Meme - "People not liking you isn't oppression"
Meme - Gays Against Groomers: "Do you have any idea how hard it is to watch radical activists and nefarious industries use us to sexualize, indoctrinate and medicalize children? The public is turning against us all, after we fought so hard to be accepted into civil society. It's hard to even blame them. The majority of us really just want to live our lives and leave everyone alone, most of all children. This agenda being pushed is setting us back decades and erasing everything we achieved in this country. For the children's sake, and our own, this must be stopped. #GaysAgainstGroomers"
Meme - "I don't understand pride month.. Why do I need to celebrate you taking it in the ass or slapping your fish biscuits together?"
Democrats Confused By Parades Where Everyone Wears Clothes And Doesn’t Swing Sex Toys Around | Babylon Bee - "Several sources investigated the events around the nation, which reportedly featured American flags, apple pie, and innocent joy. As of now, it is still unclear what these events were celebrating and who they were for. "Our sources indicate these strange kink-free parades could be fronts for dangerous fascist groups," said Congresswoman and affirmative action recipient Cori Bush. "I watched one on TV and didn't see a single genital. This is white supremacy." Parents who brought children to these events are being urged to read a copy of Gender Queer to their children as soon as possible to counteract any white nationalist programming they may have absorbed at a July 4th parade"
Michigan Hate Speech Bill Would Make It A Felony To Cause Someone To ‘Feel’ Threatened - "A Michigan hate speech bill that has passed the state House and is now in the hands of the Senate is alarming conservatives, people of faith, and legal experts. The bill, HB 4474, is part of a package of legislation that would replace Michigan’s existing Ethnic Intimidation Act and make it a hate crime to cause someone to “feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened.” Under the bill’s framework, “sexual orientation” and “gender identity or expression” are included as classes protected against intimidation. If passed, the hate speech legislation would make violators guilty of a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of $10,000... In a Tuesday ruling that could potentially have implications for the hate speech legislation in Michigan, the Supreme Court set new standards for what constitutes a threat, making it more difficult for a state to convict someone of making a threat. “The State must show that the defendant consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority opinion and was joined by six other justices."
BBC Radio 4 - Best of Today, Ian McEwan remembers author Martin Amis - "‘I don't know if you saw um Hanif Kureishi writing I think yesterday on Twitter about, um, saying I'm relieved not to be a young writer today working in this atmosphere of self-consciousness and trepidation. This North Korea of the Mind, as as he put it’"
Meme - CNN @CNN: "Black fathers are often portrayed as absent or distant, but that isn't what most people experience, according to both data and Black dads themselves. Such biased portrayals are often based on who is telling the story."
Readers added context they thought people might want to know: "Percentage of children living absent their biological fathers:
Black children: 64%
Hispanic children: 42%
White children: 24%
Asian children: 16%"
Meme - "MEXICAN GIRLS IN MEXICAN CARTOONS *pretty*
MEXICAN GIRLS IN "LATINX" CARTOONS *ugly*"
St Paul’s Cathedral branded Winston Churchill a ‘white supremacist’ and ‘unashamed imperialist’ - "St Paul’s Cathedral has upset the family of Sir Winston Churchill after they branded the wartime leader as an “unashamed imperialist” and “white supremacist.” The insulting description is understood to have remained on the cathedral’s website for more than a year, although Sir Winston’s state funeral was held there in 1965."
Hospital prayer room for gravely ill children plastered with LGBT flags - "A hospital prayer room for gravely ill children and their families has been plastered with LGBT flags amid claims that the NHS is being hijacked by transgender ideology. As part of a new inclusivity drive, a “sanctuary” at Edinburgh’s “Sick Kids” hospital, designed as a quiet space for those suffering trauma and grief, was taken over by symbols representing dozens of sexualities and genders. The “spiritual care” facility previously described as offering room for “quiet reflection, prayer or meditation” was also rebranded a “chill-out zone” for Pride month, with rainbow-coloured signage directing patients and relatives to it. The move has outraged some staff and family members of poorly children, with one clinician claiming a leading children’s hospital had been turned into a “social issues battlefield”. Meanwhile, the family of a terminally ill toddler said they were no longer able to use the room to find comfort in their faith as it had become a “display of activism” which contradicted the teachings of mainstream religions. The chaplaincy service at the hospital, one of the UK’s leading centres for paediatric care, is run by Maxwell Reay, a transgender man and activist who belongs to a fringe Christian congregation in Edinburgh. Mr Reay, who has described being trans as a “gift from God”, is facing claims that he has breached rules which state hospital chaplains should not seek to impose their own beliefs when offering spiritual care... Among the garish bright flags put up in the otherwise plainly-decorated prayer room were colours representing polyamory, meaning consensual sexual relationships involving more than two people."
Clearly gravely ill children and their families who happen to be queer need to know that they are accepted
This is a clear admission that LGBT is the new religion
Ian Miles Cheong on Twitter - "Seattle authorities initiate manhunt against offender who defaced LGBTQ+ crosswalk"
Auron MacIntyre on Twitter - "They put their sacred symbol on crosswalks because they want them to be defiled They want to manufacture these opportunities to punish blasphemers publicly"
When crime is so low that you have time to hunt down blasphemers
Ian Miles Cheong on Twitter - "Wokeism can be defined by its active denial of reality and adherence to dogmatic irrationality.
- "Healthy at every size."
- "Trans women are women."
- "There are more than two genders, but also genderfluid, genderqueer, and bigender people are both male and female and sometimes neither."
- "Children can consent."
- "Genital mutilation is gender affirming healthcare."
- "Racial discrimination through affirmative action is neither racist nor discriminatory."
- "Riots are mostly peaceful protests."
- "Self-defense is murder."
- "Gas ovens and woodfire stoves cause climate change."
- "True democracies like Ukraine indefinitely suspend elections and ban opposition parties, the media, and jail critics."
- "Wind turbines promote sustainability, and are good for the environment, but nuclear energy is not."
- "Engaging in war against foreign countries and destabilizing governments through regime change and color revolutions promotes peace and stability.""
Meme - Alliance Defending Freedom @ADFL...: "LANDMARK SCOTUS VICTORY: Today the Supreme Court strongly reaffirmed free speech in our case, 303 Creative v. Elenis, ruling 6-3 that govt may not compel Americans to express messages they don't believe...."
Seth Dillon @SethDillon: "Leftists don't seem to realize that this ruling protects them, too. They can never be compelled by the state to make a cake for conservative that says, "trans women are men" or "gender-affirming care is child abuse." Their own freedom of expression has been preserved here. The only thing that hasn't been preserved is their non-existent right to trample on the freedom of others.
Their reaction to this ruling shows that they value forced expression over freedom of expression. If that seems authoritarian, it's because it is.
Meme - AskDrBrown: "the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision that Lorie Smith, a Colorado-based Christian graphic artist and web designer, did not have to create content that violated her beliefs. In response, Clara Jeffery, editor-in-chief of Mother Jones, tweeted, “perhaps gay stylists, designers, caterers, and planners should start withholding services from Christian conservatives and see where that goes.” After all, Jeffery reasoned, if a Christian can create content for a gay couple, surely gay professionals can decline services to Christian conservatives. More extreme was the reaction of actor Michael Imperioli who posted on Instagram, “I’ve decided to forbid bigots and homophobes from watching The Sopranos, The White Lotus, Goodfellas or any movie or TV show I’ve been in. Thank you Supreme Court for allowing me to discriminate and exclude those who I don’t agree with and am opposed to. USA! USA!” In her strong dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that, “Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.” And she claimed that the ruling comes amid a “backlash to the movement for liberty and equality for gender and sexual minorities.” Many headlines reflected similar sentiments, such as this one posted on the UK Guardian: “US supreme court strikes blow against LGBTQ+ rights with Colorado ruling.” In reality, the ruling did no such thing, and Justice Neil Gorsuch was right to challenge Justice Sotomayor’s arguments. He stated that Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion “reimagines the facts” from “top to bottom.” He also argued that she failed to answer the fundamental question of, “Can a State force someone who provides her own expressive services to abandon her conscience and speak its preferred message instead?” In his view, what Justice Sotomayor was arguing for was for the court to allow the government to force an individual to “speak contrary to her beliefs on a significant issue of personal conviction.” This is clearly a violation of our most fundamental Constitutional rights. That’s why law professor Jonathan Turley described the Supreme Court decision as an “amazing moment” in history with regard to the First Amendment. And he rightly pointed out that the decision had nothing to do with discrimination, since Smith freely served a wide range of customers, including those who identified as LGBTQ. As Turley noted, cases such as these “do not change the public accommodation laws. You cannot be refused to go into stores and buy items that are pre-made, for example, based on your race or your status.” But if someone wants to compel you to create something contrary to your convictions, the state cannot compel you to do so. That is exactly what Colorado law was trying to do, and the Court, by a ruling of 6-3, shut that unjust law down. Kristen Waggoner, CEO of the Alliance Defending Freedom, and Erin Hawley, an ADF attorney, echoed Turley’s sentiments, writing, “The Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative v. Elenis is a crucial victory for every American regardless of their religious, political, or ideological views. In that case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the most fundamental of civil liberties—that the government may not tell people what to think or say.” As for the counter-argument raised by Jeffery’s and others, I’d love to hear their answer to these simple questions. Should a gay web designer be compelled by the state to design a website for a counseling service that helps people overcome same-sex attractions? Should an Orthodox Jewish web designer be compelled by the state to design a website for Jews for Jesus? Should an atheist web designer be compelled by the state to design a website called “Answering Atheism”? Should a trans-identified web designer be compelled by the state to design a website on the dangers of hormone therapy and sex-change surgery? Should a Muslim web designer be compelled by the state to design a website for a meat service specializing in pork products? Should an African American web designer be compelled by the state to design a website selling Confederate flags? Should a Christian web designer be compelled by the state to design an “Adultery Hookup” website? Should any web designer be compelled by the state to design a pornography website? If Jeffery or Imperioli were website designers, should the state be able to compel them to create pro-Trump content for a Republican lobbyist? Or content stating that he won the 2020 elections? The answer to all these questions is obvious: none of these people should be compelled to create content that violates their beliefs or convictions. The state clearly has no right to compel them to do so. And what about a gay-owned T-shirt company? Should they be compelled by the state to design a t-shirt with the words, “God does not recognize same-sex marriage”? Should a Christian-owned printing company be compelled by the state to design flyers for a Satan conference? The list goes on and on, and in every case, the answer is an obvious “No!” But should these same individuals or companies be allowed to refuse general services to someone because they are gay or trans or Jewish or Muslim or Christian or Black or White? Obviously not. That’s why some of the Christians who have come under attack in recent years had served LGBTQ+ customers for years. Some of them even had LGBTQ+ employees. But when it came to creating artistic content that violated their beliefs (such as creating a wedding cake or designing a floral arrangement for a same-sex ceremony), they declined. And for that, they were dragged into court, with their lives turned upside down. (See here and here for prime examples.) In the same way, if a gay person said to Lorie Smith, “I’m Tony and I’m gay, and I’d like you to create a website for my window cleaning company,” it would be illegal (not to say unchristian and unethical) for her to say, “No, I won’t do that because you’re gay.” But if Tony said, “I’m Tony and I’m transgender, and I’d like you to create a website for my children’s books that are designed to help kids recognize their hidden trans identity,” it would be legal (and Christian and ethical) for her to politely decline. That’s why the Supreme Court’s decision should have been 9-0, applauded by people from all backgrounds. The fact that it was 6-3, with many Americans outraged over the ruling, reminds us of just how confused our nation has become. May truth and sanity prevail."
Meme Single person to crowd: "You should all change your core values and beliefs so I fit in"
Meme - Kid: "Parent-person, just take a look upon this cool & healthy example of masculinity."
*Pride flag parent*: "ugh. Don't look at this muscular, white, conservatie (sic), cis-male, binary, heteronormal catholic priest, Alex. I don't want you to be influenced by... Alex?... OH MY GOD! ALEEEX?!"
Kid: "It is too late, father. I am based now and my name is Alexius, like Saint Alexis of Edessa, and you can never be a real woman. Even with rotting wound between thighs. It is officially Sacred Heart"
Meme - Sargon of Akkad: "Progressivism can not survive mockery. "There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy.""
"Guardian takes legal action to shut down parody headline generator"
Meme - Be The Match. Sponsored: "At only 19-years-old, Camille deserves to experience all life has to offer. But without a donor, her life will be cut short. YOUCOULDBETHECURE.ORG Black Donors Needed. Sign Up Be The Match for Camille"
KM Dougherty: "Last i checked, our skin color did not define the inside of us. Anyone could be a match for this young lady."
Be The Match: "Hi there! We encourage everyone to join the registry, though there is a critical need for those with diverse ethnic backgrounds to join. When it comes to matching human leukocyte antigen (HLA) types, a patient's ethnic background is important in predicting the likelihood of finding a match. This is because HLA markers used in matching are inherited. Some ethnic groups have more complex tissue types than others. So a person's best chance of finding a donor may be with someone of the same ethnic background. Hf you are not yet on the registry, you can join online by clicking here: http://ms.spr.ly/6187r7L3J. We hope you advocate for others to join the registry and give hope to searching patients. -Sydney"
Weird. Why don't they know that race is socially constructed?
Meme - Bleppsama @Bleppsama: "The kids are not alright. Congratulations on being the most groomed generation in history I guess."
iskamag @iskamag 14 so no nsfw pls | gay | robo fur | need frens | love vgm and chiptune | xbox fan
Scarlet (idk) @pluvvvv she/her | minor | pansexual | aspiring polyglot | vent acc @s7UwU1 | @gay_shitposts i love her so much!! fyi i have social anxiety and bpd
Gala!Kohan @MageWolf721 15 | Male He/him they/them | angry human being | I'm unsure what else to put | pfp by @depressowof
Spooky Squarm @Squarmptin Abby, 14, pan, ace, and enby, she/they || Where I write shit wattpad.com/user/Squarmptin || art acct: @Squarms_art"
Demoted and Placed on Probation - "It all started in June 2018, when Quillette published my article, “Why Women Don’t Code”... In his tweet promoting my article, Peterson took issue with one of my claims. I had written that I thought I could survive at the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering where I work. Peterson disagreed. As it turns out, Peterson was right. My position is not tenured and when my current three-year appointment came up for review in December, I was stripped of my primary teaching duties and given a highly unusual one-year probationary appointment. The administration insists this decision had nothing to do with the controversy generated by my article. But as I will explain, that seems highly unlikely. As one faculty colleague put it, an “angry mob” has been after me ever since my article came out. In 2005, the University of Washington hired me to redesign their two introductory computer science classes. I developed two highly successful courses that have over 4,500 enrollments combined per year and are among the most highly rated 100-level courses at the University of Washington. In a recent internal survey, over 80 percent of the students agreed that the assignments increased their interest in computing and showed them how useful such knowledge can be. Teaching at this scale is a massive undertaking and for the last 15 years I have been responsible for overall management of the staff, instructors, and TAs who provide this service. In response to my Quillette article, a group of graduate students in the Allen School filed a grievance against me with their union. The university agreed to several of their demands, including that, “A group of (mostly senior) faculty will review the introductory programming courses to ensure that they are inclusive of students from all backgrounds.” A working group was formed and it produced a set of recommendations... Most of these suggestions seem to rely on the notion that undergraduates are delicate. While I agree that we must be careful to ensure that all students feel welcome and respected, we should be helping our students to become antifragile... In the 15 years I have been part of the school, I am the first regular lecturer to be offered less than a three-year extension... A faculty colleague told me he believes I am being fired for my political beliefs. He said it became clear during the meeting at which my reappointment was discussed that quite a few people wanted me to be summarily dismissed. Others said it was unacceptable to fire me outright. In the vote that was taken, faculty were asked to choose one of three options: no reappointment, a one-year reappointment, or a three-year reappointment. So the one-year appointment was the middle ground that allowed faculty to punish me without taking the most drastic available step just yet. I have the impression I am expected to feel grateful. The students weighed in on the decision as well. A poster was plastered throughout the undergraduate labs and the student union encouraging students to visit a web address if they wished to express concern about my possible reappointment (reposted here). Critical student testimonies were collected in a letter to the dean urging her not to reappoint me. Nor have my teaching evaluations slipped in recent years. I am, however, spending more time thinking about how to encourage viewpoint diversity... n the fall of 2018 I assigned Haidt and Lukianoff’s The Coddling of the American Mind as part of a seminar for honors students. I received my highest scores ever for this seminar (an average of 5.0 on a 5-point scale)... a blogger identified as “Anonymous Husky” called for me to be fired in a Medium post entitled, “Why the UW Computer Science Department Can Do Better than Stuart Reges.” The article mentioned the bake sale, my Quillette article, and my protest against the war on drugs that led me to be fired from Stanford in 1991. It was emailed to every member of the computer science faculty and many of the undergraduate TAs I work with... the Stanford Daily published a full-page article I had written entitled, “On Being Gay: Feelings and Perceptions.” The chair of the department told me that they wanted to offer me the job, but that they had been embarrassed by my article. They wanted me to promise never to publish such an article again... Over the course of my life, it has been astonishing to watch anti-gay sentiment reverse. Today, the people on campus who need to worry about expressing their ideas are conservatives and religious people. Now it is gays doing the punishing of anyone who opposes gay marriage, gay adoption, hate speech codes, and civil rights protection for gays. Everything old is new again. I’m once again having private conversations behind closed doors in my office with closeted individuals, but this time they are students, faculty, staff, and alumni who oppose the equity agenda. They are deeply concerned about the university’s direction, but they are also afraid of jeopardizing their current or future job prospects. They also worry about losing friendships and professional relationships. One faculty colleague described it as “mob rule.”... I am concerned that people believe free speech is improving on college campuses when in fact things are getting worse. We have fewer overt examples of speakers being shouted down and disinvited, but now the censorship is going underground. Those who talk to me behind closed doors censor themselves because they know the consequences of speaking up. As the economist Timur Kuran has explained, this preference falsification is extremely dangerous because it prevents us from having the meaningful conversations necessary to find practical solutions to problems. So I understand why many people will choose to stay silent. I did it myself aged 23 when I stopped writing articles about being gay so that I could be hired into my dream job. But I’m older now and although I don’t have what people call “fuck you money,” I have enough saved that I can afford to speak my mind. For the rest of you, remember Jordan Peterson’s admonition: “Watch what you say. Or else.”"
Damn privilege, stopping him from understanding what it's like to be a minority!
Gay Rights And The Limits Of Liberalism - "How the far left broke the gay settlement. And reignited homophobia.
At the Human Rights Campaign Fund... I said (paraphrasing from memory): “The goal of any civil rights movement should be to shut itself down one day. And once we get marriage equality and military service, those of us in the gay rights movement should throw a party, end the movement, and get on with our lives.” You can imagine how well that went down. And, sure enough, 30 years later, with marriage, military service and trans equality enshrined in the law, the HRC building now has a massive, six-story high poster hanging on it: “BLACK LIVES MATTER. TRANS BLACK LIVES MATTER.”... liberalism knows limits. A liberal politics does not seek to impose meaning on everyone; it creates the space for individuals to choose that for themselves. It doesn’t seek to deliver the truth about anything either; it merely provides the mechanisms for the open-ended pursuit of truth. A liberal politics will seek formal equality for members of minorities; but not substantive equality — what is now called “equity.” It would not require us to come to one, single understanding of reality; it would always allow diversity of opinion and encourage free debate. Live and let live. Remember that?... Homosexual citizens absolutely deserved equal rights, but the question of homosexuality itself would — and should — always be open to dispute and debate. Since a liberal society contains both fundamentalist preachers as well as lesbian atheists, it cannot resolve the core question. So it shouldn’t try. And it should celebrate, not bemoan, this ideological diversity... the gay rights movement should have shut down in 2015 after Obergefell; and the trans rights movement should have shut down in 2020 after Bostock. Once gay men and lesbians and trans people achieved legal and constitutional equality, the fight was over. But in the movement I was once a part of, many, of course, were not liberals, let alone liberal conservatives — but radicals, who reluctantly went along with marriage equality, but itched to transform society far more comprehensively. And these radicals now control everything in the hollowed-out gay rights apparatus. Their main ticket item is a law that would replace biological sex with gender in the law, and remove protections for religious liberty: smashing the liberal settlement. Combine that with acute polarization in the Trump era, and information silos, so that many gays get their sense of reality from MSNBC and Elton John, and you can see how the spiral into illiberal madness began. And this is what I mean by “illiberal”: the use of public education, corporate power, and government fiat to enforce the postmodern doctrines of queer and gender theory; the suppression of debate; the abuse of science; and the deployment of children as weapons in an ideological campaign... When majorities supported gay couples getting married, they did not thereby support having their daughters forced to shower next to biological males in locker rooms, or compete with them in competitive sports; they did not support teaching kindergartners that their bodies have nothing to do with whether they are boys or girls; they did not support using unapproved drugs on troubled children to arrest their puberty, and sterilize them for life; and they did not support schools transitioning their children into the opposite gender without their knowledge... most who were persuaded to support gay equality did not believe that supporting gay rights meant endorsing anti-scientific piffle that sex is a “spectrum.”... there is no good, scientifically sound evidence at all behind “gender-affirming care” for children. No solid evidence it reduces suicidality; no solid evidence it is “life-saving”; and truth be told, very little evidence for knowing whether it helps or hurts. Clinical experience and small selective studies just cannot substitute for rigorous research. We have none. But we have piles of evidence that mistakes have been made — in abundance. For that matter, there is no empirical, medical way to show what a child’s “gender identity” is at all — outside the child’s own words, which are now, in a medical first, deemed to be completely dispositive in diagnosis. Some super-blue states are actually making it illegal to conduct more thorough psychological counseling to test for other factors, before setting a kid on a lifetime of medicalization. In what other context is this even imaginable? In what universe is it morally essential to subject children to irreversible medical treatments, for which we have no solid, long-term clinical trials? And to use emotional blackmail to force parents to go along?... all male and female biological differences have to be denied, and those who object are slandered or fired. Women are “menstruators”; lesbians are “non-men”; gays are all “queers”; and homosexuality is a bigoted form of “genital preference.” This ideology, by denying there is such a thing as a male sex, has even taken aim at homosexuality itself — and the gays are too tribal, oblivious or distracted to stand up for themselves. The ignorance in this movement is also stunning... the current head of HRC, testifying before Congress, said that Serena Williams could beat a pro male tennis player, and refused to answer if she believed there were physical differences between men and women. It seemed, in fact, as if she had never been in a debate about this before, and never thought much about it. But as Riley Gaines noted in that hearing, “Both Serena and Venus lost to the 203rd ranked male tennis player.” In the gay rights movement, we examined every single possible argument that could be used against us, and answered them. We debated anyone anywhere. And, in the broader context, we left you, gays and straights, alone. Nothing in your life had to change to accept gay equality. Compare that with the transqueer movement. They will never leave you alone, they will police the words you use, they will deny you access to any same-sex space, they will force your daughter to compete against males, they will tell your child they may be the opposite sex inside and keep it from you, and they will use blackmail — and a farrago of falsehood — to put your kid on a lifetime of medication. They refuse to debate opponents; they cancel and demonize even the most liberal of people (see JK Rowling); they censor words or destroy their meaning and defend violence."
The "myth" of the slippery slope strikes again