Links - 26th March 2022 (2 - Women)

the hype on Twitter - ""so did you make her cum?" nah man, i don't make women do anything, i'm not controlling"

Meme - "I just woke up from a switch and my bf slept with my alter,I feel cheated on just cuse it's my body doesn't mean it's me. idk how to feel he knew I wasn't me idk how to act now cuse I feel cheated on"

Meme - "I want to extract the eggs from your ovaries and take the milk from your honkers and mix them together to make an omelette"

Domestic violence survivor who fled abusive partner then married a man who KILLED his wife - "A mother-of-two who survived two violent relationships before choosing to wed a man who had spent 20 years in prison for murdering his ex wife says she's been 'judged' for her choices.    Stephanie Garcia, a parole case manager from Santa Rosa, Texas, fell for the charms of Gerardo Castaneda just a month after he was released from prison in 2007, after serving 20 years for the murder of his first wife in 1996.  The couple were married just seven months after meeting but Castaneda left Garcia a year later, leaving her feeling 'preyed upon' and 'manipulated'."
Hit me once, shame on you
Hit me twice, shame on me
Hit me thrice, ???
Apologists claim that it's hard for women to get out of abusive relationships so it's not their fault. Presumably it's not their fault for seeking out abusive relationships either

Weird, Cheating and Love: Testing testing - FML - "Today, one of my friends asked me to flirt with her boyfriend to see if he would flirt back. Knowing this was a trust test, I agreed. She got pissed at me when he flirted back and still isn't speaking to me. FML"

'Survivor' Players With Vaginas Got Extra Underwear, Competitors Say - "Two "Survivor" competitors said players with vaginas got an extra pair of underwear on season 41.
"Survivor" players can wear the same underwear for up to 39 days, which comes with health risks.
People with vaginas have more health risks associated with wearing underwear for a long time."
Trans angle aside - this is what "equality" looks like

Meme - "This is masked male villain that we turned into an innocent-looking female villain with no character that you are supposed to feel bad for as a plot twist."
"Marvel this is 7th week in a row you've shown us a masked male villain that you turned into an innocent-looking female villain with no character that we are supposed to feel bad for a plot twist"

FML - Posts | Facebook - "Today, I got punched in the face by a girl for asking if she was okay after I had seen her crying. FML"

Meme - "I have 5 kids, 3 baby daddies and divorced twice nothing too crazy ! Swipe right for some "real' conversations"

FML - "Today, my friend and I told each other about our boyfriends. They're both nice, kind, beautiful, talented, funny, sweet and smart. They also both have the same name. And house. And job. And car. FML"

Meme - "Julie Jax Replying to @leonalioness6: My stepfather and mother said if I ever brought home a black man they disown me. I didn't just bring one home I married him! Yes divorced now but still. So sorry for your family. It's awful! But we love you!"

Meme - "Star Lord: What a trash character. Can't even control his emotion. He's the reason Thanos won
Wanda Maximoff: She is just depressed because she lost her love. It is normal for her to want happiness she deserves, even if she has to torture an entire town.
Sylvie: She is just filled with hatred and revenge. She didn't betray Loki. She just wanted him to be save. That's why she sent him to the TVA where he's safe than sending him anywhere else. I certainly can't be mad at her. What Multiversal war? Oh come on, her emotion is more important"

June 23rd, 2021 - Top Comment of the Day : topcommentoftheday - "Guys, what are the sensation differences with putting your penis in a mouth, vagina, and ass, and which do you prefer?
    The mouth is a sports car. Capable of amazing things when controlled by a talented driver.
    The vagina is a high-end sedan. Luxury interior with all the amenities and features. Built for comfort, a smooth ride all the way. 10/10, would drive it every day.
    The ass is a 1997 base-level Jeep Wrangler with 130,000 miles on the odometer. Yeah, sorta fun to take for a spin once in a while just for kicks. But the interior is pretty sparse, the seats aren’t very comfortable for driver or passenger, and you might leak some fluids unless you do a big maintenance ritual right before you take it out. Personally I could take it or leave it. But I’m aware that some people just have a THING for Wranglers. So be it, to each their own."

Meme - Old man with T-shirt: "Sex instructor. First lesson free"
Skimpily dressed girls: *flirting and walking away*
"I think the first one on the left is xantasmine and the tall one is leynafarnham. The one at the back is giovannaa.perezz"

🤡Miku🤡 on Twitter - "Gatos por mi casa///Gatos en Japón"
mizuna_cos and and suichan_cos
Before the kiss

China - A wife less ordinary - "When June Ding goes on a date with a Chinese man, she hikes up the virgin factor. Instead of wearing a low-cut top and necklace, she stows away her cleavage and dons a demure sweater and scarf. During the course of the evening she is careful to let the man do most of the talking, to appear interested in everything he says and to react with sufficient wonder to ensure that he is comfortably marinating in his own ego at all times... Animated, affable and razor sharp, she graduated at the top of her high-school class and then left China to study at Yale, where she earned a BA and a graduate qualification in law. She worked briefly at a New York City law firm before feeling the pull of home – like most Chinese her age she is an only child – and moved back to be closer to her parents. That has allowed them to focus on what they see as June’s next obligation to the family: marriage. “Pay attention to your laugh!” warns her mother as June gets ready for a date one evening. Her mother constantly reminds her to tame any expression of amusement when in the company of a Chinese gentleman. June’s father... suggests that she mute her laugh altogether and instead encourages her to “smile like the Mona Lisa”. Anything more exuberant might convince a prospective suitor that she is assertive, worldly, charismatic – not a good wife, in other words. June’s love life offers a prime example of the obstacles Chinese women with advanced degrees can encounter when seeking a marriage partner. Most men she is set up with don’t seem interested in casual dating. They are looking for wives – blushing, tender, baby-making wives. June’s education, exposure to a foreign dating culture and emotional expectations all make her something of an anomaly in modern China where the propriety and practicality of traditional courtship often dominate. She is determined to avoid finding a husband of the shake-and-bake variety – the kind who, shortly after shaking his hand, you have married and begun baking children for. In this she is running against cultural expectations: though China’s economic and physical landscape have changed beyond recognition in recent decades, social mores lag far behind... In rural areas, women may be considered leftover at 25; in larger cities it kicks in closer to 30... For older generations of Chinese, adulthood and marriage are essentially synonymous. Professional accomplishments are considered almost irrelevant if an individual remains unmarried and childless (the two usually go together since having a baby outside wedlock is illegal in most provinces)... A few threaten disinheritance or even rush their children into a precipitous marriage because they believe it better to divorce than not to marry at all. (Small wonder that there is a growing niche in renting boyfriends or girlfriends to take home for family celebrations.)... “We like our wives to be yogurts,” says a 35-year old Chinese investment banker. “Plain yogurts, so that we can flavour them as we’d like.” On paper he seems like the kind of match that would suit June. Like her, he’s ambitious, well educated, has a good corporate job and speaks excellent English. At work he is surrounded by high-achieving, single women but, though he enjoys their company, he’s not interested in marrying an educational or professional equal. In fact, he’s already engaged. “My fiancée is a plain yogurt,” he says. “She’s low maintenance and doesn’t really have her own ideas. I like her because she’s easy to manage.” Chinese women have been an integral part of the formal economy for far longer than many of their Western counterparts, yet many men have a tendency – some would say a cultural obligation – to reject women with equivalent education and salaries... In most countries where more women get university degrees than men, the prevalence of hypergamy – women marrying “up” a social class – tends to diminish over time... Paternalistic China is a flagrant exception to this trend... June says she switches between two distinct modes, Chinese girl or overseas returnee with an Ivy League degree. Her friends tell her that is not enough: she needs to be versed in the ancient art of sajiao, or the strategically executed temper tantrum, an indispensable element in the dating arsenal of every Chinese woman. “A woman who knows how to sajiao knows how to make a man happy,” declared an article in the Chinese edition of Psychologies magazine in 2012. Sajiao involves pouting, mewling and the stomping of feet. That doesn’t sound attractive. Yet in a rapidly changing social and economic environment, it has become a critical skill for maintaining a sense of continuity and order in gender relations by helping a Chinese man feel loved, honoured, chivalrous and, above all, manly... “Sajiao allows her to appear soft and feminine rather than hard and powerful, traits that challenge traditional notions of womanhood. By playing up to the male ego, she accomplishes the near-impossible: making her man feel like a man.” In the 1940s American women were given remarkably similar advice... “In the eyes of many Chinese men, a beautiful girl can only be beautiful so long as she’s useless and completely lost and destroyed without a man supporting her”... “And a smart girl can only be smart so long as she isn’t too beautiful to be taken seriously,” she adds. As for a smart, beautiful woman? That, Ivy proudly proclaims, is a mistress... “Do you worry about fidelity with your future husband?” asks June, the ever-inquisitive student. “He will cheat,” says Ivy. “Men of status always do. The trick is finding one who will be savvy enough to keep it a secret from you. In my experience, a bad man fools you once; a good man fools you for ever.”"
Unfortunately, this barely touches on the other side of the equation. Given female mate choice - exacerbated by the unbalanced gender ratio - blaming only Chinese men for not wanting Chinese women is odd

🦋 liv on Twitter: "wtf how do boys make plans this easy??!?"
Women overcomplicate things

Twitch Says Being Seen As 'Sexy' Isn't Against The Rules, Creates Dedicated Category For Hot Tub Streamers - "Twitch announced that it has created a new category: “Pools, Hot Tubs, and Beaches.” Previously, hot tub streamers largely used the catch-all Just Chatting category"

Hoops Bank on Twitter - "PJ Washington is now forced to pay $200k/month in child support over the next 18 years. Ex-wife secretly filed for divorce 2 weeks after giving birth to child."

Meme - "United Nations: What you say matters. Help create a more equal world by using gender language if you're unsure about someone's gender or are referring to a group.
policeman -> police officer
landlord -> owner
boyfriend/girlfriend -> partner
salesman -> salesperson
manpower -> workforce
maiden name -> family name
fireman -> firefighter
husband/wife -> spouse"
"Smugumin: brb asking my black friend if he's found/payed his owner yet"
Not to mention: maiden name has a different meaning from family name

Meme - "Roommate wanted
Single male (44) searching for roommate
Must be female aged 18-25 and single
Must be willing to cook and clean
1 bedroom apartment, you can use the couch until you are comfortable enough to share the bedroom.
No pets, no drinking, no drugs and no male friends allowed
My home has a" "no closed doors" policy. (This is for safety)
$400 a month
Call Owen 313-"

Meme - *Sugoi Dekai* "WHAT THE HELL HER BREASTS ARE LARGE!!"
"THIS IS FASCISM"
*He-Man* "his biceps are bigger than his head, incredible"
"we must do 8 hour arm workout tonight"

The Captain on Twitter - "Dudes, if you're trying to meet a cool woman, look for a gal out walking her dog. She's active, clearly has great taste in animals, AND she's already prepared to pick up shit off the street — this is your chance."

NYPD Cop Who Gave Lt. Christmas Party Lap Dance is Tearful, Apologetic - "The NYPD rookie who was caught on video giving a lap dance to a married lieutenant at a holiday party is super emotional, apologizing to the lieutenant's wife and also saying if she were a man who did something similar it wouldn't be nearly as big a deal.  Vera Mekuli tells TMZ ... she hasn't spoken to the lieutenant since the party and hasn't been comfortable showing up at her precinct. She says her fellow officers at the station have been pretty understanding, allowing her to work from home. She wants to eventually return to the station house and then go back to duty on the streets."
Accountability for women is misogynistic

Meme - "Daily reminder that much anime is disordered.
Porn - Giving its viewers unrealistic expectations of women - Anime"
"Yeah, most anime shows women as kind, compassionate and likeable."

Meme - "When a man says he'll do anything for a woman, he means fight bad guys and kill dragons, not vacuum or wash dishes"

Meme - "Im always a little mean to men because if you treat them like humans they think u wanna sleep with them"
Comment: "Ladies, if men have their standards this low, maybe you need to treat men better. Like, if it’s to the point where we just want to be treated as human, that means they’re treating men like absolute crap and that them giving us the bare minimum is enough for some people"

J on Twitter - "My gf cheated on me with a married man. I plotted with his wife to catch our cheating partners in the act & we did. After, I asked his wife if her & I could date since we both been through pain. She said no &had a 3some with them instead. I snapped & shot everybody in their foots
I served 7 years at Harrison Oatman penitentiary. I got a light sentence because it was my first offense & it was a crime of passion/temporary insanity. Sentenced to 10 years & served 7. I'm out & put the past behind me. I have a new lady so all is well."

Facebook - "ULTIMATE SUPER ULTRA WHOLESOME 😤 Artist : Sakai Hamachi."

Model plans to marry her dog after giving up on men following 220 failed dates - "A fed-up former model who says she "done with men" plans to marry her pet dog after going on 220 failed dates.  Elizabeth Hoad hopes to persuade her local Catholic church to allow her to wed her six-year-old golden retriever, named Logan...  Elizabeth is not the only person to have their nuptials with their beloved four-legged friend .  Wilhelmina Callaghan married Henry the Yorkshire terrier in 2009."

I don't want you to tell me I'm beautiful in spite of my scars - "for some reason, I reject the notion that others might deem me to be beautiful. Perhaps it’s because I find it insincere or patronising. Maybe I’m not as healed as I thought I could be.   Or, maybe, I reject the idea that we feel the need to comment on the appearance of others and rate each other based on looks.   I appreciate the well-intentioned nature of comments like, ‘you’re still pretty even with your scars’.   But there’s always an ‘even though’, an ‘in spite of’, or an ‘aww, bless’ (the worst of the bunch) attached to these compliments. Even when those additional words aren’t actually said out loud, in my head, it’s always the sub-text.   Be it from a stranger, a friend, or a family member, I can’t help but resent when people compliment my looks and feel as though I’m simply being humoured... I want to explore how we, particularly as women, can lift each other up while not simply commenting on each other’s appearance.   I’m all for showing some much-needed love and throwing out compliments, but how do we define the grey area between empowering comments vs. those that can be loaded and triggering? For instance: ‘You look great, have you lost weight?’ – the implied message being that thinner is better."
I'm told a woman who doesn't give compliments is toxic. People will take offence at anything

Meme - "Guys think i stepped into the wrong uber why are there cameras *FAKETAXI*"

Meme - "tell me she's not built like Mewtwo"

Meme - Joan 'Smullen' Timson: "Dear, attention seeking statement breast feeders, as someone who breastfed my three kids without ever whipping them out in public, just pack it in. If you need to feed your babies whilst out and about, you can express your milk before hand. I realise this won't make you the centre of attention or make you look like the original earth mother, but maybe you could have a poo in the street to make up for it. Hope this helps."
The lactivists can't dismiss her as someone with no experience of breastfeeding

Woman travels 6,000 miles to remove love-lock from tourist attraction out of ‘pettiness’ - "A woman recently travelled 5,953 miles from Los Angeles in the US to Seoul in South Korea to remove an old love-lock that she and her ex had attached to a famous tourist attraction.  Kassie Yeung posted a Tiktok video about her epic journey, which has attracted 4.8 million views to date... Commonly known as the Namsan Tower, people travel to the top to attach colourful padlocks to the fences as a symbol of their love. The trend is similar to that practised at the Pont des Arts bridge in Paris, where officials ended up removing the locks in 2015 due to fears that the bridge might collapse... it took her around 30 minutes to sort through the hundreds of locks to find the one she and her partner had affixed in 2019.  Yeung admitted that removing the lock wasn’t the only reason for her flight and that she was also there for work... The South Korean landmark isn’t the only destination bearing love-locks.  They were also removed from fencing at Point Danger in Queensland in 2015 – and a similar approach was taken at Junction Bridge over the Arkansas River in the US in 2017."

Duchess of Argyll was pregnant at 15, had 88 lovers during marriage and took infamous porn picture - "As the Duke pursued his adultery claims, Margaret alleged he was having an affair with her own stepmother. She later withdrew the claim and paid out £25,000 when sued.  The Duke raided her desk in their Mayfair house, convinced he would find evidence of infidelity. He struck gold.  In a diary, days of illicit encounters were marked with a “V”. He also found incriminating letters and 13 racy Polaroid snaps. One showed her naked but for a three-strand pearl necklace, performing a sex act on a lover.  Another was a full-frontal that has come to be known as the “Headless Man” picture, in which she stood naked, facing the camera, next to a tall nude man. His head was out of shot.  Gossip-mongers ached to know his identity and the Duke was required to pose naked to prove the torso wasn’t his. Names touted included Transport Minister Ernest Marples, German diplomat Sigismund von Braun and her friend Peter Combe.  Duncan Sandys, then Secretary of State for the Colonies and Winston Churchill’s son-in-law, has been named as the man receiving oral pleasure, while film star Douglas Fairbanks Jr was named as the other man... After three years of wrangling, the case was heard over 11 days in 1962. A ruling was delivered in May 1963, with Lord Wheatley granting the Duke his divorce on the grounds of the Duchess’s adultery with Combe.  His horror clear, the judge said: “There is enough in her own admissions and proven facts to establish that by 1960 she was a completely promiscuous woman whose sexual appetite could only be satisfied with a number of men."

Police warn that Infamous Sex Island resort offering unlimited sex with 100 women will be raided - "US authorities have warned the controversial 'Sex Island' trip offering unlimited sex with 100 women will be raided by police - and could be shut down - when the drugs and alcohol-friendly vacation kicks off next month.  Previous incarnations of the orgy holiday have taken place on an island off the coast of Venezuela.  But this year the raunchy party will take place at an undisclosed resort in Nevada - the only US state to allow some legal prostitution. Guests will choose two 'beautiful' women each day for the four-day party, which includes raunchy activities such as topless quad bike and horse rides and a 'sexual helicopter tour'.  But organisers The Good Girls Company were last week served with a warning from America's Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) warning that officers would raid the event - and deport tourists if drugs laws were being broken.  Previous events have openly claimed to be 'drugs-friendly' and holidaymakers have told how illegal drugs including cocaine and LSD were freely available.  The warning from the federal government read: 'If any illegal substances are found on the premises of your resort, the immediate shutdown of the event be ordered.  'All foreigners attending and caught handling illegal drug substances will be immediately taken into the nearest immigration detention center and processed for deportation.' The letter also warned of severe penalties if any of the prostitutes at the event are found to be under 18.  A spokesman for The Good Girls Company said: 'The authorities are clearly getting nervous about Sex Island coming to the US for the first time, but they know they can't stop us in Nevada so they are warning us about illegal drugs.  'We have reassured our guests that they don't have to be worried about being deported. Everything will be legal and above board.'  The first Sex Island holiday was planned to take place on a private island off Cartagena, Colombia, but was blocked by the South American country's government after news of the event sparked anger.  After rumours last year's event would be held on an island off the coast of Trinidad and Tobago, the country's national security minister Stuart Young vowed to shut down the festival, and appealed to the public for information about the location.  The holiday was in fact held on the Isla Margarita, off the northern coast of crisis-hit Venezuela, where prostitution is legal. A promo vid for this year's X-rated holiday, to be held at an undisclosed resort in the Nevada desert, shows a bevy of naked beauties cavorting in a swimming pool, riding horses and driving quad bikes. The men will also be able to attend a 'holographic concert' during their stay, and other 'sexual surprises' are on offer, including the chance the spend 30 minutes with all the resort's 50 girls at once.  The video, which starts with a man hallucinating after getting lost in the desert, which ends with the words: 'Don't wait until you're dead to visit heaven'.  Tickets for this year's event cost $6000 - around £4,600. However, organisers have promised to refund the money of one guest who wins a competition during the event to have sex with the most women during the four days.  Another golden ticket will be given away in a raffle, with every purchase of merchandise from Sex Island's online store giving men one entry in the draw.  'Guests will be taken from Las Vegas International Airport by our private helicopter to our discreet location in Nevada. Enjoy the company of 100 beautiful girls in our alcohol and marijuana friendly environment,' says the event's official website. All of our girls are tested and free of any sexual diseases. We have a strict condom policy. At any moment you can switch girls with the other 50 guests.'  'The girls' mission is to please you and make you feel like a king... Enjoy breathtaking surroundings with your girls at the one and only Sex Island.'  Last year one former client, a 16-year-old boy, said he lost his virginity on a previous sex island holiday.  The teen, known only as Brian, said: 'It was incredible, so amazing that I want to cry just thinking about it.  'I had sex for the first time, alcohol for the first time and I did drugs for the first time.'... another man named Ryan, who told his wife he was going on a work trip, said: 'The yacht was full of beautiful Latina women, dancing and drinking. As we got on we were handed drinks and people started to loosen up."

Meme - "My bull stole my husband and I don't know how to deal with this.
I made a throwaway for this. We started in this lifestyle about 6 months ago. I found a bull who I really liked and we got along really well. Soon my husband joined in by watching. And then he helped us a bit and got more involved. After some time I started telling him to blow the bull to make him ready for me. And he didn't object at all. 1 was suprised by this but didn't object. It led to me watching him blow the bull and the bull coming on his face or mouth. I wanted to take it further so I asked the bull to fuck my husband. But we had to practice for that as my bull is one the bigger side. So I started ducking my husband with a strap on and we slowly progressed to the bull. It led to me watching the bull fuck him. 1 sent them on errands together to humiliate him. But they became friends afterwards and I didnt mind. Yesterday my husband told me that he wants a divorce. This literally came out of nowhere. I checked his phone but found nothing and was lost as to why. I went to the bulls house and told him to talk to him but he seemed reluctant to do that. He told me that my husband is dating him. I thought that this was a joke set up by them. It wasn't he is serious about this and now the both of them are dating. This is the side of cuckolding nobody told me about. I don't know what to say or how to feel. I can't even talk to anybody about this. I feel so embarrassed."

Meme - "Bae
Pick any girl I know from my IG and we'll ask her for a 3sum
igh bet
*censored*
her
Block the bitch now I kno the bitch you wanna fuck
Matter fact go talk to her and delete my number
bye"

Meme - "r/singlemoms
Boyfriend proposed, I said yes, but I have worries.
Advice Wanted
I'm 28 and a single mother to a 6 year old son. My boyfriend recently proposed and I said yes, but I'm worried I may be settling. I met my boyfriend on okcupid two years ago, after a string of terrible dates. All I could find were men who just wanted sex or didn't truly understand the compromises needed to date a single mom. My boyfriend is a kind, sweet, thoughtful man, and has embraced my son as if he was his own. He showed my son how to ride a bike, takes him to football camp, my boyfriend is more involved in my sons life than his own father. When my boyfriend asked me out, he wasn't really my type. He's only slightly taller than me, I'm 5'8. The bulk of what he wears is jeans/T-shirts and I have to constantly tell him to go get his hair cut. He cleans up well, but his laissez-faire attitude towards grooming is a turnoff and does effect out sex life. We share bills 50/50 and he doesn't really like to splurge on a nice dinner. I hinted at wanting a romantic getaway and he surprised us with a trip to Disney world. While well intentioned, I don't really feel special in our relationship. can't help, but worry that if we were to get married that I would be settling for less than I want and deserve in a relationship. I don't want just comfortable, but romance and passion. Sometimes it feels like we are just really close roommates. I asked my dad and he thinks I would be foolish to let him go. I could really use some advice from the women here or if anyone had similar thoughts and overcame them?"

Miscellaneous: Today, I was robbed. I didn't know how the robber got in, as... - FML - "Today, I was robbed. I didn't know how the robber got in, as there was no clear signs of forced entry. I later found out that my psycho ex had written my address on the key I lent her when we were going out, then purposely left it on a table in a café. FML"

Meme - SlutBarbie @ThroatBaby999: "My daddy first fingered me when was 4 years old. I knew it wasn't right but something in me loved being touched.. and the attention that came with it. Since that day began to touch myself, and it gradually got worst. I became a nymphomaniac. A Thread..
I tried to hide whi I was for shame I'd be looked down on. But now I embrace it, My daddy waited till was about 13 before he put his dick in me. He would tell me when was younger in a few years my Pussy would be big enough for him to fit inside of me."
Meme - "He fingered and ate my pussy for years. I would shower and lay naked across my bed waiting for his "goodnight kiss". See my mommy passed when I was 2. So it was just my father taking care of me. Just me and him always, and he was lonely.. And I loved that my body made everything ok. I can still remember tryna wrap my little mouth around his big black dick. He was huge to me, and it made me so horny for as long as I can remember. Making me wet just reflecting on it now.
Sometimes I go back to my home state and visit my daddy. He doesn't touch me anymore, and that bothers me. I think he thinks because I'm grown now I will tell or that I don't like it.. when truth is when see him all I wanna do is suck his dick and lick his ass and balls."
Meme - "And for him to fuck me like he still loves me. I miss the attention daddy gave me. Nobody can make me cum like him. Daddy if you see this... I still want you."

Meme - "IF YOU EAT BACON, PEPPERONI OR HAM, THEN TAKE A GOOD HARD, FUCKING LOOK AT THIS. *pigs in abattoir*"
Timothy: "I've seen a child being born and I still eat pussy."

Vaccines are a tool, not a silver bullet. If we’d allowed more scientific debate, we would have realized this earlier (Covid)

Opinion: Vaccines are a tool, not a silver bullet. If we’d allowed more scientific debate, we would have realized this earlier - The Globe and Mail

"Fluvoxamine is a “repurposed drug,” and comes from what might seem like a most unlikely source – psychiatry. It is an antidepressant used most commonly to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder. The drug has had two randomized control trials, or RCTs (the highest level of evidence) and four observational studies showing it keeps people with COVID out of hospital, from requiring intubation, and helps prevent death. The discovery of its anti-COVID properties came after impressive sleuthing in France and the United States. Then a partnership co-led by a team of Canadians conducted the large randomized trial that proved what it could do...

 Consider how things appeared in April, 2020, when Bill Gates, whose foundation is the largest private contributor to the World Health Organization, said: “The ultimate solution, the only thing that really lets us go back completely to normal and feel good … is to create a vaccine.” His “only” meant, that in practice, our chief hope and focus – in research, policy, in the media, and even emotionally, for many – became the vaccines. Mr. Gates articulated what became our master narrative: Public health would stop the spread with extemporizing measures such as lockdowns, discouraging social functions and travel, and closing schools and businesses until the vaccines arrived, all of which would protect us until we achieved vaccine-induced herd immunity everywhere, which, we were told, would eliminate the virus. We put our faith in the vaccines, while other approaches – such as drugs for early treatment, or a role for our natural immunity, or lowering our personal risk factors, for instance – got comparatively less attention.

Key individuals predicted – half promised, really – we’d be done with COVID, at least in the West, by the summer of 2021. In February, 2021, Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, said the vaccine was still offering strong protection at the six-month mark and “indicators right now … are telling us that there is a protection against the transmission of the disease.” That April, Dr. Ugur Sahin, the CEO of BioNTech (which developed the vaccine for Pfizer), told reporters, “Europe will reach herd immunity in July, latest by August.” It wasn’t a tough sell. Who would not want it to be true? Having no pandemic experience, we took them at their word. Politicians fostered the idea that our proper aim for handling COVID would be to “eliminate it everywhere,” as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said. Early treatment doesn’t promise that, though it might lower death rates. Eradication had more psychological appeal: let’s get it out of our lives forever.

Yet, in dismal December, 2021, two years in, with cases soon to reach record highs, and another lockdown looming and vaccines waning, it wasn’t working out that way. Perhaps if we hadn’t been so focused on one tool things might have gone differently. And perhaps if certain voices hadn’t been silenced, and others handed a megaphone, our pandemic tool kit, and mindset, would have been different too.

Early in the pandemic, at the Sainte-Anne site of the Parisian mental hospital, Psychiatrie & Neurosciences, something mysterious occurred. The staff started contracting COVID in high numbers, but their patients, gravely mentally ill, did not. Three staff got COVID for every patient, despite the patients having more risk factors, such as being overweight, or having cardiovascular disease.

Someone wondered, could it be that the patients’ psychiatric medications were protecting them?...

Repurposed drugs have a track record, and thus often a safety advantage. And the generic ones are cheap. Fluvoxamine costs about $15 for a course of treatment. Repurposed drugs are used by poorer countries that can’t afford vaccines or expensive early treatment drugs such as Paxlovid ($500) or Molnupiravir (US$700 and not yet approved in Canada).

So why hasn’t treatment focused more on repurposed drugs?

First, because the master narrative, once it took hold, directed our attention away from this possibility. Second, in North America, the first repurposed drug that came to public attention was hydroxychloroquine. When it was endorsed by then-president Donald Trump it became highly politicized. People’s opinions about it often had more to do with their political affiliation than whether they had read any of the (now) 303 studies. Third, agencies that regulate drugs, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, mandate that any drug they evaluate have a sponsor, usually a drug company agreeing to assume liabilities for the drug. It’s an extremely expensive process. If an old, cheap generic drug shows promise for repurposing, it still needs independent studies before a health body will recommend it for that. Drug companies have no financial incentive to apply for a formal approval for a new use and the drugs may languish.

Of all the reasons that we didn’t focus on repurposed drugs, I would argue, the master narrative was the most important, because of the way it organized so many people’s thoughts, attention and emotions.

The narrative would not have been nearly as problematic had it not been so tied into something else: the military metaphor that has defined our COVID experience from the beginning. This master narrative was our battle plan and this was a “war” to eradicate the enemy virus.

This military metaphor seems second nature in medicine. We are always in a “war against cancer,” or “combatting” heart disease, Alzheimer’s, and AIDS. But this way of thinking only became common in medicine several hundred years ago, after the philosopher Francis Bacon argued the goal of science should change from what it had been – “the study of nature” – to the very practical “conquest of nature.” Soon physicians were speaking of “conquering” disease, with “magic bullets.” We increasingly left behind the original Hippocratic mindset of medicine as an extension of nature, which involved working with it, as an ally, wherever possible – not to conquer, but to heal, often with the help of the patient’s own healing capacities...

Reappraisal of any prevailing narrative requires taking in new insights, which, by definition, arise from a minority viewpoint. When a military metaphor sweeps through a society or a bureaucracy beset by fear, all-or-nothing, you-are-with-us-or-against-us thinking follows. We become more prone to see someone who doesn’t go along with the majority view – including scientists who spot problems with the reigning narrative – as putting the rest of us at risk, and a “traitor,” rather than as someone doing their job. They are attacked, censored or self-censor to survive. In war, you shut up and follow orders, or get court-martialed.

We are especially suspicious of other people during contagion, because our brains are fired up by a primitive circuit that protects us by making us obsessively preoccupied with the purity of those around us. Will this person get me sick? It even fires if we think their actions, or even policy proposals might be risky. The circuit, called the behavioural immune response, causes us to fear, loathe and feel rage toward the “impure” germ bearer. It results in many false alarms (think of someone driving alone with a mask on). It’s one reason debates about vaccines are emotionally radioactive. Some vaccinated people feel all the unvaccinated bear germs, while some unvaccinated people feel vaccine may put germs or toxins in their bodies.

This past summer, as news broke that there were breakthrough infections and vaccine protection against infection was waning, the North American media began to advise us to lower our expectations for them: “Vaccines Can Only Do So Much,” read a headline in The Washington Post. Many readers were caught completely off guard. In part they were surprised, because the censorship of scientists who held dissenting views – and had been warning this might happen – was much more widespread than many are aware of.

According to an Amnesty International report published in October, censorship and harassment of health professionals, and others, has been a problem “across the world,” during the pandemic. Most singled out are those who express critical opinions of their governments’ policies (e.g. restrictions of movement, lockdown, or criticisms of government dispensing with civil liberties).

The censors justified these actions as simply banning “misinformation” and “prevent[ing] panic.” In North America people were not imprisoned, but many brilliant scientists and physicians with proper credentials from places such as Harvard, Oxford and Stanford, were under fire. Physicians were vilified for questioning government policies on lockdowns, masks, aspects of vaccines, mitigation or unproven treatments – the very things that were, of course, the subject of serious continuing scientific debate. In some jurisdictions in North America physicians are threatened by their regulating boards with suspension or revocation of their medical licenses for spreading “misinformation,” forcing some doctors to have to choose between what they – rightly or wrongly – see as their patient’s best interests, and their own livelihood. But as the Amnesty report states, “Winning the battle against the virus includes not just government led actions and top-down diktats, but also bottom-up approaches which can only come about if the rights to freedom of expression and access to information are fully enabled.”

There were “snake oil” claims on the internet, yes, but generally when scientists and health care workers were party to these quarrels, it was because there was a scientific debate. In such a case, to accuse one’s opponent of spreading “misinformation” is to pre-emptively ascribe to oneself an unjustified certainty – and to one’s opponent bad faith. At times no one really knew what was more harmful – e.g. keeping children out of school, or sending them in. There was incorrect information aplenty in our novel situation, and that included some spread by officials who flip-flopped multiple times on masks, or who, claiming to “follow the science,” differed with officials in similar jurisdictions, based on changing data.

This, in medicine, is called the problem of “medical reversal.” An approach thought to be helpful is proven to be harmful, and vice versa. Sometimes two studies can contradict each other even on the same day. Physician-scientist Vinayak Prasad, of UC San Francisco, argues it is the most important problem facing medicine today. The problem of medical reversals didn’t disappear the day the virus landed on our shores. We had not only a virus problem, but a medical reversal problem.

The medical boards were in an unusual situation, torn between once-cherished traditions of scientific debate, and the atmosphere of crisis and their wish to do their part in “the war.” After all, it is vital that public health, and its officials, in a crisis, be able to convey consistent messages as they ask citizens to change their behaviours, and undergo various privations. But if those messages are to be persuasive, and the requests for such privations scientifically arguable and legitimate, the actions must be based on a full, open, unhampered scientific process solid enough to withstand scientific criticism and debate. Why else should the public go along? Censorship, by giving the public the false impression there are no medical controversies, undermines the censor’s own claim to speak in the name of science and public safety. Ironically, it guarantees the public will be left misinformed.

The authors of the master narrative tend to say the main reason that things have not gone as they predicted is because variants arose. But if anything could have been predicted, it is that viruses mutate. Columbia virologist Vincent Racaniello described how fellow scientists were worried that the new mRNA technology, by focusing on only a small portion of the virus, the spike protein, would make it easy for the virus to “get around” or escape the vaccine through mutations. “That’s partly why,” he said in May, “all the variants are arising now, because we have only the spike epitopes in there.” That view didn’t get much of a hearing...

In December, 2020, the new mRNA vaccines were rolled out, and were, according to the randomized clinical trials, 95 per cent (Pfizer) and 94.5 per cent (Moderna) efficacious in stopping infection. Physician-scientist Eric Topol, head of Scripps Labs, said these vaccines “will go down in history as one of science and medical research’s greatest achievements.”

But by the time summer 2021 arrived, real world experience contradicted Mr. Bourla’s and Dr. Sahin’s claims of potency at six months, no transmission by the vaccinated, and imminent herd immunity. Pfizer’s Mr. Bourla, in his February interview, had called Israel “the world’s lab,” because it was vaccinated with the Pfizer extensively and several months ahead of other countries, giving the world a glimpse of its future. But when Israeli public health released its six-month data, they showed that vaccine effectiveness had dropped to 39 per cent, and Delta was surging. (The FDA had originally said it would not approve a vaccine less than 50-per-cent effective.) A Mayo clinic study showed that after six months, protection granted by the two Pfizer doses dropped from the original 95 per cent to 42 per cent. Another Israeli study showed it had dropped to 16 per cent. That huge discrepancy couldn’t be attributed just to the new variant, Delta, because protection was already fading at five months for the earlier variants too.

So why such a discrepancy? The original studies were clinical trials. The Pfizer study followed about 38,000 people without COVID who were divided in two groups – half got the vaccine, and half a placebo. The investigators asked the question: could the vaccines prevent symptomatic cases of COVID-19? But, as Peter Doshi, senior editor at the British Medical Journal, warned, “None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths.” He explained that, “Because most people with symptomatic COVID-19 experience only mild symptoms, even trials involving 30,000 or more patients would turn up relatively few cases of severe disease.” Susanne Hodgson of the University of Oxford agreed: “The current [randomized control trials] that are ongoing are … not powered to assess efficacy against hospital admission and death.”

The Moderna report to the FDA on Dec. 17, 2020, confirmed “there were no deaths due to COVID-19 at the time of the interim analysis to enable an assessment of vaccine efficacy against death due to COVID-19.” Moderna followed about 30,000 people. When asked by the British Medical Journal, why the trial had not been designed to assess if the vaccine could prevent hospitalization and death, Moderna answered: “You would need a trial that is either 5 or 10 times larger or you’d need a trial that is 5-10 times longer to collect those events.” In the Pfizer study of 38,000 people, not a single person in the placebo or the vaccine group died of COVID. By publication date, only one person had died of COVID in the Moderna study. To state it clearly: One person out of about 70,000 in the combined studies of Pfizer and Moderna actually died of COVID. In the real world, at the time, about 60 per cent of COVID deaths were in people over 75 years of age. But only 4.4 per cent of that age group were in the Pfizer study. The sample chosen was not appropriate to answer the public’s most pressing question: Could the vaccines save lives?

And how long had the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines been studied in the Phase 3 follow-up trials before being released for mass use in the winter of 2021? Two months.

These studies looked at the vaccines at their most potent, in a low risk population, and gave us a flattering snapshot. But COVID-19 is a movie.

In contrast, the Mayo study, and the Israeli data, were looking at data over a more realistic time course to test effectiveness.

The waning created a crisis in Israel... As breakthrough infections became commonplace throughout the world, noted Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina said, the message that “this is only an epidemic of the unvaccinated … is falling flat.”

As for Dr. Sahin’s claim that we were on the brink of vaccine-induced herd immunity and being rid of COVID altogether, experts such as Larry Brilliant (who had helped eradicate smallpox with vaccines) and five other scientists wrote in Foreign Affairs in July, 2021, “Among humans, global herd immunity, once promoted as a singular solution, is unreachable.” They explained in precise detail why COVID-19 was unlike smallpox, and it could not be “eradicated,” such as the fact it is growing in a dozen animal species already. “If we are forced to choose a vaccine that gives only one year of protection,” said Dr. Brilliant, “then we are doomed to have COVID become endemic, an infection that is always with us …” That vaccines would get us to a vaccine-based herd immunity had been one of the two main scientific justifications for vaccine mandates. Now it was gone.

The other justification for mandates had been that the vaccinated don’t transmit the virus.

Most of us had presumed, when we got our first doses, that we couldn’t pass the virus on to others. Public statements repeatedly praised people for “doing your part to stop the spread.” But in August, CDC director Rochelle Walensky told CNN, when asked why the vaccinated must wear masks, “Our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta; with regard to severe illness and death, they prevent it. But what they can’t do any more is prevent transmission.”

In fact, the original randomized clinical trials for Pfizer and Moderna did not test if the vaccines stop transmission. Now our best hope was that the vaccinated might transmit less than the unvaccinated. Several studies could be interpreted as showing this. But others found the vaccinated likely had equal transmission...

The master narrative was silent about natural immunity and its relationship to vaccination status. Many scientist-physicians, from prominent universities in the U.S. with specialties in public health, argue that one can be for the use of the COVID vaccine, but also against mandating it for unvaccinated people who are already immune.

These scientists maintain what matters is not whether a person is vaccinated or not, but whether they are immune or not. Thus, the European Union recognizes natural immunity in its Digital COVID Certificate, which is in lieu of a vaccine passport, and is not limited to proof of vaccination. You could get a passport and travel if you have been vaccinated or if you have “recovered from COVID-19″ or if you have a recent test saying you are negative... Such scientists think it irrational that government calls for mass mandates are escalating just as the core original justifications for them – that the vaccinated don’t transmit the virus, and the vaccine will bring us to herd immunity – have collapsed...

A recent pivotal study from South Africa – not yet peer reviewed – shows that in poor communities, where there was modest vaccination (39 per cent of adults), more than 70 per cent of people had already been exposed to the virus in previous waves, going into Omicron. The twice vaccinated had more protection than those who were unvaccinated and never had COVID. But the unvaccinated who had COVID and recovered had more protection from severe disease than the vaccinated. One Israeli study showed that the unvaccinated who recovered from COVID have 27 times less risk of reinfection compared with the vaccinated, and nine times less risk of hospitalization.

In a recent Munk Debate, Harvard’s Dr. Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and vaccine safety specialist, argued that mandating vaccines for the naturally immune “actually creates problems because when people see that they are forced to take a vaccine that they don’t need because they already are immune, that causes a lot of distrust in public health. And we have seen during this last year and a half that all the hard work we’ve done over many decades to build trust in vaccines is now disappearing because we’re making these mandates that make no sense from a scientific or public health perspective.”

Public health moves at the speed of trust, as physician Rishi Manchanda wrote. Of the two main approaches to public health – the participatory, and the coercive – the coercive usually makes enemies, and tears society apart. It’s like a hare: it has quick victories. The participatory approach, is a tortoise; when it fails to persuade, instead of blaming those it serves, it asks, as a scientist might, where have I fallen short, and aims to do better...

In the West, many have responded to waning vaccine protection with time by doubling down, proposing ever more boosters. What is the scientific evidence for frequent boosters? That’s a matter of scientific debate.

The original Pfizer study submitted to the FDA booster meeting was shockingly tiny – a mere 306 patients were given the section, and they had been followed for only a month, and, again, most of the subjects were younger than those at risk (18-55). Pfizer wanted it on that basis rolled out to millions. That was enough to get FDA officials asking hard questions. Crucially, nobody had studied the long-term effects of multiple mRNA boosters – there hasn’t been time. The FDA refused Pfizer’s recommendation to approve the booster for the entire U.S. population, with the top two heads of its Vaccine Research and Review Committee, Dr. Marion Gruber, (the head, and former acting chief scientist at the FDA), and Philip Krause (deputy director), and international colleagues, writing in the Lancet:

“There could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently, especially with vaccines that can have immune-mediated side-effects (such as myocarditis, which is more common after the second dose of some mRNA vaccines, or Guillain-Barre syndrome, which has been associated with adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines [like the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson]). If unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions, there could be implications for vaccine acceptance that go beyond COVID-19 vaccines.”

When the head scientists of the FDA Vaccine Review committee and colleagues raise such questions, it can’t be dismissed as fringe fear-mongering. Shortly after, Dr. Gruber and Dr. Krause quit the FDA because the Biden administration was putting pressure on them to approve boosters before the vaccine committee had even met. The standard practice for approval is for the agencies to convene panels of outside experts to review the data openly, weigh risks and benefits, and take votes. But in December, the FDA and CDC leadership three times took the extraordinary step of not convening those experts for key booster meetings, in essence going around them because committee members had warned that the science supporting boosters for younger people was weak to non-existent, and they had safety concerns. Dr. Paul Offit, perhaps the most high profile provaccine physician-scientist in America, who was on the FDA panel told The Atlantic, he wouldn’t advise a booster for his healthy son in his 20s, or a healthy male in his teens, because the risks of myocarditis (higher in males) outweigh the benefits. Dr. Offit rejects the CDC’s and FDA’s all-or-nothing approach to children’s vaccination.

Vinayak Prasad, the UCSF epidemiologist, says if you put the Danish, Ontario, U.S., and Kaiser studies about Omicron together, “it’s time to face the reality about the vaccines.”

“Two doses of vaccine does nothing or almost nothing to stop symptomatic SARS-CoV-2,” he says. “Three doses barely does anything, and the effect will likely attenuate over time.” He says, “Booster mandates make no sense. … Boosting should happen in populations where it further reduces severe disease and death – a.k.a. older and vulnerable people.”

With Omicron surging, Israeli public health met to discuss a fourth booster. The New York Times reported that some scientists on the Israeli government booster advisory panel, “warned that the plan could backfire, because too many shots might cause a sort of immune response fatigue, compromising the body’s ability to fight the coronavirus.” This immune fatigue was, perhaps, not inconsistent with negative vaccine efficacy. It’s not proven, but the fact that public-health officials were voicing such concerns shows that the doubling down strategy on boosters is being reappraised on safety lines. The EU, in a reversal, has just come out against regular, continuing boosters, saying they are afraid it will weaken the immune response

From the very beginning, some scientists have wondered whether our goal – the conquest and eradication of the virus – was the right one. As Michael Cordingley reminds us in his book Viruses, in each millilitre of seawater there are about 10 to 100 million viruses, and this was a respiratory virus, free-floating, all around us, likely to shape shift and mutate. Could we, conquerors of nature, really overwhelm an enemy so omnipresent and agile?

As we have seen, as part of the reappraisal, there’s an increasingly new goal being articulated by most public-health experts, that it’s not “eradication of the virus,” but it is keeping hospitalizations and deaths down, but also, working with the virus. The chairman of the Israeli Association of Public Health Physicians, professor Hagai Levine, said, “Because Omicron is so contagious, our efforts to stop its spread are probably pretty futile. … We are not going to stop this wave.” Then he dared to say, “We have been trying to dodge the bullet for two years, and in Israel we have been successful to some extent. But most of humanity is still alive after contracting COVID.”

The Jerusalem Post reported, that in Israel some health experts “believe the ‘magic bullet’ this time around will actually be widespread infection.” It cited Dr. Cohen, saying, “The fifth wave might end when a large number of people will be infected.”

Just as deaths have decoupled from cases with Omicron, our COVID mandates have decoupled from the science originally used to justify them. But the goalposts are moving, and now it is argued that only mandates will keep hospitals free of high-risk unvaccinated patients...

Portraying the unvaccinated as the sole cause is inaccurate, and deflects from the painful fact that Canada has fewer ICU and acute care beds per capita than almost any country in the developed world, and that the current vaccines are not working as well as hoped. What is called for is not more scapegoating and coercion, but healing, and more early treatment for both groups, now that we have it. Honouring the bedrock of medical ethics, no treatment without consent, is humane, preferable and possible.

Also reappraising is Bill Gates himself. He admitted this past November, “We need a new way of doing the vaccines.” He also accepted that our focus had been too narrow. “We didn’t get much in the way of therapeutics … way less than should have been the case.”

Consider how different our narrative is now. More and more officials are saying openly what the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration – the ridiculed view of 60,000 public health scientists and physician signatories – said some time ago: Our goal is not eradication of the virus, or a one-size-fits-all policy, but lessening of deaths in the vulnerable through focused protection, and focused vaccination. The immunity we have will be a mix of vaccine immunity and natural immunity, depending on the person. The new plan – to live with the virus and get back to living a normal life – is a departure from the pure Baconian “conquest of nature,” and hearkens back to the ancient, Hippocratic, notion that we must work with nature as an ally, in a kind of collaboration...

It’s been a blow to our Baconian narcissism to be upended by nature these past two years. That thin-skinned Baconian within seems almost offended to admit that protection has come not only from scientific advances, but from natural immunity. Others might see this as a reassuring reminder that natural processes are not always and only the enemy. We shall find out, as we observe the unvaccinated, to what extent natural immunity, accumulating in waves of infection over time, does or does not protect, for the current or future variants."

 

 

 

---

Links - 26th March 2022 (1 - Feminism)

Why I won't date another 'male feminist' - "when we talk about “having it all”, we also want a feminist boyfriend, right?... Unfortunately, it wasn’t quite so simple. From the man who opened a text conversation with a photo of his naked chest and encouraged me to reciprocate in the name of the Free The Nipple movement, to the fellow who agonised over accepting a blowjob because, despite enjoying them, he found the act simply too degrading to let me perform; dating male feminists turned out to be one of the least empowering decisions I’ve ever made... men looking for feminist-sanctioned romance tend to fall in to one of two categories: those who use our attraction as a sign of approval and seek out trophy feminists to clear their conscience of any inherent patriarchal wrong-doing, and outright predators who employ a bare-bones knowledge of feminist discourse to target any young woman whose politics so much as graze the notion of sex-positivity... For every male feminist horror story I have lived, I’ve been told a dozen more by equally-frustrated female friends... It’s not that I don’t think men can be feminists... But these men are in a disappointing minority compared to the rest of the male feminists I, and many other women, have encountered: men who use the term “feminist” as either bait or an alter-ego, assuming that their opt-in respect for women will entitle them to legions of adoring lovers – really the most anti-feminist act of all."
This coheres with the study finding that even feminist women don't want to date feminist men

‘Every woman police officer I know has been sexually assaulted by a colleague’
Maybe keeping certain professions single sex, or segregating the sexes in them, was really a way to protect women

University Feminists Are Betraying Their Movement’s Liberal Past - "University feminists are tired of tolerance. Universities are banning anyone and anything their feminist professors and students take issue with. Cardiff banned Germaine Greer; apparently, she’s the wrong kind of feminist. Goldsmiths College banned Kate Smurthwaite; she’s the wrong kind of comedian. Oxford silenced a debate on abortion. For the architects of the safe space, nothing is safe from being added to the list of the unsafe. ‘Blurred Lines’ was banned for being the wrong kind of song. The Sun was banned for being the wrong kind of newspaper. What today’s feminists value, above all else, is diversity — except, of course, diversity of ideas... Momma trivialises the men who patronise women. She says they cannot handle discussing philosophy, politics, and contrarian views. Today’s patronisers of women, however, are not those old misogynistic men with illiberal standards; rather, they are the feminists who tell women what they can and cannot discuss, hear, and read. No longer are women encouraged to attack difficult and dangerous views; instead, feminists tell them to hide, avoid, censor and ban... At Edinburgh, where I go to school, students who oppose campus censorship are shut out of the feminist society. For opposing the legalisation of the sex trade, dissident feminist Magdalen Berns has been banned from future feminist society events. Feminists on campus have treated her like a sub-human traitor to women. They don’t understand — surely in part due to their own unwillingness to hear and debate those who disagree with them — how someone could ever have the kinds of beliefs Magdalen has... the Goldsmiths University LGBTQ Society announced their solidarity with the university’s Islamic Society following a talk by ex-Muslim Maryam Namazie. Members of the LGBTQ Society stood in solidarity with members of the Islamic Society, whose President described homosexuality as “a disease of the heart and mind.” This trend continues in online feminist forums. On university feminist society forums, criticising female genital mutilation (FGM) is often a cause for dismissal — it’s deemed to be an instance of islamophobic hatred. Standards of cultural relativism and censorship are pushing young women away from engaging these difficult topics."

WNBA Championship Parade Video Showing Barely Any Spectators Goes Viral
Clearly they deserve equal pay

Diane Kruger opens up about ‘inappropriate’ screen test for Brad Pitt’s Troy: ‘I felt like meat’ - "Diane Kruger has detailed the “inappropriate and uncomfortable” screen test she underwent during the casting process for Troy... Kruger, who portrayed Helen in Troy, said auditioning for Wolfgang Peterson’s 2004 historical drama in full costume for the “studio head” made her feel “like meat”.  She told Variety: “I remember testing for Troy and having to go to the studio head in costume. And I felt like meat, being looked up and down and was asked, ‘Why do you think you should be playing this?’”"
Clearly, to see who the right actress to play the face that launched a thousand ships, they should have asked her her views on world peace, and she shouldn't have auditioned in costume to avoid distracting the men

Scribbler Cards on Twitter - "Dad, Thanks For always helping me out financially…. So that I can focus on being an independent woman."

DailyMed - MINOXIDIL EXTRA STRENGTH FOR MEN- minoxidil solution - "For use by men only...
Do not use if
you are a woman"
Damn sexism! What happens for trans people?

Why Male Leaders Should Mentor Women
Why would a man want to be accused of mansplaining? Even ignoring the possibility of a #MeToo

Claudia Webbe MP on Twitter - "This is still a tiny fraction of the targeted abuse, bullying, misogyny, hate and intimidation Some of this hate is born out of xenophobia, racism, a deep sense of entitlement and what appears to be long held grudges - they want to silence my socialism they want to bully me out"
MP Claudia Webbe avoids jail after threatening to throw acid at her boyfriend’s female friend - "The Leicester East MP, 56, launched a campaign of harassment against Michelle Merritt, a long-term friend of her boyfriend Lester Thomas.  She was convicted last month of harassing Ms Merritt, by threatening to throw acid in her face and release naked images of her... “I do not find the defendant to be cogent, compelling and truthful in all aspects of her evidence.  “Some of the things she said I believe were made up on the spur of the moment.”  He added: “In short, I find Ms Webbe to be vague, incoherent and at times illogical and ultimately I find her to be untruthful.”... Webbe said... “Throughout this process I have received numerous threats to my life and vile racist abuse."
Playing the victim to distract from your own guilt. Convenient (Raeesah Khan did that too)

Sarah Michelle Gellar, Others Respond to Joss Whedon Allegations - "David Boreanaz, who played Angel on “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” has voiced his support for Charisma Carpenter following her allegations of misconduct against the show’s creator, Joss Whedon... Marti Noxon, a writer and executive producer on “Buffy” and the showrunner for the final two seasons of the show, tweeted her support of the “Buffy” actors on Friday.  “I would like to validate what the women of ‘Buffy’ are saying and support them in telling their story,” Noxon posted to Twitter. “They deserve to be heard. I understand where [Charisma Carpenter], Amber [Benson], Michelle [Trachtenberg] and all the women who have spoken out are coming from.”...   Several “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” stars — including Sarah Michelle Gellar, Michelle Trachtenberg, and Amber Benson — have responded to the allegations that Whedon abused his power on the sets of “Buffy,” its spin-off “Angel,” and the DC Films feature “Justice League.”"
Male feminists strike again

Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot has accused Joss Whedon of ‘threatening’ to make her career ‘miserable’ - "In 2020, Gadot’s Justice League co-star Ray Fisher claimed the director engaged in “gross, abusive, unprofessional and completely unacceptable” behaviour on the set of the 2017 film... Charisma Carpenter, who worked with Whedon on Buffy the Vampire Slayer and its spinoff Angel, wrote an open letter alleging the showrunner had subjected her to years of emotional abuse.  Carpenter claimed that he “called her fat” when she was four months into her pregnancy, accused her of “sabotaging” the production of Angel, and “unceremoniously fired [her] the following season” after she gave birth"

Women can get away with telling bad jokes more than men, study finds - "Making jokes – even when poorly received – is seen as an attempt to connect and 'advance communal goals' by women, as opposed to the perception that men are doing it for themselves.  The study said men were seen to commit 'mistakes of greater magnitude that make them appear less likable, competent, and funny'."
The power of "patriarchy"

The Philosophy of Life - Posts | Facebook - "Systemic Gender Discrimination is a serious issue. Unconscious bias, double standards and casual misogyny have made sexism almost invisible. Even though AWARE Singapore employs male staffs, all top positions are held by women. Double standards are so embedded in our culture we often don’t recognize when we’re reinforcing them. Given the pervasiveness of everyday sexism, there is clearly much to be done to arrive at the day where gender is a non-issue in how we parent, speak, lead and pursue our ambitions. Until then, those who recognize the chasm that needs to be closed to reach gender equality must actively speak up and call out sexism when they see it – both the unintentional, seemingly harmless everyday variety and the more menacing and ill-intentioned types. We may live in a patriarchal society in Singapore, but rest assured, AWARE is fighting workplace gender inequality by practicing workplace gender inequality."

Meme - "Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy. Do you see the double standard?
*Man with sculpted body, woman with flat body*"

Meme - "I NEED FEMINISM BECAUSE... I considered not getting this photo taken because I'm not wearing make up"
"Your low self esteem isn't a reason why you need a sexist hate movement."
Comments: "If you're taking silly photographs outside of Kings College Cambridge, one of the most prestigious colleges and part of one of the worlds best universities, you don't need anything at all, if we're honest."
"I love how they talk about dressing nice and putting on make up as though they do it for us. The do it so they don't get bullied and picked apart by... wait for it...other women."

Julie Bindel on Twitter - "I am on a train, and have just diagnosed myself with Complex PTSD because a fella has just opened a packet of Cheesy Wotsits. I should be cured by the time I reach Darlington (unless some homophobe reviews this tweet & says it's crap in which case I will be on a Section by York)"

J.K. Rowling on Twitter - "Laurie, you’ve been flinging terms like ‘fascist’ and ‘transphobe’ against women who disagree with you for a very long time. I don’t recall you showing the slightest empathy for other women’s trauma while you dismissed their, in my view, reasonable and rational concerns.
I have the self-awareness to know that however upsetting the death and rape threats your fellow activists throw at me are, there are literally billions of people suffering more than I am. You claim to be suffering PTSD because of *bad book reviews*
Bad reviews are part and parcel of being a writer. If they cause you equivalent trauma to being bombed out of your house or witnessing the murder of loved ones, maybe find a job where dishing it out, but not being able to take it, is a key requirement."
Reply: "What's remarkable about this rant is she accuses @guardian  of publishing anti trans stuff It just shows that even those like the Guardian who are so sympathetic to the gender religion Are captured by it Still can never do enough It's never enough for the new gods of Gender"
Laurie Penny can't even claim Rowling is a misogynist - only that she has "internalised misogyny". But while sliming JK Rowling as a "transphobe" is easy, claiming she has "internalised misogyny" is harder, given her (formerly) liberal credentials
Clearly women can't be criticised since it will cause them "trauma"

Study Concluding that Male Mentorship Is Better for Women's Careers Retracted After Backlash - "A research paper concluding that working with female mentors might hurt young women’s careers in the sciences has been retracted after fierce criticism from “group email threads” and on social media. The academic journal that published the paper apologized for “any unintended harm derived from the publication of this paper.”  A study published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications was retracted following backlash from people who were uncomfortable with the paper’s findings... The research paper studied a variety of dynamics within three million mentor-mentee research pairings, including the “possibility that opposite-gender mentorship may actually increase the impact of women who pursue a scientific career”... The authors — which studied the disciplines of biology, chemistry, computer science, economics, engineering, geology, materials science, medicine, physics, and psychology — wrote that their study “suggests that female protégés who remain in academia reap more benefits when mentored by males rather than equally-impactful females.”  “Our findings also suggest that mentors benefit more when working with male protégés rather than working with comparable female protégés, especially if the mentor is female”...   The authors of the research paper say that while they “believe that all the key findings of the paper with regards to co-authorship between junior and senior researchers are still valid,” they have nonetheless decided to retract the article. "We are an interdisciplinary team of scientists with an unwavering commitment to gender equity, and a dedication to scientific integrity”"
Of course, we are told that "science" is neutral and we must "follow the science", since if the left pretends that there is no (self-)censorship in science they can then claim "science" supports their claims. Another prime example: the retraction of Johnson et al on the race of police officers being unrelated to who they shoot, not because it is bad science but for political reasons

Retracting a Controversial Paper Won’t Help Female Scientists - "The first concern was over the MAG dataset on which the analyses relied. AlShebli and her team addressed this critique by downloading the most recent version of the dataset, which improved on many of the previous name-disambiguation errors. They re-ran all of their analyses (an arduous task) and updated their results.  Second, reviewers expressed concern that AlShebli’s team treated co-authorship as synonymous with mentorship. To establish that senior co-authors had indeed provided mentorship, AlShebli and her team sent a survey to a random sample of 2000 of the scientists. Of these, 167 responded. This is a low response rate, suggesting reports may not generalize across the broader sample. Notwithstanding this limitation, 72–85 percent of respondents agreed they received guidance on each of the skills listed in the survey. Ninety-five percent agreed they had received guidance on at least one of the skills. These findings lend some (albeit limited) confidence that senior co-authors did indeed provide mentorship to their junior co-authors. Moreover, AlShebli’s team made sure to explicitly state in the article’s title they investigated “informal mentorship in academic collaborations,” as well as in the text: “we study mentorship in its broader sense, which may involve multiple senior collaborators who may or may not hold a formal supervisory role.”  Third, reviewers expressed concern over the paper’s lack of attention to the societal factors potentially contributing to the gendered results, such as men’s greater historical career advantages and resource access. AlShebli’s team thus included an explicit acknowledgement of these forces in their general discussion... Fourth, the reviewers requested that the team tone down their causal inferences, given that correlational data do not allow for such interpretations... Authors often publish corrections or post-publication updates to addend their articles, which may be appropriate in this case.  Beyond these four primary critiques, others focused on the analytic techniques, which were addressed in the article’s supplemental materials. Although I am not in a position to assess whether these controls were sufficient, four independent scholars with relevant expertise reviewed the paper. Moreover, following recommended best practices, the authors provided open access to their data which allowed fellow academics to conduct their own analyses... Paper retractions are generally reserved for instances of data falsification and coding errors that render results invalid. Neither applies in this case... A recent study found that people evaluate scientific studies reporting a male-favoring advantage less favorably, compared to those reporting a female-favoring one. Papers demonstrating a male (versus female) advantage were viewed as less credible, less valuable, more offensive, and more harmful. These findings suggest merely highlighting a disparity disfavoring women is likely to evoke public outcry.  Science, however, relies on the dispassionate accumulation and scrutiny of data... only by documenting reality (or our closest approximation to it) can we strive to improve society. Interventions based on faulty data or incorrect assumptions will fail, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars and innumerable hours. When we bury findings that make us uncomfortable, the empirical landscape presents an inaccurate, lopsided view of reality. If policies and interventions hinge on that empirical landscape, we will only set ourselves up for failure. Moreover, by presenting an incomplete picture of phenomena, we undermine trust in science... Research finds that disparities in organizational power may corrode female-female cooperative relationships. For example, among over 60,000 working individuals, female employees judged their female managers as less competent (d= .08) and reported less close relationships with them (d= .15), compared to female employees reporting to male managers. In another study, using over 11,600 employees, female workers were less satisfied with their jobs when they reported to a female than male boss, whereas male employees showed no difference in satisfaction as a function of their boss’s gender. These negative outcomes were observed primarily among female junior/senior relationships, a pattern mirrored in AlShebli’s findings. However, this slight animosity appears to cut both ways, as female superiors occasionally distance themselves from, fail to help, or actively thwart their female subordinates, a phenomenon known as the “Queen Bee Syndrome.” For example, in a survey of 1,700 employees, minority women reported more support from their male than female supervisors, as well as more optimism about their potential for promotion. In another study, low-performing female employees who switched from a male boss to a high-performing female boss earned 30 percent less than similarly low-performing male employees who made an identical switch... This “Queen Bee Syndrome” has also been documented in academic contexts. Two studies found that senior female academics evaluated junior female academics as less committed to their careers than junior male academics, whereas no such bias was found among senior male academics"
Since liberals believe that reality is socially constructed, they think that pretending that inconvenient facts don't exist will magick them away
If you don't "believe the science", you are a "denier" (i.e. a heretic)

Feminism is a political ideology that is about power not women's liberation | The Post Millennial - "I first heard a woman say, "If my feminism isn't intersectional it isn't feminism" out loud and in front of people. She was, and still is, editor of The F Word and working in the UK parliament. She was more honest about the differences between feminism and women's rights, saying very clearly, "Just because a woman makes a decision, doesn't mean it's a feminist one."  The common goal of all feminisms, even ones that despise one another, is not to promote women's rights but to dismantle patriarchy, and if women get in the way of that goal, then they become legitimate targets... There is a corresponding area of research in male intrasexual competition—competition between men—but this is hardly controversial. There are vast libraries full of books about male contests from The Iliad to Jack Reacher. Indeed, around the world in all cultures, humans have built monumental arenas to worship male competition and called them sports stadiums. We experience immense joy and excitement watching men compete with other men in these arenas, and men have a hell of a time doing it too.  There are no corresponding cultural arenas for women to compete with one another. Well, not until Twitter and Instagram, that is, which are perfect environments for female relational aggression. Competition at a safe distance, which is how women (and older men), on average, prefer it. There is something called inTERsexual competition and this is more familiar to us. This is competition between the sexes, aka the battle of the sexes and is feminism's main obsession. Competition between women is not, and it is feminism's biggest blind spot by far. Research shows that competition within a sex is far more intense than between sexes, but because feminists and feminist academics in other disciplines are so focused on blaming patriarchy for their problems, they consistently fail to see the pink elephant in the feminist room. Some glimpse it, like feminist grand dame Germaine Greer when she declared in 2014 at a feminist conference,  "Men's misogyny doesn't concern me. I'm more concerned about ours, Men are trained to work in groups." And she was right. Feminism has no robust framework with which to grapple with female competition and rivalry. Some call it queen bee syndrome, others call it internalised misogyny - all are insufficient circular roads that inexorably lead back to patriarchy theory. And because there is no explanation within feminist language to describe it, feminists, overcome with dissonance, generally resort to denial. And this is the main reason Alshelbi's paper was seized upon as 'problematic'...
'Its appalling that this group of nonWestern, junior researchers, 2/3 women, were bullied by another academic social media outrage mob into submission.  Protestations of #punchingdown? Nowhere to be seen. More Social Justice Bullshit.'...
The fact is, there is no justification for retracting this paper other than it offends feminist sensibilities. Had the paper reached different conclusions, feminists would have found no issue with their methods. In fact, the degree of perfectionism feminists in STEM demanded this paper adhere to, if applied to the entire cannon of feminist and gender studies research, would wipe both off the scholarly map... Another woman to catch Medusa's gaze this month is author Jessica Cluess, who has lost her livelihood after being accused of racism by intersectional feminists, because she criticized critical race theory. Yes, you have that right. Cluess was accused of racism because she mocked the tweets of "antiracist educator" Lorena German, who doesn't seem to know an ad hominem from her elbow.  Unlike with AlShebli, this has nothing to do with science. There's barely a demand for even basic, high school level, standards of intelligence here. Both cases however, make me wonder what benefit is critical race theory and feminism generally, to women, if it schools them only in learned helplessness and intellectual fragility?... Feminist activism isn't for women's benefit. It's for feminism's benefit.  We need to remember, when feminists are lobbying for 50/50 women's representation in politics, science or business, they don't mean women at all. They mean feminists. And since the number of feminists in the general population, men and women combined, is optimistically never more than 15 percent and regularly as low as 7 percent, they are actually lobbying for a significant OVER representation of ideologues with less than liberal intentions. Feminists take the name of "woman" in vain just as woke progressives take the name of black people in vain. If we are not useful to them, they have nothing but contempt for us. We are legitimate targets for cancellation... The fundamental problem with the feminist concept of patriarchy is that it is an axiomatic, unquestioned premise upon which all feminisms stand on. That the premise may be false is never considered. But the premise is false, and therefore, so is all that follows from it... the difference between women's rights and feminism is that for the latter, women are a means to an end towards dismantling patriarchy, not helping women to self actualize as a stay at home mother, a CEO or anything in between. Remember what my learned friend who works in the UK Parliament said, "Just because a woman makes a decision doesn't make it a feminist one."  And cancel culture, the harpy"s weapon of choice? It is an organic manifestation of the dark side of female psychology, enabled and encouraged by feminist chauvinism."

Feminist writer Clementine Ford says coronavirus 'isn't killing men fast enough' - "She said the widespread backlash she received proves how 'fragile' men are... in 2017, she hand-signed a copy of her book 'Fight Like a Girl', with a message that read: 'Have you killed any men today? And if not, why not?'"
So since feminists bitch about "misogyny" even more, they are even more fragile

Clementine Ford To Keep Grant After Misandric Tweet - "Misandrist Clementine Ford will not lose thousands of dollars in funding despite the firebrand feminist triggering a review into a grants program by tweeting “the coronavirus isn’t killing men fast enough”"

Clementine Ford Doxxes 14 Year Old Boy - "it seems Clementine Ford likes to target children, as they are easy targets. We saw a perfect example of this when she bullied school boys after giving a talk at their school (Aquinas College in Melbourne)... her feminist cronies wrote some pretty disturbing comments. One reads “vasectomies at puberty, microchip implants too“... it is her specialty in getting men fired or even boys expelled from school...    ‘What’s going on in the head of anyone who would say that to somebody?‘, she went on.  You have to love the hypocrisy here. She claims it made her feel pretty sick, yet apparently it’s perfectly okay for her to call for the genocide of men with statements such as “kill all men”. As for her comment “whats going on in the head of anyone who would say that to somebody?“. Yes indeed, what is going on indeed inside the head of a feminist who says to kill all men?"

Government To Fund Clementine Ford For Next Man Bashing Book - "Clementine Ford has announced that she received a government grant to write her third man bashing book. Yes you read correctly, your tax payer dollars are now being used by the Melbourne City Government to fund Clementine Ford so she can write man bashing books. Imagine the outrage if they funded a man to write books degrading women...   The Victorian government has unveiled a glittering $16.8 million “survival package for the arts”. Because, clearly, in the midst of a pandemic what Australia needs most urgently is to fund struggling man hating feminists like Clementine Ford.  Yes, it seems poor Clementine was suffering during COVID19, as the public focus was taken away from man hating feminists like her. In fact, she struggled so badly that she even had to launch a beauty line business in makeup. But that didn’t last very long, because we all know that you can’t polish a turd."

Growing Up, I Rejected Cooking in the Name of Feminism—But What Did I Miss in the Process?
Also headlined, "I Rejected Cooking in the Name of Feminism—Until I Had to Feed Myself"

Lies, Damned Lies, And Campus Sexual Assault Statistics - "Researchers don’t ask students directly if they are sexual assault victims but ask about a broad range of behaviors, such as “unwanted” behaviors that are open to interpretation, as being asked out by someone one doesn’t like could be considered “unwanted” even though it is in no way sexual assault or harassment. The researchers then determine that if students responded “yes” to any of these questions, it means they must have been sexually assaulted. Keep in mind, the definition of sexual assault here lies outside the criminal definition. When students who answered “yes” to any of the questions are asked why they didn’t report, the vast majority say they didn’t think the incident was “serious enough,” meaning they may not have even seen the action as “assault.”...
1-in-3 Men Would Rape If They Could Get Away With It This statistic was quickly debunked as soon as it appeared in 2015. A woman who admitted to me at the time that she was seeking grant money (a good motive for finding alarming statistics in one’s survey) claimed her study found that a whopping one-third of surveyed men had “intentions to force a woman to sexual intercourse.” Wow, right? Except, as I’ve pointed out with previous misleading statistics, this one suffers from many of the same flaws. It’s not nationally representative, and the answers of just 73 men were used to arrive at the 1-in-3 number blasted out by the media and women’s groups. Of those 73 men, 23 were found to have those intentions, based on the researchers own definition of what constituted bad intentions. Just nine guys said they would actually rape a woman. Nine guys do not an epidemic make. These guys may not have been taking the survey seriously or they were answering a question from Plato’s Republic: How many people would commit a crime if they knew they wouldn’t be caught?"

Campus serial rapist survey debunked - "This one claims to show that the majority of campus rapes were perpetrated by a small number of repeat offenders. The study, authored by David Lisak, was first questioned last year by Slate's Emily Yoffe, who pointed out that the study's respondents were not limited to college students and couldn't be used as a representative sample of national college students... Lisak's study — which has since been used to claim that students accused of campus sexual assault are probably potential serial rapists — had nothing to do with campus sexual assault... Lisak didn't even complete original research; he based his findings on data presented in four other studies. When LeFauve asked Lisak about those other studies, he couldn't recall their topics or even who authored them.Lisak has also claimed at various times that he conducted follow-up interviews with some of the subjects of his study. This seems improbable as the surveys conducted in his study were apparently anonymous. When LeFauve asked Lisak how he was able to conduct follow-up interviews with anonymous respondents, he hung up on her."

How 'mattress girl' changed her mind - "She now listens to Jordan Peterson. She attended Reason writer Robby Soave’s book party for Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump. In the book, Soave writes critically of Sulkowicz.Yet, she has recently found herself engaging with many libertarians and conservatives, whom she never would have spent time with before... Sulkowicz has decided she no longer wants to fit into a fourth-wave feminist box.“As I became more and more feminist,” she said, “I think I got to a point where I was literally just straight up hating men. I just hated men, I wished all men would die.”Now she wants to listen to their perspective — not just men, but others she has disagreed with.The most remarkable part of the story, though perhaps not the most surprising, is that Sulkowicz says she didn't even know a conservative until last year. Putting everything else aside, it's incredible that someone who became so vocal on political issues could know so little about the other side. But this is not uncommon, especially on the Left.The Cut explains, "In the past, Sulkowicz dismissed opposing views without understanding them, but now she sees intellectual curiosity as intertwined with respect: she wants to disagree with people on their own terms.""

The Middle Eastern Feminist - Posts - "stop calling women "females," it's degrading thanks"
"Edit: A lot of you have missed the point. Incels and men often use this term as a derogatory and dismissive way of belittling women. Some of you make me really tired.
Important point. We are women, whether we are Black or poor or Muslim or trans or brown or disabled or Indigenous or queer or stateless or colonized or fat. We are women! -Hawzhin"
So much for "inclusive language"
Feminist stupidity is not limited to the first world
Comments: ".....so next time I fill out my information for my driver's license, I'll make sure to refuse to choose Female since it's apparently degrading."
"Use Shesheshe instead of hehehe, feminists might get angry."
"You are a woman but you won’t accept you are a female, what kind of logic is this?"
Ironic how liberals love inclusive language but hate "female" and prefer "woman"

The Problem With Calling Women 'Females'
From Jezebel

Stop Calling Women “Females”
From a UCSB publication

6 Reasons You Should Stop Referring To Women As "Females" Right Now
From Buzzfeed

The Problem with Referring to Women as “Females” - "By definition, referring to women as “females” reduces them to their reproductive abilities. That sounds a bit degrading, don’t you think?... From my observation, “female” is most often used by low-value men (and women) to debase, devalue, and criticize women...  If you are not a part of or engaging with black American culture, you probably will never come across this. The only people I’ve heard call women “females” are young, black men, and most of the time the people who have a problem with being called a “female” are black women or women who are engaging with black culture."
Apparently "pregnant women", "mensturating people" or "people with uteruses" does not reduce women to their reproductive abilities. And the fact that "trans inclusive" language is used by people who want to marginalise and harm biological women (e.g. prisons, sports, toilets) is irrelevant Will she be cancelled for "racism"?