Great observations Susan! I’m a 61 year old lesbian, a word which I’m sure you’ve heard Johns Hopkins University recently redefined as a non-man who is attracted to non-men. The gender cult will have fully had its way when men become the only people who are permitted to be called women. The cult’s project of upending our language by targ…
Great observations Susan! I’m a 61 year old lesbian, a word which I’m sure you’ve heard Johns Hopkins University recently redefined as a non-man who is attracted to non-men. The gender cult will have fully had its way when men become the only people who are permitted to be called women. The cult’s project of upending our language by targeting all words referring to women and redefining them by meticulously cleansing them of any reference to females makes this the most sexist, woman-hating social force the west has seen in generations. We are being served, or rather force fed, old conservative wine in new progressive bottles.
Hey, Barb, good to “meet” you. I gather, BTW, that Johns Hopkins may have pulled back on that wacky definition (though I haven’t followed through to confirm). What worries me most is getting through to anyone we know, and then to public officials, to get this ship turned around. Biden is clueless, and his advisors (Levine chief among them) are making a fool of him. That Rose Montoya incident is only the latest, and sure to be fodder for numerous campaign ads. I know some Ds are frustrated enough to vote for Rs, but I think that’s a really bad idea. In addition to the issues with which you and I and so many others are rightly concerned, Rs will gut social programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and the ACA. So I think that makes any of us who care about those things, too, which I do, to do everything we can to educate others and then get everyone to contact their public officials early and often in hopes we avoid a total calamity in 2024.
Good to meet you too Susan! Yes, I’m encouraged to see that the Hopkins definition received a Dylan Mulvaney-type reception. One thing I’ve done to plant a seed with my friends, who are on the left with me but who I don’t think are actually seeing this hiding-in-plain-sight, multi-headed gender cult for what it is, is to point them to the “Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling” podcast series. I think it’s deeply thoughtful, compassionate and humble, while refusing to pull any punches. My friends found it so engrossing they binge-listened all 7 episodes. I’m alarmed that virtually all of our civic institutions have become propagators and enforcers of the gender cult. It’s so important for Ds to stop propagating the cult and start standing up to it, for the sake of everyone being harmed by it. Not to be too Machiavellian about it, but I also think it would be a huge political win for the Ds to do so. The cult is built on the lie that biological sex is not real, so it’s fundamentally unstable. I hope that once one brave, high-visibility democrat calls this shit out for what it is, an avalanche of support will follow. I can tell from “reader’s picks” comments on NYT articles about all issues trans that congressional democrats are completely out of touch with the democratic electorate.
Barb, everything you write here is spot on, and particularly this: “The cult is built on the lie that biological sex is not real, so it’s fundamentally unstable. I hope that once one brave, high-visibility democrat calls this shit out for what it is, an avalanche of support will follow.” (I’ve been able to get one person, a straight white elderly male, to listen to Witch Trials. Others don’t know what they are missing--it is really terrific!)
Great observations Susan! I’m a 61 year old lesbian, a word which I’m sure you’ve heard Johns Hopkins University recently redefined as a non-man who is attracted to non-men. The gender cult will have fully had its way when men become the only people who are permitted to be called women. The cult’s project of upending our language by targeting all words referring to women and redefining them by meticulously cleansing them of any reference to females makes this the most sexist, woman-hating social force the west has seen in generations. We are being served, or rather force fed, old conservative wine in new progressive bottles.
Hey, Barb, good to “meet” you. I gather, BTW, that Johns Hopkins may have pulled back on that wacky definition (though I haven’t followed through to confirm). What worries me most is getting through to anyone we know, and then to public officials, to get this ship turned around. Biden is clueless, and his advisors (Levine chief among them) are making a fool of him. That Rose Montoya incident is only the latest, and sure to be fodder for numerous campaign ads. I know some Ds are frustrated enough to vote for Rs, but I think that’s a really bad idea. In addition to the issues with which you and I and so many others are rightly concerned, Rs will gut social programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and the ACA. So I think that makes any of us who care about those things, too, which I do, to do everything we can to educate others and then get everyone to contact their public officials early and often in hopes we avoid a total calamity in 2024.
Good to meet you too Susan! Yes, I’m encouraged to see that the Hopkins definition received a Dylan Mulvaney-type reception. One thing I’ve done to plant a seed with my friends, who are on the left with me but who I don’t think are actually seeing this hiding-in-plain-sight, multi-headed gender cult for what it is, is to point them to the “Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling” podcast series. I think it’s deeply thoughtful, compassionate and humble, while refusing to pull any punches. My friends found it so engrossing they binge-listened all 7 episodes. I’m alarmed that virtually all of our civic institutions have become propagators and enforcers of the gender cult. It’s so important for Ds to stop propagating the cult and start standing up to it, for the sake of everyone being harmed by it. Not to be too Machiavellian about it, but I also think it would be a huge political win for the Ds to do so. The cult is built on the lie that biological sex is not real, so it’s fundamentally unstable. I hope that once one brave, high-visibility democrat calls this shit out for what it is, an avalanche of support will follow. I can tell from “reader’s picks” comments on NYT articles about all issues trans that congressional democrats are completely out of touch with the democratic electorate.
Barb, everything you write here is spot on, and particularly this: “The cult is built on the lie that biological sex is not real, so it’s fundamentally unstable. I hope that once one brave, high-visibility democrat calls this shit out for what it is, an avalanche of support will follow.” (I’ve been able to get one person, a straight white elderly male, to listen to Witch Trials. Others don’t know what they are missing--it is really terrific!)