Matt Walsh's "What is a Woman?" is the kind of content most thought would be safe under new Twitter ownership. A new battle over the film feels like an attack of nanny-Twitter déjà vu
I have posted that exact scene to countless comment boards in recent years. And I told my still-BFF, back when we were in our 20s (40-ish years ago) that the destruction of society begins with the debasement of language, and it had begun.
We see the fruits, now, and they are unwholesome in extreme.
Just a simple question, though. Is trying to win an irrelevant argument worth causing hurt to people? There are plenty of offense-seekers, but when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis, it’s being deliberately cruel and hurtful. And why would a decent person do that? Call it hateful, or mean, or whatever, if it hurts someone else, just fucking stop it.
"an irrelevant argument": what may be irrelevant to you or me may be crucial for other people, most especially someone whose child has just announced they may have been born in the wrong body.
"she still has a penis" lol Res ipsa loquitur. I also would never want to be deliberately cruel and hurtful to anyone, and would never feel the need to do so IRL, but I also just cannot assent to an obvious untruth no matter how many feelings are wounded (but that's just me).
People getting to say ugly hateful hurtful mean stupid etc things is simply the price of freedom (free speech and expression) in a free society, and i'm not sure a society whose new first commandment is "Thou shalt not offend" is a society any of us would want to live in.
hmmm, forgive me if your comment (and the basis of this post, censoring a film) suggested that to me...
Once again, it all comes down to perspective.
One side says: "These are just vulnerable people who want to live in peace like anyone else. We should make gender self-identification the only qualification and treat these people in no ways different from other members of their self-declared group."
The other side says: "Our educational, medical and cultural institutions have all been captured by a political ideology that says the mammalian sex binary is an oppressive construct that needs to be dismantled. And this has led to absurdities like the inability to define 'Woman' and a campaign to make this standard pedagogy that cannot be debated."
I see both sides. I have no interest in the Walsh doc, it just seems like trolling to me, but I also believe he should be able to air it and people should be able to watch it if they wish.
There is another side. It's called the truth. Teachers and Professors are getting fired because they refuse to use gender pronouns that do not match a person's sex. They are being asked to lie. That is one problem. The other problem is allowing and perpetuating another person living out a lie. That is the most deceitful thing one person can do to another. Jump back several decades to when the medical profession would treat the very rare gender dysphoria person, not with hormones and surgeries but with mental, and emotional care. For me personally, saving souls is the far greater enduring kindness then bolstering a troubled sinner’s wrongful view of themselves.
It's much worse than using "pronouns." The cult attacks womanhood and parents, while there's no corresponding attack on maleness. There are plenty of us old school feminists around and we have no illusions about the intent of this cult, in spite of decades of attacks against "feminists" and being told there's no need to worry about our rights. We always keep a military as we don't take our national safety for granted. We understand human nature. But for those who are able to ignore cognitive dissonance, the rules magically change when it comes to females.
I had zero interest in the Walsh doc until this recent kerfuffle. Now I'm thinking about watching it. Not right now but maybe later. Eventually I'm going to want to see if it's all innocent and bland and inoffensive as Walsh's defenders suggests, or an evil film advocating oppression and filled with lies.
Like anyone else, you may "see both sides" in this matter, but the "other side" is correct, is Right, and that "campaign" is a threat to free thought and speech . . . to the very concept of truth. It's so Postmodern!
Like it or not, necromorphs have been yoked to the neo-Marxist agenda that seeks to destroy Western civilization in the name of the "liberation of the culturally marginalized." Pity the poor, confused person who just wanted to be left alone to pursue his own fantasies. He's been dragged into a fight by those who claim to be his liberator.
And any person on any color can say the same thing. The real white supremacy comes from the liberal left in their need to virtue signal. I'm hoping they start a trend where they self immolate against their own whiteness, inability to educate every other white person of their values, and just burn themselves. I hear three phase power works too.
The entire "trans" agenda is to be deliberate a$$h0les, especially targeting women. I and every other female I know have never bothered dudes in drag, yet all I see are endless attacks on womanhood. I say ladies, arm yourselves.
Some people will, of course, be deliberate assholes. Others with conflate perfectly reasonable behavior, and the enforcement of perfectly healthy boundaries, with "being a deliberate asshole". So specificity about was the undesirable behavior is, specifically, is probably for the best.
When a man tells me I must play along with the delusion that he's a woman or face severe consequences, I no longer care whether or not that person has their feelings hurt. My freedom to think as I wish is my only concern.
Tough guy...or woman. Your immediate concern should be just "thinking"---tackle the "freedom" part later when you get the "thinking" part down. It's not easy, let me tell you.
Of course. Anyone who reaches a different conclusion than you must not be thinking. Let me guess, you also think anyone who disagrees with you is a "fascist" too. Typical left authoritarian.
“when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis” that person is telling THEIR truth. That it is impossible for a man to become a woman - especially those following the teaching of religion and science.
There’s that darn chromosome that trips them up ...every time.
Being forced to buy into these peep’s delusion is crazy - the sick peeps pretending to be something they are not are the ones being hurtful and rude.
This cat I am holding is actually a dinosaur. If you call it a cat instead of a dinosaur, you are rude, insensitive, hurtful...ect.
Truth is not subject to personal ownership. What is true is true universally. One is either born with X chromosomes (woman) or XY chromosomes (man). This is true, despite some extremely rare exceptions due to damage/mutation.
One's so-called "personal truth" is a stupid way of saying "belief."
I'm entirely willing to entertain complicating conversations about gender and what people should be allowed to call themselves, assert about themselves, or do in regards to expressing their personal truth.
It's when we can no longer have those conversations, because they are somehow offensive, that I start to think the complicating conversation of radicalism has gone too far.
Biology is a real thing. Sex is not assigned to you at birth. You want to talk about how you feel you are a she and not a he, your genitalia aside? Fine. You want to tell me "the system" assigned you your genitalia at birth? Then you're delusional, and you're not helping yourself or anybody else.
That's very reasonable and charitable. I'm afraid that the years-long campaign to muddy the waters around sex, the strident rhetoric, the preposterous claims, and the calls for censorship of anyone daring to refute these claims have evaporated any good will I might have had in the past when listening to the so-called "trans-gender issue."
Which I understand. I try to exercise tolerance for the tolerant and remain open to actual progressive (rather than regressive) discussions about topics where there is a desire for actual dialog. Usually there isn’t, alas.
Also I’m very tolerant of people living their lives, whatever odd or offbeat or fetishized way they wish, so long as they aren’t demanding I structure my life around their fetishes. Live and let live, that’s my motto.
Which means if biological women want their own sports league, they can have one. And so forth.
I believe it's a simple matter of just minding your own fucking business. Live and let live. It's really not that difficult. It does require a bit of practice, some repetition. Did mommy and daddy omit this from life's early lessons?
Women did live and let live until our sports were taken over, our private spaces invaded and our jails infiltrated by convicted rapists. The misogyny of this movement is breathtaking. Women are expected to give up our safety to cater to this insanity. No more.
It's not a movement and sports are not being taken over private spaces are not being invaded jails are not being infiltrated by convicted rapists. Get a grip. Join the real world. There's much more breathable oxygen in the real world.
I think people can be forgiven for seeing it as a movement. That said, there are multiple examples of every other assertion Laura made, in the real world. To characterize such things as dominant is likely not accurate. There are, I expect, far more women's prisons with no transwomen rapists in them that otherwise, just as there are plenty of woman-on-woman sports competitions conducted without a single transwoman involved.
But such things have happened, and pretending they have not does not really address the complaint. In fact, it would tend to suggest that it will be yet another case of "that just isn't happening . . . and it's good that it's happening" form of argument that tends to accompany most efforts at cultural shift.
That said, the vast majority of people have nothing to worry about when it comes to men-who-feel-they-are-women invading their spaces or violating them in some way. It's not really a particularly pressing real life argument--but clearly, there are plenty of people on both sides of the argument that want it to be litigated.
So if I have to have an opinion, it's going to be that biological men and women should be understood to be such, that separate spaces of biological women are entirely legitimate and should be protected, and that prisons and medical care should be managed based on biological sex rather than preferred identification.
"Minding your own fucking business." Until you have something original and worth quoting, Feldspar, it's really not bad advice. That, and staying on your meds.
If only these deranged men and their deranged handmaidens would just "mind their own flocking business." But you're incapable and want to mind the business of females, children and parents. Call yourself whatever you want, wear whatever you want, get whatever surgery you can afford. I don't care. Leave the rest of us out of it and stop attacking women and children because you have a mental health problem.
I tend not to refer to myself at all---that's a habit best left to crazy people. For what it's worth, I'm a straight male white boy currently wearing a filthy pair of Carrhart work shorts and an equally filthy t-shirt. I don't like it but at the moment I'm too tired and lazy to shower and change into something else. That and the bulk of my chiffon pastel evening dresses are still in winter storage.
I wanted to run this by you earlier but you were engaged in your side-hustle of LQBTQ-bothering from afar, at no cost, which is big of you. And I also want to update you on my health--I've got a date with the surgeon at the end of the month! Eerily prescient of you. Finally having the bunion on my left foot corrected. Crutches for 6 weeks. Try and tell me that don't blow. And I can afford it, too, against the odds that were posted on the board when the new year broke. I'm not flush, but neither am I begging in the streets. Thank you for the kind inquiry. Most thoughtful.
And...I find it interesting (and helpfully explanatory) that you're an acolyte and follower of the mouth-breathing troglodyte-unicorn, Chris Rufo. I just checked up on him earlier today, on YouTube, to gauge the Warp and woof of Rufo's most recent lectures and sermons. He's one of my favorite right-wing propagandists to track. Love both his pitch and delivery. What an unremitting asshole that guy is.
But as along as we're exploring the subject of gender bending, here's something you might be able to help me with. Why is it that so many prominent male personalities of the right-wing grifter class dress like members of a Community College glee club? Here I'm thinking of Rufo, Walsh, Lindsay---and of course the choir master himself, "Dr." Jordan Peterson, with his weird combinations of off-the rack Men's Warehouse steam punk suits and the occasional shiny sharkskin number, a bad idea for any man even if he's living under a bridge. Any ideas? Just the usual right-wing bad taste? We'll leave it at that.
Coincidentally---and I think you'll enjoy this---Palace Hermaphrodite Matt Walsh took a sartorial beating on Twitter today when he was "outed" (really couldn't miss it, the boy was asking for it) for wearing what was clearly a sport jacket with a traditional "feminine" cut above the waist, designed to flatter, at least conceal, a woman's hips. A "waistcoat" in the vernacular. With a fucking T-shirt! For hip-less, girly-man Walsh it was probably a gambit to make himself look less troll-like to the papparazzi and building security during the world premier of his new home movie. So I give the guy a pass here---he has larger problems with what folks see when he enters a room---primarily that he has brown hair and a black beard.
Our "man" Walsh completed the ensemble with tan shoes (jesus christ) and "pressed" jeans (jesus christ again). The Applebee's greeter look. This is something I've always found troubling. Men who iron their fucking jeans. I'm sorry, forgive me, but that's strictly Nancy territory as far as I'm concerned. Walsh never made it to college so methinks the entire get-up is overcompensating a bit, an attempt to give the impression that he's either on his way to, or on his way back from, the Princeton Club. Poor kid.
Yes, poor Walsh. I stand up for the LQBTQ crowd because it's obviously the right thing to do and also a morally civil response to the bullying that's issued forth by pussies like you, Rufo and Walsh and the rest of the dickhead playground bullies. Smirking Punks that only know how to punch down. It's also yet another phony, trumped-up propaganda meme created and curated by the usual Goebbelian Bullshit Outlets, similar to the boutique shop hosted by your boy Rufo (and whatever else Rufo is, he's most certainly a "boy"). He got fat on himself with his big CRT grift, and now, unsurprisingly, here we are with Matty "waistcoat" Walsh shrieking over the doings of another already marginalized cohort. What a bunch of fucking lightweight, candy-ass snowflakes you boys are.
You do realize this is Nazi shit, don't you, kmick? Take a moment and climb aboard Twitter and take a look at a Walsh thread, and substitute "jew" for "trans." Bullying and scapegoating marginalized populations was integral to the Nazi program. See you around on the threads, cowboy.
You have way too much time on your hands, btw, imbecile, that movie's been out for a over a year. You are the reason most sane people hate. Almost like a tv character. Neuman.
Because necromorphs have been folded into yet another movement of "liberation" by the neo-Marxist left, minding one's own business on this issue is no longer an option.
I was happily minding my own business until it became a crime in some places to call a man a man and a woman a woman, until people began claiming publicly and vociferously that men can give birth and breast-feed newborns with their own tits.
Some of us are uncomfortable living amid a smog of lies and political horseshit intended to make a delusion real by legislation, decree, and social pressure.
If you speak of necromorph liberation you by default speak of the arrival of the long-awaited neo-marxist "dead space," whereby necromorphs are liberated and labor, once chained, is now set free, roaming the country side, foaming at the mouth, seizing the means of production and then refusing to have anything to do with the junk, throwing it instead into nearby rivers and streams and such, organizing labor unions, then quickly leaving town before things get too "hot" with the Teamsters, running the odd capitalist under the guillotine, in brief, making general pains in the asses of themselves just as Marx forecast.
Remember: every individual cell of a necromorph is a viral pathogen in itself.
You practice calling a cat a dinosaur, and see how long it takes for you to realize it is scientifically impossible.
Minding your own business gives one the freedom to say anything. It is the “trans police” that get their panties in a wad and fire peeps for stating the truth.
1. The teachings of science and medicine universally agree that trans people are real, that dysmorphia is a genuine condition for which treatment exist. I don't think there is even one medical or psychological consortium that doesn't largely proscribe transitioning as long-term treatment for persistent gender dysmorphia. Now I don't have kids and am no expert on these issues, but really who (but another trans person) in this thread would be? I'm OK deferring to the people whose job it is to know the right things to do about this stuff. Is anyone arguing that every single member of the AMA, the Endocrine Society, the American Association of Mental Health Professionals, etc. has been coopted by radical transactivists into recommending medicinally unhelpful mistreatment of patients? That's a fast track to malpractice, poverty and possibly jail.
2. I'm sort of happy that you're fiercely loyal to calling things as they are, not as any party might wish them to be. I hope that your conviction encompasses the grotesque body mutilation that has been visited up children for decades now, called elective cosmetic surgeries, (in addition to the trans-related interventions you object to). After all--the cosmetic surgery industry represents over 230 billion dollars a year (which makes even the projected increases in trans surgical intervention over the next decade, possibly as high as 20 million dollars annually, a mere pittance). And while every single medical board and standards agency all agree that transitioning has some curative value, no one but plastic surgeons believes the same thing about cosmetic surgeries that are routinely--ROUTINELY!--performed on (mostly) girls and boys who are not yet teenagers. One of the most common surgeries? Rhinoplasty and....breast augmentations. Let that sink in. That's right... more ten year old girls will receive breast augmentations in one year than the entire number of <17 year old boys and girls will receive any sort of trans-related surgical intervention in five years. Ten year old girls. Getting breast enlargements. Talk about grooming.... Anyway, I'm sure you're as outraged about that, otherwise you'd look rather like a hypocrite.
3. Many people in this thread are so aggrieved over being asked to call someone by a pronoun or a proper noun that they believe doesn't tell the genetic truth of the person's identity. But what if I told you we've been doing this within human society for as long as we've had the institution of marriage? I mean, do you simply accept the new surname that a coworker wants you to use for her, when she returns from her honeymoon? Or do you give her a stern lecture about no matter how hard she wants to pretend she's now Ms. Johnson, it's empirically true that she is now and will always remain genetically a Ms. Robins? I'm just suggesting you exercise a modicum of the same kind of acceptance for trans people. That's all.
4. My favorite cat in all of history is F. Smiledon. That's the sabertooth tiger, a member of America's now-extinct megafauna that while not technically part of the Triassic epoch, is still routinely lumped into the group of infamous mega predators that common parlance will sometimes refer to as dinosaurs. And if you called that kitty a dinosaur I doubt it would care one way or the other. I know I wouldn't.
Uh, Joel--a big ol' no. Double ixnay on the kiddie cosmetic surgery hooey. In 2021, Americans spent a total of $14.6 billion on ALL cosmetic surgeries for all age groups. From what stagnant pond did you fish out the $230 billion figure? That figure nearly approximates the annual defense budget of China.
I pulled your paragraph (below) that consists of several different flavors, mostly sour, of nonsense. Do you have any documents, statistics, or news stories generated by reputable media, governmental agencies, NGOs, or studies in the medical literature that can speak to your assertions?
Maybe even some off-hand anecdotal material, say, a few 14-year old girls who are on record saying if they had it to do it all over again they'd be more patient and wait for the big tits until they turned 16? Anything at all that might buttress this nonsense that you have so charmingly shared with the group? Anything?
I've attached a link to the American Academy of Pediatrics site that might (or might not) be helpful. Or helpfully illuminating.
Curious as to who or what you're representing here. You definitely have the hyperbolic ghoul-speak perfected by right-wing fairy-tale merchants over the past few years down to spec: ..."the grotesque body mutilation that has been visited up children for decades now..."
"And while every single medical board and standards agency all agree that transitioning has some curative value, no one but plastic surgeons believes the same thing about cosmetic surgeries that are routinely--ROUTINELY!--performed on (mostly) girls and boys who are not yet teenagers. One of the most common surgeries? Rhinoplasty and....breast augmentations. Let that sink in."
"...That's right... more ten year old girls will receive breast augmentations in one year than the entire number of <17 year old boys and girls will receive any sort of trans-related surgical intervention in five years. Ten year old girls. Getting breast enlargements. Talk about grooming.... Anyway, I'm sure you're as outraged about that, otherwise you'd look rather like a hypocrite."
Feldspar, you know what? You're correct. My 230 billion dollar number was way off. I apologize. To clarify, I was quoting a figure that represented the estimated industry revenue growth over a ten year period. I keep a DRAFT email with snippets and excerpts that I refer to from time to time, which is where I mistakenly pulled my figure from. I apologize and I appreciate your fact-based correction. However, I would still assert that 14 billion dollars still eclipses the total value for the trans medical industry by orders of magnitude. My point was damaged by my own sloppy mistake, but I wouldn't say it is rendered incorrect. Do you disagree?
The second portion of my comment that you took issue with has to do with the vast difference between minors receiving breast augmentations versus any sort of trans-related surgical intervention. As far as I can tell, my point remains correct.
We have data suggesting that approximately 4,500 teenagers will get breast augmentation for any given year; meanwhile, despite there being no standardized database tracking numbers of trans surgeries for minors, we have a couple of different tracking entities and all point to the numbers of surgeries for trans kids (while certainly increasing by as much as 13 fold in the last two years) still being less than 300 cases per year.
To recap: your critique of my comment, which contained 4 distinct arguments, correctly identified one error within one of those 4 points. Does that mean that you agree with the rest--really, the vast majority--of my comment?
Thanks again for the fact check, btw. I really do appreciate it.
You're both a couple of obviously educated mental retards. I mean you're both fucking nuttier than fruitcakes. Wtf? You ought to be writing political speeches for the retards that run for office. Fuck. You'd both be fun to punch.
"An irrelevant argument" is hardly how the trans-philes see it. Your plea for civility rings hollow when the other side sees the loss of livelihood as fair game for adhering to conscience.
+1 for transphiles. I’m not a transphobe, I don’t hate anyone beyond central bankers and war hawks. It’s perfectly reasonable to object to men in women’s sports and women’s prisons. To act baffled as to why people would object or say it’s mean as Jeffrey is arguing is a sign of transphilia, imo.
It’s obvious that if a group wants the rest of society to use the new rules they have made up, that that group is asking a favor of the rest of society. And most will probably have no problem remembering to use the favored noun or pronoun. The stipulations would be that the favor needs to be asked. The understanding of any agreement is that the nouns are new to the English language, so that no offense is proper should the noun or pronoun be the “wrong” (actually correct) one, by mistake.
But also, favors should not be coerced. I have no need to respect the request/demand of another party who has no respect for me. That’s no longer a favor, it’s a command, an expectation based on narcissism.
The stridency of trans activists has eliminated any personal goodwill that might have been possible before this concerted effort to force everyone to believe lies and to doubt our animal nature to make way for some sort of trans-human fantasy.
Don't let our friend Elon Musk hear you say that. Uncle Elon is one of the more vociferous cheerleaders of all things trans-human, along with fellow psychopath J. Bezos. Eventually the plan will be to rocket to Mars together, where they'll erect a trans-human utopia that will allow them to project the necessary power to begin ruling the universe...or some shit like that I read somewhere.
I dunno. I seem to remember a marginalized group (African Americans) demanding that society no longer use the N word, and although some miserable old bigots still resist this "favor" today, most Americans recognize it's OK for this to be asked of us.
And it's OK for their to be societal consequences if someone chooses not to police their language in this specific way. I actually think asking rather than demanding society make this adjustment to its language (and, btw, to what some Americans believed was objectively true about Black people), would have been a show of weakness that would have hurt, rather than helped American race relations.
I feel the same way about the queer community asking Americans not to use the F word. I'm queer myself and if I hear someone casually using that word, I assume that I should not let them know I'm gay, because they have revealed homophobia to me, possibly are a danger to me. These tweaks to language are actually indicative of evolution toward more inclusive, tolerant societal norms (IMHO).
If it's hurtful to a person not to be called a woman, then surely they should be able to define what a woman is. That's the point of the documentary, the people who are insisting on telling others who they can and can't call a woman seem unable to provide any practical definition of the word, and (as you'll know if you've seen the documentary) go out of their way to obfuscate and avoid providing a definition.
There is a simple biological definition of woman: adult human female. If you want to propose a different definition, great, but then you need to actually propose a definition, or stop complaining when people point out that you haven't given a definition, just said "I don't like your definition".
I suspect you were trying to be "clever" here, but you do realize that you basically are agreeing with me, right? Either that or you're telling us about your sex kink superpower for some reason.
Let’s flip that around. Who else may be hurt by using improper English to define others? It is actually a favor to supplant the words that define a person with different words that have carried different connotations for millennia. One class of people has borne the brunt of not having a clear understanding of what actually defines them, and that is women. Beginning with female athletes having the abilities they have honed since they were young girls be replaced with males with the female moniker, trans-W, the theft becomes very clear: women can be returned to the class with lesser rights. This is why defining a woman is the crux of this issue. An adult female. One definition. Tick tock, the game is locked. A transgendered woman is a different class, as is a man, or a transgendered man.
That flip around is dangerously close to a false equivalency. Not to take anything away from the feelings of unfairness about trans women in women's sports (not even sure which side of that question I'm even on), but I don't think depression, hate crimes against, or suicide have been skyrocketing among those athletes who believe they have been treated unfairly.
"Suicide have been skyrocketing among those athletes who have been treated unfairly". Which athletes? The "trans" athletes? Can you point to any actual data? Because this "they will commit suicide" is a false fact that's been touted and finally debunked. It is also emotional blackmail and no one should be cowed into submission by emotional blackmail. And if athletes who are treated unfairly will commit suicide is in any way true, then do you have no worry at all that biological women and girls who are athletes will now start to commit suicide because the sport has become completely unfair to them? Alas, no. From all your comments, it is explicitly clear you give no fuck about biological women and girls.
How about football and soccer players who contract Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE)? "A fatal brain disease associated with repeated traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), including concussions and repeated blows to the head." Lots of reported suicides there.
Athletic competition at high levels---beginning with elite youth leagues--- is challenging enough without the petty and cruel bullying by ignorant bigots. Overwhelmingly female athletes in the U.S. support transgender athletes. The exceptions are far from the rule. Additionally, the number of trans athletes competing in college athletics is infinitesimally small as to be statistically irrelevant.
I suspect you are quite ignorant of the sports world in general and women's competition in particular.
What does CTE or TBIs have to do with alleged trans athletes suicide rates? You're bringing in something entirely irrelevant. If you want to digress that way then I can also point out young women's mental health problems have severely increased in recent years too.
You have no proof at all the female athletes in the US overwhelmingly support trans identifying male athletes. You're the one who's ignorant. Girls and women are being threatened into silence, and you interpret that as "overwhelming support". When what is actually happening is overwhelming silencing of their freedom to speak.
How does the number of trans athletes being "infinitesimal" justify unfairness? Unfairness is unfairness, and cheating is cheating. Even one single competitor with unfair advantage is unfair. Should Lance Armstrong be vindicated for doping? It was just him, just one competitor? Why made any fuss about it, huh? Why all the fuss about the Patriots maybe using a deflated footballs? It was just one team!!!!
Infinitesimal you said? At what point then will it become unacceptable? When only male athletes calling themselves girls and women are winning all the spots on all competitions? At what point will you finally allow women and girls to have their own sports?
Not to mention even a single male with advantage can smash all female competitors's records and win all the competitions in a discipline. The greater physical advantage is that huge.
And this "Infinitesimal" isn't even true. Women and girls are losing by huge numbers. http://shewon.org
No, not the trans athletes. Read it again. slower if necessary. I am saying that if there are women athletes who feel allowing trans women to compete is unfair, it's not showing up in depression, hate crimes, and suicide. All the hateful shit you and your fellow trolls want to heap on trans people actually has negative impacts.
You want me to point to data that demonstrate transgender people have higher suicide rates? OK, the best data on that would be....ALL the data, since every study demonstrates this. You think you can pretend that's not real just by saying it's been "debunked?" Can you turn water into wine?
I'll repeat what I think feldspar said earlier--this isn't about women's sports, prisons, bathrooms. That's just the smokescreen shit you put up to try to cover the truth: you're a hateful person.
How about you read it slower and at least try to have some sympathy for women and girls? No, you can't. Because you're at heart an awful misogynist. This is clear as day from all your comments dismissing women and girls' concerns. Women not feeling depressions and suicidal from the TrAnstifa's obliterating their rights is not showing up? What world are you in? You have no clue at all how women feel and react do you? They suffer in silence and you use that as proof against them as "evidence not showing up". Hate crimes? You want women to commit hate crimes to "prove" they see the unjustice and unfairness your cult is inflicting upon them? Are you insane?
You dismiss all women and girls' concerns as "hateful shit". You're the one who's hateful. You hate against women, your misogyny, is dripping in your every word.
You can't even show any "data". You're just claiming there are "all data" and "every study", without pointing to a single study at all. Show one in the comment and I guarantee they can be debunked.
"Can you turn water into wine?" I don't. But obviously you do. You think a man can magically turn into a woman.
This is exactly about women's sports, prisons, and bathroom. We women don't need you to mansplain to us our pains, and the injustices we're suffering under your hand. Just because you and your lots found a new way to take away our rights by dressing yourselves up in a skirt and growing your hair and claiming some "gender soul" doesn't change the fact that what this is, is just age old misogyny and sexism. We women have been dealing with this for thousands of years. We've seen it all before. We know it when we see it.
To hell with YOUR hateful shit. You're a hateful, women-hating, misogynistic, sexist person.
A "transwoman" is a man, and it's some of that group of men and their handmaidens that are deliberately nasty, telling the rest of humanity to go along, shut up or get destroyed. Women have plenty of history of being told to shut up and just bob the head in agreement to whatever a dude says, no matter how crazy. This group has no trouble calling people nasty names, especially women and girls who wish to maintain their boundaries. Why would a decent person tell females to shut up and then force his way into female private spaces and sports, why would a decent person insist the rest of us must cater to his derangement and hatred of females by attacking any who use words that signify a biological function specific to females, why would a decent person tell others, others that have been speaking the English language their entire lives, to use his narcissistic "pronouns," why would a decent person try and manipulate children and get laws passed to give this group a free pass to do this in the schools while trying to obliterate parents? I don't care if it's one of these deranged dudes or the deranged handmaidens who try this with me (a middle-aged woman), walk away as the threats are useless here.
Men really support a movement that doesn't affect them because they are not harmed by a person claiming to be a woman and invading their personal spaces. This argument about "causing hurt' is ridiculous when women are being raped in prison by biological men allowed to be there because they claim they are women. I will not "stop it" because some man wants to pretend he is a woman yet puts me, my daughters and granddaughters in harms way.
I find this always a tad disingenuous to post as if the pronoun issue is a matter of niceness. If it was a matter of niceness, would a really nice person put a demand on other people ?
Language evolved over untold years and we evolved special brain sections for detecting the sex of another person. I do a lot of walking and I can spot a man or woman from miles an I am rarely wrong when we get up close. And this is not an issue for a transgender that just looks the part, this is only an issue when our brains tells loud and clear someone is one sex but we have to pretend it is the other one.
What trans people demand is that I disable that part of my brain and act as if my intuition gives false information. Since in social settings the demands are enforced with social punishment, it puts me on edge to not make a mistake.
I worked for a company with a transgender that had a neutral name and looked like a man. I tried hard to use 'she' but it felt like a lie and of course there were honest mistakes The lying made me feel bad and the mistakes embarrassed me.
So I am not sure why it is nice to compel someone to say words that are not true and punish when a mistake is made.
Your comment is truly unbelievable. An "irrelevant argument"? Perhaps to you since you're a man. Deliberately cruel and hurtful? What about the entire society now being deliberately cruel and hurtful to women and girls by forcing us to accept the delusion that a man is a woman and that we must sacrifice our own safety, privacy, dignity, and success to such men? I suppose cruelty and hurt of women and girls don't matter to you. What decent people would tell a trans woman "she" is not a woman because "she" still has a penis? I'll tell you who: a woman or girl who is showering in a women's changing room who suddenly finds herself confronted with a naked man with his penis calling himself a "woman", and everyone in charge tells her they don't care if she doesn't want to be naked in front of the opposite sex. Or a mother who doesn't want her twelve or thirteen year old girl having to use the same bathroom as a forty year old male calling himself a woman, or a an eighteen year old boy in school. Or a parent who watches her daughter train for years in a sport but now finds she can never win or get that athletic scholarship because a boy with penis and all the advantages of male puberty decides to waltz in and compete in the female category. And a battered woman in a homeless shelter or a rape victim in a rape shelter being gaslit and told she must accept rooming with a "woman with penis" or else she has to leave. Yes, how absolutely indecent of all these women to point out the trans woman is actually a man with penis? How absolutely cruel that a rape victim would not want to room with a "woman" with male organ intact. According to you, all these women should just fucking stop it. None of their feelings and concerns matter. It is an offense that women and girls want to feel safe and dignified.
If going along with someone’s delusion (or lie) makes you feel kind and virtuous, fine. Do not expect others to be like you. I value honesty and resistance to thought control and freedom of expression. Being enslaved to other peoples feelings is a kind of hell but typical of enablers of those with narcissistic personality disorder.
OK. Gotcha. Now, could I ask you to tell me the truth? Does this make me look fat? Because I've been dieting for months now and I'm ready to wear my new swimsuit to the beach. I don't want to look foolish.
"Is trying to win an irrelevant argument worth causing hurt to people?"
The argument is not "irrelevant," and its purpose is not to "win" in some rhetorical/debate club sense, but to remind everyone of the reality of human sexual dimorphism and to re-establish the TRUTH of biological sex and the FALSITY of delusions that lead people to deny it and make some of the most ridiculous assertions about men and women I have ever heard. (I will not exemplify them here in the interest of brevity.) Necromorphs don't get a pass on criticism or mockery. Why should they be the exception? We have a duty to point out absurdity, hypocrisy, stupidity, and evil, even if doing so damages the fragile egos of the sexually confused or makes the critic a target of the mob.
Sorry, but the necromorph political lobby has over-played the pity angle. In fact, their rhetoric is a form of emotional blackmail: "If you assert the reality of sex, you drive necromorphs to commit suicide." Your appeal to our pity is an example.
So at what point did you decide that being gay wasn't a mental illness? I'm just wondering. The scientific and medical consensus happened in the mid-70's, btw. Before that, being gay meant you were pathologically messed up. Also, a few decades before that, masturbation was also considered a mental illness. I guess I'm just trying to find out what are your delineations before and after some other rather important reversals on what constitutes mental illness? And could you ever conceive of that happening again regarding trans stuff?
If you believe despising one's own biology to the point of physically denying it and mutilating its appearance is normal human behavior, then you must be really, really evolved.
Body dysmorphia remains a classified mental disorder. But isn't that the problem? That we need "experts" to tell us that cutting off one's penis is disordered, until they tell us it's not?
Please quote where I said mutilation is normal human behavior. My comment spoke directly to the history of medical diagnoses. Do you disagree with anything that I actually said in my comment? You seem to be saying you disagree with the medical consensus that dysmorphia is a legit diagnosis. Why do you think you're better qualified than entire medical consortiums to make that determination?
I don't disagree with you, except that it is "consortia." And to emphasize that the same medical establishment that claims science is under attack by Covid-deniers or malcontents would like us to go along with the line that DNA, for instance, is an irrefutable part of life, except when it becomes problematic to say so in front of the playgroup. What will science do when a trans-woman commits murder but leaves DNA at the scene? The murderer is by scientific consensus a man based on his DNA profile, but the murderer claims to be a woman. How is that possible? We all know the answer. But what happens when the mob of trans-activists gathers in front of the courthouse and various sectors of the "scientific community" argue that the person on the witness stand is in reality a "woman." Why would "scientists" have an argument at all, if the science of biology is so clear on the facts? It's just that this whole thing is so preposterous it makes me giddy that the world is so uncertain of itself. Einstein was the first to prove it: the world is indeed a relativistic place. It is an anarchist's dream.
So if I go to the vet because I think that the CIA has implanted a mindreading microchip in my front paw, is the doctor mean and hurtful by not acknowledging my delusion and cutting my paw off?
" but when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis, it’s being deliberately cruel and hurtful"
No, it's not. Someone can possibly do it to be cruel and hurtful, but some people can simply disagree. Or some--I think most people--can want clarity and honest language. What does this person, who is not a biological woman, mean by saying they are a woman? How should we refer to biological men and women? When is actual biology relevant?
How many people are walking up to trans women and telling them they are not real women, just to be dicks? I don't care if you want to think of yourself as a woman, but I also don't believe thinking of yourself as a woman entitles you to full access to spaces created for biological woman, or means that you can compete with biological women in sports. I also don't believe that excluding you from women's sports, because you are a biological man even though you identify as a woman, is cruel or hurtful, at least not any more so than disregarding a biological woman's unique biological femininity.
"If it hurts someone else" usually only matters to people in certain circumstances--basically, when there is a violation of their personal boundaries. When it's them violating the boundaries of other people, then those people "need to get over it".
Not to mention that whoever is financing the Twitter acquisition (you can bet that Musk wasn't using his own money) was likely to have had some words with Musk about how this was making them nervous.
If so, then the pertinent question is Why? How tf did we, or anyone(!), get to this place where 'being insulted' (not to mention 'offended', ffs) is to be taken so seriously? If 'The Elites' are behind this whole culture war nonsense...WTF are they getting out of it? WHAT is being gained?
Theodore Dalrymple's take makes the most sense to me:
"Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to."
I'll qualify my endorsement of the quote slightly. To say it's "communist propaganda writ small" suggests that it's primarily a communist product. I'm not sure at all about that; a lot of players - not all of them communists - have an interest in controlling people, and an effective tool is an effective tool regardless of who is wielding it.
A lot of people scoff at the idea of spiritual warfare. I have no idea if you do or not, but I certainly take it seriously. To offer another quote, this time from Wendell Berry, "If the devil doesn't exist... how do you explain that some people are a lot worse than they're smart enough to be?”
That being said, I suspect that the diabolical puppet masters have the same goal they always have; i.e. the damnation of individual souls. I also suspect that their human puppets have imagined for themselves all sorts of mutually incompatible goals. Not being of demonic intelligence myself, I can only guess that the puppet masters find the resulting chaos a bonus.
Well...combine the facts that civilization (western/classical liberal) is very fragile, ethereal, really, and the human heart is basically evil, and you have the outcome - a very psychologically ugly segment of the population desiring evil to triumph over good. Evil celebrates power in a way that (human) good does not.
The eventual destination is Indonesia in the 1960s or Cambodia in the 1970s. That's not anyone's "goal", per se, and we have ample opportunity left to avoid it. However, if we allow the rich bastards to continue to rule with no input from the rest of us, we'll get there eventually. For more recent efforts, look at Libya, which formerly was the most prosperous nation on its continent.
Hey, listen to this from a Wikipedia humorist summarizing, in a glorious nub of dismissal, Teddy Dalrymple's opinion of anybody to the left of Reagan or Thatcher, cough, cough.
"...In his writing, Daniels [Dalrymple] frequently argues that the leftist views prevalent within Western intellectual circles minimise the responsibility of individuals for their own actions and undermine traditional mores, contributing to the formation within prosperous countries of an underclass afflicted by endemic violence, criminality, sexually transmitted diseases, welfare dependency, and drug abuse. Much of Dalrymple's writing is based on his experience of working with criminals and the mentally ill."
"Leftist views" as death rays from outer space, or sewer CHUDS making their way out of the nation's sewer pipes.
Too bad that right-wingers don't buy into global warming---they could write off the climate as just another "traditional more" done in by "leftist views."
Here's a thought. What if it's all about keeping everyone's eye off the real ball? The real ball being: economic growth of staggering proportions amongst the few at the very top, death of democracy, economic stagnation for the masses, increasing home/hopelessness, the shrinking of permissible thought, non-stop wars, increased likelihood of nuclear Armageddon, no real action on climate change and biodiversity loss, acceleration of technology takeover of everyday life, etc.
I see "political correctness" as a kind of ideological, one might even say theological contest for power and status. Many of those involved, either as perpetrators or victims, do not seem humiliated at all; they _believe_ in what they are doing. Contests for power are open to people of all classes, cultures, and ideologies -- even to radical egalitarians. ("All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.")
The population has been conditioned to be distracted and indoctrinated at the same time. Radio, TV, sports, movies, media, gadgets. Whatever the heart desires. Meanwhile, the agency of the individual is being limited and eventually even your thoughts will be controlled.
The globalist agenda is to have everyone controlled by 2030. The unknown is who will be at the top? Europe's elites, Russia, China?? It won't by the US because it has always been the target, mainly from within over the past 100 years.
It's part of an information war being waged against us by Marxists and by their unlikely bedfellows, the elites. They perceive freedom, the middle class, and Western Civilization in general, as obstacles to power. See: "Cultural Marxism". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6rk1mYiOAw&t=1384s
Odd...just rewatched Lindsays speech earlier today. We've ALL known this for years now. Decades even (Bush and the NWO, et al).. But, again...to what end? A few dozen Oligarchs rule the world? And?
Throw in a party of visiting Martians and thousands of periodic carnivorous underground dwellers and the screenplay pretty much writes itself from there.
Put a question like this out to an ideologically mixed-bag audience like Matt draws, and you'll get all sorts of answers, all probably too simplistic. Who gains from culture wars? You'll get answers that: It's the Oligarchs (meaning big business and financial interests); it's the Communists; it's the Marxists; it's the Russians; it's the Chinese; it's the Jews; it's the Deep State; it's the Democrats; it's the Republicans; etc., etc.
In general, culture wars, political wars, and their occasional kinetic war manifestations are all reflections of human nature. People feeling they don't or can't get a "fair shake" from producing things valued by others that they can trade for things valued by themselves, so they seek other means of obtaining what they consider their due. One common way is to take a side in a group in a societal conflict (a culture war).
People get an emotional satisfaction out of feeling that they are part of a group that they see exercising power (over others), and in many cases there may be some financial benefits (from small to very large) among members of groups that are able to exercise power.
I don't think there's a single monolithic group of "Elites" controlling culture wars for their benefit, but there are many people who can accumulate moderate to large amounts of power for themselves by deftly maneuvering in and through culture wars. Also, those who just want to live their lives following some passion--which includes engaging in commercial activities--still have to address the culture wars going on around them.
Breitbart was wrong when he said politics is downstream from culture. Culture is a product of invention. and intervention from those with power, be it financial, hereditary, military... They have a cult, a kinship that uses the weak-minded successfully. Their roadblock has always been the minds of those that know the Highest Power, and its not them.
I think it is about achieving ever greater power and control. Calling it communism or another rubric doesnt help. Power over others is an end in itself.
Aside form a large portion Tesla stock being put up as collateral, I was under the impression a large chunk of the guarantors were middle eastern, so it's hard to fathom them putting much pressure behind this move?
100% I said back when Musk purchased beware the silent partner(s) which I strongly suspect is DoD... they seem not be be able to account for $3 trillion... and counting. That buys a hella bouquet of influence.
You know you can answer you own questions through the use of one of the several search engines available on the World Wide Web. At no cost. They're real handy!
And If you're still in a wagering mood I'll take that bet on whether or not Musk is coughing up any of his moolah in his acquisition of twitter. The financial picture is a bit muddled, Musk being both a disingenuous cad and congenital liar.
I threw in a humorous piece for you from The Verge, link below, that has Musk in full Captain Hornblower mode as it relates to the subject of both his Tesla and Twitter "financing," which is also tangentially related to his securities fraud trial. Hard to keep up with the man.
He signed a contract he hadn't vetted on a lark, and then only followed through under duress. If TPTB really didn't want the Musk experience, they could have saved a lot of annoyance. Of course, we wouldn't have had The Twitter Files™, so I'm glad...
What surprised me was that the government allowed the transaction to go forward in the first place.
I figured that, at a minimum, Musk would get a Serious Talking To, along with the suggestion that he might not want to consummate this particular deal.
*Maybe* that Serious Talking To happened after New Twitter and The Twitter Files broke?
Fast forward less than 24 hours later, and Twitter’s executive responsible for that decision has resigned as a result of her differences with Musk over that decision. See below:
So yeah, Musk has not been “brought quickly around.” That was a knee-jerk take on a thread full of knee-jerk takes on an unusually knee-jerk-ish article for this site.
Musk has done some weird shit and is occasionally hypocritical about his “free-speech absolutism”—not denying that. But let’s also not assume he was made a creature of the machine overnight just because an executive’s department censored, Musk criticized it for censoring, and the executive resigned.
Okay. That’s what this article is about, so I assumed that was the basis of your comment. And “brought quickly around” makes it sound like he serving the Establishment right now, when clearly, based on the resignation of a second head of trust and safety, he is continuing to buck the Establishment, at least to some degree.
People who financed Musk's acquisition of Twitter and thus are owners and stockholders of Twitter took a look at the balance sheet and the precipitously declining ad revenue at Twitter-Elon and told Uncle Elon to cut the shit and start manufacturing some scratch...or else.
They don’t like to be shown their own shadow. Instead, they want to project it onto the rest of us and deny it exists by gaslighting us with terms like “conspiracy theory.”
Oh yeah, the cult is *very* upset by the censorship reporting of late. They’ve already decided that Matt (but not the other TF journalists I guess?) was just paid off by Musk to make it all up, and that’s the end of it.
Ignoring the massive, Titanic-sized pile of evidence in the room, of course.
If Musk ends up "forced" to censor, perhaps he could start censoring "pro-abortion content" under the umbrella concept of "hate speech" to make a point.
The left used to care because they were the targets of censorship. They may need to be reminded of why this matters to all of us.
If what laughably passes for the left today are creatures of the MICIMATT, they have nothing to worry about. The real left- anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, ever critical of corporate agendas and the inverted totalitarian corporate state, have already been silenced, except in the marginal media, which Matt’s presence in makes less marginal. Of course, one of the reasons for that may be that he has become a darling of the right, because the right is as politically illiterate as the Democrats are now. I don’t think Matt has changed at all since he was covering the GOP convention in 2008. It’s just that now the entire political class is entirely batshit crazy. If the right ever catches on to that, Matt will be tossed to the margins with Chomsky, Hedges, Nader et al, I fear. Having said that, the chance that any quasi- political grouping so utterly politically illiterate that it regards Biden and his ilk communists are unlikely to catch on to anything.
I always read Matt and other voices on the left that I respected, precisely because I don't want to live in a bubble. Im not alone, easily 20% of both political party supporters do this. It's the small percentage on either side that make all the noise and get all the attention.
You've made an excellent point here that I can't believe I hadn't thought of prior. Often people try to illustrate the dangers of censorship and point out that the pendulum swings both ways. Your thought here is an excellent way of giving that lesson more immediacy.
I know of at least one person on Twitter who dropped the "private businesses can do what they want" talking point re: what happened to Daily Wire. That same person, I suspect, was having a conniption back when Musk bought Twitter.
The PC Nanny-State diehards at Twitter will be just as bad if not more difficult to weed out than cleaning up our security agencies. They are dyed in the wool control-freak cultist and will not go gently into that good Twitter Feed…..
In reading this article, I kept thinking of how I was introduced to the work of Matt Walsh - by his appearances on Tucker Carlson's show. I wondered if the article would mention Tucker's proposed show on Twitter ... and it did. Really, how could Tucker host his new show on a Twitter like this?
Speaking of Tucker, I haven't heard anything from him in a while. I would have liked to have seen his segments on DeSantis's presidential announcement. It seems to me the Powers that Be have already won by keeping such an important voice silent. Every day we have shocking new news stories that Tucker would have been opining about.
He needs to at least get a Substack site and go back to writing ... But going on Substack would piss off Musk and Twitter.
Rumble is a great concept, but the tech is terrible (and I say this as someone who bought in the SPAC and still hold it). If they fixed the tech so it was user friendly, and the search, it would be unstoppable. The only thing stopping Rumble is Rumble (same with locals).
On Tucker I kept hearing he is a great writer. I tracked down some of his old work. From what I read, imo, he is an even better writer than he was tv host. I hope he writes again.
He's a fabulous writer. That's where he got started. It's clear he wrote all his own great monologues.
The more I think about this, I think it was vital that the Deep State kept him off the airwaves in this presidential cycle. I think the key to the operation for our rulers is getting "Joe Biden" re-elected. It's really all or nothing if they want to implement the rest of their programs (Green New Deal, central bank digital currency, social ID and investsting, some more mRNA vaccines, The W.H.O Health Treaty, even more censorship and more election fraud, etc).
Tucker threatened all of this. But he's not pushing back every night now is he? So far ... mission accomplished.
One reason I love Matt is he still writes. Matt on politics and related is the equivalent of what Bill Simmons used to be on sports. Then Simmons stopped writing and went almost exclusively to podcasts.
Article in Britain’s Daily Mail yesterday about Tucker. Fox News went to Maine and ripped out Tucker’s studio-walls and all. Tucker had intended to be up and running his Twitter show by now but he’s has to repair/reconstruct his studio. Photos of him and workmen getting it done.
Tucker’s show was one of two I watched. Seriously miss him. But I don’t see his abilities finding full expression in writing. He is much too engaging in speaking to his audience to limit himself to the pen.
I have had enough of these endless bull-shit responses, whether it is the FBI or Twitter, where the individuals who make these alleged “mistakes” never get identified or punished. As I Tweeted to you yesterday, Musk’s Twitter has shadowbanned you in a very aggressive fashion and the Woke satisfying “mistakes” keep piling up. When Elon corrects these “mistakes” and identifies (and terminates) the individuals responsible, then I will believe he is not taking the knee.
Did she get canned or did she resigned? I believe the last report I read, she resigned. And I'm still not clear if she resigned because she wanted to censor or if she resigned to protest the censorship.
She may have resigned. If she did, it’s probably because she wanted to censor as is her self-perceived divine right. But that’s pure speculation based on the fact the petty-tyrants think they’re doing The Lord’s work.
How is this not discrimination? Are they denying that biological women exist? This attack on nature, reality and women is "hateful," not questioning the new religious rhetoric. Musk better allow this. If questioning the new Inquisition is hateful, democracy is in serious danger. We have a new moral police. I'm a heretic, and will continue to question this new religion.
I support Matt's skepticism of efforts to de-platform the enemies of the woke, but I am always caught a little off guard when Matt goes to bat for reactionary cockroaches like Matt Walsh.
Defend the guy's right to free speech, Matt, but remember the team he is playing for.
In a general sense I agree with him on this issue, though. Not in any policy sense, but I think a lot of the current controversy is a forced conflation of sex and gender, and the censorship is designed to prevent clarification of this point.
This, along with certain gender ideologists declaring that anyone ranging from gender non-conforming individuals to men with feminine personality traits to women with masculine personality traits are "transgender."
Taking a word and saying it means "whatever I want it to mean" is something ideologists love to do.
It’s rude to impose your internal world with compelled participation in delusion. He virtue signaled validating dissociative disorders and public participation in sexual fetishes, which is exactly how we got here.
Men aren’t the sex class that’s being erased, no skin of his back, or any other man. I can’t hold down a regular job because I’ll have a panic attack at being forced to play along. Why? Because of the nature of all the disorders attached to trans identities, because it’s narcissistic abuse, enforced by society and the federal government. In California this will be law.
Do you know anyone who is trans? Your comment indicates you are not familiar with, or perhaps are not interested in others’ feelings. No one is trying to force anything on anyone. No trans person is telling you or anyone else what to call yourself. Try to extend the same courtesy.
You can’t hold a job because…why exactly? There might be a trans person there with whom you would be expected to cordially interact? The horror!
I’m a Trans Widow, which means I’m intimately familiar with the fetishism, narcissism and autism at the heart of Trans Identities. My husband was inspired by the heroism that Glenn Greenwald created for Bradley Manning, he decided he wanted a bit of that “stunning and brave” validation for himself. I’ve had to become an amateur expert, for 8 years now.
You’re describing DARVO tactics. Yes, the entire Trans Movement centers on compelled participation and violation of womens boundaries. Cis, uterus haver, front hole haver, birthing person, are all imposed renaming of an entire sex class against its will, by the class that’s historically and globally oppressed it.
I’ve found that other people with autism, Narcissistic personality Disorder and Bipolar Personality disorder can’t see the type of abuse or logical fallacies affiliated with their disorders. It’s invisible to other autistic narcs. Is that you?
The "Do you know anyone who is trans?" rhetorical question is not a good play.
A large number of us have, and we see what you have in your experience with your (ex?) husband.
But even for those who haven't, so-called "trans activists" have spread their assorted messages around enough that most people can begin to form reasonable opinions.
Yes and no. Women adopt trans identities for different reasons than men. Women are escaping the oppressive pornified expectations of the way womanhood is marketed to them.
The exploitation of their bodies is normalized at a young age, porn is now an influence at the elementary school level. Women are cutting off their breasts and dressing like men the way some prey animals disguise themselves as predators. They’re escaping patriarchal exploitation and violence.
In my experience many trans identified women have a lot of internalized misogyny that extends to other women. This is their survival strategy. Disguise themselves in camouflage and direct attention towards other women.
Many are lesbians escaping Lesbophobia, my daughter briefly socially transitioned after LGBT camp, which ironically taught her that it’s bad to be a lesbian. I always taught her self acceptance, so it didn’t stick, she desisted and is now happily married.
Do they trigger the same type of fear and anxiety men do? No. Am I triggered by having to participate in that lie that’s been repeated in every direction for several years? Yes. Does their internalized misogyny impact and upset me? Yes.
The context of the motivation is key. Men adopt trans identities to violate and control, Women do it to escape and blend in. Both are triggering for different reasons. One out of threat, the other empathy.
Non sequiturs is the best you got? I'm an "autistic narc?" I would ask why people with weak arguments always seem to resort to name-calling, but that's kind of self-evident here. And to keep from confusing people, remember that to the vast, vast, vast majority of the population, "narc" is either a cop or a squealer, not a narcissist.
So according to you, any person who identifies as trans ("...the entire Trans Movement...") is fetishistic, narcissistic, and autistic? Please feel free to share your global generalizations about all nonprivileged groups. Tell us the characteristics all Jews share, or that all African-Americans share, or all women, or all Native Americans, name the group.
"Compelled participation?" Who is compelling you to begin identifying as a different gender? Who? Who is driving this omnipresent force compelling our participation? And participation in what? I identify as a man, and no one has suggested, much less compelled, anything else.
If there is a discussion to be had about trans topics, like that of swimmer Lea Thomas (referenced in another comment rather clumsily), let's have the discussion. But can we just please stop the incessant "trans taking over the country" nonsense? Straight, white men still run things, and this is not in danger.
"Straight, white men still run things" -- ironically that's precisely the discussion being had about Lea Thomas. They're running so many things that they're now breaking into new areas they never even had access to before.
You are being played. When someone really, really cares about another individual they do not lie to them. They do not use deceit to pacify them. They are honest with them. It is eternally hurtful when one cares more about “feelings” than the salvation of another soul.
What planet are you on? We’re experiencing very different realities…
No one is trying to force anything on anyone except the absurdity of injecting confused men into women’s spaces whether that’s athletics or prisons.
The term cis is being forced on all people who aren’t revolting against their immutable biological reality.
Will Thomas won the women’s NCAA Championship. That’s not victimless, he has a dick in his lady’s swimwear. It’s absurd.
To top it off, the inflammatory rhetoric used by trans activists and progressive politicians imo led to the violent death of 6 people in my town of Nashville.
I didn't say anyone is trying to force anything, The Woman In Purple did.
But after your report of the worldwide forced use of "cis," I just checked with some acquaintances and relatives; none have been forced to use the term "cis." Different social circles, I guess.
And if inflammatory rhetoric is to be avoided for the sake of public safety, keep your "dick in his lady's swimwear" childishness to yourself.
I also agree with him, in a *general* sense, insofar as I think that trans-activists have exceeded their brief. I also agree that the wholesale attempt to divorce gender from sex is incoherent and Orwellian.
Nevertheless, I hope you will reserve your outspoken sympathies for people like Kathleen Stock or even JK Rowling, and not forget that Walsh is in the camp of Gavin McInnes and Dennis Prager, and everything that comes with that.
(BTW, when are we going to see the return of that famous Taibbi levity? Did Thomas Friedman stop writing columns? :)
Have you been reading Matt’s columns or are you just here to throw dirt? Even in the current column under discussion levity abounds. I especially enjoyed this line:
“a sarcastic “mockumentary” that gently tinkles in the face of transgender orthodoxies”
Can you actually state specifically what your problem with Walsh is, rather than these vague generalities (such as the "camp" he belongs to)? It's fine to disgree with someone (there's certainly plenty I disagree with Walsh on), but if you're going to elevate someone to persona non grata status, then I think you have some obligation to justify it.
Kathleen Stock has acted as a TRA within a feminist movement, to preserve her reputation at other womens expense. She used AGPs as human shields from transphobia, and treated those affected the narcissistic abuse of AGPs as the bigots.
Please take note of her affiliation with Larry Summers. She’s also participated in undermining and maligning American feminists. Leave the British neo liberal establishment out of this.
I've been dealing with the ramifications of her inconsistent, classist and self interested attempts at using Autogynephiles as human shields, to give the impression that she isn't transphobic, for her own professional preservation, and future income, since 2016. Despite knowing what the comorbidities of autogynephilia were, she promoted these fetishistic men to speak on our behalf. She and the other "Head Girls or "Professional Feminists" created a classist caste system in which their professional reputations were more important that representing the actual victims of Gender Theory. They, the professional feminists, became the victims for commenting on victims.
From MY perspective, she's a classist coward that inflicted her self interested narcissim on a movement she pretended to represent. An academic that sold gender theory until it bit her in the ass.
Isn't a "TRA" a "trans rights activist"? I don't see how that would apply to Stock.
I'm not sure what all this "human shield" jive means. All I know about her is that she is skeptical about extending the rights of actual women to include men who only live as women. The only thing I see having "bit her in the ass" was her assumption that academia would stay above the fray instead of turning into an expensive PC boot camps for booshy white piss pots.
By the way, this bit of truth-massaging in the article you linked says it all about where you are coming from:
"The list of names Weiss says are associated with the (so far notional and unaccredited) venture include ...Kathleen Stock, who just resigned from her position at the University of Sussex because of peaceful protests against her views on trans people."
She simply "resigned"? After a "peaceful protest"? I guess to the guy who wrote this article, "peaceful" means anything short of having a brick thrown through your window. Kathleen Stock was subjected to a severe pressure campaign from a whinging academic mafia who apparently feel that in 2023 you should be cheered for dragging a feminist lesbian through the mud if she can't be successfully programmed to ignore a transvestite's Adam's Apple.
"Current controversy is a forced conflation of sex and gender?" More accurately: right-wing propaganda as fungal growth:
Under favorable political conditions, propaganda memes germinate and gather momentum. During this process, the memes absorb adherents across all media channels, the controversy becomes activated, social division takes place, and more controversy is synthesized. The media channels initially grow into separate spherical structures, but are eventually flattened across all platforms.
"Under favourable environmental conditions, fungal spores germinate and form hyphae. During this process, the spore absorbs water through its wall, the cytoplasm becomes activated, nuclear division takes place, and more cytoplasm is synthesized. The wall initially grows as a spherical structure."
I think calling Matt Walsh a coackroach is “reactionary” and warning Taibbi about whose team he is on is honestly none of your business. Taibbi can choose his own team, or no team at all. Choosing teams is what had gotten us all into this mess.
How original...an ominous “remember what team he’s playing for” What team would that be exactly? One that knows the difference between male and female and recognizes that one’s purported “gender identity” is no more real than your junkie cousin all tweaked out and claiming to be a “spell caster” at Thanksgiving again.
In the camp of "nobody should be forced to accept fringe unprovable belief systems", it's a little frustrating to see a reactionary Catholic at the head. If you watch some of his other work, Walsh was clearly putting forth effort to keep this documentary consumable by skeptics.
In a perfect world, these things would be lead by ideological skeptics.
I am here to ask that no person be talked about in a dehumanizing way. Walsh is a human not an insect. Dehumanizing people leads to nothing good or true or enlightening.
Mmm.., no. I think YOU should worry about who YOU think is worthy of being compared to a scurrying, filthy invertebrate and let other people hold their own opinions.
I think Twitter is just done, that's it. "Free speech" whatever was a marketing ploy but Musk but he clearly doesn't believe in it with any conviction.
I really hope Substack notes continues to grow. I post there all the time, it's a lot more fun than Twitter. There are no advertisements and as of yet, no spam. Comments are all real and it feels way healthier than Twitter.
Whether Substack notes stays awesome forever, who knows, but I'm enjoying the golden age for now.
Yes, I think so. Nowhere near the number of Twitter users, of course, but the audience is definitely expanding. It feels way healthier than Twitter. Real discussion, it's nice
Well that’s good to hear. I would happily use it if it more could approach even a fraction of Twitter’s marketing power, though I’m not getting much of that lately anyway
The notion that one must market content on social media is what started the collapse of the Web as a free communication system and turned it into a monitoring and control mechanism that it is right now. Time to figure out a new paradigm.
Yeah unfortunately from the marketing perspective, notes is mostly composed of other writers. At this point it's better for having conversations than promoting work.
I gave up on promoting my Substack on Twitter too. With the link throttling it hardly seems worth the effort
The folks you see in there I always see talking about all sorts of stuff. In fact, I made a Note just for you and tagged you in it. There's a couple conversation that I can't quite remember where they happened, so hopefully my friends (subfriends? lol) will help.
I recently unsubscribed because it’s not in my interest to pay money to the man that’s erasing the crimes against me. If you’re willing to hide the crimes against an entire global sex class, what else will you lie and deceive about? Nothing. You’re another manifestation of controlled dissent. So are your colleagues, why would you be any different?
As long as users have some control over what they want to see, that can help minimize that issue.
For example, I still keep my main Twitter timeline to "following" rather than "for you" or I look at my lists. That alone improves the Twitter experience, even if it's not a solution to the issues Matt described.
Do not like notes as it clogs up my data useage. Also I should be able to decide what I want to read on notes. Not have effing hundreds of posts coming into my Substack account.Cannot seem to delete. Have never! used twit.
All of this is very simple. People need to stop using Twitter and other formats that infringe upon thier rights and support only those formats that support the Bill of Rights.
No. F that. Thats akin to the 'if u dont like public school, go private' angle. Its bullshit. The Public deserves, and demands, that very Bill of Rights is extended and upheld in matters of public discourse.
I get what your sayin’, and on Twitter I want to agree, but there is a reason I send my own kids to private school (and vote for everyone to have universal school choice)...... sometimes you have to build up something new because the far left destroyed what was there.
I agree with your sentiment, but public schools are publicly funded entities. When it comes to corporations who impose their ideologies onto the masses, this is the time to “vote with our feet,” so to speak. No one will hear the demands of the public if the cash is still coming in. We have to opt out of this BS, which will serve as a lesson for other companies.
i agree. Centrists & right wingers do not take politics to heart like the left, who treat politics like its jesus. So we continue to patronize & monetize the people that seek to destroy us.
Tens of thousands of people have been banned by the transsexual police force on Twitter since Elon took over. Myself being one of those people. This is no surprise at all. The pronoun brigade and alphabet mafia still runs the show. Freedom of speech on Twitter is an illusion.
I paid to watch What Is A Woman. I am a libertarian.. Matt Walsh was brilliant. I would have a hard time not punching that smug so called "professor" in the face..a more smug pompous ass would be difficult to find and the interview with the "trans man" could bring you to tears..well done. Twitter would have me watching it again.. but. well it is Twitter after all
Translation from Newspeak:
Hateful conduct: that which contradicts the Official State Narrative or wounds the feelings of a member of a Protected Victim Group™.
“When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master — that’s all.”
Lewis Carroll is smiling from the hereafter.
I have posted that exact scene to countless comment boards in recent years. And I told my still-BFF, back when we were in our 20s (40-ish years ago) that the destruction of society begins with the debasement of language, and it had begun.
We see the fruits, now, and they are unwholesome in extreme.
Excellent -- the perfect reference 👍
thanks!
Just a simple question, though. Is trying to win an irrelevant argument worth causing hurt to people? There are plenty of offense-seekers, but when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis, it’s being deliberately cruel and hurtful. And why would a decent person do that? Call it hateful, or mean, or whatever, if it hurts someone else, just fucking stop it.
"an irrelevant argument": what may be irrelevant to you or me may be crucial for other people, most especially someone whose child has just announced they may have been born in the wrong body.
"she still has a penis" lol Res ipsa loquitur. I also would never want to be deliberately cruel and hurtful to anyone, and would never feel the need to do so IRL, but I also just cannot assent to an obvious untruth no matter how many feelings are wounded (but that's just me).
People getting to say ugly hateful hurtful mean stupid etc things is simply the price of freedom (free speech and expression) in a free society, and i'm not sure a society whose new first commandment is "Thou shalt not offend" is a society any of us would want to live in.
Dissembling snowflake. You.
Sure, freedom means people get to say all kinds of shit. I’m suggesting that we can occasionally—or more than occasionally—choose not to.
Who is suggesting “Thou shalt not offend?” I’m suggesting “Thou must not always (or ever) be a deliberate asshole.”
Who is suggesting “Thou shalt not offend?”
hmmm, forgive me if your comment (and the basis of this post, censoring a film) suggested that to me...
Once again, it all comes down to perspective.
One side says: "These are just vulnerable people who want to live in peace like anyone else. We should make gender self-identification the only qualification and treat these people in no ways different from other members of their self-declared group."
The other side says: "Our educational, medical and cultural institutions have all been captured by a political ideology that says the mammalian sex binary is an oppressive construct that needs to be dismantled. And this has led to absurdities like the inability to define 'Woman' and a campaign to make this standard pedagogy that cannot be debated."
I see both sides. I have no interest in the Walsh doc, it just seems like trolling to me, but I also believe he should be able to air it and people should be able to watch it if they wish.
There is another side. It's called the truth. Teachers and Professors are getting fired because they refuse to use gender pronouns that do not match a person's sex. They are being asked to lie. That is one problem. The other problem is allowing and perpetuating another person living out a lie. That is the most deceitful thing one person can do to another. Jump back several decades to when the medical profession would treat the very rare gender dysphoria person, not with hormones and surgeries but with mental, and emotional care. For me personally, saving souls is the far greater enduring kindness then bolstering a troubled sinner’s wrongful view of themselves.
It's much worse than using "pronouns." The cult attacks womanhood and parents, while there's no corresponding attack on maleness. There are plenty of us old school feminists around and we have no illusions about the intent of this cult, in spite of decades of attacks against "feminists" and being told there's no need to worry about our rights. We always keep a military as we don't take our national safety for granted. We understand human nature. But for those who are able to ignore cognitive dissonance, the rules magically change when it comes to females.
I had zero interest in the Walsh doc until this recent kerfuffle. Now I'm thinking about watching it. Not right now but maybe later. Eventually I'm going to want to see if it's all innocent and bland and inoffensive as Walsh's defenders suggests, or an evil film advocating oppression and filled with lies.
Like anyone else, you may "see both sides" in this matter, but the "other side" is correct, is Right, and that "campaign" is a threat to free thought and speech . . . to the very concept of truth. It's so Postmodern!
Like it or not, necromorphs have been yoked to the neo-Marxist agenda that seeks to destroy Western civilization in the name of the "liberation of the culturally marginalized." Pity the poor, confused person who just wanted to be left alone to pursue his own fantasies. He's been dragged into a fight by those who claim to be his liberator.
And any person on any color can say the same thing. The real white supremacy comes from the liberal left in their need to virtue signal. I'm hoping they start a trend where they self immolate against their own whiteness, inability to educate every other white person of their values, and just burn themselves. I hear three phase power works too.
The entire "trans" agenda is to be deliberate a$$h0les, especially targeting women. I and every other female I know have never bothered dudes in drag, yet all I see are endless attacks on womanhood. I say ladies, arm yourselves.
Some people will, of course, be deliberate assholes. Others with conflate perfectly reasonable behavior, and the enforcement of perfectly healthy boundaries, with "being a deliberate asshole". So specificity about was the undesirable behavior is, specifically, is probably for the best.
When a man tells me I must play along with the delusion that he's a woman or face severe consequences, I no longer care whether or not that person has their feelings hurt. My freedom to think as I wish is my only concern.
Tough guy...or woman. Your immediate concern should be just "thinking"---tackle the "freedom" part later when you get the "thinking" part down. It's not easy, let me tell you.
Of course. Anyone who reaches a different conclusion than you must not be thinking. Let me guess, you also think anyone who disagrees with you is a "fascist" too. Typical left authoritarian.
It's a typical comment from the mineral impersonator: annoying, high-handed snark.
The assumed persona of the All-Knowing gadfly.
That's obviously true in your case.
“when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis” that person is telling THEIR truth. That it is impossible for a man to become a woman - especially those following the teaching of religion and science.
There’s that darn chromosome that trips them up ...every time.
Being forced to buy into these peep’s delusion is crazy - the sick peeps pretending to be something they are not are the ones being hurtful and rude.
This cat I am holding is actually a dinosaur. If you call it a cat instead of a dinosaur, you are rude, insensitive, hurtful...ect.
Truth is not subject to personal ownership. What is true is true universally. One is either born with X chromosomes (woman) or XY chromosomes (man). This is true, despite some extremely rare exceptions due to damage/mutation.
One's so-called "personal truth" is a stupid way of saying "belief."
I'm entirely willing to entertain complicating conversations about gender and what people should be allowed to call themselves, assert about themselves, or do in regards to expressing their personal truth.
It's when we can no longer have those conversations, because they are somehow offensive, that I start to think the complicating conversation of radicalism has gone too far.
Biology is a real thing. Sex is not assigned to you at birth. You want to talk about how you feel you are a she and not a he, your genitalia aside? Fine. You want to tell me "the system" assigned you your genitalia at birth? Then you're delusional, and you're not helping yourself or anybody else.
That's very reasonable and charitable. I'm afraid that the years-long campaign to muddy the waters around sex, the strident rhetoric, the preposterous claims, and the calls for censorship of anyone daring to refute these claims have evaporated any good will I might have had in the past when listening to the so-called "trans-gender issue."
Which I understand. I try to exercise tolerance for the tolerant and remain open to actual progressive (rather than regressive) discussions about topics where there is a desire for actual dialog. Usually there isn’t, alas.
Also I’m very tolerant of people living their lives, whatever odd or offbeat or fetishized way they wish, so long as they aren’t demanding I structure my life around their fetishes. Live and let live, that’s my motto.
Which means if biological women want their own sports league, they can have one. And so forth.
“ One is either born with X chromosomes (woman) or XY chromosomes (man). This is true, despite some extremely rare exceptions due to damage/mutation.”
THE CRUX OF THE MATTER. The SCIENCE. Which so- called trans peeps pretend not to believe even know about.
Say that in a group of delusional peeps and watch how those mild mannered “women “ attack you for stating the scientific truth.
...Sayeth the citizen with the epicene christian name...
I believe it's a simple matter of just minding your own fucking business. Live and let live. It's really not that difficult. It does require a bit of practice, some repetition. Did mommy and daddy omit this from life's early lessons?
Women did live and let live until our sports were taken over, our private spaces invaded and our jails infiltrated by convicted rapists. The misogyny of this movement is breathtaking. Women are expected to give up our safety to cater to this insanity. No more.
It's not a movement and sports are not being taken over private spaces are not being invaded jails are not being infiltrated by convicted rapists. Get a grip. Join the real world. There's much more breathable oxygen in the real world.
You get your fantasy and we'll keep reality.
I think people can be forgiven for seeing it as a movement. That said, there are multiple examples of every other assertion Laura made, in the real world. To characterize such things as dominant is likely not accurate. There are, I expect, far more women's prisons with no transwomen rapists in them that otherwise, just as there are plenty of woman-on-woman sports competitions conducted without a single transwoman involved.
But such things have happened, and pretending they have not does not really address the complaint. In fact, it would tend to suggest that it will be yet another case of "that just isn't happening . . . and it's good that it's happening" form of argument that tends to accompany most efforts at cultural shift.
That said, the vast majority of people have nothing to worry about when it comes to men-who-feel-they-are-women invading their spaces or violating them in some way. It's not really a particularly pressing real life argument--but clearly, there are plenty of people on both sides of the argument that want it to be litigated.
So if I have to have an opinion, it's going to be that biological men and women should be understood to be such, that separate spaces of biological women are entirely legitimate and should be protected, and that prisons and medical care should be managed based on biological sex rather than preferred identification.
Are you on drugs?
"Minding your own fucking business." Until you have something original and worth quoting, Feldspar, it's really not bad advice. That, and staying on your meds.
I wasn't aware that we were competing for Bartlett's entries. I'll do better next time. Promise.
If only these deranged men and their deranged handmaidens would just "mind their own flocking business." But you're incapable and want to mind the business of females, children and parents. Call yourself whatever you want, wear whatever you want, get whatever surgery you can afford. I don't care. Leave the rest of us out of it and stop attacking women and children because you have a mental health problem.
I tend not to refer to myself at all---that's a habit best left to crazy people. For what it's worth, I'm a straight male white boy currently wearing a filthy pair of Carrhart work shorts and an equally filthy t-shirt. I don't like it but at the moment I'm too tired and lazy to shower and change into something else. That and the bulk of my chiffon pastel evening dresses are still in winter storage.
I wanted to run this by you earlier but you were engaged in your side-hustle of LQBTQ-bothering from afar, at no cost, which is big of you. And I also want to update you on my health--I've got a date with the surgeon at the end of the month! Eerily prescient of you. Finally having the bunion on my left foot corrected. Crutches for 6 weeks. Try and tell me that don't blow. And I can afford it, too, against the odds that were posted on the board when the new year broke. I'm not flush, but neither am I begging in the streets. Thank you for the kind inquiry. Most thoughtful.
And...I find it interesting (and helpfully explanatory) that you're an acolyte and follower of the mouth-breathing troglodyte-unicorn, Chris Rufo. I just checked up on him earlier today, on YouTube, to gauge the Warp and woof of Rufo's most recent lectures and sermons. He's one of my favorite right-wing propagandists to track. Love both his pitch and delivery. What an unremitting asshole that guy is.
But as along as we're exploring the subject of gender bending, here's something you might be able to help me with. Why is it that so many prominent male personalities of the right-wing grifter class dress like members of a Community College glee club? Here I'm thinking of Rufo, Walsh, Lindsay---and of course the choir master himself, "Dr." Jordan Peterson, with his weird combinations of off-the rack Men's Warehouse steam punk suits and the occasional shiny sharkskin number, a bad idea for any man even if he's living under a bridge. Any ideas? Just the usual right-wing bad taste? We'll leave it at that.
Coincidentally---and I think you'll enjoy this---Palace Hermaphrodite Matt Walsh took a sartorial beating on Twitter today when he was "outed" (really couldn't miss it, the boy was asking for it) for wearing what was clearly a sport jacket with a traditional "feminine" cut above the waist, designed to flatter, at least conceal, a woman's hips. A "waistcoat" in the vernacular. With a fucking T-shirt! For hip-less, girly-man Walsh it was probably a gambit to make himself look less troll-like to the papparazzi and building security during the world premier of his new home movie. So I give the guy a pass here---he has larger problems with what folks see when he enters a room---primarily that he has brown hair and a black beard.
Our "man" Walsh completed the ensemble with tan shoes (jesus christ) and "pressed" jeans (jesus christ again). The Applebee's greeter look. This is something I've always found troubling. Men who iron their fucking jeans. I'm sorry, forgive me, but that's strictly Nancy territory as far as I'm concerned. Walsh never made it to college so methinks the entire get-up is overcompensating a bit, an attempt to give the impression that he's either on his way to, or on his way back from, the Princeton Club. Poor kid.
Yes, poor Walsh. I stand up for the LQBTQ crowd because it's obviously the right thing to do and also a morally civil response to the bullying that's issued forth by pussies like you, Rufo and Walsh and the rest of the dickhead playground bullies. Smirking Punks that only know how to punch down. It's also yet another phony, trumped-up propaganda meme created and curated by the usual Goebbelian Bullshit Outlets, similar to the boutique shop hosted by your boy Rufo (and whatever else Rufo is, he's most certainly a "boy"). He got fat on himself with his big CRT grift, and now, unsurprisingly, here we are with Matty "waistcoat" Walsh shrieking over the doings of another already marginalized cohort. What a bunch of fucking lightweight, candy-ass snowflakes you boys are.
You do realize this is Nazi shit, don't you, kmick? Take a moment and climb aboard Twitter and take a look at a Walsh thread, and substitute "jew" for "trans." Bullying and scapegoating marginalized populations was integral to the Nazi program. See you around on the threads, cowboy.
the A portion of my defense of defe
You have way too much time on your hands, btw, imbecile, that movie's been out for a over a year. You are the reason most sane people hate. Almost like a tv character. Neuman.
Because necromorphs have been folded into yet another movement of "liberation" by the neo-Marxist left, minding one's own business on this issue is no longer an option.
I was happily minding my own business until it became a crime in some places to call a man a man and a woman a woman, until people began claiming publicly and vociferously that men can give birth and breast-feed newborns with their own tits.
Some of us are uncomfortable living amid a smog of lies and political horseshit intended to make a delusion real by legislation, decree, and social pressure.
If you speak of necromorph liberation you by default speak of the arrival of the long-awaited neo-marxist "dead space," whereby necromorphs are liberated and labor, once chained, is now set free, roaming the country side, foaming at the mouth, seizing the means of production and then refusing to have anything to do with the junk, throwing it instead into nearby rivers and streams and such, organizing labor unions, then quickly leaving town before things get too "hot" with the Teamsters, running the odd capitalist under the guillotine, in brief, making general pains in the asses of themselves just as Marx forecast.
Remember: every individual cell of a necromorph is a viral pathogen in itself.
Give Indiana a look. You won't have any trouble there.
“ It does require a bit of practice…”
You practice calling a cat a dinosaur, and see how long it takes for you to realize it is scientifically impossible.
Minding your own business gives one the freedom to say anything. It is the “trans police” that get their panties in a wad and fire peeps for stating the truth.
And you're a volunteer hall monitor in the trans world?
1. The teachings of science and medicine universally agree that trans people are real, that dysmorphia is a genuine condition for which treatment exist. I don't think there is even one medical or psychological consortium that doesn't largely proscribe transitioning as long-term treatment for persistent gender dysmorphia. Now I don't have kids and am no expert on these issues, but really who (but another trans person) in this thread would be? I'm OK deferring to the people whose job it is to know the right things to do about this stuff. Is anyone arguing that every single member of the AMA, the Endocrine Society, the American Association of Mental Health Professionals, etc. has been coopted by radical transactivists into recommending medicinally unhelpful mistreatment of patients? That's a fast track to malpractice, poverty and possibly jail.
2. I'm sort of happy that you're fiercely loyal to calling things as they are, not as any party might wish them to be. I hope that your conviction encompasses the grotesque body mutilation that has been visited up children for decades now, called elective cosmetic surgeries, (in addition to the trans-related interventions you object to). After all--the cosmetic surgery industry represents over 230 billion dollars a year (which makes even the projected increases in trans surgical intervention over the next decade, possibly as high as 20 million dollars annually, a mere pittance). And while every single medical board and standards agency all agree that transitioning has some curative value, no one but plastic surgeons believes the same thing about cosmetic surgeries that are routinely--ROUTINELY!--performed on (mostly) girls and boys who are not yet teenagers. One of the most common surgeries? Rhinoplasty and....breast augmentations. Let that sink in. That's right... more ten year old girls will receive breast augmentations in one year than the entire number of <17 year old boys and girls will receive any sort of trans-related surgical intervention in five years. Ten year old girls. Getting breast enlargements. Talk about grooming.... Anyway, I'm sure you're as outraged about that, otherwise you'd look rather like a hypocrite.
3. Many people in this thread are so aggrieved over being asked to call someone by a pronoun or a proper noun that they believe doesn't tell the genetic truth of the person's identity. But what if I told you we've been doing this within human society for as long as we've had the institution of marriage? I mean, do you simply accept the new surname that a coworker wants you to use for her, when she returns from her honeymoon? Or do you give her a stern lecture about no matter how hard she wants to pretend she's now Ms. Johnson, it's empirically true that she is now and will always remain genetically a Ms. Robins? I'm just suggesting you exercise a modicum of the same kind of acceptance for trans people. That's all.
4. My favorite cat in all of history is F. Smiledon. That's the sabertooth tiger, a member of America's now-extinct megafauna that while not technically part of the Triassic epoch, is still routinely lumped into the group of infamous mega predators that common parlance will sometimes refer to as dinosaurs. And if you called that kitty a dinosaur I doubt it would care one way or the other. I know I wouldn't.
Uh, Joel--a big ol' no. Double ixnay on the kiddie cosmetic surgery hooey. In 2021, Americans spent a total of $14.6 billion on ALL cosmetic surgeries for all age groups. From what stagnant pond did you fish out the $230 billion figure? That figure nearly approximates the annual defense budget of China.
I pulled your paragraph (below) that consists of several different flavors, mostly sour, of nonsense. Do you have any documents, statistics, or news stories generated by reputable media, governmental agencies, NGOs, or studies in the medical literature that can speak to your assertions?
Maybe even some off-hand anecdotal material, say, a few 14-year old girls who are on record saying if they had it to do it all over again they'd be more patient and wait for the big tits until they turned 16? Anything at all that might buttress this nonsense that you have so charmingly shared with the group? Anything?
I've attached a link to the American Academy of Pediatrics site that might (or might not) be helpful. Or helpfully illuminating.
Curious as to who or what you're representing here. You definitely have the hyperbolic ghoul-speak perfected by right-wing fairy-tale merchants over the past few years down to spec: ..."the grotesque body mutilation that has been visited up children for decades now..."
"And while every single medical board and standards agency all agree that transitioning has some curative value, no one but plastic surgeons believes the same thing about cosmetic surgeries that are routinely--ROUTINELY!--performed on (mostly) girls and boys who are not yet teenagers. One of the most common surgeries? Rhinoplasty and....breast augmentations. Let that sink in."
"...That's right... more ten year old girls will receive breast augmentations in one year than the entire number of <17 year old boys and girls will receive any sort of trans-related surgical intervention in five years. Ten year old girls. Getting breast enlargements. Talk about grooming.... Anyway, I'm sure you're as outraged about that, otherwise you'd look rather like a hypocrite."
https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/gradeschool/puberty/Pages/Cosmetic-Surgery-in-Teens-Information-for-Parents.aspx#:~:text=There%20are%20no%20specific%20laws,children%20make%20the%20right%20decision.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281357/total-us-expenditure-on-surgical-and-nonsurgical-cosmetic-procedures/
Feldspar, you know what? You're correct. My 230 billion dollar number was way off. I apologize. To clarify, I was quoting a figure that represented the estimated industry revenue growth over a ten year period. I keep a DRAFT email with snippets and excerpts that I refer to from time to time, which is where I mistakenly pulled my figure from. I apologize and I appreciate your fact-based correction. However, I would still assert that 14 billion dollars still eclipses the total value for the trans medical industry by orders of magnitude. My point was damaged by my own sloppy mistake, but I wouldn't say it is rendered incorrect. Do you disagree?
The second portion of my comment that you took issue with has to do with the vast difference between minors receiving breast augmentations versus any sort of trans-related surgical intervention. As far as I can tell, my point remains correct.
We have data suggesting that approximately 4,500 teenagers will get breast augmentation for any given year; meanwhile, despite there being no standardized database tracking numbers of trans surgeries for minors, we have a couple of different tracking entities and all point to the numbers of surgeries for trans kids (while certainly increasing by as much as 13 fold in the last two years) still being less than 300 cases per year.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11392117/Trans-child-surgery-risen-13-TIMES-decade-hospitals.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3706052/#:~:text=Nearly%20320%2C000%20breast%20augmentations%20were,%2C%2011%E2%80%9318%20years).
To recap: your critique of my comment, which contained 4 distinct arguments, correctly identified one error within one of those 4 points. Does that mean that you agree with the rest--really, the vast majority--of my comment?
Thanks again for the fact check, btw. I really do appreciate it.
You're both a couple of obviously educated mental retards. I mean you're both fucking nuttier than fruitcakes. Wtf? You ought to be writing political speeches for the retards that run for office. Fuck. You'd both be fun to punch.
Wokey-dokey.
Do not abuse cats!
"An irrelevant argument" is hardly how the trans-philes see it. Your plea for civility rings hollow when the other side sees the loss of livelihood as fair game for adhering to conscience.
+1 for transphiles. I’m not a transphobe, I don’t hate anyone beyond central bankers and war hawks. It’s perfectly reasonable to object to men in women’s sports and women’s prisons. To act baffled as to why people would object or say it’s mean as Jeffrey is arguing is a sign of transphilia, imo.
"Freelance writer, on the outskirts of the English language..."
It’s obvious that if a group wants the rest of society to use the new rules they have made up, that that group is asking a favor of the rest of society. And most will probably have no problem remembering to use the favored noun or pronoun. The stipulations would be that the favor needs to be asked. The understanding of any agreement is that the nouns are new to the English language, so that no offense is proper should the noun or pronoun be the “wrong” (actually correct) one, by mistake.
But also, favors should not be coerced. I have no need to respect the request/demand of another party who has no respect for me. That’s no longer a favor, it’s a command, an expectation based on narcissism.
The stridency of trans activists has eliminated any personal goodwill that might have been possible before this concerted effort to force everyone to believe lies and to doubt our animal nature to make way for some sort of trans-human fantasy.
Don't let our friend Elon Musk hear you say that. Uncle Elon is one of the more vociferous cheerleaders of all things trans-human, along with fellow psychopath J. Bezos. Eventually the plan will be to rocket to Mars together, where they'll erect a trans-human utopia that will allow them to project the necessary power to begin ruling the universe...or some shit like that I read somewhere.
Aren't all rules, new or old, made up?
I dunno. I seem to remember a marginalized group (African Americans) demanding that society no longer use the N word, and although some miserable old bigots still resist this "favor" today, most Americans recognize it's OK for this to be asked of us.
And it's OK for their to be societal consequences if someone chooses not to police their language in this specific way. I actually think asking rather than demanding society make this adjustment to its language (and, btw, to what some Americans believed was objectively true about Black people), would have been a show of weakness that would have hurt, rather than helped American race relations.
I feel the same way about the queer community asking Americans not to use the F word. I'm queer myself and if I hear someone casually using that word, I assume that I should not let them know I'm gay, because they have revealed homophobia to me, possibly are a danger to me. These tweaks to language are actually indicative of evolution toward more inclusive, tolerant societal norms (IMHO).
If it's hurtful to a person not to be called a woman, then surely they should be able to define what a woman is. That's the point of the documentary, the people who are insisting on telling others who they can and can't call a woman seem unable to provide any practical definition of the word, and (as you'll know if you've seen the documentary) go out of their way to obfuscate and avoid providing a definition.
There is a simple biological definition of woman: adult human female. If you want to propose a different definition, great, but then you need to actually propose a definition, or stop complaining when people point out that you haven't given a definition, just said "I don't like your definition".
Difficult these days in America to define a man or woman but I can spot an asshole from 100 yards out no problem.
I suspect you were trying to be "clever" here, but you do realize that you basically are agreeing with me, right? Either that or you're telling us about your sex kink superpower for some reason.
Actually, I was agreeing with you. No sex kink superpower---yet.
Oh okay, it's all good then :)
Let’s flip that around. Who else may be hurt by using improper English to define others? It is actually a favor to supplant the words that define a person with different words that have carried different connotations for millennia. One class of people has borne the brunt of not having a clear understanding of what actually defines them, and that is women. Beginning with female athletes having the abilities they have honed since they were young girls be replaced with males with the female moniker, trans-W, the theft becomes very clear: women can be returned to the class with lesser rights. This is why defining a woman is the crux of this issue. An adult female. One definition. Tick tock, the game is locked. A transgendered woman is a different class, as is a man, or a transgendered man.
That flip around is dangerously close to a false equivalency. Not to take anything away from the feelings of unfairness about trans women in women's sports (not even sure which side of that question I'm even on), but I don't think depression, hate crimes against, or suicide have been skyrocketing among those athletes who believe they have been treated unfairly.
"Suicide have been skyrocketing among those athletes who have been treated unfairly". Which athletes? The "trans" athletes? Can you point to any actual data? Because this "they will commit suicide" is a false fact that's been touted and finally debunked. It is also emotional blackmail and no one should be cowed into submission by emotional blackmail. And if athletes who are treated unfairly will commit suicide is in any way true, then do you have no worry at all that biological women and girls who are athletes will now start to commit suicide because the sport has become completely unfair to them? Alas, no. From all your comments, it is explicitly clear you give no fuck about biological women and girls.
How about football and soccer players who contract Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE)? "A fatal brain disease associated with repeated traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), including concussions and repeated blows to the head." Lots of reported suicides there.
Athletic competition at high levels---beginning with elite youth leagues--- is challenging enough without the petty and cruel bullying by ignorant bigots. Overwhelmingly female athletes in the U.S. support transgender athletes. The exceptions are far from the rule. Additionally, the number of trans athletes competing in college athletics is infinitesimally small as to be statistically irrelevant.
I suspect you are quite ignorant of the sports world in general and women's competition in particular.
What does CTE or TBIs have to do with alleged trans athletes suicide rates? You're bringing in something entirely irrelevant. If you want to digress that way then I can also point out young women's mental health problems have severely increased in recent years too.
You have no proof at all the female athletes in the US overwhelmingly support trans identifying male athletes. You're the one who's ignorant. Girls and women are being threatened into silence, and you interpret that as "overwhelming support". When what is actually happening is overwhelming silencing of their freedom to speak.
How does the number of trans athletes being "infinitesimal" justify unfairness? Unfairness is unfairness, and cheating is cheating. Even one single competitor with unfair advantage is unfair. Should Lance Armstrong be vindicated for doping? It was just him, just one competitor? Why made any fuss about it, huh? Why all the fuss about the Patriots maybe using a deflated footballs? It was just one team!!!!
Infinitesimal you said? At what point then will it become unacceptable? When only male athletes calling themselves girls and women are winning all the spots on all competitions? At what point will you finally allow women and girls to have their own sports?
Not to mention even a single male with advantage can smash all female competitors's records and win all the competitions in a discipline. The greater physical advantage is that huge.
And this "Infinitesimal" isn't even true. Women and girls are losing by huge numbers. http://shewon.org
No, not the trans athletes. Read it again. slower if necessary. I am saying that if there are women athletes who feel allowing trans women to compete is unfair, it's not showing up in depression, hate crimes, and suicide. All the hateful shit you and your fellow trolls want to heap on trans people actually has negative impacts.
You want me to point to data that demonstrate transgender people have higher suicide rates? OK, the best data on that would be....ALL the data, since every study demonstrates this. You think you can pretend that's not real just by saying it's been "debunked?" Can you turn water into wine?
I'll repeat what I think feldspar said earlier--this isn't about women's sports, prisons, bathrooms. That's just the smokescreen shit you put up to try to cover the truth: you're a hateful person.
How about you read it slower and at least try to have some sympathy for women and girls? No, you can't. Because you're at heart an awful misogynist. This is clear as day from all your comments dismissing women and girls' concerns. Women not feeling depressions and suicidal from the TrAnstifa's obliterating their rights is not showing up? What world are you in? You have no clue at all how women feel and react do you? They suffer in silence and you use that as proof against them as "evidence not showing up". Hate crimes? You want women to commit hate crimes to "prove" they see the unjustice and unfairness your cult is inflicting upon them? Are you insane?
You dismiss all women and girls' concerns as "hateful shit". You're the one who's hateful. You hate against women, your misogyny, is dripping in your every word.
You can't even show any "data". You're just claiming there are "all data" and "every study", without pointing to a single study at all. Show one in the comment and I guarantee they can be debunked.
"Can you turn water into wine?" I don't. But obviously you do. You think a man can magically turn into a woman.
This is exactly about women's sports, prisons, and bathroom. We women don't need you to mansplain to us our pains, and the injustices we're suffering under your hand. Just because you and your lots found a new way to take away our rights by dressing yourselves up in a skirt and growing your hair and claiming some "gender soul" doesn't change the fact that what this is, is just age old misogyny and sexism. We women have been dealing with this for thousands of years. We've seen it all before. We know it when we see it.
To hell with YOUR hateful shit. You're a hateful, women-hating, misogynistic, sexist person.
"...Who else may be hurt by using improper English to define others?"
Probably me if I weren't too busy laboring to decipher or being irritated by incomprehensible comments on the Racket News comment threads.
A "transwoman" is a man, and it's some of that group of men and their handmaidens that are deliberately nasty, telling the rest of humanity to go along, shut up or get destroyed. Women have plenty of history of being told to shut up and just bob the head in agreement to whatever a dude says, no matter how crazy. This group has no trouble calling people nasty names, especially women and girls who wish to maintain their boundaries. Why would a decent person tell females to shut up and then force his way into female private spaces and sports, why would a decent person insist the rest of us must cater to his derangement and hatred of females by attacking any who use words that signify a biological function specific to females, why would a decent person tell others, others that have been speaking the English language their entire lives, to use his narcissistic "pronouns," why would a decent person try and manipulate children and get laws passed to give this group a free pass to do this in the schools while trying to obliterate parents? I don't care if it's one of these deranged dudes or the deranged handmaidens who try this with me (a middle-aged woman), walk away as the threats are useless here.
Men really support a movement that doesn't affect them because they are not harmed by a person claiming to be a woman and invading their personal spaces. This argument about "causing hurt' is ridiculous when women are being raped in prison by biological men allowed to be there because they claim they are women. I will not "stop it" because some man wants to pretend he is a woman yet puts me, my daughters and granddaughters in harms way.
He is a total misogynist and doesn't even have any self-awareness of being such.
I find this always a tad disingenuous to post as if the pronoun issue is a matter of niceness. If it was a matter of niceness, would a really nice person put a demand on other people ?
Language evolved over untold years and we evolved special brain sections for detecting the sex of another person. I do a lot of walking and I can spot a man or woman from miles an I am rarely wrong when we get up close. And this is not an issue for a transgender that just looks the part, this is only an issue when our brains tells loud and clear someone is one sex but we have to pretend it is the other one.
What trans people demand is that I disable that part of my brain and act as if my intuition gives false information. Since in social settings the demands are enforced with social punishment, it puts me on edge to not make a mistake.
I worked for a company with a transgender that had a neutral name and looked like a man. I tried hard to use 'she' but it felt like a lie and of course there were honest mistakes The lying made me feel bad and the mistakes embarrassed me.
So I am not sure why it is nice to compel someone to say words that are not true and punish when a mistake is made.
Your comment is truly unbelievable. An "irrelevant argument"? Perhaps to you since you're a man. Deliberately cruel and hurtful? What about the entire society now being deliberately cruel and hurtful to women and girls by forcing us to accept the delusion that a man is a woman and that we must sacrifice our own safety, privacy, dignity, and success to such men? I suppose cruelty and hurt of women and girls don't matter to you. What decent people would tell a trans woman "she" is not a woman because "she" still has a penis? I'll tell you who: a woman or girl who is showering in a women's changing room who suddenly finds herself confronted with a naked man with his penis calling himself a "woman", and everyone in charge tells her they don't care if she doesn't want to be naked in front of the opposite sex. Or a mother who doesn't want her twelve or thirteen year old girl having to use the same bathroom as a forty year old male calling himself a woman, or a an eighteen year old boy in school. Or a parent who watches her daughter train for years in a sport but now finds she can never win or get that athletic scholarship because a boy with penis and all the advantages of male puberty decides to waltz in and compete in the female category. And a battered woman in a homeless shelter or a rape victim in a rape shelter being gaslit and told she must accept rooming with a "woman with penis" or else she has to leave. Yes, how absolutely indecent of all these women to point out the trans woman is actually a man with penis? How absolutely cruel that a rape victim would not want to room with a "woman" with male organ intact. According to you, all these women should just fucking stop it. None of their feelings and concerns matter. It is an offense that women and girls want to feel safe and dignified.
If going along with someone’s delusion (or lie) makes you feel kind and virtuous, fine. Do not expect others to be like you. I value honesty and resistance to thought control and freedom of expression. Being enslaved to other peoples feelings is a kind of hell but typical of enablers of those with narcissistic personality disorder.
OK. Gotcha. Now, could I ask you to tell me the truth? Does this make me look fat? Because I've been dieting for months now and I'm ready to wear my new swimsuit to the beach. I don't want to look foolish.
I admire your effort, but they don't respond to irony, or really any rational approach.
No, they don't.
"Is trying to win an irrelevant argument worth causing hurt to people?"
The argument is not "irrelevant," and its purpose is not to "win" in some rhetorical/debate club sense, but to remind everyone of the reality of human sexual dimorphism and to re-establish the TRUTH of biological sex and the FALSITY of delusions that lead people to deny it and make some of the most ridiculous assertions about men and women I have ever heard. (I will not exemplify them here in the interest of brevity.) Necromorphs don't get a pass on criticism or mockery. Why should they be the exception? We have a duty to point out absurdity, hypocrisy, stupidity, and evil, even if doing so damages the fragile egos of the sexually confused or makes the critic a target of the mob.
Sorry, but the necromorph political lobby has over-played the pity angle. In fact, their rhetoric is a form of emotional blackmail: "If you assert the reality of sex, you drive necromorphs to commit suicide." Your appeal to our pity is an example.
Being forced to go against conscience, being told to pretend that mental illness is not real, has its own set of consequences.
So at what point did you decide that being gay wasn't a mental illness? I'm just wondering. The scientific and medical consensus happened in the mid-70's, btw. Before that, being gay meant you were pathologically messed up. Also, a few decades before that, masturbation was also considered a mental illness. I guess I'm just trying to find out what are your delineations before and after some other rather important reversals on what constitutes mental illness? And could you ever conceive of that happening again regarding trans stuff?
If you believe despising one's own biology to the point of physically denying it and mutilating its appearance is normal human behavior, then you must be really, really evolved.
Body dysmorphia remains a classified mental disorder. But isn't that the problem? That we need "experts" to tell us that cutting off one's penis is disordered, until they tell us it's not?
Please quote where I said mutilation is normal human behavior. My comment spoke directly to the history of medical diagnoses. Do you disagree with anything that I actually said in my comment? You seem to be saying you disagree with the medical consensus that dysmorphia is a legit diagnosis. Why do you think you're better qualified than entire medical consortiums to make that determination?
I don't disagree with you, except that it is "consortia." And to emphasize that the same medical establishment that claims science is under attack by Covid-deniers or malcontents would like us to go along with the line that DNA, for instance, is an irrefutable part of life, except when it becomes problematic to say so in front of the playgroup. What will science do when a trans-woman commits murder but leaves DNA at the scene? The murderer is by scientific consensus a man based on his DNA profile, but the murderer claims to be a woman. How is that possible? We all know the answer. But what happens when the mob of trans-activists gathers in front of the courthouse and various sectors of the "scientific community" argue that the person on the witness stand is in reality a "woman." Why would "scientists" have an argument at all, if the science of biology is so clear on the facts? It's just that this whole thing is so preposterous it makes me giddy that the world is so uncertain of itself. Einstein was the first to prove it: the world is indeed a relativistic place. It is an anarchist's dream.
So if I go to the vet because I think that the CIA has implanted a mindreading microchip in my front paw, is the doctor mean and hurtful by not acknowledging my delusion and cutting my paw off?
Not necessarily. The vet may just be terrified of getting on the bad side of the CIA.
Lol
" but when someone tells a trans woman she is not a woman because she still has a penis, it’s being deliberately cruel and hurtful"
No, it's not. Someone can possibly do it to be cruel and hurtful, but some people can simply disagree. Or some--I think most people--can want clarity and honest language. What does this person, who is not a biological woman, mean by saying they are a woman? How should we refer to biological men and women? When is actual biology relevant?
How many people are walking up to trans women and telling them they are not real women, just to be dicks? I don't care if you want to think of yourself as a woman, but I also don't believe thinking of yourself as a woman entitles you to full access to spaces created for biological woman, or means that you can compete with biological women in sports. I also don't believe that excluding you from women's sports, because you are a biological man even though you identify as a woman, is cruel or hurtful, at least not any more so than disregarding a biological woman's unique biological femininity.
"If it hurts someone else" usually only matters to people in certain circumstances--basically, when there is a violation of their personal boundaries. When it's them violating the boundaries of other people, then those people "need to get over it".
Using the F word hurts me. STOP IT
Newsflash - people of influence and authority don't like New Twitter.
So Musk was quickly brought around.
Not to mention that whoever is financing the Twitter acquisition (you can bet that Musk wasn't using his own money) was likely to have had some words with Musk about how this was making them nervous.
If so, then the pertinent question is Why? How tf did we, or anyone(!), get to this place where 'being insulted' (not to mention 'offended', ffs) is to be taken so seriously? If 'The Elites' are behind this whole culture war nonsense...WTF are they getting out of it? WHAT is being gained?
Theodore Dalrymple's take makes the most sense to me:
"Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to."
I'll qualify my endorsement of the quote slightly. To say it's "communist propaganda writ small" suggests that it's primarily a communist product. I'm not sure at all about that; a lot of players - not all of them communists - have an interest in controlling people, and an effective tool is an effective tool regardless of who is wielding it.
And then what? Is the goal to have a Western version of the CCP or something?
A lot of people scoff at the idea of spiritual warfare. I have no idea if you do or not, but I certainly take it seriously. To offer another quote, this time from Wendell Berry, "If the devil doesn't exist... how do you explain that some people are a lot worse than they're smart enough to be?”
That being said, I suspect that the diabolical puppet masters have the same goal they always have; i.e. the damnation of individual souls. I also suspect that their human puppets have imagined for themselves all sorts of mutually incompatible goals. Not being of demonic intelligence myself, I can only guess that the puppet masters find the resulting chaos a bonus.
Well...combine the facts that civilization (western/classical liberal) is very fragile, ethereal, really, and the human heart is basically evil, and you have the outcome - a very psychologically ugly segment of the population desiring evil to triumph over good. Evil celebrates power in a way that (human) good does not.
The left covets China's system of social credit, and this is how they are going about accomplishing it.
Contribute to a disfavored candidate? Say good by to your bank account.
The eventual destination is Indonesia in the 1960s or Cambodia in the 1970s. That's not anyone's "goal", per se, and we have ample opportunity left to avoid it. However, if we allow the rich bastards to continue to rule with no input from the rest of us, we'll get there eventually. For more recent efforts, look at Libya, which formerly was the most prosperous nation on its continent.
Hey, listen to this from a Wikipedia humorist summarizing, in a glorious nub of dismissal, Teddy Dalrymple's opinion of anybody to the left of Reagan or Thatcher, cough, cough.
"...In his writing, Daniels [Dalrymple] frequently argues that the leftist views prevalent within Western intellectual circles minimise the responsibility of individuals for their own actions and undermine traditional mores, contributing to the formation within prosperous countries of an underclass afflicted by endemic violence, criminality, sexually transmitted diseases, welfare dependency, and drug abuse. Much of Dalrymple's writing is based on his experience of working with criminals and the mentally ill."
"Leftist views" as death rays from outer space, or sewer CHUDS making their way out of the nation's sewer pipes.
Too bad that right-wingers don't buy into global warming---they could write off the climate as just another "traditional more" done in by "leftist views."
I thought is was now climate change because the warming part hasn't panned out?
Daniels is right.
Where I live it's panned out plenty.
Here's a thought. What if it's all about keeping everyone's eye off the real ball? The real ball being: economic growth of staggering proportions amongst the few at the very top, death of democracy, economic stagnation for the masses, increasing home/hopelessness, the shrinking of permissible thought, non-stop wars, increased likelihood of nuclear Armageddon, no real action on climate change and biodiversity loss, acceleration of technology takeover of everyday life, etc.
Distracting the population while they are plundered
Bingo!!!
I dont buy that for even a fraction of a second.
lol ok, what do you buy re: elites motivation driving divisive culture war agendas
I see "political correctness" as a kind of ideological, one might even say theological contest for power and status. Many of those involved, either as perpetrators or victims, do not seem humiliated at all; they _believe_ in what they are doing. Contests for power are open to people of all classes, cultures, and ideologies -- even to radical egalitarians. ("All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.")
Thats my point, man! Whats going on?
Distracting/dividing the public...wtf is that gonna do? (nvm thats not anything new for centuries!).
So we are distracted, etc...and 'plundered' as a result. Ok...then what? The Elites put us all in camps while they play their fiddles?
Cmon man....
Maybe more down the lines of plundering an easily distracted population.
The population has been conditioned to be distracted and indoctrinated at the same time. Radio, TV, sports, movies, media, gadgets. Whatever the heart desires. Meanwhile, the agency of the individual is being limited and eventually even your thoughts will be controlled.
The globalist agenda is to have everyone controlled by 2030. The unknown is who will be at the top? Europe's elites, Russia, China?? It won't by the US because it has always been the target, mainly from within over the past 100 years.
The plundering part has already happened. Yet somehow still distracted.
It's part of an information war being waged against us by Marxists and by their unlikely bedfellows, the elites. They perceive freedom, the middle class, and Western Civilization in general, as obstacles to power. See: "Cultural Marxism". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6rk1mYiOAw&t=1384s
So you’re saying this is a Marxist/ communist plot? Brezhnev’s not is office anymore.
Real cute. This is why it can happen and has been happening. Too many deniers.
I take it you've never heard of China then?
Yeah, but everyone knows that Marxist/Communist plots come out of Moscow.
That's the best explanation I've found. (See TWC's original question ^^^) Do you have a better one?
Odd...just rewatched Lindsays speech earlier today. We've ALL known this for years now. Decades even (Bush and the NWO, et al).. But, again...to what end? A few dozen Oligarchs rule the world? And?
Yes, exactly. However, their world has a max of 1 billion people according to them.
Georgia Guidestones and all that. Took some joy in those being blown up and subsequently demolished rather quickly.
World socialism.
Throw in a party of visiting Martians and thousands of periodic carnivorous underground dwellers and the screenplay pretty much writes itself from there.
Put a question like this out to an ideologically mixed-bag audience like Matt draws, and you'll get all sorts of answers, all probably too simplistic. Who gains from culture wars? You'll get answers that: It's the Oligarchs (meaning big business and financial interests); it's the Communists; it's the Marxists; it's the Russians; it's the Chinese; it's the Jews; it's the Deep State; it's the Democrats; it's the Republicans; etc., etc.
In general, culture wars, political wars, and their occasional kinetic war manifestations are all reflections of human nature. People feeling they don't or can't get a "fair shake" from producing things valued by others that they can trade for things valued by themselves, so they seek other means of obtaining what they consider their due. One common way is to take a side in a group in a societal conflict (a culture war).
People get an emotional satisfaction out of feeling that they are part of a group that they see exercising power (over others), and in many cases there may be some financial benefits (from small to very large) among members of groups that are able to exercise power.
I don't think there's a single monolithic group of "Elites" controlling culture wars for their benefit, but there are many people who can accumulate moderate to large amounts of power for themselves by deftly maneuvering in and through culture wars. Also, those who just want to live their lives following some passion--which includes engaging in commercial activities--still have to address the culture wars going on around them.
Breitbart was wrong when he said politics is downstream from culture. Culture is a product of invention. and intervention from those with power, be it financial, hereditary, military... They have a cult, a kinship that uses the weak-minded successfully. Their roadblock has always been the minds of those that know the Highest Power, and its not them.
My SWAG is that New Twitter is likely not performing financially as projected, and the departure of big names is giving creditors the willies.
IIRC, one of the market makers recently valued it at about a third of what was paid.
Who here really thinks Musk is worried about others’ opinions about his purchase value?
What do you mean by "market makers"? As in the formal securities market sense?
Yes. One of the Wall Street firms. Should have had a link handy.
Not that he cares, read his net worth has gone up 40b or so recently.
I think it is about achieving ever greater power and control. Calling it communism or another rubric doesnt help. Power over others is an end in itself.
Unrest and conflict.
Gee, just like a real business.
Aside form a large portion Tesla stock being put up as collateral, I was under the impression a large chunk of the guarantors were middle eastern, so it's hard to fathom them putting much pressure behind this move?
Interesting and a good question. Guarantors or investors? What terms?
Still, middle easterners hire people to watch their money, too.
Ha!
As Michael Jordan once famously said after getting backlash for not taking a partisan stance, "Republicans buy shoes too".
Banks put up more than half of the equity for twitter's purchase.
Does anyone know a bookmaker who’ll take a bet on the money coming from the DoD? $3 trillion buys a lot of stuff and people.
100% I said back when Musk purchased beware the silent partner(s) which I strongly suspect is DoD... they seem not be be able to account for $3 trillion... and counting. That buys a hella bouquet of influence.
The Saudis are investors it public record.
You know you can answer you own questions through the use of one of the several search engines available on the World Wide Web. At no cost. They're real handy!
And If you're still in a wagering mood I'll take that bet on whether or not Musk is coughing up any of his moolah in his acquisition of twitter. The financial picture is a bit muddled, Musk being both a disingenuous cad and congenital liar.
I threw in a humorous piece for you from The Verge, link below, that has Musk in full Captain Hornblower mode as it relates to the subject of both his Tesla and Twitter "financing," which is also tangentially related to his securities fraud trial. Hard to keep up with the man.
Cheers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_Twitter_by_Elon_Musk
https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/who-is-funding-elon-musk-in-44-billion-twitter-acquisition-15036371.htm
https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/25/23571568/elon-musk-twitter-loan-financing
He signed a contract he hadn't vetted on a lark, and then only followed through under duress. If TPTB really didn't want the Musk experience, they could have saved a lot of annoyance. Of course, we wouldn't have had The Twitter Files™, so I'm glad...
What surprised me was that the government allowed the transaction to go forward in the first place.
I figured that, at a minimum, Musk would get a Serious Talking To, along with the suggestion that he might not want to consummate this particular deal.
*Maybe* that Serious Talking To happened after New Twitter and The Twitter Files broke?
It's live right now...
https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1664439456886038528
Fast forward less than 24 hours later, and Twitter’s executive responsible for that decision has resigned as a result of her differences with Musk over that decision. See below:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1664617261557055490?s=46&t=v0VS2wm3l98uciy7ez7i2A
So yeah, Musk has not been “brought quickly around.” That was a knee-jerk take on a thread full of knee-jerk takes on an unusually knee-jerk-ish article for this site.
Musk has done some weird shit and is occasionally hypocritical about his “free-speech absolutism”—not denying that. But let’s also not assume he was made a creature of the machine overnight just because an executive’s department censored, Musk criticized it for censoring, and the executive resigned.
I'm not so concerned about the film itself.
Okay. That’s what this article is about, so I assumed that was the basis of your comment. And “brought quickly around” makes it sound like he serving the Establishment right now, when clearly, based on the resignation of a second head of trust and safety, he is continuing to buck the Establishment, at least to some degree.
I was making a more general remark on the direction of New Twitter.
For that matter, Musk doesn't have to be a willing or enthusiastic participant.
Fair nough
People who financed Musk's acquisition of Twitter and thus are owners and stockholders of Twitter took a look at the balance sheet and the precipitously declining ad revenue at Twitter-Elon and told Uncle Elon to cut the shit and start manufacturing some scratch...or else.
Shockingly, it turns out his decision making is driven by money and not some set of lofty ideals. Who could have known.
I just wish we could find enough “left” Americans who still thought censorship was an abomination to fill a bucket.
I posted at a professional site about the Censorship Industrial Complex panel in London.
It wasn't deleted but the moderator immediately reminded everyone not to post conspiracy theories.
They don’t like to be shown their own shadow. Instead, they want to project it onto the rest of us and deny it exists by gaslighting us with terms like “conspiracy theory.”
Oh yeah, the cult is *very* upset by the censorship reporting of late. They’ve already decided that Matt (but not the other TF journalists I guess?) was just paid off by Musk to make it all up, and that’s the end of it.
Ignoring the massive, Titanic-sized pile of evidence in the room, of course.
Which ones? Lol
The So-called Democrats
Russia Gate for starters.
Hahaha
If Musk ends up "forced" to censor, perhaps he could start censoring "pro-abortion content" under the umbrella concept of "hate speech" to make a point.
The left used to care because they were the targets of censorship. They may need to be reminded of why this matters to all of us.
If what laughably passes for the left today are creatures of the MICIMATT, they have nothing to worry about. The real left- anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, ever critical of corporate agendas and the inverted totalitarian corporate state, have already been silenced, except in the marginal media, which Matt’s presence in makes less marginal. Of course, one of the reasons for that may be that he has become a darling of the right, because the right is as politically illiterate as the Democrats are now. I don’t think Matt has changed at all since he was covering the GOP convention in 2008. It’s just that now the entire political class is entirely batshit crazy. If the right ever catches on to that, Matt will be tossed to the margins with Chomsky, Hedges, Nader et al, I fear. Having said that, the chance that any quasi- political grouping so utterly politically illiterate that it regards Biden and his ilk communists are unlikely to catch on to anything.
Agreed that Matt hasn't changed at all.
If the right ever gets the levers of control back, the push for Internet censorship will come from them again. Human nature.
I always read Matt and other voices on the left that I respected, precisely because I don't want to live in a bubble. Im not alone, easily 20% of both political party supporters do this. It's the small percentage on either side that make all the noise and get all the attention.
Pretty astute comment, this.
What u point to bothers me. A lot.
I'd like this comment 100 times if I could.
Thank you, druzus.
You've made an excellent point here that I can't believe I hadn't thought of prior. Often people try to illustrate the dangers of censorship and point out that the pendulum swings both ways. Your thought here is an excellent way of giving that lesson more immediacy.
I know of at least one person on Twitter who dropped the "private businesses can do what they want" talking point re: what happened to Daily Wire. That same person, I suspect, was having a conniption back when Musk bought Twitter.
I feel that most everyone I used to associate with has exited the room to go join the authoritarians. I don't recognize there being a Left anymore.
I find Bridget Phetasy's Substack Politically Homeless to be a poignant reminder of my refugee status.
Hard same. I just try to avoid serious discussions when in company. Sad.
Need to check that out. Thanks for mentioning it.
I wish Nat Hentoff was still around. He would be horrified at all this and would speak out
Discouraging. I get email alerts when you post at Substack.
Then later I go to see if you've tweeted it and sometimes, I respond to posters, but I do not depend on Twitter for alerts.
The PC Nanny-State diehards at Twitter will be just as bad if not more difficult to weed out than cleaning up our security agencies. They are dyed in the wool control-freak cultist and will not go gently into that good Twitter Feed…..
In reading this article, I kept thinking of how I was introduced to the work of Matt Walsh - by his appearances on Tucker Carlson's show. I wondered if the article would mention Tucker's proposed show on Twitter ... and it did. Really, how could Tucker host his new show on a Twitter like this?
Speaking of Tucker, I haven't heard anything from him in a while. I would have liked to have seen his segments on DeSantis's presidential announcement. It seems to me the Powers that Be have already won by keeping such an important voice silent. Every day we have shocking new news stories that Tucker would have been opining about.
He needs to at least get a Substack site and go back to writing ... But going on Substack would piss off Musk and Twitter.
I had thought Tucker would have gone to Rumble, given that site is "hands off" when it comes to what people can say.
But if Tucker launched a Substack, he'd likely draw a large subscriber base.
He could probably do a combination of the two, TBH.
Rumble is a great concept, but the tech is terrible (and I say this as someone who bought in the SPAC and still hold it). If they fixed the tech so it was user friendly, and the search, it would be unstoppable. The only thing stopping Rumble is Rumble (same with locals).
On Tucker I kept hearing he is a great writer. I tracked down some of his old work. From what I read, imo, he is an even better writer than he was tv host. I hope he writes again.
He's a fabulous writer. That's where he got started. It's clear he wrote all his own great monologues.
The more I think about this, I think it was vital that the Deep State kept him off the airwaves in this presidential cycle. I think the key to the operation for our rulers is getting "Joe Biden" re-elected. It's really all or nothing if they want to implement the rest of their programs (Green New Deal, central bank digital currency, social ID and investsting, some more mRNA vaccines, The W.H.O Health Treaty, even more censorship and more election fraud, etc).
Tucker threatened all of this. But he's not pushing back every night now is he? So far ... mission accomplished.
One reason I love Matt is he still writes. Matt on politics and related is the equivalent of what Bill Simmons used to be on sports. Then Simmons stopped writing and went almost exclusively to podcasts.
I actually prefer reading a 5 to 10-minute article over listening or watching a 50-minute podcast.
Article in Britain’s Daily Mail yesterday about Tucker. Fox News went to Maine and ripped out Tucker’s studio-walls and all. Tucker had intended to be up and running his Twitter show by now but he’s has to repair/reconstruct his studio. Photos of him and workmen getting it done.
Screw Fox, but thanks for the update. They just moved there a couple years ago after Antifa rioted outside his house when only his wife was home.
Tucker’s show was one of two I watched. Seriously miss him. But I don’t see his abilities finding full expression in writing. He is much too engaging in speaking to his audience to limit himself to the pen.
I agree. For him, he was more effective on TV. And he got a lot better as he went along ... like most of us do.
There is one specific and clear message:
A message to Tucker Carlson - to stay away from current Twitter and move to Rumble -- ASAP.
Time will tell.
Watching What is a Woman? tonight.
Have been married for 45 years and am still discovering new features 👍
I have had enough of these endless bull-shit responses, whether it is the FBI or Twitter, where the individuals who make these alleged “mistakes” never get identified or punished. As I Tweeted to you yesterday, Musk’s Twitter has shadowbanned you in a very aggressive fashion and the Woke satisfying “mistakes” keep piling up. When Elon corrects these “mistakes” and identifies (and terminates) the individuals responsible, then I will believe he is not taking the knee.
She got canned:
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/taibbi-meet-new-twitter-same-old-twitter#comment-stream
Did she get canned or did she resigned? I believe the last report I read, she resigned. And I'm still not clear if she resigned because she wanted to censor or if she resigned to protest the censorship.
She may have resigned. If she did, it’s probably because she wanted to censor as is her self-perceived divine right. But that’s pure speculation based on the fact the petty-tyrants think they’re doing The Lord’s work.
Well, that is a good start!
Hear, hear.
Are we at the point where far too many people think there is a new civil right not to be offended?
How is this not discrimination? Are they denying that biological women exist? This attack on nature, reality and women is "hateful," not questioning the new religious rhetoric. Musk better allow this. If questioning the new Inquisition is hateful, democracy is in serious danger. We have a new moral police. I'm a heretic, and will continue to question this new religion.
I support Matt's skepticism of efforts to de-platform the enemies of the woke, but I am always caught a little off guard when Matt goes to bat for reactionary cockroaches like Matt Walsh.
Defend the guy's right to free speech, Matt, but remember the team he is playing for.
In a general sense I agree with him on this issue, though. Not in any policy sense, but I think a lot of the current controversy is a forced conflation of sex and gender, and the censorship is designed to prevent clarification of this point.
This, along with certain gender ideologists declaring that anyone ranging from gender non-conforming individuals to men with feminine personality traits to women with masculine personality traits are "transgender."
Taking a word and saying it means "whatever I want it to mean" is something ideologists love to do.
It’s rude to impose your internal world with compelled participation in delusion. He virtue signaled validating dissociative disorders and public participation in sexual fetishes, which is exactly how we got here.
Men aren’t the sex class that’s being erased, no skin of his back, or any other man. I can’t hold down a regular job because I’ll have a panic attack at being forced to play along. Why? Because of the nature of all the disorders attached to trans identities, because it’s narcissistic abuse, enforced by society and the federal government. In California this will be law.
Do you know anyone who is trans? Your comment indicates you are not familiar with, or perhaps are not interested in others’ feelings. No one is trying to force anything on anyone. No trans person is telling you or anyone else what to call yourself. Try to extend the same courtesy.
You can’t hold a job because…why exactly? There might be a trans person there with whom you would be expected to cordially interact? The horror!
I’m a Trans Widow, which means I’m intimately familiar with the fetishism, narcissism and autism at the heart of Trans Identities. My husband was inspired by the heroism that Glenn Greenwald created for Bradley Manning, he decided he wanted a bit of that “stunning and brave” validation for himself. I’ve had to become an amateur expert, for 8 years now.
You’re describing DARVO tactics. Yes, the entire Trans Movement centers on compelled participation and violation of womens boundaries. Cis, uterus haver, front hole haver, birthing person, are all imposed renaming of an entire sex class against its will, by the class that’s historically and globally oppressed it.
I’ve found that other people with autism, Narcissistic personality Disorder and Bipolar Personality disorder can’t see the type of abuse or logical fallacies affiliated with their disorders. It’s invisible to other autistic narcs. Is that you?
The "Do you know anyone who is trans?" rhetorical question is not a good play.
A large number of us have, and we see what you have in your experience with your (ex?) husband.
But even for those who haven't, so-called "trans activists" have spread their assorted messages around enough that most people can begin to form reasonable opinions.
Thats rough, but only half the picture. Do you, as a woman, get as upset when a person insists theyre a dude when they are not?
Yes and no. Women adopt trans identities for different reasons than men. Women are escaping the oppressive pornified expectations of the way womanhood is marketed to them.
The exploitation of their bodies is normalized at a young age, porn is now an influence at the elementary school level. Women are cutting off their breasts and dressing like men the way some prey animals disguise themselves as predators. They’re escaping patriarchal exploitation and violence.
In my experience many trans identified women have a lot of internalized misogyny that extends to other women. This is their survival strategy. Disguise themselves in camouflage and direct attention towards other women.
Many are lesbians escaping Lesbophobia, my daughter briefly socially transitioned after LGBT camp, which ironically taught her that it’s bad to be a lesbian. I always taught her self acceptance, so it didn’t stick, she desisted and is now happily married.
Do they trigger the same type of fear and anxiety men do? No. Am I triggered by having to participate in that lie that’s been repeated in every direction for several years? Yes. Does their internalized misogyny impact and upset me? Yes.
The context of the motivation is key. Men adopt trans identities to violate and control, Women do it to escape and blend in. Both are triggering for different reasons. One out of threat, the other empathy.
Non sequiturs is the best you got? I'm an "autistic narc?" I would ask why people with weak arguments always seem to resort to name-calling, but that's kind of self-evident here. And to keep from confusing people, remember that to the vast, vast, vast majority of the population, "narc" is either a cop or a squealer, not a narcissist.
So according to you, any person who identifies as trans ("...the entire Trans Movement...") is fetishistic, narcissistic, and autistic? Please feel free to share your global generalizations about all nonprivileged groups. Tell us the characteristics all Jews share, or that all African-Americans share, or all women, or all Native Americans, name the group.
"Compelled participation?" Who is compelling you to begin identifying as a different gender? Who? Who is driving this omnipresent force compelling our participation? And participation in what? I identify as a man, and no one has suggested, much less compelled, anything else.
If there is a discussion to be had about trans topics, like that of swimmer Lea Thomas (referenced in another comment rather clumsily), let's have the discussion. But can we just please stop the incessant "trans taking over the country" nonsense? Straight, white men still run things, and this is not in danger.
Thanks for confirming my assumption. All of you follow a pattern.
"Straight, white men still run things" -- ironically that's precisely the discussion being had about Lea Thomas. They're running so many things that they're now breaking into new areas they never even had access to before.
You are being played. When someone really, really cares about another individual they do not lie to them. They do not use deceit to pacify them. They are honest with them. It is eternally hurtful when one cares more about “feelings” than the salvation of another soul.
What planet are you on? We’re experiencing very different realities…
No one is trying to force anything on anyone except the absurdity of injecting confused men into women’s spaces whether that’s athletics or prisons.
The term cis is being forced on all people who aren’t revolting against their immutable biological reality.
Will Thomas won the women’s NCAA Championship. That’s not victimless, he has a dick in his lady’s swimwear. It’s absurd.
To top it off, the inflammatory rhetoric used by trans activists and progressive politicians imo led to the violent death of 6 people in my town of Nashville.
I didn't say anyone is trying to force anything, The Woman In Purple did.
But after your report of the worldwide forced use of "cis," I just checked with some acquaintances and relatives; none have been forced to use the term "cis." Different social circles, I guess.
And if inflammatory rhetoric is to be avoided for the sake of public safety, keep your "dick in his lady's swimwear" childishness to yourself.
That’s not childish, it’s crude truth.
You're extremely concerned with feelings. Do you care about the feelings of the right? Or do only left wing feelings matter?
I also agree with him, in a *general* sense, insofar as I think that trans-activists have exceeded their brief. I also agree that the wholesale attempt to divorce gender from sex is incoherent and Orwellian.
Nevertheless, I hope you will reserve your outspoken sympathies for people like Kathleen Stock or even JK Rowling, and not forget that Walsh is in the camp of Gavin McInnes and Dennis Prager, and everything that comes with that.
(BTW, when are we going to see the return of that famous Taibbi levity? Did Thomas Friedman stop writing columns? :)
Have you been reading Matt’s columns or are you just here to throw dirt? Even in the current column under discussion levity abounds. I especially enjoyed this line:
“a sarcastic “mockumentary” that gently tinkles in the face of transgender orthodoxies”
nah, that's sucky and overblown, not good taibbi. sarcastic mockumentary? gently tinkles? redundant as a jewish rabbi
matt's humor has been limping since elon backstabbed him.
a good editor would be helpful
Can you actually state specifically what your problem with Walsh is, rather than these vague generalities (such as the "camp" he belongs to)? It's fine to disgree with someone (there's certainly plenty I disagree with Walsh on), but if you're going to elevate someone to persona non grata status, then I think you have some obligation to justify it.
Kathleen Stock has acted as a TRA within a feminist movement, to preserve her reputation at other womens expense. She used AGPs as human shields from transphobia, and treated those affected the narcissistic abuse of AGPs as the bigots.
Please take note of her affiliation with Larry Summers. She’s also participated in undermining and maligning American feminists. Leave the British neo liberal establishment out of this.
Kathleen Stock is a highly intelligent philosopher and a voice of sanity against academic neo-liberal quackery.
So, agree to disagree >:)
I've been dealing with the ramifications of her inconsistent, classist and self interested attempts at using Autogynephiles as human shields, to give the impression that she isn't transphobic, for her own professional preservation, and future income, since 2016. Despite knowing what the comorbidities of autogynephilia were, she promoted these fetishistic men to speak on our behalf. She and the other "Head Girls or "Professional Feminists" created a classist caste system in which their professional reputations were more important that representing the actual victims of Gender Theory. They, the professional feminists, became the victims for commenting on victims.
She's considered a TRA within feminist circles. An establishment mouthpiece that doesn't challenge the status quo, Which is why she's aligned herself with the Anita Dunn of The Right Wing, and financial interests in the industries we're fighting against. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bari-weiss-university-austin-larry-summers-david-mamet-kathleen-stock-b1953871.html
From MY perspective, she's a classist coward that inflicted her self interested narcissim on a movement she pretended to represent. An academic that sold gender theory until it bit her in the ass.
Isn't a "TRA" a "trans rights activist"? I don't see how that would apply to Stock.
I'm not sure what all this "human shield" jive means. All I know about her is that she is skeptical about extending the rights of actual women to include men who only live as women. The only thing I see having "bit her in the ass" was her assumption that academia would stay above the fray instead of turning into an expensive PC boot camps for booshy white piss pots.
By the way, this bit of truth-massaging in the article you linked says it all about where you are coming from:
"The list of names Weiss says are associated with the (so far notional and unaccredited) venture include ...Kathleen Stock, who just resigned from her position at the University of Sussex because of peaceful protests against her views on trans people."
She simply "resigned"? After a "peaceful protest"? I guess to the guy who wrote this article, "peaceful" means anything short of having a brick thrown through your window. Kathleen Stock was subjected to a severe pressure campaign from a whinging academic mafia who apparently feel that in 2023 you should be cheered for dragging a feminist lesbian through the mud if she can't be successfully programmed to ignore a transvestite's Adam's Apple.
“Forced conflation of sex and gender” what do you mean by this? I’m slightly confused by what you mean my apologies.
"Current controversy is a forced conflation of sex and gender?" More accurately: right-wing propaganda as fungal growth:
Under favorable political conditions, propaganda memes germinate and gather momentum. During this process, the memes absorb adherents across all media channels, the controversy becomes activated, social division takes place, and more controversy is synthesized. The media channels initially grow into separate spherical structures, but are eventually flattened across all platforms.
"Under favourable environmental conditions, fungal spores germinate and form hyphae. During this process, the spore absorbs water through its wall, the cytoplasm becomes activated, nuclear division takes place, and more cytoplasm is synthesized. The wall initially grows as a spherical structure."
https://www.britannica.com/science/fungus/Growth
I think calling Matt Walsh a coackroach is “reactionary” and warning Taibbi about whose team he is on is honestly none of your business. Taibbi can choose his own team, or no team at all. Choosing teams is what had gotten us all into this mess.
I think you are stretching the meaning of the term "reactionary", and Matt has every right to hear from his readers.
"I think you are stretching the meaning of the term "reactionary"..." Not as much as you're stretching the meaning of the term "cockroach".
What a sickening comment.
How original...an ominous “remember what team he’s playing for” What team would that be exactly? One that knows the difference between male and female and recognizes that one’s purported “gender identity” is no more real than your junkie cousin all tweaked out and claiming to be a “spell caster” at Thanksgiving again.
I'm talking about "Team Charlottesville", if you catch my drift.
There's a valid point here.
In the camp of "nobody should be forced to accept fringe unprovable belief systems", it's a little frustrating to see a reactionary Catholic at the head. If you watch some of his other work, Walsh was clearly putting forth effort to keep this documentary consumable by skeptics.
In a perfect world, these things would be lead by ideological skeptics.
I am here to ask that no person be talked about in a dehumanizing way. Walsh is a human not an insect. Dehumanizing people leads to nothing good or true or enlightening.
I'm starting to think that no one here is familiar with this Christian conservative's body of work.
Thinking in terms of teams is the highest grade of propaganda.
Calling people "cockroaches" is definitely a great way to be taken seriously. Keep it up.
Hey, if you are a fan of this jerk, that is on you.
It’s okay not to call people cockroaches even if you aren’t a fan of them. Shocking, I know.
Okay. Don't call him a cockroach if you don't want to. Peace.
You know, you can just say “yeah, I probably shouldn’t call someone a cockroach just because I disagree with them.”
Mmm.., no. I think YOU should worry about who YOU think is worthy of being compared to a scurrying, filthy invertebrate and let other people hold their own opinions.
I think Twitter is just done, that's it. "Free speech" whatever was a marketing ploy but Musk but he clearly doesn't believe in it with any conviction.
I really hope Substack notes continues to grow. I post there all the time, it's a lot more fun than Twitter. There are no advertisements and as of yet, no spam. Comments are all real and it feels way healthier than Twitter.
Whether Substack notes stays awesome forever, who knows, but I'm enjoying the golden age for now.
Musk is shyster, what should we expect but this?
Is it growing?
Yes, I think so. Nowhere near the number of Twitter users, of course, but the audience is definitely expanding. It feels way healthier than Twitter. Real discussion, it's nice
Well that’s good to hear. I would happily use it if it more could approach even a fraction of Twitter’s marketing power, though I’m not getting much of that lately anyway
The notion that one must market content on social media is what started the collapse of the Web as a free communication system and turned it into a monitoring and control mechanism that it is right now. Time to figure out a new paradigm.
Yeah unfortunately from the marketing perspective, notes is mostly composed of other writers. At this point it's better for having conversations than promoting work.
I gave up on promoting my Substack on Twitter too. With the link throttling it hardly seems worth the effort
Network effects.
How do they work?
Totally agree, Notes is great. As long as substack keeps the faith. I believe and bought stock
Please link us to any proof people are having discussions on notes. I'd love to see it
here
https://substack.com/profile/86-bill-bishop/note/c-16746809
I have conversations on Notes every single day, so I'm not really sure what you're on about
Before anyone wastes their time, what do you consider discussion?
Anything at all involving more than one person contributing to a conversation. Anything you have really.
Cool!
Here's something I started tonight: https://substack.com/profile/25059567-phisto-sobanii/note/c-16808233?utm_source=notes-share-action It's a bit navel gazing and talking about Substack, but who knows where it'll go.
The folks you see in there I always see talking about all sorts of stuff. In fact, I made a Note just for you and tagged you in it. There's a couple conversation that I can't quite remember where they happened, so hopefully my friends (subfriends? lol) will help.
I am not yet sure even how does it work. It is not intuitive as Twitter is.
👆 me too. I’ve tried a total of maybe 30 minutes and gave up
I don't know. Is it?
It's not sticky yet (I don't think), but I could be nudged into using it.
Twitter continuing down the drain would be a good time for Notes to look into that.
That's right. Waste, depression, conflict, failure, deterioration -- these are the ground of opportunity.
Way too early to tell if it’s growing imo. Bright shiny new object right now.
I recently unsubscribed because it’s not in my interest to pay money to the man that’s erasing the crimes against me. If you’re willing to hide the crimes against an entire global sex class, what else will you lie and deceive about? Nothing. You’re another manifestation of controlled dissent. So are your colleagues, why would you be any different?
Fair enough, what's next? Censoring protestors in Iran?
I agree. Substack is a much more pleasant place. Real discussions with real people. No throttling or banning.
If Substack ever gets the popularity that Twitter enjoys, the signal-to-noise ratio will deteriorate to Twitter levels.
"We have met the enemy..."
Fucking humans.
Maybe, who knows. That's why I'm enjoying it so thoroughly right now
As long as users have some control over what they want to see, that can help minimize that issue.
For example, I still keep my main Twitter timeline to "following" rather than "for you" or I look at my lists. That alone improves the Twitter experience, even if it's not a solution to the issues Matt described.
Absolutely! Then what? Think CIC will eventually be 100%
"CIC"?
Censorship Industrial Complex. We can never have enough abbreviations!
Thanks!
I am not even sure yet how Notes work.
Twitter is intuitive -- despite much Notes propaganda I can’t figure how to find somebody I like...
Do not like notes as it clogs up my data useage. Also I should be able to decide what I want to read on notes. Not have effing hundreds of posts coming into my Substack account.Cannot seem to delete. Have never! used twit.
All of this is very simple. People need to stop using Twitter and other formats that infringe upon thier rights and support only those formats that support the Bill of Rights.
No. F that. Thats akin to the 'if u dont like public school, go private' angle. Its bullshit. The Public deserves, and demands, that very Bill of Rights is extended and upheld in matters of public discourse.
I get what your sayin’, and on Twitter I want to agree, but there is a reason I send my own kids to private school (and vote for everyone to have universal school choice)...... sometimes you have to build up something new because the far left destroyed what was there.
I agree with your sentiment, but public schools are publicly funded entities. When it comes to corporations who impose their ideologies onto the masses, this is the time to “vote with our feet,” so to speak. No one will hear the demands of the public if the cash is still coming in. We have to opt out of this BS, which will serve as a lesson for other companies.
i agree. Centrists & right wingers do not take politics to heart like the left, who treat politics like its jesus. So we continue to patronize & monetize the people that seek to destroy us.
The Bill of Rights says nothing about what private companies can do regarding speech.
Tens of thousands of people have been banned by the transsexual police force on Twitter since Elon took over. Myself being one of those people. This is no surprise at all. The pronoun brigade and alphabet mafia still runs the show. Freedom of speech on Twitter is an illusion.
Same here. I rejoined Twitter after Musk proclaimed "truth and facts will not be banned". And promptly got banned for tweeting truth and facts.
And who does Musk think is going to watch Tucker Carson when Musk is still busy banning Tucker's audience.
I don’t like it when Mom and Dad fight.
I paid to watch What Is A Woman. I am a libertarian.. Matt Walsh was brilliant. I would have a hard time not punching that smug so called "professor" in the face..a more smug pompous ass would be difficult to find and the interview with the "trans man" could bring you to tears..well done. Twitter would have me watching it again.. but. well it is Twitter after all