Yeah, it's Monday. I tried calling the VA four times. Didn't get through. Tried logging into my bank. Told me I got the password or username wrong. (As it turns out, I hadn't, but after lots of condescension, I got an admission that they were having issues with the site. ) Two hours later, they still haven't sent the promised email.

In addition, there's that Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively thing. She's a rich white female movie star, but she's not a man. All those attributes make people hate her, but they don't really work against men, because women are subject to being a monolith. Yes, I know she got married on a plantation. Yes, she had a clothing line called, "Antebellum." So she gets to be harassed by some dude? (And there were some pretty nasty accusations, too.) So what's the punishment for the wedding? Dick pics? Porn? Touching? And then the whole, "Antebellum," thing, which---along with the wedding, I just don't......what the fuck? But once you start justifying sexual harassment---and that's what this is---as punishment for misdeeds, you're making rapists in the audience very happy, because you are on their side. You're making it easier for them. This is why I hate prison rape jokes. One, you're saying rape is a justifiable punishment. Oh, really? Who decides? It's mostly men doing it, but a fair number of Cool Girls jump right in, too.

It comes back to Helen Benedict's Virgin or Vamp: How the Press Covers Sex Crimes, which really is about nailing the English languages sexism and how before women even begin, they are hamstrung from the start. It means men have less competition and don't have to exert themselves as much.

So here's a refresher course. Look how everything that's praised in men gets attacked in women. Sexism isn't "separate but equal." It's exact opposites. Women are evil, men are good.

Ahem.


I figure this is a good time to publicize this list, which comes from Helen Benedict's Virgin or Vamp: How the Press Covers Sex Crimes. This is an excellent book, which while theoretically covering the language of the press has a lot to say about how people who use the same language also embrace the same sexist theories about rape.

These myths are especially relevant today, and they appear to be almost completely unknown, as people have no desire to consider where they might get their opinions about rape. This stuff is fed to us by our culture.

Some myths are so deeply embedded that they need to be exposed before one can adequately discuss rape. These myths are stated in bold; Helen Benedict's comments are in italics.

" Rape is sex.
This is the most powerful myth about rape lies at the root of all the others. It ignores the fact that rape is a physical attack and leads to the mistaken belief that rape does not hurt the victim any more than does sex. The idea that rape is a sexual rather an aggressive act encourages people not to take it seriously as a crime---an attitude frequently revealed in comments by defense attorneys and newspaper columnists.


The assailant is motivated by lust
Because rape is seen as sex, the assailant is assumed to be a hot-blooded male driven beyond self-control by lust. In fact, research has shown that far from being frustrated men with no other sexual outlet, most rapists have normal sex lives at home, and many of them are married. The motivation to rape stems most commonly from anger, the need to dominate, and terrify, or more rarely, from sadism, not from pent-up sexual desire.


My comment? Well, this explains why some people think rape is a compliment. They're wrong, of course, but now you have ammunition.

The assailant is perverted or crazy
Teh image of a rapist as perverted, ugly, seedy, or insane contradicts the preceeding hot-blooded male myth, but it is held in reserve, as it were, for times when the sex crime is extremely grotesque or when the victim cannot easily be pegged as having provoked it. Yet repeated studies have found that rapists usually have normal psychological profiles compared to other criminals. The majority of rapists are known to their victims---they are relatives, boyfriends, husbands, teachers, doctors, neighborhood friends, colleagues, therapists, policemen, bosses----not seedy loners lurking in alleyways.


The assailant is usually black or lower class
This essentially racist perception leads to the widely held misconception that most rapes are committed by black men against white women, or by lower class men against higher class women---a conception bolstered by the press, which tends to give these stories more play than other kinds of rapes. It is true that proportionally more rapes are committed by the urban poor, but the majority of rapes occu between members of the same race and class. According to a U.S. Department of Justice study conducted between 1973 and 1987, 68 percent of white women and 80 percent of black women are raped by men of the same race. The study also found that 57 percent of all rapists are white, 33 percent black, and the rest are either of mixed or other races.


A sexual attack sullies the victim
Because rape is seen as sex rather than violence, and a womans' sexuality is still seen largely as the property of her present or future husband, a rape victim is seen as having been 'spoiled' or 'dirtied' by an assault. Among Muslims, for example, a woman who has been raped is sometimes disowned by her fiance or family for having brought them shame by becoming sullied and thus unmarriageable. St. Vincent's Hospital Rape Crisis Center in New York has had to shelter rape victims from the threat of murder by their families for these reasons. Victims of nonsexual crimes are never seen this way.


Rape is a punishment for past deeds
This myth applies to all sorts of vicitms, both of crime and accidents. It is as ancient as the idea of fate itself, yet plays a living part in people's thinking about tragedy. The myth may be a defense mechanism; if we believe that victims bring on their misfortunes because of past bad behavior, then we can convince ourselves t hat we are immune by virtue of having been 'good.'


Women cry rape for revenge
The idea that women like to use accusations of rape as a tactic for revenge has been popular for thousands of years. In Susan Brownmiller's definitive history of rape, Against Our Will, she pointed out


"The most bitter irony of rape, I think, has been the historic masculine fear of false accusation, a fear that has found expression in male folklore since the Biblical days of Joseph the Israelite and Potphar's wife, that was given new life and meaning in the psychoanalytic doctrines of Sigmund Freud and his followers, and that has formed the crux of the legal defense against a rape charge, aided and abetted by by the set of evidenciary standards (consent, resistance, chastity, and corroboration) designed with one collective purpose in mind: to protect the male against the scheming, lying, vindictive woman."


The tendency of women to lie about rape is vastly exaggerated in popular opinion. The FBI finds that 8 percent of reported rapes are unfounded, but other researchers put the figure at only 2 percent.

One function of all these myths, and perhaps the reason they persist to this day, is to protect non victims from feeling vulnerable. If people can blame a crime on the victim, then they can find reasons why that same crime will not happen to them. A way to do this is to subject the victim to a set of old-fashioned moral standards for more rigid than are normally applied in everyday life, so that the victim is bound to fail and look like a 'bad' woman.


Women provoke rape
Because rape is believed to be sex, victims are believed to have enticed their assailants by their looks or sexuality. This belief is so established that not only lawyers, reporters and policemen accept it, but victims and perpetrators do , too. In fact, interviews with rapists have revealed that they barely notice the looks of their victims. The only exception is when a rapist attacks a woman who, in his eyes, represents a race or class he hates, or reminds him of a person on whom he wants revenge.Most commonly, rape is a crime of opportunity: she's there.


Women deserve rape
Because rapists, like all men, are believed to find women irresistible, this myth assumes that women bring on rape by behaving carelessly prior to the crime---it is not the rapist who 'caused' the rape, it was the woman who failed to protect herself from enticing him. The myth is in use every time a police officer asks a victim a question like: "What were you doing out on your own?" The fact that everyone takes risks at times and that acting foolishly does not mean one 'deserves' an attack are often forgotten, as is the fact that a behavior that may have seemed normal can appear dangerously risky in retrospect if it was followed by an attack. This myth makes it particularly difficult for women taking an obvious risk...to escape blame.


Only loose women are victimized
The myth that women invite sexual assault naturally leads to the belief that only overtly sluttish women are raped. This belief denies sex crime victims their innocence, forgetting that they committed no crime. The loose-women idea is also part of a larger, widely-held belief that bad things do not happen to good people---a thought that comforts non-victims, but forces victims to blame themselves. This myth results in a cyclical trap for a sex crime victim; the woman becomes 'bad' by virtue of having been raped because one myth hold s that she would not have been attacked if she had not provoked the assailant with her sexuality, while another myth holds that only 'loose' women are sexual.


These particular myths form the backbone of the way we think about rape. Now comes the way we treat specific victims, and how they are chosen to be good victims---the only kind of victims allowed, or bad victims, which means they're either not victimized at all, or they're intent on attacking men with their accusations. Get it?


From the book:

"Whether any one victim is labeled a 'virgin' or a 'vamp' and which myths are brought into play, depends both on the characteristics of those who are discussing the case and on the circumstances of the crime itself. Going over the vast amount of sociological literature on this subject---studies of how people react to rape scenarios---I have identified eight factors that lead the public, and the press, to blame the victim for the rape, and to push her into the role of 'vamp'.

1. If she knows the assailant. (Victims recieve more sympathy in the assailant is a stranger.)

2. If no weapon is used. (Studies show that the public is more inclined to believe a rape happened if a weapon was used.)

3. If she is of the same race as the assailant. (Victims traditionally attract the most attention if they are white and their assailants are black. Blacks raped by whites tend to receive more attention than black-on-black crime, which receives the least attention of all.)

4. If she is of the same class as the assailant. (She will be blamed less if the assailant is of a lower class than she.)

5. If she is of the same ethnic group as the assailant. (If prejudices to do with ethnicity or nationality can be called in to slur the assailant the victim will benefit.)

6. If she is young. (Older women tend to be seen as less provocative.)

7. If she is 'pretty.' (Studies have found that although people tend to be biased against attractive rape victims, they are biased in favor of attractive assailants. The idea is that an attractive man does not need to rape because he can get all the women he wants, a refection of the 'assailants are motivated by lust' myth. This finding applied tellingly in the Chambers/Levin case.)

8. If she in any way deviated from the traditional female sex role of being at home with family or children. (People blame the victim more if she was in a bar, hitchhiking, at a party, or out on her own anywhere 'good girls' are not supposed to be preceding the attack.)

Copyright 1992 Helen Benedict.


Go out and buy this book. I gave you a link and I simply cannot quote the whole book. It's an excellent reference. Now. Immediately. Get it used if the new price is too much. Period.

One more thing: as this book is not available electronically anywhere, I typed up this myself while propping the book up on a cat who would not move. So any typos are probably not present in the book but the result of my reading stand moving or rolling over or something.
testing


Well, I guess I can't do this via my phone.
The House GOP has issued subpoenas for James Comey and Loretta Lynch,  because they have only so much time to show how utterly amoral they are.  Investigate Repubs?  THEN WE'LL INVESTIGATE <i>YOU.</i>

Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton and they chatted about grandchildren.  Of course,  this is suspicious to the sort of people who know they've met with Rusdian operatives <i>and lied about it</i> dozens of times,  sometimes to Congress. 

It's hard to sum how petty and stupid the GOP really is. These are people,  I'm convinced,  who voted for Trump not <i> in spite of </i> his malice,  his failures, his sexually predatory history,  but because of it. 

These are people who could beat someone up,  then whine that they are the true victims because the victim's face attacked their fist.  

These are people who will tell you that Sandy Hook did not happen,  but Pizzagate did.  They close DMVs in black neighborhoods after demanding new IDs----only of POC----or address requirements that affect only Native Americans.  They close polling places only in black or Dem neighborhoods.  They gertymander districts so that the minority----white men----somehow get more representation than the majority.  

They tell lies that they <i>want</i> to be true,  so they feel justified.  

The choice was between this and Hillary in 2016,  and the left went full birther there. That's it.  That's all.  If you don't fucking show up more than once every four years,  then fuck off and die.  There's no such thing as a protest vote in a two-party system,  Mr. "I-Have-No-Problem-Voting-For-Women-But-I-Seek-Out-Lies-About-Them-To-Give-Myself-An-Excuse." That paranoid Hillary Stole The Election bullshit is exactly the same shit coming from left OR right.  Lefty boyz need to get their issues in hand.  People would rather believe lies about women than the truth about men.  The crime bill? Uranium One? Goldwater Girl? Sexism got us here,  and that needs to be stomped out.  The same assholes that atracked Hillary are now going for Pelosi,  with the same bullshit.  You're sexist and you have Mommy issues.  

Here's a clue bros:  when you go after ONLY women with such acid venom,  it's obvious.  

We ain't forgiving and forgetting this time.  

Clean up your goddamned house. 
So if your own side betrays you, who do you turn to?

Mitch McFoghorn wants an "ethics" investigation. This better mean that Moore gets blocked at the Capital door.

Yeah, I believe her. Liberal dudes get brought up, steeped in the same culture like Reichwing dudes. Too many times, liberal dudes seem to think that voting for womens' rights can be accumulated for valuable fun sexism points later on. It's still deeply uncool to care about women because you can get away with so much. It's a freebie.

Also, guys really seem to think you should get "one" for free. Like sexism is something you should give service to fighting, but hey, maybe ine day you want to try it yourself, you know? (This is why Repubs eagerly vote for shit that helps billionaires, because, hey, someday-----! You're messing with that fantasy, that conceit, you better think of a strategy.)

This is horrible to type on my phone, so I have to stop here for now.

Dear Gawd

Nov. 15th, 2017 02:25 pm
Where do I start?

The Republicans just lie and lie some more and then guess what? They lie some more. Why?

Because they got nothin' otherwise.

Take the baby parts story. Some sleazy loser who I won't name shot video under false pretenses and using fake credentials---a crime in and of itself----and then edited it. Turns out Planned Parenthood donates the effluvia from abortions and related procedures, when possible, to organ donation and research facilities. Fetal tissue offers life-saving opportunities for various reasons I won't go into here in the interest of streamlining, but anyhoo, one thing that happens in any type of organ donation is paperwork that keeps things organized. There's nominal "transfer" fees that document, in effect, the movement of tissue donations through various medical networks. Usually some insurance company covers that fee, and it helps the accounting department keep track of things. Organ and tissue donation is an unmitigated good in the world. When my brother died, the doctor estimated that through organ, skin, and bone donation, plus research, my brother saved at an immediate minimum, at least 64 lives. Fill in that "donor" button on your IDs, folks.

That's it. That's all. That's the kind of liars we're dealing with. Incidentally, James O'Keefe falls into this category, too. He's the guy who looks like Lee Harvey Oswald and calls his film company "Project Veritas." "Veritas" means truth, for which this slimy little motherfucker ought to be slapped vigorously every day and twice on Sunday. Also, WTBFOS (What The Bloody Fuck of Shit) IS it with these slimey Repubs using these (wince) Orwellian titles? "Americans for Truth." Shit like that. If you ever see a smarmy glurge ad on TV that breathlessly accuses a Dem of all of Faux "News"' basest fantasies, look at the last few frames and you'll see some name that protests too much.

It's kind of like how the people who call themselves "capital-P" Patriots always avoid reading the Constitution. The capital-C "Christians" seem to come from a bizarro world where the Bible to them is like garlic to a vampire (mmmmm......garlic), because they seem to relish tossing the homeless out on the street, taking health care from the ill, doing anything to get lots of money, judging and lying about people if they're not sufficiently judgeworthy, and so on. Also? Whenever you see somebody who fetishizes 9/11 and does the "All Lives Matter" crap, you know they're Reichwing assholes. Never fails. Ever. Oh, and if "mansplaining" sets somebody off, you can just bet they're one divorce or three breakups away from full-on MRAhood.

While we're at it, any approval of the "Red Pill" is a bad sign. The Red Pill is basically MRAhood but without the attempts at camouflage. They preach about "last minute" resistance and "slut defense", which basically means that if you say "no" they think you're lying. What does that translate into? These guys are rapists, and a few of them have actually admitted to it. I don't care how nice a guy seems, if you see "Red Pill" run like the wind.

Why am I talking about MRAs? Because they never were about all men, just white angry conservative men, and Trump united them and turned them into full-on, swastika-wearing Nazis. Hello, if you're wearing swastikas, just shut the fuck up with that "you call everybody you disagree with a Nazi."

Which itself irritates the ever-living fuck out of me. You are wearing a swastika, asshole. What exactly are the Nazis famous for? Gardening? Yeah, I really liked their health care programs.

And this is what the fucking right does all the damned time. You can bitch about Dems all you want but a lot of them have this touchingly naive idea that facts will convince you. (I've had to cut back on my swearing because there are no obscenities that do justice to Trump, etc., etc., and if you want to insult Repubs, all you have to do is let the tape roll or the video go on and on through every hostile press conference, every arrogant appearance.Accuracy is their enemy. You'd think they'd pick up on that eventually.)

WHY? It's so irritating. Hello, asshole, that swastika is right there on your goddamned shirt. Did you think that would work? I'm mentally flailing here, trying to put a whole maelstrom of thoughts into some order here, but if they had the guts to own it, we'd be in a lot more trouble than we already are in.

When my Gary Stu ex boss (who claimed he was the grandson of an English duke) fired me, he said I was a trouble maker. (How come it's always the victim who's the trouble maker, not the guy who actually commits the offense? Because women are supposed to be punching bags for men? Because men get to do whatever they want? The way we erase men who do shit to women is striking.)

I got to step up close to him and say, "You know what, asshole? If you were everything you said you were, you wouldn't have stabbed me in the back like this."

And if these guys were everything they claim they are, they wouldn't need Naziism and lies.

Incoming!

Nov. 14th, 2017 10:12 am
Roy Moore got banned from a mall.

For creeping on teenaged girls.

While he was DA.

In his thirties.

The GOP can fuck right off when it comes to that "Party of Lincoln" crap, but really, aremmmus there a contest going on?

And what the fuck is going on with this formatting?

Access

Apr. 26th, 2017 04:31 pm
Okay, obviously I'm dipping my toes in the dreamwidth waters.

And I seem to have deleted a pile of messages from my inbox, but not those from the pathetic little trolls, whose tiresome repetition is like counting sheep, "Am I bugging you yet? Am I bugging you yet? Am I bugging you yet? How about now? Maybe now? How about now?"

Zzzzzzzzzzzzz........Ahem. Yack. Where was I?
I just watched some old white guy claim that voting for a rich white guy-----which he didn't specify----was him "kind of rebelling."

Let's ignore that rich white men blocked the country's first black president at every turn.

Let's ignore that Trump is pretty much the DEFINITION of status quo: he's a rich white *mediocre* guy who's scammed and stolen his way through life, getting away with it *because* he's a white guy.

And he treated these morons the exact way he treats every new mark: he made promises.

They believed him because he's a rich white dude.

And he's broken every promise he made to them, been exposed as a conman, a fraud, a liar, and a thief----and they're just shocked. It's the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Off phenominon.

And now Trump's screwing over little people has ratcheted up to a whole new level: cutting taxes on rich people.

They're eliminating all tax deductions except for a few.

This bears no resemblance to what he promised.

Oh, and dude? You were NOT a "lifelong" Democratic if the switch to this Nazi asshole was that fast and that easy.

And strangely, white men absolutely refuse to even say the word "misogyny." Doesn't exist except in the dictionary. You'd have to burn tampons on womens' lawns----with giant signs saying "GIRLS SUCK"----plus signed affadavits stating that you declare you hate women before any of these guys would agree it rises to the level of misogyny. And 9 times out of ten they'd argue you were mentally ill (if you were a guy)or argue that the tampons spontaneously combusted first.

I hate everybody.

The VA

Apr. 6th, 2011 12:12 pm
The Va said, on the paperwork it sent me, that I could 'appeal'. But everyone I've talked to says there's no hope of an appeal, they're going to do take my money, no matter what, why don't you start making those innumerable phone calls to uncaring low-ranking people on the phone trees, those bureaucrats who when they get higher up the chain, are just as bad as the retired officers who spout off about 'collateral damage' when they do the books.

Nobody will help me. I don't know what to do. I won't even be able to buy food. Or, here's the deal: if I stock up on food in the months before this happens.....then I won't be able to save money.

What do I do? Nobody will help me.
Oh, Christ, is it time for another round of, "Oh, I hate those feminazis who want all men to die!"? It's like that bullshit email forward that goes around about Jane Fonda---it's kind of disgusting how eager people are to be ignorant assholes.

I always like it when somebody goes, "Oh, but I only hate the feminazis!"

Well, that's okay, then, sweetie, you go on right ahead!

Except since when did feminists invade Poland? Where are the death camps, by the way?

And if you're a Rush Limbaugh fan, go fuck off and die, would you?

The type of people who simper, "Oh, I only hate the feminazis!" aren't interested in accuracy. They just like hating feminists, because they're good girls, not those women, those loud shouty women who just might have reason to be angry. But, no, they're unladylike, let's gather our little sewing circle together and pat ourselves on the back.

Fuck that shit.

They don't want facts. They want the status quo. They want lite feminism, which is basically just being feisty.

They tend to trot out Andrea Dworkin's name, as well as Valerie Solanus. And of course they don't give a shit about facts.

Andrea Dworkin was a few years older than me. She grew up when rape was basically only something black men could get convicted of---if the victim was white----and that sexual harassment was just a fact of life. Women pretty much had to get married, but men could walk away from wife and kids with effortless ease. Men also got to whine about how they needed those good jobs to support their wifey and kiddies, even if the woman they were competing against had a family herself.

Want ads---high paying jobs for men, shitty jobs where you got harassed for women---were segregated. People forget how incredibly blatant sexism was just forty years ago. Girls couldn't wear pants to school in Minnsota till I was in the third of fourth grade---and even then there was an uproar. Contempt for women was everywhere. Oh, and when men agitated for civil rights, even when Rosa Parks struck the first blow, it was clear that men were the ones who were going to be liberated. "The position of women in the SNCC," said Stokely Carmichael, "is prone." Women didn't need rights. Rights were for men. When women broke with the male leftists and formed their own movement after asking nicely for years, the men laughed at them---much the way John Adams laughed at his wife, Abigail, who begged him in a letter to 'remember the ladies.' Later on, he railed at the possibility of a petticoat regime. In the Sixties, leftist men and conservative men both thought the idea of womens' rights were a crock of shit---and the birth control pill meant that for eager guys, there was no longer any reason for the word 'no'. Women had to put out now, these sensitive war protesters gloated.

Eldredge Cleaver boasted about how he practiced raping black girls in the ghetto before switching to white women, attacking and damaging white mens' property. Men of all ages tripped over him to express their appreciation. In reviews of "Soul on Ice" at Amazon, only three or four mention rape, and then act like the poor guy was driven to it or something. The others just use incredibly florid language and maybe mention 'gender', if they hint at Cleaver's real life at all.

It's hard to get across how much power men had over women. It's hard to get across how much power they still have over women to this day. And this is what Andrea Dworkin lived through, without all the extra experiences she had. She was a battered woman, a prostitute, a rape victim. I think she gets to hate men after all that. And I think that's just fine, because after spending half my time as a feminist, I'm really sick and tired of the sort of cowards who go, "Oh, well, rape culture is bad, but what's really tragic is how it affects men!" Try having a discussion about rape, and you'll find yourself confronted with dudes who are looking to find out just how much they can get away with in terms of rape. "But what if we're both drunk?!" they demand, thinking they've found the perfect technicality so they can rape. Absence of no is not automatically the presence of yes, there, asshole. These guys assume, however, that the state of women at all times is one of consent. That's what we're for, right?

As illustrated by the "Schrodinger's Rapist" thing, men have an infinite capacity to whine about how womens' well being is just such a infringement of mens rights to do whatever they want to around women. Men whined to the heavens about how, how would a woman know he wasn't a rapist unless she put her book and her rights down and catered to whatever dude is around her and demanding her attention? Yeah, I think I'm entitled to hate that kind of self-absorbed bullshit. I'm not your widdle reflecting pool, Narcissus. Get the fuck over yourself and let me read my goddamned book. Did I look at you? Did I acknowledge your existence in any way? No? Then fuck off. I don't have to get to know you. I don't want to get to know you. For starters, I think you have problems respecting 'no'. That means something fairly important.

What bugs me most about the simpering souls who go, "I just hate the feminazis'" is that they ignore all the accumulated bullshit that builds up. Oh, wait, am I supposed to be sunny and cheerful to everybody? No, I'm not. Sucks to be you. Go find somebody else if you want that person. It's not me. And if you tell me to "smile" I'm going to smack you till my hand stings. Too angry? Tough shit. I hate namby pamby people, but then again at certain levels of society, you get to be that way.

The other women who get brought up all the time are Valerie Solanas and Jane Fonda. Solanus wrote "The SCUM Manifesto" which every MRA around likes to act is the secret feminist Declcaration of Manhating, and then she shot Andy Warhol. Jane Fonda is the subject of periodic email forwards which contain bullshit. Anybody who brings up any one of the three is trying to damn all feminists. I think it needs to be turned back on them. So are you trying to say that these three women--Dworkin, Solanus and Fonda---are somehow representative of feminists? Asshole. But they always come up. Or else so do general condemnations of 'those feminists who hate men.' You see some echoes of this kind of thinking in the widespread condemnation of Jeremiah Wright, who was roundly criticized after Obama announced his run for 'hating America."

Wright was a US Marine when there was a draft, and when rich white boys protested in the street against fighting in a war like, you know, peasants. He was a Marine when lynchings were common. I'd say he's entitled to say whatever the fuck he wants, however unpleasant it is for white people who don't want to think about what it's like to live in a racist society. When you're talking about somebody with relatively little power hating on their oppressor, the same thing applies. When I see more men condemn rape and rapists and rapists apologists---just look at the Julian Assange fanboys!----than they do feminists getting angry about rape, then we'll talk. Not until and not on mens' terms.

I ain't going to hold my fuckin' breath, frankly.
I suppose I better do something with this, eh? Gah, I'd like to feel fucking conscious. It's killing me to be this exhausted all the time.

Then there's so much horror going on in the world I can't seem to cope.
Page generated Jul. 14th, 2025 01:43 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios