The trouble with saving the world.

Well after a busy (and dry) few months I’ve finally fixed up the garden for winter veggies and taken the time to return to my blog. In this post the two are connected… ;-)

My son likes those little tins of flavoured tuna, okay, I confess I like them too. I only buy them when they’re marked down, partially because they’re way over priced and partially because it’s such a consumerist hay maker. Not that I don’t sympathise with people who work such long hours they have no time to make their own salsa… but like Australian wool spun in China and then shipped back to Aus, like little plastic disposable toys for kids’ takeaway “meals”, shipping thousands of tiny tins of tuna and onion around the place is decidedly unfriendly. Those little tins, like the one inch high dollies you step on in the middle of the night on the way to the loo, are symbols of everything that’s wrong with our current thinking.

We can eat well out of the veggie garden when it’s producing summer salads or winter soups. It’s local, no pollution involved in trucking stuff anywhere, no pesticides or toxins and no by-catch or antibiotics or animal cruelty (apart from throwing stones at the cats). Eating what you grow yourself is “friendly” in many ways.

But tinned fish is not primarily unfriendly to the environment. That’s one of two points I’d like to make here. This anti-greenhouse “thing” is not about saving the planet. The earth has geological ages to recover from the predations of humans. What we’re talking about is saving our own hides from poisoning and starvation. Yes it’s a crying shame that we’re taking so many species with us in our greed and stupidity, but let’s be honest. Evolution will step in again when we’re gone. Life of some sort will continue quite happily without us.

We need some deep and fundamental changes to the way global business and trade are conducted. The real problem with the climate change debate is not the computer modelling or voting for the right politician. It’s that the media are controlling it. While ever vested interests are trying to maintain their own advertising budgets at the same time as whipping up anger and hysteria, while backing their own horse for political races… you get the picture. Topics which are fundamental to the necessary change in thinking are being deliberately obscured in favour of blatant hypocrisy and continued advertising. Buying new light globes will save the world… kind of thing.

Back to the tin cans, car culture is a perfect example of this point. The internal combustion engine is essentially 17th century technology. Take a bit of fuel, take a cylinder… The result is one of the most inefficient and polluting modes of transport ever devised. So what do we do? Give one to everyone. Allow me to explain. Most of what has happened in the last couple of hundred years with private transport is advertising. A culture has grown up around the psychology embedded in images of freedom, independence, power and wealth, not to mention the pussy magnet, that fill pages and pages of newspapers and magazines. We are taught to think in terms of having access to these vehicles and requiring square miles of tarmac upon which to drive them. Traffic jams, air pollution and rusted out old car bodies are part of the landscape.

Yet everyone is pretty well aware of the amount of pollution produced not only in the emissions of cars but in their production and destruction. You can drive a well maintained old car for 25 years and not create the same amount of pollution that is generated rolling one new car off the production line. Internal combustion is so inefficient that in a car only about 1% of the energy produced is actually reaching the wheels and pushing you forward. For some reason we’re still buying thousands of the things every year. Why? Advertising. Status. Insecurity. Who makes money from these things? The media and car manufacturers. This is why “greenfleet” is so much bullshit. It’s disguising the problem, not solving it.

In order to reverse some of the destruction that is occurring around us, the human race needs to make some really smart moves like ditching cars in favour of bicycles or public transport and changing the way we think of movement and plan cities. There are plenty of other options for transport but they’re yet to be developed properly. Motorcycles and the Carver are two, though they’re still internal combustion engines. How about two or three wheeled bikes with electric motors that can be charged from your home solar panels? (How about home solar panels while we’re at it!)

French Empire furniture

French Empire furniture


But it’s all about consumerism. Consumerism and growth. Growth is another problematic concept. The idea of economic growth is essentially 18th century colonialism. Back in the 17th and 18th centuries the world was a big place and rich white boys from all over Europe could take off in ships around the globe, meeting new people, enslaving them, raping and pillaging and making a fortune from the profits. Just like the Romans, Hittites and everyone else but with puritan christendom, tall ships and guns.

These days the world is not a big place. There are somewhere around 6 billion people on the planet and we’re building houses on the arable land that could otherwise support us. We’re using technology and ideas that are hundreds of years old and in the process wrecking the place for ourselves.

The changes that need to occur in the way we think, the way we do business and the way we live our lives are broad and profound. It will be enormously productive for those who have the ingenuity and bravery to take the necessary steps. The problem is that there are too many snouts in the trough. The ethical and psychological shift that needs to happen in the next few years is immense, but those in control of the discussion are turning it into a useless debate on the thin surface of social norms. Rather than addressing the real underlying issues, this is merely perpetuating the thinking of old fashioned growth and consumerism. And it’s for the benefit of board members at the expense of the rest of us.

Using the example of car culture, here’s why. Buying and selling of cars, manufacture of car related by products and passing of car related laws are all deeply embedded in Western culture. We elect governments based on promises of new roads or road laws. We buy papers on the basis of looking for a new car or a fantastic car crash that killed a dozen teenagers. We think in deeply entrenched stereotypes about people who oppose construction of roads. We think in different but equally entrenched ways about people who drive nice cars and update them regularly. These things occur on a day to day basis without us even being consciously aware of them. Our identities, politics and attitudes are wound up in the image that manufacturers and advertisers have constructed about cars.

Further, changing to hybrid, hydrogen or other energy forms doesn’t improve the situation. There’s more pollution generated by construction of hybrid cars than the current oil guzzlers. There’s still way too much asphalt on the earth and far too much consumerism on the periphery. Making another car isn’t going to help. What we need is an alternative to a car… An alternative to the kind of thinking that drives us to want a nicer car, pass a better law, put new seat covers in or vote for someone to build a bypass.

So you see what I mean. To change all that is a seriously *big* effort and yet if we are to avoid self-destruction this is what needs changing. How can the media, who are the vehicle of all this destructive behaviour, possibly conduct or contribute to a discussion about fixing it? That would be biting the hand that feeds them. It would be shooting themselves in the feet. How can the politicians, who are hand in hand with the media voices who elected them, legislate to ban car advertising, fund serious research into useful alternatives or promote the sociological shift that could help?

You know what? If you really want to save the world, stop buying papers and magazines and stop watching private media tellie. Like the culture jammers say… “Don’t buy it”. Drive a well maintained old car. Buy locally made. You know all this, yes? The catch is, what are you thinking? Does consumerism have a grip on how you see yourself and how you present yourself to others? How deeply affected are you by society’s standards and stereotypes?

Well, it’s a little trite but that’s part of the point I’m trying to make. We’re on the wrong track trying to solve this hassle if we’re getting our information from the tv news or unable to criticise advertising influences. Filtering your social context and adding some helpful voices in your inner dialogue is a good move. So is interaction with smart people. University faculties are full of them. The Internet likewise is a medium for discussion and ideas.

The point I’m making is that we need open minds about where we’re going. It’s like any dysfunction. It might take years to resolve, but the moment you say to yourself, “you know what? I do want to change this.” Then things can begin to happen.

Most of us no longer think of ourselves as the pinnacle of evolution or the ‘purpose’ of god’s creation. Many of us realise that humans are an animal species. We’re simply one more part of life on earth. We’re beginning to get the idea that we need to participate respectfully and intelligently in the life of the planet. The cosmos is not a pyramid hierarchy with rich white aristocrats at the top, which was the kind of thinking that gave us colonialism by the way. Life is a web. An interactive matrix. We understand that we’re connected and that this is the only planet we have. *That* is the solution. Make it a mantra. Make it an affirmation. Write it in lipstick on the bathroom mirror if you like. I’m an animal and I live on the earth with all the other animals. It’s about living, breathing and enjoying your life. It’s about your life in connection with the lives of others, human or otherwise, not what colour your steering wheel cover is.

Map of the British Empire

Map of the British Empire

Lay off Amy Winehouse.

At a Sunday bike fix not long ago Val had some music playing on his bike’s loudspeakers. It’s a setup with an old car amp and speakers on panniers on the back of the bike running off an ipod. Kinda dinky.

A song came on with the most beautiful smokey blues voice and I asked him who was singing. Sure enough it was Amy Winehouse singing “Back to black” from her latest album. I was very impressed. I had no idea quite how good she is.

The discussion came up about her supposed drug use. Fancy that, a musician doing drugs. What will the world come to! ;-) Of course, when you think about it drug use has sometimes seemed almost mandatory for anyone in the arts and music scene. Before there was heroin and tablets there was always wine, hash and opium. For many thousands of years these things were available legally.

It is no coincidence that opiate drugs work so well because they fit the endorphin receptors in the human brain. How many thousands of years were these plants cultivated by humans for exactly that purpose?

A large part of the complaint about Ms Winehouse came from the US trash media. I’m beginning to wonder if it wasn’t because they’re jealous of her talent. The US media seem to think they’re the whole point of evolution and planetary development sometimes.

Not to mention inventing the war on drugs. Using “save the children” (TM) as a cover, in spite of the drugs industry in the US being second only to petrochemicals as a money spinner and many large drug companies being based in Texas… conservative politicians have created a you-beaut-wonderful straw man to use as a whipping boy to distract punters every time another one of them gets busted for snorting crack and screwing street kids. There isn’t really a war on drugs or the troops in Afghanistan would be helping set up schools and hospitals, not stuck in a penny ante tit for tat with guerillas armed by the Saudis. Same is true in Colombia. They could have had farms growing food, instead the US wanted coffee and coke, so they set about upending South American economies with standover tactics described as free trade agreements.

Aside from all of that, the real problems with illegal drugs are mainly the fact that they’re illegal. If they weren’t brewed up in backyard dunnies and cut with rat poison, we’d have plenty of pills kids could try out safely. Those who are going to get addicted can always get addicted to legal or illegal drugs and at least there’d be some safeguards and harm minimisation in place.

Humans are always going to want to alter their consciousnesses. Hell, we’ve only really had an egotistic “I” conscious self for a few thousand years anyways. Maybe drugs helped trigger this evolution? If Governments really gave a rats arse about the damage done by illegal drugs they would be setting programs in place and ignoring the hysteria in the media. Or at the very least not exploiting it in the name of re-election. How about exploring some of the reasons why kids want to do drugs? How about some limits on the emotional abuse and sexual content of advertising that pushes people over the edge? (And if you think that’s an overstatement consider that advertising is known to affect and alter the physical function of your brain).

In the meantime give Amy a break. The last thing the poor girl needs is to be a scape goat for a slow news week in Hollywood. Heh, the people that castigate her on television look like they’re made of plastic anyway.

Reeling them in.

The headlines in the morning papers read thus: “Libs left reeling by Labor surge.”

It’s not really news that the Liberal Party are having a hard time after their former dictator departed. And this isn’t the first time I’ve recommended a book by Marion Maddox God under Howard. The Liberal Party in Australia are hard-line conservatives and pretty much a festering hive of right-wing extremist religious politics. Some have described them as Fascist or Nationalist.

All this brings something of a sense of deja-vous to those of us living down here in Victoria. After a preening fascist moron was voted out everyone breathed a premature sigh of relief. Ding dong the bastard’s dead… or at least voted out on the end of a boot, where he can hopefully do no further damage. And we’re still realising quite how much damage he did. After Kennett sold off all the utilities and public transport, the problems arising from such a fire sale are still coming home to roost.

We had a newer, friendlier Premier, one who made noises about having learned lessons and governing in the interests of the voters. What we found after some time was that though the noises coming from State Parliament were different, in practise nothing was.

The public transport system is one prize example. The opportunity arose last November for the State Government to take the reins again, which they forfeited and the system is as crappy as ever. Likewise selling off the utilities was supposed to make them lean, mean and efficient. What actually happened is that the utilities are now owned by mostly overseas interests, many, many jobs were lost and the famed improvement in service has boiled down to the introduction of two and three year contracts to keep people chained to a particular provider at the expense of any improvement in either service or competition.

It is really funny therefore to watch Morris Iemma, the scheming weasel of NSW Parliament who is doing for the NSW Labor party what Jeff Kennett and John Howard did for State and Federal Liberals. No one in their right mind thinks that there will be any benefit in selling out public utilities. There must be a very, very nice future job or golden handshake in the works for someone in all of this and it sure as hell ain’t the voting public!

The corporate media helped sell the idea and the utilities when the fire sale was on in Victoria and at Federal level with Qantas, Telstra, the Commonwealth Bank and energy utilities sold for a song, they now enjoy a very, very modest level of criticism of such sales. Rather than every Australian being part owner of the gas, telephone, electricity, public transport, a national airline, a bank and of course the water infrastructure, now very few individuals hold shares and most are traded by multi-national conglomerates.

The utilities are run with a profit agenda. This is a huge problem for global greenhouse solutions. No one’s promoting serious changes to the status quo because they are more interested in a profit and share prices than they are in say, eliminating the use of coal fired power stations. No one’s pushing hammer and tongs for every household in Victoria to have rain and grey water systems because, you guessed it, there’s a profit agenda. Despite the damage being done to the environment and the risk to the survival of humans and many other animals, money still talks the loudest among the groups of old white men who run the global kleptocracy.

Unfortunately we’ve over-learned our stereotypes too well, otherwise every woman worth her salt would be making noises about the utilities being returned to public ownership in order to make the necessary changes. The stereotype of leftist politics and the fabricated need to avoid such like the plague has been drummed home so far that some people think Labor is left wing. Nothing could be further from the truth.

While we wait in vain for anything practical and positive to be done about global warming, we watch the approval ratings of the new government climb and climb, while Brendan Nelson shoots himself in both feet with gay abandon. We watch another Sydney Anglican employ the tactics of ‘bread and circuses’, as did his predecessor, and create commissions and enquiries into all manner of things. He even had his national youth summit and a listening tour. In reality, it’s all show. What is happening is little different to anything prior. A lot of song and dance, and bloody nothing really changes.

And the media’s still raking in the money with it’s embarrassing collusion in the whole sordid sideshow.

Bah, humbug.

Sex-crime reporting criminal.

It’s been a good day for those who get off on sado-masochistic sex and paedophilia. There are three stories in the papers in this regard.

Man on 225 sex related charges. Man jailed for luring teenager for sex. ‘Narcissist’ pedophile sent to jail.

We seem to have a veritable plague of stories about men who drug, manipulate or coerce women and children into sex. And they’re not even footballers. The sentences add insult to injury. 4 years for possessing child pornography and attempting to seduce a child for sex. A man convicted of kidnapping and raping a 5 and a 7 year old was sentenced to 15 years and 13 years consecutively. The excremental fiend who drugged and raped at least 13 women is yet to be sentenced.

This is horrific. Given the links between porn, religion, advertising and people’s attitudes to sex and others’ bodies, why are we not altering the images projected in our society? It’s not as if it should require a law to be passed. Surely anyone with a brain can recognise that it’s a bad thing for men to rape little children and therefore make some alterations in media and advertising to reduce the sexualisation of children. Are we really so screwed up as a community that multi-national conglomerates can continue to value profit over the welfare of human life? Oh, wait… forget I asked. That’s being really too idealistic, isn’t it. I mean, fancy expecting human adults to consider the welfare of children in any way, shape or form. That’s only a subject for media propaganda on the law & order platform during elections, isn’t it?

The very same media who bombard lounge dwelling viewers with hysterical over-reactions to say, cars breaking the 40k speed limit in school zones and children having access to the ‘nets quite happily screen advertisments of young teenage girls dancing provocatively in their underwear. Every night there are hundreds of ads for “girls gone wild” younger and younger women and girls revealing their bodies in video that can be downloaded onto a mobile phone…

For some reason there’s a complete failure to connect the images and attitudes people are exposed to overtly and subliminally with the continuing increase in abuse of women and children.

Consider these three articles as an example. The crimes and the way in which they are committed are reported in stomach churning detail. Even the paedophile’s threats to the little girl are reported shamelessly. The perpetrator is described as narcissistic and maladjusted, which is possibly as close as can be printed to “smegma snorkelling fucktard child rapist” without risking a law suit from said rapist.

Even where the men involved are specified as the agents of these crimes, even where the survivors reactions and their feelings are the main subject of the stories, the manner in which the crimes’ details are explained, at length, in detailed delight, reduces the women and children involved to mere actors in another Australian home grown porno. What a complete and utter disgrace.

Karen Hissane and Kate Hagan have made an effort in the first story to communicate to the reader the suffering of the women, perhaps to engage the sympathy of the readers for those who were drugged and raped by this no-hoper sick pile of dog-vomit man, yet the underlying implicit psychological threat remains in tact. Every woman who reads this is aware that any man can do this. To them. According to the article, possibly even without their knowledge. Any man reading this is aware that he could do this to any woman. The article even tells them what drug to use. The power imbalance in the patriarchy and the domination of the male over sex-caste females is reinforced yet again.

Perhaps this is why the judges’ condemnation of the perpetrators and their heinous activities rings so hollow? These men are singled out, tried and convicted for crimes that in a civilised society should be unthinkable, yet what’s really happening is the scapegoating of a few individuals for what is a society wide continual criminal abuse and enforcement of sex-caste brutality upon Australian women and children. These guys are really only the very few in the brown-shirt front line of the perpetuation of sex class society. They’re the ones who got caught.

Millions of other men are daily beating, raping and threatening women who are coerced into refraining from reporting the abuse or who are psychologically subjugated enough to internalise the violence and blame themselves for it.

These crimes are merely the tip of the iceberg of patriarchal abuse that weighs around the neck of every woman alive. The real crime is the continuing enforcement of the woman hating sado-state through every media outlet and social representation. Jesus tapdancing christ, it’s the 21st century, can we make any changes at all in the interests of the welfare of the planet and any humans on it?

Man problem

On the front cover of one of the local papers this week was the headline MAN PROBLEM. Together with a photo of four obligatory feminine females, the story waxed whiny about the lack of men in Melton. Apparently according to the last census there are hundreds and hundreds more women than men, between the ages of about 20 and about 50, in this region.

This might only be a reflection of the numbers in Australia overall, but in the larger picture it tends to be the older age groups where women hold sway.

Considering that we now outnumber men, why exactly is it that the boys’ club mentality remains entrenched in our culture? Oh, that would be the money. After ten years of misogynist Government, women are worse off than in the Seventies when it comes to equal opportunity and equal pay… So money, and dicks, still talk downunder.

In the online edition, the title has been altered to Melton’s man drought. Perhaps someone thought it was impolite to imply that there might be a problem with the male of the species?

In the same paper, though apparently not in the online content, are stories of robberies, a hit and run and two rapes of women by men.

It seems that our supposed “man problem” might not actually involve a lack of them.

Mixed messages.

It’s one of those WTF? Kind of days. You could be forgiven for wondering what’s going on in Aus these days, what with the media pulling things back and forth all over the place. A symptom of being in it for the money and damn the torpedoes. A mentality of exploitation and all that…

A photo of a female golfer was published in a “lad mag”, a class of publication that manages to combine pornography with misogynist tabloid journalism in a most depreciatory manner. Locker room “journalism”, if you like.

Golf star sues over ‘lustful’ claim. from The Age is also run as golf champ sues over saucey photo in the Sydney Morning Herald. This is not the first time this has happened. Laura Bingle, the bikini clad woman in the “Where the bloody hell are you?” tourism adverts also sued them for publishing photos of her. Oddly, mention of this seems to have vanished from the papers’ archives. A search on the subject now returns porn. Hmmm. Worse, the comments section in the Daily Terror where a bunch of jocks deride the woman for taking her clothes off and being ‘not that hot’.

All this could be shrugged off as merely convict mentality, however the article appeared next to this one. US chastity evangelist targets Aussie kids.

The issues of course are the focus on marriage, which according to Dr. Muriel Porter in her thesis ‘sex, marriage and the church’ is a historical anomaly anyway. Until late in the 18th century it wasn’t legally necessary, most “marriages” were common-law, that is de facto, and only because of widows’ benefits in the world wars being given only to women who were legally married, did so many couples opt for the formal ritual.

Secondly a concentration on abstinence is in some cases replacing useful sex education regarding contraception, disease prevention and homosexuality.

Interesting messages to send, don’t you think? Sign here, promise to keep your knickers on until you get married… but in the meantime you also have permission to be considered meat. It’s a bit like Britney Spears supposedly being a virgin but at the same time prancing around like a stripper. Is there any middle ground? Can we all be simply human and let sex stay in a happy place and get on with life? Nah. Sex sells, and they’re in it for the money. Whether it’s selling “soft” porn or subjecting children’s minds to insitutionalised religious guilt, it’s all about money and power. What century are we in, again?

Deadly car culture

This little gem has annoyed me so much I’ve blogged about it twice now. Once on my cycling blog but now let’s get stuck into the misogyny inherent in the story.

A report this morning about a hit and run driving accident, in which a man hit a woman pushing a pram across a pedestrian crossing, appeared in the online paper. According to the article the man has been arrested and charged with “negligently causing serious injury”. Why not attempted murder? Did he think the pram was full of cans and therefore it was alright to drive right over the top of it and the woman pushing it? Did he not see the pedestrian crossing and think she was fair game?

Australia has been a very masculine oriented culture right from the beginning, when the white population was mostly male convicts. These days, as I blogged yesterday, there are more women than men, yet women still manage to be described in media and culture as somehow secondary to real humans, those being men. The male experience and perspective on life is still considered to be “normal” and of course much more important than “female” things like having babies, providing sex and looking like a blow up doll in order to appease the male populace.

For those men who think this is going too far in describing Aussie culture, consider the treatment of women who opt out. One of those idiot women’s magazines ran an article last year about gangs of men who rape lesbians to make them straight. Then there’s the cultural annihalation of females over 40, unless they reinvent themselves as desperate housewives.

In the case of car culture, things go even further. The car being naturally an extension of the male appendage, which is also used as a weapon to enforce masculine dominance, reporting of major accidents such as this one reveal a great deal about the attitudes inherent in Australian culture. First note the use of passive language.

Charlene Cavanagh, 31 was crossing a pedestrian crossing on the Princes Highway in Norlane with her two-year-old son when she was hit last Saturday.

Hit by what, I wonder? A gumnut? It’s almost as if she’s responsible for the accident by being on the pedestrian crossing, getting in the way of the driver.

While we’re on the subject of victim blaming, here’s some other stunning examples from recent reporting.

Assaulting a woman while she was breastfeeding her child in a shopping centre women’s lounge had this young man in court yesterday.

His lawyer, Zarah Garde-Wilson, said her client had suffered a traumatic episode as a result of his partner’s abortion.
He made apologies for his conduct and had spent 27 days in pre-sentence detention.
Ms Garde-Wilson said her client had suffered “ridicule” in custody and notoriety in the community following media reports about his arrest.

Somehow all of a sudden this has centred on how he feels, how he has suffered and the time he has done. Well, at least he’s active in something in this story.

Here’s how the same incident was reported by a woman in a tabloid…

A TEENAGER has pleaded guilty to groping a breastfeeding mother at a shopping centre.

Groping??!!! But wait, there’s more!

Prosector Sgt Kevin Ellis told the court Mr Chkhaidem had “invaded what was an intimate moment between mother and child”.
He said security footage showed Mr Chkhaidem loitering outside the changing room before the assault.
“She was fearful and felt she may have contributed to the incident,” Sgt Ellis said.

I’m still googling to find the reporting on the original incident, but the searchwords keep finding me millions of articles on women’s breasts before and after feeding, and some idiot groping ‘fakes’ at a fashion show.

The young man hung around the mothers’ lounge, approached this woman while she was feeding her child then after harrassing her for some time, he physically sexually assaulted her. This is, in the Australian press, reduced to groping.

Naturally, being a good little fem bot, the mother concerned has internalised responsibility for the assault. “She felt she may have contributed”. How exactly? By being there? By being female? And this said by a police officer involved in prosecuting the offence. What hope does this woman have? What hope do any of us have, if we are still, in the 21st century, considered responsible for men violating our bodies simply because we’re female? Talk about convict culture.

Another interesting point is the manner in which men are blogging about this story. Do a search in technorati and have a look at the way the man’s ethinicity come into play. How dare some non-white boy touch our women! All the possessiveness of your average, garden variety neanderthal.

In the original report in the tabloids the ethnicity of the perpetrator was the focus of the story, and the mother was quoted as saying

In a feeding room doing something natural, feeding your own child, you should be able to do (it) in privacy and peace

The mother goes from being shaken and embarrassed to feeling responsible. Possibly because a prolonged assault was considered nothing more than a groping in the press? A breast grab…?

This is a perfect example of the way crimes against women are reported in a passive voice, so that men are not seen as being responsible for their own actions, and also the tone of the language might well be a script for a p0rno!

Tigtog has blogged a timely piece about passive/aggressive use of language in rape reporting.

But this accused rapist pleads guilty would have to take the cake for the latest piece of turning the male rapist criminal into a victim of the crime.

If a woman expresses feelings of humiliation or depression after she is raped by a man, she’s accused of playing the victim or told to get over it. It seems that even as victims, men are more legitimate human beings than women.

Some months ago Germaine Greer appeared in a tv show interview in which she commented on the way most women don’t realise how much men hate them. Do they really hate you? The interviewer questioned. These articles would be a fairly good depiction of the fact that if you’re an honest woman, you only have to open your eyes to see that men really do hate you.

I am so angry right now!