VIDEO: With Katie Herzog on the Expansion of LGBTQ Identity and How it is Wielded in Political Discourse - "While various marginalized identities still trigger great discrimination, suffering and even danger in certain venues in the world, in other key elite centers — academia, media, liberal cosmopolitan enclaves, elite political debates — they confer great advantages, naturally fostering the incentive to claim it. The more marginalization points one can assemble, the more rights a person is assigned, the more deference they are due, the more inherent soundness and moral righteousness their political arguments are assumed to carry. Anyone who participates even minimally in political discourse in these venues knows these are the prevailing rules, and anyone who denies it is being dishonest. That’s the reason there have been so many cases of white straight people in academia and media getting caught falsely assuming marginalized identities that are not their own. Any set of rules for political discourse that subordinate the merit of an argument to the identity of the person advocating it is one that is inherently unhealthy and distorted. And that framework, undoubtedly growing in strength in elite U.S. precincts, is also producing a wide range of incentives, distortions and pathologies for how marginalization and its various identities are understood."
The alt-right: identity politics on steroids - "the ‘alt-right’ has been one of the most abused terms in Anglo-American political discourse. The label has been used to refer to a range of figures, from US president Donald Trump to best-selling psychologist Jordan Peterson, from any member of Boris Johnson’s cabinet to full-blown neo-Nazi thugs and avowed racists. This stretching of the term is not only disingenuous — it is also dangerous. By making the alt-right a mundane catch-all smear, the hideousness and danger of the actual alt-right is hidden. Such intellectual laziness has another negative outcome: it fails to understand the deeper reasons that gave breathing space to the alt-right. Because if we scratch the surface, we are in for a surprise: the alt-right is not the resurrection of Nazi Germany or the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan, but the unwitting by-product of some of the dominant mainstream ideas of our time... what differentiates the alt-right from the rest of the transgressive, anti-mainstream right is its distinctive racial worldview. And at the centre of its racial worldview lies white nationalism... the alt-right is a distinctive 21st-century phenomenon. This is because the worldview of the alt-right is the logical result of the dominant ideology in the West today — namely, tribalism. Spencer’s talent, such as it is, lay in his ability to adapt his racist message to the prevailing cultural climate of our times. Thus, the alt-right is focusing on two areas possessed of a strong currency in today’s politics: identity and victimhood. We are constantly being told that our identity is special, that we should be proud of it, and that it makes us who we are. It tells us we are not sovereign individuals; rather, we are male, female, cis heterosexual, LGBT, BAME, minorities… the list goes on. The alt-rightists see this trend, nod approvingly, and simply add their identity to the list. We are white, they say, and this is who we are. In this sense, the alt-right is entirely on trend, intellectually speaking. In academia, for example, racial thinking has also experienced a powerful revival in recent decades. But it has come back wearing a progressive face. Critical-race studies, and similar disciplines, tell us that colour-blindness is problematic, and that ‘whiteness’ is an inescapable predicament for white people. Indeed, critical-race theorists present whiteness as something close to a modern form of original sin. The alt-right has seized on this revamped concept of race, and appropriated it for its own ends. In its hands, whiteness becomes something that must be defended. As Jared Taylor, a sixtysomething ‘race realist’ intellectual, who is popular in the alt-right movement, puts it:
‘What do you call a black person who prefers to be around other black people, and likes black music and culture? A black person. What do you call a white person who listens to classical music, likes European culture, and prefers to be around white people? A Nazi. All non-whites are expected to have a strong racial identity; only whites must not.’...
Ironically, it is perhaps more accurate to portray the alt-right as a white-vulnerability movement, rather than a white-supremacy one. After all, this is the ultimate justification for the alt-right’s dream of an ethno-state — namely, that it will provide a ‘safe space’, as Spencer himself puts it, for white people, threatened, as they allegedly are, by globalism and multiculturalism. Indeed, Spencer, Taylor and others in the alt-right openly claim that other races have, on average, a higher IQ than whites. Such a claim would have been unimaginable for old-style white supremacists. But here it provides another reason as to why whites need their own racial ethno-state – because they are not as bright, as, say, Asian people... We are constantly being told that our ethnicity, our gender, our upbringings and our culture define who we are. We need to stand up to this view, and defend our individual free will and our capacity to change our predicament. Only then, perhaps, will it be possible to change the world for the better. This is how we will defeat the alt-right and its misanthropy – through a defeat of tribal thinking and identitarianism in general."
So, You Want To Define Woke? - "Spoiler alert! Woke is the Left’s “Red Pill.” Duh. I mean, both terms reference being asleep to some broader worldview — a system of oppression that we can’t see, like fish in water, until we finally wake up... Now, if you want the real definition, here it is: Woke is left wing, zero-sum, cultural and systemic identitarian-collectivist activism... I mean, we could simplify things and just call it “Cultural Marxism,” but Wikipedia considers that some kind conspiratorial dog-whistle. Curiously, it’s actually not a conspiratorial dog-whistle if you just change the words around a little…
'Marxist cultural analysis'...
So maybe it’s better to say: Woke is Neo-Marxist Cultural Activism That’s Totally Not Trying To Destabilize The West. Come to think of it, both of these definitions, while apropos, may just be a little over some people’s heads, so let’s try something a bit easier: Woke is The Left’s Alt-Right. Ah, now I know we’re speaking the same language. If you think about it, both the Alt-Right and the Woke-Left are identitarian-collectivists, both obsessed with identity and putting it first in matters of policy. Sure, they definitely have opposite views about how society should treat “cis/white/straight/Protestant/males” specifically, but they’re ultimately using the same strategies, or ideological framework, to achieve their ends. (Kinda like how the Nation of Islam and Neo Nazis make good bedfellows.) One wants to use discriminatory policies while the other…wants to use discriminatory policies... the only way to measure a lesser of these evils is by which identities you prefer to get screwed. But even this is only part of the picture. There’s actually a crucial difference between them: Whereas the Alt-Right wants to differentiate themselves from the standard Right, the Woke-Left wants to infiltrate and assimilate the Progressives... the young Progressives have had years of calculated indoctrination. Still, many have been picking up on its bullshit. It’s not just a conservative thing. Progressives are increasingly telling their stories of “walking away from the Left.” Full disclosure, I’m one of ‘em... Sarah Silverman described Woke as: “…learning new things about people or the world and then acting accordingly like basic kindness, maybe a gesture of care to people who are more vulnerable than you.” But that’s just more of the mud. When someone says, “Go Woke, Go Broke,” they’re clearly not referencing basic kindness or learning new things. For example, despite Billy Eichner’s best attempts to wave away the failure of Bros by blaming homophobic crowds, there’s a reason why it could fail in 2022, yet Brokeback Mountain was widely praised in an era when marriage equality still wasn’t even legal. Can you spot the difference?... let’s be real here, saying “Woke” is far easier than saying “left wing, zero-sum, cultural and systemic identitarian-collectivist activism.”... Race and sex swapping established characters isn’t inherently woke either, it happens all the time in stage plays, and it can be done without sacrificing the nature of the character. Think Starbuck from the Battlestar Galactica remake. The problem again is Woke-Diversity: rigging the casting for the sake of an ESG score or the showrunner’s own prejudice, especially where it doesn’t make sense. Think the BBC show, Anne Boleyn. And, I hate to break it to you, but if you think Superman has to be black for black people to relate, you’re a racist, no matter how hard the Woke want to redefine the term. And if you know any kids who feel that way, congratulations, they’ve been indoctrinated to view identity first and foremost, which is a win for the Woke. In fact, it’s the first component of their agenda. And it’s not just the identities, it’s also what you do with the characters. For example, making all young women unbelievable-scientific geniuses (Wakanda Forever had two of these “Women in STEM tropes,” and the horribly-titled Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania’s whole plot revolves around another), or making all older women “girl-bosses.” Seriously, it’s like every person in authority has to be a chick with a stick up her ass. It’s sheer, fucking hubris. Conversely, it can also mean making all men, especially white men, little more than villains or buffoons. This isn’t building women up, it’s patronizing them while breaking men down... I want strong, female characters. Hell, we have a rich history proving that both can be strong and compelling. Think The Terminator. No, I’m explicitly talking about turning female characters into Marry Sues whilst making a mockery of men. Think Rey vs Finn in the new Star Wars trilogy. Even a toddler could tell that this isn’t putting them on the same level. Likewise, it can be found in the very skeleton of a production, such as “diversity-hiring” unqualified show runners. Not only does this trickle down wokism, it leads to a loss in quality, as green “creatives” who aren’t familiar with (or blatantly don’t like) the material they’re working on produce poor work. Think She-Hulk, whose showrunner clearly knew nothing about the titular character, law, or even comedy. It can go even further and be directors who only hire an LGBTQWTFBBQ+ cast for their production or others who outright refuse to cast a white lead... This may come as a surprise, but I have no qualms talking about serious topics in teen shows, including racism or sexism, etc., provided it’s not woke sophistry. I like seeing diverse casts (granted, more so by their character than superficial features like race), it just can’t be forced and has to make sense in the context of the work. Not even talking about entertainment, I want to see people pulled out of poverty or not abused by police…I just don’t start and end the conversation with the color of skin. I also think we should teach the full scope of history, especially the ugly bits, sans contemporary agendas and provided it’s honest and age appropriate. See, each caveat I have to add to those statements is where you can find wokism hiding. Speaking of which, Lefties try to say Anti-Woke means not telling “black history.” That’s bullshit too, because they don’t want to just tell history, they want to “reframe” it to achieve their goal, and that’s what we’re calling out... I don’t want children being told what to think, I want them taught how to think critically. They should not be vehicles for your agenda so your ideas can get away unscathed by challenge."
Liberals keep claiming conservatives fail in defining woke. But they always dismiss the definitions offered
Post-Marxism is another good way to define wokeness
Keywords: defining wokeness, define woke, define wokeness, definition of woke, definition of wokeness
Meme - Chanel Pfahl @ChanLPfa: "Found on the official Government of Canada website."
"WHEEL OF PRIVILEGE AND POWER
(the closer you are to the centre, the more privilege you have)"
Meme - "Tacoma Olympia Polyamory Society
Private group
350 members
About: Hello and welcome to T.O.P.S! (Don't worry, bottoms/ verse are welcome too!)
We're an 18+ social group for polyamorous folk in the Pierce County area. We'll hold social events for adults only and family friendly events too! The primary objective is to connect with likeminded people to create a community and help people make new friends! You can live outside the Pierce County area, but know most (possibly all) events will be in Pierce County. All people are welcome to join except the following:
- Centrist/Right Wingers/Republicans/Trumpers
- Racists and Anti-BLM/ALM Supporters
- Ableists
- Bigots
- TERFS
- Classists
- Fascists
- Sexists/Misogynists
- Pro-Blue Lives Supports (We're ACAB here!)
- Nazis/Anti-Semits"
Meme - USSR: "Now that we have power, it's time to get rid of the useless people"
Pride flag: "I can't wait, finally we will be free of the straight Christians, Comrade!"
USSR: "Up against the wall"
Pride flag: "Comrade?"
Meme - Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok: ".@OneTeamFCS is so desperate for students to read pO*n in school that they offered students prizes and Starbucks gift cards if they stopped by the school library for "banned books week." We looked into their library and one of the books they offer is "Fun Home" which shows a "lesbian terrOrist" doing oral s*x"
Why do liberals want to sexualise children so much?
Canadian dad rips school board for sexually explicit book available to young children, gender policies - "A Canadian father of a fourth-grade student went off on a school district on Tuesday not just for requesting to know what his daughter’s gender identity is, but also for the contents of a book on the school library shelves. David Todor spoke during a public portion of a Waterloo Region District meeting in Waterloo, Ontario in Canada on Monday, raising concerns about a book by Toni Morrison, titled, "The Bluest Eye... Morrison talks about homosexuality, bestiality, and sodomy. Todor read the passage of the book his daughter can check out from the school library, during the school board meeting, saying, "If it’s good enough for her to access it, it’s good enough to be read over here." "He could have been an active homosexual but lacked the courage. Bestiality did not occur to him, and sodomy was quite out of the question, for he did not experience sustained e----ions and could not endure the thought of somebody else's," Todor read. "And since he was too diffident to confront homosexuality, and since little boys were insulting, scary, and stubborn, he further limited his interests to little girls. They were usually manageable and frequently seductive. "Do you know that when I touched their sturdy little t-ts and bit them—just a little—I felt I was being friendly," he continued to read. Todor also raised concerns about the school district’s policies and a couple of surveys he says were given to students between fourth and 12th grades. One question had Todor scratching his head; it had to do with students marking what their sexual orientation is... Todor told the board he remembered when people did not ask those questions. "It’s none of your business what a person’s sexual orientation is," he said. "Who’s interested in knowing the sexual orientation of my daughter? She’s in grade 4." Another survey he said was given to students within the same grade range addresses gender identity, asking the student what their gender identity is. "Again, I ask you, who’s interested in knowing the sexual orientation and the gender identity of my daughter," Todor asked... Todor said he found it interesting the school had a policy to remove parents from the equation when it came to their kids, but also a policy that teachers are being told not to talk to parents, but students are being told to tell everyone except for their parents."
Twelve-year-olds are taught about anal sex in school while nine-year-olds told to 'masturbate' - "Schoolchildren are being taught about anal sex and orgasms before they have reached puberty and set 'masturbation' as homework, secretive lesson plans reveal. Many teachers are 'indoctrinating' children with scientifically false claims about biological sex, presenting gender as fluid and furthering a narrative that people can be born in the wrong body. It comes as the NHS is facing a mass legal action from 1,000 families who claim their children were rushed into taking life-changing puberty blockers' by the Tavistock Centre. MailOnline has found graphic teaching material — including a sex manual for pre-teens — being taught to children in classes around the UK. It follows a concerned mother being denied the right to see the content of the lessons being taught to her 15-year-old daughter in her Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) classes, which became compulsory three years ago. Despite a judge refusing Clare Page the right to see the material, MailOnline can reveal that a wealth of questionable teaching resources are already available online. Colouring books, word searches and cartoon drawings have also been given to young girls and boys by 'activist teachers' in their 'overarching mission to sexualise children in the name of inclusion'. Since September 2020, Relationships Education has been compulsory in primary schools and RSE mandatory in secondary schools. The change left many teaching staff seeking guidance. The void was filled by charities — some harbouring unconventional views on biological sex and sharing material on their websites that references underage sex. MailOnline can reveal that some children are:
Taught that from birth until the age of one, babies can 'experience pleasurable sensations' by touching their genitals
Given ways for 12-year-old girls to orgasm while masturbating, including pinching or stroking the clitoris
Given 'masturbation' homework from a pre-compulsory RSE resource
Told that girls as young as 12 can find sexual pleasure from anal, vaginal and oral sex
Taught that it's normal to want to masturbate during and even before they hit puberty
Informed that it's normal for prepubescent children to be sexually attracted to anyone
Told that gender is different from sex but is a much more intrinsic part of who a person is
Taught that people can change their sex from being a man to being a woman
Also taught that some 'non-binary' humans are neither men nor women
Taught that men with the male Y chromosome can actually be women
The Sex Education Forum (SEF), Coram Life Education and Brook are some of the leading charities that create lesson plans for schools, hold PSHE workshops and point teachers towards related educational material... the TES lesson plan makes the false claim that being XXY (also called Klinefelter's Syndrome) means you can be male or female, or neither. This is false. As the NHS points out, only men can be XXY... Vagina Matters also showed explicit cartoons of a woman's naked breasts, buttocks and vagina. The guide for girls as young as 12 also pointed out where the clitoris was using a graphic diagram. Vagina Matters is the top free teaching resource on Brook's website. It is a tool aimed at 12 to 14-year-old girls that covers about sex, masturbation and orgasms. It also normalises sex 'before your first menstruation'. Most girls start to menstruate between the ages of eight and 13. Sex before the age of 13 is legally considered as rape. The guide even advises pre-teens different ways of stimulation, from massaging their clitoris with a finger to being penetrated by a penis, licked with a tongue and using sex toys on themselves. The schoolgirls' guide to a vagina also said: 'During puberty, and even before that, it's normal to have the desire to masturbate and to imagine how you would want to be touched by someone else.' The guide, which targets 12 to 14-year-old girls, added: 'You can be sexually attracted to anyone.' In the next paragraph, it listed ways to find 'sexual pleasure'. It said: 'These could include masturbation, fingering, penetration of the vagina with a penis or sex toy, penetration of the anus with a penis or sex toy, [and] using the mouth and tongue to stimulate your partner's genital area.'"
Cops Probe After Middle School Librarian Allegedly Says Students Are ‘Sex Workers’ To Justify Pro-Prostitution Book - "Police in Northern Virginia are investigating after a middle school librarian allegedly defended a pro-prostitution book by saying it belonged in the library because many of the school’s 11- to 13-year old students are sex workers... A shocked Loudoun County teacher went to the police after the librarian, Stefany Guido, allegedly made the comment to her. The teacher had asked Guido about a book a parent had flagged on Twitter called “Seeing Gender,” which included a chapter titled “‘Sex Work’ Is Not a Bad Term.” The Daily Wire is withholding the name of the teacher, who as a “mandatory reporter” felt compelled to tell police that students in her charge could be in danger. “A person may exchange sex or sexual activity for things they need or want, such as food, housing, hormones, drugs, gifts, or other resources,” reads one shocking passage in the book... The Sterling Middle School teacher went to the school library after seeing the unidentified parent’s tweet about the book to find out if it was actually available to students. Guido retrieved the book and defended it, the teacher told police in a recorded conversation... “She started talking about how there’s kids who come to the library who do sex work, and this makes them feel validated,” the teacher told police. “As a teacher, if you get an individual student coming to you because you’re abused, you have to go the police immediately.” The teacher said Guido did not name specific students, except one who had passed through the school about six years ago. Guido allegedly said she marked the book as being for eighth graders... Guido has been active in political and cultural hot-button issues. In 2017, Guido told the Human Rights Campaign she was canvassing for votes for a transgender Democrat political candidate. “I felt like I was actually making an impact in politics — which has always felt impenetrable in the past. It was so rewarding to get to go out and interact with other voters in a positive way,” she said. Earlier this month, she used Facebook to raise money for abortions. The school’s other librarian, Lisa Buffi, created a 17-page list of “LGBTQ+ Books” for children, such as “a picture book with rhyming text that encourages boys and girls to ignore common gender stereotypes,” one about a boy who transfers to a new school and begins life as a girl, and others called “The Bride Was A Boy,” “Boy Meets Boy,” and “Being Jazz: My Life As A (Transgender) Teen.” She also appealed to outside donors to purchase books such as “Ghost Boy,” and promoted an effort by a gay group to donate books to the library. The American Library Association has increasingly promoted to children comic books that contain overt sexual messages. In April, it chose a self-described “Marxist lesbian” as its president-elect. Her platform seemed to have little to do with literature, saying “So many of us find ourselves at the ends of our worlds. The consequences of decades of unchecked climate change, class war, white supremacy, and imperialism have led us here.”"
Damn banned books!
What does it say that a book about "gender identity" talks about sex work?
Meme - systlin: "So I found out that my coworker has been selling gay indulgences and honestly what a fucking genius she is. Her best friend loves chick fil a and always feels guilty about it, so Steph just told her once 'listen if you eat there send me $20 and all is forgiven" and. She did it. And is still doing that. We're working and Steph gets a notification and just goes "Oh L just sent me the Lesbian Forgiveness Tax for chick fil a" and I went 'what'
@ all straight people who've ever eaten at chick fil a; cashapp a queer person $20 immediately"
"#is this what is going to cause the gay reformation in a few years"
"Intensely interested to see what gay grievances get nailed to the front of the local gay club"
Yet more evidence that wokeness is a religion
i/o on X - ""Socioeconomic differences cause race differences in crime" Uhm, no. Upper-middle class blacks commit felonies in the US at about the same rate as working-class whites. "Systemic racism" No one seems to be able to point to the presently-operating organized and interconnected framework and intentionality — that is, the system — which makes racism in America "systemic". Intermittent or disconnected incidents of racism do not constitute a system. The mere existence of disparities proves nothing, and is far more robustly explained by large and persistent mean IQ gaps between blacks and whites (and Asians). There's no presently-operating "system" of racism in the US. It's virtually all residual and legacy effects and incidents in isolation from one another. "Systemic" is a deliberate misuse of language. The only racially discriminating "system" using institutional power is affirmative action."
Thread by @echetus on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "If you use Wikipedia, you've seen pop-ups like this. If you're like me, you may have donated as a result. Wikipedia is an amazing website, and the appeals seem heartfelt. But I've now learnt the money isn't going where I thought... The organisation which administers Wikipedia - to whom the money goes - is the Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Wikimedia is a San Francisco non-profit with 400 employees - which has exploded in size in recent years. In a decade, Wikimedia's spending has soared: from $10 million in 2010 to $112 million by 2020. This suprised me, seeing as Wikipedia seems to be functionally the same website it was 10 years ago. So what explains this huge increase? Maybe more people use the site, making it more expensive to run? No: 2021 website hosting cost $2.4 million - which is LESS than it did in 2012. In fact, according the Wikimedia Foundation's own website, less than half of what they spend goes on directly supporting the website. Bear in mind - Wikipedia used to be an incredibly cheap, volunteer run website... So where is the money going? Well, a lot of it Wikimedia gives away to other organisations. And a significant portion of their staff are employed in that process. From 2012 to 2020, the spending on salaries increased fivefold, and $22.9 million was given in grants. At this point, you should know that while Wikipedia emphasises a "Neutral Point of View", Wikimedia is openly politicized. It is a full participant in America's culture wars, and this helps us understand how they spend the donations. Let's take a look at two big recipients. The SeRCH Foundation received a quarter million dollars of donor cash. Glancing at the website, you could assume it was about the admirable goal of minority representation in STEM. However on closer inspection, it turns out to be a bit more unusual than that. They're proponents of an "Intersectional Scientific Method" involving "hyperspace"(?) Their output is extremely long YouTube videos which get about 50 views a time. In the videos they discuss issues in science like objectivity (they're against it) and bias (they're in favour). There's been one new video in the last year. Also enjoying Wikimedia's largesse was Borealis Philanthropy. Borealis is yet another grant giving organisation: They're even more political, and fully committed to driving America's cultural revolution. Wikimedia gave $250,000 to Borealis's Racial Equity in Journalism Fund. That money was then cascaded down to a dozens of ideologically aligned news outlets across the US. Thus, the money you give to keep Wikipedia online is diverted to bankroll the inescapable American culture war. Back in 2017, a Wikipedian called Guy Macon wrote a strident article entitled "Wikipedia has a Cancer". He predicted Wikimedia's runaway spending would bankrupt Wikipedia, resulting in its takeover by Facebook or Google. Since then, Wikimedia's budget has almost doubled. What Macon misunderstood is that orgs like Wikimedia are not cancers. They are parasites that cannot survive outside their host. Almost nobody would donate to Wikimedia so it could spend money on these causes - without Wikipedia, Wikimedia would starve. In the west, an advanced industry of NGOs, charities, and foundations has evolved which funds so much of the weirdness in our daily lives. A caste of activist-professionals have emerged, which inevitably capture any non-profit with spare cash. This is what is sometimes called The Blob: a powerful but inconspicuous force that has given us the dysfunction of the 21st century. Wikipedia is an amazing and important website. But it doesn't need your money. It has enough to stay online, improve and grown. What it needs more donations for is to fund one side in the United States' culture war. A sad footnote to this: In 2021 SeRCH ran their own funding programme, "Hot Science Summer". In deciding who to fund, the key criteria was use of the Intersectional Scientific method. Everything else - a scientific background, data - was optional. What could possibly go wrong? One of the projects was into spatial learning in the California Two-Spot Octopus, for which the researcher got 12 hatchling octopuses. Unfortunately, the lab experiment went horribly wrong, killing the poor creatures before the research could be concluded."
Meme - Derek Hopper @derekmhopper: "Isn't it funny that the shitlibs at this bookstore instinctively know which countries are shitholes? Malala is from Pakistan-which wasn't mentioned by Trump-yet the store employee saw the book, thought "Yes, Pakistan is a shithole", and put it on display."
*Writers from s**thole countries*
Also seen: The Kite Runner (Afghanistan), A Brief History of Seven Killings (Jamaica), The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao (Dominican Republic), Exit West (Pakistan). Of course, the cope will be that this is what Trump meant
Meme - "You pay for them to teach you this shit?"
"Other anchors for the spectrum
Left
Rational
Egalitarian
Internationalist
Progressive
Right
Irrational
Racist
Nationalist
Retrogressive"
Clear proof that academia is free of bias, and anyone who alleges this hates learning