Categories
free speech Gender Intelwars Sexes Transgender Transgender sports

Law student faces possible expulsion for daring to say women have vaginas and that men are physically stronger

A Scottish law student is being investigated by her school for making biologically factual statements about women and men, the U.K.’s Times reported. And now she faces possible expulsion.

What happened?

Lisa Keogh, a 29-year-old student at Abertay University in Scotland, is reportedly facing discipline from the school for telling her classmates that a woman must have a vagina — citing generally understood biology that females are born with female genitals — and that men are stronger than women and “the difference in physical strength of men versus women is a fact.”

Keogh told the Times that she made the comments during a video seminar, which prompted the class lecturer to mute her. Her comments came as the class discusses the topic of men who identify as female taking part in mixed martial arts matches. She said she pointed out to the class not only that women have female body parts but also that in such a scenario the trans athlete “had testosterone in her body for 32 years and, as such, would be genetically stronger than your average woman.”

She is also accused of calling women the “weaker sex” and having the gall to stand up for men after one of her classmates indicated that all men are rapists and pose a danger to women. Keogh admits to responding by calling her anti-men classmates “man-hating feminists.”

“I didn’t intend to be offensive but I did take part in a debate and outlined my sincerely held views,” she said, the Times reported. “I was abused and called names by the other students, who told me I was a ‘typical white, cis girl.’ You have got to be able to freely exchange differing opinions otherwise it’s not a debate.”

Those statements did not sit well with her younger classmates who anonymously reported her to the school’s higher-ups.

Her lawyers have described the entire thing as “farcical,” the paper said.

And Keogh apparently agrees, having told the Times that after she received an email accusing her of uttering transphobic and offensive comments during a class on gender feminism.

“I thought it was a joke,” she said. “I thought there was no way that the university would pursue me for utilising my legal right to freedom of speech.

“I wasn’t being mean, transphobic or offensive,” Keogh said. “I was stating a basic biological fact. I previously worked as a mechanic and when I was in the workshop there were some heavy things that I just couldn’t lift but male colleagues could.”

What’s next?

Now Keogh, a mother of two who aspires to be a human rights attorney, faces possible expulsion and fears she could lose her chance to “make a positive contribution” all because a handful of anonymous younger classmates had their feelings hurt.

“I’m worried that my chance of becoming a lawyer, and making a positive contribution, could be ended just because some people were offended,” she said, according to the Times. “Those girls fresh out of high school who accused me are training to be lawyers. There are no trigger warnings in a courtroom. The judge isn’t going to whisper softly or excuse them from listening to things they might not want to hear.”

Abertay University told the Times that it would not comment on disciplinary matters.

Share
Categories
FRANCE French language Gender Gender neutral words Gender-neutral Intelwars Woke culture Wokeness

France bans gender-neutral words in schools, says they’re ‘harmful’ to French language

France has banned the use of gender-neutral language in schools, bucking the recent woke culture trend spreading throughout academia around the world.

Gender equality advocates were pushing for full stops in the middle of written words, which they called “midpoints,” that would allow both male and female forms of the word to be represented at the same time. The Daily Mail reported, “In French grammar, nouns take on the gender of the subject to which they refer, with male preferred over female in mixed settings.”

However, the Academie Francaise or the French Academy, which is the 400-year-old education authority responsible for preserving the French language, shot down the woke proposal. The Academie Francaise declared the overture to be “harmful to the practice and understanding of [French].”

Nathalie Elimas, France’s state secretary for priority education, said the proposed gender-neutral changes were “a danger for our country” and “the death knell for the use of French in the world.” Elimas added that the use of midpoints “dislocates words, breaks them into two.”

Elimas said the changes would push people to learn English, which doesn’t gender nouns, instead of French, “With the spread of inclusive writing, the English language—already quasi-hegemonic across the world—would certainly and perhaps forever defeat the French language.”

France’s education minister Jean-Michel Blanquer told French newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche that the midpoints would present challenges for learning disabilities, including dyslexia.

“In addition, this writing, which results in the fragmentation of words and agreements, constitutes an obstacle to reading and understanding the written word,” Blanquer stated. “The impossibility of verbally transcribing texts using this type of writing hampers reading aloud as well as pronunciation, and consequently learning, especially for the youngest.”

Despite the decision from the Academie Francaise, a French teacher’s union, the SUD Education Union, attacked the ruling and even instructed schools to ignore it.

“SUD Education demands from the Minister that he stop trying to impose his backwardness on the educational community,” the statement read. “SUD calls on staff to take no account of these instructions from another time, and to exercise as they wish, depending on professional situations, the full use of their pedagogical freedom.”

Top French politicians, journalists, and intellectuals have recently become concerned about woke “out-of-control leftism and cancel culture” from the United States and how it could affect French culture.

“Emboldened by these comments, prominent intellectuals have banded together against what they regard as contamination by the out-of-control woke leftism of American campuses and its attendant cancel culture,” the New York Times reported in February. “With its echoes of the American culture wars, the battle began inside French universities but is being played out increasingly in the media. Politicians have been weighing in more and more, especially following a turbulent year during which a series of events called into question tenets of French society.”

French President Emmanuel Macron delivered a speech in October, where he sounded the alarm about “certain social science theories entirely imported from the United States.”

“Many of these topics in which France used to excel academically have been undermined and we have abandoned them,” Macron said in his speech. “And in so doing, we have left the intellectual debate to others, to those outside of the Republic by ideologizing it, sometimes yielding to other academic traditions…And when I see certain social science theories entirely imported from the United States, with their problems, which I respect and which exist, but which are just added to ours, I say to myself that it is reasonable to make this choice. And so we must, very clearly, re-invest, on a massive scale, in the field of social sciences, history, understanding of civilizations by creating posts, by stepping up dialogue, academic and scientific debate in order not to allow the knowledge, the understanding of Islam as a religion, of the civilization it underpins and its contribution to our country and our continent to become ideological and exclusively political debates.”

In October, Blanquer warned that there is a need to fight the ideologies coming from American universities.

“No one has the right to cowardice anymore,” Blanquer said, according to the Daily Wire. “There is a fight to be waged against an intellectual matrix coming from American universities and intersectional theses, which want to essentialize communities and identities, at the antipodes of our republican model which, for its part, postulates equality between human beings, independently of their characteristics of origin, sex, religion. It is the breeding ground for a fragmentation of our society and a vision of the world which converges with the interests of the Islamists.”

Share
Categories
First graders learning about gender Gender Gender is a choice Gender isn't real Gender social construct gender theory Intelwars La jolla country day school

Prestigious California school teaches 1st graders that gender is nothing more than a choice

A prestigious California private school is facing criticism after its curriculum reportedly taught first-grade children that gender is a choice.

What are the details?

According to KUSI-TV, teachers at posh La Jolla County Day School in La Jolla, California, are educating students on gender, stating that the concept is a mere choice.

The station reported that many concerned parents reached out to the network to describe what they say is the school pushing a “leftist ideology.”

One parent told the station that teachers assigned the children’s book titled, “It Feels Good to Be Yourself.”

The book says, “Some people are boys. Some people are girls. Some people are both, neither, or somewhere in between,” according to KUSI.

In remarks, Payton Hobbs — head of the institution’s lower school — confirmed that the book was shared with students.

“[T]he focus of the lesson [redacted] mentioned is connected to concept of Dignity and its meaning here at LJCDS,” Hobbs said in a statement. “During the lesson, they discuss ‘acceptance of identity’ as an aspect of our Dignity model. Students are also provided time to talk about what this means to them.”

“[A]fter this initial discussion, they read ‘It Feels Good to Be Yourself’ by Theresa Thorn which focuses on gender identity,” the statement continued. “Afterwards, the team takes questions from the students, and talk a bit about pronouns.”

The station reports that the school tuition is nearly $30,000 per year for students K-4.

Anything else?

The school made headlines in November after one official reportedly told a student to remove their “offensive” Make America Great Again hat.

At the time, KUSI reported:

KUSI News has obtained an email sent to all staff from La Jolla County Day’s Head of School, Gary Krahn.

The controversy that emerged from Krahn’s email to LJCD staff is in regards to one of their students showing up to school wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat.

Krahn’s email reads, “We also had a student wear a MAGA Hat today. I have talked with that student who now understands why that hat is offensive to our community. He will not wear it again. In addition his mom said that she is embarrassed by his actions. She will fulfill her role as a parent. We will continue to grow as a community that sees and values the dignity of all people.”

(H/T: The College Fix)

Share
Categories
Are feminists bad Black Lives Matter BLM Brooklyn Center Brooklyn center mayor Change my mind COMEDY Crowder Crowder bits Crowder bits playlist1776 Crowder clips Crowder confronts Crowderbits CURRENT EVENTS equality fake news Feminism Feminism debate Feminism explained feminist Feminist owned Funny conservative Gender Girl power Hat culture How to be a feminist How to debate How to debunk Intelwars LGBTQ liberal libertarian Lids Louder with crowder Lwc Mayor Mike elliott Minneapolis Minneapolis shooting minnesota Mug club news Police Politics Stephen Crowder Steven Crowder Tedxtalks Video Women Women ceo Youtube.com

Crowder: Feminism isn’t actually about empowering women

Steven Crowder told his audience on Wednesday that Minnesota police officer Kim Potter – the female cop identified in the “accidental” shooting death of Daunte Wright – appeared to be a danger to herself and to her partners.

Crowder reviewed police body cam footage of the traffic stop that showed officer Potter making a failed attempt at arresting Daunte Wright. In the video, Wright slipped from Potter’s grip and made it back into the driver’s seat of his vehicle. Potter can be heard on the video shouting she would tase Wright if he did not comply. Tragically, Potter accidentally pulled her gun thinking it was a taser and shot Wright

After reviewing the tape, Crowder concluded that in addition to accidentally shooting Wright, she put herself and her fellow officers in danger multiple times.

Crowder related officer Potter’s actions to the “lie that feminism is about empowering women.” He argued that officer Potter appeared less than capable of detaining a grown man, despite being on the police force for 26-years. “We convince women they add value in ways they don’t. We convince them that they add value in the way men add value,” Crowder said.

Watch the clip for more from Crowder. Can’t watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Steven Crowder?

To enjoy more of Steven’s uncensored late-night comedy that’s actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.

Share
Categories
Gender Intelwars Language Leftists Neopronouns New York Times political correctness pronouns Woke culture

Get ready for rise of ‘neopronouns.’ They can include ‘fantasy characters’ such as ‘vamp/vampself,’ ‘prin/cess/princesself,’ ‘fae/faer/faeself.’

TheBlaze has reported frequently on the increasing use of alternate pronouns over recent years. Just in December, in fact, news hit that the admission application for a business school offered a whopping 27 alternate pronouns that prospective students could choose from — you know, inventions such as “ey,” “xie,” “hir,” “vis,” and “eirs” in case the apparently outdated “she” and “he” don’t suffice.

Well, the New York Times calls such newly created terms “neopronouns” — and according to the paper, we ain’t seen a thing yet.

Now what?

The Times on Thursday published a nearly 2,000-word article on the topic, revealing for starters that the phenomenon of using “they” and “them” to describe a single person is becoming normal.

But that’s old hat. Turns out that neopronouns — created terms like “ze” and “zir” that gloss over gender — are expanding to include “noun-self” pronouns, which can refer to animals or “fantasy characters,” the paper said.

Therefore, the Times reported, one’s pronouns can be “bun/bunself” and “kitten/kittenself” — or even “vamp/vampself,” “prin/cess/princesself,” “fae/faer/faeself.” The paper also said “common slang” (“Innit/Innits/Innitself”) is fair game, too.

“Many neopronoun users are dead serious, and are also part of online communities that are quick to react swiftly to offenses,” the paper explained. “They are deeply versed in the style and mores of contemporary identity politics conversations.”

More from the Times:

A popular Twitch streamer who goes by AndiVMG recently apologized after jokingly tweeting that her pronouns were “bad/af,” which led many neopronoun users to accuse her of transphobic invalidation of their identities.

AndiVMG did not respond to a request for comment for this article but wrote on Twitter: “It wasn’t meant to mock people who use neopronouns. However I have since educated myself on the matter and spoken to people who use neopronouns and I see why what I said was hurtful.”

How are folks reacting?

There’s plenty more conjugating of the issue within the lengthy Times’ treatise, but what seems more entertaining is how observers are reacting to the story.

TheBlaze’s Dave Rubin cut right to the chase:

Conservative scholar and author Christian Sommers wondered, “Is this all real?”

Others expressed similar sentiments:

  • “I shall now refer to myself as squi/squirlly/squirrelself,” one commenter wrote.
  • “OK this article made my head hurt,” another user said. “I respect pronouns usage. But this just seems like people taking it to far. We are not little kids who are making up names.”
  • “Another sign America is circling the bowl like a violent bowel movement,” another commenter opined.
  • “What about inanimate object pronouns like ‘Apache attack helicopter’ or apatcopter?” another user quipped. “Discrimination at its finest if they don’t [accept] my identity as apatcopter.”
  • “At what point are ya’ll sick of sharing a country with folks pushing this kind of stuff?” another commenter wondered. “Their fantasyland lifestyles are slowly dragging our country towards economic ruin. Let them live however they want, in a country they want. Break off half the US & let’s get back to truth.”
Share
Categories
College Course Gender Gender nonconforming Intelwars Jesus Left-wing college Nonbinary Swarthmore college

Christ studied as gender ‘nonbinary’ in ‘Radical Jesus’ college course — but conservative theologian takes issue with that view

At famously left-wing, progressive Swarthmore College — an elite Pennsylvania school where pro-Palestinian students once demanded a ban on a hummus brand due to its alleged ties to Israel — a course is being taught that examines Jesus as gender “nonbinary.”

What are the details?

Radical Jesus” is listed on the school’s website as an introductory religion course. The professor who teaches it is Mark Wallace. A Swarthmore article about his recent book “When God Was a Bird: Christianity, Animism, and the Re-Enchantment of the World” indicates Wallace considers his Christian animism a “baseline sensibility” — and that he applies it to his “Radical Jesus” course, in which he “leads sessions on Jesus as an animist, alongside examinations of Jesus as a political revolutionary and nonbinary in a gender sense.”

The Swarthmore article added that Wallace views Christianity as “an Earth-based spirituality — including holy plants, sacred animals, and hallowed landscapes — not [as] an otherworldly, heaven-bound religion.”

“There you’ll see a rich environmental ethic, not a religion about a God who is distant and abstract and invisible, up there in the sky somewhere,” he said in the piece. “It’s a way of rethinking Christianity as a way of life, consistent with the cultures and spiritualities of Indigenous peoples.”

Campus Reform asked Wallace for further details on the notion of Jesus as gender “nonbinary,” and the outlet said he replied that “gender is fluid or socially constructed” and also sent Campus Reform his “Radical Jesus” syllabus, in which he instructs students to “learn to identify oneself and others according to preferred pronouns” since the practice “shows respect for others, as does the willingness to experiment with gender-nonconforming language for terms such as ‘God’ or ‘the sacred.'”

Indeed, the “Radical Jesus” syllabus indicates the course’s first session is titled, “Confused? Jesus offers clarity — or do they?” as opposed to “does he.” And the week 3 session is focused on the “nonbinary Jesus.”

The outlet also said Wallace pointed to a passage in fifth chapter of the Gospel of Mark regarding a bleeding woman who touches Christ’s garment and is healed. Campus Reform said Wallace insisted the power that flowed from Jesus was an “internal flow” reacting to the woman’s touch.

“Jesus is female-like because he flows or leaks,” Wallace explained, according to the outlet. “We can say, then, that Jesus is gender-nonconforming, doubly-gendered, or not traditionally male in these and other passages.” Campus Reform also said Wallace referenced Matthew 19:12, in which Jesus says some men have “made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.”

Pushback

Campus Reform noted that it asked Darrell Bock — Dallas Theological Seminary’s senior research professor of New Testament Studies — about Wallace’s claims, and the outlet said Bock contested them.

As for the bleeding woman, Bock agreed with Wallace that “the thing that ‘flowed’ was [Jesus’] power” but that it “had nothing to do with His gender but His access to the power of God,” the outlet noted

Bock added to the outlet in reference to the “eunuch” verse in Matthew that Christ was using a “figure of speech here. It is not making themselves literally a eunuch, but accepting celibacy as a way to be dedicated to the kingdom.”

Campus Reform said it contacted Swarthmore for comment but did not receive a response.

Anything else?

Swarthmore also offers other religion courses along the lines of “Radical Jesus,” including “Is God a White Supremacist?” and “The Queer Bible.”

Share
Categories
Constitution Constitutional Convention Founding Principles Gender Intelwars Ratification Debates rights Voting Women

Despite What They Tell You: The Constitution Never Discriminated Against Women

One way some writers try to discredit the Constitution is to assert that the document’s original meaning discriminated against women.

Thus, a 2011 Time Magazine cover story claimed that “The [Constitution’s] framers gave us the idea that . . . women were not allowed to vote.” An October 13, 2020 article in The Hill added, “The very fact that [Amy Coney] Barrett accepted the president’s nomination means that there are limits to her originalism. She clearly doesn’t believe that being a woman disqualifies her from sitting on the Supreme Court.”

The author of the Time Magazine article formerly headed the National Constitution Center. The author of The Hill piece sports a “Ph.D. in Political Science from Indiana University, with a focus on comparative constitutional law.” Both of them should have known better.

It has been over a century since the state legislatures ratified the 19th amendment, which guaranteed female suffrage nationwide.  The amendment is worded in a way that readily provokes two questions: (1) Taken in context with previous amendments, it implies that women already voted in some states; is this true? and (2) why didn’t the amendment add the right to hold federal office?

The answers are: (1) Yes, before the amendment was ratified, women voted in many states. Where they were blocked from the polls, it resulted from a decision by state authorities. It was not dictated by the Constitution. (2) The original Constitution permitted women to hold federal office, as demonstrated by the congressional service, before the 19th amendment, of Rep. Jeanette Rankin of Montana.

In fact, the Constitution never barred women either from voting or from holding federal office. On the contrary, the document’s framers carefully avoided sex-based tests for voting or officeholding, just as they avoided tests based on race, property, or religion. Here’s the background:

When the Constitutional Convention met in 1787, most state constitutions contemplated that voters and officeholders would be male. Some expressly limited voting to “male inhabitants” (New York, Massachusetts) or “freemen” (New Hampshire, Pennsylvania). The Virginia constitution provided for election to the state Senate of “the man who shall have the greatest number of votes in the whole district,” and the New York constitution described the state legislature as consisting of “two separate and distinct bodies of men.”

Although at the time people often employed the word “man” generically to signify a human being, these documents probably meant “man” in the narrower, male sense. For example, the Virginia constitution’s use of “man” was interpreted in practice to limit voting and office-holding to males.

But not all state charters were written that way. The New Jersey constitution was gender-neutral. It nowhere contained the words “man” or “men.” Rather, it granted both suffrage and the right to hold office to “all inhabitants” who met certain property requirements. It uniformly referred to officeholders as “persons.”

The New Jersey constitution did use the pronoun “he” and its variants. But of course before the PC language-manipulation project of recent years, standard English used “he” and its variants to designate either men or women. Women had their own pronouns; men had to share theirs.

Contemporaries fully recognized the New Jersey constitution as gender-neutral. That’s why women could vote in that state. They voted in such numbers that New Jersey political operatives routinely included appeals for the female vote.

The spirit of the time favored female political involvement in other states as well. Massachusetts saw sporadic female voting. During the public debates over the Constitution, women participated actively on both sides of the issue. In addition to voting for ratification convention delegates in New Jersey and perhaps elsewhere, women organized public events, mostly in favor of the Constitution. Mercy Otis Warren of Massachusetts (later a distinguished historian) contributed essays against the Constitution. And both sides apparently made written appeals to women for political support.

The delegates to the 1787 Constitution Convention were consciously writing for the ages. They surely realized that female suffrage could spread beyond New Jersey. Politics being what it is, the power to vote would encourage women to run for political office as well. The framers therefore made the document agnostic on the subject of gender. Any restrictions based on sex would have to be imposed at the state level, because the Constitution did not impose them.

The records of the convention show that gender neutrality was the dominant assumption from its early days. The Virginia Plan, the outline used to kick off the debates, was gender neutral. Judge William Paterson’s competing New Jersey Plan followed his state’s basic law by referring to participants in public affairs as “citizens,” “inhabitants” and “persons.” Only once in the New Jersey Plan did “man” or “men” appear, and that was in the phrase “body of men” to describe a presumably armed band of men defying federal law.

From the beginning, moreover, the framers accepted that representation in the lower house of the national legislature would be based on state population or wealth, rather than according to the number of males, as in states such as New Hampshire and New York.

Later in the convention, the framers did consider some gender qualifications—only to reject them. For example, in late July and early August, 1787, a Committee of Detail fashioned the convention’s resolutions into a first draft of the Constitution. Committee member James Wilson suggested that electors be limited to “freemen,” as in his own state of Pennsylvania. And his colleague Edmund Randolph’s initial outline listed “manhood” as a possible suffrage qualification.

But the committee rejected both proposals as “not justified by the [convention’s] resolutions.” When the committee draft emerged, it avoided the singular word “man” and referred to the president as a “person.”

In the interim, though, some gender specificity crept in. The Committee of Detail draft described the national legislature as consisting of “two separate and distinct Bodies of Men.” It also granted the president the title of “His Excellency,” with no provision for any “Her Excellency.” And later in the convention Pierce Butler of South Carolina proposed, and the convention adopted, a clause with a one-time appearance of the phrase “He or She.” Of course, such a phrase might suggest that where the Constitution employed only “he” (as everywhere else in the document) it meant only males.

Later in the convention, though, the delegates dropped “He or She,” thereby clarifying that “he” encompassed persons of the both sexes. The convention also delegated final drafting to a Committee of Style. Committee member Gouverneur Morris did most of the actual writing. With respect to gender, he followed the New Jersey model. The final version of the Constitution made the following changes from earlier drafts and resolutions:

  • It omitted the phrase “Bodies of Men” in describing the national legislature.
  • It avoided all use of “man” and “men.”
  • It employed only gender-neutral terms such as “person,” “citizen,” “inhabitant,” and titles such as “officer” and “elector.”
  • It deleted the power of Congress to override state laws on voter qualifications, thereby fully empowering states to enfranchise women for federal as well as state elections.

This gender neutrality was not lost on the wider public. It may have been one reason more women worked for the Constitution than against it. But gender neutrality also came under fire from the Constitution’s opponents. One essayist writing under the pseudonym “Cato” objected to the document’s allocation of Representatives by “inhabitants” rather than by male freemen. Another writer, satirizing opposition arguments, criticized the Constitution because it did not limit the president to a person “of the male gender.” The satirist pointed out that “Without [such an] exclusion” Americans might “come to have an old woman at the head of our affairs.” Of course, those sexist arguments did not prevail.

Sex-based restrictions were left to the states, and over time states gradually abolished them?a development the Constitution’s gender neutrality made possible.

A version of this article appeared in the December 27, 2020 issue of the Epoch Times.

The post Despite What They Tell You: The Constitution Never Discriminated Against Women first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Share
Categories
application Gender Georgia state university Intelwars LGBTQ pronouns Transgender

Dizzying 27 alternate pronouns displayed on college business school application — along with an ‘other’ option

Georgia State University’s J. Mack Robinson College of Business features a program called WomenLead which “equips female students to excel in school, enter the workforce with developed skills, and find their place in leadership positions.”

One might assume a program geared toward women wouldn’t need much in the way of gender identifiers on its application form, but once you scroll down a little ways past boxes to input your last name, first name, and “nickname or preferred first name if different from your given name,” the form asks “what pronouns do you prefer?”

And it’s a smorgasbord.

Apart from box you can click for the seemingly obvious choice (“she,” “her,” “her,” “hers,” “herself”), there’s an option we’ve been seeing quite a bit of for the last couple of years (“he,” “him,” “his,” “his,” “himself”). And then “they,” “them,” “their,” “theirs,” “themself.” Alrighty, then.

But that ain’t all.

If the latter choices don’t pass muster with applicants, there are seven more groups of alternate pronouns to choose from that display a whopping 27 words of some sort, such as “ey,” “xie,” “hir,” “vis,” and “eirs.”

The kicker? If none of those choices suffice, the application leaves a space at the bottom of the section in which hopefuls can list their “other” pronouns.

Don’t ever say the application creators were not thorough.

What did WomenLead have to say?

Director of WomenLead Nancy Mansfield told Campus Reform the program “invites all students who meet the requirements regardless of gender.”

The outlet said it also contacted Georgia State University for comment, presumably without success.

Anything else?

Indeed, readers of TheBlaze have traveled down this path numerous times. To wit:

  • A staff editorial for The Wellesley News, the student newspaper for Wellesley College, earlier this year called for the prestigious all-women school to edit its policies and language in deference to transgender and nonbinary individuals — most notably to stop calling students “women.”
  • Last year a British police chief filmed a social media video stressing the importance of recognizing “International Pronouns Day” and said misgendering someone is a “form of abuse.”
  • And also in 2019, even Merriam-Webster got into the act and added a new definition for “they,”a new definition for “they,” reflecting increased usage of the word among those who identify as gender nonbinary.
Share
Categories
Cartoon network Gender Intelwars Left-wing hollywood Politically Correct pronouns Transgender Woke

Cartoon Network, which is geared toward children, promotes multiple genders — and gets called out for it

The kid-oriented Cartoon Network posted a tweet earlier this week focusing on “normalizing gender pronouns” and “respecting them.”

“Whether you use he/she/them or something else, we acknowledge and LOVE you!” the rest of the tweet said.

The tweet links to a 20-page “gender justice toolkit” from the National Black Justice Coalition, a self-described “civil rights organization dedicated to the empowerment of Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and same gender loving (LGBTQ/SGL) people, including people living with HIV/AIDS.”

The tweet also includes a four-frame cartoon — which includes the Cartoon Network and NBJC logos — and appears to feature children.

“Gender pronouns describe a person’s gender identity,” one frame’s text reads. “Examples of pronouns are she/her, they/them, and ze/zir! A lot of people are learning about gender identity. If you’re comfortable, you can share your own pronouns!”

The frame’s text also reads, “We can’t tell someone’s gender just by looking at them, and shouldn’t assume we know. There are many gender identities beyond ‘girl’ or ‘boy.’ Some people don’t identify as any gender.”

More from the gender justice toolkit:

Language is often a reflection of culture, and when unchecked, can be used to perpetuate violence and oppression. Words have the power to reinforce stereotypes, marginalize the most vulnerable among us, and support harmful ideas about race, gender, sexual orientation and gender identity, socioeconomic status, and other factors. Language also has the power to be a revolutionary tool in dismantling existing power structures. Language has the capacity to liberate and empower.

The toolkit indicates that it’s “designed to facilitate uncomfortable and, at times, difficult conversations that can save lives.”

“This specific toolkit has been designed with the goal of ensuring gender justice in mind, which means ending the violence that black women and girls — both cisgender and transgender, as well as gender non-conforming people — experience simply as a result of who they are and how they exist in the world,” the description also said.

What was the reaction to the Cartoon Network’s tweet?

The tweet’s message certainly carried some left-wing support among commenters — but not everyone agreed with its sentiments:

  • “Stop grooming children,” one commenter said.
  • “Can someone explain the ‘they/them’ pronoun??” another user asked. “That part is confusing. You can transgender into more than one person???”
  • “Identity politics need to stay very very very far away from kids,” another commenter said. “And once they arrived, a bit further away still.”
  • “I have to say that if you really want to just push children into this sexualization then the only one[s] who will want to watch these will probably be leftist parents who want to brainwash their kids,” another user noted. “The only words that I can describe this thing are: dangerous, unnecessary, cringe.”

(H/T: FaithWire)

Share
Categories
birth certificates Gender Intelwars Leftists New England Journal of Medicine political correctness Transgender Woke

No more sex identification on birth certificates, New England Journal of Medicine article declares

A New England Journal of Medicine article published last week states that birth certificates no longer should include sex identification “given the particularly harmful effects of such designations on intersex and transgender people.”

What are the details?

The article said birth certificates in 1949 underwent a revision that “created a line of demarcation. The legally identifying fields above the line appear on certified copies of birth certificates, whereas information in the fields below the line, which is used for statistical purposes, is deidentified and reported in the aggregate. Race and parents’ marital status, for example, were moved below the line of demarcation to permit self-identification and to avoid stigma, respectively.”

Simply put, the authors said it’s time to move sex designation below the line.

More from the article:

Designating sex as male or female on birth certificates suggests that sex is simple and binary when, biologically, it is not. Sex is a function of multiple biologic processes with many resultant combinations. About 1 in 5000 people have intersex variations. As many as 1 in 100 people exhibit chimerism, mosaicism, or micromosaicism, conditions in which a person’s cells may contain varying sex chromosomes, often unbeknownst to them.2 The biologic processes responsible for sex are incompletely defined, and there is no universally accepted test for determining sex.

Assigning sex at birth also doesn’t capture the diversity of people’s experiences. About 6 in 1000 people identify as transgender, meaning that their gender identity doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth. Others are nonbinary, meaning they don’t exclusively identify as a man or a woman, or gender nonconforming, meaning their behavior or appearance doesn’t align with social expectations for their assigned sex.

Sex designations on birth certificates offer no clinical utility; they serve only legal — not medical — goals. Certainly, knowing a patient’s sex is useful in many contexts, when it is appropriately interpreted. Sex modifies the clinical suspicion of a heart attack in the absence of classic symptoms and is a proxy for many undefined social, environmental, and biologic factors in research, for example. But, in each of these applications, sex is merely a stand-in for other variables and is not generally ascertained from a birth certificate.

‘Keeping sex designations above the line causes harm’

The piece emphasizes that “keeping sex designations above the line causes harm.”

More from the article:

For people with intersex variations, the birth certificate’s public sex designation invites scrutiny, shame, and pressure to undergo unnecessary and unwanted surgical and medical interventions.1Sex assignments at birth may be used to exclude transgender people from serving in appropriate military units, serving sentences in appropriate prisons, enrolling in health insurance, and, in states with strict identification laws, voting. Less visibly, assigning sex at birth perpetuates a view that sex as defined by a binary variable is natural, essential, and immutable. Participation by the medical profession and the government in assigning sex is often used as evidence supporting this view. Imposing such a categorization system risks stifling self-expression and self-identification.

People with intersex variations may undergo surgeries before they are old enough to consent, often losing reproductive capacity and sexual sensation as a result. Transgender people receive worse health care and have worse outcomes than cisgender people.3 Health care professionals have a particular duty to support vulnerable populations who have historically been harmed by clinicians and by the medical system in general.

The bathroom thing

The authors of the article go further and address safety concerns related to transgender individuals using locker rooms and restrooms of their choice. “But fears about privacy and safety violations in public accommodations aren’t supported by evidence. A study examining the effects of a Massachusetts law protecting transgender people in public accommodations revealed no increase in violations. Meanwhile, many intersex and transgender people avoid public spaces, including restrooms, for fear of mistreatment.”

Passports and other documents

The authors also say that if sex designations are removed from birth certificates, it would allow applicants for passports and other government-issued documents “to identify their gender without medical verification.”

Pushback

A number of article commenters questioned the authors’ conclusions:

  • “I consider myself a left of center thinking person but this goes a little too far down a rabbit hole I don’t want to step into,” one reader noted.
  • “If a person who is male wants to pretend they are female, does that mean I legally have to pretend with them?” another reader asked.
  • “Tinkering with birth certificates will not alter the fact that humans are either men OR women, as little as the Flat Earth Society can make the earth flat,” another reader commented. “There are tiny flat patches on earth and a tiny number of humans have ambiguous sex but this does not change the fundamental principles.”
  • “This kind of thinking is just another example of how far we are wandering from truth,” another reader said.
Share
Categories
Children Children choosing gender Emily Ratajkowski Gender Intelwars Leftists model Pregnancy Woke

Pregnant supermodel Emily Ratajkowski says she and her husband ‘won’t know’ baby’s gender ‘until our child is 18’ and ‘they’ll let us know then’

It’s become standard fare for leftist celebrities to proclaim they’re letting their children choose their genders. And pregnant supermodel Emily Ratajkowski is the latest, writing in Vogue that she and her husband “won’t know the gender” of their baby “until our child is 18” and “they’ll let us know then.”

What are the details?

Ratajkowski added to her essay, “I like the idea of forcing as few gender stereotypes on my child as possible” but that she doesn’t like “that we force gender-based preconceptions onto people, let alone babies. I want to be a parent who allows my child to show themself to me. And yet I realize that while I may hope my child can determine their own place in the world, they will, no matter what, be faced with the undeniable constraints and constructions of gender before they can speak or, hell, even be born.”

Indeed, the woke pronoun thing is primed and ready to go.

Still, she acknowledged that she’s asked her husband — actor-producer Sebastian Bear-McClard — if he wants a boy, and that “he refuses to give me an answer, swearing that he doesn’t have a preference. But one Sunday as he’s watching football he makes a remark about how it’d be fun to have a little boy to watch with.”

Ratajkowski said she shot back, “Girls watch football, too!”

One thing’s for sure, though: The supermodel has fears about raising a son — particularly due to the child’s inevitable whiteness.

“I’ve known far too many white men who move through the world unaware of their privilege, and I’ve been traumatized by many of my experiences with them,” Ratajkowski wrote. “And boys too; it’s shocking to realize how early young boys gain a sense of entitlement — to girls’ bodies and to the world in general. I’m not scared of raising a ‘bad guy,’ as many of the men I’ve known who abuse their power do so unintentionally. But I’m terrified of inadvertently cultivating the carelessness and the lack of awareness that are so convenient for men. It feels much more daunting to create an understanding of privilege in a child than to teach simple black-and-white morality. How do I raise a child who learns to like themself while also teaching them about their position of power in the world?”

‘Nothing worse than the undisturbed sleep of a white man in a patriarchal world’

She then shared a story about a friend’s struggle with white males — namely her husband and new baby boy:

My friend who is the mother to a three-year-old boy tells me that she didn’t think she cared about gender until her doctor broke the news that she was having a son. She burst into tears in her office. “And then I continued to cry for a whole month,” she says matter-of-factly. After a difficult birth experience, she developed postpartum depression and decided that she resented her husband more than she’d ever imagined possible. She told me she particularly hated — and she made an actual, physical list that she kept in her journal, editing it daily — how peacefully he slept. “There is nothing worse than the undisturbed sleep of a white man in a patriarchal world.” She shakes her head. “It was hard to come to terms with the fact that I was bringing yet another white man into the world. But now I adore him and can’t imagine it any other way.” She also eventually learned to love her husband again. The sound of his perfect sleep next to her at night is now tolerable.

Anything else?

Ratajkowski is no stranger to expressing left-wing views. She publicly backed Democratic socialist presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in 2016 and took some heat for partnering with Planned Parenthood a year earlier. But in fairness, Ratajkowski in 2017 said she stood up for Melania Trump after a New York Times journalist called the first lady a “hooker.”

Share
Categories
culture Gender Intelwars Navy Navy SEALs political correctness US Military

Navy SEALs remove terms like ‘brotherhood’ from ethos to be more gender-neutral

The U.S. Navy SEALs and the Navy Special Warfare Combat-craft Crewman have removed so-called gendered terms like “brotherhood” from their ethos and creed statements in an effort to present the Navy as gender-neutral.

Another change made to the SEAL ethos was to alter the words “A common man with uncommon desire to succeed” to “Common citizens with uncommon desire to succeed.”

The changes were made to comply with changes in the law allowing women to serve in the SEALs and SWCC, a spokesman for Naval Special Warfare told American Military News.

“Naval Special Warfare continues to deliberately develop a culture of tactical and ethical excellence that reflects the nation we represent, and that draws upon the talents of the all-volunteer force who meet the standards of qualification as a SEAL or SWCC,” Lt. Cmdr. Matthew Stroup said.

“The previous versions of the SEAL Ethos and SWCC Creed were written prior to the law allowing women to serve as operators in Naval Special Warfare,” Stroup continued. “The changes do not in any way reflect lowering standards of entry, rather they ensure that all those who meet the requirements to train to become a SEAL or SWCC are represented in the ethos or creed they live out. This improves the posture of the NSW force by ensuring we draw from the greatest pool of talent available.”

“To date, no women completed the SEAL or SWCC qualification training pipelines,” he added.

The new SEAL ethos can be found on the official website for the Naval Special Warfare Command. American Military News provided a link to an archived version of the ethos containing the original language.

From the report:

Another alteration to the first paragraph changes the phrase “I am that man” to “I am that warrior.”

In the fourth paragraph, the sentence, “The ability to control my emotions and my actions, regardless of circumstance, sets me apart from other men” is changed to “The ability to control my emotions and my actions, regardless of circumstance, sets me apart from others” in the new version of the SEAL ethos.

In the final paragraph of the ethos statement, the prior sentence states, “Brave men have fought and died building the proud tradition and feared reputation that I am bound to uphold.” The sentence is now changed with the reference to “Brave men” changed to “Brave SEALs.”

The memo also calls for the SWCC creed to change the term “Brotherhood” in the first paragraph to “group of maritime warriors.” Additionally, the memo states the sentence “I challenge my brothers to perform, as I expect them to challenge me” is to be changed to “I challenge them to perform, as I expect them to challenge me.”

American Military News also provided links to the new version of the SWCC creed and compared it to a copy of the older version without the gender-neutral changes from the U.S. Special Operations Command website.

“The changes come despite the fact that there have been no women to successfully complete SEAL or SWCC training and enter the elite units,” American Military News reports.

Retired SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who was pardoned by President Trump of one war crime conviction and acquitted of other serious charges, blasted the changes to the SEALs creed in an Instagram post Friday.

“What a joke. Note the names that signed off at the bottom. Adm. Colin Green (part of the hierarchy that tried to use the system to put me away)~ let’s remove all male pronouns & BROTHERHOOD from the SEAL ethos,” Gallagher wrote.

“To be honest I thought the ethos was always BS,” Gallagher added. “Now I know it is. A creed or ethos is supposed to be written in stone, obviously ours is not and will sway to whatever political agenda is being put out.”

Share
Categories
Gender Gender is a social construct Gender reveal parties Intelwars leftism social justice Social Media Trevor Noah Videos

Trevor Noah says gender reveal parties are dangerous, should only happen when kids are old enough to choose gender. Ted Cruz hits back with savage burn.

“The Daily Show” host and comedian Trevor Noah says gender reveal parties should be obsolete, as children clearly aren’t able to choose their genders as babies.

What are the details?

In a Tuesday monologue, Noah pointed to the California fire sparked by pyrotechnics at a gender reveal party. The fire, dubbed the El Dorado Fire, has burned more than 13,000 acres at the time of this writing.

“At this point, ‘gender reveal party’ is now one of the most dangerous terrorist organizations,” Noah joked during the monologue. “It’s ISIS, al-Qaeda, Taylor Swift fans, and gender reveals parties.”

The Comedy Central host added, “Aside from all the damage it can cause, celebrating a baby’s genitalia is starting to feel very outdated. Given everything we’re learning about gender, gender reveal parties should only happen when the child is old enough to know their actual gender — and to pitch in some cash for the fire damage.”

He also suggested that parents “do something that helps the situation” following the fire, suggesting that expectant parents attempt to douse the El Dorado fire with pink-colored water if the child is a girl, or blue-tinted water if the child is a boy.

In response, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said that many liberal men simply “never grow balls.”

In a Friday tweet, Cruz on Twitter linked a tweet from The Daily Wire, which reported that Noah was apparently “offended” by gender reveal parties.

He wrote, “A fair point. Many liberal males never grow balls[.]”

‘Nothing less than child abuse’

Cruz has been outspoken about his stance on biological gender, children, and parenting, and in 2019, said that parents allowing children to transition genders was a “horrifying & tragic” notion to behold.

In a tweet, the Texas Republican wrote, “This is horrifying & tragic. For a parent to subject such a young child to life-altering hormone blockers to medically transition their sex is nothing less than child abuse.”

Share
Categories
Daniel radcliffe Gender Harry Potter Intelwars j k rowling

‘Harry Potter’ actor slams J.K. Rowling’s comments on gender, argues: ‘Transgender women are women’

“Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling continues to take heat for arguing against “erasing the concept of sex” or biological gender, and even the actor that played the lead in the movies about her books has condemned her comments.

Daniel Radcliffe penned an essay wherein he acknowledged that he has Rowling to thank for his success, but pushed back against her statement while insisting: “Transgender women are women.”

What are the details?

Over the weekend, Rowling tweeted, “If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”

Social justice warriors pounced on Rowling’s comments, attempting to “cancel” her over her views.

Radcliffe reacted in a post published Monday on the website of The Trevor Project, an organization that provides “crisis intervention and suicide prevention services” to LGBTQ youth.

The actor — who has been involved with The Trevor Project for years — wrote, “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”

He continued, “According to The Trevor Project, 78% of transgender and nonbinary youth reported being the subject of discrimination due to their gender identity. It’s clear that we need to do more to support transgender and nonbinary people, not invalidate their identities, and not cause further harm.”

Radcliffe also acknowledged “that certain press outlets will probably want to paint this as in-fighting between J.K. Rowling and myself, but that is really not what this is about, nor is it what’s important right now.”

He added, “While Jo is unquestionably responsible for the course my life has taken…I feel compelled to say something at this moment.”

But he went on to apologize to anyone hurt by Rowling’s remarks, saying, “To all the people who now feel that their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished, I am deeply sorry for the pain these comments have caused you.”

Share
Categories
Cancel culture Gender Intelwars JK Rowling LGBT social justice warriors Twitter

Social justice warriors cancel ‘Harry Potter’ author J.K. Rowling because she affirmed biological gender

British author J.K. Rowling, known for writing the world famous “Harry Potter” books, triggered an avalanche of controversy over the weekend for affirming scientific views of gender and sex.

Although Rowling supports LGBT people, she said that maintaining the biological structure of gender and sex is vitally important — especially for LGBT people.

“If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth,” Rowling wrote.

“The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women — ie, to male violence — ‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences — is a nonsense,” she continued.

“I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so,” the author added.

What was the response?

Rowling’s comments went viral and generated more than 50,000 replies. One thing is clear: people are angry with Rowling’s affirmation of science.

  • Literally NO ONE said the concept of sex or womxn is erased.
    The only thing erased here is YOU erasing the legitimacy of trans folks.
    Please reconsider where you stand here, for trans folks and for so many who used to idolize you,” one person
    responded.
  • “As a physician, I want people to know that sex exists on a bimodal biological spectrum just like gender exists on a bimodal sociological spectrum. While most identify as either female or male, there are intersex and trans individuals whose identities are just as valid and real,” another person responded.
  • “The vast consensus of medical and other scientific experts validate trans people and urge affirmation of us. Your own country’s medical organizations have said as much.
    You don’t love trans people, and certainly don’t care about us,” another person
    said.
  • “Truly pathetic that in the midst of huge outcry against police brutality and the unjust killings of black people by authorities, you choose to use your gargantuan platform and influence to attack a vulnerable minority?” another person told Rowling.
  • “I feel heartbroken for every trans kid who grew up on Harry Potter, only to find out the author of their beloved childhood books is such a transphobic bigot,” another person said.
  • “Just want to add my valuable 2 cents here:

    F**k JK Rowling.

    Thanks for listening. #JKRowlingIsOverParty,” another person said.

But not everyone was angry with Rowling — ironically transgender people.

Blare White, a transgender person, replied, “Facts. I only see facts.”

“Trans people appreciate @jk_rowling’s courage in speaking out against an authoritarian ideology that oppresses women, gay people and trans people. We need to return to reality. Sex is real and it is immutable,” another transgender person said.

Share
Categories
equal pay Feminism Gender Gender Wage Gap Gender wars Intelwars Men's soccer Soccer Sports Us women's soccer team USA wage gap Women's soccer Women's sports

US Women’s soccer suffers defeat in court over ‘equal pay’ lawsuit

U.S. Women’s soccer players suffered a legal defeat when a judge ruled that they were not being unfairly paid in comparison to their male counterparts.

The ruling was handed down by Judge R. Gary Klausner of the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Friday.

Critics have claimed that female soccer players aren’t payed as well as their male counterparts, but Klausner disagreed.

“The WNT (Women’s National Team) has been paid more on both a cumulative and an average per-game basis than the MNT (Men’s National Team) over the class period,” said the court according to a report from Reuters.

Klausner allowed for a separate claim to proceed by the female players arguing that they were receiving disparate compensation in the form of travel, training, housing and other proceeds.

The United States Soccer Federation showed that the female players were paid $8 million more in salaries and bonuses, despite the games of the male players grossing much more game revenue.

Molly Levinson, who represents the female players, said that they plan to appeal the decision.

“We are shocked and disappointed. We will not give up our hard work for equal pay,” said Levinson.

“We are confident in our case and steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that girls and women who play this sport will not be valued as lesser just because of their gender,” she added.

Here’s more about the great soccer gender pay debate:


Here’s Why Women Are Paid Less In Soccer

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
Coronavirus COVID-19 Frederica Wilson Gender Intelwars Women

Florida Democrat says coronavirus pandemic is a ‘gendered’ crisis that disproportionately impacts women

Democratic Rep. Frederica Wilson of Florida said Tuesday that the coronavirus pandemic, which has killed tens of thousands of people worldwide and decimated the U.S. economy, is actually a “gendered crisis” that impacts women more than men.

“In so many ways, the #COVID19 pandemic is a gendered crisis. We’re disproportionately on the frontlines as healthcare workers, food service workers, grocery.” Wilson tweeted.

Wilson’s comments are similar to those made by New York Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul in an op-ed in The Hill, co-written by Lauren Leader. They wrote:

76 percent of the health care workforce is female. A majority of the nurses, nurse practitioners, health aides and even a majority of doctors under the age of 45 are female. These everyday heroes are working tireless hours to save lives, while at the same time trying to protect their own health and the well-being of their families.

It’s not just women in health care who are bearing the brunt of this crisis. Think about this: women comprise the majority in most of the economic sectors hit hardest economically by the shut down of our economy. 40 percent of mothers in the U.S. are the primary breadwinners. They are the majority of service workers, two-thirds of America’s minimum wage workers, and they are more likely to be waitresses, cooks, hotel housekeepers now out of work.

Adding to the misery, 39 percent of small business owners are women — many living on the margins, now unsure whether they will even survive.

Still, the impact of the virus is clearly widespread and neither gender is getting a pass from the consequences. And notable in the above statistics is the fact that a majority of doctors over 45 are male, men are the primary breadwinners in most households, and most small business owners are men.

Additionally, current data shows that men are significantly more likely to die of COVID-19 than women. Dr. Deborah Birx, a response coordinator on the White House coronavirus task force, said the mortality rate in Italy is about twice as high among men as it is among women.

In short, everyone is suffering, and it takes a bit of statistical framing to portray the pandemic as “gendered.”

Share
Categories
Gender Idaho Intelwars Sports Transgender Transgender agenda Transgender female Transgender sports Transgenderism

ACLU threatens to sue if Idaho passes law banning biological males from competing against biological females in sports

LGBT groups are decrying the state government in Idaho as a bill banning biological males from competing against biological females in sports comes closer to becoming a legal reality.

The bill was approved by the Senate and will go the House for approval. Critics say the bill is unconstitutional and allows for discrimination against transgender persons.

Supporters of the law say it will protect females from unfair competition by biological males.

“It started to level the playing field. But now we are in a new crisis,” said Republican Sen. Mary Souza according to the Associated Press.

“Girls who have been struggling and training and competing in their sport are suddenly confronted by biological males,” she explained.

Trangender advocates and supporters complained about the bill on social media.

“The notion the Idaho House would spend time during #CoronavirusOutbreak looking for new ways to persecute transgender people is just beyond the pale. Don’t do this,” pleaded Montel Williams.

“While the world grapples with #coronavirus the Idaho Senate focused on discriminating by legislating against #transgender people and voting 24-11 to pass a bill barring transgender girls and women from women’s high school and college sports teams,” said Democratic strategist Meghan Stabler.

“We will sue”

The ACLU promised legal action if the governor signed the bill.

“The Idaho Senate just passed a bill targeting trans student athletes. This bill could subject any student athlete to invasive screenings,” the ACLU tweeted. “If @GovernorLittle signs this bill, we will sue.”

Here’s more about the proposed Idaho law:


Idaho lawmakers hear debate on transgender athletes’ bill

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
editorial Gender Intelwars Left-wing college students Massachusetts Newspaper Nonbinary Transgender Wellesley College Women

Campus newspaper for prestigious all-women college tells school to stop calling students ‘women’

A recent staff editorial for The Wellesley News, the student newspaper for Wellesley College, calls for the prestigious all-women school to edit its policies and language in deference to transgender and nonbinary individuals — most notably to stop calling students “women.”

What are the details?

The editorial takes umbrage at the “never-ending reminders” on campus that Wellesley is for “Women Who Will,” as well as the “attitudes of students, staff, and faculty members on campus who continue to refer to Wellesley ‘sisters’ and use she/her pronouns without consideration for who is in the room. These current practices and attitudes perpetuate the ongoing exclusion and ignorance of transgender and nonbinary identities.”

In addition, the editorial calls attention to Wellesley’s policy of excluding transgender male students from admission and only allowing applicants who identify as women — whether male or female assigned at birth — or who were identified as female at birth who now identify as nonbinary. “Those who are assigned male at birth and identify as nonbinary or identify as cis males are not eligible for admission,” the editorial adds.

More from the paper:

On the fifth anniversary of Wellesley introducing its new gender policy, The Wellesley News calls for the College to reject its complacent attitude and towards the neglect of the transgender and nonbinary community. To do so, we ask that the College administration revise its policy surrounding the admittance of transgender male students and usher in a more inclusive language standard for official communications. Additionally, we ask students to reflect these changes in their everyday lives in order to foster a more kind, empathetic environment.

That ‘women’ word

The editorial also stresses in order to complete a “cognizant rejection of the gender binary,” a few other things are in order, such as doing away with that “women” word. It notes a few ideas adapted from the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion web page of another all-women school, Mount Holyoke College, which also includes transgender and nonbinary students:

  • “When discussing the student body, say ‘Wellesley students’ rather than ‘Wellesley women.'”
  • “Avoid making statements like ‘We’re all women here…'”
  • “Use gender-neutral language whenever possible in syllabi and other general written communication.”

“When we reexamine our assumptions surrounding gender through small shifts like language, we become more tolerant of those who deviate from the gender spectrum,” the editorial concludes. “And, most importantly, we cannot stay silent as our nonbinary and transgender siblings are stripped of their humanity by being excluded from something as crucial as language.”

(H/T: The College Fix)

Share
Categories
Classics Gender Homer's iliad Intelwars men and women Oxford University student achievement UK Virgil's aeneid

Oxford faculty may nix Homer’s ‘Iliad,’ Virgil’s ‘Aeneid’ from Classics syllabus to close ‘attainment gaps’ among students

The Classics faculty at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom is proposing to remove Homer’s “Iliad” and Virgil’s “Aeneid” from the early stages of study in order to close “attainment gaps” among students, according to the Oxford Student, a campus newspaper.

What are the details?

This proposal is part of a series of reforms aimed at modernizing the first stage of the Classics degree, known as Moderations (aka Mods), the Student said.

But the Mods — culminating with a set of 10 exams — has been increasingly criticized in recent years due to attainment gaps between male and female candidates, as well as between candidates who have studied Latin or Greek to the “A-Level” and those who have not, the paper noted.

More from the Oxford Student:

The removal of Virgil and Homer papers, which take up two out of the ten Mods papers, have been marketed as a move that will reduce the attainment gaps and thus improve access to the subject. However many have questioned why the solution to this problem involves the removal of Homer and Virgil.

There have been a number of other recent reforms proposed by the faculty, including changes to the way in which students are streamed based on previous levels of study as well as an increase in the amount of language tuition available to all Classicists. However, this most recent reform has accused of being an unnecessary step by members of the Classics faculty who claim that the removal of the compulsory study of Homer and Virgil would result in an incomplete and less fulfilling course of Classical study.

What did one Classics student have to say?

Jan Preiss, a second-year Classicist at New College, set up a petition against the proposal, the paper said.

“Removing Homer and Virgil would be a terrible and fatal mistake,” Preiss told the Oxford Student. “[The proposal] would mean that firstly, Oxford would be producing Classicists who have never read Homer and never read Virgil, who are the central authors of the Classical tradition, and most of Classical literature, in one way or another, looks back to Homer and interacts with the Iliad. Removing it would be a shame because Homer has been the foundation of the classical tradition since antiquity, and it is impossible to understand what comes after him without studying him first.”

What did a professor have to say?

Professor Jonathon Prag told the paper that no decision has been made on the proposal.

What else has been going on at Oxford?

Share
Categories
Gender Gender identity Intelwars LGBT agenda LGBTQ Non-binary person Scotland Transgender watch

Nonbinary person complains of being asked, ‘Are you a boy or a girl?’ during haircuts, being forced into ‘female or male’ boxes. Reaction is brutal.

A nonbinary person was featured in a video earlier this month sharing the struggles of getting a “simple” haircut when those providing the service ask, “Are you a boy or a girl?” and also being forced to fit into society’s “female or male” boxes.

‘I’m some thing on the outside existing beside the world as it rolls by all pink and blue’

The unnamed person — who appears courtesy of BBC Scotland — complains that “I’m more of that ‘other’ (if that’s even an option) like I’m some thing on the outside existing beside the world as it rolls by all pink and blue.”


Image source: Twitter video screenshot

The individual also shares that usually there are two options when it comes to a haircut: There’s a salon, which oozes “that womanly world of perfumed femininity with which I feel like I have little affinity.” Then there’s the barber shop, “which isn’t much better since this voice and these swells in my chest make me feel like an infiltrator.”

The speaker adds that those providing haircuts often ask, “Are you a boy or a girl?” and “Am I trans, am I gay, and I don’t know what to say. Sometimes I pick my labels to make other people feel OK, but it’s never enough to say where I’d like to be trimmed or shaved … they need to know my sex.”


Image source: Twitter video screenshot

The person notes that haircutters say it’s the only way they can determine the appropriate rate, as women’s haircuts are typically more expensive than men’s.

In conclusion

The individual sounds a tad hopeful in the end, noting that in the last few years “drag queens” and “out queer celebrities” have made a big splash upon culture — and then finishes things off with a bang: “We’re queer, and we’re here … could you just cut our f***ing hair?”

Brutal response

A number of Twitter users didn’t hold back their contempt for the nonbinary person’s complaints:

  • “This really is the new Greatest Generation. My heart goes out to each and everyone of them. Haircuts are the new Normandy beaches.”
  • “Wtf is wrong with snowflakes? Just go to a unisex hair salon. It’s not hard is it.”
  • “Have we failed entirely as a society? Do we really now pay attention to people that feel unsafe & ‘unwelcome’ getting their hair cut? Does EVERYTHING have to be unisex to accommodate a tiny minority that keeps inventing problems on a daily basis? How about some gratefulness?”
  • “When life is too easy so you need to fabricate some form of struggle.”
  • “Please send this person to Venezuela for a month. People seem to have entirely forgotten what real problems look like.”
  • “I’m a women. About 4 years ago I had a mohawk with shaved sides, done by a hairdresser and maintained for a short while by a local barber. No one cared that I was a women, no one. I mean, absolutely no one objected to me having short hair in either the hairdressers or barbers.”

Oh, and this one:

(H/T: Louder With Crowder)

Share
Categories
free speech Gender Intelwars Social Media Transgender Transgenderism Twitter

Trans woman reports man to police for his ‘gender critical’ tweets. Judge says too bad — that’s free speech.

A British judge ruled Friday that a man who issued “gender critical” comments on Twitter is protected by free speech.

What are the details?

According to Reuters, a British judge issued the ruling after a transgender woman complained to authorities that a man on social media made what she called “brazen transphobic comments.”

Former police officer Harry Miller allegedly shared 31 “gender critical” remarks between November 2018 and January 2019.

One such message included, “I was assigned mammal at birth, but my orientation is fish. Don’t mis-species me.”

The outlet also reported that he made remarks about Caitlyn Jenner — formerly known as Olympian Bruce Jenner.

The unnamed trans woman called authorities and filed a complaint. Upon investigation, authorities determined that Miller’s Twitter remarks were considered a “non-crime hate incident.”

Reuters reported that Humberside police paid a visit to Miller about the complaint, which Miller said “left him with the impression that continuing to tweet could cause Miller to face criminal prosecution.”

In response, Miller took legal action against the police, insisting that authorities tried to tamp down Miller’s freedom of speech.

What did the judge say?

Judge Julian Knowles at London’s High Court said that Miller’s remarks were lawful and protected by free speech.

“In this country we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo, or a Stasi,” Knowles declared. “We have never lived in an Orwellian society.”

Knowles added:

The claimants’ tweets were lawful and there was not the slightest risk that he would commit a criminal offense by continuing to tweet. I find the combination of the police visiting the claimant’s place of work, and their subsequent statements in relation to the possibility of prosecution, were a disproportionate interference with the claimant’s right to freedom of expression because of their potential chilling effect.

Miller said that he stands by his remarks and is not biased against transgender people.

“I want to raise awareness by stating that which used to be instinctively obvious — a biological man is a man, and a biological woman is a woman,” he insisted. “To claim otherwise is extraordinary.”

According to the BBC, Miller added, “This is a watershed moment for liberty — the police were wrong to visit my workplace, wrong to ‘check my thinking.'”

Miller’s lawyer, Paul Conrathe, said, “It is a strong warning to local police forces not to interfere with people’s free speech rights on matters of significant controversy.”

What else?

In a statement, the Humberside Police said it acted in good faith.

“Our actions in handling the incident were carried out in good faith but we note the comments of the judge and we will take learning from this incident moving forward,” the statement read.

The police are still able to classify the remarks as “non-crime hate incident,” but Miller plans to appeal the decision. The BBC reported that the appeal has been granted and will go straight to the Supreme Court.

(H/T: The Daily Caller)

Share