The market demand for lies is too huge to give up the lucrative business model CC0 image from Pxhere I wonder what might have gone down if anyone at Fox News had had the balls or labia to issue the following statement if it had been part of the terms of their legal settlement. “As you most likely have heard, Fox News just settled with Dominion Voting Systems over our claims in 2020 that their systems were used to rig the election for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. We claimed that Donald Trump rightfully won the election but it had been stolen from him, a falsehood we amplified along with other untruths about the election that subsequently connected us to the January 6th insurrection. As part of the terms of the settlement, we are required to level with you and admit we lied. We lied about the election. We lied about Dominion’s systems. We lied about Joe Biden stealing the election. While we lied to you we texted and messaged each other behind the scenes acknowledging there was zero evidence of widespread voter fraud. We lied in our reporting of it, and we’ve been lying about the outcome until now. We lied because we knew if we told you the truth about what was happening on Election Night, you would likely get mad and move to one of our competitors. And that’s exactly what you did. Fox News was the first network to correctly call the swing state of Arizona for Biden-Harris. And you, our audience, moved immediately to our competitors Newsmax and One America Network, who were more than happy to tell you what you wanted to hear. When we gave you back the lies you demanded, you returned to us. We thank you for your loyalty, support and forgiveness. We here at Fox News will have to balance what will keep us on the air and providing paychecks versus potentially getting sued. Make of that what you will, but we want you to be quite clear on something: Our competitors are also getting sued by Dominion. If Newsmax and OAN lose their suits or settle out of court as Fox did, and remember, they don’t have our deep pockets, they too will have to be more circumspect in how much they can afford to serve their audiences what they want to hear, rather than the truth. Think about that, faithful news consumers. Fox News and our competitors have been held and are being held to account for falsehoods we told you on Election Night. If Dominion and Smartmatic prevail against the other news networks, you will have nowhere to run when the ugly truth emerges: Our side also legitimately loses elections. We will continue to serve you as best we can but think about what we’ve said. What will you do on Election Night next year if things don’t go your way? More crow, Foxfolks? It seems to be part of the settlement that Fox News doesn’t have to apologize on-air to Dominion or admit their lies. While the settlement is widely regarded as a huge victory against misinformation, fake news, Donald Trump and the Republican Party, not being required to admit their falsehoods, say, three times in the week after, was a huge blow against public accountability. Would have been interesting to watch Tucker Carlson, their top-rated, most popular liar, deliver at least one of those messages, right before they fired him. Fox’s fantasy apology wouldn’t have read like the above. There’s no way they’d have been that truthful or criticized their audience so boldly. But it would have been arguably been the first time they ever did something to serve their country—by levelling with their audience. Defamation lawsuits, I’ve found, are about money, not apologies. Dominion supposedly didn’t care; they wanted compensation for their fleeing clients and prospects when the fake-news coalition turned them into America’s Traitors. Deals in their pipeline dried up in the wake of allegations their machines were used to commit fraud. The Fox settlement is about ten times their current worth. They will undoubtedly be awarded more money not just in their lawsuits against Newsmax and OAN but also Mike Lindell, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and a few others. This whole sorry debacle has rocket-boosted their power and bottom line and shaved years, maybe decades, off their growth roadmap. Yes, we all wanted to see Tucker Carlson (or whoever was left) eat a huge helping of white supremacist crow baked in a dish of abject humility and liberally (ar ar!) seasoned with Donald Trump’s tears, on-air, apologizing and admitting they lied to their audience. Even without the admission of their business model, a more realistic apology and ‘fess-up of their lies would have really rubbed their audience’s faces in the ugly fact that they truly are as gormless as liberals think. That it’s been confirmed how immature, how willfully ignorant, what incredible snowflakes they are, unable to handle the truth. That America’s ‘libtards’ were right about them all along. What does it say about America that millions of viewers want to be lied to, and will run like crying toddlers to another insular bubble to protect them from reality if you dare to confront them with it? The road to hell, paved with bad intentions The Idiocrac-izing of America by the Republican Party and the far right has been a First World Wayback Machine for decades. Before the 1980s, Washington D.C., and Congress in particular was able to function despite political differences. At the end of the day, so the legends from old-timers go, Republicans and Democrats came together to tip a few and maybe have dinner together after hours. They knew each other, knew their families, and even if you had considerable differences with Senator Byrd, maybe you loved his lovely wife and played with his grandkids. When Ronald Reagan died in 2004, pundits spoke of how he was the first American President to make downright mockery of the opposition, including dinging them for admitting they’d raise taxes when he himself raised them eighteen times before he left office. Then there was his ‘joke’ about the Democratic platform. In 1992, as the country sweated through another election summer, critics and TV pundits commented on how the Republican National Convention’s much-vaunted ‘big tent’ was getting smaller and smaller, not to mention whiter and richer. Then came the Clinton years, marked by a noticeable decrease in journalistic integrity and fact-checking, and Republicans more intent on bringing down Bill Clinton than fixing America’s problems. They manufactured scandal after scandal, until he played right into their hands by having launched their secret gotcha plan months before they’d even thought of it. Once another Democratic President was in power, President You-Know-Who-Who’s-Darker-Than-You, the gloves were off. As has been famously recorded, the GOP leadership vowed to stop any mandate or objective of the Obama administration. Which they’d have done in had he been white, since they treated Bill Clinton much the same way. But now, with bald-faced racism. No, nothing racist to see here. Fair use photo from Wikipedia. It’s been downhill fast. They took a noticeably harder-right turn in 2000, when they went from watchdogging the government (the traditional role of journalism) to cheerleading America and President Bush. Fox News served the market for right-wing perpetual aggrievement of those who felt their their ‘way of life’ was under siege. Fox wasn’t the first media outlet to offer a sop to those who voted for their own economic oppression. That begin with Reagan’s striking down the Fairness Doctrine which mandated equal time for controversial views. It’s what enabled Fox News to become a clear conservative network, with G. Gordon Liddy, conspiracy theorist Art Bell, Rush Limbaugh and other conservative talk radio pioneers clearing the way. By the time election 2020 rolled around, juiced by the Internet and the rise of social media for the previous decade, the U.S. had become a nation of multipartisan bubbles, further divided daily by the bipartisan identity politics and labels of the right and left. Image by Alexa from Pixabay The winning business model Fox’s audience has demonstrated a second time it’s little better than a crying baby who refuses to eat its spinach. With the departure of their favorite liar, the 8:00pm evening audience formerly enthralled with Tucker Carlson has departed once again to Newsmax and One America Network, apparently unaware they’re next in the Dominion/Smartmatic lawsuits. It demonstrates just what ‘sheeple’ we’ve accused them for decades of being. The ‘reality-based community’ is laughing its ass off, but let’s remember, lawsuits for Klan Murdoch are simply a cost of doing business, just like most of the world’s banks continue blithely laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels because even if they get fined a few billion for breaking federal laws, they write it off as an operating expense. Too big to jail. Fox News took their fiction factory business model, streamlined, refined, optimized, and evolved it, and turned it into the most monolithic tool for promoting conservative goals by appealing to its morally ugliest, most gullible base, and it raked in billions. Eroding and arguably destroying democracy in the process? Bonus! Their business model has never adhered to the ‘highest journalistic standards’ as they laughingly alleged after the settlement. It’s been to lie. Period. On Election Night 2020, a few Fox News rogue idiots deviated from the corporation’s otherwise market-based content decisions and made the ill-informed choice to serve up a single ugly fact to their audience. One little mouthful of strained spinach, and the toddlers screamed. Except, they weren’t trapped in high chairs, they were old enough to run, thumbs in mouths, to those who would protect them from those mean old Foxes. As execrable as Fox’s lying was, lies are money . They made a rational decision to not go out of business when they returned to lying. They knew telling the truth would piss off their customers, and they couldn’t compete with real news organizations on their turf. Not with the Fox stars’ journalistic integrity skills decades out of date, if they ever existed. They knew it would damage their stock price, as came out in the behind-the-scenes mad messaging. They worried about what this would do to their bottom line, from the corporate down to the personal. Carlson fumed how they’d spent twenty-five years building their brand and reputation, all to have it destroyed in a single night with a damnable truth. Any successful business owner or CEO would have backtracked. ‘Facts’ are the New Coke of right-wing media. Their customers returned when Fox learned their lesson. Tucker Carlson may be a ‘twitwaffle’ as one of my Facebook friends put it, but he was the ringleader who molded a certain segment of American minds to the point where he had almost supreme power over them, ready to act on what their ‘most trusted network’ told them to do. And when Donald Trump purportedly incited a riot using, as U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta noted, “words of incitement not protected by the First Amendment,” Fox News’s stars and staff collectively pooped their pants and begged the President to tell people to stop. It was at that moment the lunatics took over the asylum. A Salon story details how the late Roger Ailes, one of Fox News’s founders, dreamed of a right-wing propaganda network in the early 1970s that would consist of Republican and conservative leaders issuing dictates for how people should think, arguing to weaponize TV’s passive engagement experience. (A few years later the term ‘couch potato’ would be popularized by TV Guide.) It was nothing more than a Nixon-era pipe dream, but Fox News became the post-Fairness Doctrine baby he nurtured to psychopathic adulthood, verbally mass-shooting counterbalancing liberal thought and making the world safe for bold racism, misogyny, violent political expression, and every -phobia dear to conservative hearts. Then the lunatics overthrew the dictators. It may be why Fox began sliding even more toward crackpot political conspiracy theories and how a compulsive liar like George Santos could get elected to anything. I ask, nevertheless, not whether we’re being too hard on Fox News and its unquestionable American commitment to money over ethics or morality, but why his customers are so willfully blind and ignorant. And whether we ignore, perhaps, our own potential Fox Newses on the left. Lies, damn lies and liberalism Media Bias Fact Check categorizes content sites by bias and factualism. Its description of ‘Left-Biased’: “These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.” Here are a few of our fave-or-ite left-wings: Alternet - Black Lives Matter - Boingboing - Change.org - CNN - Daily Beast - Feminist Current - GLAAD - Human Rights Campaign - LGBTQ Nation - Media Matters - NAACP - Occupy.com - Pink News - Rolling Stone - Slate - The Good Men Project - TruthOut - Vox Nothing that screams ‘The future Fox News of the left.’ So far. But the rise of authoritarianism on the left includes the shock ‘n’ awe politics of personal destruction embodied in ‘cancel culture’, the ‘deplatforming’ of controversial speakers, (not always from the far right), the censorship of books and other content, and the utter takeover by ‘woke’ ideology of cowardly university academics who meekly submit to each dictatorial demand to fire any faculty member who dares challenge their power. I’m coming to realize that America may be turning into a shade of Afghanistan, when two coalitions regularly overthrew each other for power: The Northern Alliance and the Taliban until NATO overthrew the Taliban. Whichever one ruled that week, it wasn’t good for anyone. Except those in power. Hateful fundamentalists or fundamentalist haters? Which do you prefer? Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

It's real, but like the left's other cliches, the real deal's not nearly as pervasive as advertised. Underneath the resistance is a more comprehensible fear: Sexual violence. Royalty-free image from Rawpixel Out of all the left’s badly-abused words , ‘transphobia’ has to be the one flogged so hard it’s become one with the asphalt. I’m not sure anyone really knows what genuine transphobia is anymore. The key is the suffix ‘-phobia’, which is an outsized fear of something. Like, I’m pretty genuinely arachnophobic if a spider gets on me (I’m not sure a serial killer would freak me out as much). A mysophobe is someone terrified of germs, dirt or contamination and goes to great lengths to maintain very strict personal hygiene. And real homophobia is best exemplified by what you see in the U.S. military’s ongoing tussle over gay soldiers, for whom President Bill Clinton pioneered ‘Don’t say gay’ long before Florida. The left famously tosses around pejorative words they’ve long since rendered meaningless: Racist, misogynist, transphobic, TERF, Nazi, fascist. The right is in the process of neutering ‘woke’ and ‘pedophile’. Like the left, it’s also fond of Nazi and fascist. Will the real transphobics please stand up? The ‘misics and the ‘phobes Last November a fun game trended on Twitter for an hour or so in which people were encouraged to take a news headline and insert the word ‘transphobia’. It parodied Pink News, an LGBTQ website obsessed with transphobia in its headlines. Some of us wags with nothing more constructive to do took up the challenge. I had a field day with it. Planned Parenthood defines transphobia as “….when people have deeply rooted negative beliefs about what it means to be transgender , nonbinary, and gender nonconforming.” Furthermore, it goes a step further and defines it in context of ‘transmisia’, which “highlights the prejudice at the root of beliefs, attitudes, behaviors, and systems that hurt or deny the existence of trans and nonbinary people.” They’re similar, but Planned Parenthood differentiates trans misia from trans phobia, as the latter is an anxiety disorder along with all other genuine phobias. Transmisia is mostly what you see on social media, while genuine transphobia is far less common. The question few seem to ask is: What is the nature of the hostility or fear of transgender people? Which appears to be mostly against transwomen, whose stories dominate mass and social media. Conservatives, and in particular the far right and the religious right, have been historically hostile to gender-bending or blurring of sex roles. For the religious, such attitudes are rooted in the Bible, when patriarchy meant women and children were property of the man. Ergo, the right is more prone to homophobia, which is disgust for a man who ‘acts like a woman’, having sex with another man, and even worse, if he’s the ‘receiver’. Why would he let himself be treated like a woman? they ask themselves, which gives us some insight into what they actually think about women. ‘Phobia’ enters the picture when the man becomes afraid he might be targeted by male lust, an intolerable situation for a sex used to being the hunter or the predator rather than the prey. (Prey = weak, vulnerable, passive. Like an animal. Like a woman.) He might even become the prey of a man who can force sexual contact if he rebuffs the advances. It can create cognitive dissonance on some level if the homophobe realizes or considers this is what women have to feel - fear of rape and sexual violence he himself might have forced on or created within women. Today’s potential predators, in the mind of a genuine -phobe, look more like women than predators in years past. Someone feminine who could force herself on him with a penis, and there’s nothing he can do to stop it. Worse, what if he becomes attracted to a beautiful woman who turns out to be more penis-ed than advertised, as portrayed in a famous movie, activating potential worries this might mean he himself is gay - or less straight, at least, than he thinks. I would think it might be a shock to find one’s self fooled by someone one thought was the opposite sex, but not necessarily homophobia-triggering, but then I never was attracted to a man who turned out to be a woman. I can understand being mad or feeling misled, but not wondering whether I was actually gay for being attracted to said individual. But I’m not a man, and in my experience men worry far more about being gay than women. Although interestingly, an obsessive fear that one might be gay could be a sign of obsessive-compulsive disorder, rather than homophobia or closeted homosexuality. Where genuine transphobia lies is a real fear of being a romantic or sexual target of someone who’s not what they seem. It’s a newer iteration of homophobia, which itself is rooted in misogyny. But fearing the threat of sexual violence from male bodies, however they dress? That’s the most common threat for both men and women. Men are violent, against other men as well as women, especially against men who aren’t ‘man enough’ for them. That’s not transphobia. That’s fear for personal safety. Let’s note that transmen are largely left out of this debate. There’s none about transmen and washrooms. I expect they use whichever they want, with little drama. Men won’t care as much if a woman is there, although I wonder how safe the transmen might feel since they’ll be as susceptible to rape as they always were. Ironically, for all the male fear of male sexuality directed at themselves, many studies have found that a large number of transgender youth, teens and adults have been sexually assaulted and raped, and may be at higher risk. Less attention has been paid to transgender sex offenders, complicated by how common it’s becoming for typical male heterosexual offenders to ‘go trans’ in an effort to stay out of male prisons where, pretty arguably, they might otherwise become targets of transphobic male violence, or male rape one way or the other. But also arguably, because women’s prisons will give them access to women who can’t run away. These men will rule the roost. The fear of sexual violence by transwomen, literal males under the skirt, lies at the heart of trans movement resistance for both men and women. There’s no difference in criminality between men who identify as men and men who don’t. It’s easier to change the hair, the clothes, the face, and the body than it is to change what’s between the ears. The fake female rape rise Rapes by women against women are on the rise according to the latest stats, unless you realize that transwoman rapists are now called ‘she’. News stories not always in the right-wing media abound of men taking advantage of the trans movement to commit sex offenses (not always rape) in women’s private spaces, yet TRAs and ‘allies’ claim ‘that never happens’ and complain about ‘transphobia’, treating all ‘people with penises’ as though they were potential rapists. Well, yeah, that’s why we have sex-segregated bathrooms and other spaces. Because some men will take advantage of it, and we don’t know who. Like how the University of Toronto had to decrease their number of gender-neutral bathrooms ‘coz guess what da boyz did? They filmed two women showering. Don’t know how the miscreants were dressed or what their pronouns were, but don’t care. Penises do not belong in women’s private spaces. It’s not transphobic to say so. It’s realistic. The bathroom tug-of-war may not be completely about women’s safety. It may be as much the flashpoint over control - whether women will cede male control over private spaces. Ironically, the right may have driven this issue that so threatens them more than they realize. After all, the right itself doesn’t believe in women’s right to control their bodies; as predicted, after their victory over Roe v. Wade, they’ve begun attacking birth control. Women’s rights suddenly seem more important to misogynist right-wingers now that their wives or daughters may have to share a bathroom with a male pervert discreetly filming them or waiting to assault them when they open the stall door. The law of unintended consequences. TRAs behaving badly Transactivists’ common complaint that criticizing the movement ‘feeds the right-wing narrative’ ignores how they enable the right to gorge on transmisia and transphobia: TRAs’ bad behavior and inflammatory language, heavily fueled by the least marginalized group in the world - adult human males who’ve appropriated marginalization. As J.K. Rowling noted in the excellent podcast series The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling , “…Women are the only group, to my knowledge, that are being asked to embrace members of their oppressor class unquestioningly, with no caveat.” We live at a point in history where transactivists demand we believe genuinely absurd beliefs not just from the right but also from the left, on something that’s not a matter of opinion but established scientific fact: Sexually dimorphic humans cannot change their sex just by wishing or declaring it so, or with medical intervention. No, not even with a gender identity certificate. I think of all the times I laughed at Christian fundamentalists when they came to my door handing out execrable Jack Chick tracts. “How can I believe what you say about the afterlife,” I’d ask, “when you can’t even handle the fundamental truth that we evolved from earlier life forms, and particularly monkeys?” I’d force them to stay on my turf rather than argue on Biblical points. “This is established scientific fact, as clear to anyone who reads a science book as it is to you and I that the sky is blue. We can both look up and see it’s true, unless you’re color-blind, then it might not look blue, but that will be a failure of your eyes rather than the truth. Why should I believe you when you can’t even accept established truth here on earth?” The notion that we can change gender, that a transman is the same as a man and a transwoman is a woman is the far left equivalent of the fundamentalist Christian Creationist belief. Right here in 2023. TRAs demand we accept their deluded view of the world or we are ‘killing transpeople’, wishing them dead or erased, committing genocide, encouraging the police to not investigate crimes against transfolk, and many other invented claims and downright lies designed to shut down the awful truth they don’t want to hear, akin to the belief that challenges the 6,000-year-old planet and the six-day Creation. Image by Mohamed Hassan on Pixabay Couple that with the aggressive drive to push gender questioning on small children, and an equally aggressive drive to alter their bodies permanently, and the right’s got all it needs to scare their own into voting Republican to Save The Children. What do Republican political wannabes need with transphobes when they’ve got TRAs? And we on the Level Left find ourselves allied with the the forme. The Murky Middle is where we don’t always like the company we keep. I can support people, including children, who feel weird, or different, or aren’t sure of their gender identity or romantic preference without agreeing with every single point of religious or gender ideology. I don’t live in a black and white world; mine contains many more shades of grey than a mommy-porn kink trilogy. I can agree with conservatives on some things, but not others. They can agree with me and my kind on the need for same-sex bathrooms without necessarily sharing my or our views about abortion, gun control, the debt ceiling, or the wisdom of supporting Donald Trump. It’s not transphobic, or even transmisic, to state what I believe in good faith—with the weight of the scientific community behind me—that sex is ingrained in every cell of one’s body and that biology does in fact define you. I might privately believe you’re a man or woman underneath the garb and stereotypical haircuts but still treat you as you want to be treated, as long as you’re not a dick—or a bitch—about it. I don’t think I’ve met very many transphobes, as I suspect most of us haven’t unless we hang out with toxic masculine men and toxic feminine women, perhaps with their own internalized misogyny. We arguably know far more transmisics, and may be guilty of it ourselves at least at one point or another. If the alphabet soup community wants to change the attitudes, or reduce the resistance, it can start with the heteromisic, homomisic, and gynomisic (or -phobe) in the mirror, whose hate for Others who don’t believe like they do directly approximates the hate we see in the right’s MAGA rallies. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

In case woke censorship has de-platformed you or otherwise taken you down, or could if you don't watch your mouth Bye-bye! Photo by Tom Fisk on Pexels Updated 07/26/23: CounterSocial is moved to the list of ‘woke’ deplatformers. My account got suspended and everything I had on there was ‘irreversibly’ wiped off. They didn’t tell me why, of course; I’m guessing they didn’t like this article that I posted there yesterday. It’s A Sign Of The Apocalypse When The Right Supports Science And The Left Doesn’t. Glenn Loury is a black intellectual I subscribe to on Substack. He and his guests’ dialogues/trialogues are always thought-provoking. I especially favor one recurring guest, linguistics professor John McWhorter. While Loury is a bit more conservative, McWhorter and I are level-headed libs. I highly recommend his book Woke Racism: How A New Religion Has Betrayed Black America . McWhorter doesn’t ‘do’ victimhood racism, like I don’t ‘do’ victimhood feminism. Recently, YouTube took down one of Loury’s talks allegedly for violating ‘hate speech’ standards. As many have learned by now, ‘hate speech’ means first and foremost anything that offends, upsets, or challenges transactivists and no surprise, guess what triggered this takedown. Loury and McWhorter had studiously avoided discussing transgenderism, until Loury hosted both McWhorter and journalist, theologian and educator Mark Goldblatt, who’s recently written a book, I Feel, Therefore I Am: The Triumph of Woke Subjectivism . He’s who I sleep with at night! At least until I finish it. A few days later, Loury’s YouTube episode went down like You-Know-Who in a Miami federal courthouse. Goldblatt had floated the provocative, and as far as I know, fairly new idea that one element driving transgender growth is that gender dysphoria is a mental illness, possibly akin to schizophrenia. I found Goldblatt’s argument interesting but unpersuasive, especially since he didn’t address what has already been widely noted - that ‘gender dysphoria’ may be a haven for those with unrelated, untreated mental illness. If that’s what he meant he didn’t make it clear. It sounded like he made a case for gender dysphoria as a mental illness itself, and I’m not ready to agree with that. Nevertheless, it was clear it was an opinion, not stated fact. And YouTube took it down because, and this is a broad problem across online fora and social media, Thou shalt not speak critically of transgender broads (ar ar!) . The demonstration of this sort of power is exactly why I consider transgenders to be the least marginalized group, ever. And also because it’s almost always biological males behind the power demonstrations. Big surprise. The woke battle against opinion I’ve been de-platformed twice for angering transgenders - first on Medium a few years ago and as I understand it, the Woke Reign of Terror continues there with others threatened, downranked, or de-platformed for offending transactivists, however rationally and politely expressed. Medium has a long and well-deserved reputation for being a far-left platform and nothing seems to have changed since I left. I got de-platformed more recently on Vocal.media, less problematic because thanks to its outworn platform and lack of support for non-fiction writers I was already on the verge of abandoning it anyway. But what’s interesting is they weren’t very specific about why my account was suddenly suspended, and without warning (with Medium there’s fair warning), and when I pushed, the customer support kid (I could tell) cited one article about transgenderism and vaguely alluded to others. “Then why did Vocal approve these articles in the first place?” I asked since, unlike Medium, one’s articles have to be approved before publication. They never answered, and I didn’t push it since I was done with them anyway. When I joined a few years ago humans approved submitted articles before publication. Then they automated the process and my articles published in minutes instead of a few days. So now, I assume, like Medium, someone has to complain about ‘hate speech’. And it is, as we will see very shortly, always woke snowflakes behind it. I’m sarcastic, I’m critical, and I’m without question opinionated, but I have never once said anything indicating I hate transpeople, or suggested they don’t have the right to exist, or they should all be killed, or whatever oppressive fantasy they’ve concocted about their feminist critics. I’ve stated many times the extent of my TERFiness is that male-born bodies don’t belong on female sports teams or places where women get naked or semi-naked. Otherwise, I don’t care what they do, where they go, who they love, how they dress, or what they call themselves. I had been thinking about getting back to making YouTube videos, but one thing that held me back was whether I could say anything feminist about transgenderism. Before, I’d never addressed it. Glenn Loury’s experience convinced me I can’t return to YouTube. This hasn’t happened to me, and it won’t, because I know it will if I say anything critical of the transgender movement. The public platform Who’s Who of woke censorship (and not) Of the main Big Tech players, Facebook de-platforms the right just like everyone else but notably also occasionally, for the right. Particularly conservative religious cultures who live as in terror of free speech as Ron DeSantis. Google and YouTube also de-platform. Twitter’s commitment to free speech prevention has slacked off with its current and somewhat emotionally unstable CEO. It was pretty damning when Elon Musk tweeted photos of the closet full of #StayWoke t-shirts he found at Twitter HQ. The Old Regime had been hostile to critique of ‘marginalized’ groups however protected said speech might be under the First Amendment. It controversially removed a lot of far-right-wing groups and its demigod Donald Trump after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, but the optics would have been terrible if they hadn’t—the conspirators, after all, plotted it in plain sight on Twitter and elsewhere. And six people died. The Twitterati didn’t want to get caught in that forthcoming investigative shitstorm. Today Twitter appears more open to unpopular opinions regardless of whether from the left or right, although it’s still pretty arguably a multipartisan shithole for the mentally ill, since Musk’s rocky reign as the platform’s Fearless Tweeter caused advertisers, non-profits, journalists and many influencers to abandon it. Patreon , the fan-funding site where one can look for patrons to help fund one’s creative work, has banned some of its higher-profile and money-drawing former creators like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson for saying controversial things that were not to the left of Castro. Censorship may now get very expensive for Patreon: They may be on the hook for millions of dollars in arbitration fees as a new California law argues that Patreon’s practice of banning controversial creators disrupts “the economic relationship between Creator and Backer,” legally considered to be “tortious interference with a business relationship,” and while the snowflakes at Patreon can continue to ban people, their backers can now dispute the decision and request it be moved to arbitration since they can’t support their creators anymore and possibly lose their content. Paypal may be next. But make no mistake, it’s the left’s censorship efforts driving the growth of alternative social media and blogging platforms to avoid being taken down for offending the fragile. There are not, to my knowledge, right-wing fora or platforms de-platforming others for political speech they don’t like. I can now add CounterSocial , a Twitter/X alternative that suspended my account for unspecified reasons but which pretty certainly is my article highlighting the lack of science behind ‘gender-affirming’ care. (07/26/23) The unfortunate result is that most alternatives are, to be blunt, right-wing shitholes. What I’m looking for are those committed to adult, mature speech (there are a few) with intervention only if there’s real ‘hate speech’ expressed (‘Kill all the blind pot-smoking left-handed immigrant multisexual plumbers’), as well as those that may have started out as super-right-wing, but may be getting infiltrated by lefties also abandoning platforms or getting banned by hyper-woke censors. Something to consider as you peruse the following lists. The last 10-15 years have sorely tested the First Amendment and opened debate on whether there should be limits the pre-online Founding Fathers couldn’t have anticipated. I myself, for all my resistance to censorship red-capped or trans-flagged, sometimes wonder whether there should be new limits for the First beyond prohibiting treason or endangering public safety (the latter of which may offer a particularly strong legal argument for it, eventually). So take my snark for what it is, but not necessarily my opinion as to whether these users should or shouldn’t be allowed their free speech. The list is offered to help navigate where they might want to devote their attention, and to cut through the plethora of right-wing sites many (including myself) would rather give a pass. Just know the extremists have all flocked to many of these because of the Big Tech purges. Where there is minimal or no moderation, you’ll find right-wing extremism. Other platforms are practicing some moderation in an effort to keep them from turning into hyper-partisan twitholes. Note that none of these following are censorship-free ; and never have been. You still can’t claim you want to kill the President or offer groomer tips for sexually abusing children. These sites, for better or for worse, take a largely hands-off approach to the newer forms of ‘woke’ censorship endemic on Big Tech platforms. Many of them operate on the ‘Fediverse’, a conglomeration of countless open-source, independently-hosted, interconnected servers for social networking, blogging, microblogging, file hosting and sharing. There’s no central authority deciding what is or isn’t ‘acceptable’ and its decentralized nature makes it less vulnerable to government interference or shutdown. As well as to controlling what users have access to on this network constellation free-for-all. Still right-wing shitholes “You should check out Gab,” my conservative trans-man (yes really) fellow feminist writer told me. “It’s not as horribly conservative as you’re led to believe.” I considered it, out of curiosity, but didn’t. “I’m afraid I’ll wind up on some government shit list,” I told him. Good call, since Gab and other newer Twitter alternatives like Parler came under attack shortly after for their utilization in planning the Jan. 6th insurrection attempt. (As did Twitter itself). Gab and Parler are pretty much right-wing shitholes. So is Gettr , launched for conservatives by a former Donald Trump aide. FrankSpeech is a social media platform formed by MyPillow guy Mike Lindell. Minds is a darling of the far right, CloutHub is for Christian natonalists, and Telegram, based in Dubai, is a critical app for many far-right groups, and a playground for cybercriminals . BitChute is also famously far-right and banned from Paypal; London Real was started by American podcaster Brian Rose who became a British citizen and then switched from Democrat to Republican. (No word yet on whether he’s planning to become a woman.) The Wall Street/London banker in a fancy suit provides a platform for conspiracy theorists and started his own London Real Party . Also the LondonReal.tv platform promotes scammy-sounding crypto, bitcoin and getrichquick ‘academies’. Bleah. FreeTalk 45 was begun by Fox News wannabe One-America News, currently on the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit list for allegedly lying about their voting devices. Steemit - This social media site is blockchain-based where users can get STEEM cryptocurrency for publishing and curating content. I myself am deeply suspicious of bitcoin and crypto, but what’s of much bigger concern here is how Steemit helped to mainstream QAnon. Don’t forget moldy oldies like 4chan with no accountability and famously a haven for extremists and ‘hacktivists’ (double bleah). Platforms and fora for grownups, including a few left-wing shitholes Substack - This is one of the few platforms which has a very clear understanding of what constitutes ‘hate speech’ and prefers not to interfere unless one engages in very clear unprotected speech. One will find plenty of right-wing writers but but you really have to look, and it won’t get recommended to you unless you read Trumpily to begin with. It does appear to have a firm commitment to free speech, the way it was before the First Amendment came under attack on both sides by extremists. I feel pretty comfortable that, unless Elon Musk buys it or something, I won’t get shut down here. They’ve already been attacked by and stood down transgender wannabe censors. Mastodon - This decentralized Twitter alternative has been around for awhile and when I joined several years ago, it was super-woke. It was also super-kludgy and painfully slow to use which was why I stopped bothering with it. It’s still a bit kludgy and I find it a bit confusing to use but it’s better than it was. So far, no issues with any of my articles. It did also find itself connected via the Fediverse to Gab a few years ago. But I haven’t seen Gab there myself. diaspora* - It appears not to have much of a right-wing problem apart from, briefly several years ago, having to remove ISIS-related pods and posts after Islamic extremists were kicked off Twitter. Friendica - Part of the Fediverse, Friendica doesn’t appear so far to have a massive partisanship problem. It appears to be closer to Mastodon than Parler. Tribel - It’s arguably a left-wing shithole, although I say that tongue in cheek since I’m left-wing. It’s run by Democratic activists, and lefty users complain they’re being infiltrated by more right-wingers. I like the platform. It’s easier to deal with than Mastodon and I like the political mix. Tribel is rumoured to be Elon Musk’s next big acquisition which means one less competitor for Shitter—er, I mean Twitter. Although I’m not sure he’s financially prepared for any ambitious acquisitions until Twitter is out of the red. I’ve found no allegations so far that it censors political speech. Tribel is currently crowdfunding and has raised their market valuation from $19 million to $21 million and are aiming for $25 million. I’m keeping an eye on these folks. Aether - Advertised as an alternative to Reddit (itself a political mix), Aether is decentralized and open-sourced with self-governing communities and some moderation. Their FAQ notes it’s a ‘civilized place for public discussion’ and offers the usual cautions against name-calling, ad hominem attacks, etc. But it avoids censorship. Shitposter Club - They don’t censor but they’re also trying to keep the platform from turning into the twithole Twitter turns into when there’s no adult supervision. Their terms of service warn about the usual stuff: No kiddie porn, spamming, doxing, persistent harassing (insulting is fine) but they ‘don't want the server to turn to shit and flamewars and Heil Hitler All The Time.’ So, no censorship, but kinda. A little here and there. Tumblr - This microblogging platform has famously been a left-wing shithole for years; hyper-super-duper-mega-ultra-woke with chocolate sauce, whipped cream, sprinkles and a cherry. It pretty arguably birthed and incubated the modern trans movement and all the labels. Despite this, it was so hands-off censorship at one time that it became a free-for-all that came under heavy criticism for not reigning back some extremism, starting in 2012 when it took a stand on blogs that promoted self-harm and eating disorders. It took forever to crack down on genuine hate speech, and in 2018 commenced The Great Purge of adult content including, allegedly, kiddie porn, along with violent imagery and sexual harassment. So it censors , but not, AFAICT, free speech. Good on them! It’s still super-duper woke but AFAICT only bans you if you post some really serious shit. Like porn. Right-wing-shitholes to keep an eye on They may have started out or may still be right-wing shitholes, but are showing signs of being infiltrated by cooler heads including the insufficiently woke on the left. MeWe - It’s a self-described Facebook alternative with a focus on data privacy, which is a nice change. Its hands-off moderation policies make it a natural for crackpots and crank jobs tired of being challenged and fact-checked. But it also counts among its advisors some pretty smart brains and Internet pioneers like Tim Berners-Lee, Steve Wozniak, SumZero CEO Divya Narendra and filmmaker Cullen Hoback. Locals - Right-wing but established as an alternative to Patreon after Dave Rubin, the founder, got banned. His political views have spanned the spectrum. He sometimes calls himself a ‘classical liberal’ and has interviewed conservatives who don’t fall within the purview of the far right, like John McCain, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Sam Harris. So far, Locals looks right-wing but not super-far right. Rumble - This right-wing YouTube alternative is now being infiltrated by the left as woke censorship de-platforms liberals on The Big Guy. I’m watching them and weighing whether, or when, I might join Rumble since I’m quite sure I’ll get de-platformed by YouTube, and TikTok is also too woke for intellectual freedom (not to mention dangerously Chinese-y spy-ish). If I do join I may have to hold my nose, unless I can find a better alternative. Or maybe it will become the multipartisan shithole I prefer. Is censorship ever okay? My ‘let it all hang out’ free speech values were solidifed in the ‘90s during my pre-Internet BBS days. I hung out in skeptic groups and one particularly fun chat channel called #holysmoke for challenging Christian fundamentalism. I confess my commitment to free speech is sorely tested by events in recent years and in particular the Jan. 6 attack. Unregulated social media is a breeding ground for misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and genuine hate speech. Not to mention poor self-esteem. Jonathan Haidt on Substack is writing a book about social media’s negative impact on children’s, teen’s, and young adults’s mental health. Hate speech is a real problem, with the right believing anything goes, and the left having lost sight of what’s genuine hate speech. I didn’t complain, I’ll admit, when right-wing groups got removed from Twitter, and I tweeted how great it would be if Twitter did the same to the extremist woke left. That was never going to happen, since they didn’t attack the Capitol, but I knew Twitter would turn into a woke shithole without them, which was what happened until Musk. People got banned, shadow-banned, downranked and suspended for upsetting the delicate sensibilities of mostly ‘woke’ transvestites wielding their patriarchal power to shut down women for daring, once again, to say No to them and their penii. My censorship views aren’t 100% pure. I doubt anyone’s are. But what used to be unacceptable—hate speech and censorship—has become mainstream by both, and what was once acceptable free speech is censor-worthy if it ‘hurts feelings’ (like stating transwomen aren’t women - a biological fact that one may or may not accept), or makes people feel ‘unsafe’ (wokespeak for ‘I don’t have a rational, reasoned response to this’). I suspect we’re entering a new era where we may need to revisit what free speech is, what’s protected and what’s not, and whether some of it is driving violent acts like Jan. 6 or mass shootings. Or, you know, pizza shop threats because of some silly-ass conspiracy theory. Until we bring about a kinder, saner online world, the alternatives to Big Tech censorship are out there, and the good news is they’re not all right-wing shitholes. They may become less so as disgruntled liberals infiltrate and hopefully dilute the more toxic extremism. (Or righties infiltrate platforms like Tribel). A Level Lefty can dream. I Feel, Therefore I Am - The interview with Mark Goldblatt that got Loury his ‘first strike’ with YouTube I Was Censored By YouTube - Glenn Loury, speaking with is creative director on what happened, and how Substack is committed to free speech Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

The 'Not young and cute enough to listen to anymore' thing didn't happen. I didn't stay young and cute, so maybe my stridency drowned out the apathy. CC0 2.0 image by Kim Hyeyoung on Flickr When I am an old woman I shall wear purple With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me. - Jenny Joseph, ‘Warning’ When I was living with my now ex-partner, we subscribed to the Hartford Courant. I regularly read one of their female op-ed columnists. Once she wrote about noticing her opinion seemed no longer as valuable to male editors, seemingly because she had reached ‘a certain age’. That age was 40. I paid attention because I wasn’t so far from forty and while I was still pretty cute, the columnist noted she didn’t look much different at forty than earlier ages, yet she thought she was glossed over, her opinions less often solicited, at editorial meetings. Her opinion was definitely more valued, she felt, when she was younger and prettier. Interesting, I thought, as I was a fairly opinionated and mouthy young(ish) woman myself. I’d best be on the lookout for that, I thought, as I approached forty. I don’t want to be shunted aside just because I’m no longer wank material. I just turned sixty and so far, I don’t think I'm any less heard than I was when I was a super-flirtatious belly dancer at 35. Be strident! I’ve never been one to hold back my opinion, although I’m working to tone it down. Maybe, like, you know, going ‘flamethrower’ instead of ‘nuclear’. I never reached that point where I felt ‘unheard’. Although ‘heard/unheard’ wasn’t a recognized thing back in the ‘90s. I just never stopped speaking up. I have envied men over the decades, they who are oh-so-confident in themselves, sometimes to the point of insufferability, but more often in the best sense. Men don’t care nearly as much what other people think of them. While everyone suffers from Imposter Syndrome to one degree or another, women specialize in it. We under-believe in ourselves, where men tend to over-believe, but here’s the thing: They get shit done, whether they have the talent and chops or not. They acquire skills by doing stuff, achieving things we chickies tell ourselves ‘we can’t’, and dudes will continue to rule the world until we grow some bigger labia, learn how to fail and not give up . What I never envied men for is their ability to speak up. I had that covered. I offered my opinions, sometimes stuffed down one’s throat, I talked back, challenged, and made myself heard . You can’t help but hear a woman when she speaks loudly and forcefully, or 'strident’ as our misogynist critics love to call it. Embrace the insult, ladies. Strident is something we should be proud of! Men are strident, and what’s good for the gander…! Within reason. I wrote some pretty strident opinions for a small Connecticut alternative newspaper in my thirties. When I was digitizing my life a few years ago I ran across my old stories, and there were many I didn’t scan. I winced just to read the headlines. They were pretty politically, uh, strident. I’m embarrassed about them now. But I never stopped speaking my mind. My first website was circa 1997, called Deify Yourself! It was a humor page of funny religious satire I curated from the Internet. You could self-declare yourself a deity, just as so many religious leaders have done (but I cautioned newbie deities not to abuse their power!) It went a bit viral early on in Australia when the Weekend Australian wrote about it. I don’t believe I have ever not felt heard. To be clear, that doesn’t mean my opinion was always acted upon, but people did listen. I spoke up in company meetings. My opinion was often solicited. Times had changed. I’ve had to deal with ‘mansplaining’ on occasion, lecturing, people brushing me off, but I can’t say as I’ve ever felt unheard, like my stories or ‘lived experiences’ weren’t taken seriously. Not everyone listened, some ignored some were rude, some tried to talk over me, but I don’t know it was because I wasn’t a cute 30-year-old anymore. No one gets ‘heard’ by everyone. Not even the Dalai Lama, who has to deal with the tone-deaf Chinese government. I’m quite certain countless people wished I’d just STFU already! Fuck ‘em. 60 is the new 40 I don’t feel sixty. In my head, I’m still 35 and totally cute. A writer friend of mine who was the age I am today when we met online said the same thing. Mentally he was still a handsome hunk who could get any babe he wanted. Hell, he was married five times. He told stories of how one year in Hollywood as a struggling screenwriter he snorted $50,000 up his nose. (That’s over $232,000 in USD today!) Maybe that explains why his career choice didn’t pan out. He passed away a few years ago. If I never bought the insane notion I wouldn’t be heard, I did buy the insane notion I wasn’t attractive at forty. This attitude was juiced, in part, by going on dating sites and not being nearly as in demand as I might have been years prior. I got over the romantic entitlement but some male apathy, I’d learn two decades later, was the toxic influence of porn on men and online datings’s degradation of everyone’s social skills. As I approached fifty I felt less angry and irritable. Things that bothered me just a few years ago no longer did. I cared less about what people thought. Now I am sixty, and am I an old woman? At my birthday party, friends told me I was the youngest 60-year-old they knew. (I hope that doesn’t mean I’m prone to tantrums and drama queen theatrics!) I find myself watching my aging process less with disappointment and depression than curiosity. I keep myself up for myself, and don’t give a damn whether people think I don’t dress properly for my age, which I don’t. But I find myself this year scrutinizing my Summer Bimbo clothes thinking maybe it’s time to reboot. I bought some new pretty new tops that show less wrinkles skin. I won’t dress as sexy as I once did (like, last year!) but I will not look like those women who’ve given up on themselves. I’m not an old lady. Yet. You see the woman in the back flirting with the gentlemen next to her? That’s my grandmother. The woman on the other side with the highball and the ciggie? That’s my great-grandmother. When she was 73 she had a 50-year-old boyfriend who was madly in love with her. She had two sisters who notoriously held naked pool parties. And my great-great-great grandmother was an English servant girl who married the son of her employer which scandalized his family. I descend from a long line of temptresses and tarts. I aspire to be my great-grandmother when I get to be her age. Maybe with a cannabis gummy instead of the ciggie since I don’t smoke. But def the highball. Unfollowing the unheard When I blogged on Medium I read countless stories of women who complained they were ‘unheard’ when they told their abuse stories. There were always some commenters, almost always males, who suggested she was lying, or exaggerating, or seeking attention, or just made a snide remark in an effort to ruin her day. “Women aren’t heard!” many would lament, ignoring the countless comments from supportive, believing women and men, some truthtellers failing to acknowledge their stories were pretty lame, and the ‘abuse’ they described sounded more like an immature partner who didn’t know how to handle conflict. Failing to persuade others is not ‘not being heard’. Not getting what you want isn’t ‘not being heard’ either. But it still takes great courage to tell one’s trauma story. Some will hear, some won’t. That’s life. Many people are unheard today because they’re afraid to speak up. There’s a Big Chill on free speech, with many not willing to risk their jobs or their families’ safety. You must choose your words carefully on social media; others are literally roaming the platforms looking for something to destroy someone over. Or they send rape and death threats and ‘ swat ’ your home. Censors won’t shut me down, or shut me up. I’ve still got Substack and Wix. Substack’s idea of ‘hate speech’ is, as it turns out, actual hate speech . Not opinions fragile, spoiled, coddled flowers don’t like. I am 60 now, and I grow less and less concerned with what others think of me. Maybe I’m turning into a man! (Ha ha. Relax.) I am loud and strident. Speak up, speak out, speak loudly, and be stridently strident in your stridency, no matter who you are. Make them hear you. Whether they want to or not. I am an old woman, long past forty, and I am still heard. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

Sometimes I swear we're only one or two steps away from resurrecting Nero's Circus Sea cucumber impersonating the Titan submarine that went off near the Titanic. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 image by Mark Yokoyama on Flickr On Thursday, June 22nd, hours before we learned the adventurers in the Oceangate Titan Sub calamity were absolutely, positively, Titan-ically dead, I scrolled Twitter looking for up-to-the-minute news. Like many, I followed the story closely and like some, I hoped for a safe outcome for all. Not everyone on Twitter was compassionate. Because, billionaires. You don’t even want to know what the emotionally deficient were producing over on Tik Tok. Apparently, a tragedy like this is super-hilarious when you don’t know or like the victims. Yeah, there’s a lot wrong with the passengers in this story. Willful blindness to safety issues. A VP fired for pointing out what a deathtrap this thing was. ‘Experimental’ submarine: Something you NEVER descend into. A submarine guided by a cheap VIDEO GAME CONTROLLER. A Plexiglass shield. No GPS. Maybe some spit and duct tape. And oh yeah, bolted inside. While sitting on the floor. For a four-hour round trip. Then there’s the stupidity of risk-takers who signed a waiver mentioning death three times. Who paid $250,000 each to tourist the Titanic, see it up close and personal, and cross that off their bucket list. The sheer brainlessness in getting into a thing like that with its known safety issues. Did they know? If not, why? And if they did, WTF??? Men take what appear to the rest of us to be reckless risks. On the other hand, as I’ve seen expressed elsewhere, it’s why men do and discover great things in crazy places and women don’t. It was men who located the Titanic in 1985, not ambitious women. When women do crazy things - like climb Mount Everest - we do it years after men have gone before us. I don’t think these passengers were stupid for wanting to see the Titanic from a submarine, I think they were stupid for doing it in that submarine. And although I can unequivocally say I’d never do anything that stupid, I too am not immune from the desire, every once in a great while, to do something reckless. About fifteen years ago I climbed to a sacred kiva at the top of a New Mexican cliff with ladders and narrow paths. The ladders looked strong and I really wanted to see the kiva, but it was dangerous. What if I slipped? What if I fell? I might get killed, or permanently injure myself, and I was a Canadian in the United States with travel insurance. A very rickety-looking railing along a narrow footpath on a cliff We done did it! Several years later, I did something a helluva lot dumber, with some peer pressure from a male friend: I climbed the Scarborough Cliffs in the east end of Toronto with him and a third (female) friend. Words have yet to be invented to describe how stupid that was. People have died doing that. People have had to be rescued from this foolish endeavor. Today, not back then, the City sends you the bill for many thousands of dollars. I can’t blame him . I did it to push myself to do something I’d never done before. I survived the kiva climb, right??? There’s pushing yourself, and then there’s being a complete dumbass. So I get it, but I wouldn’t have climbed into the Titan if they’d paid me $250,000. The teenager supposedly didn’t want to go, but his aunt said he did. So who knows. Dumbassery may or may not run in his family. But that doesn’t mean their deaths were funny. Stories like this are packaged with the movie drama of will-they-or-won’t-they-reach-them-in-time, and the larfs you get when people you look down on as stupid gits git what you think they deserve. Sometimes I swear we’re one step away from burning (fill in your least favorite outgroup) as human torches in Nero’s Circus. The Twitter circus I’ve been thinking of this ever since the rise of torture porn, and I don’t mean the garbage you see on actual porn sites. I refer to movie franchises like Saw, Hostel, and The Human Centipede . What kind of a person pays good money to watch other people fake being tortured , for fuck’s sake? Fake torture or live torture in ancient Rome, there’s not much difference, and there are only a few short moral steps from the former to the latter. Maybe we can blame it on OJ. His infamous car chase arguably launched the succeeding era of ‘reality TV’ although anyone old enough to be alive during the B.C. era (Before Cable) remembers all-channels live coverage of breaking news events. John F. Kennedy’s motorcade wasn’t mega-covered outside of Dallas, it was just an ordinary presidential motorcade, interesting only for the locals, until something tragically extraordinary happened. America remained glued to its TV sets in the days after, and as a result, millions watched Kennedy’s accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, get assassinated live. So maybe it’s Jack Ruby’s fault. Or maybe it’s the Hindenburg’s, another event only interesting to the locals, but which went globally viral when the flight went horribly tits-up. Sometimes, it doesn’t end the way it does in the movies. Sometimes the rescue mission fails, and everyone dies. Sometimes the rescue mission never had a chance. We can laugh about it if we’re particularly heinous or just congratulate ourselves on being neither rich enough nor arrogant enough to climb into a demonstrably unsafe sardine can navigated by a Super Mario controller. Still, diving deep to see the Titanic is a pretty cool adventure, assuming you’re in a seaworthy vessel and the manufacturer’s CEO isn’t a fucking idiot. And when they fail, we get to laugh at them, because other people’s pain and tragedy is, like, fucking hilarious. Or something. Twitter isn’t famous for its compassion, and many took the opportunity to create memes and compare the disaster to allegedly prescient pop culture precedents like an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer pilots a submarine that gets stuck in a coral cave and watches his oxygen signal flash ‘Gone’. Or noting that if there had been a pretty 24-year-old on board, Jack Dawson would have saved everyone. Many on Twitter noted how the media reported after the fatal implosion that ‘knocking sounds’ were heard coming from way down below. Experts haven’t yet determined where they came from but it’s not likely the Titan, since the implosion and death were instantaneous. I was reminded of the old Twilight Zone episode in which a Navy destroyer crew hears strange knocking sounds coming from a submarine nearby that sank in World War II. But I didn’t mention it. It seemed to trivialize the gravity of what had happened. Rich people or not, lacking in judgement or proper safety management analysis or not, I can’t take pleasure in their deaths. I can’t imagine even taking pleasure in their deaths had it been Matt Gaetz, Josh Hawley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones and Donald Trump. I might have guiltily thought, Well at least they’re expendable , then castigated myself for it. We may not love them, but someone who knows each one and shares some of their DNA does. We all do dumb shit sometimes. Had my friends and I fallen off the Scarborough Cliffs, others might have laughed at how dumb we were, how we ‘deserved it’. There’s an argument to be made for that, but it doesn’t make it right. Not everyone does something dumb out of a reckless sense of invulnerability. Sometimes they do it to please their dad. How different are we from the savages of yore? The first two results are for movies featuring fake torture. The last two may be a mixed bag of make-believe torture and the real deal. Porn sites don’t much care whether the people in it are actors or real victims. Whatever keeps ‘em clicking, and the real deal, I’ll bet, gets a lot more clicks. Human suffering has always provided entertainment, but in ‘Pre-Code’ Hollywood certain standards had to be met for a movie to be released. The bad guy had to get punished (because in the earliest films he often wasn’t); no romantic or sexual relations between blacks and whites; no white slavery; no making fun of the clergy. How one handled other difficult depictions, such as rape, cruelty to children and animals and drug use were carefully defined. In ancient Rome, there were no such restrictions. It’s unclear whether Nero was ever the ratbastard of which some have written. He was no angel, for sure. The stories of his fabled cruelty stem primarily from three historians: Tacitus, Cassius Dio and Suetonius, who may have been the QAnon of their day. They and Nero existed during a time when the rhetorical tradition of vituperatio flourished. This pretty much encapsulated the ‘anything goes regarding what you want to say about your opponent’ including fake news, conspiracy theories and the vilest accusations imaginable. (Sound familiar?) Others have noted how similarly Nero’s alleged cruelties are to mythological stories. So the QAnon Toga Triumvirate might have been bullshitting about Nero’s human torches and other alleged atrocities, and I’ll note we’ve found no ancient corpses to back up any of it. Nevertheless, torture and execution as entertainment were popular back then and for many centuries after, with the fifteenth century being the most brutal, with torture raised to an art form according to Steven Pinker. We civilized ourselves after that, but I’m not so sure civilization is forever. At least Lee Harvey Oswald’s family wasn’t subjected to hideous memes on social media. We’ve all taken part in today’s ancient circuses, with only some of us hoping the Evil Billionaires would be rescued. In the movies we don’t have to root for them—they’re not real. Also, movie billionaires are always demonstrably evil, whereas I’m not sure any on board the Titan can be believed to be evil for any reason other than being billionaires. One wonders. Who personifies the real evil in the world? And how different are we, really, from the ancients? Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

Far-left feminists have left the 'reality based community' and joined the effort to destroy women's rights It feels like a very dark time to be a woman, online or offline. You’d better watch your mouth, or else. Guns and rape threats from one side, deplatforming and rape threats from the other. People who’ve decided to be women - because, you know, it’s that easy , just snap your carefully-manicured black-polished fingers - will shut you down, assault you, threaten you, maybe even your family. They will get you fired . They will ruin your life. And that’s just the angry transvestites, doing what abusive men have been doing to women for thousands of years. What’s far more mystifying is their genteel little handmaids - not the ones on the right, although they’re there too, waiting for their menfolk to take charge (yet still I add #NotAllConservativeWomen). I reference those on the left - mostly those way farther down who fancy themselves ‘feminists’, who are nothing more than good little Tools of the Patriarchy. Doing the bidding of the sort of men they’d never tolerate if he wore a NASCAR shirt instead of a bustier. Yammering on about abusive men and ignoring the ongoing monstering of their sister J.K. Rowling, just as in the witch hunts of yore. Condemning celebrity men accused of physically abusing their partners, yet cheering on transactivist physical assaults on biological women at Let Women Speak rallies. Cute little girlies playing at being feminist, little realizing how closely they resemble their sisters on the far right. This is what went down at my alma mater, Kent State University, recently. A female (a real one) transactivist proved a challenger’s point about how much she acts like a Nazi. She realized she overstepped her ‘rights’ when the guys noted she’d just committed an assault on camera. Okay, it’s not an ‘assault’ in the traditional sense but it absolutely is by ‘woke’ standards. She slinks away slowly, into the crowd, I bet to make a break for her dorm room before campus security shows up. How did feminists become so passive? Remember when feminists stood up for women’s rights, rather than men’s? Let’s be clear: The trans movement is primarily about men’s rights, to define themselves as women and to go where they want to go, parade their dicks around where they want, and destroy Title IX by discouraging women out of sports by competing against them. All with the blessing of so-called ‘lefties’ and easily-gaslit Regressive Left ‘feminists’. It’s getting so you can’t tell the difference between the left and Ladies Against Women . Although at least LAW is a conscious joke. June 23rd marks the 51st anniversary of Title IX , making it illegal to discriminate against women’s sports at any educational institution receiving federal funding. Second Wave feminists fought long and hard for this, and now their adorable little granddaughters with purple hair and rainbow-colored clothing are working to destroy it, guilelessly playing into the hands of the far right who can’t stand how confident succeeding in sports makes women, and greedy male athletes who’d rather have all the funding back for themselves, thankyouverymuch. It’s not hard to see the right-wing agenda at play in the ‘transwoman’ athlete debate, unless you’re a gutless girlie who hasn’t challenged your own assumptions since you were old enough to legally drink. How can these women obsess so much about ‘the patriarchy’ and ‘misogyny’ and endlessly debate male entitlement, narcissism, and abusive behavior toward women and yet be so relentlessly blind to exactly that, right in front of their pretty little faces? Male violence: It’s not always bad, I guess. Those TERF bitches had it comin’ to ‘em, amirite? How can rational, intelligent women who brook no nonsense from religious fundamentalists on women’s place, who will fight celebrity sexual abusers tooth and nail, who will support their victims, stand with E. Jean Carroll and Jeffrey Epstein’s former Lolitas, who condemn Donald Trump as possibly the worst human being ever, turn a blind eye to the grossest, rankest, most obvious misogyny, including statements and behavior they’d vehemently condemn if Republicans or famously conservative celebrities made or engaged in? All for the Devil in a blue dress. I mean, how tolerant would they be if Matt Gaetz told his female critics to ‘Suck my dick,’ or Ronald DeSantis demanded the right to use the women’s changing room? Which he might actually get away with if he added a wig to his white go-go boots. I’m not kidding. He’s kind of an aging prettyboy. What if he did it in a dress and a cheap wig? Would that make it okay? When did some feminists turn their brains over to The Patriarchy (dun-dun DUUUUUNNN!!!)? The New Satanic Panic Sometimes I feel like I’m walking among the Pod People. Like, any moment, Donald Sutherland will turn, point, and make that hell-demon scream. Because I haven’t drunk the Kool-Aid. Or fallen asleep near a trans-pod. Christian fundamentalist nuttiness in the ‘80s spawned the Satanic Panic, leading Americans and Europeans for about fifteen years to search for some mythical underground Satanic network torturing and abusing children by repurposing the old ‘blood libels’ against the Jews. I’ve encountered weird beliefs as a Pagan, and New Age observer, and, for about twelve years, student of comparative religions. I’ve known people in groups who believed they were alien abductees, reincarnations of historical people, and in possession of amazing psychic abilities they weren’t. That God created the world in less than a week and that he picked a bunch of illiterate desert dwellers as his chosen people. Hoomans are good at self-aggrandizing, deluding each other, and most of all ourselves. But nothing takes the biscuit in my two-thirds-lived life so far as the utter steamrolling of such clearly delusional trans ideology over so-called ‘feminist’ brains. It’s our equivalent Trump’s-stolen-election-level delusion. Tragically, real people, genuine transfolk, suffer as a result. Their antecedents crossed the gender lines in many historical times and places. Why some people feel genuinely ‘born in the wrong body’ is beyond my understanding but given that it’s clear many are born gay or lesbian, a subject that was not resolved when I was in college, I accept that there may be processes in the fetal brain that mess up a bit, leaving someone more than a bit confused in our sexually dimorphic world. Or that hormonal events can perhaps change how one feels about one’s self. Or even that it might be a mental illness. We don’t know yet. Research on transgenderism is still in its infancy, shackled by vicious transactivists who shut down academic research and ruin careers if scientists don’t support their fundamentalist narrative. If they’re ‘right’, as they maintain, what are they so afraid of? I’ve known people with genuine gender dysphoria, and it’s as difficult for them, in many ways, to exist in a patriarchal world as it is for the rest of us, although more liberal environments can make it easier. But the transgender movement, infected by the homophobic, gynophobic woke mind virus, isn’t primarily about them , the genuinely gender dysphoric, it’s been hijacked, as always, by largely heterosexual men with differing agendas who’ve deduced, quite rightly, that they can get certain naive ‘feminists’ on board if they successfully appropriate the mantle of marginalization. It’s about coercing women to submit to male desires. Like good women did before ‘feminism ruined everything’. “Yes dear. Whatever you say, dear.” Public domain image Never has there been a ‘social justice’ movement that demanded, and received legal support for, requiring and enforcing the rest of us to go along with their self-perceptions. Civil rights, #MeToo, poverty activism, environmental activism and many others have all, at times, demanded too much, or in certain circles required uncritical fealty to some dominant narrative or dogma, but no one ever got fired because they said they thought George Floyd or the whooping crane had it coming to him. A repugnant idea, as I’m sure some have said, at least privately, but not cancel-worthy. Even ugly ideas are a part of public discourse, and exactly how much of which is a problem we’re going to face in the coming years. And all with the help of patriarchy’s good little handmaids. If you can’t beat The Patriarchy, join it! The most dangerously uncritical, pro-patriarchal element in Regressive Left ‘woke’ feminism is the erroneous belief that puberty is a dis-ease that needs to be treated medically for children resisting the perfectly natural physical transition from childhood to adulthood, leading one to wonder whether perhaps the problem is real-world Peter Pans . Instead, puberty gets redefined as supreme torture requiring escape into the other sex. J.K. Rowling began speaking out about the trans movement when she read how, in the U.K., the number of girls suddenly wanting to become boys grew by a mind-boggling 4,000%. Historically, males to females have far outnumbered the reverse, Chaz Bono being very much an early-movement outlier. Anyone older than forty can remember a time when the number of trans kids was zero, and changing sex wasn’t even an item for discussion. Now girls with sexual trauma in their past and discomfort with the attention their budding bodies receive from immature boys and even more ominously, creepy older men, are escaping into the birth sex they aren’t. How have we older feminists failed young girls if we’re not teaching them from a very early age how to handle misogyny and sexual harassment, who to complain to and to come to Mom and Dad if it persists? Rather, today’s tools for the patriarchy preach the supremely, 180-degree-about-face unfeminist lie that, if you don’t like living in a sexist, misogynist world, the answer is to become a man rather than, say fighting misogyny, sexism and patriarchy. Because I’d like to remind these ‘feminists’, and the transvestites they defend, there’s nothing wrong with being a biological woman. How did the normal process of turning from a child into an adult, which humans have been undergoing for millions of years if they’re lucky enough to not have died before adolescence, become so pathologized, that it must be treated medically rather than psychologically, since genuine delayed puberty affects only a small percentage? The farthest-left feminists, who scream the loudest about misogyny and bigotry on the right, are as silent as little lambs about the abusive practice of cutting off a girl’s breasts and shrivelling her reproductive organs before her brain is fully developed enough to know what the person inside the meat package really wants. Women’s rights? Really, girlies? When is male abuse of women acceptable? Don’t say ‘never’ when you watch mansplaining transactivists and your witless biological sisters shut down women’s speech and physically assault them for challenging the mass madness. Where were these feminist sisters when the Trans-Patriarchy forced female athlete Riley Gaines into a classroom where she had to remain under police protection for three hours while harridans biologically male and female screamed abuse and epithets at her the entire way? Like this video here documenting it from Twitter. Posted by a notorious right-wing whack job. Who was RIGHT about the left’s response to this. Gaines’s response: Gaines was at San Francisco State University in April to speak out against how she and her female teammates had to compete against Lia Thomas, a fully male ‘transwoman’ competitive swimmer and share a locker room with his full maleness on display. The same feminists who damn the Republicans and conservatives for their anti-science opinions and policies on how women’s bodies work ignore the glaringly obvious truth—no need for detailed scientific papers on this one, folks—that male athletes shouldn’t compete with female athletes because of their clear, obvious, historically-documented physical advantage. THEY ARE MALES. An advantage they never lose no matter how many hormones they take. This is the sort of WTF is wrong with your brain, you dizzy bint, moment, accentuated by the same Tucker Carlson face I also serve the pizza pedophile conspiracists, Trump supporters after his federal indictment, and pretty much anything emanating from Marjorie Taylor Greene. I mean, the stupidity of the far-left’s embrace of the glaringly ridiculous, dangerous, and obviously unscientific fallacies perpetrated by the phallocracy is every bit as palpable as evolutionary physiology suddenly taking a wild, drunken U-turn the wrong way down a puberty exit ramp in the 21st century. Puberty is not torture. Males should not compete with females. It’s really, really simple for feminists if you’re not highly malleable and susceptible to male manipulation. It’s not my opinion. It’s the science, stupid. I am part of what the Republicans twenty years ago began disparaging as the ‘reality-based community’. Now ‘woke’ feminists and their transactivist masters have divested themselves of reality, and support assaulting children with unneeded medical intervention and women’s rights with transvestites on female sports teams and concerted attacks on free speech exactly like you see in Putin’s Russia. And I’ll remind you, it’s no longer a Communist country. It’s a right-wing dictatorship, which is why Donald Trump loves Putie-Pie so much. Critics call Riley Gaines a ‘conservative’ speaker. I don’t know her politics and I couldn’t find them; but she’s made several appearances on right-wing media. Hmmm, I wonder why? Maybe because they provide the love, support, sympathy and sound science vs the abuse she receives coming from the left? Dear Goddess, is the right now more feminist than the left? Real feminists still have a lot of work to do Sometimes I wonder if I’m too hard on the young’uns, expecting them to know what I know after forty years of conscious feminism. Then I wonder what happened to Generation X, my generation, that we let girls grow up thinking, tacitly or publicly, that it was okay to identify with victimhood, and at the same time still manage to raise misogynist boys . Patriarchy wasn’t built in a day, and it will take more than a century of modern-day feminism to tear it down. It strikes me that the problems, as always, are the psychological weaknesses in feminine brains. Not intellectual weakness, but evolutionary traits that may no longer serve us as well. We don’t challenge ourselves, and each other enough. We don’t question our own bad judgments, bad decisions, and bad behaviors enough. We’ve turned ‘Don’t blame the victim’ into a holy, untouchable mantra rather than evolving it into what’s more relevant today: Don’t BE the victim. A turn from personal responsibility somewhere in the ‘90s has rendered some feminists as helpless as our foremothers at the beginning of Second Wave feminism. They existed in a world where they had far fewer rights than we have today, when sexual harassment was ‘just how men are’, and ‘take it as a compliment’. When rape was jokingly treated as ‘If you can’t stop it, just lie back and enjoy it’, a supremely male way of thinking. I doubt many jokesters would have just stayed still and ‘enjoyed it’ if another man was forcing his dick into his asshole. Rape: It’s never as funny when you’re the victim. Regressive feminism isn’t just a problem of the young woke. Much of it comes from still-unaddressed, outdated victimhood ideology in older X’ers and Boomers. No, it doesn’t matter what she was wearing when she was raped, but we need to acknowledge that sometimes we do dumb shit and if we think more proactively and preemptively, we can reduce the rape rate simply by making better choices. What kicked off the ‘take back your power, grow some labia’ idea in my brain was when I got into a car with a strange man I’d met an on online dating app and came close to a real sexual assault. I was 51. I got out of it okay, was really mad at him for what happened and never saw him again but later, I was really mad at myself for allowing that to happen, even though I’d had reservations about it. We have to focus on ourselves now. It’s no longer all about men, male dominance, power, and the patriarchy. We have more power now, but we haven’t yet accepted the responsibility that comes with it. The woke kiddies have the power but neither the maturity, experience, nor responsibility the mature handling of power requires. They misuse and abuse it, exactly like their brothers and sisters on the far right. Right-wing gynophobes have successfully ended women’s reproductive rights. Left-wing gynophobes have targeted women’s. I expect Lia Thomas will successfully compete in the Olympics women’s swimming pre-trials. And he will take the gold that belongs to real women. But the good news, for the left at least, is that they’ll all be woke AF. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

A left-affirming Missouri circuit court is responsible for destroying one of the most evidence-based gender-affirming laws we've seen. Image by Enrique Meseguer from Pixabay It’s interesting that there was no such thing as a ‘trans kid’ until about the last fifteen years, and probably no one older than 35 or 40 knows of any child or teen who committed suicide because they couldn’t, for one reason or another, medically transition to the sex they weren’t. I actually can name one. A boy I knew in high school became a ‘transsexual’ after he graduated. Back then, it took several years. He didn’t commit suicide because he wasn’t allowed to transition overnight, or before graduation. I’m the only person I know who knew a ‘trans kid’ before it became cool. I doubt many other Gen X’ers, and probably the first of half of Millennials, can remember a single ‘trans kid’. I define ‘trans kid’ as one self-defined as trans, not one who, in retrospect, seemed like ‘they might have been’. Who simply might have been gay or just a little effeminate, or butchy, and otherwise non-birth role gender-conforming. I mean a kid who said, “I’m not a boy, I’m a girl,” or vice versa. They just didn’t exist. Even my schoolmate didn’t claim it; I learned about it through the grapevine. In the ‘Teens, transgender became a veritable epidemic, infecting young people across social media along with older men, avid watchers of transgender porn and later ‘sissy porn’, who suddenly found their ‘inner woman’ the way people used to find Jesus. Critics of the ‘new normal’ have come most publicly from the right. But they’re quietly supported by growing allies on the Level Left and the center who have begun to acknowledge the illiberal Bizarro World we now live in: Conservatives on the right side of science, and far-lefties flipping it the bird. The prevailing scientific voices in North America are still out on whether so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ is scientifically sound, supported by leading medical organizations and science publications, but growing evidence overseas favors a much slower and cautious affirming approach than the insta-transition American model. The science is looking more crickety than it did 10-12 years ago. Meanwhile, back in North America, medical professional apparatchiks bow and scrape to transactivist masters rather than examine the latest findings from western Europe for which transgender support has been much less contentious. Why North Americans believe in gender-affirming care In April, Missouri introduced a ban on gender-affirming care, and the state’s Republican Attorney General added an ‘emergency rule’, adding the most rational and comprehensive rules we’ve seen so so far in the U.S. for such care. It started out as a ban on anything medical for children, then Democrats added provisions for kids already seeking treatment, but unfortunately the emergency brake provisions AG Andrew Bailey added for both children as well as adults got struck down. The rule required the patient: Must receive at least 18 months of therapy beforehand Must be screened for autism Must provide documented evidence of clear gender dysphoria for at least three years prior Must be screened for signs of social media addiction and ‘social contagion’, i.e., from their peer group Physicians also had to present a lengthy list of negative possible side effects short-term and long-term. That last part is a little troubling, given the historical Republican/conservative hostility to science and evidence-based policy. They have a tendency to get it wrong, or just make shit up if they can’t find any half-assed science to support what they want. They tried to argue several years ago that abortions were connected to an increased risk of breast cancer; it was utter fiction . A whole book was written called The Republican War On Science . The historical conservative hostility to evidence is well-established, encouraged further by the Religious Right and its naive commitment to Bible mythology. But this was pretty sound, based on the lack of hard evidence for the efficacy of gender-affirming care, and for the very real ethical and moral alarms it raised for children and teens. Should this include adults? Maybe. While adults have the right to decide what to do for themselves, it’s perhaps a better idea to return transitioning to the more cautious, systematic process that was in place decades previously. The American medical profession is primarily responsible for publicly supporting gender-affirming care and preaching the science is sound. Some skeptics wonder if doctors might have, shall we say, alternative motivations for uncritically supporting gender-affirming care besides the welfare of others and suicide prevention. You know who besides the political right supports banning or limiting gender-affirming care for kids? The most liberal, progressive countries on the planet. Sweden. Norway. Finland. They’re joined by France, the UK, and the Netherlands. As I’ve written before, the latest news coming out of Europe, which is always a few years ahead of North America, is that systematic literature reviews of the science behind gender-affirming care shows it to be almost completely based on low-quality, unreliable research. The ‘Dutch Protocol’ model, the default standard for gender-affirming care, has come under serious scrutiny , and in Holland, from whence the Dutch Protocol originated, even one of the co-authors of its studies has noted that the world is ‘blindly adopting their research’, which is outdated, having coming from a different time (2011 & 2014) and with small samples, and hasn’t been replicated. Yet North American pro-affirmation supporters can point to countless science-based organizations and publications and note that they all support gender-affirming care. This includes the American Medical Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Nurses Association, the American College of Physicians, and the American Association of Geriatric Psychiatry. There are plenty of others. This also includes so-called science-based publications like Scientific American, which appears to have gotten ‘wokenized’ a few years back. SA published an article, Stop Using Phony Science To Justify Transphobi a, which resulted in a backlash and the Paradox Institute’s highly scientific return volley, A Response to SciAm’s Stop Using Phony Science. Then there’s the Springer Journal, which accepted and published Lisa Littman’s peer-reviewed paper on the connection between social media and peer groups to the rise of adolescent transgenderism, which the Journal pulled under pressure by transactivists. (I highly recommend the research article, by the way.) Nature and its sister publications have now published guidelines for censoring politically incorrect research . Even our scientists are drinking the trans Kool-Aid except for those who still bravely support objective reality. It’s hard not to doubt one’s self when so many reputable organizations and publications assure us the science is there, making us feel like bad people, or maybe Trumpy fanboys and fangirls, because we might be hurting others by resisting this. But with European countries pulling back on affirming care, based on what they’ve found to be shoddy science and the discredited Dutch Protocol behind it, it gives us skeptics space to pull our heads out of the rainbow-colored clouds and ask some fairly obvious, no-science-required questions. Like Where were all the trans kids before? And, How come no one ever committed suicide before, say, 2007, because they were stuck inside their birth body? And, Why do people think you can change sex when no biological male hominid has ever gotten pregnant, and no biological female can fertilize a womb? As the King of Siam would say, “Is a puzzlement.” What’s behind the Missouri law? The proposed legislation was a brake for both kids and adults. Like with automobiles, brakes reduce speed, but the car can still move forward. Let’s break down the four main points: Must receive at least 18 months of therapy beforehand The rise in mental health problems, including drug and alcohol addiction, along with a spiralling suicide rate in all age groups including children and teens, long predates the rise of transgenderism. The lack of proper screening for pre-existing psychological co-morbidities in transition patients has been a hallmark of gender-affirming care. Is gender dysphoria the problem or a symptom? If the latter, then it would as foolish to medically transition someone as to treat them with chemotherapy if they haven’t got cancer. The therapy requirement seems a little onerous; not everyone can afford it. But Millennials have been described as the most depressed generation ever, and their younger Gen Z brothers and sisters may arguably be in even worse shape. Pre-screening may identify better, less expensive, and less permanently life-altering treatments better suited to the patient. Must be screened for autism People who identify as transgender or non-binary are six times more likely to exhibit autistic traits, or have diagnosed autism. Parents of children on the spectrum have complained for many years that the transgender movement is taking advantage of their kids , recruiting them into a movement with medical treatments they believe will ultimately harm their child. Properly diagnosing, evaluating, and treating conditions like autism or pre-existing psychological issues makes perfect sense. Must provide documented evidence of clear gender dysphoria for at least three years prior Only in the last fifteen years has ‘trans kid’ taken on the appearance of a social contagion. It’s already well-established that anorexia is socially contagious among teens as is suicide, and the now-debunked trans claim that kids who don’t get immediate ‘affirming care’ will commit suicide may teach children and teens that’s the typical, ‘appropriate’ response to parental resistance. Most will outgrow it. Any kid who meets the Missouri criteria can begin transitioning when they’re legal adults. If they even want it by then. Must be screened for signs of social media addiction and ‘social contagion’, i.e., from their peer group The Lisa Littman study and others draw an ever-darker potential correlation between the concurrent rise in popularity of transgenderism with social media. Jonathan Haidt, he of The Righteous Mind , is working on a new book about the harm he believes social media generates in children, teens, and young adults globally. In his Substack newsletter he shares some of what he and his team have found. He hasn’t mention transgenderism so far, but he’s making a very strong case for how much social media induces depression, anxiety, narcissism, anorexia, and other mental health struggles for young people, the most affected by far being young progressive/liberal women. Interesting. Strange times Unfortunately, a great, caution-based approach to gender-affirming care was ended by a circuit court judge on the grounds that Bailey had overstepped his authority. The Missouri ACLU celebrated the decision as did many other pro-affirming care groups. It’s a shame, because this sort of caution is desperately needed for a debate grounded more on ideology, feelings and the highly unreliable ‘lived experience’, than it is on actual evidence and genuine science. I wonder how tolerant progressive parents would be if their daughter decided she ‘identified’ as a Disney princess and insisted she’ll commit suicide if she’s not altered to look like Jasmine, or Belle, or Ariel (“Mommy, I need a fishtail. Also, I need to be black!”) We live in strange times, indeed, when the left denies gender-affirming care for so-called ‘trans kids’ is experimental, and Republican politicians point out the care is far too rushed and the science, not so good. There is so much wrong with the left’s uncritical evaluation of kids’ claims they may be ‘transgender’ or ‘non-binary’, with so little attention paid not only to the clear contradictions in leftist thinking, but also the naive belief that kids know what’s best for them. Go ahead, let them eat all the Twinkies, cookies and candy they want. Here’s a sheet Oregon Democrats stole directly from the Republican playbook: Attaching an unpopular rider to a bill that requires one to pass a something they find repugnant in order to get what they want. In this instance, they tied gender-affirming care to a reproductive rights bill. They were willing to throw women under the bus (of course) to continue their medical experimentation on children. Oregon and Texas Democrats also blocked amendments that would have required health insurers who cover medical transition to also provide detransition care. Because one is covered and one is not. Guess which one? And in this Bizarro World I find myself siding with a state’s Attorney General I probably couldn’t stand on any other point of public policy, a man who belongs to a party I largely regard as being on the wrong side of almost everything else. But this is the Bizarro World we now live in. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

Which means there's no shame, even for bigots, when human label-bots drop pejoratives like pinatas and candy "I'm a Nazi, you're a Nazi, he's a Nazi, she's a Nazi, wouldn't you like to be a Nazi too?" CC0 Public domain image by George Hodan The snippet alleged ‘dog whistle racism’ in the post…I couldn’t see the rest. NextDoor ’s email notifications only include maybe 7-8 words to pique one’s interest. But when I clicked on View comment, it ‘couldn’t load’. Pretty sure it was my post someone had responded to. I made a good-faith effort to find it, but the whole post and thread had disappeared. I could load no part of it, so I suspect either the original poster had deleted theirs, or maybe someone complained, and NextDoor ended it. What I’d done is respond, unemotionally, to the OP who'd lamented the end of affirmative action in the U.S. I stated some arguments in favor of the decision by paraphrasing earlier discussions by American black intellectuals I’ve been reading this year, specifically Thomas Sowell and Shelby Steele, both of whom make a case (decades ago!) for how affirmative action policies perpetuate the racist notion that blacks aren’t good enough to get into prestigious schools on their own merits, that some may not be psychologically and behaviourally prepared to get into an Ivy League school with a very good SAT score, when their Asian and white counterparts have to score much higher to be considered. And also, that affirmative action never helped poor black people. I was straightforward and honest. Perhaps what may have gotten up people’s nose is that I said blacks might have to work a little harder - not because of racism but to get the same high SAT scores expected of others. I relayed uncomfortable observations from these two authors - one of whom noted that “Asian Americans who benefited from the end of racially discriminatory policies are now criticized for being 'white supremacist' [i.e., 'acting white' - brackets mine] rather than lauded for being the grand academic and economic successes they are.” Although I can’t be certain, I’d bet the ‘dog whistle racism’ comment was meant for me. After all, white people aren’t supposed to challenge marginalized groups. Not even when they quote smart black people. It didn’t bother me. Had I been able to respond, it would have begun, “Stop it already with the dog-whistle racism. I’m not racist just because you don’t agree with me.” It didn’t bother me that perhaps, for a few hours, I was publicly labeled a racist. The label doesn’t mean much anymore. Neither do any of the other pejorative labels the left and right hurl at each other. Nazi, homophobe, transphobe, misogynist, misandrist, hater, fascist, woke, TERF, troon, blackface, womanface. They all mean only one thing: “I disagree.” Them’s not fightin’ words I don’t understand why some get so easily triggered, still, when someone pastes an irrelevant label on them. I know I’m not a racist, so if someone called me a racist because I summarized what two black intellectuals said decades ago and added I agree, and hey, isn’t it weird how Asian-Americans who succeed are now accused of being ‘white supremacist’, so what? People with brains who aren’t prone to ideological extremism can see the accuser for what they are. Especially if they’re a coward hiding behind an anonymous profile, with a gray head for a profile photo, and a careless-sounding name like empene19404636, the hallmark of someone whose account gets shut down fast, a lot. The sad fact is racism and white supremacy are real, words for very serious political and social cancers, that used to carry a lot of punch, but now land with the power of a baby’s fist. ‘White supremacy’ is a once-powerful epithet that should only have ever been applied to genuine white supremacists, rather than everyone who doesn’t agree with the Critical Race Theory narrative. When antiracists defined it more broadly, and claimed it was ‘baked into’ everything, they unintentionally normalized it. Since it’s everywhere, but we don’t see it, how bad can it be, right? Real racists are the KKK or the Nation of Islam. Both believe their respective races are superior to another and will not allow that ‘inferior’ race to join. One is more violent than the other, and I won’t say neither is better than the other (although I can say a few good things about the Nation) but they’re both racial supremacists. On the feminist front, rape, as Matt Damon pointed out quite rightly, is very different from a butt grab but Minnie Driver and Alyssa Milano #MeToo’d him right off Twitter by sparking a flame war because they didn’t know the difference. And of course ‘TERF’ means ‘feminist’ since there’s nothing the slightest bit radical about pointing out simple biology: You can’t change your sex, and women need to be protected from certain male bodies and psyches. ‘TERF’ is just a silly word that never meant anything substantial anyway; invented by men to marginalize feminists who stand up to them and continue to tell them, ‘No’. Attack of the Nazi-bots I got added to another ‘Nazi sympathizer’ list the other day on Twitter. It was compiled by what looked like some young (of course) guy. So I blocked him. I have no patience with these people. Oh yeah, that sure showed me. There’s a whole army of human Nazi-bots on Twitter who toss the word at others like apes flinging their feces. Don’t like someone? Call them a Nazi, or just throw your poo. Most of these little social justice sparkies wouldn’t know a real Nazi if one goose-stepped into their living room and Jahwohl -ed them while they watched Queer Eye . And I’m quite certain they’d never fight actual Nazis, they’d quiver in their closets like frightened kittens. ‘Nazi’ used to mean real-world Nazis. Anthony Crider; cropped by Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2018 (UTC) - Charlottesville "Unite the Right" Rally (Wikipedia) Nazism, and genuine white supremacy, are as serious as a nuclear war. Both are dangerously close to achieving real power as so many have in governments around the world. Genuine Nazis and racial supremacists (they’re not always white, depending on the country) are never good for those who aren’t born with the Chosen Ones’ skin color. Careless use robs critically important words of their power. Now there’s no shame in being called a Nazi because everyone can write them off as just another hysterical ‘woke’. Or an idiot MAGA, since Nazi Tourette’s Syndrome isn’t just an ailment of the left. Politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene compare face masks to WWII Jewish stars, and for decades anti-abortion activists have compared the practice to the Holocaust. In fact, many people lose the argument the moment they open their mouths - or set fingertips to keyboard - if one invokes Godwin’s Law that the first person to compare their opponent to Hitler or the Nazis loses the argument. “You know, Nazis were the National Socialist Party,” Greene said . “Just like the Democrats are now a National Socialist Party.” Nazis to the left of me, Nazis to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with Jews! Even if one is anti-Semitic, that doesn’t make them a Nazi. Historical footnote: Anti-Semitism long predates Hitler’s Reich. I doubt the Charlottesville Nazis - real Nazis, carting the schwag and the swastika that defines those who clearly hew to Nazi values - give a rat’s patoot what people call them. It’s okay now. It’s been normalized. It’s a joint effort by the left and right to make Nazism okay again. Special kudos to the post-modernist left’s efforts to erase word meanings: Not only do we not know what a real man or woman is, we also can’t tell a fake Nazi from a real one. Or Marjorie Taylor Greene. Do the work Impugning ugly motives to one’s opponents isn’t just a way to ignore genuine grievances; it can also be used to avoid uncomfortable self-examination if one belongs to a marginalized group. Let’s return to ‘dog whistle racism’, which often crops up in marginalized groups’ speech who’d rather not self-examine too deeply. The point I’d made on NextDoor was that not everyone believed affirmative action was a good idea, or was perhaps a good idea past its expiry date, and now held many back, and that I was hardly alone in noting American blacks may need to develop themselves more. Some black students got into good schools on their own merits because they did score highly, thanks to immigrant parents who didn’t schlep the entire family to the Promised Land in the U.S. so their kids could wear their jeans around their hips, spout shit about cops and pretend that black authenticity is dying young and profoundly ignorant in a street gang shootout. Maybe black parents could push their kids harder, like middle-class and upper-class white parents do. This is an opinion shared by many on the left, not just the right. And not just white liberals, either. Personal responsibility. It’s a concept despised by those who prefer victimhood to power. I reminded NextDoor how women, like blacks, were once considered ineducable, and how we hyperventilated decades ago about the lower numbers of women completing college and whether they could compete with men and now—we’re graduating in higher numbers than men. If the chickie-boo girlies can do it, so can American blacks. Not all lefties subscribe to the soft bigotry of low expectations, nor do all black antiracists. So I smiled when I saw ‘dog whistle racism’, because I might have struck a nerve. There’s nothing unthinkable about what I, Sowell, Steele, and many others of all colors, and partisanship, have said already. Black Americans need to compete on their own merits, just as women have had to do. It’s hardly racist to suggest they can do the work. It’s not implying the old stereotype they’re ‘lazy’; I see the same fear holding them back that hold back many women. The other day I was in a Zoom brainstorming session with a friend who’s trying to establish her European-based business in Canada helping companies train the right women to be leaders; she shared with us how women resist leadership training because of Imposter Syndrome; fear that they can’t compete with men; and that no one would listen to them. She said male managers have shared their frustration with her that good, strong, female candidates reject the idea because they themselves don’t believe they’re ‘leadership material’ regardless of what anyone else thinks. That’s one big freakin’ honkin’ reason why we don’t see more female leaders, but you’ll never hear that from the victimhood feminist brigade. And similarly, some black Americans are unwilling to relinquish the training wheels the Supreme Court just removed. Pejorative labels applied to those whose speech one doesn’t like, because it threatens one’s self-worth, or highlights internalized feelings of inferiority and group Imposter Syndrome, are a psychic Bandaid. They make you feel better but you’re still as sick as you always were. Or self-defeating. Add ‘dog whistle racism’ to the lexicon of words that no longer mean anything anymore. Yay, teams MAGA and woke. No one any longer knows what an actual racist or Nazi looks like. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

Maybe we should remind them how lucky they are to have what they've got Photo by Keira Burton on Pexels When I ruminate, as I am wont to do (Regrets—Oy’ve had a few-ah as Sid Vicious put it) and I need to stop self-obsessing, I consider those who’d do anything to live the sane, routine, boring, often tedious post-pandemic forever-changed life I am privileged to live. After all, no one’s bombing the shit out of my country in an effort to regain the alleged glory days of forty years ago, nor do I leave my apartment every day wondering if I’m going to wander into a mass shooting. I have good, mostly steady, freelance sales work that keeps me off the streets and out of the pool halls, and I have good healthcare available - much of it covered by the province of Ontario. I’ve begun to appreciate my previously taken-for-granted and oft-unappreciated body. I don’t know how many of us don’t value our healthy, functioning bodies until they’re not. At sixty, I’m feeling my age more, although not like my parents did. While I hefted a heavy bundle buggy of groceries off the bus the other day I considered how my parents might have done it more carefully, how my mother would have asked a stranger for help. My parents’ generation didn’t do physical exercise like we do. My dad’s ‘exercise’ was volleyball once a week followed by a big bowl of ice cream in front of the TV, and, as fathers have done for millions of years, fell asleep in front of it. A friend in his late fifties told me how his doctor expressed surprise he wasn’t on any medication. Nothing to manage a heart condition, cholesterol, depression, anxiety, blood pressure, excess stomach acid, or the heartbreak of golfer’s elbow, mostly because he doesn’t play golf. I’m not on any prescription meds either. Our healthy lifestyle isn’t the whole story; we just got lucky with good genetics. So far, anyway. Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes I have a friend in Australia with body dysmorphia. She wishes she hadn’t been given the body she has. She would happily trade it for someone else’s as long as it didn’t hurt all the time, if she could go back to having a normal life, like she did before her manageable, but not curable, physical conditions set in. If only she could change her body. I have another friend closer to home, whose life is a constant stream of health issues. She lives in doctors’ offices for herself and her senior mother. She hates living in a regularly malfunctioning body. We joked a few years ago about a woman we knew who managed Type I diabetes. “I’d happily switch bodies with her,” my friend said. “Only having to manage diabetes would be a cinch.” How is it so many aren’t happy with the bodies they’ve got, especially if everything works in accordance with the way our physiology has evolved? The gender-blending movement is only the most recent iteration of a millennia-long campaign by humans to improve bodies never good enough for us. The dissatisfaction is too often between the ears rather than in physical well-being. Nothing hurts, everything works—so how does it not ‘feel right’? Humans have tattooed, body pierced, and otherwise adorned themselves with body ‘enhancements’, the same we engage in today, not to mention modern body mods we criticize and debate - bigger boobs, surgically-enhanced pecs for those too lazy to go to the gym, cheek implants, tummy tucks, liposuction, and many other medical treatments to ‘fix’ bodies that may otherwise be seen as ‘imperfect’. Boob Jobs & Butt Bleaches & Brazilians, Oh My! Sometimes our body mods are more practical and life-affirming, done to treat a painful condition or disability that reduces quality of life. But mostly, people look in the mirror, frown, and think, “My life would be so much better if I just changed blah blah blah.” Body doctors for brain ailments A lot, but not all, children are born in fine, healthy bodies. Or their bodies are fine but their brains, like all human brains, can become depressed, anxious, stressed and delusional. Today they’re directed to body doctors when what they need are brain doctors. They’re told if they’re unhappy, they were born the wrong sex, and if so, why not fix it? Why should you have to live in a body you don’t want? Wouldn’t you be better off with different one? (I wonder if some black people were born with skins who’d be ‘better off’ white. Just a devil’s advocate thought.) Adolescence is a rough time for everyone, but also a ridiculously human life transition everyone must pass through if they’re lucky enough not to die from leukemia at age four, as a childhood playmate of mine did. It won’t be much longer now before the U.S. and Canada are whacked upside the head with a clue-by-four coming from Europe that there’s near-zero science behind ‘gender affirming care’. We resist, but in the immortal words of The X-Files , ‘the truth is out there’. Like, on a plane leaving right now from Stockholm. The North American medical profession lies to people of all ages about what’s known about the long-term effects from puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and adolescent surgery. (Answer: Fuck all.) Much more research needs to explore the short- and long-term effects of transgender healthcare, but not only is anything that threatens the trans narrative career-destroying, it’s also a punch in the ol’ Bulgari wallet, since the industry is estimated at $2.1B USD in 2022, projected to $5B by 2030 . Parroting debunked kiddie suicide threats, these doctors wonder why they get compared to Josef Mengele. Related: STUDY ANALYSIS: Transgender Identity and Suicide Attempts and Mortality in Denmark We don’t even know what percentage of patients have de-transitioned after regretting their previous decision. Estimates range from 1-1.5% by the medical profession that’s making mountains of cash off troubled people, to 25%, based on the small assortment of clinical studies. It’s a big, vague football field of a spread. Many detransitioners don’t tell their doctors what they’re doing out of a sense of embarrassment and shame, and they don’t go public; that’s as socially destructive as conducting non-transactivist-approved scientific research. As I watch this medical-scandal-to-be unfold, I wonder why the hell so many ‘progressive’ parents who worry about anorexic daughters otherwise teach their kids at ever-earlier ages that they’re ‘imperfect’ and that somehow evolution, which has brought our sexually dimorphic species to apex biological dominance over millions of years—has somehow horribly fucked up with so many newer humans. The kids who don’t grow up Do these parents ever thank God, Darwin or their lucky stars that their children aren’t suffering from real health problems? I don’t remember Dorothy much - my only memory is standing in her bedroom, as she regarded me cross-eyed, a consequence of the chemotherapy to treat her leukemia. I don’t remember actually playing with Dorothy before she got really sick but I remember regretting she was no longer there to play with. She lived in the hospital while we visited her mother. My mother provided as much moral support as she could to a grieving parent. Dorothy passed away on Christmas Eve, 1967. She never got to open her presents. I don’t know if her parents talked to her much about Christmas. I sort of hope Dorothy passed not regretting the presents she’d never get to unwrap. Christmas Day was a particularly joyous one for my parents as they had a new baby son. While they celebrated my brother’s first Christmas and my fifth, Dorothy’s parents planned a funeral. Do today’s ‘progressive’ parents ever read or hear about kids whose childhoods are a series of painful medical treatments, often restricted to homes or hospital beds to keep them alive? Do they ever read about some child who bravely fought cancer or a heart condition or a blood disorder to the very end, bravely smiling and bald, withered, with tubes stuck up her nose and think, Thank God my child is healthy ? Is ‘self-acceptance’ an obscene word? If it’s okay to be fat, is it okay to be thin? If it’s okay to be gay, is it okay to be straight? If it’s okay to be trans, is it okay to be ‘cis’? Are parents trying to perpetuate a toxic culture of self-hatred and body dysmorphia? It’s the very apex of privilege to just schlep them off to the doctor, instead of exercising parental authority (Does it even exist anymore?) saying No, you can’t be a boy, you’re a girl? Or take away their phone, so Johnny and Janie can’t compare themselves to others on Instagram or learn the newest goofy identity label . Will privileged parents allow Barbie-obsessed eight-year-olds to get boob jobs? I mean what the hell, she can cut ‘em off when she’s sixteen and decides she hates how much boys like big boobs. There was an old Bloom County cartoon from the ‘80s in which some stupid college student interrogates Cutter John, the Vietnam vet in a wheelchair, about what he really wants to do. Is he angry? Does he want to kill people? What does he really want to do? “Walk,” Cutter John replies. I wonder what people with real disabilities, leading limited lives in a society for whom they are always a burdensome afterthought, think when they look at grown-ass adults running to the doctor. “Fuck, I’ll take any body, no matter the sex, no matter the race, if only I could (walk, see, hear, move, bathe myself, pee in a bathroom rather than a plastic bag).” I try to ‘fix’ my ‘imperfections’ too. I lose weight, but I’m not Jack Skellington. I dye my hair. I wear makeup. But that’s it. I’ll age naturally, like Brigitte Bardot. The wrinkled face of old age: It’s a privilege! I have so many school friends who weren’t as privileged as I. I miss them. A lot. Plastic surgery carries real risks and complications but gender transition ‘healthcare’ is performed too much on the young and with uncritical acceptance of whether the patient truly knows what s/he wants. It may eventually teach a horrifying, no-backsies-allowed lesson about just how good they had it when their worst problem was what every human being longs for - whatever they don’t have. Before 2014, transition for all ages involved a much lengthier process. Now you can get your McTopSurgery done practically as a drive-through. Yeah. Just wait until you want a baby. It strikes me as singularly ungrateful to not cherish the luck of the birth lottery for a well-functioning body rather than for t’other side of the fence where there’s a dick or a vagina you don’t have. I read recently the searing story of a mother’s pain caused by her transgender son. What had once been a lovely, happy little girl got recruited by the ‘trans cult’ and turned into an angry pseudo-man, hooked on anabolic steroids and prone to intense rage against all those who loved her. The mother says she screamed in horror and cried to see her daughter’s breast-less chest. She raged silently for her own sister, dead from breast cancer, who would have given anything for two healthy breasts. I don’t begrudge those who really are gender dysphoric, who may require medical intervention to change their sex. Some gender dysphoria may be real in ways we don’t yet understand. I support gender-affirming care for adults, but I believe it should be a long, slow process like it used to be, with lots of self-evaluation with the help of mental health professionals required , and mandatory screening for autism. It will not kill progressive parents to tell their ‘trans’ kids, “No,” or at least “Wait, you can’t transition now. The law requires you to be 18. You can live how you want until then.” Their kids won’t kill themselves, either. It’s just not happening in Europe, or America’s red states. It didn’t happen prior to 2014 when gender transition moved from slow and steady to fast-track. Not happening. If there’s one word missing from public discourse, it’s ‘authenticity’. I note it’s least common in trans discussions on social media. I wonder why. I’m appalled by the horrific thanklessness of neurotic adult patients, and parents who don’t value their beautiful children as they are, who refuse to challenge their sick mental perceptions the way they would if their daughter was a 60-pound Instagram influencer with millions of fellow ‘Ana’ followers. What if they said, “No. You’re fine the way you are. Why don’t we go visit a pediatrics sick ward at the hospital so you can see how goddamn lucky you are to have the healthy, mobile, functioning body you have?” Photo by Ivan Samkov Robin Williams killed himself because he was suffering from dementia and Parkinson’s and didn’t want to be a burden to others, or suffer the horror of a slowly paralyzing body that would have left him like a babbling baby in a cradle. I can’t say I blame him. How can you live a life of freedom and fulfillment, then be told by your traitorous genes, “That’s enough, no more fun for you! One day, you will only be able to stare at the ceiling.” Now how bad is your life, trans-gender-queer-non-binary whateverthefuck? Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

We libs *can* work with the right on some issues without assimilation into the Mar-A-Borg-o cult Which wing are you? From Public Domain Pictures Pejorative labels are meant to control us via the fear of shame. But they have only as much power as we give them. There’s a quick ‘n’ easy way to officially lose an argument on social media with your first post or tweet. If a label bothers me, it’s my job to examine it. Is it accurate? Am I guilty? Do I resemble that remark? There’s one label that’s bugged me a bit, more than the now-tired racist, Nazi, white supremacist, transphobe, TERF, closet Michael Cohen groupie, etc. but which I’ve now faced down and realize I no longer need fear. While the other labels now leave my blood pressure at a comfortable 139/68, calling me a ‘right-winger’ has made me want to run for the exit like a little girl. “You morons don’t realize you’re shills for the right wing!” the tran-scult crowd crows. Before, I fell over myself protesting that I was NOT in fact a right-wing shill. Perish the thought! How dare they! But I found a certain level of denial: A kinship I find sometimes with the right—even conservatives like fundamentalist Christians I would otherwise eschew, and against whom I was a liberal gadfly for many years when I wrote for an alternative newspaper in Connecticut. That was before progressives abandoned liberal principles and embraced authoritarianism, censorship, and demanded unquestioned fealty to their illogical ideologies. Public domain photo Now my blood pressure hops like an anemic frog at the ‘right-wing’ accusation and returns to my customary resting state. Buddhism kicks in and says, “It’s just a label, this is XTwitter, so whaddaya expect?” I don’t have to agree with Those People on much, but I can tweet a supportive comment once in awhile to a PATRIOT CHRISTIAN GOD BLESS AMERICA THESE COLORS DON’T RUN XTwitteratus profile when she comments about not supporting laws that deny puberty for children. We can agree on that, at least. She and I won’t follow each other, but I may get a like or a supportive comment in return. We’d never kaffeeklatsch if I lived in her ‘Murican ‘hood and it’s best if we don’t talk about guns, free trade, income inequality, immigration, abortion, Jesus, Trump, Canada’s Freedom Convoy, MAGA, the 2024 election, indictments, Lauren Boebert, MTG, or gay kids, but we can figuratively bump fists in passing as we both support what we agree to be one of the greatest evils and failings of the so-called ‘progressive left’ - the uncritical acceptance of the misogyny-fueled trans movement. It’s gone far beyond normal rights for non-conformists to a hate-on for women and a sick obsession with medically changing children whom we wouldn’t trust to smoke, drink, vote, or drive, but whose words we treat as though they issued from granite tablets under Moses’s armpits when they say, ‘I want to be a girl.’ I’m not a shill for the right, but I will sound like it when I state what is verboten to the ‘woke’ left: At least on this one particular issue, the right is right and the left is wrong. Hold your nose and extend your hand I speak treason. “Fluently!” Here’s some more treason for ya: The right needs the left and the left needs the right. One speaks the truth when the other side won’t. If you really want to know what’s going on with Donald Trump’s alleged (or confessed) crimes and his indictments, consult the left-wing media. If you really want to know what’s going on with the growing evidence of the transgender movement’s toxicity and lack of scientific evidence for gender-affirming care, consult the right-wing media. We’re coming to a place where we must work with people we don’t like very much - or at all - in order to rein in two toxic cults gone mad. This isn’t as bugspit insane as it sounds. We used to do it like this in the olden days of the twentieth century. We even do it sometimes now, when something like a financial collapse or a killer pandemic has us by the short ‘n’ curlies. Back in the olden days, transgender meant folks who had transitioned for any number of reasons and left it at that. When it became politicized by misogynist men it greatly resembled what feminists have always had to contend with—self-centered male backlash in response to expanded rights and growing power for women. Invade my boardroom will you, you uppity little rhymes-with-runt? Fine, I’m coming for your bathrooms! A woman stole my job, because she couldn’t possibly have gotten it through merit. Penis, for gods’ sakes! It adds like 65 points to your IQ! Okay bitch, I’m coming for your sports trophies! I know the right wing has never been much of a friend to women, and yeah, it’s their fault American women have to jump through ever more—now illegal—hoops to access an abortion, but fighting the excesses of the transgender movement and especially its horrifying attack on children’s bodies is every bit as critical. It means conservatives will, whether they want to or not, fight for women’s rights, power, and bodily autonomy, which could bite them in the ass later with a different Supreme Court. Forcing male athletes back onto male athletic teams will boost Title IX sports once again, giving young women an opportunity to compete fairly, achieve, win and take that killer confidence into the adult world. So who knows, maybe some will accuse them of being shills for the left. The spectrum Public domain image by Nicklas W Bjurman on Wikimedia Commons Not all liberals wave the Pride flag, and not all conservatives wave the Confederate one. Both can be selectively pro-science. One side can’t acknowledge climate change despite living on our planet, while the other denies the biological differences of their own eyes. So, like, ludicrously blind stupidity is bi-sectual. There are Nazis and Communists and Fascists and Antifascists and Libertarians and monarchists and socialists and Social Democrats and Market Liberals and whateverthefuck Jordan Peterson is this week. Some conservatives know climate change is real and a gigantic threat to humanity; I hope Greta Thunberg and others will accept their help and support if they want to work toward a cleaner planet before it burns to a crisp or turns Miami into an underwater snorkel park. My sister-in-law’s dearly departed sister-in-law, a cherished member of our blended family, was a conservative Christian who worked with women to choose alternatives to abortion. But she still supported choice, even though she thought it was the worst one. She couldn’t in good conscience tell a woman she must have a baby. She also didn’t think you must accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour, which is why we enjoyed many digestion-boosting post-Thanksgiving walks and chats before she died. People don’t fit the neat little peg holes we create. They especially don’t fit our childishly simplistic dichotomous pits of moral certainty, the ‘wrong’ side defined as anything less than 100% purity in one’s commitment to a dogmatic narrative. As the ‘progressive’ left descends into chaos, ‘eating its own’, creating dangerous conspiracy theories and turning its back on science and evidence-based policy, I find myself looking over to the other side to see with whom I can commune, who are as repulsed by the excesses of conservatism gone wild and Trumpian authoritarianism. So I look ‘right-wing’ to minds that can’t see a swathe of blended shades of beliefs, values, ideologies, religious beliefs, and understanding of humanity. I can agree with the right—the rational-minded ones—without joining Mar-A-Borg-o. No. Not happenin’. Wouldn’t be caught dead at Mar-A-Borg-o. Photo by Alan Santos/PR on Wikimedia Commons, CC0 2.0 Just as they agree with me on some issues, if not on everything, they may not want to subscribe to my Substack. The mark of a true progressive is evidenced by someone close to me who recently said, “My husband and I are almost to the point financially where it would make sense for us to vote Republican. But I won’t do that; I won’t forget those who don’t have a seat at the table.” She recognizes her privilege and doesn’t blame others who couldn’t accomplish what she and her husband have. They got lucky in the birth lottery. How many of us are that strong a liberal? If you found yourself making enough money that it would be in your best interests to vote for all those juicy Republican tax breaks, would you do it? How much of an economic political whore are you? You may never have to find out. The other day, someone threw the ‘right-wing’ label at me for a snarky comment I made. The iron-poor amphibian hopped like a feeble old man. The label no longer burns because I’ve confronted my own role, and gotten honest with myself about engaging with ‘the enemy’. Not all of them are. We need them if we’re going to change anything. Not all the anti-democratic dangers are on the right. I was surprised to learn from a podcast featuring Greg Lukanioff, the inspiration for The Coddling of the American Mind , that of the top ten schools in America, the left has a 75% success rate in getting a professor punished or fired. This includes not just losing one’s job but suspensions, extended investigations, ‘sensitivity’ training, and having your paper or syllabus censored. He also notes we don’t know what’s happening at the schools outside the top 400 because their cases rarely, if ever, make the news media. But threats from the right result in punishment less than half the time. Lukianoff further notes that on most college campuses, there’s not much chance of being cancelled by the right, unless you teach at a religious college or a state university in a red state. Overall, attempts to get people fired come from the left 60% of the time, and from the right 40%, with right-wing organizations like Fox News pitching many of the tantrums about ‘offensive speech’. You may not like what Ron ‘Don’t say gay’ DeSantis is doing in Florida, but you can’t ignore the left either. Écrasez l’infâme! Opposing political sides have never been wholly at peace with each other; mudslinging political attacks are as old as the rise of politics many thousands of years ago. Ancient Romans accused their political rivals of murder, incest, greed, impiety, sacrilege, effeminacy, drunkenness and public vomiting, just to name a few. Cicero really pissed off Marc Antony when he accused him of having had a love affair with a young man during his misspent youth. Oh please. That’s a Democratic campaign slogan! But an empire divided is ripe for conquest, which is why dictatorship was such a popular form of government back then. Sometimes, you needed one super-strong proven dude to lord over the rest and tell them how it will be, and send anyone to the gallows or the torture chamber who gave him any shit. We can still work across the fence. Like, even, believe it or not, right now. Both parties in America have come together in the last few years on legislation to support military sexual assault prevention, on reforming the police after the George Floyd tragedy, and this summer to suspend the debt ceiling and set federal spending limits. I guess no one in Congress wants their daughter getting raped by her C.O. and prefers to reform the police before the far-left garners enough support to defund it. Cross-partisanship can happen. We need to find our common ground with the other side on issues we agree are important and, uh—not talk about a lot of other stuff. Republicans and conservatives who want to see Donald Trump kept out of the White House will find plenty of support in the liberal wing. They may not have enough support on their own side - Republican Congresscritters display an appalling lack of balls or labia to stand up to the Trump Train(wreck) - and will need reinforcements. Others can back them up when the MAGAs start throwing tomatoes, rocks or pipe bombs. Democrats and liberals who want parents to understand there’s no real science behind ‘gender affirming care’ will find plenty of support from the ‘Murican flag-wavers and cross-wearers. We may not agree on much, but at least we can on: Hell No, Trump Must Go Home, And Fer Fuck’s Sake, Leave Kids Alone! Here’s the deliciously subversive part: We might even make some odd new friends. Because not all Christians are rigid Bible thumpers, not all pro-choicers are on the left, not all liberals want to abolish the police nor all conservatives the FBI. There’s a Silent Majority in the middle, somewhere between MAGA and woke, where we can work together, perhaps even talk together about politics without downtowns nesting in glass-shattered streets and cop cars burning like a Canadian forest. Where, if we can listen to each other, we can find commonalities, and perhaps integrate some of our compatible beliefs and values to incorporate some good ideas we got from those other guys. Like: They respect authority and we respect science. Make Evidence-Backed Doctors Great Again! Because here’s the thing: The other Republicans are trying to seize power illegally since they can’t win enough votes, and the far left preaches we must ‘burn the system down’, and some of them may try. They sound frighteningly similar. Will this be the left one day? Photo by TapTheForwardAssist on Wikimedia Commons, CC0 4.0 The rest of us look at both extreme alternatives, shake our heads, and say, “Nuh-uh.” It’s up to us, folks. The bird can’t fly with only one wing. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

''Critical Social Justice' has infiltrated the mental health industry and spreads rather than contains wokeness's harmful ideas Public domain photo from Rawpixel Well this explains everything, I thought to myself. The fox is coaching the henhouse! Author Lisa Selin-Davis explains the perpetuation of wokeism in her recent The Free Press Substack article, How Therapists Became Social Justice Warriors . I had no idea social justice had infiltrated the mental health industry, which makes me rethink whether greater resources for affordable mental health help will alleviate or multiply pervasive societal mental illness. Because wokeness is a primary driver. Selin-Davis traces the short history of how therapists got ‘woke’ and trained to view the patient as a collective part of a greater group, whether it was a ‘dominant’ group or a ‘marginalized’ one, rather than treating them, as therapists have historically have, as an individual. God help you now if you’re unfortunate enough to be white, male, or ‘cis-heteronormative’. Because you and your privilege are ground zero for what ails others. And their antidote to your mental distress is woke mind poison. The therapist training Selin-Davis describes sounds frighteningly like those hellish DEI corporate workshops we read and hear too much about. First, start with a dictatorial commitment to ‘antiracism’, whatever that means this week. Then be sure to give all the ‘right’ answers in class, or risk being shamed and penalized. What galvanized the social justice-izing of mental health counseling was the rise of Donald Trump, the death of George Floyd and street protests . One student described a ‘civility pledge’ she had to sign toward the end of her training, stating her commitment to acknowledge all the social justice warrior evils: Racism, ableism, sexism, classism, nativism, heterosexism, politically incorrect country music , etc. Vulnerable, unhappy people, oppressed by mental health struggles, come to these freshly-minted head specialists and pay for more mental poison. Mental dis-ease begins with social justice One woman in the article illustrates how Critical Social Justice ideology creates and perpetuates pre-existing mental illness. The social justice warrior cared deeply about diversity and equity, but found herself struggling with her ‘whiteness’ and her constant fear she was oppressing others without even trying. Critical Race Theory teaches a hopeless narrative for everyone, but particularly for white people: They’re born into white supremacy and can never escape it, and oppress others simply by existing. The woman felt guilt as a lesbian, too, as Queer Theory teaches ‘cis’ is “associated with colonization and white supremacy and oppression.” WTF? She’d internalized social justice’s self-hatred lessons that the only acceptable authenticity is that of the marginalized. If you’re not—and apparently someone granted privilege to lesbians when she wasn’t looking, your only permissible response is a never-ending demand for public confession for your sins of being born ‘privileged’. Instead of working to achieve genuine social justice, and existing happily lesbian with her girlfriend, the woman became consumed with CSJ-manufactured guilt as she anguished over her alleged ‘internalized white supremacy’. Social Justice created her unhealthy pathologies that diverted her from a path of helping others, to counseling she might not have otherwise needed, and, as it turned out, might have been better off without. She found a black therapist to help her with her race and gender issues and all went very well for several months. It went tits-up, ironically, when she began making real mental health progress. Getting better weakened her ‘wokeness’ which threatened her therapist’s social justice commitment to a victim-centered identitarian worldview. When the patient criticized cancel culture the therapist accused her of assimilating ‘white supremacy culture’ and making the black therapist feel ‘unsafe’. If there’s one word that must never pass a mental health professional’s lips unless the patient has turned on them with a knife, it’s ‘unsafe’. That’s a social justice distortion most often applied to challenged ideas for which the recipient has no rational answer. Eventually, the therapist ended the relationship with the patient for being insufficiently attentive to her presumed birth-granted skin power, which was even more harmful for the patient. She was in essence ‘cancelled’, the very worst punishment for the non-conforming social justice warrior, by someone she’d trusted with her psychological vulnerability. Social justice activism drove the patient both into and then out of therapy, when the good it did her did so-called ‘harm’ to the therapist. Interestingly, a therapy modality that perpetuates the problem it seeks to reduce results in a prolonged financially remunerative arrangement for the therapist which can last for years, even decades. It’s an ironic position for a mental health professional: If you do your job well, success is rewarded with profit loss. I can’t help but think the patient could have saved herself many months, and a lot of stress and money, by reading books outside her social justice bubble that might have challenged and illuminated her in more psychologically healthy ways, especially books challenging the myopic social justice self-flagellating prison. The therapist, treating her patient as a presumed ‘oppressor’ rather than an individual with her own unique neuroses and traumas, worked to reinforce the pervasive ‘woke’ ideology of helplessness and hopeless oppression. She told the patient, ‘You’re not free because of homophobia and sexism. You’ll never be free.’  What a supremely bleak and depressing view of one’s future, not to mention humanity. How utterly demoralizing it must be to believe that ultimately, struggle is useless, including against genuine oppression - so why even bother trying? Why protest in the streets, why bother striving to become a better person, if you remain forever either an assigned victim or an oppressor, regardless of your most sincere efforts? Ideology vs empowerment Under the old therapy modality, the patient was guided toward healthier mental perceptions, coping, and resilience skills, along with a growing inner strength, the exact opposite of the victimist mindset, the very definition of powerlessness. In fact, it’s victimhood that often drives people into therapy, the point being to not allow whatever makes her feel like a victim control her life. In the proper setting, one is encouraged to grow mentally stronger and develop personal power, which is what the aforementioned therapy client did until her therapist pulled her back from the cliff edge of psychological health. Selin-Davis’s article notes that some ideologized newbie therapists claim they could never take on a Trump-supporting client. I can’t imagine another group of people as much in need of real mental health help as the MAGAs. They’re subject to their own toxic, victimizing, self-defeating and self-destructive ideologies, greatly resembling their social justice antagonists. MAGAs, like SJWs, need to challenge their self-perception as victims, whether they were victimized against their will with a neglectful childhood or an abusive partner, or whether they agreed, consciously or not, to adopt identitarian victimhood. But ultimately, if you can’t find a marginalized group to join, simply make up your own label! If you’re a group of one, congratulations! You’re marginalized! So none of it is your fault! Empowerment, genuine empowerment, not woke-warrior lip service, is the sworn enemy of victimhood ideology. The less you see yourself as a victim, the less you act as a victim. The more you see your power to change your life, and you engage that power, your life will most likely improve. It’s a direct threat to those who prefer to reject personal responsibility because they’re marginalized. The message of covert disempowerment promoted by emotionally unintelligent social justice warriors self-oppresses and benefits those with real power unwilling to share any of it. I wonder if the SJW’s therapist felt threatened by the very freedom from psychological pain to which she’d led her patient, perhaps longing to seize some of that freedom herself but risking her job and potential ostracism when her peers found out she questioned the core tenets of social justice ideology. It would lay to waste everything she’d been taught and believed in. Donald Trump and his lackeys play to this same mindset for Team MAGA, blaming everyone for the working class’s plight without ever challenging them to aspire higher, educate themselves, to take charge of their lives more, or to demand better politicians to address their real interests. It benefits Trump and the Republicans to keep their base feeling victimized - if the voters took charge of their lives rather than blaming immigrants and progressive elites, they might not need the GOP anymore. Who needs a saviour when you can save yourself? The futility of eternal victimhood Mental un-health is socially contagious. It includes anorexia, suicide, and depression, but happiness is also contagious. One study found that having a happy neighbor increases one’s happiness probability by 34%. Hanging out with a more positive crowd and taking breaks, whether it’s vacation or just some time off from thinking about systemic racism, rape culture or colonialism, might be more beneficial, not to mention time and money-saving, than a therapist with an unexamined sense of her own self-imposed victimhood. It’s frightening to think that people in real mental distress visit professionals who feed their pathologies and turn them away from the timeless skills of empowerment, self-challenge, coping and resilience that results in stronger psychological health. The Buddha, 3,500 years ago, taught human beings the secret to happiness and mental well-being not by wallowing in the injustices of the world, but in learning to co-exist with and alleviate it with good deeds, to strive not to contribute to others’ unhappiness, and to challenge one’s own self-harming mental perceptions. He deconstructed how our beliefs can cause us as much, and arguably more, pain than any actual victimization we’ve experienced. The more new-ish mental health treatment Cognitive Behavior Therapy, or CBT, closely resembles Buddhist teachings. CBT seeks to challenge ‘cognitive distortions’, the ‘mental constructs’ Buddhists encourage followers to root out. It challenges thoughts, beliefs and attitudes that may or may not be real, that may hurt us. One such cognitive distortion in the social justice movement (and Judaeo-Christianity) is the distasteful notion of original sin - that you can be born into a negative state through no fault of your own. It was the putative basis of the Genesis tale of Adam and Eve, purporting to explain why humanity is so ugly (it’s our fault for disobeying God!) and it’s extended into CRT-based antiracism, which teaches the cognitive distortion that you can be born into an inescapable white supremacy, just as Jews and Christians believe you can never escape the taint of Adam’s and Eve’s original sin, and all you can do is strive ever harder to be a better person. Ideological victimhood dies without validation from others, and people who abandon victimist thinking and take charge of their lives, are deeply threatening to those who won’t. The ‘woke’ and the MAGAs each hew to a toxic, self-limiting, self-destructive self-image in which nothing is ever their fault. Rejecting victimhood is the Kryptonite of ‘wokeness’ and MAGAtry. Evidence, logic, rationalism, reason and hard data are their sworn enemies. Mental health is the primary tool in the arsenal of The Silent Majority, those of us who want to take back our power from the perma-victims of modern discourse, who hold themselves, not to mention others and their social justice causes, back. Therapy can still be beneficial, and Selin-Davis’s articles lists the rebel therapists banding together to offer un-woke therapy for those who don’t want their therapists to dictate some issues are ‘off the table’ because it makes them feel ‘unsafe’. If you can’t afford therapy, no problem! Good books will challenge what you think you believe to be right in social justice. You can read them for free from the library or order them on-line, used copies super-cheap. I just saved you a whackload of money, and maybe hastened your journey to a healthier mental outlook. You’re welcome ;) Not all mental health struggles can be addressed with a few books, so if you need a therapist’s help Selin-Davis’s article offers non-woke therapy sources to start. Also research and interview potential therapists to make sure they won’t undermine your progress. It’s okay to be liberal or progressive or supportive of social justice, but the key thing to remember is they shouldn’t be pushing any particular political worldview on you. If your mental health issues come from your social justice work, start with a few of these books: The Righteous Mind - Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Religion - Jonathan Haidt Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody - Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay Woke Racism: How A New Religion Has Betrayed Black America - John McWhorter I Feel, Therefore I Am: The Triumph of Woke Subjectivism - Mark Goldblatt The Content Of Our Character: A New Vision of Race in America (this book is over 30 years old but it’s as fresh and relevant today as it was in 1990) - Shelby Steele Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality - Helen Joyce My Problem With Everything: My Journey Through the New Culture Wars - Meghan Daum The Morning After: Sex, Fear & Feminism - Katie Roiphe War Before Civilization - Lawrence Keeley (On how violent pre-colonial Indigenous cultures were) Emotional Intelligence 2.0: Harness the Power of the #1 Predictor of Success - Dr. Travis Bradberry & Dr. Jean Greaves This last is one of the best damn books I’ve ever read that will put you on the road to more highly fortified mental health. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a post!

Over-inclusivity endangers women and opens the door to sexual predators intent on eroding female agency. Stop being so *nice*, girls! This is the most important word in the female vocabulary. Practice it until you can say it firmly and with finality. The 1996 movie The Crucible highlights a lose-lose Puritan ultimatum: Tell the truth —that you were not a witch and practiced no Biblically-forbidden dark arts—and be ostracized, not for witchcraft but for ‘lying’; and if you lied and ‘confessed’ to preserve your communal life, you forever damned your soul to eternal hell in accordance with Puritan belief. The truth was hateful to the Puritan community; it wasn’t the narrative they wanted. They chose—preferred—to believe in witches. When far-left blogging platform Medium declared war on truth I wondered how it could have allowed itself to become so subsumed by illogical woke idiocy. When Canadian Pride transactivists began attacking libraries I wondered how Pride let itself get hijacked by fetishistic heterosexual men. When so-called ‘progressive’ activists attacked not just libraries but bookstores and Amazon , I wondered why they practiced censorship themselves when they labeled right-wing censorship as Nazism. On the Orwellian far-left, free speech is now as verboten as on the far-right. How did we get to this place? I think progress stopped when progressives, and especially Third Wave feminists, gave up the ability to say ‘No.’ The Patriarchy thanks them for their support. Leda and The Swine MeToo dragged consent out of the bedroom and into the public square and turned ‘rape culture’ into a household phrase. A recent Unherd article debated whether the Noughties (the decade with central double-zeros) enabled Russell Brand to become a hypersexualized misogynist and alleged perpetrator of sexual assault. It’s really about rape culture. When feminists use the term they almost always mean male words or actions. They fail to consider how much women contribute to rape culture too. Like not saying No when you’re not in danger. Unfortunately, many women are raised to be nice , and far more considerate of others’ feelings than men are. It’s not entirely men’s fault when they’re raised to be the way they are, too. We all have to strive to do better after our parents’ inevitable mistakes. Women can be more forceful and assertive, and men can stop and consider how their words and actions affect others. Progressivism has jumped the shark with its obsessive largely female fetish for inclusivity: No one claiming to be from a ‘marginalized’ group must ever be challenged or considered worthy of exclusion. It’s incredible that an age that can condemn Russell Brand and Louis CK for not listening when women said No, now insist women can’t say No to more fashionably-dressed sexual predators and opportunists, and shame their sisters who do. The feminist trick, as clever misogynists have discovered, is to slap on thicker eyelashes than thou, steal their sister’s bra and stuff it like she did when she was eleven, and and whine on TikTok about how hard their appropriated ‘marginalized’ lives are. The silly little chickie-boos will suck it right up! You can even get them to ignore their fine-tuned sense of danger from strange men in enclosed, private spaces, and assure other women they should not fear transwomen in changing rooms or public restrooms. This, despite mounds of research showing the same levels of violent criminality between transwomen and men, and the growing list of busted cross-dressing sexual predators. These dizzy dames have even been persuaded we should reward convicted sex offenders who find their ‘real woman’ with female prisons, a level of punishment for female prisoners I’m guessing runs afoul somehow of the Geneva Convention. No, no, nothing to see here! These poor dear souls just feel comfortable ‘coming out’ now! Image by Long Phung from Pixabay This is not good for women. Gavin de Becker notes in The Gift of Fear, “No animal in the wild suddenly overcome with fear would spend any of its mental energy thinking, ‘It’s probably nothing.’” Animals evolved over millions of years to hightail it at the approach of a hungry predator. So, to, have women developed a highly-attuned sense of danger, whether their mate came home angry from a poor hunt or drunk from the local pub. The smart human female animal gets the hell out of the way. A violent transactivist faction dictates to women that they will complain no more when penised people demand (in the historical tradition of entitled men) that women grant them access to all their female-only spaces, including even sex-segregated spaces originally conceived to protect women from male predation. Worse, women, real women, comply like good little girls and do what these men want. Because it’s always men - however fashionably dressed or passably female—who make these demands. Women are femsplained by Regressive Lefties that they should say No to some men - the ones they don’t want to have sex with - but yes to the ones who want to penetrate women’s-only spaces - regardless of how unsafe it makes women feel. Like, it’s a major colossal global human rights crisis if they don’t. This even includes rape crisis centers and domestic violence shelters, absolutely the last places the be-penised should ever be. Until a few years ago, they were genuine safe spaces for women directly abused by penises who could count on not encountering another one. No more. Get over your transphobia, girlfriend! The Ghislaine Maxwells of the left ‘Fauxminists’ are as dangerous to women and women’s rights as the Freedumb Convoy and red-state politics. Fauxminists are a manifestation primarily on the left, since anti-feminist women on the right are largely honest about it. Fauxminists consider themselves feminists but support anti-feminist causes, and I can’t think of anything more anti-feminist than throwing imprisoned women to the rapists, or telling mothers and their young daughters that they should just accept transwomen in women-only spaces because ‘they’re not going to hurt anyone’. This is criminally ludicrous. It directly contradicts women’s lived experience with male stranger danger, and even the ones they know. It even contradicts central progressive belief that we are who we are via environment and culture rather than anything innate. Never mind that it’s a belief contradicted by countless anthropologists, biologists and neuroscientists, but the left’s resistance to inconvenient science and recognizing contradictory hypocrisy has a lengthy history along with the right’s. We believe what we want to believe . If feminists believe we’re the product of our upbringing rather than our sex, do they really think a human male will toss out the window his prior experience growing up male in a violent, sexist society? Especially a convicted sex offender? Do they honestly believe he stops thinking like a male because he realized ‘he always felt like a woman’? And do they believe everything a man tells them? One of the biggest psychological weak spots in the female brain is the nature and nurture drive to be nice, to help others, to avoid hurting someone’s feelings, especially men’s. This is a sound evolutionary response as some men can become violent if they feel shamed or rejected, and letting them down easy is a survival tactic that hopefully prevents one from killing her. This is where the ad hoc lie “Sorry, I’m a lesbian,” comes from. Or, “Thanks, but I’m married,” when she’s not. They don’t always work but they offer the less emotional suitor plausible deniability: She’s not rejecting me, it’s nothing personal. Fauxminists naively believe that everything changes when a man claims to be female, which directly endangers others when they demand all women collaborate with primarily heterosexual transvestites and autogynephiles who are in it for the woodies. They’ll argue on X’s #MeToo that women have to be wary of all men because they don’t know which are the rapists or killers. Unless they’re transwomen. Why do they turn their brain over to Da Patriarchy when blatantly opportunistic men demand access to a rape crisis center? Not only must real feminists and progressives battle vicious misogynists on the right, now we have to battle their fauxminist allies on the left. If you’ve ever wondered why resistance to extreme trans rights get charged with being a ‘right-wing’ effort, it’s because it is. Because the right supports sex-segregated spaces, and the left, well—it supports rape culture and male sexual predation. Full stop. Fauxminists are the Ghislaine Maxwells of the left. Isn’t it interesting that Jeffrey Epstein’s infamous list included, as far as I can tell, almost exclusively Democratic politicians and progressive-leaning actors and celebrities? The left just cain’t say no. Not even to victimizing underage girls. Besides Jeffrey Epstein, the far-left and its fauxminists have a long record of enabling and supporting male criminal sexual behavior: The ILGA’s conscious inclusion of NAMBLA into their ranks; England’s infamous grooming gangs which fauxminists and Regressive Lefties ignored. Notice they condemn Epstein more than his Chief Collaborator? And now they instruct women to ignore their most critical instincts and pretend there’s no danger when a big galoot like Lia Thomas is taking his pants off. “It’s just nothing,” they tell women. If victims of sexual assault feel uncomfortable with a ‘woman with a penis’ listening to or overhearing their story at the rape crisis center, or that some guy who sort of looked like Dame Edna commented at the pool what a beauty their little daughter is, suddenly the fauxminists abandon #MeToo and tell these women to ‘just get over it,’ because, you know, women don’t molest children , and ‘transwomen are women’. Maybe this explains the real reason the dodo bird died out. Every time they thought they caught a whiff of a human in the breeze they told themselves, “Oh, it’s probably nothing. Humans are non-violent just like us.” Well, that’s what a human told her, anyway. CC0 2.0 Photo by Ed Schipul on Flickr Just Say No To No Where is this leading? Social psychologist and relationship expert Dina McMillan describes the many types of controlling, abusive men in her book But He Says He Loves Me: How to avoid being trapped in a manipulative relationship. She lists the sort of women controlling men look for. Some want the easily manipulated victim susceptible to doing whatever it takes to please the man. The ones with the lowest self-esteem are the easiest to reel in. Others want higher-value women who may require a little more work. Some prefer a real challenge: The strong, independent, feminist woman. “How well does that work?” I thought dubiously as I, a strong, independent, feminist woman read the book. Better than I might have expected. Women who think they can’t be controlled or abused by men are a World Series-level grand slam if he can get her to submit. It requires much more investment in ‘training’ her for the relationship but it can be quite successful, from his point of view. I see this same dynamic playing out in the unquestioning fauxminist support for the trans narrative. Transactivists, like other abusive males, exploit their adversaries’ weakest link. Which, on the left, is its over-inclusivity and inability to just say no. To anyone. Social psychologist Dina McMillan extrapolated the connection I just made to all of the ‘woke’, who she says are using ‘all of the tactics from my abuse series…It’s really quite frightening….It’s an absolutist totalitarian religion…I can’t even call it a social movement.” They’ve won the hearts and minds of the easiest pickin’s of the progressive chickens. They’ve persuaded misogyny’s cock blocks to stop saying No to men. And to oppress any sister who refuses to submit. What’s their next step? Not saying No to men who force themselves into women’s-only spaces puts them one step closer to no right to say No to sexual access. It’s what the incels have been preaching for years: Women shouldn’t have the right to say no to sex with any man. Even certain sexually successful men would agree. You can have sex with more women if you don’t have to waste a lot of time with consent. ‘Progressive’ feminism’s willingness to lift critical boundaries on traditional predatory male sexual behavior is why fighting trans rights has come to be identified with the right. Many of us on the left join after watching the horrifying spectacle of predatory grooming tactics by men pretending to be something they’re not. Fauxminists are silent when transwomen complain of the ‘cotton ceiling’ that prevents their penile sexual pleasure because real lesbians, unattracted to male bodies, jawlines and genitals, refuse to have sex with these pseudo-dykes with pikes. When the ‘minor-attracted persons’, the people formerly known as pedophiles come for the children, we know the Regressive Left fauxminists will do nothing to stop them. They never have before. The pedeophiles’ self-marginalized argument will stem from the far-left’s widely-accepted conviction that even children as young as three or four, ‘know’ what gender they’re supposed to be, and that no adult should stand in the way of transitioning. “Who are you to tell your child they can’t have sex with me? Children know what’s best for them! They can make up their own minds who they want to have sex with. Now get out of our business!” And the fauxminists will. Did you like this post? Would you like to see more? I lean left of center, but not so far over my brains fall out. Subscribe to my Substack newsletter Grow Some Labia so you never miss a damn thing!