Blog Archives
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
H is for Hate
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Holy hell, time flies when you’re not having fun! I swear, I didn’t mean for nearly 2 months to go by before writing another post. I had a topic chosen and everything. Really! But I find time is moving strangely during this neverending pandemic. Likely, many of you are discovering strange feelings and experiences are entering your small viral bubble world, and you probably feel you don’t have much control over…, well, much at all. You are not alone, even if you feel you are.
But while later than planned, I am here now with the next post in the Alphabet Series.
H is for Hate
I was going to choose helplessness at first, and it is probably a good post topic for another time, but I was inspired by a post I read back at the end of March, written by a more mainstream, academic type of ‘feminist’ on the topic of whether hate crimes and hate speech apply to women as a class, and who decided by the end of her post that while women experience sex-based issues (she seemed almost loathe to call what women experience ‘hate’), the legal system is not the way to deal with it. The legal system works for all the other hates, but it would just create more problems for women (or more likely, she meant for men) than it could even begin to solve. And we can figure out why this might be true – a) crimes and ‘lesser’ harms done to women are constant, committed by most (if not all) males, and against most (if not all) females. I mean, seriously, every single male would go to jail for some period of time in his life if we actually had justice for women and girls. And let’s face it, there would be a shit ton of brainwashed fembots out there protesting holding men accountable for their crimes against women… But it tickles me to imagine males actually justifiably (i.e., being held accountable) living with a fraction of the fear that females unfairly (i.e., simply being born female) live with. And secondly, b) most women ‘consent’ to fucked up, convoluted and demeaning relationships with males. It is impossible to police woman-hate when women seem, on the surface, to say yes to so much of what is done to them.
Now, did this mainstreamer suggest what might work? No, of course not! She works for a university and is a white woman (a dangerous status today), so taking anything other than a milquetoast stance on women’s issues isn’t possible in this age of group-selective Western censorship. There was the obligatory hint that education might be the way to go… And I think it was at this point that I realized that my topic was going to be Hate, specifically woman-hate. You just CANNOT educate males out of raping, out of their innate violent natures, out of doing everything possible to make sure that females lose in every aspect of life and in every corner of the world. Myself, I am a nature-AND-nurture theorist when it comes to human problems, and I believe that to choose either one alone to explain our human world is just plain silly, and even ignorant. But, I regularly read different kinds of self-proclaimed ‘feminists’ who do take these irrational essentialist stances for several reasons, only one of which seems to be that I end up with plenty of stuff to write about. And if you’re wondering about the woman in question, I won’t name her as she is fairly typical of most liberal-leaning feminists out there, although more educated and articulate than the average one, and besides, I don’t believe in publicly shitting on women unless they are doing something really evil and need to be taken down. And even then, I am decidedly not an activist, but rather a writer and navel-gazer and educator. I write to add a perspective, rather than to try, futilely, to change the world.
But back to hell. I mean Hate. There was a nice assortment of h-words I could have chosen for this post. Like I said, helplessness was a tempting choice and you may see it in the future. As well, H is for honesty, hope, hetero/homosexuality, housewifery (definitely want to write about that sometime), homelessness, his/herstory, harmony (key concepts in places like China, but also with the Cult of Positivity crowd — “Why can’t we all just get along, waaaah…?!!?”), and harm. And there are tons more.
Now, if you’ve read further on this blog, you’ll possibly be aware that I already have an ongoing series called Love = Hate. Hate, in general, is a massive topic. It is the prime current (coupled with greed) that runs through and guides the course of all male-dominated societies (basically, every society on earth since the beginning of time), but that is often called love, justice, fear, retribution, morality, the natural order – everything but hate. But as this is a woman-centric blog, my focus is on woman-hate or misogyny. So I’ll stick this post in there in addition to here in the Alphabet Series.
My plan here is to address a couple of the thoughts I came across in the article on hate, or rather non-hate, where it concerns women. And I’ll try to reach a conclusion or at least a suggestion, where the other author couldn’t bother.
Domestic Violence Ruins Progress on Woman-Hate Issues
I’m going to re-word this as I certainly don’t think women deserve violence from males. Ever. But I do take issue with female’s willing ignorance when it comes to putting trust in males. We are swimming in evidence that males hurt females constantly, and that proximity to males vastly increases the probability that a woman or girl will be raped, physically assaulted, sexually assaulted, and/or killed. We know that at least 25% of hetero-partnered women experience severe physical violence at the hands of their loving male partner. But despite knowing this, mothers still groom their daughters for heterosexuality and for relationships where although they will probably live an economically better life and be vastly more protected from other males than women who don’t partner with men, they will have to endure some form of misogyny, including manipulative and consensual rape, in exchange. This is the heterosexual contract, and we all know this in our lizard brains, even if we refuse to acknowledge or accept it. In the situation where domestic violence happens and a woman manages to escape it, many will still jump back in the dating pool with this delusion that there is a ‘good one’ out there waiting for her. It is pure insanity, especially in places where women can freely choose to support themselves financially instead of being forced to exchange rape for a home and food. But it is a psychologically complex issue. And even in more progressive places, it hasn’t been all that long for women to have had this choice. Change in thinking takes time especially when traditional thinking and behaviour are always more rewarded.
So, if you boil it down to a single basic truth, heterosexuality is the problem. Go with males, and you are asking for trouble, and will ensure that the system never changes for ALL women and girls. So I’ll reword my header of his section to “heterosexuality ruins progress on woman-hate issues”. Until women reject heterosexual relationships with males, progress on addressing actual hate crimes against women, which I would argue MUST, for the time being, exclude crimes committed within a consensual relationship, will go nowhere. The fact that women consent to male abuse (and this is learned at an early age due to grooming for abuse by mothers, fathers, entertainment, schools, social institutions, etc) is the number one roadblock in sussing out what is going on in any reported hate crime against a female. If you look at all other groups who experience hate crimes, not a one of them is groomed from birth to consent to abuse from or seek abusive sexual relationships with members of oppressive groups. It is because of this that I believe that heterosexuality is morally wrong, irrational from a female perspective, unnecessary for human existence and the continuance of the species, anti-progress, intellectually, for the human species, and inherently violent and destructive to over half the population of the world. And of course, as I’ve said many times before, no one is born heterosexual, so this is a circumstance that absolutely doesn’t need to exist. If we stopped forcing girls into heterosexuality, male violence wouldn’t be the guiding force of human existence. But of course, preventing this is another matter altogether and adult females would fight tooth and nail against stopping the harm of their daughters, likely on the basis that isn’t fair to deny pussy to males.
Woman-Hate Isn’t Really ‘Hate’
One point the author danced around is the idea that all of the currently protected groups under hate crime legislation experience real hate whereas women experience, not hate, but the effects of male entitlement. The reasoning is this. The motivation for persecuting racial or religious groups (and even gays/lesbians) is to eradicate them, whereas males see a use for females, so don’t want them dead, but rather, subservient. So, I call bullshit here. In the history of the world, more women have died at the hands of males than specific racial or religious groups have at the hands of their oppressors. Currently, more women and girls die each week because of men and because they are female, than all persecuted groups combined in any given week. The woman writing is British, so if you look at how many non-whites are killed by whites due to racism in the UK every week, I think there is no comparison with femicide. And I think we’d find the same situation if comparing the prevalence of other lesser hate crimes, such as harassment. There have been what I’ll call ‘episodes’ or blips on the long timeline of human existence, where one group has tried to eradicate another group. There is nothing close to the comparitively short Nazi eugenics program for Jews today – in fact, they are generally, a very wealthy and powerful group now, and frequently show themselves to be effective oppressors of other groups, including women and children. My other favourite go-to oppressed group, American blacks were never targets for eradication. They were seen as a resource to be used and abused – kind of like how men have used women in the past and still do today. So the definition of hate as the desire to obliterate in total doesn’t work. Not all accepted hate targets are targets for elimination, and on the flip side, many males actually do want women to die.
I’d also argue, as I have in several past posts, that most, if not all, oppressions stem from woman hate, the reasoning being that males covet the vaginas and uteri of the females of their tribe, and any group (racial, ethnic or religious) that threatens these possessions and the bloodlines of their group are attacked. So males don’t want males from other groups raping or stealing their women and knocking them up, so they do what they can to take away the power of those ‘others’. So all racism is based in misogyny. Pretty simple to understand. With gays and lesbians, it is still woman-hate that fuels homophobia. Men are supposed to rape and possess women (instead of being penetrated like a woman), so gay dudes are a problem. Women are supposed to be raped and possessed by males, so lesbians are a problem as they are way too goddamned free and how dare they reject those who are superior to them? So how can groups that are persecuted on the basis of woman hate experience legitimate hate, while women are not truly hated?
Solutions?
Now, I agree with the author when she says that the legal system does not solve societal problems. The legal system was designed by men, for men. I think it can help racial groups and any group with males in it. And given what has happened, legally, to validate the trans, we know that male trannies are still male, no matter what the hell they’re wearing or what is going on in their Y-chromosome-filled brains. And it is for this reason that the law will not end problems specific to women. Women are not men, so the system doesn’t work for them. Males cannot conceive of being held universally accountable for their actions, even though they may throw a paltry few under the bus to keep up the appearance of ‘justice’.
But if you don’t advocate for the legal rights for women, and your only suggestion is education, which hasn’t produced any results in the millennia that women have been pleading with, and reasoning with, and educating males not to hurt them, then what hope is there?
Well, personally, I don’t think anything is going to change for women until they reject heterosexuality en masse, and that is NEVER going to happen. So my solutions are based on pure fantasy, meaning that they will never happen in the West or any place that pays lip service to human rights. Males would never allow women to take their power away, and there are too many handmaidens working against female liberation, human rights and dignity already to ever achieve a critical female opposition to changing the legal or social systems.
I don’t believe in system change, as I said, so any solution I would ever come up with would be grass roots or individually- or small-underground-group-run. I do, personally, like the idea of vigilantes working on behalf of wronged women. In Canada, our native people’s have some legal traditions for dealing with conflict in their communities, so why can’t women go further and develop their own justice system to deal with sex-based crimes? In my opinion, if a system doesn’t work for women, then they are justified in taking matters into their own hands. Males have done this many times in the past. Why can’t women? It can be organized, or it can operate more on a vigilante or extra-system level.
The Gulabi Gang founded by Sampat Pal in India is one of my favourite women’s vigilante groups. It started out very grassroots and individual – an single woman’s natural and justified response to a situation involving an abusive husband, and it has grown into a network of over 400,000 women. Women supporting women, armed with sticks and chasing down and beating the shit out of rapists. Not only would that never be allowed in the West, but I can’t even imagine Western women getting their thinking past the utter unfairness to men of giving them a taste of their own medicine. As an update, sadly, I found out that some of the Gang took issue with Sampat Pal over how she was running things, and turned on her, beating her with the very sticks meant for men, and she eventually got kicked out of her own organization. I think back to what I said in my last G post about women needing a few generations to heal before they could ever create their own high-functioning, woman-centric society.
Oh, and one last note, as no doubt someone is wondering why I haven’t talked about ‘misandry’, which is the current whiny accusation of Western males in response to feminism. Misandry – unjustified and pathological hatred of men – isn’t a thing. Males are oppressors and hate women reflexively for no rational reason. When women hate males, it is in response to the oppression and violence done by said males. It is therefore justified, not illogical or pathological or bigotry. This purported prejudice against males that is gaining traction in both testerical incel and liberal circles as something that must be addressed because of the increasing number of ‘poor suffering males’ doesn’t exist. The lies men tell are flimsy, but widely believed, and I’ll address this in my L is for Lies post. We all seem to like to believe males’ crocodile tears. But never fear, males are still on top, doing whatever the fuck they want, and they laugh, if they even notice at all, as women and girls suffer.
Again, this is part of the Alphabet Series as well as the Love = Hate Series
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Domestic Abuse on the Street – Foreign Woman Tries to Intervene, Fails
After a week of constant misogynist student comments, constant tit-ogling by my friendly neighbourhood construction workers, daily wonderment at how my male students were able to gain entrance into university and college (they are so fucking lazy and stupid, I can’t believe it!), daily racism and misogyny shit sandwiches by all and sundry – especially my neighbours and co-workers of three years, and on top of it all, 35°C (that’s 95°F to you, Yanks) every single day in both my workspace and home (no A/C!!!), the last fucking thing I needed was dealing with a commonplace street assault.
In China, it is perfectly acceptable to abuse your wife or girlfriend on the street in broad daylight. It is not quite as bad as South Korea or Thailand, where you can physical beat the bitch down to the ground with no repercussions (I’ve witnessed this in Thailand and tried to intervene once – a Japanese man stopped me – and a friend of mine lived in Korea and saw it all the time), but the Chinese-style woman-beat-down is an every day occurrence. I have a history of intervening in male abuse of women – moreso in my youth when I was stronger and dumber. No women have ever helped me (quite the opposite, actually), but that hasn’t stopped me from trying to help dumb-ass heterosexual women. I’ve learned, mostly. I don’t bother helping heterosexual women with their problems anymore. I fought for my own fucking freedom, and I continue to pay for my decisions because het women refuse to get on board in solidarity in the name of change and making female life better. Nothing has EVER in the history of the world been gained through waiting patiently – especially when it is waiting for people (men) to overcome their abusive tendencies and dumbassery. If you want freedom, you need to fucking fight for it, sometimes violently, especially if you don’t have money, or power in other areas of your life, or the right connections. So if you’re not going to fight, then you suck it up, and don’t whine about it. You only get to whine if you follow it up with action. So, I generally refuse to be sucked down into another woman’s problems for a number of reasons. Her boyfriend will try to hurt me – that’s a guarantee. She herself will almost always hurt me in response, she will usually choose the cock she is sucking and getting raped by over a friendly sister, and return to him after she uses me, and will end up supporting a system that *sort of* helps her (the cocksucker) and badly hurts me (the rebel). It’s the same philosophy I use in other areas of life, such as with my students. If students are lazy, selfish, and don’t give a shit about anyone (sometimes including themselves), I don’t bother with them. Only the ones who are willing to do the hard work get my support beyond what I am paid to do. My time and energy are fucking precious, so I bet on the winning horses. Blaming the victim? Well, fuck. At what point will we actually ask women to take some fucking responsibility, take some fucking risks? Men are not going to change until we force them to change, impose serious consequences for their actions, control them, kill them, or separate from them. Or some combination. Victimhood is real, but telling women to just accept things, or not to take risks, or not to self-examine is bullshit. Nothing will ever change until women take charge of their lives in serious and aggressive ways. If you need proof, look at the lack of change over the last several thousand years due to pussyfooting around the issue. I’m not an activist, but I don’t sit on my ass and wait for other people to save me while my self-serving, anti-woman actions end up hurting other women. I have some serious burdens that a lot of women don’t have, but I still take responsibility for my impact. And other women are in a better position to make positive change. But they don’t. So what the fuck?
But I couldn’t help it today. I just can’t fucking stand violent men getting away with their privileged bullshit. I came across the standard domestic abuse scenario on my way to the subway station. Two university students outside the gates of my school. The boy, twice the size of his girlfriend and much larger than me as well and less than half my age, had pulled her to the side of the sidewalk and had the ‘spiral fracture grip’ on her forearm that you see with sooooo many domestic abuse situations. He was lambasting her for something – probably he was jealous that she was talking to a friend or she didn’t wear the right skirt or something serious like that. She had assumed the submissive, childlike, head down pose that is recognizable across all cultures as ‘beaten, broken, abused woman’. It must have been the androcidal impulse in me that increases as the weather gets hotter. Men rape more in hot temperatures. I feel the urge to kill rapists much more in the summer. Go figure. But anyhow, I stopped and yelled, “GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF HER!” Didn’t even register to him. He was focused on his bitch. I moved more into his line of vision (I was walking on the road, not the sidewalk), and repeated my command. He turned to me in hatred and yelled, “FUCK YOU!” I yelled ‘fuck you’ back, but it was futile. He is the big man. And Chinese. So he has racism and sexism backing up his claim to power. I am just a white whore. Like an insect. My word means nothing. I have no power as a woman and especially as a white woman – a member of a powerless racial minority with a score of zero on the Oppressor Triangle™. He dismissed me with barely a look and returned to sexually abusing his girlfriend.
I walked on, androcide in my heart. There was nothing I could do. Not even the police would be interested in this kind of stuff. I know this well. I was dismissed before when I reported a black rapist racially profiling me, stalking me and demanding to come to my apartment to fuck (rape) me on our Chinese campus. My teaching liaison refused to contact the police. Rape and sexual assault are not matters for the police. I’ll be writing about China and its annoying mantra/euphemism on ‘harmony’ soon. Point is that women have no voice, no rights in China. But who are we kidding, women have no voice and no rights anywhere. In fact, it is getting worse for us in countries where women are supposedly ‘free’ (according to rapists, I mean men).
I managed to cool down some, gradually, but with racism and misogyny in full force over this past week, I’m having a very serious “I hate China” week and I am fantasizing non-stop of ramming chopsticks into male eye sockets. It brings me a little peace to think about it, but the fact that rapists aren’t dying in reality leaves me unsatisfied and frustrated.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Story Ending Never 
You must be logged in to post a comment.