Category Archives: pronoun tyranny

SJW Love Fest at Seattle Pacific University

WARNING: Watch this only if you have 2 hours of time to waste being completely pissed off.

The Players: an assortment of self-loathing white leftists

They are celebrating the first year of their new Social Justice Major at the university. The women and men in the audience are mostly white, an assortment of people interchangeable at any Peter, Paul and Mary concert on PBS. We know them. The women have that smug, smarter-than-the-world smirk, and all the males have been properly gelded, not a functioning testicle in sight…

…with the one exception of the properly licensed testicle operator,
the sanctioned Fearless Leader and tonight’s speaker, Tim Wise.

Tim Wise, like Noel Ignatiev before him, has made his bones prosecuting the inborn guilt of white people (especially white men).

He has books to sell at the back of the auditorium. Tim’s favorite SJW crowd pleaser: White Like Me: Reflections on Race From a Privileged Son. And there is a new favorite: White Lies Matter: Race, Crime, and the Politics of Fear in America. Along with these you can purchase from an assortment of other essays, sure to grant clemency to a white Liberal seeking redemption from the inherent evil of his/her DNA.

Did I mention that Tim Wise recently spoke at Harvard University, and opined that Christians should be locked up because they can’t function in the real world? 

Yeah, he said that. And he even used Noel Ignativ’s favorite excuse,
“I was just kidding… but maybe not.”

This hits extra close to home for me, as a relative near and dear to me has given up on college after 3 and a half years. He told me that at his new college he has been told in all kinds of ways that he is the enemy of everything good, for the reason that he is white and male, and worst of all, a Christian. He is a clear headed critical thinker, and that too has brought the wrath on him.

My relative had thought it would be good to see what’s happening at the historic college chapel with the Christian student club. The Christian club turned out to be invisible, either nonexistent or in hiding. And the historic chapel was being used for drag queen shows. Demons always like to throw a party when they can desecrate a formerly holy place; no exception here.

Tim Wise, like Noel Ignatiev, is of Russian Jewish descent, and they are both atheists.

Let’s add this up. They preach the same message. They have direct ancestors reaching back to the Bolshevik Revolution 100 years ago. Their actions are not those of honest debate and scholarship, but the actions of an agent provocateur, each lecture, a Molotov Cocktail of incitement to violent revolution. Looks like the very same principalities that deceived Russia 100 years ago are making a 100th anniversary attempt to repeat their success now in America.

So relieved I’m not white!
Wait! I am white?!!! 

Guess I had better run and hide. (NOT) No, we “white people” of all colors are ready to stand and fight, be it in the physical or the spiritual:

“For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds. Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.”
– 2 Corinthians 10:4

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Pelosi reveals liberal leftist agenda in Equality Act remarks

At the March 13 Democrat press conference that introduced H.R. 5 – Equality Act, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi revealed a litany of  liberal, leftist goals she hoped Democrats would achieve. Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), gave the initial remarks. Pelosi  gave the hallmark Democrat speech.

The following text is the official transcript of Pelosi’s remarks. The bold face highlighted text marks are mine.

# # #

Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Introducing H.R. 5, The Equality Act

March 13, 2019

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined Democratic leaders of the House and Senate for a press event introducing H.R. 5, the Equality Act, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in education, employment, housing, credit, federal jury service, public accommodations and the use of federal funds. Below are the Speaker’s remarks

Speaker Pelosi. Senator Merkley! Thank you, Senator Merkley, I accept your kind words on behalf of our House Democrats who, overwhelmingly, support this legislation and I thank David Cicilline and the Members of the Task Force for their work to bring us to this day.

I remember full-well the day you described in the LBJ Room when we stood there, you taking the lead in the Senate, David in the House, and right between the two of you, John Lewis, John Lewis giving his imprimatur to the path that we were going down.

[Applause]

So, I thank you. It is a pleasure to welcome back Senator Schumer when he gets here, a former Member, and Senator Baldwin, a former Member of whom we are very proud, and thank you for your leadership, as well as Senator Booker, not of this House but certainly of this Congress who we are very proud of as well. I am proud to join all of you.

As I was listening to the comments that were being made, Congressman Cicilline – I think I decided to call you Chairman, you call everyone Chairman in the Majority – and Senator Merkley, I was thinking back on the path to this day.

When we first got the Majority, we said we had four goals we wanted to achieve. One was to pass the hate crimes legislation. Senator Baldwin was very much a part of that in the House, and Senator Schumer of course in the Senate, and then Senator Baldwin in both houses.

The next was supposed to be ENDA, end discrimination in the workplace, but we all came to the conclusion, led by the outside groups, that we should do the repeal of ‘Don’t Act Don’t Tell’ next. So, that rose to number two on the agenda, not in terms of importance but in terms of chronology and in getting the votes. So then, with the help of so many of you, we repealed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’

[Applause]

Next was marriage equality, which the courts happily recognized – marriage equality. So, we had one left, ENDA. But everybody just said, why should we be ending discrimination in the workplace? What about in every place – in housing, in every place?’

So, that’s when Mr. Cicilline stepped forward and said, ‘We’ll open the Civil Rights Act.’ Not a small thing to do, and that’s why Mr. Lewis and the Congressional Black Caucus and all of our Members were so important in getting behind that fully so here we are today.

Here we are today. We are proud to stand with Members from both sides of the Capitol to take a momentous step towards full equality for LGBTQ Americans and for our country. We take great pride in serving with a record-breaking ten LGBTQ Members in the Congress. We are happy about that.

[Applause]

Let us once again salute David Cicilline, a champion for equality. Thank you, Senator Merkley, for your tireless leadership in the Senate.

Our inside maneuvering, though, is only possible because of the success of the outside mobilization, so I want to join David Cicilline and Senator Merkley in acknowledging the work of our outside friends who made this possible.

[Applause]

Advocates and allies have always made the difference: in passing fully-inclusive hate crime legislation, repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Act, defeating the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act – remember that horrible thing? And more. Forget about it.

Again, your mobilizing and organizing will make the difference, once again, so I thank all of you for that. Let me just say on that score, that many of you have reported to us that many in corporate America and in the business community are behind the Equality Act, and I think that is going to be very important.

[Applause]

Our Founders, in their wisdom, wrote in our beautiful preamble to the Constitution ‘the blessings of liberty.’ They talked about the blessings of liberty which were to be the birthright of all Americans. That’s why I am especially upset that, last night, we were all sickened and saddened to see the President revive his hateful transgender service ban. No one with the strength and bravery to serve in the military should be turned away – turned away – so sad.

I had some trans in uniform folks here for the State of the Union Address, and they were so saddened because they have a high percentage of participation in our military, and to have that not get its full respect and, in fact, lessened by the President’s actions – so, we have important work to do in fighting to defeat this disgusting ban and we will succeed.

[Applause]

While the President betrays our values with his ban, the Congress is bringing our nation closer to equal liberty and justice for all with the Equality Act. Sexual orientation and gender identity deserve full civil rights protections – in the workplace and in every place, education, housing, credit, jury service – you want jury service? In public accommodations. That is why we are proud to stand with Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, many of whom are here with us, Bobby Scott, Sheila Jackson Lee. You will be hearing from Bobby Scott.

We are proud, as David said, that this bill has nearly 240 bipartisan co-sponsors in the House. We look forward to a swift, strong and successful vote on this bill. And now, it would have been my pleasure – did he come? Okay, Chuck is on the way.

[Laughter]

Is that okay? He will be here shortly. I am pleased to welcome back to the House side, a place where we took great pride, where she was first lesbian to be elected to the Congress of the United States. How proud we are of Tammy Baldwin.

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi March 13 introduced the so-called Equality Act, a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

The legislation, known as the Equality Act would specifically include all LGBTQ definitions and would penalize everyday Americans for their beliefs about marriage and biological sex. Similar sexual orientation and gender identity laws at the state and local level have already been used in this way.

While liberal Democrats and some liberal Republicans in the House of Representatives are lauding the proposed legislation, some conservatives are calling it a “frontal assault on religious liberty.”

If the Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. It would force employers and workers to conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs. It would force hospitals and insurers to provide and pay for these therapies against any moral or medical objections. It would force parents to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity. It would force religious institutions that provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children, and the list goes on.

Monica Burke, a research assistant in the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, in a critique of the proposed legislation noted that most Americans “don’t want a nationwide bathroom requirement, health care mandate, or “preferred pronoun” law based on gender identity, but congressional Democrats seem to think it’s time to impose them.”

Burke’s critique in The Daily Signal:

Nancy Pelosi delivered . . . on her promise to introduce the so-called Equality Act, which would elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to protected classes in federal anti-discrimination law.

Although that may sound nice in theory, in practice sexual orientation and gender identity policies at the state and local level have caused profound harms to Americans from all walks of life.

How might a sexual orientation and gender identity law on the federal level, as introduced in the House and Senate, affect you and your community? Here are seven ways:

1.   It would penalize Americans who don’t affirm new sexual norms or gender ideology.

Jack Phillips’ case went all the way to the Supreme Court after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission accused the bakery owner of discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation when the self-described cake artist declined to create a custom cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but left the law in question, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, intact. Until last week, Phillips was in court again defending himself against the same agency under the same law.

The day after the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ case, Autumn Scardina, a lawyer who identifies as transgender, requested that he create a “gender transition cake.” After Phillips declined, the state Civil Rights Commission found probable cause under the law that the baker had discriminated on the basis of gender identity.

Thankfully, the commission dropped the case, and Phillips agreed to drop his own lawsuit accusing the state agency of harassing him for his Christian beliefs.

Phillips is just one of many Americans who have lost income because of their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Others cases involve florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, videographers, web designers, calligraphers, and public servants.

These cases are just the beginning. The same policies used to silence disagreement over marriage can be used to silence disagreement over the biological reality of sex.

2.  It would compel speech.

Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming lost his job for something he did not say.

A county school board voted unanimously to fire the veteran teacher over the objections of his students after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use masculine pronouns in referring to a female student who identifies as transgender.

Vlaming did his best to accommodate the student without violating his religious belief that God created human beings male and female, using the student’s new name and simply refraining from using pronouns altogether.

Unfortunately, the school still considered this a violation of its anti-discrimination policy.

Incidents like these would increase under federal policy proposed in the Equality Act. Both federal and private employers could face costly lawsuits if they fail to implement strict preferred pronoun policies. Employees could be disciplined if they fail to comply, regardless of their scientific or moral objections.

3 . It could shut down charities.

Foster care and adoption agencies, drug rehabilitation centers, and homeless centers already face challenges under state and local policies on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In Philadelphia, just days after the city put out an urgent call for 300 additional families to foster children, the city halted child placements by Catholic Social Services because of the organization’s belief that every child deserves both a mother and a father.

Although same-sex couples have the opportunity to foster children through the state or every other agency in Philadelphia, the city canceled its contract with Catholic Social Services. The agency’s approved foster homes remain available while children languish on the waiting list.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make this situation a national phenomenon, which would spell disaster for the 437,500 children in foster care nationwide.

Other charities would be affected, too.

In Anchorage, Alaska, a biological male born Timothy Paul Coyle goes by the name of Samantha Amanda Coyle. On two occasions, Coyle tried to gain access to the city’s Downtown Soup Kitchen Hope Center, a shelter for homeless, abused, and trafficked women.

In one attempt, authorities said, Coyle was inebriated and had gotten into a fight with a staffer at another shelter, so Hope Center staff paid Coyle’s fare to the emergency room to receive medical attention. Coyle sued the center for “gender identity discrimination.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law could force any social service organization to open up private facilities—including single-sex bathrooms, showers, and sleeping areas—to members of the opposite sex.

4.  It would allow more biological males to defeat girls in sports.

Two biological males who identify and compete as women easily defeated all of their female competitors in an event at the Connecticut State Track Championships. Transgender athlete Terry Miller broke the state record in the girls’100-meter dash. Andraya Yearwood, also transgender, took second place.

Selina Soule, a female runner, not only lost to the biological males in the championships but also lost out on valuable opportunities to be seen by college coaches and chosen for scholarships.

Soule said about the 100-meter event: “We all know the outcome of the race before it even starts; it’s demoralizing.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would defeat the purpose of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which is supposed to guarantee women equal educational and athletic opportunities.

Under radical gender identity policies, female athletes have sustained gruesome injuries at the hands of male competitors. In high school wrestling, female athletes have forfeited rather than compete against transgender athletes on testosterone.

A federal law could set girls’ and women’s sports back permanently at every level.

5.  It could be used to coerce medical professionals.

Under state sexual orientation and gender identity laws, individuals who identify as transgender have sued Catholic hospitals in California and New Jersey for declining to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy women who wanted to pursue gender transition.

If these lawsuits succeed, medical professionals would be pressured to treat patients according to ideology rather than their best medical judgment.

The Obama administration tried to coerce medical professionals into offering transition-affirming therapies through a regulation in the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

That move was stopped in the 11th hour by a federal judge. However, that could all be set back in motion if a national law imposes a nationwide health care mandate regarding gender identity.

6.  It could lead to more parents losing custody of their children.

The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology will create more conflicts among parents, doctors, and the government. A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would jeopardize parental rights nationwide.

In fact, the current issue of the American Journal of Bioethics includes an article arguing that the state should overrule the parents of transgender children who do not consent to give them puberty-blocking drugs.

This has already happened. In Ohio, a judge removed a biological girl from her parents’ custody after they declined to help her “transition” to male with testosterone supplements.

After the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic recommended these treatments for the girl’s gender dysphoria, the parents wanted to pursue counseling instead. Then the county’s family services agency charged the parents with abuse and neglect, and the judge terminated their custody.

Similar cases are proceeding through the courts with children as young as 6 years old.

Meanwhile, studies show that 80 to 95 percent of children no longer experience gender dysphoria after puberty. Politicizing medicine could have serious consequences for children who are exposed to the unnecessary medical risks of drastic therapies.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make these cases more common.

7.  It would enable sexual assault.

A complaint under investigation by federal education officials alleges that a boy who identifies as “gender fluid” at Oakhurst Elementary School in Decatur, Georgia, sexually assaulted Pascha Thomas’ 5-year-old daughter in a girls’ restroom. The boy had access to the girls’ restroom because of Decatur City Schools’ transgender restroom policy.

School authorities refused to change the policy even after Thomas reported the assault. Eventually, she decided to remove her daughter from school for the girl’s emotional well-being and physical safety.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would give male sexual predators who self-identify as females access to private facilities, increasing the likelihood of these tragic incidents.

It could also make victims less likely to report sexual misconduct and police less likely to get involved, for fear of being accused of discrimination.

The proposed Equality Act could impose a nationwide bathroom policy that would leave women and children in particular vulnerable to predators. It actually would promote inequality by elevating the ideologies of special-interest groups to the level of protected groups in civil rights law.

This extreme and dangerous legislation would create unprecedented harms to businesses, charities, medical professionals, women and children, and entire families.

Texas fights back

Meanwhile, as congressional Democrats are advocating for the hamstringing of religious belief, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom—in Texas, at least. From Christian Ellis, CBN News, March 25:

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

“They strengthen our support for life, liberty and Texas values, increase protections for taxpayers,” wrote Patrick.

SB 17’s section on religious freedom reads:

“State agency that issues a license or otherwise regulates a business, occupation, or profession may not adopt any rule, regulation, or policy or impose a penalty that:

(1) limits an applicant’s ability to obtain, maintain, or renew a license based on a sincerely held religious belief of the applicant; or

(2) burdens an applicant’s or a license holder’s:

(A) free exercise of religion, regardless of whether the burden is the result of a rule generally applicable to all applicants or license holders;

(B) freedom of speech regarding a sincerely held religious belief; or

(C) membership in any religious organization.”

Conservatives across the state expect the bill to pass as the Republican party has control over the state’s House, Senate, and governorship. However, opponents like the National Association of Social Workers Texas have stated they will argue against the bill in the hearing, calling it “discriminatory”.

The organization states the bill runs “counter to the NASW Code of Ethics for all professionals, and will deny services to already marginalized persons in the LGBTQ community or women seeking access to reproductive care and services.”

SB 17 comes at a crucial time when religious freedom faces ongoing threats across the country, and as a new threat emerges in the Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives. This month, Democrats introduced an updated version of their Equality Act that elevates protections for sexual orientation over protections for religious liberty. The bill could threaten ministries with legal consequences if they denied an LGBTQ individual from working for their institution.

“Every American should be treated with dignity and respect, but our laws need to protect the constitutionally guaranteed rights that we have,” Greg Baylor from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) told CBN News.

“Now under the Equality Act we will have a nationwide law,” continued Baylor. “We will see a proliferation of instances where Christians and others are being coerced to violate their beliefs in order to comply with such a law.”

While Democrats are indicating the Equality Act is a big part of their agenda, they do not currently control the US Senate, so the measure is not expected to pass unless they gain control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election.

While Democrat liberals are planning an assault on religion, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom.

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

~ Grif

Note from Eowyn: H.R. 5 – Equality Act was introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) on March 13, 2019. See also “Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for ‘misgendering’ a ‘transgender’“.

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

German intellectuals call for end to gender-pronoun tyranny

So many choices…

The Guardian archly reports, March 8, 2019, that in an “reactionary” open letter published by the Dortmund-based German Language Association, a group of German authors, academics and comedians are calling for a fightback against “ridiculous linguistic constructions” designed to make the German language more gender-neutral.

German Language Association, with over 36,000 members, is one of several institutions in Germany which that try to set standards on grammar and spelling.

The letter’s signatories include philosopher Rüdiger Safranski, novelist Peter Schneider, comedian Dieter Hallervorden, and the former head of Germany’s domestic intelligence Hans-Georg Maassen.

In the German language, nouns have either a male, female or neuter gender; words for mixed groups of people are traditionally based on the masculine form. If you are talking about a group of teachers, for example, you would say die Lehrer, not die Lehrerinnen.

Feminist linguists have made various proposals to make the language more inclusive, either by typographic trickery, such as LehrerInnen, Lehrer(innen) or Lehrer*innen, or by replacing them with nouns that make the gender more invisible. Those proposals have been accepted by a number of academic institutions and municipal authorities. As an example, since January this year, officials in the city of Hanover no longer use the generic noun Lehrer in their correspondence, but the more neutral Lehrende (“teaching ones”).

The protest letter, headed “An end to gender nonsense!” and published shortly before International Women’s Day, argues that the distribution of gender to generic nouns in German is too arbitrary for there to be a systemic sexist bias. As examples, in German, lions are male while giraffes are female and horses neuter. The signatories also dispute that masculine generic pronouns discourage women from entering certain professions, pointing out the fact that Germany’s constitution has 13 mentions of the “chancellor” in its masculine form “did not prevent the repeated rise of Angela Merkel to the post of chancellor”.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Radical feminist kicked off Baltimore LGBTQ Commission for referring to male rapist as male

Trans ideology has allowed a male rapist into a female prison. It has allowed males to compete in female sports. It has forced women to accept men into showers and locker rooms. It has allowed a man to be named Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year. Women who object are vilified and harassed on social media; they lose friends, social standing, and even jobs.

The transgender fiction is too much even for some Leftists.

Last November, a self-described Progressive playwright said she was blacklisted for dissenting from the transgender groupthink.

The latest inmate to break free from the Left’s thought-gulag is self-described radical feminist Julia Beck.

Austin Ruse reports for Crisis Magazine, Feb. 1, 2019, that Julia Beck, a lesbian and a self-confessed “radical feminist”, told her story on a recent Heritage Foundation panel, convened to encourage opposition to a Congressional bill called the Equality Act.

HR 2282, The Equality Act, introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) — who was the first openly “gay” mayor of a U.S. state capital — would enshrine the transgender ideology into American law under the legal concept of public accommodation, wherein the federal government will take away any and all women-only spaces in the country.

Julia Beck said she was booted from the Baltimore LGBTQ Commission because she referred to a male rapist, who claims to be female, as male. The authorities put the male rapist in a woman’s prison, where he proceeded to rape more women.

The logical question to ask the prison authorities and Baltimore’s LGBTQ Commission is this:

How can a man rape women unless he is male?

For correctly referring to the rapist as male, Beck was accused of “violence” and voted off the LGBTQ Commission. Leading the attack on Beck was the Commission chairman — a man who also claims to be female, and a lesbian.

During the hearing to kick Beck off the LGBTQ Commission:

  • A gay man announced that “biological sex is a thing of the past.” To which Beck sensibly responded, “How can we be homosexual if sex is fake?”
  • Testifying against Beck was a woman who identifies as a man, insisting she is not and had never been a woman despite having a vulva because “It does not make me any less of a man that I have a vulva. It’s there and it’s masculine.” Alas, as described by Beck, the woman-who-calls-herself-a-man had “just survived a hysterectomy and was shaking and complaining of hot flashes.”

Beck told the largely conservative audience at Heritage Foundation:

“There are only three sexualities: homosexual, heterosexual, and bi-sexual. All the hip new identities in the alphabet soup like non-binary, gender fluid, pansexual, are not real sexualities. Sexualities are based on sex while gender identities are based on stereotypes.”

To underscore her point, Beck points out that so-called “trans-women”, i.e., biological males, usually present themselves in the most exaggerated and even grotesque caricatures of women.

Beck was one of four radical feminists on the Heritage panel, all of whom have virtually nothing in common with conservatives other than opposition to the trans ideology.

Beck’s co-panelists also had horror stories to tell:

(1) Jennifer Chavez, of the Women’s Liberation Front, told several stories of desperate mothers whose kids were hijacked into the trans-cult. A 14-year-old girl “spontaneously” decided she was male and, according to her mother, went from a “sweet loving girl to a foul-mouthed hateful pansexual male.” The girl ran away from home and moved to Oregon, where she was given a double mastectomy and a radical hysterectomy, even though she had been diagnosed previously with ADHD, depression, and anxiety. She is now living on the streets and planning a surgery that would take part of her arm in order to create a crude penis with a mechanism to fake an erection.

Chavez said much of this contagion is spread via YouTube and other social media sites by Jazz Jennings and someone named Riley J. Dennis, who is famous for saying it is bigotry for males to avoid sex with “trans-women” such as himself. Dennis, one of the sickest and most dangerous people on social media, has a huge YouTube following where he discusses all manner of vile things such as how to have sex with someone in various stages of “transitioning.” A short clip of Jazz Jennings was shown at Heritage in which he was celebrating his impending castration. It showed a “penis” cake that Jennings gleefully sliced to cheers from his family and friends.

(2) Kara Dansky, also of the Women’s Liberation Front, said that the issue is really about the intellectual bankruptcy of gender identity ideology and the importance of language. No one really knows what these words mean; all definitions of gender identity either reinforce sexist stereotypes or are completely tautological and rely on regressive sex-based stereotypes. Referring to men who identify as female because they see themselves as nurturing and compassionate and like to wear dresses, Dansky said this is insulting to women who worked hard to get into the workplace, dress the way we like, and that women are not defined by what we wear.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Pronoun Tyranny: CA State Senate prohibits “he/she, him/her”

The State of California sinks deeper into radical-left madness and tyranny.

in 2017, California became the first state in the union to create a “non-binary” option for legal documents and drivers licenses, as well as make it a crime for nursing homes (“long-term care facilities”) to use the “wrong” pronouns.

Now, the California State Senate is prohibiting gender-specific pronouns, such as “he/she” or “him/her”.

Amanda Prestigiacomo reports for Daily Wire that on Jan. 17, 2019, Senate Judiciary Committee chair Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) announced that gender-specific pronouns are prohibited during judicial committee hearings. Henceforth, “gender neutral designations” would be used when addressing committee members.

Jackson proclaimed:

“Our first order of business is to approve the committee rules. I’d like to note — in respecting the fact that we are now a state recognizing the non-binary designation as a gender — he and she, we are now merging them so we are using what my grammar teacher would have had a heart attack over: we are using the phrase ‘they’ and replacing other designations so it’s a gender neutral designation: ‘they.’ Basically, that’s the primary reforms and revisions to the committee rules. In the spirit of gender neutrality for the rules of this committee, we now designate the chair as ‘they.’”

Then Jackson proceeded repeatedly to violate its own rule when it said:

“The world is a different place. My grammar teacher is long gone and we won’t be hearing from her — from them! From they!”

And when it repeatedly used “she” and “her” to promote abortion “rights”, as well as “he” and “his” in reference to another committee member.

Hannah-Beth Jackson, who will be 69 years old in May, has been in the California state legislature since 1998 (State Assembly 1998-2004; State Senate 2012-present). Although it looks like a man, Wikipedia says it is married to retired Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge George Eskin, with whom it has a daughter, two stepchildren, and six grandchildren.

In 2013, Jackson introduced a bill, SB 113, allowing 16-year-olds to pre-register to vote online. SB 113 was passed and signed into law in 2014, and took effect in 2017. In 2016, Huffington Post named Jackson one of 11 “women” “blazing new trails” in American politics.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Gender Taliban comes to the Church of Sweden

The tyranny and insanity of Gender PC has come to Christianity.

Throughout the Old Testament, God is referred to as “he”. In Luke 11, Jesus taught the disciples “The Lord’s Prayer” that begins with “Our Father, who art in heaven,” not “The Lady’s Prayer” that begins with “Our Mother, who art in heaven”.

Despite all that, the Church of Sweden — the largest religious institution in Sweden — is replacing all masculine pronouns for God with gender-neutral words.

The RT reports that on November 23, 2017, the annual autumn convention of the Church of Sweden’s leadership in Uppsala approved a new handbook on how to conduct services — on the language, liturgy, music and other aspects of worship.

According to the new handbook, which replaces the previous version from 1968, the clergy are to avoid terms like “Lord” and “He” in worship services because they imply that God is male. Instead, the clergy are to adopt gender-neutral wording to make the Church “more inclusive”.

Critics of the change say it undermines the concept of the Holy Trinity, which is referred to as “the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” by Christians. They see the gender neutrality rules as politicizing matters of faith and a potential hurdle in spiritual communion between the Church of Sweden and other Christian denominations.

Christer Pahlmblad, an associate theology professor at Sweden’s Lund University, told Denmark’s Lutheran newspaper Kristeligt Dagblad the move was “not smart” and disrespects the theological heritage of Christianity — “You cannot replace 2,000 years of theology.”

The national Evangelical Lutheran Church was the state religion of Sweden until 2000 and currently has over 6 million baptized members in a country of 10 million. Women have been ordained as priests since 1960 and currently comprise 45% of the ordained clergy and an even greater share among the leadership.

Its head, Antje Jackelén, 62, is one of a handful of female archbishops in Christian churches. In 2013, Jackelén was elected 70th Archbishop of Uppsala and Primate of the Church of Sweden on a progressive platform. She is well known for interpreting Christian dogma from a spiritual rather than literal standpoint. As an example, Jackelén said that those who see the virginity of Mary, mother of Jesus, as a biological issue have completely missed the point.”
Jackelén dismisses the idea that human gender is applicable to God. According to the Swedish national news agency TT, Jackelén said that “Theologically, we know that God is beyond our gender determinations, God is not human.”

No toxic masculinity for Sweden’s Byggnads Construction Workers Union

See “Welcome to Sweden! – where men wear pink pussies“.

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Gender Pronoun Tyranny: Professor downgrades student's paper for using the word 'mankind'

Sat, 01 Apr 2017 19:10:21 +0000

eowyn2

When will this madness end?

Shanna Nelson reports for Campus Reform, March 28, 2017, that Cailin Jeffers, an English major at Northern Arizona University, lost credit on an English paper for using the word “mankind” instead of a gender-neutral alternative.

Jeffers said she received an email from her professor, Dr. Anne Scott, that she had been docked one point out of a possible 50 on a recent paper for “problems with diction (word choice)” related to her use of the word “mankind” as a synonym for “humanity.”

Scott wrote:

“I would be negligent, as a professor who is running a class about the human condition and the assumptions we make about being ‘human,’ if I did not also raise this issue of gendered language and ask my students to respect the need for gender-neutral language. The words we use matter very much, or else teachers would not be making an issue of this at all, and the MLA would not be making recommendations for gender-neutral language at the national level.”

After offering Jeffers the opportunity to revise her paper, Scott warned that if Jeffers refuses to change “mankind” to a gender-neutral synonym, “I will still need to subtract a point because your choice will not be made in the letter or spirit of this particular class, which is all about having you and other students looking beneath your assumptions and understanding that ‘mankind’ does not mean ‘all people’ to all people. It positively does not.”

Jeffers told Campus Reform that after the first essay assignment, Scott had given the class “a list of ‘do’s and don’ts” that Scott had found in the student essays. Jeffers said:

“Most of them make sense, just things like ‘make sure you’re numbering your pages’ and ‘cite in proper MLA format,’ but she said we had to be sure to use ‘gender-neutral language’. Included with this rule were several examples of what was and wasn’t okay to use. In one of these examples she stated that we could not use the word ‘mankind.’ Instead, we should use ‘humankind.’ I thought this was absurd, and I wasn’t sure if she was serious.”

So Jeffers decided to test the policy on her next paper by twice writing the word “mankind”. When Jeffer’s paper was docked for using the word “mankind,” she  requested a meeting with Scott. As recounted my Jeffers:

“I stated that I agree with everything she said about my paper except my use of ‘mankind.’ She proceeded to tell me that the NAU English department, as well as the Modern Language Association, are pushing for gender-neutral language, and all students must abide by this. She told me that ‘mankind’ does not refer to all people, only males. I refuted, stating that it DOES refer to all people, [but] she proceeded to tell me that I was wrong, ‘mankind’ is sexist, and I should make an effort to look beyond my preset positions and ideologies, as is the focus of the class.”

Following the meeting with Jeffers, Scott sent an email to the entire class in which she vehemently denied that gender-neutral language is merely a question of “political correctness,” pointing out that both the Modern Language Association and the American Psychological Association have put out guidelines promoting gender-neutral language:

“The issue goes beyond ‘political correctness,’ for my colleagues and I recognize that words help to create our reality, power dynamics, and relationships among people. You are welcome to make a statement about your politics, or conscience, or beliefs by using gender-specific language in your papers, and in many cases gender-specific language is called for, when you can discern with certainty the gender of the characters and author you’re discussing. However, I’ll still have to subtract a point or two for any kind of language that refers to all people as ‘mankind’ or readers as ‘him/he’, for the reasons I’ve outlined carefully above.”

Campus Reform has reached out to Dr. Scott, as well as the Dean of the College that houses the English Department and the English Department Chair, but none had responded by press time.

Here are some student reviews of Anne Scott on Rate My Professors:

“For Prof Scott, political correctness is more important than learning. She’s all about viewpoint discrimination. If you want the grade you deserve, you have to read her mind and reflect what’s in there. And it’s a narrow mind. A definite avoid.”

“Way too liberal even for me. Way too ‘politically correct’ for me. Should focus on Chaucer and forget trying to change the world to her utopian fantasy. The point of college is to train people to think, not tell them what to think.”

“You must be ‘politically correct’ and ‘gender neutral’ at all times or your grades will suffer! Run away!”

“Watch your politics in this class. I had to pretend I believed in the nonsense she spouts. Felt like 1984 in there with all the ivory tower liberal type indoctrination.”

“She’s a proponent of ‘gender neutral language’ going so far as to knock points off of other students’ grades if they do not acquiesce to her brand of politically correct nonsense.”

“This complete joke of a professor goes out of her way to get offended and makes her students suffer for it. She will deduct points unless you agree with her about her left wing social justice warrior viewpoints. Don’t take this professor. She deserves to be fired.”

It is noteworthy that rave reviews of Scott got plenty of thumbs down.

I feel so sorry for our college students . . . .

The President of Northern Arizona University is Rita Hartung Cheng. Here’s her contact info.:


Phone: 928-523-3232

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

New ‘pronoun pins’ at U of Kansas let people choose their gender

gender-pins

From Fox News: Kansas University libraries will now offer students, staff and visitors the choice of wearing “gender inclusive” buttons identifying their preferred gender pronouns, in order to help promote a “welcoming environment” on campus.

The buttons, which read, “He/Him/His,” “She/Her/Hers” or “They/Them/Theirs” are part of a year-long effort on behalf of the KU library’s “You Belong Here” marketing campaign touting the school as warm, welcoming, and tolerant.

“Because gender is, itself, fluid and up to the individual, each person has the right to identify their own pronouns, and we encourage you to ask before assuming someone’s gender,” a sign in the library above the available buttons reads, according to local media.

The library signs go on to explain that “misgendering” someone “can be hurtful” and lead to emotional distress as that person contemplates their ultimate exclusion from modern society, or struggle with “invalidation” of their life choices.

KU’s “front line” librarians came up with the idea, and have been wearing the buttons with pride. They say the markers have been so popular that the library has already had to reorder buttons, and that students routinely ask for them.

DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0