A great number of those "liberal politicians" doing the forcing are women.
There's no way around this. Women, not men, are largely responsible for mandating trans uber alles. It's a fact. Yep. Even when that means they make other women and children unsafe by making society friendly to predatory male troons.
Liberal women did this. And liberal gay men. I was one of those liberal gay men, and I bear responsibility for my former participation. But liberal women vastly outnumber us.
It is women in schools and institutions and in the home that are doing this to children.
I very much agree with you on this. Did you watch the second season of White Lotus? I just finished it last night -- it is a brilliant encapsulation of this. I was surprised at how daring they were.
Organizations like Black Lives Matter, the Catholic Church, corporations like Disney, other 501(c)(3) Tax-exempt Corporations, and teacher unions should be completely shut down with the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Under the law, the meaning of racketeering activity is set out at 18 U.S.C. § 1961: Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act); . . .
An HBO show that is very, very good and not contaminated by the poison the rest of culture is -- shocking, I know! It's a takedown of the American upper classes, but understated. The second season plot revolves around a group of devious gays and a very rich, very dumb, old white woman and her equally stupid but broke young assistant. It shows the American bourgeoisie to be utterly helpless and broken and venal, but without resorting to awful woke tropes.
I've been burned by recommendations from friends/acquaintances who assure me that some show or movie is "not politically correct! you'll be amazed at how it doesn't follow wokism!" etc. Then I watch it, and I see all this subliminal stuff my friend/acquaintance apparently missed. Part of the problem here is that all my friends/acquaintances don't realize how deeply the Leftist Mainstream has seeped into their psyche & nervous system, such that they often can't even detect its propaganda when it's there between the lines. I would tentatively bet $500 that when I watch White Lotus, I will see it's not quite what Jenny cracked it up to be.
It's one of those shows that a woke person could still like, because it's subtle. But I see it as a critique of elite and their craven, selfish use of woke ideology as a way to hang on to their status. It's not a crusading show, it's sly and sophisticated. It's also very damning in showing the class differences at play.
I just read a glowing article + interview with the creator on NPR. Wikipedia says nothing negative about it, and includes the fact that "The series received a positive critical response. It was included on the American Film Institute's list of the ten best programs of 2021 and 2022, and received various accolades including ten Primetime Emmy Awards, and two Golden Globes. "
And of course it's on HBO.
I just find it hard to believe it can really be significantly anti-Left given its snug and apparently total approval by the Mainstream which is massively Leftist.
Drag Queen Story Hour is just another arrow in the quiver of the same wealthy, Jewish elites who are systematically flooding America with 3rd world refugees, censoring speech, chipping away at the Constitution, and racially attacking white Americans in the media . . .
I find it hard to believe that Glenn Close would participate in, and Ron Howard would direct, any movie that isn't really Leftist (while maybe throwing a few bones to those who are getting fed up with woke). I'd have to see which Progressives attacked it and how numerous & influential they are. Are we talking reviews in Rolling Stone, Salon, Huffington Post, New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, MS-NBC, etc.? Or just some Leftist pundits on Twitter?
Wow, I will take your word for it that it isn't woke. I honestly see a new show come out, and assume it will be ideological so I never watch new shows. And to be honest, I could see it turning woke, that's the problem now too. So I usually wait until a shows gone for a few seasons now
I hear ya. But like I said above, it's the kind of show that a woke person would tolerate and view as woke, but it's actually a very cutting critique of upper class American culture and its hypocrisy.
Some shows concentrate on subject matter that's not really pertinent to anything that can be latched onto for woke propaganda -- like Better Call Saul, for example, which to my eagle eye pretty much avoided any offenses in that regard.
Then there are shows that are sort of hybrids -- where half of it is thoroughly un-woke, while the other half is woke (or before the term "woke" became fashionable, we could say "politically correct"). Thus, that series about hardened criminals in prison called "Oz" which aired 1997-2003. When it came to the black and Hispanic prisoners, the show was brutally honest and politically INcorrect about how evil and dangerous they are. But then the Muslim prisoners (mostly black) in the prison population are depicted consistently as saints and angels, with their leader (played with unctuous perfection by actor Eamonn Walker) coming off as an infinitely patient and moral sage, sort of a black Gandhi -- meanwhile all the non-Muslim prisoners, black and white, are depicted as monsters. And of course, the worst monsters of all are the white "nazi" prisoners.
Yeah I mean, there's just no way the writer/creator is anti woke or anti leftist. Given the amount of a list actors involved especially. I kinda just wanna wait until the show inevitably comes out against something anti mainstream, like the show The Boys did.
And the two biggest departments that contribute to changes in corporate culture are HR and Marketing, which have the highest percentage of female employees and leadership.
LOL. 90% of what you’re pushing back on was not in my comment, not even implicitly. But it’s the Internet, so I guess I should have remembered that a basically neutral, conversational statement will usually be interpreted in the most uncharitable way possible.
Perhaps, but perhaps I'm a little bit right. It's so clockwork. There's a comment from a man every single time this comes up, just like yours. It really does seem that the critique can't be allowed to stand without a "correction" that rehabilitates the image of women.
So, yeah, maybe I'm somewhat wrong. But no, sir, I don't think it's *entirely* me reading into it.
And "LOL"? You need an "LMAO" to go with it, just to properly communicate the dismissal.
I’ve always said that, there is an innate bias in Society that no one, under any circumstance can point out any inconvenient facts about women, if you do, you will face Society’s wrath. I’m waiting for Mean Girl to be “cancelled,” which is very unlikely, there is always an excuse for iliberal, dictatorial, catty and outright toxic female behavior.
While human beings can equally express toxic, ruthless behavior, I often find that women tend to be the biggest offenders, all the while cast as the most “oppressed” in all of Christendom. It’s only gotten worse with Wokism’s domination of the Culture.
Opportunism knows no limits in this brave new world, and I see women, much more guilty than men. Society gives them privilege and coddles their every whim, so what you get is a sense of Entitlement beyond the norm, and this is what creates the toxic femininity which is so prevalent in Society, especially now with these ultra radical Feminists pushing irrational agendas and points of view which have more to do with their own internal pathologies than in others?!
Whenever I hear a woman call a man entitled, I laugh at the sheer ignorance and complete lack of self-awareness! Absolutely no one will counter this behavior, to do so will leave you “cancelled” and ridiculed beyond belief. People think these things, but they dare not say it out loud - or else!
" there is an innate bias in Society that no one, under any circumstance can point out any inconvenient facts about women, if you do, you will face Society’s wrath"
Sure, this is the case with various Leftist Pets -- Women, blacks, Muslims, LGBTQs, etc. But you haven't really experienced Society's wrath until you start noticing and critiquing the dreaded J word (Jews).
Maybe it's because women (or the dreaded feminists), as a group, are often blamed for things as a group. I have never heard someone blame men as a group. I often hear the line "She makes women look bad, " but I've never in my life heard "He makes men look bad." I would add this cult could not have infiltrated so much of our society without those in leadership positions in business and politics supporting it. That would be mostly males, but I will correct it and rehabilitate it by stating these male leaders could not have gone this far without the worship of their huge numbers of Transmaidens. Unfortunately, many females keep men on a pedestal, even terrible men. I get what Brock was saying. I'm a woman, and I want to stop all the cult members and supporters from further damaging children and society.
I can assure you that, when it comes to women, and not just feminists, they absolutely blame men as a group. Constantly. It's all over the media. Has been for decades. I *don't believe you that you don't see it*.
Men and women are both responsible for where we're at, and we both need to to address the problem. You are right.
But this "only women are blamed" is so out of sync with reality that I have to choose between wondering you're not being truthful, or if you really could have not noticed this.
Are you willing to hear, and possibly credit, that that thing you've never heard is heard by men all the time? That's key. If the answer is "no," good day.
Jesus Christ, dude. I said that a lot of pushback is coming from TERFs, which is an objectively true and neutral fact, and that’s all I said about them. I didn’t say anything about sitting down for tea and biscuits and back rubs with them. You’re arguing with a figment of your imagination, not with me, Have fun with that. LOL, LMAO, ROFL, SMDH.
Which women? You use the term TERF, a specific group of women, and then talk about blame for "what women are doing." Apparently, women are doing various things. Some (too many) are Transmaidens, some are TERFS, and some are doing other things. The TERFS go after and blame individual men, not "men." They also go after individual women or Transmaidens, not "women." Women may be "doing," but so some men are "doing." Are we to ignore them?
Yeah, I've noticed that many of the semi-famous TERFs out there when they are articulating at length start blurting out various ejaculations (pun intended) of misandry -- e.g., Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull who for some baffling reason calls herself "Posie Parker" and affects an odd physiognomic persona (including her blonde do) of looking like a 1950s Marilyn Monroe. It's rare if not non-existent to find a TERF who will be as refreshingly pro-man as for example Janice Fiamengo -- but then, she explicitly identifies herself as an "Anti-Feminist".
One frequent "ejaculation" or meme amongst TERFs is reiterating & reinforcing (either implicitly or explicitly) the claim that implies that all men are monsters who might rape you at the drop of a barrette.
I had a lesbian feminist professor in college who stated in a lecture that all men are rapists, and those who haven't raped yet just haven't had the opportunity. I saw a lot of women in the lecture hall looking at each other with raised eyebrows. Even they realized it was an insane idea. That was thirty years ago. I can't even imagine how absurd college has become now.
Josh, this issue that you mention is a big component of what has really broken me over the past few years. So many women.... MOTHERS, GRANDMOTHERS, female obstetricians/gynecologists/pediatricians who I work with continue to promote and participate in the sheer insanity of this modern day leftist agenda. It’s just so heartbreaking to watch.
It's interesting that before women became more embedded n the workforce as economic agents, they were mostly conservative voters. If only women had had the vote in the UK between 1918 and 1997, the Tories would won every election other than 1945 and 1997.
SInce 1997, women have turned more and more to the left. I can only speculate that once women have to compete in the workforce they like the idea of more government interference to restrain capitalism.
For the most part, I would characterize the problem you describe as one of Feminists, not Women in general. Then considering Feminists, I'd say most Feminists are not consciously directing this Trans Industrial Complex but are functioning as more or less passive co-dependent enablers of it. This is complicated by the fact that ALL Leftists (male and female) are, in fact, Feminists.
Hmm, I'm not sure. There are women (not all) in my family who are not feminists or even woke liberals but who rebuke me if I show my aversion for drag queens or the sycophant TV approval of men dressed as women/trans 'women'. Admittedly they have confessed children at drag queen performances isn't suitable, but try and then ask if the drag queens have no agenda and are so innocent why do they not police their shows and why do they indulge in 'story time' and I get accused of being the one with issues!
Well, what you describe reflects the phenomenon of the Leftist Mainstream seeping into the hearts & minds of nearly everyone in society (by virtue of being the Mainstream), even of people one doesn't think of as "Leftist" per se -- so that they will say things now and then that show a submission to Leftist Narratives (but not necessarily 100% of the time).
I just wish there was even a smidge of good faith among the liberal-left in terms of their arguments and talking points. They have built a carapace of lies to protect the positions that would otherwise shock and appall most regular people (like blow jobs for kids), and if you are a leader who is not willing to put a hole in that carapace then you are not worth my time.
The mindset has infected everything. One of the reasons I retired from my practice in plastic surgery was due to the “official “ welcoming given to the trans agenda. I knew that my views would get me into trouble,even as one of the last independent physicians in my area.
I've completely departed the left. My own values and philosophy no longer include any of the things that made me a reflexive leftist in the past. But it took a long time, and a lot of soul searching.
A profound change in seeing the world politically and culturally is emotionally difficult.
It is difficult! And I feel like I have also completely departed the left, on every single moral question (because none of this is actually political, it's moral, imho.) There is only one remaining thing niggling away at me, and that is -- for lack of a better word -- my taste. And while it's easy to dismiss that as just a frivolous thing, I actually think that the cultural influences you absorb growing up -- things like the bands you loved, the books you read, the movies you watched over and over again -- keep me emotionally tied to others on the "left." This is a quandary that I spend a LOT of time mulling over and I hope to some day articulate it better than I'm doing here. 🤣
99.9% of all the artists I like -- in music, film, literature -- are flaming Leftists. Virtually the only alternatives are opening acts for Rich Little in Branson, Missouri...
I too have made the same departure. It’s been a long journey over the past 4 years or so, but it had to be done. As my mom always used to tell me... “don’t waste time arguing with the truth, it will never get you anyplace good “. It’s been such an interesting journey, I have learned so much and now feel more grounded and much more at peace. That being said, it has been discombobulating and isolating. I have lost some friends in the process, but I have gained some new ones.
Same here. It has been a jarring and unsettling experience, especially as my beliefs and stance on many things were (I thought) rock solid. It's like the ground has shifted under my feet. Personally I have gone though various levels of resistance and (now) more acceptance. I still find myself parroting things I once used to believe but I know it's more out of wanting to believe, rather than actually believing.
I've noticed most ex-Leftist anti-Leftists show signs they haven't done a thorough purging. This may indicate several possibilities:
1. It's not possible to thoroughly purge;
2. even if possible, they emotionally need to retain certain vestiges and apparently don't feel they have to go all the way with their "cleansing"
3. they're actually still more or less Leftists and either don't realize it, or don't think that's terribly bad (and they may even think it's a positive good, insofar as they have internalized the Left's insidious virtue-signalling).
The problem is that there really are people who are evil or batsh*t crazy, and giving them the benefit of the doubt is how they were able to take over.
I'm with you. I do believe in redemption, but the person has to be redeemable in order to be redeemed. I also believe in good and evil. Most of us are failed good people, but there are some that are evil.
Brilliant piece. I used to be left wing, definitely conservative on most issues now, and especially so when it comes to child safeguarding. Nothing angers me more than adults thinking their feelings/identity matters more than children's safety and well-being. I think it's the main issue that severed me from the progressive left, and even from liberalism more generally.
As Kenneth Vinther pointed out in his review of Scott Howard’s The Transgender-Industrial Complex (2020) at Counter Currents, transgenderism is a thoroughly kosher campaign: “at the top of the [transgender] pyramid rests a series of charming Jewish billionaires...”
Jenny - you're like an amazing machine that reads my mind, and then turns the turmoil it finds there into compelling, logical discourse. Damn, you're good.
I was just watching a Billboard Chris video before I read this piece! I find him so brave for doing what he does, but his on-the-street videos always give me such anxiety. The way people attack him--I don’t know how he does it. BUT the videos provide a perfect glimpse into the white liberal mindset. Time and time again, people see his board with ‘Children cannot consent to puberty blockers’ and go up to him and accuse him of homophobia. It’s completely bonkers because they’ve got it exactly opposite--it’s the trans movement that is homophobic! They are literally transing kids who would likely otherwise grow up to be gay or lesbian. They are essentially exterminating gay people. But the liberal mind has been brainwashed to think of ‘LGBTQIA+’ as one group, so in their mind any questioning of ‘trans rights’ is ‘homophobic’. It’s maddening and frustrating to me, as a gay man.
And PS, the entitled gay douchebag asking the question is also lying about Ted Kennedy supporting the ‘LGBTQ community’; during Ted Kennedy’s lifetime the T was a fairly new addition, and there was no Q.
Okay, having read the whole thing, I think I understand Jenny's stance. It would have been nice and refreshing, I agree, if RFK Jr. had schooled that gay bear who interrogated him, instead of anxiously trying to nimbly step around the little Leftist minefield he set.
Yes, I think that's a very good way of putting it. I understand those for whom the foreign policy issues are important, but to me -- if you are not protecting your own children, then why even care about what happens overseas? And I also think you hit the nail on the head that a trap was set for him. Unfortunately his libtard instincts overrode his populist instincts and he totally f-ed up his response. And if you believe the story M4L tells about just how involved he was in the arrangements for speaking at their event, it looks even worse for him.
There are 2 usually distinct and even mutually contradictory sins involved here:
1. Taking the morally wrong position
2. Making a mistake which resulted in the appearance of #1, then trying to clean up on aisle 9 in a disingenuously self-serving way, instead of honestly admitting the mistake.
Can we disentangle this to figure out which RFK Jr. did?
It's crazy how that fear of being seen as transphobic/homophobic (or any kind of 'phobic' for that matter) triggers people into agreeing with almost anything. Almost like a knee-jerk reaction, they'll say anything to make themselves look good. We don't need that kind of vanity in our politicians, there's already enough going around.
Another great column Jenny. The summary of your position on Vax/anti-vax perfectly represents mine. It's too unregulated, but clearly, CLEARLY, vaxes have done a lot of good.
Thank you for this! I was shocked when I watched that townhall and saw his response. Why didn't he know more about M4L? This was an opportunity to educate that man and the public about the good work they are doing. I was like you, starry eyed and wishing and hoping that he was the real deal but now I'm not so sure. Parents having access to what their kids are being taught is essential. RFK wants to be known for building bridges and here's a perfect opportunity.
I think that it's possible that he just totally crapped the bed on this, and possibly regrets his big fat lie of answer, but it's too big a misstep to be taken in any way charitably.
Hello my dear cousin. Interesting read. One point about vaccines. I could not step foot on the campus of Springfield (MA) College in pursuit of my master's degree in Rehab Counseling without proof that I had received the series of hepatitis shots. This was in 1998. My love to you all!
Yeah, like I said above, the AA thing didn't really bother me. I mean, the man is a Democrat and the ruling had just come down, and I wasn't surprised given who his father was, etc. But this is the founder of Children's Health Defense and he's going to throw Mom's for Liberty under the bus? No way. They are natural allies and if he hadn't reverted to auto libtard mode he would have done something very interesting.
Thank you for so eloquently stating what I and many others are thinking. RFK went the way of Ramaswamy. Both waffled on Big Trans and RFK lied on top of it. I will not consider any candidate that does not have a Big Trans line about the size of the San Andreas Fault. If a candidate doesn't get asked his or her views on Big Trans and doesn't state hardline views of their own accord, no dice. I compare this to nuclear desolation. Nothing else will matter until Big Trans is annihilated. If this doesn't happen, there will be no other issues to debate. Love your description of a "sexual aristocrat," but the military woman in me is not as charitable. Like the activists working in the schools, he does have a sense of unbounded entitlement and access to children, his arrogance inflamed by a group of all women standing in his way.
Yes he did and same with me. It's near the end at about 6 minutes. He at least does say he would protect children. But he would allow a special "group" to keep the extra privilege to come in the military service with a medical/mental health condition that needs "treatment." Boot camp/basic training is designed to rid members of their individuality and neediness in order to form a cohesive team with a single mission. All must be somewhat physically fit with no medical problems when enlisting. But "trans" gets to pick which uniform is worn and will be provided medical care (hormones) as part of their privilege, along with surgery if requested. As an example on why this is so important, I once had a dental abscess while we were underway in an exercise. It was pretty bad but we were too far from the carrier (where there was full medical) to fly me there. I had to wait almost a full week, with our Independent Duty Corpsman hoping it wouldn't break and cause sepsis, before we were close enough for me to be flown over. They did have the maxillofacial surgeon ready for me when I arrived! Now consider the medical problems inherent in giving someone cross-sex hormones and the accompanying problems from surgery. Will they have the privilege of only going to ships or duty stations where there's full medical? There's now only one candidate that's hardline on Big Trans, and that is the hardline Catholic. I still hope for RFK and Ramasway to be in the next administration as cabinet members, but I'm going for the hardliner and figuring on Congress keeping one of his other hardlines in check. We are in big trouble when the rest of the candidates feel the need to squirm on this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFPxwsO5K4s
Yes hostility against the Trans Industrial Complex is a sine qua non for any candidate -- but there are also others:
a pledge to prevent another "pandemic" psy-op (and of course a public recognition that it was a psy-op)
rejection of critical race theory and its entire nebula
rejection of the entire Goddamned LGBTQ alphabet -- every jot and tittle in the waste bin.
rejection of the Ukraine proxy war
rejection of Climate Change hysteria
public recognition of the mountain of red flags surrounding the 2020 Election indicating it was stolen, and a pledge to launch a Congressional investigation availing itself of the participation of all those who have been punished in various ways for calling attention to it these past 3 years.
Yes to all! You left one out that my old feminist brain despises, and that's the dems telling me over and over that the Trump "grab the pussy" tape was an admission of sexual assault. This is infantilizing women. Trump is not my type, but there are plenty of women that like his type and do want him to grab their hooya. Grown women are not delicate flowers that must be shielded from dirty sex talk. I've been through pregnancy and childbirth 3 times, so obviously something was going on down there 9 months previous, but somehow we (females) are having an out of body experience when this happens. Rejection of the infantilizing of women is also on my list.
Also if you watch that old video and include the context, it's clear he isn't saying he himself goes around grabbing pussy; he's describing a type of woman powerful/wealthy men feel the license that they can treat that way. Further, one observer on a podcast (forgot who it was) pointed out years ago that at the end of that Access Hollywood interview, which had taken place on a promotional tour bus, Trump gets up and leaves the bus but is still followed by cameras, and he runs into an attractive young female and he behaves almost with a kind of shy politeness -- indicating his comments previously were more braggadocio for the interview with a hip young interviewer than his normative self.
Yes, and then compare the pearl-clutching antics over the "pussy" tape, a conversation between 2 adult males about sex between ADULTS, with the sexualization and pedophilia, the sexual assault the pearl-clutchers are committing on children.
That was pure vulgarian locker room talk, the kind countless normal guys engage in with other dudes. It's just dumb bro noise, and doesn't indicate the speaker is in any remote way an actual molester. In the corporate world, I've heard women say some equally raunchy things about men, but I don't take it literally or seriously and certainly don't think they should be cancelled over it.
> public recognition of the mountain of red flags surrounding the 2020 Election indicating it was stolen, and a pledge to launch a Congressional investigation availing itself of the participation of all those who have been punished in various ways for calling attention to it these past 3 years.
More importantly, some plan to keep the 2024 election from being stolen the same way.
"The sight of Kennedy kowtowing to a man who absolutely epitomises middle class gay male entitlement, and throwing a bunch of women under the bus in order to do so, pushed me very close to burning anger. "
You were "close"? I can't wait to read your prose when you are on or above that limit.
Keep telling it the way it is eloquently and passionately! And a gentle ear scratch to the dachshund.
This particular substack, by the way -- especially the long intro -- might be the best example to use, should anyone ask me questions like "Is Jenny Holland a Leftist? Is she anti-Leftist? Is she an ex-Leftist anti-Leftist? Does she still retain vestiges of the Leftist virus" etc. One can see here more clearly than in any other substack I've read of hers to date the latent residues of Leftism in her which indicates she hasn't purged it -- which in turn indicates (she may feel) those residues are too much a part of her nature. This makes it all the more remarkable how she has changed vis-à-vis the baseline Leftism of her youth up to the point (I assume in the last 3 years or so) when her disenchantment with the Left began to crystallize.
"'Is Jenny Holland a Leftist? Is she anti-Leftist? Is she an ex-Leftist anti-Leftist? Does she still retain vestiges of the Leftist virus' etc"
If you eventually figure it out, do let me know! This entire Substack is me publicly trying to answer those questions, and repeatedly failing, and you all kindly indulge me! 🤣
You're right, your entire substack oeuvre reflects these questions and their possible answers, and it seems to be an open-ended perhaps lifetime project/odyssey for you. And this in turn reflects to me that the issue of Leftism is much subtler and more complex than many (including me) have thought -- to a great extent because of how massively, insidiously, and profoundly Leftism has permeated the Mainstream over the course of, say, the 20th century into our own 21st. Leftism's amazing reach with its thousand tendrils & tentacles into culture and into each of our psyches practically results in the only absolutely pure non-Leftist being some Nazi Viking who believes in pillaging, raping and enslaving all non-Nordic peoples.
I do feel some sympathy for RFK, Jr. here because you really can't win on some of these issues. He is anti-censorship, which is one reason I support him, and that would make supporting the Moms for Liberty group difficult. I don't think Moms for Liberty are being unreasonable; however, in today's environment especially, any censorship immediately becomes a slippery slope. If I was advising the group I would say they should advocate for alternative perspectives (Irreversible Damage, as an example, although that is an adult book) to be in collections as opposed to removing books.
I don't know if he actually knows that Moms for Liberty has never taken a stance against gay marriage, but regardless, maybe he just wanted to assure the guy questioning him that he supports gay rights. He is pretty good about clarifying and apologizing when called out on things. He is big on civil rights issues, but he doesn't support trans women in women's sports. I don't know if he has spoken out on medical treatment for trans youth, but given his stance on the pharmaceutical industry, I would assume he would oppose it.
I like DeSantis pretty well but I think he is for the war in Ukraine (at least that is my superficial understanding). I listen to RFK, Jr. in interviews and compare that to Biden and Trump, and he just completely outshines them. So I'm unsure what the alternatives are.
I also have sympathy with him as he does seem like a breath of fresh air in every other regard. But I'm afraid the definition of censorship being levelled at M4L does not pass my smell test, as I don't think porn in schools should be defended from a civil liberties point of view. The American education system has been completely bastardised overall, but comic books of kids performing sex acts is totally unacceptable and removing them is not censorship. We are at the bottom of the slippery slope, looking up, and kids are being harmed as a result. This is 100 percent a hill I am willing to die on. No candidate who doesn't openly support them is getting any support from me.
I do get the concern. I'm looking at it from the stance of, for instance, a friend with a trans "they/them" daughter who thought that anyone not getting the latest Covid booster was preventing the pandemic from ending and needed to "check their news sources." So (in a public library) would I prefer to leave "Genderqueer" on the shelf it it meant I could also leave "The Real Anthony Fauci" under the idea that nothing was censored, then yes. But also, a book like "Genderqueer" is going to get a lot of good reviews in the journals, while a library would have to look outside of those sources for bestsellers like "The Real Anthony Fauci," so it is on even shakier ground, and that is why I am particularly wary of any censorship.
False dilemma, easily demonstrated by an analogy. Imagine a book that instructed children to hate all blacks and try to figure out ways to murder them whenever possible and gave explicit instructions on how to do this, including the names and addresses of various black people. Obviously, everyone (other than stone cold psychopathic racists, which among whites are extremely rare, contrary to what white Leftists tell us) would favor absolute censorship of such a book. Graphic depictions of blow jobs and anal penetration and masturbation for anyone younger than adult should be considered on this level without bringing up sophistry quibbles.
At this point in time though "everyone" does not favor censorship of the material-- quite the opposite. I am afraid that any attempts at censorship in our current moment are leading us into a trap.
Anyone who doesn't is to be reasonably treated as a pedophile enabler at best -- an actual pedophile at worst (pending a thorough search of their hard drive).
The book approval process for K-12 schools is not a modern invention, and it's also not "censorship" as some have tried to imply. This is no more censorship than having a separate, adult porn magazine section is censorship. It's, appropriately, a way to make sexual adult topics and magazines inaccessible to children. As always, there will be some who go after books that are great literature and appropriate for high schoolers. But those schools and parents are best left to settle their own debates locally.
I am not sure which exact title we are referencing here, but this one at least got a positive review, but also is recommended for high schoolers, not elementary school: https://www.slj.com/review/gender-queer-a-memoir
School libraries are different than public libraries, but my guess is that the books they are selecting are favorably reviewed in the journals they use for collection development.
A great number of those "liberal politicians" doing the forcing are women.
There's no way around this. Women, not men, are largely responsible for mandating trans uber alles. It's a fact. Yep. Even when that means they make other women and children unsafe by making society friendly to predatory male troons.
Liberal women did this. And liberal gay men. I was one of those liberal gay men, and I bear responsibility for my former participation. But liberal women vastly outnumber us.
It is women in schools and institutions and in the home that are doing this to children.
I very much agree with you on this. Did you watch the second season of White Lotus? I just finished it last night -- it is a brilliant encapsulation of this. I was surprised at how daring they were.
Organizations like Black Lives Matter, the Catholic Church, corporations like Disney, other 501(c)(3) Tax-exempt Corporations, and teacher unions should be completely shut down with the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Under the law, the meaning of racketeering activity is set out at 18 U.S.C. § 1961: Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act); . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/i/124760165/disney-most-of-hollywood-and-the-catholic-church-should-be-completely-shut-down-with-the-rico-act
I don't know what White Lotus might be?
An HBO show that is very, very good and not contaminated by the poison the rest of culture is -- shocking, I know! It's a takedown of the American upper classes, but understated. The second season plot revolves around a group of devious gays and a very rich, very dumb, old white woman and her equally stupid but broke young assistant. It shows the American bourgeoisie to be utterly helpless and broken and venal, but without resorting to awful woke tropes.
I've been burned by recommendations from friends/acquaintances who assure me that some show or movie is "not politically correct! you'll be amazed at how it doesn't follow wokism!" etc. Then I watch it, and I see all this subliminal stuff my friend/acquaintance apparently missed. Part of the problem here is that all my friends/acquaintances don't realize how deeply the Leftist Mainstream has seeped into their psyche & nervous system, such that they often can't even detect its propaganda when it's there between the lines. I would tentatively bet $500 that when I watch White Lotus, I will see it's not quite what Jenny cracked it up to be.
It's one of those shows that a woke person could still like, because it's subtle. But I see it as a critique of elite and their craven, selfish use of woke ideology as a way to hang on to their status. It's not a crusading show, it's sly and sophisticated. It's also very damning in showing the class differences at play.
I just read a glowing article + interview with the creator on NPR. Wikipedia says nothing negative about it, and includes the fact that "The series received a positive critical response. It was included on the American Film Institute's list of the ten best programs of 2021 and 2022, and received various accolades including ten Primetime Emmy Awards, and two Golden Globes. "
And of course it's on HBO.
I just find it hard to believe it can really be significantly anti-Left given its snug and apparently total approval by the Mainstream which is massively Leftist.
Drag Queen Story Hour is just another arrow in the quiver of the same wealthy, Jewish elites who are systematically flooding America with 3rd world refugees, censoring speech, chipping away at the Constitution, and racially attacking white Americans in the media . . .
https://russia-insider.com/en/society/drag-queen-story-hour-jewish-groups-pushing-cross-dressing-psychopaths-children/ri27979
Watch it and let us know.
I highly recommend Hillbilly Elegy, both the book and the movie. The Progressives attacked it relentlessly.
I find it hard to believe that Glenn Close would participate in, and Ron Howard would direct, any movie that isn't really Leftist (while maybe throwing a few bones to those who are getting fed up with woke). I'd have to see which Progressives attacked it and how numerous & influential they are. Are we talking reviews in Rolling Stone, Salon, Huffington Post, New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, MS-NBC, etc.? Or just some Leftist pundits on Twitter?
Wow, I will take your word for it that it isn't woke. I honestly see a new show come out, and assume it will be ideological so I never watch new shows. And to be honest, I could see it turning woke, that's the problem now too. So I usually wait until a shows gone for a few seasons now
I hear ya. But like I said above, it's the kind of show that a woke person would tolerate and view as woke, but it's actually a very cutting critique of upper class American culture and its hypocrisy.
Dr.SHIVA™ LIVE: The “Humanitarian” Warmonger – Booby F’n Kennedy Jr. – The Other Face of Imperialism . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX-4Sd-WADg
Wow that's very interesting will check it out.
It's by far the best show on TV in my opinion. Not woke, and I would argue anti-woke. Absolutely brilliant.
Season 2 was so, so good. Just finished it last night.
How the 'Grift Right' Gimps for the Left . . . Steven Crowder almost became Mel Gibson and Kanye West by accident . . .
“Woke,” “wokeism,” “wokeness,” etc., are weasel words used to hide the truth about the Jews and the Frankfurt School.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
Some shows concentrate on subject matter that's not really pertinent to anything that can be latched onto for woke propaganda -- like Better Call Saul, for example, which to my eagle eye pretty much avoided any offenses in that regard.
Then there are shows that are sort of hybrids -- where half of it is thoroughly un-woke, while the other half is woke (or before the term "woke" became fashionable, we could say "politically correct"). Thus, that series about hardened criminals in prison called "Oz" which aired 1997-2003. When it came to the black and Hispanic prisoners, the show was brutally honest and politically INcorrect about how evil and dangerous they are. But then the Muslim prisoners (mostly black) in the prison population are depicted consistently as saints and angels, with their leader (played with unctuous perfection by actor Eamonn Walker) coming off as an infinitely patient and moral sage, sort of a black Gandhi -- meanwhile all the non-Muslim prisoners, black and white, are depicted as monsters. And of course, the worst monsters of all are the white "nazi" prisoners.
Yeah I mean, there's just no way the writer/creator is anti woke or anti leftist. Given the amount of a list actors involved especially. I kinda just wanna wait until the show inevitably comes out against something anti mainstream, like the show The Boys did.
> Better Call Saul, for example, which to my eagle eye pretty much avoided any offenses in that regard.
It glorifies the kind of amorality that wokeness requires to survive.
“Woke,” “wokeism,” “wokeness,” etc., are weasel words used to hide the truth about the Jews and the Frankfurt School.
How the 'Grift Right' Gimps for the Left . . . Steven Crowder almost became Mel Gibson and Kanye West by accident . . .
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/how-the-grift-right-gimps-for-the
With the brilliant Jennifer Coolidge. Can't wait to see it now that you say that!
And the two biggest departments that contribute to changes in corporate culture are HR and Marketing, which have the highest percentage of female employees and leadership.
Probably true, but women are doing most of the strongest pushback as well, FWIW—Moms for Liberty, TERFs, etc.
I know. No criticism of women can be allowed to stand without a correction.
I know. All bad things women do are completely cancelled by [insert example].
Women are never, ever, ever, allowed to be criticized without that criticism being "corrected" and "rebalanced."
And there's always a man afraid of female disapproval ready to do it.
LOL. 90% of what you’re pushing back on was not in my comment, not even implicitly. But it’s the Internet, so I guess I should have remembered that a basically neutral, conversational statement will usually be interpreted in the most uncharitable way possible.
Perhaps, but perhaps I'm a little bit right. It's so clockwork. There's a comment from a man every single time this comes up, just like yours. It really does seem that the critique can't be allowed to stand without a "correction" that rehabilitates the image of women.
So, yeah, maybe I'm somewhat wrong. But no, sir, I don't think it's *entirely* me reading into it.
And "LOL"? You need an "LMAO" to go with it, just to properly communicate the dismissal.
I’ve always said that, there is an innate bias in Society that no one, under any circumstance can point out any inconvenient facts about women, if you do, you will face Society’s wrath. I’m waiting for Mean Girl to be “cancelled,” which is very unlikely, there is always an excuse for iliberal, dictatorial, catty and outright toxic female behavior.
While human beings can equally express toxic, ruthless behavior, I often find that women tend to be the biggest offenders, all the while cast as the most “oppressed” in all of Christendom. It’s only gotten worse with Wokism’s domination of the Culture.
Opportunism knows no limits in this brave new world, and I see women, much more guilty than men. Society gives them privilege and coddles their every whim, so what you get is a sense of Entitlement beyond the norm, and this is what creates the toxic femininity which is so prevalent in Society, especially now with these ultra radical Feminists pushing irrational agendas and points of view which have more to do with their own internal pathologies than in others?!
Whenever I hear a woman call a man entitled, I laugh at the sheer ignorance and complete lack of self-awareness! Absolutely no one will counter this behavior, to do so will leave you “cancelled” and ridiculed beyond belief. People think these things, but they dare not say it out loud - or else!
" there is an innate bias in Society that no one, under any circumstance can point out any inconvenient facts about women, if you do, you will face Society’s wrath"
Sure, this is the case with various Leftist Pets -- Women, blacks, Muslims, LGBTQs, etc. But you haven't really experienced Society's wrath until you start noticing and critiquing the dreaded J word (Jews).
Maybe it's because women (or the dreaded feminists), as a group, are often blamed for things as a group. I have never heard someone blame men as a group. I often hear the line "She makes women look bad, " but I've never in my life heard "He makes men look bad." I would add this cult could not have infiltrated so much of our society without those in leadership positions in business and politics supporting it. That would be mostly males, but I will correct it and rehabilitate it by stating these male leaders could not have gone this far without the worship of their huge numbers of Transmaidens. Unfortunately, many females keep men on a pedestal, even terrible men. I get what Brock was saying. I'm a woman, and I want to stop all the cult members and supporters from further damaging children and society.
I can assure you that, when it comes to women, and not just feminists, they absolutely blame men as a group. Constantly. It's all over the media. Has been for decades. I *don't believe you that you don't see it*.
Men and women are both responsible for where we're at, and we both need to to address the problem. You are right.
But this "only women are blamed" is so out of sync with reality that I have to choose between wondering you're not being truthful, or if you really could have not noticed this.
Are you willing to hear, and possibly credit, that that thing you've never heard is heard by men all the time? That's key. If the answer is "no," good day.
"I have never heard someone blame men as a group."
Huh? I've heard or read men being blamed as a group almost every day for the past sixty years. The Patriarchy!
Go befriend some "TERFs" and tell me how you like it. You realize that these women blame men for what women are doing, right?
Nah. Ya don't.
Jesus Christ, dude. I said that a lot of pushback is coming from TERFs, which is an objectively true and neutral fact, and that’s all I said about them. I didn’t say anything about sitting down for tea and biscuits and back rubs with them. You’re arguing with a figment of your imagination, not with me, Have fun with that. LOL, LMAO, ROFL, SMDH.
Which women? You use the term TERF, a specific group of women, and then talk about blame for "what women are doing." Apparently, women are doing various things. Some (too many) are Transmaidens, some are TERFS, and some are doing other things. The TERFS go after and blame individual men, not "men." They also go after individual women or Transmaidens, not "women." Women may be "doing," but so some men are "doing." Are we to ignore them?
Nope. You and I are done.
Yeah, I've noticed that many of the semi-famous TERFs out there when they are articulating at length start blurting out various ejaculations (pun intended) of misandry -- e.g., Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull who for some baffling reason calls herself "Posie Parker" and affects an odd physiognomic persona (including her blonde do) of looking like a 1950s Marilyn Monroe. It's rare if not non-existent to find a TERF who will be as refreshingly pro-man as for example Janice Fiamengo -- but then, she explicitly identifies herself as an "Anti-Feminist".
One frequent "ejaculation" or meme amongst TERFs is reiterating & reinforcing (either implicitly or explicitly) the claim that implies that all men are monsters who might rape you at the drop of a barrette.
I had a lesbian feminist professor in college who stated in a lecture that all men are rapists, and those who haven't raped yet just haven't had the opportunity. I saw a lot of women in the lecture hall looking at each other with raised eyebrows. Even they realized it was an insane idea. That was thirty years ago. I can't even imagine how absurd college has become now.
Josh, this issue that you mention is a big component of what has really broken me over the past few years. So many women.... MOTHERS, GRANDMOTHERS, female obstetricians/gynecologists/pediatricians who I work with continue to promote and participate in the sheer insanity of this modern day leftist agenda. It’s just so heartbreaking to watch.
It's interesting that before women became more embedded n the workforce as economic agents, they were mostly conservative voters. If only women had had the vote in the UK between 1918 and 1997, the Tories would won every election other than 1945 and 1997.
SInce 1997, women have turned more and more to the left. I can only speculate that once women have to compete in the workforce they like the idea of more government interference to restrain capitalism.
Agree. The biggest supporters of drag story time seem to be liberal women. It's like they think "he's" one of us.
For the most part, I would characterize the problem you describe as one of Feminists, not Women in general. Then considering Feminists, I'd say most Feminists are not consciously directing this Trans Industrial Complex but are functioning as more or less passive co-dependent enablers of it. This is complicated by the fact that ALL Leftists (male and female) are, in fact, Feminists.
Hmm, I'm not sure. There are women (not all) in my family who are not feminists or even woke liberals but who rebuke me if I show my aversion for drag queens or the sycophant TV approval of men dressed as women/trans 'women'. Admittedly they have confessed children at drag queen performances isn't suitable, but try and then ask if the drag queens have no agenda and are so innocent why do they not police their shows and why do they indulge in 'story time' and I get accused of being the one with issues!
Well, what you describe reflects the phenomenon of the Leftist Mainstream seeping into the hearts & minds of nearly everyone in society (by virtue of being the Mainstream), even of people one doesn't think of as "Leftist" per se -- so that they will say things now and then that show a submission to Leftist Narratives (but not necessarily 100% of the time).
Brilliantly said, as usual. I miss the days when I could just disagree with someone, without thinking they are evil or baths.t crazy.
I just wish there was even a smidge of good faith among the liberal-left in terms of their arguments and talking points. They have built a carapace of lies to protect the positions that would otherwise shock and appall most regular people (like blow jobs for kids), and if you are a leader who is not willing to put a hole in that carapace then you are not worth my time.
The mindset has infected everything. One of the reasons I retired from my practice in plastic surgery was due to the “official “ welcoming given to the trans agenda. I knew that my views would get me into trouble,even as one of the last independent physicians in my area.
I know I've said this before, but I'm very interested in hearing more about this.
Anytime
But there isn't. And there isn't going to be. There's no comfy left to go back to.
I know. And I hate that I was so close to believing there was! There's a sucker born every minute.
I've completely departed the left. My own values and philosophy no longer include any of the things that made me a reflexive leftist in the past. But it took a long time, and a lot of soul searching.
A profound change in seeing the world politically and culturally is emotionally difficult.
It is difficult! And I feel like I have also completely departed the left, on every single moral question (because none of this is actually political, it's moral, imho.) There is only one remaining thing niggling away at me, and that is -- for lack of a better word -- my taste. And while it's easy to dismiss that as just a frivolous thing, I actually think that the cultural influences you absorb growing up -- things like the bands you loved, the books you read, the movies you watched over and over again -- keep me emotionally tied to others on the "left." This is a quandary that I spend a LOT of time mulling over and I hope to some day articulate it better than I'm doing here. 🤣
It reminds me of your earlier article - you may not be conservative but reality is.
99.9% of all the artists I like -- in music, film, literature -- are flaming Leftists. Virtually the only alternatives are opening acts for Rich Little in Branson, Missouri...
I too have made the same departure. It’s been a long journey over the past 4 years or so, but it had to be done. As my mom always used to tell me... “don’t waste time arguing with the truth, it will never get you anyplace good “. It’s been such an interesting journey, I have learned so much and now feel more grounded and much more at peace. That being said, it has been discombobulating and isolating. I have lost some friends in the process, but I have gained some new ones.
Same!
Same here. It has been a jarring and unsettling experience, especially as my beliefs and stance on many things were (I thought) rock solid. It's like the ground has shifted under my feet. Personally I have gone though various levels of resistance and (now) more acceptance. I still find myself parroting things I once used to believe but I know it's more out of wanting to believe, rather than actually believing.
I've noticed most ex-Leftist anti-Leftists show signs they haven't done a thorough purging. This may indicate several possibilities:
1. It's not possible to thoroughly purge;
2. even if possible, they emotionally need to retain certain vestiges and apparently don't feel they have to go all the way with their "cleansing"
3. they're actually still more or less Leftists and either don't realize it, or don't think that's terribly bad (and they may even think it's a positive good, insofar as they have internalized the Left's insidious virtue-signalling).
Not a sucker, no. Just someone with hope for the future - and hope is the best of things!
The problem is that there really are people who are evil or batsh*t crazy, and giving them the benefit of the doubt is how they were able to take over.
I'm with you. I do believe in redemption, but the person has to be redeemable in order to be redeemed. I also believe in good and evil. Most of us are failed good people, but there are some that are evil.
Brilliant piece. I used to be left wing, definitely conservative on most issues now, and especially so when it comes to child safeguarding. Nothing angers me more than adults thinking their feelings/identity matters more than children's safety and well-being. I think it's the main issue that severed me from the progressive left, and even from liberalism more generally.
Yes, there are a lot of us out there. Just totally fed up.
As Kenneth Vinther pointed out in his review of Scott Howard’s The Transgender-Industrial Complex (2020) at Counter Currents, transgenderism is a thoroughly kosher campaign: “at the top of the [transgender] pyramid rests a series of charming Jewish billionaires...”
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2022/03/25/jewish-loot-and-neglected-fruit-how-the-mainstream-right-serves-jews-and-betrays-whites/
Jenny - you're like an amazing machine that reads my mind, and then turns the turmoil it finds there into compelling, logical discourse. Damn, you're good.
Thank you!!
I was just watching a Billboard Chris video before I read this piece! I find him so brave for doing what he does, but his on-the-street videos always give me such anxiety. The way people attack him--I don’t know how he does it. BUT the videos provide a perfect glimpse into the white liberal mindset. Time and time again, people see his board with ‘Children cannot consent to puberty blockers’ and go up to him and accuse him of homophobia. It’s completely bonkers because they’ve got it exactly opposite--it’s the trans movement that is homophobic! They are literally transing kids who would likely otherwise grow up to be gay or lesbian. They are essentially exterminating gay people. But the liberal mind has been brainwashed to think of ‘LGBTQIA+’ as one group, so in their mind any questioning of ‘trans rights’ is ‘homophobic’. It’s maddening and frustrating to me, as a gay man.
And PS, the entitled gay douchebag asking the question is also lying about Ted Kennedy supporting the ‘LGBTQ community’; during Ted Kennedy’s lifetime the T was a fairly new addition, and there was no Q.
I have no idea how those activists do it. I couldn't.
Dr.SHIVA™ LIVE: The Mythos of the Kennedy "Royalty" Enslaves America. Time to Break Free . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX5upBRlDqY
Spot on!
Okay, having read the whole thing, I think I understand Jenny's stance. It would have been nice and refreshing, I agree, if RFK Jr. had schooled that gay bear who interrogated him, instead of anxiously trying to nimbly step around the little Leftist minefield he set.
Yes, I think that's a very good way of putting it. I understand those for whom the foreign policy issues are important, but to me -- if you are not protecting your own children, then why even care about what happens overseas? And I also think you hit the nail on the head that a trap was set for him. Unfortunately his libtard instincts overrode his populist instincts and he totally f-ed up his response. And if you believe the story M4L tells about just how involved he was in the arrangements for speaking at their event, it looks even worse for him.
There are 2 usually distinct and even mutually contradictory sins involved here:
1. Taking the morally wrong position
2. Making a mistake which resulted in the appearance of #1, then trying to clean up on aisle 9 in a disingenuously self-serving way, instead of honestly admitting the mistake.
Can we disentangle this to figure out which RFK Jr. did?
It's crazy how that fear of being seen as transphobic/homophobic (or any kind of 'phobic' for that matter) triggers people into agreeing with almost anything. Almost like a knee-jerk reaction, they'll say anything to make themselves look good. We don't need that kind of vanity in our politicians, there's already enough going around.
And even if you think RFK jr made an honest mistake here, he'll likely make similar "honest mistakes" as president.
Another great column Jenny. The summary of your position on Vax/anti-vax perfectly represents mine. It's too unregulated, but clearly, CLEARLY, vaxes have done a lot of good.
And RFK is not 'Anti-vax' as a rule.
Thank you for this! I was shocked when I watched that townhall and saw his response. Why didn't he know more about M4L? This was an opportunity to educate that man and the public about the good work they are doing. I was like you, starry eyed and wishing and hoping that he was the real deal but now I'm not so sure. Parents having access to what their kids are being taught is essential. RFK wants to be known for building bridges and here's a perfect opportunity.
If you watch this interview with the M4L founder, his reaction at the town hall is even worse.
https://warroom.org/tiffany-justice-rfk-jr-s-turns-back-on-moms-for-liberty-we-need-strong-leaders-in-america/
I think that it's possible that he just totally crapped the bed on this, and possibly regrets his big fat lie of answer, but it's too big a misstep to be taken in any way charitably.
yes, I agree that was a major fail
I fully support the work of moms 4 liberty
bad actors have taken over modern education systems
Hello my dear cousin. Interesting read. One point about vaccines. I could not step foot on the campus of Springfield (MA) College in pursuit of my master's degree in Rehab Counseling without proof that I had received the series of hepatitis shots. This was in 1998. My love to you all!
Cousin Tom Greaney
Same for me at FSU unless proof of MMR, and this was more than 30 years ago. Literally would not let me cross the threshold.
Hi, Tommy.
He lost me with Affirmative Action but I missed this exchange.
Yeah, like I said above, the AA thing didn't really bother me. I mean, the man is a Democrat and the ruling had just come down, and I wasn't surprised given who his father was, etc. But this is the founder of Children's Health Defense and he's going to throw Mom's for Liberty under the bus? No way. They are natural allies and if he hadn't reverted to auto libtard mode he would have done something very interesting.
Thank you for so eloquently stating what I and many others are thinking. RFK went the way of Ramaswamy. Both waffled on Big Trans and RFK lied on top of it. I will not consider any candidate that does not have a Big Trans line about the size of the San Andreas Fault. If a candidate doesn't get asked his or her views on Big Trans and doesn't state hardline views of their own accord, no dice. I compare this to nuclear desolation. Nothing else will matter until Big Trans is annihilated. If this doesn't happen, there will be no other issues to debate. Love your description of a "sexual aristocrat," but the military woman in me is not as charitable. Like the activists working in the schools, he does have a sense of unbounded entitlement and access to children, his arrogance inflamed by a group of all women standing in his way.
Ramaswamy did that?! I liked him. ☹️
I thought he had been quite hard line on the trans thing?
Yes he did and same with me. It's near the end at about 6 minutes. He at least does say he would protect children. But he would allow a special "group" to keep the extra privilege to come in the military service with a medical/mental health condition that needs "treatment." Boot camp/basic training is designed to rid members of their individuality and neediness in order to form a cohesive team with a single mission. All must be somewhat physically fit with no medical problems when enlisting. But "trans" gets to pick which uniform is worn and will be provided medical care (hormones) as part of their privilege, along with surgery if requested. As an example on why this is so important, I once had a dental abscess while we were underway in an exercise. It was pretty bad but we were too far from the carrier (where there was full medical) to fly me there. I had to wait almost a full week, with our Independent Duty Corpsman hoping it wouldn't break and cause sepsis, before we were close enough for me to be flown over. They did have the maxillofacial surgeon ready for me when I arrived! Now consider the medical problems inherent in giving someone cross-sex hormones and the accompanying problems from surgery. Will they have the privilege of only going to ships or duty stations where there's full medical? There's now only one candidate that's hardline on Big Trans, and that is the hardline Catholic. I still hope for RFK and Ramasway to be in the next administration as cabinet members, but I'm going for the hardliner and figuring on Congress keeping one of his other hardlines in check. We are in big trouble when the rest of the candidates feel the need to squirm on this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFPxwsO5K4s
Yes hostility against the Trans Industrial Complex is a sine qua non for any candidate -- but there are also others:
a pledge to prevent another "pandemic" psy-op (and of course a public recognition that it was a psy-op)
rejection of critical race theory and its entire nebula
rejection of the entire Goddamned LGBTQ alphabet -- every jot and tittle in the waste bin.
rejection of the Ukraine proxy war
rejection of Climate Change hysteria
public recognition of the mountain of red flags surrounding the 2020 Election indicating it was stolen, and a pledge to launch a Congressional investigation availing itself of the participation of all those who have been punished in various ways for calling attention to it these past 3 years.
Yes to all! You left one out that my old feminist brain despises, and that's the dems telling me over and over that the Trump "grab the pussy" tape was an admission of sexual assault. This is infantilizing women. Trump is not my type, but there are plenty of women that like his type and do want him to grab their hooya. Grown women are not delicate flowers that must be shielded from dirty sex talk. I've been through pregnancy and childbirth 3 times, so obviously something was going on down there 9 months previous, but somehow we (females) are having an out of body experience when this happens. Rejection of the infantilizing of women is also on my list.
Also if you watch that old video and include the context, it's clear he isn't saying he himself goes around grabbing pussy; he's describing a type of woman powerful/wealthy men feel the license that they can treat that way. Further, one observer on a podcast (forgot who it was) pointed out years ago that at the end of that Access Hollywood interview, which had taken place on a promotional tour bus, Trump gets up and leaves the bus but is still followed by cameras, and he runs into an attractive young female and he behaves almost with a kind of shy politeness -- indicating his comments previously were more braggadocio for the interview with a hip young interviewer than his normative self.
Yes, and then compare the pearl-clutching antics over the "pussy" tape, a conversation between 2 adult males about sex between ADULTS, with the sexualization and pedophilia, the sexual assault the pearl-clutchers are committing on children.
That was pure vulgarian locker room talk, the kind countless normal guys engage in with other dudes. It's just dumb bro noise, and doesn't indicate the speaker is in any remote way an actual molester. In the corporate world, I've heard women say some equally raunchy things about men, but I don't take it literally or seriously and certainly don't think they should be cancelled over it.
> public recognition of the mountain of red flags surrounding the 2020 Election indicating it was stolen, and a pledge to launch a Congressional investigation availing itself of the participation of all those who have been punished in various ways for calling attention to it these past 3 years.
More importantly, some plan to keep the 2024 election from being stolen the same way.
Fuckin' A!
"The sight of Kennedy kowtowing to a man who absolutely epitomises middle class gay male entitlement, and throwing a bunch of women under the bus in order to do so, pushed me very close to burning anger. "
You were "close"? I can't wait to read your prose when you are on or above that limit.
Keep telling it the way it is eloquently and passionately! And a gentle ear scratch to the dachshund.
Your writing is at once clear-headed and artictulate yet visceral.
Kudos!
This particular substack, by the way -- especially the long intro -- might be the best example to use, should anyone ask me questions like "Is Jenny Holland a Leftist? Is she anti-Leftist? Is she an ex-Leftist anti-Leftist? Does she still retain vestiges of the Leftist virus" etc. One can see here more clearly than in any other substack I've read of hers to date the latent residues of Leftism in her which indicates she hasn't purged it -- which in turn indicates (she may feel) those residues are too much a part of her nature. This makes it all the more remarkable how she has changed vis-à-vis the baseline Leftism of her youth up to the point (I assume in the last 3 years or so) when her disenchantment with the Left began to crystallize.
"'Is Jenny Holland a Leftist? Is she anti-Leftist? Is she an ex-Leftist anti-Leftist? Does she still retain vestiges of the Leftist virus' etc"
If you eventually figure it out, do let me know! This entire Substack is me publicly trying to answer those questions, and repeatedly failing, and you all kindly indulge me! 🤣
You're right, your entire substack oeuvre reflects these questions and their possible answers, and it seems to be an open-ended perhaps lifetime project/odyssey for you. And this in turn reflects to me that the issue of Leftism is much subtler and more complex than many (including me) have thought -- to a great extent because of how massively, insidiously, and profoundly Leftism has permeated the Mainstream over the course of, say, the 20th century into our own 21st. Leftism's amazing reach with its thousand tendrils & tentacles into culture and into each of our psyches practically results in the only absolutely pure non-Leftist being some Nazi Viking who believes in pillaging, raping and enslaving all non-Nordic peoples.
> the only absolutely pure non-Leftist being some Nazi Viking who believes in pillaging, raping and enslaving all non-Nordic peoples.
That's not really non-Leftism, that's adopting the Lefts own archetype of Evil as a way to break with it.
I do feel some sympathy for RFK, Jr. here because you really can't win on some of these issues. He is anti-censorship, which is one reason I support him, and that would make supporting the Moms for Liberty group difficult. I don't think Moms for Liberty are being unreasonable; however, in today's environment especially, any censorship immediately becomes a slippery slope. If I was advising the group I would say they should advocate for alternative perspectives (Irreversible Damage, as an example, although that is an adult book) to be in collections as opposed to removing books.
I don't know if he actually knows that Moms for Liberty has never taken a stance against gay marriage, but regardless, maybe he just wanted to assure the guy questioning him that he supports gay rights. He is pretty good about clarifying and apologizing when called out on things. He is big on civil rights issues, but he doesn't support trans women in women's sports. I don't know if he has spoken out on medical treatment for trans youth, but given his stance on the pharmaceutical industry, I would assume he would oppose it.
I like DeSantis pretty well but I think he is for the war in Ukraine (at least that is my superficial understanding). I listen to RFK, Jr. in interviews and compare that to Biden and Trump, and he just completely outshines them. So I'm unsure what the alternatives are.
I also have sympathy with him as he does seem like a breath of fresh air in every other regard. But I'm afraid the definition of censorship being levelled at M4L does not pass my smell test, as I don't think porn in schools should be defended from a civil liberties point of view. The American education system has been completely bastardised overall, but comic books of kids performing sex acts is totally unacceptable and removing them is not censorship. We are at the bottom of the slippery slope, looking up, and kids are being harmed as a result. This is 100 percent a hill I am willing to die on. No candidate who doesn't openly support them is getting any support from me.
The alternatives are not great, I agree.
I do get the concern. I'm looking at it from the stance of, for instance, a friend with a trans "they/them" daughter who thought that anyone not getting the latest Covid booster was preventing the pandemic from ending and needed to "check their news sources." So (in a public library) would I prefer to leave "Genderqueer" on the shelf it it meant I could also leave "The Real Anthony Fauci" under the idea that nothing was censored, then yes. But also, a book like "Genderqueer" is going to get a lot of good reviews in the journals, while a library would have to look outside of those sources for bestsellers like "The Real Anthony Fauci," so it is on even shakier ground, and that is why I am particularly wary of any censorship.
False dilemma, easily demonstrated by an analogy. Imagine a book that instructed children to hate all blacks and try to figure out ways to murder them whenever possible and gave explicit instructions on how to do this, including the names and addresses of various black people. Obviously, everyone (other than stone cold psychopathic racists, which among whites are extremely rare, contrary to what white Leftists tell us) would favor absolute censorship of such a book. Graphic depictions of blow jobs and anal penetration and masturbation for anyone younger than adult should be considered on this level without bringing up sophistry quibbles.
At this point in time though "everyone" does not favor censorship of the material-- quite the opposite. I am afraid that any attempts at censorship in our current moment are leading us into a trap.
Anyone who doesn't is to be reasonably treated as a pedophile enabler at best -- an actual pedophile at worst (pending a thorough search of their hard drive).
So you're fine with pornographic books in elementary school libraries?
I think we need a hard drive check here.
DeSantis is anti spending billions in Ukraine.
Why do you say that RFK can’t be both anti-censorship and also support M4L? What do you think they censor?
M4L are not into censorship just age-appropriateness.
I'm not totally up in this debate but I believe they have been asking for books to be pulled: https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/education/2023-07-12/florida-school-district-removed-5-books-after-moms-for-liberty-raised-concern-more-could-follow#
The book approval process for K-12 schools is not a modern invention, and it's also not "censorship" as some have tried to imply. This is no more censorship than having a separate, adult porn magazine section is censorship. It's, appropriately, a way to make sexual adult topics and magazines inaccessible to children. As always, there will be some who go after books that are great literature and appropriate for high schoolers. But those schools and parents are best left to settle their own debates locally.
I am not sure which exact title we are referencing here, but this one at least got a positive review, but also is recommended for high schoolers, not elementary school: https://www.slj.com/review/gender-queer-a-memoir
School libraries are different than public libraries, but my guess is that the books they are selecting are favorably reviewed in the journals they use for collection development.