation, and serious injuries are much more likely with girls and with youngers victims than with boys or pubescent and teenaged victims. Although, researchers seem confused about why this might be, I have a strong suspicion that this is a direct expression of the internalized misogyny that all women grow up with, and women trapped in unwanted caregiving roles with girl children are possibly tapping into repressed rage from their own childhood abuse. It seems logical that female abusers would see a young girl as a proxy for the hated self, and punish the girl accordingly.
Admittedly, much more investigation is needed to understand the prevalence of and motivation for female sex abusers and the damage they do to girls. Generally speaking, I think mothers are far too protected as it is, and I am no fan of seeing breeding as a human right. I think being born to a sane and loving person is the human right we need to be more concerned with. If you are a severely damaged person, you have no business being around children, let alone creating your own punching bags and fuck toys. I still remember back to my time in China, and I saw plenty of public child abuse, but it was only ever mothers slapping, punching, kicking, and using make-shift weapons on their small girl children. It was shocking, and I was the only one who seemed to notice. Never once did I see anyone — mother or father – hit a boy. Of course, I saw plenty of adult males physically abusing adult females in public. But not children. We see from crime data that males are much more likely to abuse and sexually abuse children, especially girls, but perhaps they save it for the privacy of the home since they are seldom out and about with children on their own, unlike women. And although fathers aren’t as protected as mothers from suspicion of abuse, society generally accepts male violence as the way things are. If we put a few token male rapists in jail, we can all feel like we’re addressing the problem, even though we’re not. But maternal child abuse, including molestation, needs to be addressed in a more serious way.
Aiders and Abettors
I wanted to briefly address a more common female contribution to pedophilia and that is feminization, the pursuit of youth, and the grooming of daughters. I talked about much of this in my 2017 post Thanks for Supporting Pedophilia. My theory is that instead of aging naturally and normally, adult women engage in a whole host of practices – aka practising femininity – designed to chase youth and cater to male pedophilic, hebephilic and ephebophilic proclivities. Women remove their body hair, try to stay thin and unmuscular, dye their hair, coat their faces in make-up to look younger, and dumb down the tone and content of their speech in an effort to look more childlike and to keep men’s attention. And increasingly, mothers groom their daughters for male attention by allowing them to dress age-inappropriately and femininely, to wear make-up, and they tend to punish assertive and aggressive behaviour. Consequently the lines between adult and child are increasingly blurred, and all of it is for male attention. Without males, females have no need to engage in any of this feminizing and infantilizing behaviour.
I’m going to conclude with the following. If I had a daughter, and I feel thankful every day that I don’t have children, here is my list of threats to her safety in descending order:
- Straight and bisexual men – despite entertainment propaganda that they are the only protectors of the weak that we can rely on, they are actually the greatest threat to women and girls, and you engage with them at your own and your daughters’ risk.
- All teenaged boys – in some ways, they are worse than adult men simply because they are more likely to target children than adult women for victimization. But their worlds are smaller and their access to people is more limited and they may be marginally more monitored than adults. It’s a fine line, though.
- All boy children – many are sadistic with impulse control problems, but are uber-protected by boy-moms because of their supposed innocence. You’d be surprised how often little boys commit sex crimes though.
- Straight and bisexual women – while they are much less likely to commit sex crimes than men, as I mentioned, straight women who sex offend tend to be much more physically brutal with girls in addition to molesting them. In addition, straight women are male pedophile enablers, especially if they are boy-moms or women in committed relationships with men. Straight women will sometimes participate in molestation with their partner, but most often will just cover up or pretend the crimes aren’t happening. In some cases, women will trade their daughters’ bodies for a place to live despite there being lots of help for single mothers in Western countries.
- Gay men – they are not so much a sexual risk to girls, but gay men are misogynists too. I’ll bet they’re probably less dangerous to girls than, say, boy-moms.
- Lesbian and separatist women – the only risk they pose is any internalized misogyny they have from growing up and living in a toxic anti-woman world. But by and large, they are the safest people for girls to be around.
So, like the right-wingers of QAnon and various religious groups around the world, do we need to lose our shit in the quest to root out pedophilia in all tribes but our own? No. The sexualization and abuse of children, especially girls, is part of a much larger problem called male domination. And separatism is a more logical place to put your energy and a better investment for your daughters.
This post is part of the Alphabet Series.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
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. ⚢
Scent of a Man
This is a companion piece to that snore-fest of a misogynist classic, Scent of a Woman, starring tired old typecast actor, Al Pacino.
Soooo, let’s pretend I’m blind. All my other senses are heightened. I’m not going to go so far as to say I can identify individuals, unlike the Pacino-pornhound, but I will say this: no matter where I go in the world, my nose knows when I’ve entered or passed a place where men go. And by ‘go’, I’m not just talking location, but also the euphemism.
Yep. I mean urine.
Male urine is one of the worst smells in the world, up there with male jizz and dead bodies/rotting meat. (I’d rather smell poop or farts than those other three, actually.) But you don’t need to be blind or bolstered by heightened olfactory powers to know when males are lurking and leaking. First, they piss everywhere! Not just in washrooms, but in public. On my most recent trip to the US, the very first smell to greet me when I alit from the public transport from the airport was male urine. And the first thought to go through my mind as I choked and tried to breathe was first ‘Welcome to America!’ but I quickly revised it to ‘Same smell, different country’. Interestingly, that smell was the last one I experienced before I boarded public transportation in China on my way to the US. Only my location had changed. The smell was the same. I realized that male wee is the great globalizer. McDonald’s or Walmart may peddle the globalizing shit, but male bodies, literally, produce the globalizing piss. And while all serve to make you feel a sense of familiarity no matter where you are, the urine does so more than anything else because olfactory memory, especially paired with fear and disgust, tends to be one of the most powerful mind-fucks. That scent alone will remind you who is in charge (men), who is destroying the world (men), and of whom you need to be afraid (men).
There are reminders of this power in the form of piss and pissing everywhere you go. One example from my world: I was walking down a busy street in China two days ago in broad daylight, and a dude ahead of me stepped off the sidewalk, unzipped his fly and let loose right then and there under the trees lining the walk. No shame. Just pure, unadulterated male privilege. The privilege to be completely safe while uncovered. The privilege to go unquestioned while exposing genitals. The privilege to filth up common space with human waste. Imagine a woman doing that. Wouldn’t happen. She’d end up raped, beaten, shamed and/or arrested. Children, as well, are given a free pass, especially if they are male. Chinese mothers teach their boys from a young age that they don’t need to learn to control their urges. Male urges must be given precedence over everything else, including public health and safety. I don’t wish to see cock in public EVER, yet I see little-boy dick absolutely everywhere I go in China, even in ‘civilized’ places. Little-boy dick pissing on the sidewalk, on trees, in the street from the curb. Who the fuck wants to be reminded of their masters’ presence on a constant basis?
But let’s get to the toilets. Even in countries where males are sort of required to limit their urination to designated areas (like that is possible…), these places often stink much more than women’s toilets. Part of it might be the spray factor. This need to stand and spray isn’t human, but rather, pure, unthinking animal. Men really should sit down to pee. Basic logic. But given the world we live in, men don’t have to think about their grossness and entitlement because either a woman is cleaning up after them or they just live in their own filth without noticing. I can’t imagine ever again sharing a residential space, including a bathroom, with a male.
In China and other places without a strict cleanliness mentality or understanding of basic hygiene, and with out-of-control populations (meaning high volume male urinating), and with poor plumbing systems, the bathrooms are absolutely disgusting. I even find the women’s bathrooms in China horrific. They stink. Part of the problem is cleaning mentality. People very much believe that if someone is employed to clean, then they can be as filthy and inconsiderate as they want. They leave urine, blood and shit everywhere – for someone else to clean up. But unfortunately, the cleaners seldom know how to clean properly or care about cleaning properly. Another part of the problem is the design of squat toilets. Unlike with the Western sit-down toilet, the squatter bowls are open and shallow. Unless you can force your piss stream to a trickle or position yourself directly over the small hole at the very end of the long and very shallow bowl, urine bounces off the porcelain and sprays absolutely everywhere. Gross.
But the male toilets in China? #$%@! Unlike the women’s, I can smell them from 100 feet away. Directly passing by them is an eye-watering, brain-cell-killing, throat burning, lung-emptying experience. My swearing reflex, much like a gag-reflex, is triggered every time. When I taught high school in the Chinese countryside several years ago, my poor American colleague’s classroom was situated right beside one of the male toilets. Her room was permanently tainted by the smell of wee. Male wee. It must have gotten into the wood of the students’ desks. So, even with the door closed during a low-urination time of day, it was suffocating. I felt so bad for her. I was luckier with my classroom placement.
Now, I got curious. Not that curious – not all-day research curious – just a little. Male stench can’t just be a plumbing or cleaning or entitlement problem, right? There has got to be a difference in male and female urine. I can’t deny what my nose, throat, eyes, and lungs constantly tell me. I read that there are differences in male cat urine (felinine protein for marking territory) and male mouse urine ((methylthio)methanethiol which attracts females), for example. Scientific inquiry (or lack thereof) indicates that there is nothing that really explains why male and female urine might smell differently. The implication is that it must be all in one’s head (and, goddammit, one’s throat and nose…), of course. Individually, urine smell can be affected by dehydration, types of food eaten, and disease conditions. After a cursory look, there is no conclusion that excreted hormones account for male stench. Who knows what is true? Either there is no difference (hard to believe), or men are abusing science to prove they are not gross, or the science hasn’t been done because it is more important to fund studies trying to prove women are natural, abusable fuckholes. I found one poorly written pop-sciencey/interpretation article written by an unintelligent, male-identified woman trying to imply a link (where no link exists) between mice and humans. Sorry lady, women are not fucking ‘turned on’ by the smell of male wee. Quite the opposite… Quite the opposite indeed… The smell of men inspires violent urges in me, actually.
Regardless of whether there is a difference in urine – really, that is not the point here, and I don’t really care – there is still a conclusion to be made. Men stink, and they need to pee in designated places, sit down while they do it, and clean the fuck up after themselves – especially if they are using residential bathrooms or dual-sex/unisex bathrooms where women are forced to use the same facilities. And this is yet another reason to keep male trannies out of the women’s toilets, btw. And their man-pee stench will give them away as dudes even if the bad wig and smirking entitlement don’t. Aside from the fear/intimidation, safety and violence issues, and usurping women’s status and rights issues, trannie men stink, too, and they should put their stinky male urine where it belongs – THE MEN’S ROOM.
Requiring men to self-regulate is not a human rights abuse. It is a tempering of ages-old privilege and infringement upon the rights of women.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Equal Opportunity Religion Hating – Or Not?
Do you love online quizzes? Do you like the idea of contributing to academic research? Are you into social justice and personal bias? Well, head on over to Project Implicit, a collaboration designed to investigate “thoughts and feelings outside of conscious awareness and control”. They administer tests on race, religion, gender, age and more.
It’s pretty interesting. I’ve taken a couple of the tests. They seem to rely upon timed keyboard response to word pairings and categorizing, and dependent variables are the time you take to respond and the mistakes you make. The idea is that how we respond is not just a factor of our conscious processing – after all some people are good at consciously self-monitoring their behaviour. We have hidden biases that can come through despite being politically correct.
There were some follow-up questions after the quizzes I took that attempt to examine what I believe influences the way I think, but likely, most people have no idea why they unconsciously behave the way they do. Only when you make a true effort to examine your privileges and biases (through reading, listening, interacting, adopting humility, etc) can you even begin to understand what is going on inside you.
Anyhow, I took a test on views on religion, as well as one on gender stereotypes with regard to science and liberal arts. With the latter, I scored in (the top – my interpretation, haha) 1% of people who overwhelmingly associated science with women and liberal arts with men. I wasn’t surprised at either the misogyny of the rest of the population or with my atypical response. They asked me at the end for possible explanations for my results. In all honesty, having worked in both science and liberal arts, all the best scientists I’ve worked with have been women. Men tend to suffer from arrogance, inflated sense of importance, misogyny, and the need to confirm their own, often strange, beliefs. Women, I’ve observed, are more humble, less biased, and thus truer to the spirit of science. Good role models, in other words. So in my mind, I always associate scientists and properly done science with women. In all honesty, I also tend to associate women with liberal arts and anything intellectual, creative, interpretive, and artistic, as well. Men? I am more and more frequently associating men with porn and violent oppression than noble endeavours, creativity or rational thinking… Hey, once the scales fall from the eyes and you decide you aren’t going to suck the Patriarchal cock anymore, you begin to see things for what they really are. But there was no text input or radio button option to explain my thinking on that, alas. I’m sure the mostly male research team will just pass me off as an anomaly or as we research types tend to say, “an outlier”.
Regarding the test on religion, that one was more interesting and surprising to me. I hate all religions, for obvious reasons (misogyny, ignorance, magical thinking, control, violence, hatred, homophobia, anti-progress, and I’ll say it again, misogyny). The test looked at the four major religions: Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. They had two lists of words. One consisted of ‘positive’ words (excellent, good, etc) and the other of ‘negative’ words (bad, terrible, etc). There was a series of groupings. In each, you were told to press one key if you saw a word from one of the religions OR a positive word, and to press a different key for all the other religions or a negative word. The test purported to tap your subconscious attitudes toward each religion.
At the end, I was given a relative placement of my negative attitude towards each of the religions, and as you can see from my outcome above, Christianity fell to the negative bottom of my personal religious shit-pile. Keep in mind that I believe that ALL religions are evil, which is my conscious attitude, but subconsciously, I suppose, I associate the most negative qualities with Christianity. I thought I was an equal-opportunity hater. I’m kind of disappointed.
* note for all dudes discovering their knickers suddenly in a twist at my audacity to associate science and competence with women, I am explaining my personal experience and thinking, not reporting on a scientific study I’ve done or treating my experience as a study. Chill out and stop getting so bloody sensitive and emotional, for fuck’s sake! Note also that women have tolerated this kind of bias from you for millennia. And you’ve been rewarded for it! At least I don’t rape or deny you employment!!!
Story Ending Never 
You must be logged in to post a comment.