This post consists of some background to my most recent survey on rape, which is still open to participants (click the button below):
The survey was designed to explore people’s understanding of and beliefs about rape. The content of the survey was drawn from collected data and research, a wide range of reported personal experiences, news stories, and myths and propaganda propagated through various entertainment outlets. If you plan to take the survey – and it would be immensely appreciated if you did – please click through before reading further. My personal views are not important to the survey, and I don’t wish them to colour participant responses.
After years of thinking and examination of the number one influence on and limitation to my existence as a girl first, and later, a woman, I have to conclude that any discussion or consideration of rape must begin with a discussion of language. Indeed, any thinking on hierarchy, power dynamics or control mechanisms (which is where rape finds its roots) must take into account the role of language.
Humans vs. All Other Creatures
In considering the differences between humans and other mammals or any creature for that matter, there are some significant differences that set us apart. And note that this is in no way a comment that humans are superior to animals, as I don’t believe that for a second. Each species has its strengths and weaknesses, which makes hierarchy-development a rather stupid and pointless endeavour. In considering humans, language and the capacity for deep and complex self-awareness set them apart from all other living things on earth. Other creatures may have systems of communication and a limited ability to reflect on simple behaviours, but none rivals human capacity. That is not a judgment, just a fact. Dolphins don’t conjugate verbs and chimpanzees don’t chronically and masochistically self-sabotage or even commit suicide over lack of purpose or meaning in life. Non-humans also don’t develop systems of ethics or morality – even misguided, faulty ones. These are uniquely human ‘achievements’ and are only three of many, many examples of the complexities of human language and self-awareness.
Humans are also the only species capable of malice. Now, note that I am not talking about survival instincts. Men and silly women who defend men often argue that male violence is just a reflection of the instinct to survive and is comparable to the killing that any other species does. This is classic male logic designed specifically to try to justify violent male behaviour. Some of my Chinese male university students will state without blinking that we ‘live in a jungle’. Now, I do believe that males are naturally violent. They are wired for it. But as I’ve written before, as humans, we also have self-awareness, and it is this unique and incredible ability that allows humans to override violent impulses. But, as humans are also uniquely malicious creatures, instinct and deliberate cruelty frequently play off each other. No creature other than the human (male) kills for pleasure. And no creature other than the human (male) tortures other living things. There is no evolutionary or ‘survival’ purpose for killing for pleasure or for torturing. I’ve met a lot of men who try to argue with seriously twisted logic that there is a need for these things. This is when I back away, and wish I had a weapon at the ready in order to do like all other creatures do out of instinct – remove a dangerous threat to one’s survival. But, alas, human females are the only creatures on earth who are NOT allowed to defend themselves.
And this is where language enters the scene.
The Role of Language in Power, Control and Hierarchy
The pen is mightier than the sword.
Language is one of human’s oldest tools. Like all tools, it can be a beautiful mechanism or system used to do wonderful things and inspire the best in all of us. But like all tools, it can also be used to destroy everything in its path. In the hands of men, language is frequently used to express male ‘love’ and ‘creativity’, which as most women eventually come to find out, are dangerous things and not at all what female love and creativity are.
As human males have come to realize, weapons alone will not get you sustainable power. Sure, you can overwhelm a perceived enemy, but it is really difficult to maintain that victory for any period of time without a much more powerful weapon. That weapon is language. Language is, in fact, a much more powerful weapon than any ‘sword’. But they work together. Just as it is hard to sustain control with only swords, it is also difficult to gain and keep power with only words. We’ve all heard that common description of successful evil dynamic duos: ‘You have the brawn and I have the brains’ (cue the Pet Shop Boys here…). Well, that is an apt description of the sword and the pen. Employ the brute force, overwhelm the enemy, enact the mindfuckery of the brutalized population that only language can achieve (e.g., “War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.”), and then all future brutality just becomes an accepted part of the system. Those few who see beyond the language mechanisms and refuse to believe have no leg to stand on, and find themselves very much alone and often questioning their own sanity.
Whoever Controls Language Controls the World
As a tool and building block of control and power, it is safe to say that if you aspire to megalomaniac status, you need to master language. I don’t mean that you should learn to speak several languages. I mean you need to learn how to use language to manipulate people and situations, and to obscure facts. You need to weaponize language. You need to see where language has its greatest influence. My Oppressor Triangle discusses a few major centres of influence, but there are other arenas. Language has had its greatest influence in the areas of politics, law, economics, academia, and the health care system (industry). These areas don’t function separately. There is much overlap. The language enacted in the political sphere can and does affect all other spheres of power, for example.
The question becomes: who controls language? And the answer is: men. Men have always controlled language. And they control it as much today as they have in the past. It’s not a race thing, as much as some people might wish it to be so. It is a MALE thing. If you are a big picture thinker, if you think internationally across time and place – and really, you have to be if you are ever to hope of ending oppression – you have to accept the truth that males control language, and as a result, they control everything. If you get bogged down on other group affiliations, you’ll change nothing. Only the truth can set you (and everyone else) free.
How do we know that males control language, and as a result, the world? It’s pretty easy. You have to take an overarching look at lifestyle and living conditions and determine who overwhelmingly benefits and who overwhelmingly is denied choices and freedoms. Look at any country. It is the same no matter which country you look at and no matter which race is being considered. Who is the poorest group? Females. Look at any field of research: who is studied meticulously and who benefits from the research? Males. Look at entertainment in any country. Who makes the most money, and who is hired based on talent rather than physical attributes? Males. Who is human trafficked most often? Females. Whose social justice complaints actually make progress? Males of all races and orientations. Who receives the poorest health care, and the most needless and harmful surgeries? Females. Who has been hurt most by the field of psychiatry? Females. Whose bodies and decisions about bodies are controlled by the state and institutions like religion and marriage? Females. Who is barred from politics, employment, education, and safety on a regular basis? Females.
And more. So much more.
There are data to back up each of these. Easy to find. Google, government web sites, academic journals. I’m not doing that here. This is not an academic journal article. And it is tedious to state and restate everything that has been said by women a million times before. What I find important here is the theory that it is language and the control of language that facilitates control on every other level.
Language and Rape
Men have been raping, torturing and killing women since they realized they could. It has nothing to do with evolution or survival. Any man who tells you that it does is dangerous and you should get away from him before he hurts you.
Male control of language has had its greatest impact on the one thing that has allowed them to maintain control over women. Rape. Without rape, men don’t have a hold over women. Control the language surrounding rape, and you control the crime itself – or whether it is even considered a crime, or who can commit it, or who is responsible, or who can be raped. We know that women have no power, and certainly have no control over language, because rape is so rampant and that they are on the receiving end with little ability to avoid it or seek justice for it.
It is only relatively recently that rape was even considered a crime, and only extremely recently that rape was considered to be a form of torture. In Western cultures, the rape of a woman was considered to be a crime against the man who owned her. And it could only be committed by a male who did not own her. She herself, as a rape victim, was deemed dirtied, rendered an embarrassment, and often tossed out like so much garbage from family and community. Even today, rape victims often end up in prostitution or suffering from mental health problems that leave them unable to self-actualize, let alone take care of themselves properly. The propaganda and brainwashing campaign that all societies provide to women to get them to accept rape as reality, as normal, often succeeds in neutralizing female protest to unlivable conditions. Rape is a crucial part of Western entertainment – drama as well as comedy – although Western men are not alone in their enjoyment of female torture. Many women will suppress their experiences or deny that rape even happened. Rape victims who don’t follow the rules are often punished by society, and frequently by other women who prefer to lash out at other women than to name the real problem.
In non-Western countries, rape has gone through equally horrible control by men. In some countries, raping girl children isn’t considered rape. Elsewhere, rape cannot occur within a marriage or family. In others, rape has only occurred if a woman can get a handful of male witnesses to support her claim. No, women aren’t in control of language at all. Anywhere in the world. I mean, no woman would ever set up the linguistic, social and legal hoops/barriers to proving rape that are currently in place in every corner of the earth. We aren’t that masochistic or stupid of our own free will.
Men Can Be Raped, Toooooooo!
Likely, in response to women calling more attention to rape and violence against women, men retaliated. Men always retaliate. They are allowed. There are always repercussions to women gaining even an ounce of freedom or power or justice. And language is always at the centre of any retaliation. And there is always violence to back it up.
So recently, men decided to change the language surrounding rape. They decided that rape no longer meant ‘male forcibly entering a female through her vagina using his dick’. Suddenly, males could be raped! And further, women could be rapists!
These revelations served a very, very important purpose. You see, if you can show that a crime or negative circumstance ALSO affects men, it is no longer a sex-based inequality or a hate crime. Men no longer are forced to be held responsible. Men are no longer predators. They are no longer deficient in some way. If you can show that they suffer tooooo or that women are doing the same evil deeds tooooo, then men no longer will be examined as the sole source of a major problem or epidemic. Once males can name themselves as victims, all focus can ‘justifiably’ be removed from women and recentred on men and boys. All we need is one male victim to negate the suffering of millions of women. And all we need is one female predator to negate the predation of millions of males. That is the male control of language at work. Change one word or one definition, and you can change the lives of millions. Control is regained.
Predictably, women got on board with the rebranding of rape, as they usually do when males find new ways to name themselves as victims, to detract from female victims, and to blame women for something. Women are usually the first ones on board with helping men hurt women. And men are experts at painting themselves as victims and martyrs.
Rape, in the minds of many, now also means a woman ‘forces’ a male to pop a boner and stick it to her. And strangely, rape now also means a dick forcibly entering an anus. But the thing is this, even if the former is forced, it is not rape. It may be a sexual assault, and if so, it needs to have its own label. The latter is NOT RAPE. It actually already has its own label. It is called forcible sodomy. Women are also frequently forcibly sodomized by men, more often than men are forcibly sodomized by men, and often in addition to being raped. But ignoring and/or broadening existing definitions has achieved its goal. We’ve taken the focus off what men do to women. And sex crimes are no longer seen primarily as the domain of male perps. Congratulations men and the dangerous women who support them.
Letting Victims Define Crimes
I wrote a short piece in the past on the problem of letting perpetrators define their crimes. Interestingly, it is only with male violence against women that this is allowed. As in my example in that previous post demonstrates, it sounds ridiculous say, to allow a thief to define his crime. But we don’t bat an eye when men get to define crimes against female bodies.
Women need to be allowed to define the crimes against them. As it is, so many victims fall through the cracks because currently, men define what happens to women. Men control women’s and girls’ bodies, and that is a serious issue.
There are several problems with how we deal with rape and sexual assault – besides our unwillingness to name men as the primary perpetrators of sex crimes and the sole perpetrators of rape. One is that we don’t have enough clearly defined categories of crimes. We also have too many barriers to victims coming forward. And finally, our punishment system is inadequate and doesn’t take into account that a) crimes against women are hate crimes, and b) men who commit sex crimes are more likely to commit again than any other type of criminal, even after being ‘punished’ (i.e., no man ever, ever, ever rapes once). Personally, I want all rape, sexual assault, torture and murder of women/girls by men punished by death. This has nothing to do with deterrence (which we know doesn’t work), or revenge (which is a male ‘logic’ thing), but everything to do with protecting future victims. It does not make sense that victims and potential victims have fewer rights and considerations and access to safety than hate-crime-sex criminals. In other words, only a dead rapist can’t rape again.
Other things to consider:
- Many women don’t report rape if their attacker is seen as ‘at risk’ or ‘vulnerable’. This includes non-white men, immigrant men, homeless men, disabled men, unemployed men, etc. It is a mixture of fear and compassion that drives women to negate their victimhood and protect their attacker.
- The burden of proof should be on the perpetrators, not the victims. Men should have to prove that they did not rape. In no other crime is the burden of proof on the victim. This exists ONLY because rape is a sex-specific hate crime committed by MEN against WOMEN, where males, who are in control of language, get to define the crimes they commit. Rape is the only crime where all the perps are male and all the victims are female. And men don’t want to take responsibility or stop raping. This needs to change.
- Consent has always been a problematic issue. It is rooted in property disputes. Bodies should not be seen as property. Further, in no place on earth do women come to the table on equal footing with men, and as such, they cannot give free and equal consent in any agreement with a male.
- Orgasms are erroneously seen as evidence of consent thanks to 2-dimensional male thinking on sex. Females are trained from birth to see servitude as a duty and a pleasurable activity. Orgasm has nothing to do with acceptance or lack of coercion.
- Many people believe that rape must involve weapons or threat of bodily harm in order to be considered rape. I’d argue that most rape is of the coercive or manipulative variety. I’d bet all of Donald Trump’s money that almost all women have ‘sex’ with the men in their lives (including husbands) because they fear abandonment, rejection, cheating, emotional and physical beatings, etc. All women know on some level that male love can turn on a dime if they don’t live up to the constantly changing expectations.
- Male children are born with a weapon – their penises. They learn about how to weaponize their dicks early in life thanks to parents, television/film, porn, and school. I’d argue that if they are using their dicks as weapons, then they need to be treated as dangerous. Sex predators never stop. I don’t have a problem with killing sex predators who are children – innocent child, my ass. And I also have no problem with holding mothers and fathers responsible for the crimes of their boy children. Rape destroys girls’ lives. No girl ever ‘gets over it’. I know I’m nearly alone in wanting boy sex predators eliminated from existence, but you’re deluded if you think predators are ‘born’ in adulthood out of nothing.
- I think statutory rape needs to be rethought. It’s not that I believe that girls are capable of free and equal consent with a boy the same age. No female of any age is ever on equal footing with a male of any age. This one is a hard one for me though. It saddens me that children are fucking. I truly wish girls were kept separate from boys for the duration of their childhoods so as not to have opportunities, educations and futures destroyed by the straight mandate and public school crash course in fuckholery and blowjobbery. One final note: Adult males who fuck girl children and teenagers need to be shot. Period.
- ‘Sex workers’ / porn actresses – paid sex is rape as far as I’m concerned. There is a lot of disagreement on this. And people get mighty pissed when a feminist suggests that sex work is abuse, not work. Abused people often lash out and get defensive when they feel attacked (even if they are not being attacked, but rather someone is trying to help them). All I can say is that women would not sell their bodies if men didn’t exist. It is almost always done out of desperation and/or resulting from childhood sex abuse. These are the conditions that make rape easy peasy to dress up as legit in a capitalist, male-serving society.
- Drugs and alcohol are convenient get-out-of-jail cards for men, and eternal damners of women. It is no coincidence that males joke about helping women relax with a drink. ‘No inhibitions’ is just man-speak for ‘no credible defense’ in a rape trial.
This really is a huge issue. So much more could be written. But it is some background to my survey. Again, if you wish to participate and let your thoughts be known, it would be very much appreciated. The link to the survey is below.
There isn’t a single culture on this earth where males don’t lust after and pursue the objectification, assault, and rape of little girls. Pedophelia is built into all religions, condoned by all systems of government, and is practised by all racial and ethnic groups in every country in the world. It has been practised, often in a publicly sanctioned way, since time began. I’ve written before that there really is no such thing in males or females as natural ‘heterosexuality’. I’d extend that, in males, to human-oriented sexuality. Males are attracted to anything that they can envision will accommodate their dicks. It can be a living thing or an inanimate object. It can be natural or man-made. It can be human or animal. And among humans, there really is no difference for men between adults and children except where lame attempts have been made to set up guidelines on which humans can be raped by men with impunity. All this is to say that all men have a variety of lusts in them, including towards children (especially girl children). It’s just that some men hide these lusts better than others, and some are more successfully conditioned to react negatively to children as sexual stimuli. Conditioning doesn’t erase pedophilic tendencies, mind you.
Every culture on the planet has a pedophilic underbelly and often, an above-ground set of bizarre, but unquestioned, rituals, designed to prepare girl children for use by males of all ages. And that same system reinforces this brainwashing by putting into the heads of adult women that their value increases if they, too, pursue youthful appearances and behaviours. Some rituals are common across time and place, but each culture has its set of weird shit that is forced upon women and girls to prepare them for use by males. And as adult females pursue their return to a ‘jail bait’ state, they further serve as examples to girls. And sad to say, but mothers are the number one enforcers of female slave behaviour in their daughters. Very few girls escape having an infantilized and acquiescing sex slave as a role model in their childhood homes.
It is no coincidence that feminization goes hand in hand with infantilization. Feminization has nothing to do with this fabled ‘sexual power’ that men tell us we have (the power to inspire boners). No, sexual power is held solely by men – it is the power to rape, among other male sexual privileges. Rather, feminization is the reduction of a female to a powerless, submissive, sexualized, objectified state. Infantilization is the reduction of a person to a powerless, submissive, child-like state. In females, they are essentially the same thing, and you only need to do one to make the other easier to achieve. An infantilized adult woman would seem more feminine. And a feminized adult woman would seem more infantilized. Imagine how difficult it is to infantilize a butch lesbian, for example – it’s difficult because she is not feminizing herself or allowing anyone to feminize her. The woman who cannot be infantilized / feminized is very threatening to men and women who serve men. She refuses to be owned.
[A note on emasculation. ‘Emasculation’ – which is something men complain about, but really isn’t a thing – is the male reaction to a woman who challenges his perceived right to dominate and/or rape women. Men can only be ’emasculated’ if they believe they are naturally superior to women and believe they can do what they want to them with impunity. So, you see, it really isn’t a serious thing at all, but the whining of insecure and unintelligent males who have enjoyed an enormous amount of privilege in their lives. There is no equivalent to emasculation for women. Women have never had any kind of power. The closest would be feminization/infantilization, which is more of an ensuring that power is never achieved rather than a taking away of (non-existent) power. Emasculation is actually a good thing for men – and the entire world – and really, should be called ‘humanization’ – the stripping of men’s right to threaten, control, rape, and kill women with impunity – a process that makes males more human.] For more on the lack of true equivalent to emasculation when it comes to women, see this post.
The feminization and infantilization of women all over the world is almost ubiquitously accepted by females, so effective has the brainwashing program been. Women don’t question the strange and cruel rituals they are forced to engage in, and often serve as on-the-ground enforcers for children and non-conforming, rebel-women, thus lessening the work men have to put into controlling the female population. All practices are designed, often by women themselves in a subconscious effort to make themselves more appealingly rapeable to pedophiles. That is key to remember. All feminization practices all over the world are designed to make women seem like fuckable children, the preferred human targets for men. Confident, strong, independent, adult women don’t tend to fall so easily for male nonsense and tend to distance themselves from male control. There is no appeal to men in this kind of person. Children, on the other hand, aside from their child bodies, which are incomprehensibly attractive to males (honestly, I can’t even get into the head of a generic male in order to understand their universal pedophilic lusts), children are naive, inexperienced, and easy to manipulate psychologically and intellectually. These characteristics are appealing to men, in general.
So what do women do to make themselves more appealing to rapists? I don’t have enough space here to discuss the range of rituals carried out in different countries, but I’ll offer a few up.
In China, where I have years of experience, I notice that it is customary for women to refer to themselves as ‘girls’. In university classrooms, males will refer to themselves as men, but their same-age female classmates will be ‘girls’. If I call them ‘women’, everybody gets weirded out. It has been explained to me that that is what males want. They want a female who acts like a girl. And after years of watching predictable and repetitive interactions between dating and married couples here, I understand the dance well. Females are required to be literally physically led around by males. They are not to have preferences. They are required to sulk, and pout, and cry, and sit silently alternating with throwing infantile temper tantrums when something is inevitably done wrong by the male in the relationship. They act very much like children, in other words. Women are required to give little slaps of protest to the arms of their boyfriends or husbands when said dude is messing around. They are required to let deficient males cheat off them in class and then to accept the inevitable rewarding of these same incompetent males with better jobs, more opportunities and higher pay. Chinese women are completely infantilized. And when they refuse to act like children – especially in the workplace – they are called ‘dragon ladies’.
I was also treated to a charming relating of a Chinese myth by one of my local friends. He was telling me that some people believe that daughters are actually former lovers of their fathers in a past life. He thought it was a cute and sweet story. I felt revolted and saw an open door for rationalizing incestuous pedophilia. I don’t know how common this belief actually is. But it is creepy as hell and an example of one of the many myths men around the world design in order to create justifications for the abuse of female children and adults.
We have infantilizing, pedophilic rituals in the West as well. One prime example is the tortuous and irrational practice of removing body hair from female bodies. Almost all Western women cling to this practice and angrily protest and relentlessly attack brave and strong women who refuse to submit to this idiocy. The practice is becoming worse and more barbaric with new techniques and harsher standards. More and more hair has been stripped from women’s bodies – there is practically nothing left on women these days. And the only explanation that makes sense for how this all started is that it has to do with trying to obtain a child-like body. Little girls have almost no hair on their bodies. Men like to rape and objectify little girls. But how did this horrific ritual start? How did we get from allowing girls to grow naturally into adult women to forcing women to believe their naturally maturing bodies were gross or unnatural or dirty? I can only imagine that male pedophilia is at its root. Women either got jealous (probably) or wanted to distract their husbands from raping their daughters (um, possibly), and decided that instead of standing up and saying ‘fuck off!’, they would distract the pedophiles and try to bring them back to the path of woman-rape. I can’t imagine any other reason for this practice’s origin that makes sense. All irrational female behaviour and thought patterns are directly caused by male control, rape, and destruction. Sorry dudes, women don’t irrationally try to destroy themselves for the hell of it. It is because of men. And for some reason, women think it makes more sense to go along with self-destruction than to fight.
Western marital name-changing is also an infantilizing ritual done only to women. Erasing a woman’s human identity and branding her with the mark of her husband just like a child or livestock is another way in which women are denied any kind of power. It has been said many times that there is power in a name. And it makes sense that any power that may come from that might be denied a woman. Men and women alike scoff at the idea that it is a big deal for a woman to change her name. But suggest to a man that he take a wife’s name, or even better, accidentally call a man by his wife’s name (if she keeps her surname), and you’ll find out just what a big deal it is. I remember witnessing a never-ending and irrationally blown-out-of-proportion rant by my left-wing, liberal, highly educated father one time when he answered the phone and was called his wife’s name by a telemarketer. It was like he had received a death threat, given the way he reacted to what was an innocent mistake. See, marital name change IS a big deal and it serves to infantilize women and to reinforce that they are the sexual property of their master-husband.
Another example that is present in many cultures in the world is that of beauty pageants. There is an increasing interest in entering young girls into pageants and forcing sexuality and objectification on them in very blatant ways. It is a messed up world of making little girls look and act more like adult women. We are at a point where little girls and women are clearly being told they are one and the same. Fuck objects. But, the younger, the better. It is truly horrifying.
Likely, you can think of specific examples of pedophelia support in your own life / culture. Perhaps (likely), you even do things yourself that support pedophelia through the infantilizing of yourself, your female offspring, and/or the women around you. All feminization serves to infantilize women, and remember that all infantilization of adult women is rooted in men’s desire for children. Controllable, rapeable, infantilized women are the closest thing today’s men can legally get to children. And women are deeply invested in keeping men raping them, and will go to great lengths to makes themselves seem as young as possible. Like in my other posts on enforced heterosexuality (and enforced sexuality), I truly believe that men are not specifically designed to fuck women. They get turned on by anything and everything, and if it comes to humans, little girls are often much more appealing than less naive and harder-to-control adult women. Ask yourself if you really, truly want to know exactly how large the international, underground and deep-web pedo-porn rings are. And whether your hubbies and boyfriends and fathers and sons are jerking off to pics and vids of children. Yeah, you might not want to know…
I don’t celebrate Christmas. The Chinese people around me can’t understand it because they don’t give a shit about understanding other people’s cultures, preferring instead, to apply stereotypes and to force me to fit into the box they have have for us non-Chinese. A lot of Western people don’t celebrate the holiday, in fact. I’m one of them. I’m an atheist (another thing the Chinese can’t wrap their heads around), and I am not a capitalist (which most Chinese people are and can’t understand that I’m not). The holiday mostly makes me uncomfortable due to the religious and materialistic bullshit. Luckily, living in China as I do, I’m almost always working and often forget when the actual day arrives.
Despite that, I made up a wish list for Ms. Claus, Santa’s asexual (or possibly lesbian) daughter. I’m hoping she’ll put the old fucker into an old folks’ home and take over the holiday with the aim to dismantle the whole thing. I write this list knowing that not a single one of them is possible. You can’t buy my wishes like you can the latest iPhone. They will never happen. Women – even feminists – aren’t interested in real change, especially since real change can’t happen through reasoning with men. I am really starting to think that people like misery; they like to have stuff to complain about. People like to hate and blame others – especially those who are most convenient and easiest to take down. No one is interested in addressing the real problems or the people with real power (men of all colours and ethnicities and religions). Meh, here’s the list anyways. I’m winding down as I have been since the summer. It’s really hard to give a shit anymore when you can’t find women who are serious about reality, who don’t include men in feminism, and who are willing to call a spade a spade…
- I wish that white women would stop hating themselves so much; stop listening to what white men, non-white-men, and non-white women tell them to feel and do and think and say; and above all, stop telling other white women how to do white female slavery correctly. You wanna be a slave, well go for it. But fuck off telling me to accept victimization by the entire GD world because I deserve it because of the colour of my skin.
- I wish that all people would understand that only women can be raped. Only by men. Other types of sexual assault are just that – other types of sexual assault. Trannie-dudes can’t be raped. Non-trannie dudes can’t be raped. Lesbians can’t rape women. New, correct definitions created by women are needed for the unfortunately wide range of shitty forced sex acts that are done to (mostly) women and girls. Definitions that serve the actual victims and not the perpetrators.
- I wish that trannie-dudes would shut the fuck up. Do I need to say more? They don’t need to die in a fire. Just shut. the fuck. up. Oh, and stay out of women’s space. Go get some help. The world is your oyster. You’re men!!! Accept it!
- I wish feminists would espouse a non-breeding agenda. Having baybees is not a feminist act. We have enough goddamn people in the world. Plus, breeding is the single most selfish and self-serving act one can commit, and breeding in this world serves to disastrously hurt the rights and status of those women who bravely and unselfishly choose not to breed for the good of humankind, and the environment, and all the other species on the planet who suffer because humans are stupid and gross. If you have laydee-feels, my dear feminists, then adopt one of the many, many unwanted children that already exist in the world. Seriously. There are many. Too many.
- I wish that non-white people, especially women, would stop blaming white women for every shitty thing happening in their lives. Guess what? White chicks – especially the single, childless, and asexual or lesbian ones – have shittier or equally shitty lives. They did not cause whatever is happening to you. The ‘rich white woman’ is an oh-so-convenient trope meant to encourage racial and misogynist hatred, to separate women, and to create false narratives and myths. And personally, I know more rich non-white women than white women, so what the fuck? Why aren’t they held responsible for anything? In addition, it is not white women’s job to fix your problems. White women have little to no power in this world. Never have. Quite the opposite, in fact. Instead, blame men, especially those of your racial group, closest to home. The ones raping you and eroding your self-esteem and forcing pregnancy on you in the name of love. The ones you blindly serve and support unconditionally while trying to destroy people who DON’T want to enslave you, but who desperately want you to be free to self-actualize as intelligent, creative beings.
- I wish heterosexual women would stop trying to hurt, use, discard, shame and one-up non-straight women..
- I wish everyone would stop coddling rapey and violent and misogynist men of religion and colour. Being a member of a ‘minority’ group in no way, shape or form, means that they don’t have any power or that they give a shit about other crapped-upon groups (i.e., women). ALL men have power over ALL women. I’ve been assaulted by more men of colour than white men through my life – even in places where there are more whites than anything else. No white chick with her liberal agenda will EVER convince me that white men are worse than any other group. That kind of naive, blinkered, cookie-seeking thinking is gonna get you raped, dummies. Been there, done that. Been raped. Many times.
- I wish a single, childless woman could afford to support herself and not have to constantly worry about what she’ll do when she’s old and can’t support herself.
- I wish old women were respected and were allowed to age and look old. Like men are!
- I wish the world didn’t have such a frightened, psycho need to control the life and death of other people, while at the same time, not giving a shit about quality of life. All people capable of making plans for their future should be able to choose the time and method of their death without the interference of a population that truly doesn’t give a shit about them despite their faux-impassioned protests about the sanctity of life. Such hypocritical bullshit.
- (Okay, not an even 10.) I wish women could go anywhere at any time and not have to worry about what men will (not ‘might’) do to them.
Happy Christmas or whatever you do at the end of the month.
I swear I have a larger male readership than a female one. My most popular post is the one I wrote about the Muslim rapist, and most of the search terms that bring (men) people to my site involve porn, Arabs, blacks and Muslims raping white women, and similar concepts. Apparently, men love the idea of white women getting what’s coming to them – and they want to see it – because white women are hated more than most, I suppose. This blog has also made it onto a few hate sites set up by men – you know the kind of dinkus I’m talking about – the two-brain-celled rapists who like to call themselves ‘rational’ (LOL!) so that they can dismiss threatening, reality-based feminist writings. Banal, boring, funny if it weren’t backed by very real violence. Men hate women – what’s new? So, to celebrate my male readership, I devote this next post to them and their tiny, whiny male egos and the bottomless jealousy that goes with it. Love you, boys 😉
One day in school, when I was in my early teens, the teacher gave our class some busy work in the form of math problems so as to leave the classroom for some teacherly business. I got to work. What can I say? I love math problems. But of course, boys don’t do well when unsupervised. I firmly believe in sex-segregated education. Girls just don’t ‘devolve’ when the tiniest of opportunities arise. Indeed, my male college students can barely handle sitting, paying attention and learning in a supervised classroom. Based on my extensive experience in multiple countries, I think males aren’t really cut out for education (probably better suited to manual labour, imo). So, anyhow, upon my high school math teacher leaving the room all those years ago, of course one of the douchebags sitting near me whipped out a pack of cards and started building a house. It stole my attention away from what, in my opinion, was much more fun and productive, but mostly because all I could think about doing was letting him make some significant progress only later to lean in and blow the fucking thing down. But I hadn’t yet become a bitch♥ at that point, so I let him be and went back to my math party.
♥ Defined by society at large as ‘a woman who interferes with or even just points out the rules governing male privilege’. Note this is not the only definition of ‘bitch’, and it certainly isn’t mine. That is for another post.
Now, this post isn’t about education or math problems or even nifty things to do with a pack of playing cards. It is about fragile, unnatural, male systems that can easily be blown down if we can see past whatever distractions and roadblocks have been set up to protect them.
In order to have this discussion, I need to talk a bit about the natural and unnatural. Determining what is natural and what is unnatural has always been a confusing thing for us humans. Males define things and force females to believe them. And males have never, despite their insistence, been rational beings. So, for now, fuck the male definitions. I like to use behavioural evidence to suggest reality in many situations. So here, a general rule of thumb can help us discern the difference.
The more human interference that is required to force something to happen or exist, the more unnatural that something is.
And the converse:
The more human interference that is required to prevent something from happening or existing, the more natural that something is.
We need some neutral examples first, before I show myself to be the bitch♥ that I am.
Forcing the Unnatural. Think of dams. Men have destroyed entire geographical areas by building self-serving, short-sighted dam projects. Proponents have called them “the cornerstone in the development and management of water resources development of a river basin“, but really, any male can put a positive spin on even the worst things on the planet. Just listen to them. They mansplain all the time about how destruction = progress. In a more rational (i.e., non-male) world, one would always to do a cost benefit analysis (or more basically, a pros and cons list), and actually pay attention to what a cost is. The pros of a dam are completely human-centric – forced water supply, flood control, irrigation, navigation, sedimentation control, and hydropower – and are designed to serve human gluttony and laziness and the rape agenda of men (specifically, over-breeding and over-population due to enforced heterosexuality). But the negatives of such an unnatural act as creating a dam are not really worth what is gained. Dam projects, especially large ones, destroy local and not so local environments by causing widespread erosion, deepening ground water tables, decimated complex ecosystems, extinction of species, and encouraged migration of predatory humans to areas where high-volume human life is not naturally sustainable. Dams are not natural and they force conditions that are not natural with catastrophic consequences, many of which aren’t immediately seen. But males gleefully call this kind of stuff ‘progress’ and ‘achievement’.
Preventing the Natural. Think of what we call ‘weeds’. Weed is a relative term. Kind of like calling a woman ‘crazy’ when she opposes something men are doing. Unlike women, weeds are insusceptible to the variety of punishment women are given, and require much more effort to control as they can grow quickly and take over an area where humans are trying to grow something unnaturally. So, a weed is basically a normal plant that some human doesn’t want in his or her environment because it interferes with his or her agenda. Cyperus iria, for example, are weeds that Asians don’t want interfering with their rice fields. And dandelions are weeds that North Americans don’t want in their lawns or in their veggie gardens. (Note here that I’m not talking about invasive species that mostly arise due to humans fucking up the environment and opening the door to species that shouldn’t be there in the first place, but that take over once there.) Once a human male decides that something natural is inconvenient or gets in the way of a selfish human need or desire, it is labelled as bad, evil, crazy, etc., and most importantly — unnatural. And it is eradicated. Often the eradication causes further problems (see this post where male solutions are, in fact, ways to create more problems and justify male existence). With weeds, we’ve got a whole host of herbicides that were created and that wreak more havoc than just destroying innocent plants.
Unnatural Systems Are Fragile Systems
One thing you might notice about forcing the unnatural and suppressing the natural is that it is really hard to maintain their constant forced or suppressed state, and there are usually negative repercussions for not allowing nature to do what it is supposed to do. [*Note that what men call ‘natural’ is usually quite the opposite. Again, men define things to serve their agenda.*] Dams need constant maintenance and we are even now still learning about the negative impacts of individual massive dam projects. And weeds? They aren’t happy to stay away. You get rid of them once, and they come right back. Weeding, as a chore, is a constant thing – the bane of a gardener’s life besides natural pests and unpredictable weather.
But let’s think about the natural and unnatural on a level of human control. Men control and poison every level of life in the name of power and their own insecurity. All living things fall under his purview. And one of his favourite things to control is the lives of women. There is much more sadistic pleasure to be had from controlling the life, behaviour and body of a woman than there is from weeding a garden, doncha know.
Here’s the thing about controlling human life, though. All unnatural systems require violence and hard core propaganda to force them to remain in existence. I mean, all forced unnatural systems and all suppressed natural things require a level of violence, but when it comes to human control, there is one variable of complication. Unlike weeds, humans can and do fight back when they are backed into a corner. Humans, especially women, also generally respond well to violence and threats. So in order to force women to do unnatural things or live in unnatural ways, they must be threatened with violence. The threat must be constant, reinforced with examples of the threat coming true, and the threats and violence must be bolstered by all sorts of mythology, idealizations, romanticization, slogans, cautionary tales, and various other punishments for curiosity, boundary-testing and outright deviation or rejection of the control. Wonder whether a human system, regardless of culture, is natural or unnatural? Look at what holds that system in place. Are people punished in some way (socially, economically, physically, sexually, legally, etc) for deviating? Is one group of people treated differently than another group in the same system? Is fear a massive component in the compliance of at least one group involved in the system? Do the rules make sense for everyone if you actually delve beneath the surface and question them? How much resistance do you get from adherents if you question their devotion to the system?
These systems might seem rather tried and true. Rooted in hundreds or thousands of years of history. In fact, many people within the system will cite the long history of a system as proof that ‘it works’. But in actual fact, unnatural systems are quite fragile things. If you take away the many support beams (propaganda, violence, punishment for bad behaviour, etc), the system falls apart. Like a house of cards. Like a house of straw. Without the violence and related support, the system doesn’t work. Isn’t meant to work. Cannot work.
Heterosexuality and the Control of Women: A Fragile System
Women have been controlled by men for thousands of years. Unlike what most people will say, it is not natural. Heterosexuality, which I have posited is not natural at all (both in Part I and Part II), is in fact an unnatural and fragile system that has been forced and is enforced through sustained violence and the threat of violence and a shitload of propaganda. It fails all the tests of what is natural.
- Are people punished in some way (socially, economically, physically, sexually, legally, etc) for deviating? YES
- Is one group of people treated differently than another group in the same system? YES
- Is fear a massive component in the compliance of at least one group involved in the system? YES
- Do the rules make sense for everyone if you actually delve beneath the surface and question them? NO
- How much resistance do you get from adherents if you question their devotion to the system? TONS (for example, I’ve written about some of women’s coping mechanisms here, but there are so many more )
If the violence were taken away. If the threat of violence were taken away. If women were allowed to deprogram and detoxify. If the complex and seriously impressive propaganda machine were shut down, there would be no heterosexuality. No female slavery. The male system, which runs on indentured female energy and service, would collapse. Men certainly won’t allow that. And most women are too brainwashed and cock-whipped to allow that collapse and their ensuing freedom. Freedom can seem very threatening when it is, as yet, undefined.
Some men do realize how fragile their house of cards – their system of dominance – is and that their lives on easy street (compared to women’s) would end if they were to reject the system they currently uphold and reap the benefits of. But it would come undone so easily if even a fraction of the world’s women just stopped, took the actual cocks out of their mouths and other orifices, and proceeded to give the best blow job of their lives. A different kind of blow job. The one where our fragile male system of dominance blew down and away like I imagined that high school douchebag’s house of cards would have had I been less interested in math.
[Continued from “Why I Don’t Believe that Heterosexuality is the Default – Part I“]
With regard to behaviour, one of the hardest-to-define words out there is ‘sex’. Nevermind that people refuse to use the word in its proper indication to refer to biological female and biological male (preferring the more loaded and completely incorrect ‘gender’ instead). Yes, as it pertains to behaviour, no one really seems able to determine what constitutes ‘sex’, and as such, it is an international obsession and one of the most destructive and distracting preoccupations on the planet.
In general, we let men define everything. Sex is what men say it is. And everything men say and do is designed to serve themselves. And naturally, as a result, women are abused and men walk the planet able to do as they please. So, with few exceptions (i.e., the gay/lesbian community), men universally define sex as dick in cunt. It is one of the most dangerous and erroneous definitions ever designed by men in the history of their putrid reign, and every ill experienced on and by this planet results from it. The enslavement of half the population is only one consequence and that is what will be considered here (although if you want to get an idea of what the male definition of sex and enforced heterosexuality has wrought, see this post). But the effects on women specifically are manifold and impossible to describe in a single post here. As a taste, we see women sexually abused while men deny that ‘sex’ occurred (remember the sexual assault of Monica Lewinsky by former President Bill Clinton, and his insistence he “never had sex with that woman”). Although specifically defined by men, there is also an ungraspable quality to sex that allows men to slither through the needlessly murky areas of sexual assault. Rape and ‘sex’ are indistinguishable and determining whether a crime occurred becomes a matter of ‘he said, she said’ (with ‘he said’ always winning the day). Further, a man can rape your mouth, and not only was it not ‘sex’ (since your cunt wasn’t involved), but it is very hard to pin a sexual assault charge on men thanks to slippery definitions. And as for lesbians, they only have ‘sex’ if it occurs between two smokin’ hot women and they do it on camera for the consumption of men. So, sex is at the same time specifically and nebulously defined, but what is key is that the definition is completely within the control of men. And women pay for it. Always.
It also follows that because men are the ones allowed to define everything, including sex, they are also allowed to define and enforce sexuality. Having mandatory sexuality – also known as hard-wired attraction or preparedness for sexual activity – serves men. As I wrote about in the last post, men have enforced attraction between males and females despite this ‘heterosexuality’ not being a natural thing. It’s not natural or a forgone conclusion because men are attracted to pretty much everything, and women – well, we’ll get to that. Men are omnisexual – they’ll fuck anything – but heterosexuality serves the very important purpose of enslaving women and providing further free services and support (besides fucking) for men. Heterosexual, male-defined sex does very little for women other than to put them in harm’s way. As I said, if a vacuum could clean the floor, make sandwiches AND give blowjobs, men would be vacuumosexual.
In short, enforced heterosexuality is unnatural and contrived in order to suppress and subordinate half the population (females) in service to the other (males). This is easy to see but difficult to accept if you are trapped on the inside.
So let’s consider homosexuality. The vast majority of people, thanks to their programming via the straight mandate, view homosexuality as unnatural. And of the others, there is a variety of view points. Some think all sexuality is wired, so some people are born hetero and some are born homo. Others believe that it is a choice. Others still might see some mix of influences and may see sexuality as fluid through the lifespan. But there is one thing that all groups have in common – they believe sexuality is natural, necessary and a human right. If you happen to be a person who isn’t interested in pursuing any sort of sexuality (i.e., ‘asexual’), you are castigated by every one of these groups. Asexuality is not allowed and is deemed unnatural.
It is my contention that sexuality is completely contrived and agenda- and entitlement-driven. I think that all defined sexualities are choices and fuelled by pressure to be sexual beings and by falsely equating or linking love and sexual activity or sex drive. Even homosexuals (fags AND lesbians) are affected by heterosexual male thinking and believe that love is dependent upon fucking. If there is no sex or if the sex dissipates in a relationship, then the relationship is in trouble. No sex = no love = no relationship. Relationships only exist if there is a defined sexuality. And it is because of this that I believe that homosexuality is also enforced (i.e., if you are not straight then you MUST be gay). If you don’t choose a sexuality, then you will never find love or be loved. Queer nonsense doesn’t solve this problem, by the way.
Attraction and Sex Drive
I can imagine that even lesbians are reading this and having knee-jerk reactions. How dare I deny their sexuality? How dare I disparage sex? How dare I suggest that they are confused about what love means or what their relationships are based on? All I can say is keep yer shorts on. Or don’t. Who cares? I’m not saying that attraction doesn’t exist. And I’m not denying the existence of sex drives. I’m just saying that they both have been misinterpreted and too much importance has been placed on them. Our entire society (no matter where you are in the world) rests precariously on the inflated importance and misinterpretation of the sex drive. It’s pretty crazy, although no more crazy than anything else males come up with and build fragile empires upon.
Like all abused drives, the sex drive has created a lot of problems in the world. Think about hunger pangs. All humans have hunger pangs when they require food. But over time, this drive has been abused and misinterpreted. Many people even think they are experiencing hunger pangs when something else is going on entirely (e.g., conditioned responses to positive and negative stress, depression, etc). I can tell you with certainty and from my own experience that I have spent most of my life eating when I’m not truly hungry, eating when I thought I was hungry but wasn’t truly, and eating things that my body does not need. And almost all people function this way and have lost the ability to understand what their body is demanding from them exactly. Few people can recognize when their body needs a pear or more water even though some signs or symptoms of deficiencies are actually quite clear. If I get frequent charlie horses, for example, I know I *probably* need to drink more water or eat a banana. You can easily train yourself to listen to your body and know what it needs to prevent illness or death. But for the most part, people put food in their faces for many other reasons than true hunger and bodily need.
The same thing goes with the sex drive – although remember, sex is not a life or death necessity like food, water and sleep are. But sex is a source of power for human males, so they have deliberately distorted what the sex drive means. And so the entire world functions on catering to what males insist they need. Marriage, female subordination in all areas of life, human trafficking, prostitution, widespread rape and its dismissal, torture, and more – all of these result from the misinterpretation of what the sex drive is.
The male sex drive is a desire for power and control and everything they do and think goes towards this purpose no matter who gets hurt (women). Men have turned their sex drives into reasons for controlling women. And because it is a ‘drive’, it is uncontrollable and ‘natural’, and therefore they don’t need to take responsibility for what it makes them do.
In women, the sex drive is not a cry for impregnation. It is an indicator that she is ovulating, but it is decidedly not a demand for dick. As has been discussed here and by others elsewhere, a woman doesn’t need a dick or intercourse to achieve pregnancy. We have the scientific means to allow two women to procreate, and if you want to risk having a male baby (biggest mistake of your life, imo), you just need to obtain male goo and stick it in or around you twat. And by the way, many women don’t have an inbuilt desire for children. It is not wired. It is socialized. The sex drive is not a wired demand for babies, and women are not wired to want children. The sex drive, rather, is more like a thermometer. If the thermometer tells you it’s hot outside, it doesn’t mean you have to go swimming. In fact, you don’t have to even learn to swim at all. What you do with the temperature reading is up to you. You can simply sit and read a book under a fan and drink a glass of cold water, if you wish.
If you pay attention to your demanding sex drive, here’s the thing. In BOTH men AND women, two minutes of simple masturbation will satisfy its demands, which tells me that the sex drive is not dependent upon male-defined heterosexual sex. It is curious, don’t you think? If one can jerk off and quell the cries of this powerful bodily demand, then there really is no need for any sort of enforced sexuality or structures such as marriage or family. (Notice that religious people of all flavours demonize masturbation because it frees women from rape and marriage and unwanted pregnancy…)
That’s not to say people should not engage in sexual activity, but it demands a recall on enforced, mandatory sexuality and a complete restructuring of society to free women from selfish male demands. If jerking off is not satisfying your sex drive, I would suspect there is something else going on and that you are looking for power and control rather than just release. This is part of the misinterpretation of the purpose and meaning of the sex drive. And in men, it is about entitlement and violence in addition to misinterpretation. Sex isn’t a human right. Neither is it necessary to anyone’s ability to stay alive. Men want you to believe it is because they all know that their is no purpose for their existence. They aren’t necessary and so the lies, the religions, the brainwashing, have been enforced to convince women that their slavery is ordained or natural, and resistance is futile.
Oh and one last thing, drives can be controlled and conditioned. You can both increase and decrease the frequency and intensity of your drives through very simple means, which I won’t get into here as it isn’t the purpose this post. Suffice it to say, we are not slaves to our drives, although we should probably pay attention to the needs of hunger, thirst and sleep – those are the only drives that serve a survival purpose. No one dies without sex, and that’s a fact.
The Homo-Hetero War
It isn’t a surprise to me that there are more ‘straight’ women than lesbians. As I said, I don’t believe that either one is wired or natural. We are brainwashed to believe we must be ‘sexual beings’ – liberal bullshit with roots in religion, of course. I do believe that lesbianism is much better for women than straight slavery, on the whole. Relationships are not easy things of course, and all relationships will encounter problems, and even lesbians have internalized the power imbalances that male-dominated society brainwashes us with. Women do abuse women. But between two women, there is no rape (remember, only men can rape women), little chance of disease, no risk of pregnancy, etc. On the whole, safer, and I’d rather women choose lesbianism over slavery to males.
Why don’t more women go this route? I’d argue that it is because of this enforced sexuality and conflation of love and sex thing. Women believe they have two options in life, for the most part. They get deep-dicked (raped) or they eat pussy. It is always about genitals no matter whether you are talking to the hets or the homos. There is no such thing as a relationship without genitals being involved.
Girls grow up with the constant message that vaginas are shameful, weird, ugly, gross, smelly, etc. No matter how you look at it, pussy is bad. They also learn that it is a commodity. Their vaginas are barely tolerable on the whole, but men, for some reason, want to put their dicks in them. Most men won’t eat pussy, but they’ll fuck it. So girls see that their horrible vaginas have some kind of hard-to-discern value, but in general, they are supposed to feel ashamed of and horrified by them.
So when it comes to sexuality, why the hell would a girl or woman want to be a lesbian as it is defined today (i.e., pussy-eating)? Since relationships are about genitals, that means that she is going to have to be in constant contact with another woman’s cunt – that hated, disgusting body part that she has been taught to view with revulsion from day one. Girls will, for the most part, when faced with these two false, but forced, options, a) choose to be raped daily by men, b) have their bodies put in danger from disease-carrying, pregnancy-inducing semen, and c) suck and gag on a male body part that is certainly no less disgusting, but infinitely more dangerous, than a female body part, and d) smell, taste and swallow one of the most disgusting substances on earth – semen. Of course, she is going to choose cock!!! Rape, disease, risk of death, constant yeast infections, urinary tract infections, body-destroying birth control pills, allergies to latex, and the constant risk of life-altering and destroying pregnancy are preferable to eating pussy. Jesus fucking christ. Does that even make sense to you???
But that is how it is. Not only are vaginas evil and horrific, but contact with vaginas is mandatory if you want to have a relationship with a woman. Forced sexuality means forced contact with genitals. If genitals and mandatory fucking and sexuality were taken out of the mix, I think we’d see a lot more lesbians. Perhaps the word (and the world for that matter) would change. As it is, I (and likely everyone else on the planet) associate lesbians with mandatory fucking/sexuality, although most people don’t consider the fucking to be ‘real sex’ since there is no dick involved (male language control at work).
However, it doesn’t have to be that way. There is nothing wrong with sex in a relationship per se, but I don’t understand how love of a woman is dependent upon loving pussy or even having sex. That is male thinking. I have heard many women say, they would have a relationship with a woman, but they can’t get past the genital contact. It is so sad to me, but it makes sense from a ‘preserving the straight mandate’ scheme. Program hatred of the vagina into all women, and loving a woman inevitably means loving a hated thing. Basic, but effective, brainwashing, in other words.
And by the way, I’m not saying vaginas are gross or wrong. I’m saying that they are given undue importance and become deal-breakers for important life choices that can make the difference between slavery and freedom/safety. I don’t believe we have to ‘love’ our genitals. That is as stupid as saying I have to love my elbow. But we do need to take away the negative associations – that too is as stupid as saying I hate my elbow. Why can’t a body part just be neutral? Well, as long as relationships are associated with genital contact, and love with sex, they won’t be neutral. For women.
The Third Option
As I said, whether hetero or homo, both groups see asexuals as threats. To straights, anyone who doesn’t follow the female slavery model is a threat. Lesbians think they are the most hated group on the planet, but that is not exactly true. They are definitely one of the most hated groups – after all, they threaten the fragile male ego and the fragile male system of female slavery by rejecting the penis. They also remind ‘straight’ women of their sad state as slaves and so incur straight female envy, jealousy, and their requisite wrath. Male power depends on women’s compliance. This is an easy, easy cause-effect reality to discern. Asexuals are much more hated than lesbians and in fact, many lesbians don’t trust asexuals. To be asexual is to reject mandatory, enforced sexuality. The straights see it as a threat to their power, and insecure lesbians see asexual women as a threat to woman-love. It’s as if to say, that rejecting the vagina is woman-hate. Nothing could be further from the truth, and it is proof that even lesbianism is tainted by straight male thinking. To be asexual is to remove sex from love and relationships. I would suggest that it is a stronger and purer way to love. And of course, you can do what you wish. I mean, really, nothing is going to change in this world, so love whom and how you please. If you want to fuck, then fuck. No one can tell you what to do. I just suggest examining your relationship(s) and why you’re in them. Would they fall apart if you stopped fucking?
A Safer, Purer Woman-Love
My contrived sexuality has gone through stages in my 44 years. I think, as a teenager, things were unexamined. I mean, really, all religions (and sexuality is like a religion) depend upon ignorance and prey upon the young and the vulnerable. All ideologies target the weak, naive and desperate so as to better take hold and implant ridiculous ideas. And so most of us grow up thinking we are straight, even with evidence to the contrary.
In my early twenties, I realized that most of my dreams were about women, and in grad school I developed a crush on a very out and proud lesbian from New Zealand. My closest friend was a lesbian, my posse consisted of all the gays and lesbians in my department, and I roomed with lesbians from another department. It was the best time of my life – I felt a little freer then than I ever have felt before and since. And that time was was a bit of a revelation for me, and I remember thinking: “Don’t all women fantasize about women?” I spent years after that vacillating between lesbian and bisexual designations. So stupid, really. What I now realize is that there was something deeper going on, and I’ve since shed all pretenses that I am a ‘sexual being’. I feel I live outside sexuality now – which is no easy thing given where I have been living for the last handful of years. A considerable number of young Chinese women tell me they don’t want to get married, and I try to help the ones who admit that they think they are lesbians. Unfortunately, they live in a culture with a shortage of rapeable women and there is enormous pressure to get these girls married and knocked up.
But I digress. What was really going on on a deeper level through my adulthood was that I did love women, but it wasn’t a sexual thing, except on the surface perhaps. Yes, there was a rather strong sex drive. But underneath was this: Every once in a while, I would meet a woman I rather admired. There was a connection. I fantasized about having a close, supportive, loving bond. I didn’t know it at the time in a way I could articulate, but I have since realized that I could imagine having a close relationship with a woman – a life partnership, if you will – that had nothing to do with her vagina or mauling her tits. I imagined sharing space and support with someone I felt kinship with and that wasn’t tainted by sexual expectation. The relationship wouldn’t fall apart because someone didn’t want to have sex anymore. Some of the women I fell for were lesbians, some were straight. But the problem with all was that all were tied up in the notion that relationships were about sex. Interestingly, I briefly dated a woman at a time when I was very invested in exploring sex with women who was wise beyond her years and who had already realized this fundamental truth. She wasn’t looking for sex, but for a deeper relationship with a woman, so I lost interest quickly. It wasn’t my time, and I was slow to shed my heterosexual brainwashing. I can understand now what she probably felt at the time. Every one of my ‘girl crushes’ since that time has ended the same way. The lesbians are looking for people to fuck. And the straight women end up falling in with an abusive, parasitic male and our friendship and bond weakened and eventually failed. It has always been and continues to be devastating.
Despite what some women say, it is not possible to have a relationship with a male devoid of sex or exploitation in some form. Men are ‘loyal’ if they are getting something from you that is not necessarily to your advantage. They deplete you and they believe it is their right to do so.
I think it is possible to have a long and strong bond with a woman (without the interference of predatory males) that isn’t based on sex. An asexual woman-love, if you will. But in this sex- and money-crazed world, I think it is difficult to achieve. I am still looking. Not hopeful, but still looking.
Part III of this discussion on sexuality: What about Women? Forced Sexuality – Part III
Live in denial if you dare – dog knows it’s easier that way, sweetums – but there is a fundamental truth that any ER room doc/nurse, paramedic, coroner, veterinarian, sports team compadre, prostitute or porn producer can agree on.
Men will fuck pretty much anything and can get off on pretty much anything.
We believe that men are ‘designed’ or ‘wired’ to seek out poontang – that men are heterosexual beings. And men have designed a whole system of lies and propaganda that props up this nonsense and keeps everyone (most importantly, women) buying into it. But, I actually don’t believe that men are fundamentally sexually wired to respond to women (or that women are wired to respond to men). You see, men are sexually ‘wired’ to respond to pretty much anything and everything. They can get hard over anything. Anything can get them off. Females, males, babies/children, animals, soft food, holes in walls, tubes – really, any animate or inanimate object that looks like it can accommodate or can be made to accommodate a dick, is sexual fodder for the human male. Men are omnisexual, rather than heterosexual. The privileged position that all men hold allows them to define sexuality and to act on whatever impulses pop into their brains or pants. They choose to call their omnisexuality ‘heterosexuality’, however. And this heterosexuality myth serves two very important purposes. Service and control.
It is not even the fact that women are the creators and stewards of human life that drives the ‘straight mandate’. You don’t need a whole system of heterosexuality- hell, you don’t even need a single dick to enter a single vagina EVER – to keep the human race going, so that is not the purpose of the lie. No, here it is. First, women are the only objects that can also be forced (often for free and in exchange for empty promises) to perform other duties in addition to serving as cum-receptacles. If any other fuckable object could service a cock as well as provide food, cleaning services, emotional support, ideas and labour to steal, and an undeserved, 24/7 round of applause, then we would not have heterosexuality. We’d have ‘vacuumsexuality’ or ‘felinosexuality’ or ‘beerbottlosexuality’. In other words, if a vacuum cleaner could provide the free services that women can and do (e.g., suck dick AND provide dinner and regular coddling for hurt male fee-fees), women would be free from it all and could actually do things with their lives away from the shaming and violence that are mandatory parts of heterosexuality for women. And second, heterosexuality serves to keep the violent male agenda in place. When women have the male agenda imposed on them, they have no time or energy to develop and live out their own agendas. And male and female agendas are fundamentally different. Women tend to be focused on peace, compromise, equality and creation. Males tend to be focused on violence, hierarchy, power, and destruction. If men could make do with vacuum cleaners and leave women alone, the world would change fundamentally to reflect female freedom. If you don’t have mandatory heterosexuality, women are free of male control and life proceeds very, very, very differently.
In short, if not for the hetero service perks and the high obtained from control of and power over women, I think men wouldn’t bother with women at all. And most women, if given the truth from birth – instead of the lie of heterosexuality – would see competition with a cat anus or a sock as demeaning and derailing of their true purpose (which has never been ‘to serve men’).
I’ve put together a small collage of some of the more common things that men put their dicks in other than women and children (or for the fags, men and children). In reality, almost anything could be included. Men spend a lot of time thinking about how to get off. To women, unless you’ve been poisoned by years of male thinking through abuse or other close proximity, looking at an object doesn’t immediately conjure thoughts of masturbation. We are usually too busy trying to solve real problems – almost 100% of which come to us from men. But, male imagination knows no bounds when it comes to getting themselves serviced, so anything – seriously, ANYTHING – can become a masturbatory device aside from pussy. If only men could turn their imaginations to helping the world instead of themselves and their weiners…
I don’t have a big problem with dudes fucking inanimate objects as long as it doesn’t take up health services if they end up hurting themselves. They probably don’t go far enough, to be honest. If more of them died while doing dangerous shit, that would probably be a good thing for the entire world. Anyhow, the thing I’m most concerned with is a) enforced heterosexuality and b) letting people (especially males) obsessed with getting off at all cost be in charge of important things. I think men can do just fine with their objects (and other men! I’m fully in support of dude-on-dude action), and should leave women alone. Women can run things, and men can spend all their time out of our sight getting off with every household item they can find. Men don’t need us to get off. And we certainly don’t need them for anything. Not for anything at all.
When I was 17, I did my time at McDonald’s. Working at Micky-Dee’s is a right of passage for Canadian teenagers. I stayed for 6 months, and left for another job after a) they raised my shitty pay at the same time that minimum wage went up in my province and called it my ‘scheduled wage increase’ which I was supposed to get after 6 months probation (funny how my ‘raise’ still meant that I made minimum wage…), b) they refused to give me training on other stations than the standard ‘chick position’ of ‘window’ (taking orders inside the restaurant) despite multiple requests, and c) one of my fellow employees terrorized me one night during closing, for which I got in trouble. I came to learn with time and experience that making a fuss when being attacked by a male will always result in you, the female, getting in trouble from others in addition to the trouble resulting from the assault. Always. Always. No one will ever convince me that men are held accountable for terrorizing, hurting, raping or killing women. It’s always a joke, an accident, a mistake, a misunderstanding, and the best one, her fault (she wanted it; I thought she was playing around; I didn’t realize she was serious when she said no/stop; I’ve held a knife to her throat before and she liked it…). Morons. Privileged, violent morons, supported by men and their female cocksuckers.
I think we need to raise the pay of all girls and women of all positions, ages, education levels, and experience. And we need to do this in the name of danger pay. Males have suggested to me before that if workplaces are too dangerous for women, then they should get married and stay at home. Yes, great solution. Really gets at the issue here. The problem is a female one, not a male one. I believe men, not wanting to be shown up by more capable women, deliberately threaten women in workplaces in order to force them back home and under the ‘protection’ of their own personal rapist/slave-owner. It’s quite the scheme.
Well, I like the danger pay idea better. I’m also in favour of the death penalty for all hate crimes against women, but we can start with higher pay. People receive danger pay when their lives are put at risk in the line of duty, and I think as a woman, working with and among men is much more dangerous than say, working on an oil rig. And an oil rig or a polar bear won’t rape you or force you to look over your shoulder every time you come and go! Women are in danger even when they have desk jobs.
So what happened at McDonald’s, that paragon of human rights in action? Well, I was forced to work ‘close’ every weekend. That meant that the restaurant closed to customers late at night, and a handful of staff were left to close down operations and clean the place. I didn’t love late-night duty, but such is the schedule of a part-time female worker. One night, I was on with an aboriginal guy from my high school. I didn’t know him. We worked different stations. We didn’t travel in the same circles at school. And he was scary-weird. My friends were ‘weirdos’, but the harmless kind. This dude had what you could only call ‘crazy eyes’. I’ve never met anyone with quite the same dead, but scary, dark pools that said to me, ‘I want to see your intestines spill from your abdomen while I eat potato chips and masturbate and hum in a high, off-key pitch’. I’d had plenty of bad encounters with boys and men by the age of 17, but I’d never before met and known I was in the presence of a bonafide psychopath. My psychologist father frequently talked about psychopaths at the dinner table, so I knew all about them and realized the truth when I finally met one.
Anyhow, I was doing my thing, trying to finish up my work as quickly as possible, when the aboriginal psychopathic teenager decided he was tired of cleaning and wanted to have some ‘fun’. This fun took the form of a long, sharp knife; crazy, dead eyes; and the pursuit of me around the restaurant.
Have you ever had the misfortune of watching a standard horror movie – you know the ones that provide masturbatory material for males and scare the shit out of females so much that they believe even more deeply that they need a ‘good man’ to protect them from all the psychos out there wanting to rape and kill them? You know, male-designed propaganda that does its job well? Well, there is always a scene in these types of films where the psycho finds the girl, and she runs. And she screams. And the crazy thing is that no matter how much she screams and how fast she runs, the psycho, who is actually just walking in a relaxed, but anticipatory, sort of way, always manages to catch up to her and corner her before killing her in some gruesome way.
Minus the killing part, this is EXACTLY what happened to me. He ‘chased’ me around the restaurant. But I was the one running. He was walking. Dead, crazy eyes pursuing me slowly. He had the butcher knife in his hand. And I screamed. I couldn’t get away. I will never forget the terror for the rest of my life. And feeling completely stunned that this was happening in my workplace of all locations (!?!)
We had a manager on duty. Yeah, we did. Really. And he yelled at me to stop screaming. Did he ask the psychopath to put the knife down and stop terrorizing me? Fuck no! Why would he do that? Women are to blame for everything that happens. They force psychos to pick up knives, to chase them, to do horrible things to them. Men can’t help themselves, you see. Women bring it out in them. Men have no control, and thus must be coddled. Women must be blamed. And the men around these violators will support their pursuits, because deep down inside, all men want to to this kind of shit. Not all go beyond their masturbation over the idea or the actual witnessing of horrors, but THEY ALL SUPPORT the terrorizing and destruction of women and girls. If your special hubby isn’t a rapist, terrorist, woman-beater, whatever, just know that a) he will never do anything to end the male privilege and feeling of superiority that comes out of males terrorizing women, and b) he secretly loves how vulnerable it makes you. When you are vulnerable and scared, it means you need him. When women are empowered and unafraid, they just don’t need men for anything whatsoever. Get it? It is a racket, and all men are in cahoots whether they are the perps or the beneficiaries of the terrorism. No one is innocent. And when you praise your big, strong man for protecting you or for being so big as to not beat you, you reinforce the lie. The lie that women need men.
Anyhow, after getting in trouble that night, after no repercussions for the psycho, after my faux pay raise, and after repeated denial of training to advance my skills and increase my pay, I left for another shitty restaurant job where I was at least allowed to make tips. The aboriginal dude stayed on and was promoted to manager (yes, aboriginal males have privilege and power over ALL women regardless of what myths and lies feel good on your tongue). Can you fucking believe it??? Kudos for the psycho, and another female is forced out of steady employment and establishing some workplace longevity due to fear and discrimination.
Think about how many women leave jobs due to threats from male colleagues, bosses or customers/clients. It’s much more common than we think, yet Human Resources Departments are oblivious to why women’s work histories look different than men’s, even when they have equal or more education. We wonder about all the factors involved in women’s increasingly diminishing pay, especially that of white women (ALL races of men as well as Asian women make more money than white women with the same education these days). We wonder why men tend to stay longer at jobs and have more success in their careers. Men don’t face sex-based threats at work. Ever. Fear is almost never a factor when men choose to leave or change jobs. Men can stay, increase their skills, standing, and pay, while benefiting profusely every time a woman is forced out due to harassment, fear or other sex-based harm/threats. And women can’t cite this kind of thing during interviews as the reason for leaving jobs or for short stays at companies. You won’t get a job if you seem like a trouble-maker. And as I said earlier, women are considered trouble-makers when they voice dissent when they are being terrorized or threatened. The punishment continues long after the actual incidents are over.
Danger pay. I want it. And I want it retroactively for my 30-year work history.
I’d like to report to those feminists who oppose the use of ‘woman’ to refer to adult, human females (supporting instead ‘wimmen’ ‘womon’ or ‘womyn’) that you can give up now. The word woman is falling out of favour in English-speaking countries.
It’s true. Human adult females are increasingly being referred to in film, television, in every day conversation, and even in business names, not as ‘women’, but as long-held slurs designed to denigrate, dehumanize and humiliate them. Women are now regularly called ‘bitch’, ‘slut’, ‘whore’ and ‘cunt’ in everyday situations for little reason at all. This is the new, socially-approved set of labels. Once forbidden on television, it is incredible how often they are bandied about these days. Many television stations will still bleep out offensive words like ‘fuck’ or ‘shit’, but anti-female slurs are seldom censored anymore, even on family-rated programs. I don’t have a television, but I do selectively watch shows coming out of various countries, including the US, Canada, the UK and Australia. North America (the US and sadly, Canada) is the worst, the most woman-hating, by far. Liberalism, out of control. I can’t think of a single show I’ve seen lately, coming out of Canada or the US, where at least one female slur isn’t used each episode.
And these slurs serve a purpose. They have sprung up more frequently to counteract a perceived increase in public female visibility and power with hateful spew and to stir up knee-jerk hatred for and hate speech against women. In fact, women aren’t gaining power. There is increased sexual visibility (which is just one branch of female slavery rather than power). But there is no increase in female power. Repetitive use of female slurs – like with use of repetition in any learning model/scheme – serves to put them into the unconscious and to have them at the ready whenever woman-hate is triggered. For example, a woman speaks, and the word ‘bitch’ pops out of everyone’s mouths. A woman shows strength and people yell ‘cunt’. Clever brainwashing and programming.
The increase in hate speech against women has accompanied the increased graphic, and positively terrifying and true-to-life, violence against women featured as entertainment in TV and film. Interestingly, ethnic and racial slurs have been mostly eradicated from entertainment media. Even in regular every day speech in the West, I can’t remember the last time I heard a racial or ethnic slur. Slurs against white women, yes. Those are increasing. And occasionally blacks railing against, say, Asians, when they are not hating on white women. I remember one intersectional feminist I used to read, before I realized she was anti-woman and anti-white, complaining about some slur against her own ethnic group that I have never, ever, ever, once heard used in public. Even as a child. Or on TV. But female slurs? On the rise. And on an international level, English-language culture is beginning to export their brand of woman-hatred to every corner of the globe. Even my students here in mainland China are starting to use the word “bitch” with increased regularity. It, and other female slurs, are fast becoming synonymous with ‘woman’. Hell, young Chinese women don’t even call themselves ‘women’. They are girls or bitches now. Never ‘women’ – never adult human females.
It is disturbing and fucking scary. It is never long before an increase in hate speech is accompanied by an increase in hate crimes. But in this world, there is no such thing as acknowledged hate speech or hate crimes against women. Racial, religious and ethnic groups, yes. But women are the soiled tissues of the human race. Disposable and nothing worth thinking twice about. And women are embracing this self-hatred and hatred of other women en masse. In the name of ‘female liberation’ as defined by men. Yep, fucking scary.
I like to help the average idiot see crimes and wrongs against women through the creation of racial/ethnic equivalencies. People can’t seem to wrap their lazy brain cells around why slurring women = hurting women = bad. And why words are weapons precisely because they have the power to change perceptions and segue into entrenched changes in thinking, law, actions, and violence. Always violence.
Today, I’m talking about legitimizing slurs through business operations. Let me start by describing the sitch with a few examples.
Only in a male-dominated world can a business register and use a misogynist slur in a legally operating business name. And I’m not talking about businesses that peddle rape and sexual slavery (e.g., tittie bars, strip clubs, or rape-film-porn companies). I’m talking about restaurants. Non-nudity-focused restaurants that cater to day-time, clothed persons of all ages (including children). Restaurants are starting to use anti-woman slurs to sell their nosh.
I don’t understand how people can see and accept a restaurant name using a female slur or plan a name for their business that incorporates a female slur. But it happens and people seem to love it. Let’s look at a few popular examples.
Eggslut. In Los Angeles, I was disturbed to see a restaurant with a huge line-up with the prominently-displayed business name, “Eggslut“. What the fuck is an ‘eggslut’? Someone who likes to fuck as many egg dishes as possible? Well no. We go to the founder of the restaurant to explain this Asian-derived slur. He is Asian, after all. The restaurant was started by misogynist ‘Filipenis’, Alvin Cailan. We all know what a ‘slut’ is. And an ‘eggslut’ is a derogatory term typically used to refer to a female who likes white males that are really into Asian culture. Still, the use of the slur is confusing. Why would a Filipino asshole choose to name his cookery after this female slur? I have no fucking clue. Is he trying to show that he is as good as a white dude, and like white dudes, he can hate all women, laugh in our faces and get away with hate speech against us? Possibly. I do know that woman-hate is catchy and brings in money. Always. But it just seems so strange to pair a misogynist slur with food. Not delicious-sounding. At all. I somehow resisted patronizing the restaurant, choosing to girlcott the place instead of spend my hard-earned money on misogyny. It blows my mind that women online write about this place, doing a review of the food, and saying something like “It is a sexist name, but I decided to try it anyway.” Cocksuckers, all of them, especially since they know it is hatred, but still patronize the place, thus legitimizing woman-hate, and giving it the cunt-stamp of approval. Dominant male culture tries to shove the idea of ‘don’t be so sensitive’ down women’s throats, and a lot of women think they are cool if they can take misogynist abuse and not react to it. They score points with men if they can join in on the woman-hating fun. After all, if you complain about disrespect and hate crimes, you are a bitch… And weak.
I’d actually prefer to rename his racist, misogynist eatery “The Buk Buk Breakfasterie’ to see what happens. Buk buk is not a standard racial slur against Filipinos known by most Westerners, but it is miles better than any inappropriate reference to women. I’m sure liberals would be up in arms if a Filipino slur were used in place of a female slur, however.
Biscuit Bitch. You expect misogynist slurs from men. Men are stupid and predictable that way. But when women use woman-hatred to make money, you really have to wonder whether they are sociopaths or just really, really damaged, self-hating people or even misogynist abusers, themselves. And Kimmie Spice is one of these pathetic losers. Setting up camp in Seattle, self-proclaimed ‘head bitch’, Kimmie, serves up misogyny and southern cuisine with a sarcastic smirk (I’m guessing from what she has said about herself) at her downtown establishment: Biscuit Bitch. And it appears to be another hit, as all woman-hating stuff is. Who doesn’t love feeling absolutely free to call a woman something nasty? I’m not sure she understands what ‘bitch’ really means. Anyhow, it’s another restaurant I girlcotted. I much prefer to support women-owned businesses, but I won’t support a cocksucker in her quest to destroy women by espousing the male agenda, ending up being the mouthpiece for the masters themselves.
So I wonder to myself. Given that it is legal to use cuss words aimed at women, will we soon be seeing “Cookie Cunt” or “Hibachi Whore”or do they already exist in some form or another? I wouldn’t be surprised if they already did, to be honest.
And just to put things in perspective. Know that the following would likely not be allowed because all groups – of which men are members – are PROTECTED. Imagine patronizing the following businesses:
The Chow Mein Chink – serving chow mein, fried rice and more! I cookey, you likey!
Needlepoint Nigger – for your sewing and arts and crafts needs! We specialize in DIY gun holsters!
Kitchenware Kike – high quality cookware at low prices! Cook like a pro! Spend like a Jew!
Mussie Milk Bar – Ice cream. The halal way! No milk from pigs here!
Wetback Warehouse – legally imported goods at seemingly illegal prices!
Trannie Dogs – You’ll like our gourmet hotdogs, goddammit, or you can lift my skirt and suck my lady-cock!
People will line up to support a restaurant that slurs women. But how long would it take for “The Needlepoint Nigger” to be firebombed?
I mean, can you see? Can you understand? Do you see how woman-hate has infiltrated every nook and cranny of society such that it is accepted and even embraced? If you can’t see, even with it laid out before you, then there really is no hope at all.
Well, I guess I’m not gone for good. As I said, the story never ends. Sometimes, you need to take a break from it, though, and focus on other things. And focusing on other things I am. On mathematics. My story – the story – still goes on, however. I’ve been back in China for almost three weeks, and I’ve been been physically attacked by men twice already – one on my own small university campus – and I went through a terrifying racially-sexually motivated harassment episode by some drunk Chinese men on the subway who didn’t like the fact that my student was speaking English to me in a country where only Chinese is supposed to be spoken. Sigh. No, the story never ends…
But today, I’m talking about something other than Chinese racist misogyny.
So, I’m concentrating on brushing up on over 20 years of mathematics education for personal reasons, and I’m using some relatively good sites that serve my purpose well. One of the sites, in particular, has made sure to include female and non-Western names in the word problems. But still, the site is run by men, so while they can easily address racism issues, cuz all men can get on board with anti-racism, they still can’t get the anti-misogyny quite right. They still refer to many of the female characters as “Miss” and “Mrs.”. And I sent in a complaint with a very clear explanation of why these titles need to be removed from the material and be replaced with “Ms.” or “Dr.” depending on the circumstances.
I know, I know. No big fucking deal, right? I’m just a bitchy, hairly-legged, lesbian feminist cunt who is nit-picking details that don’t really matter because she can’t get a man to fuck her. Or something like that.
Wrong, bucko. And I’ll frame this issue in terms that people will understand easily and take seriously. Racism. People take racism very seriously (unless it is racism against whites, particularly white women). So let me offend your liberal sensibilities so that you can understand why marital titles for women are a big goddamned problem (STILL!!!) and need to be addressed like yesterday.
So imagine that all your math questions, when they refer to a black person, designate them either ‘house slaves’ or ‘field slaves’. There was no other possible job for them. After all, as we all know, blacks are only good for slavery. We saw that proved through a few years of slavery in the US, initiated by Europeans (especially the British) and embraced by black African race traitors/traders, and by American southern owners of plantations. So knowing this tradition and how effective it was in keeping social order and contributing to capitalism and southern wealth and PROGRESS (don’t forget progress), why should we bother changing anything in say, math questions? And also, keep in mind that during that particular period of slavery, black slaves took their designations and adopted families seriously. Being a house nigger was a source of pride and led to greater perks than if you just worked as a field nigger. And belonging to a prominent house/family, raised them up in the world too.
By now, your skin is probably crawling, and you’re probably denouncing me as some sort of race supremacist. And of course, I’m laughing to myself, because nothing could be further from the truth. If your back is up, then part of my job is done. Now for part two, which will be much, much harder for you to get because you, along with the entire world, hate women whether you realize it or not.
My point is that like black slavery, women have been enslaved, but with a few significant differences. First, female slavery is a much more serious and entrenched problem than any racial slavery ever has been. Without female slavery, the international system as we know it would collapse completely. You see, women have always been enslaved. Women were the first slaves, and they were (are) enslaved on the basis of their chromosomes, genitalia and biological capabilities (aka SEX). Men have only been able to accomplish what they have by stealing the intellectual, physical, sexual, and emotional services and energies of women through slavery and the ubiquitous threat of violence. The other major difference between racial slavery and female slavery is that the latter is the only form of slavery that is not only still accepted, but completely, 100% legal. To this day. Marriage, prostitution, exotic dancing, and everything that exists when sexual slavery is condoned are encouraged by ALL societies, and dog help you if you don’t comply. The above board female slavery system (aka ‘marriage’) is alive and well, with a whole commercial industry supporting it, and we still use the titles associated with this slavery. The ‘house nigger’ for females is the “Mrs.” – she holds a higher place in society than any other group of women, and although a slave whose cunt is owned by one man (unless you belong to a polygamous cult) and who can be legally raped by one man (her husband), has more social, legal, and often, economic, perks than does a single woman. The single woman – the ‘field nigger’ – is “Miss”. By her title, we know that all men can have access to her body any time they wish. When unmarried, she has no protection from a single master, unless she is young and lives in her father’s house, and any man can rape her with few to no repercussions. Although remember, like black female slaves were often raped by their male owners, girls today can be raped by their fathers. So what does ‘protection’ even mean??? Anyhow… most married women, like the proud house niggers of days of old, hold their title and predicament as a source of pride and status. Most hold the slave name (family name) of their masters, just like owned blacks did. And some women even say that they have an ‘M.R.S.’ degree (I still remember the gloating look on my uneducated mother’s face when she told me about her ‘degree’).
Note that there isn’t a single person out there who would shame or destroy a black person for decrying the period of black slavery as one of the most shameful periods in American history. Not so for women who denounce marriage, prostitution or any form of female slavery. It is not allowed. Women are still, as Yoko Ono once said, “the niggers of the world”. I would add that they were the original niggers, though.
I know I’m talking to a brick wall for the most part when I talk about why getting rid of marriage, slave designations/titles, and female sexual slavery are so important. I know that most people relegate me and uppity women like me to the category of crazy, feminazi bitches when we draw attention to parallels between racial injustices of the past and currently embraced injustices against women. I’m sure the anal canal is a comfortable, warm, tight, safe space in which to nestle one’s noggin, but keep in mind that the only thing that truly belongs there is shit making its way out of your body. But ‘head-in-ass’ disease is very common these days.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering, there has been no response by the MALE writers at my math site in response to ending the endorsement of female slavery in their materials despite me having graduate education and work experience in test construction and question writing, as well as related experience in research showing the effects of sex stereotyping in content and pre-test-sitting instructions for female testees 😉 (Guess what? telling female test-takers that women are shit before they take a test leads to lower test scores for them, even when they are top of the class and excellent test-takers…) But, what the hell do I know about the effect of target content on special populations of test-takers, right…?
Horrifying or Whorifying? It’s all the same when it comes to teaching the Chinese as a female. Add being white on top of that, and you’ve got the deck stacked against you.
I’ve been teaching on and off for the last 21 years, alternating between gigs in research universities and government policy shops (as well as farming, beekeeping, baking, and hotel housekeeping). Teaching is something I do somewhat well, although it exhausts me more than any job in manual labour ever has. At least with farming, you get strong and healthy along with your fatigue. And you work with plants! Teaching makes you tired, flabby, and fat. And you constantly wonder whether laziness and stupidity have lower limits…
In China, there is a special nuther layer as a woman and as a non-Chinese. There is a special skill that I don’t have that apparently cancels out any skill or talent I might have as a teacher. And it is something that doesn’t apply to men. Of course.
I refuse to wear ‘lady-face’ or as I have come more and more frequently to call it – ‘whore-face’ – because that is, very basically, what women’s fashion signifies: whore status. I refuse to wear the trappings of femininity, all those things that mark me as a usable fuck-object there to be consumed by men (and as a white woman in China, to be consumed by Chinese men AND women). I don’t wear pretty dresses, or any dresses, for that matter. I don’t wear heels. I don’t wear make-up. I don’t wear pretty colours. I don’t wear cutesy shit. Everything is functional, isn’t fussy, and serves to make me feel less exposed or less easily rapeable. If I trip and fall, nobody gets a look at my crotch. No one can use a selfie stick and attached cell phone to take photos up my skirt. No one gets a special view through armholes or necklines as to what lies beneath my clothes. White women are seen as whores that love to be abused. People believe that and treat you accordingly. You can’t hurt the willing, right?
So basically, you know, I wear clothes that (mostly) could be found on any average male out there. I look respectable. My clothes are clean and simple. I dress more formally than many of my students, which makes sense given our roles. But apparently, that doesn’t fly here. My only ‘girly’ thing is that I have really long hair. But that is only because in the past I have donated my hair every few years to cancer wig charities. But I have been rethinking this lately, and will be cutting my hair blessedly short this summer. I don’t want to contribute to the sexist, racist notion that white women can’t be bald. Black women can be bald and accepted, even without cancer, so I think white women shouldn’t have to suffer from public derision for not having hair on their heads. So that’s enough with the long-hair-for-donation bullshit. But I will pay for it socially here in reserved, misogynist China where you seldom see a non-old woman with short hair. (Cross into more progressive Hong Kong, and it is a different story.) In combination with my ‘man clothes’, short hair will make things considerably more ‘interesting’. I wish I could lose my considerable and distinctly non-Chinese tittage, the bane of my existence in this country, and have people mistake me for male at first. I’d be harassed A LOT less. And be given a little more respect, perhaps.
But back to lady-face. It is, as a white woman in a very racist, misogynist country, bad enough being in public wearing the no-nonsense shit that I do. I get shit for not being feminine enough, but being feminine would be a bad thing, too. It is difficult for me to imagine how much worse it would be if I exposed cleavage or bared my lightly hairy, unshaved, white legs. (Most Chinese don’t shave, but even many of the men don’t have much leg hair.) I think I would be sexually assaulted and harassed more than I am already. And I would be stared at even more than I am now. I’d be on the receiving end of more sexual behaviour from men and more derision/disgust from men AND women. And I would personally feel more uncomfortable and vulnerable. And that last bit is the difference between tolerating going out in public with PTSD under careful control, versus staying at home unless absolutely unavoidable.
Why do I bring this up? Well, I made an interesting discovery in my Business English class the other day. All female, except for a few males. I had planned to talk about giving ideas and making suggestions in the workplace, based on a chapter in their textbooks. But I opened it up by talking about personal suggestions, and I made the mistake of asking each student to give me a suggestion. I hadn’t anticipated all the misogyny and such a clear indication of where these silly assholes’ priorities were. Instead of interesting or creative ideas, several of the suggestions, strangely, by the FEMALE students, were:
- I needed to change my clothing style
- I needed to wear dresses
- I needed to wear bright colours
- I needed to wear things that would make me ‘look beautiful’
- More suggestions about wearing ‘girl clothes’
- I should wear different shoes
At one point, when I started to get annoyed by the implications that all anyone cared about was what I looked like and that my job performance clearly rested on this factor alone, I remarked that once boys started wearing dresses, I would too. You know, even if I wanted to dress like a cocksucker, I think about the following. My classroom is not air-conditioned. It went up to 37°C (99°F) last week. I usually spend 7 hours in that classroom, mostly on my feet, animated and interacting with students. I’m drenched in sweat within the first fifteen minutes. It is cooler (or less stifling, perhaps) when I step out of my classroom. I do tend to over-dress, but that is simply because I am uncomfortable with all the ogling I get in China. I also sweat like a pig. I don’t do well in the tropics. But I’m trying to imagine make-up running in rivulets down my face. I’m trying to imagine a typical lacy, polyester Chinese dress (think 1980’s in the West) sticking to my tits and legs, scratching and unbreathable, giving me a rash or hives. I’m trying to imagine my feet sweating and slipping inside high-heeled shoes. And then I imagine myself passing out in a disgusting mess on the floor with my skirt around my waist, my ankle broken, and all the kids making videos and posting it on the Chinese internet. (I would title it “Horrified or Whorified? White Teacher Fail!”)
Do men get any of this shit? No. Of course not. No one comments on what the black Muslim male teacher at my school wears. No one questions what any of the men wear or don’t wear. Anywhere in the world. No one measures a man’s teaching performance or talent by his shoes, fashion sense, or his looks. No one tells men about their bad B.O or the alcohol leaking from their pores when they sweat and breathe on students. Men show up. In whatever condition they wish. They get paid. They get respect. And they go home where their personal whores cook their food, clean their stinky clothes, and suck their dicks or spread their legs (or ass cheeks in the West!). A good life, and one men feel entitled to, but don’t deserve.
It’s bad enough dealing with my male students, but the Chinese lady-cocksuckers are a piece of work too, and they are racist and misogynist in their own special ways that feel like more of a betrayal than you get with men. You expect abuse from men. For me, I’m waiting for bullshit from men before they even open their mouths. But even when you know women will betray you because of your non-conformity, it hurts a lot when they do it. The women are part of the problem, even if they didn’t start it. I don’t let them off the hook as participants in women’s oppression. In their own oppression. In my oppression. There is never an excuse for keeping your brain turned off and reaping the meager benefits at other women’s expense.
Until you actually understand racism and the fact that it is a male invention that derives from and depends on misogyny, you are going to be confused about human interaction, especially when you move around geographically, and possibly about how to react to assaults upon your female body. You will be confused about who constitutes a racist and what constitutes a racist act. You’ll be confused about ‘racially motivated’ versus ‘racist’, and you’ll definitely be confused about whether a behaviour has nothing to do with race and everything to do with misogyny, economics, or just plain old meanness directed at the closest target available.
Racism, or the domination of one race over another, is not necessarily dependent on having a majority population. Numbers help, but they are not necessary. Racism is also much less simple to discern than misogyny. The world wants to dichotomize it (aka ‘only white people are racist’), but it is both incorrect and too easy. Woman-hate IS a simple dichotomy; it really is easy to figure out. Men hate women. And these men include all the ones we love to coddle: gay men, trannies (men who think they are women), men with no arms and no legs, homeless men, Jewish and Muslim men, and non-white men. Sexist behaviours and crimes are easy to pinpoint because men hold all the power, while women don’t. Men do all sorts of shit to women (and get away with it) because they hold all the power. Even with other mitigating factors, such as economics, males always hold power. The least powerful man can still rape (and get away with raping) the most powerful woman and holding that sexual threat over her is a source of the world’s greatest, most accepted, and longest standing oppression.
Racism is not so easy. First, it is based on misogyny. Without woman-hate, racism wouldn’t be a thing. It wouldn’t exist. It is a male creation, the sole purpose of which is to preserve bloodlines. And bloodlines are ONLY preserved by controlling women and who sticks their dicks into their fuckholes. Just listen to any racial or ethnic supremacist group (white, black, Chinese, Jewish, etc), regardless of race or ethnicity or geography, and sooner rather than later, you’ll hear them talk about not allowing inter-marriage or inter-dating and about breeding and sterilization. That is control of women, their cunts and their uteri. Control of women is at the root of racism. But then again, if you understand radical feminism, and what ‘radical’ actually means, this is obvious to you and you won’t find yourself derailed by intersectionality issues.
Second, racism isn’t a dichotomy despite so many people wishing and hoping it were. There are several races on the planet (and even more confusing, several more ethnicities that are sometimes treated and function like races), and depending on where you are, different races have different power. The race that rules (and thus can be ‘racist’) has three sources of power, which I make clear in my Oppressor Triangle below. Further, in a dynamic between two people or groups of people, we can consider a fourth source of power – the one at the centre of everything. The penis. When a penis is present, it predominates. Penis is first, and then the other three sources of power follow. I call this the Oppressor Triangle, with a dick at the centre.
Let’s go through the Oppressor Triangle briefly. You can apply this triangle to any oppression you wish. Take misogyny. Woman-hate. This one is easy because with cock at the centre, you don’t even need to go further in the analysis.
Cock at the centre. First, cock is the overriding factor. If cock is present, it will cancel out any power a non-cock (i.e., a woman) has. Cock wins over vagina. Always. Even if an individual woman has legal, political AND economic power over a man. Dude can still rape or threaten rape. That is the ultimate oppression. Further, a man with a cock will be in a position of power over a trannie dude with no cock. And a trannie who cuts off his cock and sports a dress, pumps and lipstick, will hold power over women by nature of being born and raised with an attached cock. Women have negligible power over one another. However, a woman can gain power over another woman through ‘cock proxy’. If she is a cocksucker – a practising heterosexual woman or a woman with a son – she will have power over an asexual woman or a lesbian or a childless, single woman. Basically, the less cock you have in your life, the less power you have in relation to other women. It is exactly why matriarchy wouldn’t/doesn’t function on a domination-submission or slavery paradigm.
Economic Power. Economics can be determined by sheer wealth, but also by social relationships and status. People with more money obviously have more power than people with less money. But there is another aspect to this that is not immediately apparent. People with families have more economic power than people with no families. This might seem confusing at first because most people have some sort of family they interact with, even if they don’t like them. People who have no family, which includes parents, cousins, uncles, aunts, spouses and children, have much less economic power than those with these traditional relationships. As a single, childless person, if you get sick or injured and cannot work, you lose your sole income and form of security. You have no one to take care of you, cook for you, bring in money for you, and do basic things people with families take for granted. Further, you are at high risk of death or serious life-changing implications if the illness or injury is long-term. It is hard to imagine, even if you are not 100% cool with your family, but in dire circumstances, you know they will help you out (even if there are strings attached). Those of us without that economic safety net live in a shit-scary world where the threat of illness or injury is constant and terrifying. And once you get a taste of helplessness, and how easily and quickly you can be rendered helpless, everything you do can be very scary. There is a reason single, childless elderly women (most of whom are white, by the way) are one of the poorest segments of the population in the Western world.
Political Power. This can very obviously refer to the power that a politician or someone enmeshed in the political world (e.g., lobbyists, union members, bureaucrats, etc) might have. But it can also refer to the power that your not-specifically-political group membership has politically. For example, all over the world, governments and citizens are terrified of Muslim violence. Even in dictatorial China where I live and work, the government is terrified of Muslim terrorism. Muslims are the only group in China who don’t have to abide by the government’s strict rules regarding population control, income and freedom of speech. They can say and do and go where they want. In the last year or two, there have been Muslim acts of terrorism in China (including where I live), and this relatively small group had the political power to change security measures in every single transportation station (metro, train, bus stations and airports) in the affected cities and beyond. We’ve also seen the political power of male refugees in Europe recently. ‘Oppressed’ rapists attacking local women were given asylum and their crimes were ignored and wiped from the internet. And our all-time favourite oppressed people, Jewish folks, hold enormous political power (and economic power, for that matter) all over the world. Despite being a tiny, tiny minority of the population, they have massive political clout with the American government. In comparison, women, the largest oppressed group in the world, have no political power whatsoever unless they put forth an agenda that supports men, thereby not acting on behalf of women at all.
Legal Power. Political and legal power are often confused. They can be present at the same time, and can even depend on one another. All forms of power can be interdependent, but it is not a given. Legal power can refer to that which a lawyer or legal professional has because of knowledge and training. But it can also refer to the power that comes from having one’s rights protected by law. In this way, citizens will have legal power over undocumented workers (the latter may or may not have political power over the former, however). A citizen also has legal power over a legal foreign worker. There is nothing like the threat of having one’s visa rescinded to keep someone under legal control. A diplomat has the legal power to commit whatever crimes he wishes without repercussions in his host country. Men have legal rights that women don’t have – in all countries. Men have massive legal power in cases of the sex crimes they commit, as the burden of proof is on the victim (woman) to prove that she has been violated, and often this is dependent on refuting irrelevant details about her character and behaviour. Men also have the legal power to define crimes that they commit and the rights that they have. Trannies (men who think they are women) are eroding the legal rights of women, and are so legally (as well as politically and economically) powerful that they are erasing women altogether.
So let’s get back to racism.
Racism can also be explained using the Oppressor Triangle with cock at the centre. The race that dominates in a geographical area will conduct business based on female oppression and have economic, political and legal power over other races. The dominant race isn’t automatically white. In many places, white people don’t even factor into daily life. The dominant race is based on economic, political and legal power and is controlled by men only. Racist behaviour will be committed by those with penises or racially motivated behaviour will be enacted by those who act on behalf of penises. So saying that only white people are racist is incorrect no matter how good it feels to arm oneself with that illogic. I’ll use an example based on my own years of experience – China. In China, the Han Chinese (about 20% of the world population; 90% of the population in China) are the dominant ethnicity (some feel they function as a race, however) and hold power over all other races and ethnicities within the Asiatic race living or visiting China. There are many poor Chinese, but there are many, many rich Chinese. China is actually a very rich country, with an unequal distribution of capital (like all other countries). They have economic power (and are actually fast overtaking Caucasians in the United States and Canada as the dominant race, economically, according to data). Within China, they are politically powerful – they dominate the government and have serious political clout around the world. And they have legal power – they dictate the laws that run the country and often break international law when negotiating with other countries. When dealing with whites, blacks, Arabs and other foreign and non-Chinese people in China, the Han Chinese dominate. The former hold no power over the Chinese economically, politically or legally. Even with some power (e.g., economic power), no non-Chinese will dominate a Chinese, unless it is a non-Chinese man over a Chinese woman. In a girl-on-girl scenario, a Chinese woman will dominate a non-Chinese woman with racially motivated behaviour, rather than outright racism, if backing a male agenda. Women can assist men in a racist agenda, but I am hesitant to hold women responsible for racism as racism is borne of misogyny. Like sexism, women can buy in and support cock domination and mandatory heterosexuality, but men are ultimately responsible. Learning to stop calling women ‘racist’ is similar to learning to stop calling women bitches and cunts. It is irresistible to hold women responsible for what men have created and perpetuate.
So in short,
- A male of the dominant race has racial power over a male of a non-dominant race
- I care little about this as men fight each other over the right to rape all women. when you back the rights of an oppressed man, you will only end up exchanging one master for another.
- A male of the dominant race has racial power over a female of a non-dominant race
- This is what I call ‘racist misogyny’ and is standard all over the world. It explains the ‘white whore’ phenomenon – the common occurrence white women experience when living and traveling in other countries and which no one wants to acknowledge.
- A male of a non-dominant race has racial power over a female of the dominant race.
- This phenomenon explains why white women almost NEVER report assaults and rapes by men of colour in their home countries. It also explains ‘sex tourism’ (aka ‘rape holidays‘), and rapes of local women (prostitutes and non-prostitutes) committed by visiting military personnel in foreign countries (i.e., white, black and hispanic American soldiers stationed in South Korea).
- Between women, there is no racism. There can be racially-motivated behaviour if the target behaviour is prompted by a heterosexual, male-dominated, anti-woman agenda. Otherwise, power is based on other sources (economics, politics, law, etc).
Given that women don’t create or perpetuate racism unless they are clearly working a male agenda of domination over females / woman-hate, it is not the responsibility of women to end racism, or subordinate themselves to members of other races. Racism comes from men and is based on rape and the control of women, their uteri and their spawn. When I see feminist conferences put racism on the agenda, I know I’m not dealing with radical feminists, even if they call themselves such. Women aren’t responsible for racism or cleaning it up. It is a male thing and men need to stop it. Once men let go of control of our cunts and uteri, racism will cease to exist. And organizing ‘feminist’ conferences and workshops in order to shame white women (only white women are shamed for what men of all races do to women of all races) is a fucking waste of female energy. Women aren’t the enemy, even if they often feel like it when they take on male agendas.
About a year-and-a-half ago, I was in Los Angeles, and one night, I found myself standing in line for some comedy event with a male friend who is no longer really a friend. He was becoming increasingly terrified of my increasingly frequent feminist commentary. I mean, shit, L.A. is the rape culture factory of the United States (and thus, the world). And friendo works in The Biz (Hollywood/Entertainment, for those who don’t know). He profits directly from rape culture as well as profits, as a man, off of actual rape, the threat of rape, and the dehumanizing effects of rape culture. Of course, he was terrified. I was pointing out that his little world as well as the world at large aren’t quite as fun and innocent as men would like (to force) us to think. And through my growing outspokenness, I learned that despite having known each other for almost 20 years, talking about feminism was not a welcome new addition to our relationship. Ah, the truth unveils itself as it always does, and it hurts to find out how much even long-time male friends only conditionally like you…
So, we’re standing there, and friendo points out a black dude who is seemingly working the event and who is wearing a t-shirt with Marie Shear’s famous and frequently misattributed quote: “Feminism is the radical notion that women are people” on it. Friendo wanted a head pat for noticing that and pointing it out, and likely, black dude wanted a blow job for the seriously radical act of wearing that t-shirt. “I’m a feminist, like seriously!” Indeed, young white girls were buzzing around the latter like bees to a flower. Sigh. Black dudes have waaaaaaaay more privilege than even the precious white girls that the world hates passionately and thinks exist outside oppression. Total bullshit – black dudes are oppressors too, oh yes they are. Never forget that all men have privilege over all women. Penis trumps vagina, always, always, always. Anyhow, the only real feminist act happening in this whole scenario was my defiant refusal to hand out cookies to the whole lot of them from friendo to male feminist to silly, obsequious, little, librul-neo-fem slave-girls. You see, noting anomalies in male behaviour, pointing out ‘activism’, wearing clothes, and rewarding men for not raping, are in no way, shape, or form feminist acts.
But, but, but we must show our gratitude! We must reward men for not raping us or noticing we have brains in addition to fuckholes, tits and asses!
No. No, we don’t need to do that at all. First, there is no such thing as a male feminist (see all my posts in the Wolves in Women’s Clothing series for further discussion of this). Men never do anything without a selfish reason or without expectation of reward. And, sure as shit, if a man sees a commentary like the one I’m providing – the refusal to reward him for the barest of a good deed or shred of humanity – he will pull his support and issue some choice misogynist slurs that completely betray his ulterior motivation (Him: “Why do I even bother trying to help cunts like you?!?” Me: “Um, you bother so that you’ll get your dick sucked. I refused to do that, so you call me a cunt. Interesting take on human rights activism…”)
If men want to activate for women, it should be among men, and it shouldn’t be attached to some expectation of attention or reward. That is called being human, not a superhero. Women don’t need to thank men for being human. We have been socialized to give men all our attention and adoration and gratitude for not unleashing their privilege-driven violence upon our bodies and minds. And it needs to stop. No real progress can be made otherwise.
If you (men) are truly feminist allies, you’ll leave women alone and work your anti-misogyny magic among the men who hate and hurt us daily. You’ll keep your voice off feminist blogs, while still reading and learning. You’ll keep your penises out of women, to avoid putting their lives in danger repeatedly. Thank you in advance, but keep in mind, you’ll have to bake your own cookies.
If you (women) are truly feminists, you’ll free yourself from gratitude-driven cock-sucking, and pour it into your own health first, and if you really, really need to activate, into women less free than you. It is actually more fair to men to just treat them like any other person. You don’t do them any favours by supporting/enabling their entitlement and inflating their already-large egos. If you really must express your thanks, thank women for adopting feminism. Thank radical feminists for fighting for your rights and putting themselves in harm’s way for you. Thank feminist lesbians for not supporting mandatory heterosexuality. Thank the brave women for fighting against the trannie erasure of you, your biological reality, and your rights and safety. There are so many better outlets for your gratitude. And besides, too much time spent on your knees is bad for your joints, and makes for a very limited view of the world. You deserve better.
I frequently get bored. I do a lot of stuff by myself, which is fine. I’ve always been that way. Since I was a kid. But that tendency is exacerbated in China to the point where I am frequently bored out of my skull. While in other places, doing things by myself can be either indoors or outdoors, in China, I spend most of my time indoors simply because going outside – even just outside my building – means facing too much negative attention from racist, misogynist people who don’t see me as quite human.
So getting bored means that sometimes I sign on to do things that may or may not be fun. I had one such opportunity this week. There are a couple of kids who drop in on one of my English classes at my home campus. I like ambitious people who look for chances to self-improve without being forced to do it, so I let them sit in and participate. There aren’t a lot of truly self-motivated people in the world, and I’d hate to put out what fire they may have. Anyhow, one of them announced he was a member of a little grass roots English club on my campus and invited me to attend. I figured I’d check it out. After all the group was small, and the students were not English majors, but young people just interested in improving their oral language skills that they are sadly not offered in their university programs.
I won’t get into what transpired, as that is not the point of this post, except to say that it was a nice meeting, and I was impressed with all of the students. I think I’ll go again in the future because they really are quite keen on learning and practising. And some of them have interesting things to say – I like to know what young people in a growing economy and weird political system think about the world.
What was interesting – or not, depending on your perspective – was a question that came up and the conversation that ensued. People always ask me what I do in my free time or what I’m interested in. I hate this question because I don’t have a lot to say. I don’t do a lot. I read. I write. I go to the market. I cook food that is suitable for a person living alone. I see friends or students occasionally. That’s about it. Boring stuff. But if I can’t hold back, I will tell people that I love bees. By hold back, I mean that if I start talking about bees, I can go on and on and on. I love them. I have worked with bees and I have fallen in love with them, so to speak. They make me happy. And I like to watch them, photograph them, and think about them. I also like to dispel myths about them, alleviate irrational fears of them, and tell people about how they operate. They are very misunderstood creatures.
One thing I really love about them is that they are a female-dominated society. Now, they are not female-dominated in the way that the few matriarchal human societies have been/are. Human matriarchies are good for women, but they are also good for men. Under human matriarchy, everybody actually does well. It’s not based on domination/submission as patriarchies are. The reality is contrary to what men fear – because men think women in charge would behave exactly like men. Total nonsense and indicative of how limited men are in their imaginations and how aware they actually are of how much they abuse us. They can only project, and they know they deserve to be punished for what they have done… No, unlike human matriarchies, bee society is female-dominated in a way that doesn’t benefit male bees (drones). I approve, actually. Not of the hierarchy with queen on top, but of the efficiency and cohesiveness of bee society. Males are essentially USELESS. Only a few are born and their sole purpose is to impregnate the queen. Other than that, they are completely and utterly useless. They can’t even break their way out of their birth cells, unlike the females. The females must liberate the poor little fuckers from their cells. The drones contribute nothing to the hive. They don’t bring back resources. They don’t clean or heat/cool the hive. They don’t even have a stinger with which to defend the hive. After mating, the females do what no human female has the guts to do: they either drive the males from the hive, or kill them immediately. Bee hives depend upon the contributions of every single bee. Non-contributors use badly needed resources. Males are a drain on hive resources from birth. And the girls deal with this problem effectively.
Whoops, see what I mean? Once I start, it is hard for me to stop.
Anyhow, the students asked me about what I was most interested in, and I started in on the bees. I told them all about this female-dominated society. They were fascinated, but what was interesting to me was how the students reacted. It was a half female, half male group. None of the males said anything at all in response to the cold hard reality of bee life for drones. But several of the young women started lamenting on how unfair it was for the males to be killed. Waaah!!! Poor resource-sucking males!!!
And this is why human society is in the poor, go-nowhere, filthy state that it is in. Women constantly stick up for unproductive, abusive, destructive, poisonous, dominant, rapist, parasitical, disgusting men. Most women accept their brainwashing and support the female slave structure instead of taking their rightful place as leaders and creators and protectors and stewards.
Bee society isn’t my ideal society. I do believe there is a place for those who are unable to be in top productivity (i.e., elderly wise women nearing the end of their lives), but that is probably more practical for human culture and not realistic for bees. And the hyper-focus on breeding is not what I would consider a human priority like it appears to be for bees. But removing destructive, abusive, unchanging forces entirely from a culture or society? That I can get on board with. And I think it is something human females need to do if they ever expect to live in peace, safety and happiness in this world.
Last night, I went to bed lighter, but with a heavy, heavy heart. Only if you have felt it yourself do you know what that phrase ‘heavy heart’ means. The words don’t do the feeling justice. All at the same time, you feel like something hard and weighty has crept into the space where your heart should be, a coldness invades you as emotion sears you from the inside out, you feel like you are slowly and uncontrollably, physically sinking. It is weird, and I don’t feel like I can describe its complexity.
As I lay down, I felt some relief, but more poignantly, a bottomless sadness bordering on despair. The layers of this despair are many and might be better understood through a reading of all of my posts. But this post alone will convey at least the sadness part of my emotional state, and perhaps some of the relief too.
I’ve had to let go of another misogynist male in my life.
In the space of four months, this is the second important and long-term relationship I have nixed. Both men, both from California, both uber-liberal ‘nice guys’. Not self-professed feminists (thank goodness), but guys who are totally on board with opposing (not fighting) racism (against males is the unspoken part, I’ve realized). It is fucking hard to end a long-term relationship. But it is harder to accept being treated as less. It is harder to silently accept really sexist opinions, pontifications, theories, actions and orientations from men who profess to be my friend and to care about me. If you cared about me, you wouldn’t treat me as less. It’s really that simple.
This current misogynist – I am staying with him and his wife (until this morning, that is) – didn’t seem to be so horrible in the past. I mean, he was horrible, and I chose not to examine it too closely. Until recently. I’ve been talking to another feminist online about some of the shit this guy has done over the years, and only when you talk about it do you realize what you’ve not allowed yourself to process in a necessary way. When you say it out loud or in text, you realize you’ve been tolerating abuse from or the existence of an abusive individual. But this ‘nice guy’ has become worse over the 8 years that I’ve known him. I think it is because of two things: 1) he has a dysfunctional relationship with a wife whom he both needs and antagonizes and who also is an antagonizer and controller herself – they are both fucked, co-dependent; and 2) he has been spending more and more time online engaging in ‘virtual BDSM’ with women who buy the male idea that female slavery is empowering. (I may have to do a post on the online BDSM community, where I have spent time trying to figure out what makes these idiots tick. It is the silliest thing. Ever.) Use of misogynistic sexual material or services has been correlated with increased violence against women by men. I’m not surprised that liberal dude’s online playtime has made him more outspoken against women.
Said misogynist is the liberal white dude that I wrote about in this post. He is behaving atrociously during his wife’s second bout of cancer just as he did during the first. I was around at the beginning of the first, and the second was announced just before I arrived this time. So, I’ve been around at the beginning of both and watched how this dude has mishandled both situations. Eight years ago, when her first and more serious episode of lady-cancer was diagnosed, dude realized he wasn’t going to be getting laid for a long time and issued an ultimatum that they adopt a polyamorous relationship or else he would leave. What choice did she have? She needed help through recovery. She had to say yes. He got what he wanted and still didn’t support her properly. But he still got to live for free in the house that SHE owned. And this time, it is a very treatable, slow-growing breast cancer. He announced to me and the liberal white lady from the post I linked to above that his wife’s cancer was going to kill HIM. I gave him shit for that, which he didn’t like.
And I’ve since opened my mouth several times to challenge the bullshit that has come out of his. And it has been endless. Him explaining away the cute pedophelia theme in a film we watched one night. Sexist comments when he is ‘forced’ to listen to a small group of women talking about health, travel and misogyny in the world. And the endless harping on the topic of black men getting killed by police. (I am soon going to post on the actual data on these killings provided by black activists and give the issue some perspective that you won’t get by the media, any male, or any government agency.) As I’ve become more observant and less tolerant of this man’s abuse, he has become more petulant, and has adopted a facial expression that speaks of serious male oppression. Pouting, sulking, and then more verbal antagonism towards me. This man in all his years, has never been challenged by a woman. His misogyny has gone unchecked. Because he pretends to be an activist for the poor, he receives serious cock suckage, despite the fact that he relies very heavily on free female labour (I worked as a full-time volunteer for his non-profit for 8 months, which he tends to forget about or downplay) and seldom follows through on his ideas unless a woman is involved.
I’ve had enough. I thought I could deal with or handle this stuff. I need to retain some connections in the meat world for some very practical reasons. I feel that I’ve invested too much energy in relationships with males, and now that my eyes are open, it is practically impossible to respect myself, be healthy, and maintain those relationships. I think to myself that I should have made more connections with females, but they are not necessarily any better. So many women are male-identified, and any relationship you have with them is inevitably tainted by the toxic males in their lives and the female friend’s requirement that you accept abuse that she herself Is willing to accept. And when push comes to shove, these women will often throw you under the bus to support the male abuser.
Where are the feminists in real life? I used to have a few. All were lesbians. But that was years ago. Perhaps, I need to go on a mission, a pilgrimage… Things to think about.
As I contemplate that, my heart is heavy and will be for a while. I still can’t quite figure out which is the worse feeling, dropping toxic males/connections from your life and being almost completely or completely alone, or subordinating yourself in order not to feel alone. Both suck. In different ways.
But at least from Liberal White Dude’s perspective, he has been liberated (a little) from the oppression of a feminist unwilling to accept his free range misogyny. Luckily, there are other women in his life to burden him and fuel his victim mentality and justify his beliefs and the ways he acts on them.
I’ve never been to therapy.
I think I badly need it, but I know I won’t ever go. And I’ve come to realize why this will never happen.
I was raised and abused by a father who was a male therapist. I won’t (in this post) even touch on my even more abusive mother (who was not a therapist). Between the two of them, I grew up to be an emotionally paralyzed, very confused, silent, angry, socially anxious and awkward, depressed individual, and then was further abused by these parents for being emotionally paralyzed, very confused, silent, angry, socially anxious and awkward, and depressed. Exactly the kind of person who could use a little therapy to untwist the emotional twine binding her.
But as I said, I’ll never go. Even though I went on to formally study psychology for years, I kept to the hard sciencey specializations (statistics, neuroscience, psychometry) and kept all my clinical dealings as a sideline through clinical and forensic research projects, coursework and collaboration/friendship with the more interesting of the clinical (female) crowd.
Even in the thick of things, I still declined therapy while feeling I desperately needed it at the same time. Instead, I self-examined. I know exactly what’s going on with me thanks to years of this relentless questioning and probing. Unfortunately, therapists are useful creatures – you can self-examine all you want and still not make much progress towards balance or health. Therapists are guides, and they are supposed to support you when you are at your most exposed and vulnerable.
As I am an expert in mind-fuckery, I often think about therapy professions. That was what I wanted to be as a kid, and I discarded it in college. At the time, I thought my classmates were too wishy-washy, and hey, I was really good at math and experimental design, but looking back, I know that I left because it was too threatening. Part of me didn’t want to have to address the nasty truths in my life and thus become vulnerable. I knew what vulnerable was and the therapist I grew up with both made me vulnerable and exploited it relentlessly. Who wants more of that?
And as I’ve explored the therapy professions (social work, clinical psychology, clinical psychiatry, etc), I keep coming back to the same question or set of questions.
What draws men to this line of work? And more specifically, what draws men to therapy for female victims of sex crimes (rape, sexual assault, incest)?
Let’s come back to this and talk about female therapists first.
First off, not all female therapists are good and/or appropriate for your needs. The therapist’s professional orientation may not line up with yours. The therapist has been educated by the patriarchy and likely holds patriarchal views of women and their illnesses. Speaking from experience with clinical psych undergrad and postgrad students and professors, many therapists (male and female) are not the most stable themselves. People with problems tend to gravitate towards this profession and the field is sooo competitive that often, only the most obsessive and neurotic are given admittance to programs. I can’t speak for social work programs, but most of the practitioners I’ve met have been really weird people with weird agendas. But I DO believe that it is people with problems who are exactly the people who should be working in these fields because they understand first-hand what the patient is going through. It is important, however, that the therapist have worked out her issues to minimize the intrusion of said issues into her patient/client’s situation.
All said, there are tons of well-meaning women who gravitate towards the helping professions. Well-meaning doesn’t mean effective or correct, but it is a starting place. Men don’t often have even the correct starting place.
To speak more specifically about work with female victims of sex-based crimes (aka hate crimes against women), it is easy to understand why women get into it. Women want to help women. Therapists are often victims themselves. Oh who am I kidding, all women are victims of at least one sex-based offense and are exposed to male filth on a daily basis. Female therapists want to get in there and do some good. Are they going about it the right way? I don’t know. I don’t think most of women’s energy expenditure actually makes any progress towards ending male violence. But someone has to put on the band-aids, I suppose.
I’ve also known female therapists who’ve worked with rapists and men who sexually assault women and children. I can even understand why women gravitate towards this. The work is, of course, pointless. You can’t fix men, and you absolutely can’t fix a rapist. But again, women pour endless energy into trying to fix male problems that can’t be fixed. It’s a misplaced, erroneous belief in male ‘goodness’ (whatever) and a desire to keep women safe. *Sigh*
So we come back to men. I’ve written about men and the helping professions and volunteer work before. What could possibly bring men specifically into wanting to ‘help’ female victims of sex-based crimes? It boggles the mind. Men have little capacity for empathy, and I have never met a man who can wrap his head around the fear women live with daily as a result of forced proximity to men. So to deliberately be around and ‘help’ female victims isn’t a problem in their minds. The last thing women need after victimization by a man, however, is to be made even more exposed and vulnerable with a man controlling her aftermath. Male therapists must be looking for control or a vicarious experience or something. Perhaps they are invested in putting forth a male agenda in ‘managing’ female victims. Does he want to show that ‘not all men are bad’? How completely selfish and self-centred, if that is the case.
We have a new problem with aggressive MtT’s targeting battered women’s shelters and demanding to work there and be put into direct contact with female victims. They are becoming so self-centred and disrespectful that they are bringing law suits to fight for their right to access female victims. Why are they doing this? Is it an attempt to use women’s real experiences to build up their own sense of victimhood? Whatever they are doing, it is assault. It is disgusting. And it needs to be stopped.
Men also love to gravitate towards helping male sex offenders. I have personal experience with one of these creatures. I was taking a course in a form of counselling and was paired up by phone with a black, American, Christian man who headed up his own church and specifically helped rapists get on their feet after (unfortunately) being released from prison. He and I were to do ‘counselling’ sessions on the phone. He was controlling of me from the very beginning, and took advantage of my commitment to the course. He cancelled our sessions, let me do all the work, and would take other phone calls while we were in the middle of a counselling session. But he was smarmy, saying all the right things to smooth things over. If I were 20, I would have accepted the abuse and chided myself that as a WHITE woman, I supposedly was the privileged one. But I was older and well-versed in how all men have privilege over all women regardless of other group membership. Penis trumps vagina, regardless of race, every single time. One day, I called him on his repeated disrespect of me, and the truth came out. He attacked me mercilessly, and threw all the information I’d given him in my vulnerable state as counsellee in my face. And then he played the god card – he knew I was an atheist, and let me know I was shit because of it. Pure abuse. I suspect he was a ‘recovered’ rapist himself. I put my foot down, complained to the school, and only after my fellow student attacked the teacher was he thrown out of the program.
So, I suspect that sex offenders help sex offenders, and any man who gravitates towards therapy for female victims or male offenders is just there to perpetuate the system of abuse, keep the male agenda alive and well, ‘help’ women to put their experience in a compartment and not paint all men or the patriarchy as bad, and experience personal control and vicarious excitement over female victimization. I advocate for keeping men out of all professions where they have access to vulnerable women and girls.