Women in Physics/CERN

A link I missed out the last time (which should've been the first as it summarises the situation):

Cern scientist: 'Physics built by men - not by invitation' - "He told his audience of young, predominantly female physicists that his results "proved" that "physics is not sexist against women. However the truth does not matter, because it is part of a political battle coming from outside". He produced a series of graphs which, he claimed, showed that women were hired over men whose research was cited more by other scientists in their publications, which is an indication of higher quality. He also presented data that he claimed showed that male and female researchers were equally cited at the start of their careers but men scored progressively better as their careers progressed. Prof Strumia pointed to behavioural research which he suggested may account for the disparity.One study, he told his audience, indicated that "men prefer working with things and women prefer working with people" and another, he claimed, suggested that there was a "difference even in children before any social influence". Prof Strumia said that these conclusions may "not be fully right... (but) the opposite assumption of identical brains is ideology". As evidence of discrimination against male researchers, Prof Strumia claimed that "Oxford University extends exam times for women's benefit" and "Italy offers free or cheaper university for female (research) students"" 

 

Gender Controversy Comes to Physics: A Response to the Statement Against Alessandro Strumia

"around 20% of PhD-holding physicists are women. Although this varies by country, that number has remained roughly consistent in the US over the last twenty years. Physics is thus near the bottom among STEM fields, as ranked by proportion of women...

several presentations dealt with gender issues directly. Apparently, Strumia asked if he could contribute a talk, and the organizers accepted. I am a high-energy researcher and first heard about the fracas after it erupted over the weekend. I was directed to the Particles for Justice statement. After reading it through, and then checking Strumia’s slides, I found I could not in good conscience sign it. Indeed, there are problems with Strumia’s talk, but I was greatly disappointed by the reply, and frankly embarrassed that many respected scientists would sign a statement that seems so lacking in scientific and ethical rigor. I thought to myself, how can we endorse a polemic that is at least as bad as the talk it criticizes? ...

Strumia’s talk advanced the argument that there is no anti-female bias in the field and that gender differences are driven by interest and ability. These are complicated issues and he can’t claim to have settled them. There remain important caveats and confounds, but the argument is not one that has been refuted either and I think it deserves consideration. Additionally, he made a serious mistake in one comment, by bringing up a personal comparison, which was rightly condemned by the community.

The criticism of Strumia, however, has not been confined to the unprofessional comparison or to a measured evaluation of the science. Instead, there has been an effort to demonize him and cast his arguments as pseudo-science and easily refuted bunk. In doing so, his critics have repeatedly misrepresented him, invoked specious arguments, misled people as to the state of the evidence and generally behaved contrary to the spirit of good science...

The talk is written in a casual style, including cartoons and jokes, along with a lot of plots and bullet point items. This is not uncommon within high-energy physics. Links are included in his talk to various sources supporting his claims. The basis for his own analysis is a paper by Strumia and Torre on the arXiv depository. His analysis employs a large dataset of citations and job positions from the INSPIRE website which is used widely among high energy physicists to monitor papers and authors...

Strumia’s talk does not address every criticism that might be made. He does not include references to every paper claiming to find sexism in some aspect of the STEM fields, or every study that might question his own sources. This would be an impossible task and it is not asked of any researcher. His sources appear to be reasonable, in the sense of not being dismissed in the field...

the statement begins: “We write here first to state, in the strongest possible terms, that the humanity of any person, regardless of ascribed identities such as race, ethnicity, gender identity, religion, disability, gender presentation, or sexual identity is not up for debate.” This is a fine sentiment, but a deeply deceptive bit of rhetoric. Nowhere in Strumia’s slides is anyone’s humanity questioned, nor does he even raise the issue of race, ethnicity, gender identity (as distinct from sex), religion, disability, or gender presentation. It is unethical to imply that he did. Strumia’s views can be summed up in the argument that the distribution of women in physics is consistent with personal choices and ability, that it does not show signs of anti-female bias, and that the theory that the numbers are driven by discrimination is inconsistent with the data. Those claims are certainly disputed, but they no more question women’s humanity than the claim that male weightlifters dominate world records due to greater male size and interest. Similarly, the authors condemn his “open discrimination and personal attacks.” While I share the concern over the personal comparison, nothing in his slides discriminates against women or calls for it. The authors write, “It is clear to all of us that Strumia is not an expert on these topics and is misusing his physics credentials to put himself forward as one.” Strumia does not present himself as an expert in gender studies, nor does he rely on his credentials as a physicist. This is also not a standard applied to other speakers at the workshop. For example, Dr. Jessica Wade has a degree in physics and works on light emitting diodes. Although serving on several women’s councils, she lists no academic papers in gender studies. Nonetheless, the fifth slide of her talk announces, in regard to the issue of women’s participation in STEM fields, “this has NO biological origin.” Her slide links to a paper on sex differences in school grades which makes no such claim. In fact, its findings are quite compatible with Strumia’s view. I don’t wish to single out Dr. Wade, who is entitled to her argument, but to point out the hypocrisy...

Strumia, however, did not claim that harassment never happens, he argued that discrimination was not the cause of the gender imbalance. According to the NASEM report, for faculty/staff-on-female-student harassment in the University of Texas system, 1% of male and female science students report sexual coercion and 4%(2%) of females (males) report unwanted sexual attention. Some 17% (13%) report sexist hostility and 8% (5%) describe crude behavior. What is notable is that these numbers are the same or lower than those in non-STEM fields, in Engineering, or in Medicine. In particular, female students in medicine reported a 45% rate of sexist hostility... we don’t see evidence of exceptional rates of harassment in science, and we see them much higher in a female-majority profession like medicine. While harassment surely happens in physics as in all fields, including it would apparently only strengthen Strumia’s assertion that it does not drive the gender differences between fields. This criticism of Strumia also elides his claims that women are better represented in fields like Business and Law, which have “real power” and better pay. It also fails to address his contention that they are better represented in administrative positions than as physicists or technicians.

2. The statement criticizes Strumia’s citation of the “Gender Equality Paradox,” which finds higher-equality countries tend to have bigger gender gaps in STEM. They write “This claim ignores cultural differences, and also the possibility that women in such countries have fewer career options outside of academia. Without controlling for such effects, any attempt to draw conclusions is meaningless.” This is a deeply unscientific response. The “paradox” is in fact a result of attempting to control for cultural differences...

[The authors link] a webpage collecting a number of recent articles discussing gender issues in academics. The articles are quite disparate in methods, goals and findings. In fact, they include an entire section on articles that find lack of bias or bias in favor of women in STEM...

The question of why men produce a higher citation index throughout their careers does not change the fact that they do...

The authors write of citation counts that “using them as a substitute for scientific quality is very problematic.” This is undoubtedly true, especially for individual papers, also for individual authors. Yet, no one seems to believe they are meaningless in the aggregate. For instance, people are very concerned about impact factor, which is a citation-based rating of journals and which does indeed seem to correlate with those considered most prestigious, at least within a field. The basic idea that important papers should accrue citations and forgettable ones should not is hard to ignore...

They “reiterate that Strumia’s arguments are morally reprehensible.” I cannot agree. Whether his scientific case is sound or not, his hypothesis is not reprehensible. Strumia believes physics is on average a meritocracy, which I think most scientists would agree is the ideal. If he is mistaken then he is scientifically wrong, but this does not reflect on his morals.

They continue, “Finally, we would also like to underline how grossly unethical it is to misrepresent the topic of one’s talk to workshop organizers to promote an agenda which is antithetical to the workshop itself.” The title of his talk “Bibliometrics data about gender issues in fundamental theory” is accurate. It does not indicate his conclusions, or commentary towards the end of the talk. This is commonplace in academic talks, and does not seem out of context in a session on gender participation. Indeed, no one has raised this issue regarding the other talks. The problem is apparently that the organizers assumed Strumia would not advance a conclusion they disagreed with, and that he would not criticize other viewpoints. This does not comport with a scientific attitude in my opinion...

The authors then urge future organizers to seek guidance from certain experts. The first link goes to a book by Dr. Karen Barad on her theory of “agential realism,” which is described as “Offering an account of the world as a whole rather than as composed of separate natural and social realms, agential realism is at once a new epistemology, ontology, and ethics.” The third link is to a psychoanalytic analysis of interpretations of quantum mechanics. This is not the kind of work most physicists would endorse, and certainly not what is considered rigorous science. The other citations are to opinion pieces with two exceptions. One is an uncontroversial report on the number of women in physics. The other is a study which finds women-led papers in astronomy receive fewer citations, consistent with Prof. Strumia’s findings."

 

This is the way physics ends. Not with a Big Bang, but a feminist whimper

"We live in the era of the forced apology, and so it’s refreshing to see theoretical particle physicist Alessandro Strumia of the University of Pisa, refusing to apologize for defending science from feminist blitzkrieg. Unsurprisingly, thousands of Strumia’s colleagues are now denouncing him in a disturbing example of the war on science being waged across the western world today.

It has become a truism that any academic field in which the number of women is not at least equal to the number of men must be a field in which sexism is keeping women out. Any man who contends that there is no sexism in his field is immediately held up as one of sexism’s most dangerous exemplars.

We’re talking about elite fields in academia, not dirty and dangerous male-dominated jobs like front-line soldiering, long-haul trucking, garbage collection, street paving, commercial fishing, mining, logging, roofing, sanitation, construction, sewer repair, and so on. Feminists aren’t fighting to get more women into these jobs. Hence these jobs are never the focus of panels of outraged experts or public statements by academics who have made comfortable and well paying careers out of enforcing male guilt.

When Professor Alessandro Strumia of the University of Pisa presented a paper at a conference of the elite European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN); a conference on high-energy theory and gender, he must have known that a non-feminist presentation would go down about as well as Galileo’s cosmology before the Inquisition. According to the church of feminism, all men in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths), must manifest deep concern about the declared “woman problem” and must pledge to make ever greater efforts, even including perhaps sacrificing the best and brightest, in order to meet diversity goals.

And this is a church in which confessing your sins won’t bring you any forgiveness—so don’t even think about it.

As Strumia mentioned in his presentation, physics is a special community of researchers dedicated to understanding the truth of nature; its requirements are rigorous intellectual honesty and reliance on quantitative evidence. Real science cannot flourish when these requirements are suppressed for any social goal...

he looked at the claim, made in a 2016 paper, that women’s contributions to physics are passed over because male physicists tend not to cite papers with female-first authors. He analyzed the data and found that both male and female researchers cited more papers with male-first authors, and to the same degree. Male-first authored papers were likely more often cited by both men and women, he suggested, because the male-authored papers were more significant, not because of a bias against women.

On page 12, Strumia considered the evidence for bias against women in physics hiring by plotting the number of citations male and female researchers have typically had when hired for their first job. Citations—the number of times one’s published work is cited by others—are one major way of determining the quality of a person’s research: the more cited, the more significant and influential. Up until 1995, male and female researchers had a comparable number of citations when first hired. But since 1995, female researchers have been typically hired with less than half of the citations a male PhD graduate has needed to be hired. In other words, Strumia’s graph shows that from 1995 to the present—over the past 23 years—hiring has been overwhelmingly stacked against men.

Strumia showed that female scientists are, at whatever stage, hired with fewer citations than male scientists. In addition, bias against men extends to the awarding of fellowships also. On page 15 of his presentation, Strumia showed that the average number of citations for young male physicists awarded prestigious CERN fellowships is about twice the number of citations for female CERN fellows. So CERN fellowships are being awarded regularly to lesser qualified female physicists because they’re female. Strumia demonstrated that male physicists are more productive, again by a factor of 2, than female physicists throughout the whole course of their careers...

A public letter condemning Strumia, co-authored by 18 mostly U.S. based physicists, was posted on a website calling itself Particles for Justice. To date, the letter has received thousands of scientists’ signatures.

I’ve read a lot of public statements by far-left intellectuals, but I think this one might be the most unhinged I’ve ever seen. It begins with a histrionic assertion that the “humanity of any person, regardless of ascribed identities …” is “not up for debate.”

The clear implication is that Strumia himself, merely by objecting to feminist policy, was calling into question the humanity of women or of any other people, which he was not. Everyone who signed this letter should be ashamed of such dishonesty. The co-authors of the letter also lament that Strumia used his physics credentials to pretend that he had something to contribute to a discussion of gender bias, which is not his area of expertise (though of course if he had made a plea for more aggressive measures to promote women in physics they would never have complained that he lacked the credentials to do so).

They continued that “those among us who are familiar with the relevant literature know that Strumia’s conclusions are in stark disagreement with those of experts.”

This is a classic academic feminist modus operandi. Create a discipline that is based not on scientific methodology but on untestable claims about privilege, intersectionality, lived experience, and unconscious bias. Staff the discipline with ideologues who launch journals and cite one another in their articles. Then claim that a real scientist has no standing to use quantitative methods to challenge the findings of your fake discipline.

In order to show us what only gender experts can see, the letter writers enumerate a series of rebuttals to Strumia’s points. Their first and most general criticism is that Strumia “frequently made the basic error of conflating correlation with causation.” This might be a meaningful criticism, but they fail to give a single instance in which it is the case.

Strumia’s basic argument is that when feminists claim that something must be done about physics’ so-called woman problem, and when it can be shown that less-qualified women are being hired in place of more qualified men, then feminist policies are causing discrimination against men in physics. I don’t see where the logical error is. On the other hand, one could certainly argue that the authors of the letter continually confuse correlation with causation. They find that fewer women work in high-level physics than men, and that fewer women receive Nobel Prizes in Physics, and they conclude that therefore women are discriminated against due to sexism.

This is a clear case of correlation not necessarily involving causation. Physicist, heal thyself!...

when women cite more male authors than female authors, bias is still a factor because women can be just as biased as men. This is a real stretch. What happened to the special authority of women’s “lived experience,” which has become the basis for much feminist theory? If women themselves are just as biased against women as men are said to be, how can bias against women be measured at all, if there is no unbiased standpoint, and then why is it so important to hire more women into physics if they will merely replicate the biases of their male colleagues? The authors do not pursue this line of reasoning...

It seems to say that these scientists are citing the male-first-authored papers only because everyone else is citing them, and that has little, if anything, to do with the importance of the publications. If true, this would seem to suggest that physicists are incapable of, or are not interested in, judging the worth of the research conducted by their fellow scientists, quite an astounding assertion that would surely call the entire physics enterprise into question. The letter writers do not pursue this line of reasoning either...

Again the letter writers rely on a classic feminist modus operandi: it doesn’t matter how often female advantage can be concretely proven; a generalized, conveniently unmeasurable anti-woman bias can never be absolutely disproven and is constantly evoked as if it were a self-evident truth. Unmeasurable factors are again the fail safe in response to Strumia’s graph about women’s lesser achievements in physics throughout their careers...

if social expectations are factors in female underachievement in physics, why is it that in many other academic fields in the Social Sciences, and the Humanities, where presumably women face the very same social expectations, women’s numbers and career contributions have massively increased over the past three decades? Why would social expectations be a deciding factor in suppressing female achievement only in Physics and other Mathematics-based disciplines? The letter writers, of course, do not attempt an explanation.

Overall, the letter writers make no attempt to analyze Strumia’s graphs to show how any of his numbers or inferences are inaccurate. All they’ve got is their moral outrage.

And such outrage powers their concluding ad hominem attack. The letter writers end by pointing to what they call Strumia’s “deep contempt for more than half of humanity that clearly comes from some source other than scientific logic.”

I suppose they couldn’t resist. Not only were they compelled to denounce Strumia as a misogynist (and a racist, even though he said nothing about race in his presentation), but they had to claim in good Stalinist fashion that he may be mentally ill as well, or at least a hater, as anyone must be who would object to the hiring of less qualified people on the basis of characteristics totally irrelevant to physics.

And the letter writers go even further to allege that women and other marginalized people who come into contact with Strumia will suffer from his claimed bigotry, the clear implication being that Strumia’s professional colleagues and superiors should remove him from positions in which he would supervise graduate students or participate in hiring decisions.

The mind boggles at their willingness to make such a vicious allegation. But when you can’t rebut someone’s arguments, and when you can’t begin to prove that he harbours contempt for women, the only thing you have left is mob attack in an attempt to ensure that Strumia’s professional life never recovers from his decision to call out the bullshit that passes for serious discussion at a science conference.

I can only hope that Strumia’s colleagues will resist the call to punishment, that they will recognize the utter irrationality of the letter writers’ claims. And yet thousands of scientists have seen fit to attach their names to the document. Just scroll through the list on the additional page attached to the letter and look at the roll call of shame.

Name after name after name of presumably smart people, patting themselves on the back for their virtue, finding it easier to demean a leading scientist than to deal honestly with his data. To paraphrase T.S. Eliot, this is the way that physics ends, not with a Big Bang but a feminist whimper."

If you disagree with liberals about "minorities", you are denying the humanity of "minorities".

Links - 4th August 2023 (2 - Feminism)

Further understanding incivility in the workplace: The effects of gender, agency, and communion. - "Research conducted on workplace incivility—a low intensity form of deviant behavior—has generally shown that women report higher levels of incivility at work. However, to date, it is unclear as to whether women are primarily treated uncivilly by men (i.e., members of the socially dominant group/out-group) or other women (i.e., members of in-group) in organizations. In light of different theorizing surrounding gender and incivility, we examine whether women experience increased incivility from other women or men, and whether this effect is amplified for women who exhibit higher agency and less communion at work given that these traits and behaviors violate stereotypical gender norms. Across three complementary studies, results indicate that women report experiencing more incivility from other women than from men, with this effect being amplified for women who are more agentic at work. Further, agentic women who experience increased female-instigated incivility from their coworkers report lower well-being (job satisfaction, psychological vitality) and increased work withdrawal (turnover intentions). Theoretical implications tied to gender and incivility are discussed."
David Schmitt on Twitter - "at workplace, women particularly uncivil to other women who have high agency, civil to agentic men; men particularly civil to low agency, high communal women"
Damn patriarchy!

John Durant compares coverage of Rotherham abuse vs Jennifer Lawrence nudes - "Jezebel had one story about Rotherham. But the Jennifer Lawrence story? Jackpot. Durant took the same look at Slate.com. Slate stories on Rotherham? One... So progressives are virtually ignoring large scale injustice because of capitalism? That’s priceless."
Not-So-OK Boomer on Twitter - ""Feminists" can't talk about #Rotherham (or ISIS) because a real war on women would distract from their fake one. @razibkhan"
Caring about Rotherham is racist, of course

Equal judgment for sexually active women and men - "Perhaps you've also embraced the notion that men who have multiple sexual partners are truly revered, whereas women who engage in the same behavior are scorned – the purported sexual double standard. However, a recent survey reveals that this notion is, in fact, a fallacy.  "We have yet to discover the presence of customary double standards imposed on women," asserts Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, an esteemed professor at the Department of Psychology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).  Conversely, men face slightly harsher judgments than women regarding brief sexual encounters. However, despite evidence to the contrary, the myth remains persistent, and a significant number of individuals continue to hold onto this belief... "even when examining short-term encounters, we did not discover any indications of double standards"... Sexual double standards, while an enduring and alluring part of folk psychology, have very little basis in reality... "This research further strengthens the growing body of evidence indicating that sexual double standards, although a captivating aspect of popular beliefs, lack substantial grounding in reality"... when it comes to short-term relationships, men are subjected to stricter judgments, indicating a reversed double standard."  "Both genders face harsher scrutiny regarding enduring partnerships compared to casual encounters. This revelation bears significant importance"... Many individuals are likely to dismiss this discovery, as it is widely believed to be an almost absolute truth that women who engage in sexual exploration face more severe judgment than men. However, the prevalence of this belief does not render it any more accurate... Regarding self-stimulation, the general population tends to be even less judgmental than they are about having multiple partners. In particular, women who engage in masturbation are actually subjected to less negative judgment compared to men, especially in the context of short-term relationships.  “Men find it sexy when women masturbate,” says Kennair.  This lack of surprise is supported by research, which confirms what is already apparent. Overall, there is very little evidence to suggest that many individuals are concerned about whether others engage in masturbation or not. The vast majority consider it perfectly acceptable... "The absence of sexual double standards seems to be a recurring pattern in every culture we have examined""
The copious literature on there being no double standard won't stop feminists from continuing to spread their disinformation

Brittany Martinez on Twitter - "Women like Anita Sarkeesian are a big influence in making women in video games ugly.   But it’s a slap in the face to women. Women can’t be hot and have any other talents? They have to be unattractive to be strong?  Take Aloy from Horizon Zero Dawn for example. The actress, Hannah, who was the face model, is much more attractive than the video game character that used her face.  When women play video games, they either want to play the cute character (Pikachu/Kirby) or the hot character (Lara Croft). Just like men prefer to be the badass guy."

Science Proves That Women Are Mean (Again). Thanks Science! - "when my editor recommended I write up a study released this month by the psychology journal Aggressive Behavior that seems to once again use science to reinforce the stereotype of superficial bitches, my interest was piqued. What, if any, is the value of research that “proves” the bad behavior of women? The study, authored by University of Ottowa professor Tracy Vaillancourt, shows that women are evolutionarily programmed to act aggressively, even “bitchily” towards women who we perceive as “sexier.”... to me, adding credibility to these stereotypes about women gives artillery to our detractors who use this sort of information to reinforce why women will never become CEOs. This sort of information—putting numbers to some of the most base and yes, shameful behavior of the fairer sex—acts as nothing short of cinder blocks chained to our ankles as we try to rise in the world.  So why would a female researcher be responsible for putting this out there? “I certainly would never want to hurt my community of women who have worked hard to achieve all they have. And it’s certainly something I knew I’d get chastised about,” Vaillancourt told me by telephone this morning. “There are comments out there that I’m adding fuel to the fire. I’ve been accused of setting women back a few years.”  “We do act this way, and it does hold us back--so let’s acknowledge it. It’s not a stereotype but a truism, as uncomfortable as that is,” she continues, defensive of her research and determined to make me see eye-to-eye. “Because you can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.”  The hope of revealing prejudices to change behavior involves something called a confirmatory bias, she says, or the human proclivity towards seeking information or evidence to support a viewpoint we already hold. In this case, “sexy-looking women are a threat and should be treated that way.” But by calling attention to that attitude, we’re better equipped to overcome it. In this case, “sexy-women may or may not be a threat and I shouldn’t treat them poorly until I know better.” (Or something along those lines).  “Maybe the next time someone is dressed in a way you think is inappropriate,” Vaillancourt suggests, “Instead of making snide comments or thinking derogatory thoughts, you’ll be more inclined to give her a chance.” Women need to start monitoring and self-censuring themselves, she says, and she sees her research as an early step towards that goal.  As for me, I’m left unconvinced that the potential benefits of research like Vaillancourt’s—or the numerous other published studies on female competitive behavior, social aggression and why women make terrible bosses—outweigh the negatives of handing incriminating statistics about women to haters on a silver (and scientifically-backed) platter."
"Science that doesn't confirm my political beliefs is bad and shouldn't be done". But I'm sure we'll still be told to Trust the Science

Academics find twist in tale of Rosalind Franklin, DNA and the double helix - "History of science This article is more than 1 month old Academics find twist in tale of Rosalind Franklin, DNA and the double helix This article is more than 1 month old  Authors say scientist’s role was acknowledged at the time of discovery – contrary to popular narrative Nicola Davis Science correspondent @NicolaKSDavis Tue 25 Apr 2023 16.24 BST Last modified on Fri 28 Apr 2023 18.13 BST  In the story of how Francis Crick and James Watson discovered the structure of DNA, the popular narrative is one of skullduggery and deceit. But now researchers say there is a twist in the tale of the double helix.  It has long been held that Rosalind Franklin’s X-ray diffraction image known as Photo 51 was illicitly shown to Watson, revealing to him that DNA has a double helix and allowing him and his colleague Crick to deduce the structure and claim the glory.  Now academics say the story should be rewritten, arguing that the image was far from the key to the puzzle and that Franklin appears to have expected her data to be shared – and was credited at the time.  “There’s no evidence that she thought she was robbed,” said Prof Matthew Cobb, of the University of Manchester."
Damn sexism!

Andrew Sullivan: Democrats Are Not in Disarray - "Warren’s policies were way to the left, her earlier debacles (like the DNA test) revealed terrible political judgment, and her classic persona as a know-it-all Harvard professor with a plan for everything was almost identical to that of every earnest Democratic candidate who has lost in the last few decades.  But many of her prominent backers can still only see her as the victim of misogyny. Jessica Valenti lamented that “we had the candidate of a lifetime … and the media and voters basically outright erased and ignored her.” In fact, in four critical debates, including those in January and February, Warren was given more time to speak than any other candidate. Valenti went on: “Don’t tell me this isn’t about sexism. I’ve been around too long for that.” Shaunna Thomas, executive director of the progressive group UltraViolet, chimed in: “It is the media’s sexism that determined Warren’s fate.” In fact, puff pieces on Warren abounded. And it seems telling to me that no one seems to be writing tweets or columns ascribing Amy Klobuchar’s withdrawal to sexism or Pete Buttigieg’s exit to homophobia."
When the only tool you have is a hammer...

Put it away, love - "Nevertheless, even a broad-minded broad such as myself must admit to perplexity and just a little distaste about the minge-mania currently sweeping the Western world. It’s one thing to free women from shame; it’s another entirely to do as the Fanny Fanclub is doing, lecturing us endlessly that we don’t talk about our vaginas enough...   I’m no prude, but if I needed to see illustrations of women riding pink dildos on Instagram in order to give myself permission to touch myself, I’d probably have decided it wasn’t for me and kept my hands busy by taking up sampler-sewing...   We stray into the realms of the ridiculous, however, when we survey some of the stupid v-related gifts on sale today: a crocheted tampon keyring, enamel vagina badges, a notebook bearing the front cover inscription ‘YOU MAKE ME AND MY VAGINA SO HAPPY’, and of course that reliable indicator of whether or not grown adults should have their right to vote removed – colouring books...  in another clash of interests, these sorts of sob-sisters often slander their fellow feminists as TERFs in order to suck up to the trans lobby, who would like to see the female orifice reduced to the insulting phrase ‘front hole’. Indeed, the Vagina Museum – which opened last year – promises to: ‘Challenge heteronormative and cisnormative behaviour’ and ‘promote intersectional, feminist and trans-inclusive values’. If part of this challenge is insisting that the ridiculous openings fashioned during sex-change operations are actual vaginas, one might as well showcase a performance by the Black And White Minstrels as part of Black History Week...   It would be a shame if, having protested for so long that women are more than their sex organs, we came to elevate them above all our other parts – especially our brains."

Let boys be boys - without fear of being 'cancelled' - "Boys will be boys. Once a benign platitude, the phrase is now instant cancellation material: an offensive and outrageous statement at the heart of every new incarnation of our gender war. Because whereas those words once conjured up the image of a tousle-headed, snub-nosed Just William jumping in muddy puddles, they are now symptomatic of everything that is wrong with society. The modern interpretation being: boys will be violent and vile predators. And you’re telling me that’s OK?... almost every school I know of has policies involving the length of skirts and hair, body piercings and the like as part of a general, hilariously old-fashioned principle of decorum, and you know, the thing of you being there to learn... When the phrase “boys will be boys” was first recorded in 1589, it was said to have originated from the Latin proverb: “Children are children and do childish things.”...   I’m no anthropologist, but I am a parent and I have watched my little girl go through a ferocious pink princess phase despite everything I did to counter it, just as I’ve witnessed the awestricken look on my nephew’s face when he first saw a digger by the side of the road, aged two. Is it helpful to pretend those differences don’t exist?  Anderton Park primary school in Birmingham seems to think so. On Sunday, a report appeared detailing its new list of banned words and phrases, which include “let’s go guys”, “man up” and “boys and girls”. Why? Because “sexism is a spectrum”, says head teacher Sarah Hewitt-Clarkson, “which extends from a teacher using the word ‘guys’ and not meaning anything harmful by it… to the rape, torture and murder of women.”  Well you know what I think is harmful? How casually we now put those things in the same sentence."

Sexual harassment of men rife in the UK workplace - "According to a study by employment law firm Peninsula, 77% of male workers had experienced sexual harassment by a female colleague, with many too afraid to complain to their employer, forcing them to endure silently."
Most men are harassed by women at work - "A study by the law firm Peninsula found 85 per cent of employers admit they take a complaints of sexual harassment from a male employees less seriously.   Two-thirds of the 2,300 men questioned also said sexual banter was inappropriate at work.  David Price of Peninsula said: "The balance has shifted and it is now women who are aiming sexual banter at male workers... girls at a further education college were reprimanded for wolf-whistling at builders.  Officials at West Kent College in Tonbridge, Kent, warned pupils the behaviour was "totally unacceptable," and said any student caught harassing the contractors would face disciplinary action."
From 2008

Meme - "I don't want a baby boy
I feel like a monster for saying this, but hoping this might be a place where some people can understand, Lately I've been feeling like I really want another child, but I'm holding back because I don't know what I'd do if I had a boy. I have a daughter who is brilliant and fierce and the best thing in my world. We try hard to keep her free her from all the gendered BS of childhood and let her just be herself, but I've learned it all seeps in - from friends, from school, from TV etc. I don't know how to raise a boy when I genuinely hate modern men and masculinity. My husband is an exception because he's done such a lot of work on himself, and rationally I know that we need more exceptions like this, and good parents to raise them. I KnOW ly ANC them like a lioness. But then I pick my daughter up from her alternative, free-thinking school and see the boys still fighting and kicking in the playground. I hear about my friend's pre teen son sneaking graphic porn on the computer. I hear "boys will be boys" and that those who won't end up labelled as trans, and I just don't know if I could do it. Do I have too much anger and trauma with the patriarchy to raise and love a healthy boy? Has anyone else felt or worked through this?
Edit: thanks for the many thoughtful and compassionate responses. When I searched for this topic previously I only found people shouting down and shaming women confessing to these feelings on mothering subs and forums. I'm really glad this place exists."
Meme - "I think that women should be allowed to abort for any reason. And I support sex selected abortion, as long as that is the decision of the pregnant woman."
"but you can abort if it's a boy and then try again. I would."
"She is allowed to refuse to create yet another oppressor. I understand that you are extremely male identified and you center them over all. Radical feminists don't do that. Just fyi."
Meme - "If I got pregnant and it was a boy, I'd abort that miter so quick lol"
AutoModerator @ femininity is ritualized submission: "Welcome to Reddit's most active feminist community! This is a women-centered, radical feminist subreddit to discuss gender from a critical, feminist perspective. If you're new to gender critical feminism, please familiarize yourself with some of these resources. Please follow the rules and consider if your submission is appropriate for this sub or if it should be posted to a sister subreddit. See our dictionary of common terms if you're unfamiliar with lingo. I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns."
Meme - "i have aborted the baby once i found it was a boy. im a staunch and unapologetic radfem. i have never regretted my decision. what i know for sure is that had i kept it i wouldnt have loved it like i would love a daughter."
"A taboo choice, but considering how casual men are about killing women, both in the womb and out of it, I really can't condemn you. What's good for the gander is good for the goose."
"A woman can have an abortion for any reason. Period. As long as it is her choice, it's not up for debate."
Men-hating feminists are straw feminists, we are told

Brad Wilcox on Twitter - "New study:
Happiest men and women in Europe are:
✔️ In *neotraditional relationships* where he works full-time, she works part-time
✔️ Married
✔️ Parents of young children
Unhappiest are:
✔️ She works, he doesn’t
✔️ Neither work"
Turns out, traditional gender roles seem to make everyone happy, and what feminists promote makes everyone unhappy

The failure of feminist Hollywood - YouTube - "The male superheroes don't have any time for women because they're busy saving the world but the female superhero is not interested in saving the world and is instead interested only in her career and dating life. Do you see, do you see the problem?... it's like writers want people to hate female leads... she-hulk is yet another bizarre attempt to shove corporate feminism down everybody's throats. Despite what feminist hollywood might have you believe these films shows and franchises are not appealing to men but they're also not appealing to women. Seriously i don't know a single woman who actually enjoys this except maybe the bitter ones with like 15 cats...  if we take a trip back to the 80s and 90s i think that it is fair to argue this was a great time for film and entertainment. Story lines feel authentic, the characters are memorable and the writing is still so quotable today. And most importantly writers weren't focused on forced diversity or writing films with the sole purpose of pushing wokeism and other social narratives... these female leads are a far cry from what feminist hollywood is giving us today. In an effort to place women in what have been long considered male roles feminist hollywoo over-corrected giving us a series of unlikable, unrelatable, unrealistic, strong female leads... nothing the box office doesn't lie, even if screen rant does... what leftists and feminists often attribute to sexism could be more accurately summarized by the fact that film and tv today just isn't really all that good. And having female leads doesn't change that. If anything with the way most of them are written it makes it worse... because these female characters are often shoved into a movie or a show for no good reason, it means that they aren't fully fledged people with their own pain struggles and flaws. They are there for the express purpose of propagating a feminist message and when they do for some reason have a struggle it's as one-dimensional and flat as this... unlike she-hulk, Banner is not dealing with some trivial nonsense where someone calls out to him in the street to say he looks nice... the female protagonists of old including those who were featured in older films that have now been remade and destroyed were women who embodied actual feminine and female characteristics and traits. But the difference is that those traits didn't stop them from being badasses and they aren't female for the sake of a female character. They are well-written thoughtful representations of a character who just happens to be female...  today's female characters are flat and empty and impossible to relate to. They have no flaws. They immediately succeed at everything they do and they have no journey of personal growth and development... to cap it off, so many of these women are either full of unnecessary unkind catty lines and whining or they're in a... man pickle measuring contest with the men around them... modern feminist characters are not people. They serve as vessels for feminist propaganda and man-hating... being gay and female doesn't change terrible writing... it also leads to weird situations where we are forced to suspend our disbelief to watch some tiny woman beat the snot out of a man twice her size...  I don't think that Captain Marvel experiences a single feeling while on screen, even when she's alone and supposed to be reflective... a strong woman knows when to be emotional and when to put her feelings aside. It isn't some sad reflection of women that we experience emotions... if they wanted to have she-hulk losing her absolute chops at some men it would have made a lot more sense if she wasn't presented to us as a character who consistently gets her way until this point. It's not like we've seen her having setback after setback and getting angrier and angrier so this moment makes absolutely no sense. Not that anything she does makes sense... showrunners and writers contribute sexism to their own characters by writing them poorly and no amount of shaming from directors and writers is going to change that... in summary good female protagonists are not one-dimensional. They aren't simply there to parrot liberal feminist talking points. They serve a higher purpose and often have deep rooted motivations for what they do. They don't compete with their male counterparts. Rather they acknowledge the strengths of the men around them, even sometimes acquiescing to them when necessary...  in the end wokeism has become a shield for bad television and film"
Sydney Watson and her damn internalised misogyny!

When did feminism become a dirty word? - "Standing here now in 2022, gazing upon the wreckage that is fourth-wave feminism, it is hard not to feel total despair at the signs both big and little that the movement utterly failed... Social movements that have followed feminism’s fourth wave have often come with a strong strand of misogyny. The Black Lives Matter movement escalated after a white American male policeman killed George Floyd in 2020, yet white women were singled out for endangering black men. “I am enraged by white women weaponising racial anxiety, using their white femininity to activate systems of white terror against black men,” one New York Times columnist wrote in an article typical of the time. This theory, that white women encourage white men to beat up black people, led to “Karen” becoming the slur of the moment. Initially, it was used to denote women who were racist, but quickly mutated into meaning women who were just a bit annoying... The misogyny has been even more blatant in the gender rights movement, which argues that everyone has a gender identity, which may differ from their biological sex. Leaving aside the question of what “gender identity” actually is — and no one has yet been able to define it without recourse to gender stereotypes and quasi-religious references, making it sound like a masculine or feminine soul — this means that a man can say that his gender identity is a woman, and therefore he should have access to women’s single-sex spaces, such as women’s sports teams and women’s prisons. Organisations such as Stonewall have enthusiastically got behind this issue, arguing that it is the new gay rights movement, even though redefining what men and women are has almost nothing in common with the legalisation of homosexuality. And yet, progressive organisations have dutifully fallen into the gender rights line. Gender activists insist there is no clash between gender rights and women’s rights, but any woman who points out that trans women are still biologically male and therefore at an obvious physical advantage in women’s sport, for example, is denounced as a bigot, and in some cases are forced out of their job, such as the researcher Maya Forstater and the university professor Kathleen Stock. But to tell women that not accepting biological males in their spaces puts trans people at risk is outrageous gaslighting: women are far more likely than trans women to be killed by male violence in this country, but such facts have suddenly become very unfashionable in progressive circles. What is now known as LGBT rights have firmly taken precedence over women’s rights. In 2021, Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood, an organisation originally established to provide women with contraception, wrote an apology in the New York Times, saying Planned Parenthood had focused “too narrowly on ‘women’s health’, we have excluded trans and non-binary people”. (“What we don’t want to be, as an organisation, is a Karen,” Johnson added, for good measure.) When JK Rowling wrote in her much-discussed but less-read essay that her doubts about gender ideology stemmed from her experience of being sexually assaulted in her twenties, thousands of people — including Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle — accused her of “weaponising her trauma” (Russell-Moyle later apologised). And while there has been much discussion recently about the wrongs of holding the World Cup in a country where homosexuality is illegal, the fact that a man in Qatar can legally beat his wife has merited barely a shrug. In Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon in particular has championed the gender rights movement... at a charity event to help end male violence against women and girls, at which Sturgeon gave the main speech, attendees were sent a note ahead of time that said the charity wanted “to create a safe environment for our guests and ask you to support us in this aim by refraining from discussions of the definition of a woman, and single sex spaces, in relation to the gender recognition act . . . This is not the place for that discussion”. Much more important to keep the charity — and Sturgeon — safe from awkward questions than women from male violence, presumably... the failings of fourth-wave feminism, which had become too commercialised, too much about social media hashtags and too associated with nameplate necklaces (which might give the LGBT movement, with its corporate sponsorship alliances and box-ticking rainbow wristbands, something to think about). So much of fourth-wave feminism was based on individual women’s experiences rather than collective change. On the plus side, this led to #MeToo. On the downside, it led to women seeing validation of their experiences as their feminist right. This was epitomised by the mantra, “Believe women”, which was well-intended, but utterly unworkable — if a society believes in due process and doesn’t think anyone should be damned as a sex offender on the basis of allegation and rumour. It also led to women like Gwyneth Paltrow and Kim Kardashian insisting that everything they did was a feminist form of self-empowerment, because they chose to do it, whether it was posting naked selfies or selling expensive perfumes, and anyone who questioned how feminist any of this was, was slammed as an out-of-date prude. The most obvious inheritor of all this self-empowering is the Duchess of Sussex, always insisting on “my truth” rather than “the truth”, and whose podcast, which finished last week, was ostensibly about fighting female stereotypes, but turned out to be about fighting anyone who had ever criticised or doubted Meghan. And no one — other than Prince Harry, apparently — can take that version of feminism too seriously for too long."
The joys of intersectionality!
Of course, if you object to the excesses of feminism this is "backlash"

Meme - The Meme Policeman: "Feminist News telling young women to stay in the kitchen.
Feminist News: Colleen @Coll3enG: "If I could recommend anything to young women it's to stay single at 19. I do not know a single woman who had a good experience with a man at 19. Just stay in our home and learn to bake it is better than whatever will happen to you romantically at 19""

Alleged Talmud Quotes (1/2)

I saw an anti-Semitic meme with "Talmud quotes" being shared a few times with suspiciously convenient quotes, and decided to dig into it.

Surprise surprise, the quotes mostly range from misquoted to out of context to completely made up.

Of course, being told this won't convince anti-Semites (they get upset when I point out the 109 countries claim is nonsensical), but hey it's material for this blog.

First I shall post the text of the meme. Then I shall dig into the verses:

"(Soferim 15)
Even the best of Goyim should all be killed.

(Yebamoth 98a)
All children of Goyim are animals.

(Baba Mezia 114b)
Gentiles 'Goys' are not humans, they are beasts.

(Gad Shas 2:2)
A Jew may violate but not marry a non Jew girl.

(Abodah Zarah 36b)
Gentile 'Goy' girls are in a state at niddah (filth) from birth.

(Sanhedrin 54b)
A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.

(Eben Haezar 6,9)
All non-Jewish are prostitutes.

(Sanhedrin 58b)
If a Goy hits a Jew he must be killed.

(Sanhedrin 57a)
When a Jew murders a gentile there will be no death penalty.

(Tospoth Jebamoth 84b)
If you eat with a Goy is the same as eating with a dog.

(Baba Mezia 24a)
If a Jew finds an object lost by a Gentile 'Goy' it does not have to be returned.

(Abodah Zarah 22a-22b)
Gentiles 'Goys' prefer sex with cows.

(Baba Kamma 113a)
Jews may use lies to circumvent a 'Goy' Gentile.

(Sanhedrin 19)
Every place the Jews go. they must become commanders of their lords.

(Libbre David 87)
If Gentiles knew that the Talmud teach Jews to destroy them they would kill us openly. Never communicate the Talmud with Gentiles.

(Kethuboth 11b)
When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.

(Bammidber raba c21)
Every Jew who spills the blood of the non-Jew is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God.

(Hikkoth Akum X1)
Show no mercy to the Gentiles.

(Abodah Zara 4b)
a Gentile you may kill outright with your ownhands.

(Sahedrin 59a)
Murdering Gentiles is like killing wild animals.

(Tosefta Abda Zara V111 5)
a Gentile is forbidden to steal, rob or take women slaves from a Jew. But a Jew it's not forbidden to do all this to a Gentile.

(Simeon Haddarsen fol 56-D:0)
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 Gentiles slaves.

(Midrasch Talpioth p225—L)
Non-Jews are in human term so that Jews would not be served by beasts. Non-Jew is an animal in human lenn to serve the Jew day and night.

(Schulchan Aruch Chozen Hamiszpat 156)
Property of the Gentile belongs to no one and the first Jew that passes has full right to seim it.

(Tosefta Abda Zara V111 5)
a Gentile is forbidden to steal, rob or take women slaves from a Jew. But a Jew it's not forbidden to do all this to a Gentile.

(Schulchan Amen Chozen Hamisszpat 348)
All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation. Jews can seize it all.

*Anti-Semitic Caricature of Jew rubbing hands*
Never Communicate The Talmud With Gentiles"

(Soferim 15)
Even the best of Goyim should all be killed."

This seems to be referring to:

"R. Simeon b. Yoḥai taught: Kill the best of the heathens in time of war"

We can see that some crucial words have been left out.

Note too that the Masekhet Soferim is considered non-canonical.

(Yebamoth 98a)
All children of Goyim are animals.

Yevamot 98a is talking about the rules of conversion and marriage, and when people are considered related to each other. This line seems to be a misquote of:

"It is written with regard to Egyptians: “Whose flesh is the flesh of donkeys, and whose semen is the semen of horses” (Ezekiel 23:20), i.e., the offspring of a male gentile is considered no more related to him than the offspring of donkeys and horses."

(Baba Mezia 114b)
Gentiles 'Goys' are not humans, they are beasts.

Bava Metzia 114b is talking about purity with regard to Jewish rituals. The exact line should be:

"Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says that the graves of gentiles do not render one impure, as it is stated: “And you, My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, are man” (Ezekiel 34:31), which teaches that you, i.e., the Jewish people, are called “man,” but gentiles are not called “man.” Since the Torah states with regard to ritual impurity imparted in a tent: “If a man dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14), evidently impurity imparted by a tent does not apply to gentiles. "

(Gad Shas 2:2)
A Jew may violate but not marry a non Jew girl.

This is completely fake. "Gad Shas" does not exist.

(Abodah Zarah 36b)
Gentile 'Goy' girls are in a state at niddah (filth) from birth.

"Niddah" is not translated as "filth". A woman is "niddah" when she is menstruating.

The actual quote is:

"The court of the Hasmoneans decreed that a Jew who engaged in intercourse with a gentile woman bears liability for transgressing four prohibitions, represented by the mnemonic: Nun, shin, gimmel, alef. These letters stands for: Menstruating woman [nidda], maidservant [shifḥa], gentile [goya], and married woman [eshet ish]. By rabbinic law, a man who engages in intercourse with a gentile woman is considered to have violated the prohibitions involved in having intercourse with all four of these women."

I would imagine that anti-Semites would actually approve of this line, since they don't want Jewish men having sex with non-Jewish women.

(Sanhedrin 54b)
A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.

Sanhedrin 54b talks about punishing homosexuality and bestiality with stoning (i.e. death), and the threshold of consent. The full verse is:

"The Sages taught: With regard to intercourse with a male, the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy...

The Gemara asks: What does it mean that the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy? Rav says: It means that the Torah does not deem the intercourse of one who is less than nine years old to be like the intercourse of one who is at least nine years old, as for a male’s act of intercourse to have the legal status of full-fledged intercourse the minimum age is nine years. And Shmuel says: The Torah does not deem the intercourse of a child who is less than three years old to be like that of one who is three years old...

Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old, as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halakhic status of intercourse, so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively, the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable."

While having homosexual sex with a boy under nine is not punishable by death, apparently this does not mean there're no penalties - they're just not death.

(Eben Haezar 6,9)
All non-Jewish are prostitutes.

Even HaEzar 6 is talking about Kohen (priests) and the women forbidden to them. Here is the full quote:

"Who is deemed a "zonah" [who is forbidden to a kohen]? Whoever is not a Jewess, or who is a Jewess that had sexual relations with a man to whom she is forbidden to marry in a generally applicable prohibition, or who had sexual relations with a "cholol" (the child of a kohen and a woman who was forbidden to the kohen), even though she is permitted to be married to this man."

"Zonah" can refer to prostitutes, but in this context clearly refers to a woman who has had a specific type of sex.

(Sanhedrin 58b)
If a Goy hits a Jew he must be killed.

The quote is "Rabbi Ḥanina says: A gentile who struck a Jew is liable to receive the death penalty, as it is stated when Moses saw an Egyptian striking a Hebrew: “And he turned this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he struck the Egyptian and hid him in the sand” (Exodus 2:12)."

So we finally have one accurate quote.

(Sanhedrin 57a)
When a Jew murders a gentile there will be no death penalty.

This bit is part of rabbinical musing, and the full answer is more complicated. Here is the full quote:

"The Gemara challenges: But wherever there is liability for capital punishment, this tanna teaches it; as it is taught in the first clause: With regard to bloodshed, if a gentile murders another gentile, or a gentile murders a Jew, he is liable. If a Jew murders a gentile, he is exempt. Evidently, the term liable is used in the baraita.

The Gemara answers: There, in that case, how should the tanna teach it? Should he teach it using the terms prohibited and permitted, indicating that a Jew may kill a gentile ab initio? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that with regard to a gentile, and likewise with regard to Jewish shepherds of small livestock, who were typically robbers, one may not raise them out of a pit into which they fell, and one may not lower them into a pit? In other words, one may not rescue them from danger, but neither may one kill them ab initio."

So the final answer seems to be that while there is no death penalty, it's still not something you should be doing.

(Tospoth Jebamoth 84b)
If you eat with a Goy is the same as eating with a dog.

This is completely fake. "Tospoth Jebamoth" does not exist.

(Baba Mezia 24a)
If a Jew finds an object lost by a Gentile 'Goy' it does not have to be returned.

This is misquoted. The actual quote is:

"In a case when one found a lost item in a city where both Jews and gentiles reside, if the city has a majority of Jews he is obligated to proclaim his find. If there is a majority of gentiles he is not obligated to proclaim his find."

(Abodah Zarah 22a-22b)
Gentiles 'Goys' prefer sex with cows.

I couldn't find something like this. The mentions I find of gentiles and bestiality are:

"A gentile protects and thereby spares his own animal so that it will not become barren. Since an act of bestiality may cause an animal to become barren, there is no concern that the gentile engaged in immoral behavior with it. Therefore, one may use an animal purchased from a gentile as an offering.

The Gemara asks: This works out well with regard to female animals, as they can become barren, but with regard to males, what is there to say? Rav Kahana says: Gentiles also refrain from engaging in bestiality with their male livestock, since doing so deteriorates the animals’ flesh, i.e., it makes them physically weaker...

Their shepherd is fearful of engaging in bestiality with the animals under his care, due to the forfeit of his wages that would result if this were discovered...

With regard to themselves, i.e., other gentiles, as they are aware of each other’s actions, they are fearful that they may be caught, and therefore will not engage in bestiality with an animal belonging to another gentile. But with regard to ourselves, Jews, as we are not aware of them and their behavior, they are not fearful of us...

With regard to female animals with females, what is the reason that we do not permit them to be secluded with each other? Mar Ukva bar Ḥama says: It is because gentiles frequent the wives of others, and on occasion the gentile does not find her, and he finds the animal and engages in bestiality with it instead.

And if you wish, say instead: Even when he finds the wife, he also engages in bestiality with the animal, as the Master said: The animal of a Jew is more appealing to gentiles than their own wives"

So apparently, gentiles want to have sex with *the animals of Jews*.

Notably, this section also talks about Jews and bestiality, so bestiality is not just a gentile thing:

"Consider that which Rav Yosef teaches: A widow may not raise a dog due to the suspicion that she may engage in bestiality, and she may not allow a student of Torah to dwell as a lodger [be’ushpiza] in her home. Granted, it makes sense that is prohibited for her to have a student of Torah lodging in her home, as he is regarded as discreet in her eyes, so she will not be deterred from sinning with him. But with regard to a dog, since it would follow her around after she mates with it, she is afraid to engage in bestiality with it. Therefore, it should be permitted for her to raise a dog.

The Gemara answers: Since it will also follow her around in a case when she throws it a piece of meat, people will say: The fact that it is following her is due to the meat she threw at it, and they will not suspect her of bestiality. Consequently, she will not be deterred from transgressing."

(Baba Kamma 113a)
Jews may use lies to circumvent a 'Goy' Gentile.

This bit talks about a very particular circumstance - a gentile customs collector. And even then the Talmud does not conclude that skulduggery is justified:

"Rav Ashi said: The mishna issues its ruling with regard to a gentile customs collector, whom one may deceive, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a Jew and a gentile who approach the court for judgment in a legal dispute, if you can vindicate the Jew under Jewish law, vindicate him, and say to the gentile: This is our law. If he can be vindicated under gentile law, vindicate him, and say to the gentile: This is your law. And if it is not possible to vindicate him under either system of law, one approaches the case circuitously, seeking a justification to vindicate the Jew. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva disagrees and says: One does not approach the case circuitously in order to vindicate the Jew due to the sanctification of God’s name, as God’s name will be desecrated if the Jewish judge employs dishonest means."

The Talmud does go on later comparing this to all sort of other scenarios, and then trails off.

(Sanhedrin 19)
Every place the Jews go. they must become commanders of their lords.

I can't find anything in Sanhedrin 19 which even resembles this.

(Part 2)

Links - 4th August 2023 (1 - Women)

Meme - "This is what I'm referring to when I tell my of she looks like a goddess *ugly pre-historic fertility symbol*"

Meme - "*fat, ugly woman* Taylor, 23
Plus size
5'11
If you white, it's an automatic no.
If you Hispanic, it's an a maybe
If you Black, it's an automatic yes
cxgood_: "White privilege""

Dark side of life as 'Iranian Lionel Messi' who was accused of conning 23 women into sex - "  All Reza Parastesh had to do for his fame, however, was look just like the seven-time Ballon d'Or winner. Dubbed the "Iranian Messi", he went viral worldwide back in 2017 for the uncanny resemblance... Spanish outlet Marca claimed in 2019 he'd conned a total of 23 women into having sex with him as they thought he was the then-Barcelona and now PSG star.  Reza denied ever doing such a thing - after all, he lives in a traditionally conservative country where it's illegal to have sexual relations outside of marriage...   "Put yourself in my place. You’re living in a Muslim country and this false news is spread, what will happen? Do you know that this sentence carries the death penalty in my country?...   Reza's newfound fame also landed him in hot water with the Iranian police, who arrested him for disturbing the peace when he was mobbed by crowds of people wanting to take a picture of him."

Meme - "Average Bri*ish woman glowup
*Sophie Turner*
17 *pretty*, 20 *pretty*, 23 *pretty*, 24 *pretty*, 26 *Vampire*"

Meme - "When a woman is attracted to man, she speaks in a higher pitch than normal. That explains why every girl i talk to sounds like fucking batman"

(PDF) Experimental evidence that women speak in a higher voice pitch to men they find attractive - "Although humans can raise and lower their voice pitch, it is not known whether such alterations can function to increase the likelihood of attracting preferred mates. Because men find higher-pitched women’s voices more attractive, the voice pitch with which women speak to men may depend on the strength of their attraction to those men. Here, we measured voice pitch when women left voicemail messages for men with masculinized and feminized faces. We found that the difference in women’s voice pitch between these two conditions positively correlated with the strength of their preference for the masculinized versus feminized faces, whereby women tended to speak with a higher voice pitch to the face they found more attractive. Speaking with a higher voice pitch when talking to men they wish to attract may function to reduce the amount of mating effort that women expend in order to attract and retain preferred mates."

Meme - "Single mom is not a coupon code
Kristin Michelle: "As a single mom myself, I'm really angry I didn't know I could be guilting people into giving me free stuff all this time! Seriously though, I also disabled (from birth) yet I still managed to get a very good job with medical, dental & vision insurance. I didn't go to college & my parents didn't have much. They do help me occasionally but I've mostly earned everything i have. We live ina nice place & drive a new car. Even just went on vacation for a week. I get $89 a month in child support cause I make more than his dad too lol So it can be done. We're not all losers! My pregnancy wasn't even an "accident"""

Stacey Solomon agrees with men who are honest about why they don't want to date single parents - "Some of the reasons included, not wanting to feel second best, the freedom to go on holidays at a moment's notice and not feeling equipped to be a father figure. Andrea read out one specific comment from a man who thinks 'single mums are more expensive than prostitutes'."

Rate of single men in the US looking for dates has declined - "New data from the Pew Research Center has shown that 63% of men under 30 are single – up from 51% in 2019.  COVID isolation and women’s high expectations for something serious are the main reasons they’re avoiding going out and coupling up, young guys say.  “Dates feel more like job interviews now. Much more like ‘What can you do for me and where is this going?'” said Ian Breslow, a 28-year-old high school teacher who lives in Astoria...   “She literally asked me, ‘Would you rather our kids go to public or private school?’ Followed by several more extreme questions about getting married. I just started responding with what I knew she would hate the most to get her to leave”... Experts agree that women are certainly wanting more than ever before.  “The overall picture [is] that if a woman is going to go on a date with a man, chances are it’s not for a casual fling,” Ronald Levant, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Akron, told The Post.  “Especially if the woman is kind of getting close to 30, [she’s] thinking about the biological clock and wants to have a family,” he added... Andrew Bruno, a 28-year-old nurse from Bellmore, NY, says flirting in the post-COVID era just isn’t as fun as it once was.  “Being able to naturally approach people while out isn’t like it was pre-pandemic. People are still much less likely to leave their groups or cliques at a bar,” said Bruno. “They’re certainly less talkative and that’s lowered my incentive to put myself out there.”  He also said the pandemic, more than ever before, made dating apps the central means for meeting people — and he’s not a fan... like Breslow, he’s in no hurry to get hitched."

Meme - Superheroines: "Well Lois, I think you're Wonder Woman, so let me Rip your top open..."
"I'LL... TEAR OPEN YOUR SHIRT REVEALING THE SUPERMAN UNIFORM UNDERNEATH! - YIPES. N-NO COSTUME ONLY... BARE SKIN !"
"WHATEVER GAVE YOU THE WILD IDEA THAT I,OF ALL PEOPLE, AM SUPERMAN ?"

Meme - "Fucking hell. Work finish, come home, wash clothes, iron, cook, shower, still must suck cock?!"

Meme - "r/Advice
My husband said I have "boy pussy."
I am a biological female and a woman. I havent spoken to him since. For context we were having sex, and at some point with his eyes closed he moaned "yeah that boy pussy..." and then stopped, realizing he spoke outloud. I'd feel better if he mentioned another woman cause we're (somewhat) open but i'm pretty sure he's bisexual and instead of speaking to me about it, fantasizes about me being a twink."

Meme - "When you find the perfect 2022 Ferrari but it's got over 200k miles on it: *woman with 4 kids*"

Meme - "She knows what she's doing
23
To the guys over 25: I work a stable job and have my own place
To the guys under 25: I love Star Wars and have a fat ass"

Singaporean Girl who thinks guys should pay more also mocks boyfriend for lasting "only ten minutes" in portable charger ad. : SingaporeRaw

Do Women Prefer Tall Or Short Men? - "Multiple studies have shown that height is one of the most appealing physical attributes a heterosexual man can possess. (Comparatively fewer studies have been carried out on height preferences among gay men and lesbian women, though some research suggests that gay men who prefer to top are attracted to shorter men, and men who prefer to bottom are attracted to taller men.)... Most of the women I spoke to were unrepentant about finding taller men attractive, even if they acknowledged that it had blinded them to otherwise unsuitable men and cut off their ability to fancy shorter men. Catherine says she wouldn’t change her dating preferences even if she could. "My friends berate me for being 'heightist', but it's something I'm attracted to," she explains. "Obviously, I see really hot guys who are shorter than me and I wish I could get over it, but I suppose it's your way of whittling down, otherwise I'd fancy everyone.""

Retired officer, 51, finds new career as a stripper cop — handcuffs included - "From serve and protect to strip and erect.  A career cop who spent more than 30 years on the force has found a new passion performing as a policewoman stripper.  Michelle Walton, 51, who hails from the Isle of Wight in England, retired from her local police department in 2020 before creating her saucy stripping routine when she joined a small burlesque dance class... Walton was performing her policewoman stripper act for charity on the Isle of Wight."

The 1975 star Matt Healy slammed for strange 'age-check' before snogging adoring fan - "The 1975 singer Matt Healy has left fans feeling uncomfortable after appearing to check a woman's age on her ID before snogging her at a gig.  Matt, 33, has quickly gone viral after a video emerged of him kissing a fan during a concert in Las Vegas.  Matt - the son of Loose Women star Denise Welch - spots a female fan in the crowd holding a sign asking for him to be her "first kiss".  "You better not be f***ing 16," he tells her as the woman shouts to tell him she has ID proving that she's 22 years old.  He appears to check the woman's ID and bites down on the laminated card in what looks like a check to make sure it's real."
Of course, if he hadn't checked her age and she'd been younger, he'd have been shamed for taking advantage of a young woman
Clearly 22 year old women are unable to consent to even kissing older men. They better not be allowed to vote, to protect themselves and society

Meme - Noam Blum @neontaster: "> be a man

> be in your 20s
> can't get a date because women are dating men in their 40s

> finally become 40

> now women in their 20s d
ate you
> the women who wouldn't date you in your 20s call you a creep"

Taylor Lorenz @TaylorLorenz: "Been talking to a lot of women recently who are also in their late 30s/40s about how weird it feels to be the same age as the men we dated were when we were in our early 20s. So many men in their 30s/40s use women in their early 20s to cling to their youth and it's gross"
Ashley Reese @offbeatorbit: "32 and dating a 23 year old fhdnxnckcjd I would rather jump off a building"
Weird how older women aren't condemned for infantalising younger women and denying them agency in the name of protecting them when it's really about self-interest

Meme - MED GOLD: "A man's alone time is sacred"
@clautoblo: "Woman's too"
Covfefe Anon: "Women stop existing when alone"
@clautoblo: "can't stop laughing, according to who?"
Covfefe Anon: "Look at your response. "according to who?" You can't even evaluate the thought in your own head - you need to outsource it to the hivemind."

Meme - "CAN I INTEREST YOU SOME JEWELRY TODAY?"
"YES. I'M LOOKING FOR A SPECIAL RING FOR MY GIRLFRIEND."
"HERE'S ONE FOR FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS."
"I DON'T THINK YOU UNDERSTAND. I WANT SOMETHING VERY SPECIAL"
"HERE'S A STUNNING RING AT ONLY FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS."
"WE'LL TAKE IT!"
"HOW WILL YOU BE PAYING?"
"BY CHECK. I KNOW yOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE CHECK IS GOOD SO I'LL WRITE IT NOW AND YOU CAN CALL THE BANK MONDAY TO VERIFY THE FUNDS. I'LL PICK UP THE RING MONDAY AFTERNOON."
MONDAY MORNING:
"THERE'S NO MONEY IN THAT ACCOUNT."
"I KNOW.. .BUT CAN YOU IMAGINE THE WEEKEND I HAD?"

Meme - "Mackenzie
lil ugly ass motherfuvker
i bet you've never even seen a woman naked
other than watching them online Imao."
"Yeah sure"
"Literaly what kinda broke ass nigga doesn't even have enough money to subscribe to an only fans Imao"
"One who has his life together
I could get whole big box from taco bell with that money why would I give it to you"
"because you'd be talking to a real woman for once in your sad life lmao"
"Why the hell would I ever want to talk to a woman"
"your a fucking misogynistic piece of shit i hope you die in a fucking fire you incel
go choke on your own spit Imao ive never seen or met anyone as sad and pathetic as you"

I was kicked out of a store over my shorts — I’m a victim of ‘hot phobia’ - "An OnlyFans star was kicked out of the supermarket for her skimpy outfit, but she believes she’s a victim of “hot phobia.”  Kerolay Chaves was confidently strolling through the grocery store in Brazil, wearing a nearly see-through white tank top without a bra and denim shorts so high-cut that they verge on bikini bottoms...   The adult entertainer was distraught by the treatment she received at the store, turning to her 437,000 followers for support.  “Do you believe it? I think it’s absurd that we women are still treated this way just because we dress how we want,” she declared. “Truth is, we go through it because we’re too hot, that’s all.”  But she didn’t receive the responses she evidently expected, as most commenters seemed to agree with the judgemental crowd at the store...   “I guess the same way a shirtless man would get kicked out of the spot happened to you,” they joked."
If you don't believe women should be able to walk around nude, you're slut-shaming and you're just as bad as Christian fundamentalists who want women to wear burkas

Meme - Brittany Martinez: "Didn't you cheat on your wife?"
The Hill: "California Gov. @GavinNewsom: "Women are smarter in politics, smarter in civics, they're smarter in economics. Women rule.""

Meme - dust @lildustorm: "would you? *bikini photos*"
jurtle @jabronirt: "I would not, sorry"
dust @lildustorm: "I do not care"
jurtle @jabronirt: "but you asked?"

Meme - "Jessica
You're friends on Facebook
Look im raising money to bury my 8 year old brother wanna donate you get a 2 hour camshow"

Meme - ChrisExcel @ChrisExcel102: "Pussy is more Valuable than a Degree... Don't let the system fool you.. Your pussy can take you out of poverty faster than a Degree Just use it right..."

Meme - "Girlfriend
-Doesn't remember everything you said.
-Probaly doesn't like your friend
-Takes hours to get ready.
-Will get mad when you go home late.
-Make demands out of you every day
-Only call you handsome when she needs something.
Mamak Aneh
-Always remember your order.
-Always welcome you and your friend lepak mamak.
-Less than 10 minutes Aneh give your food dy.
-Always welcome you to lepak until 3 am.
-Make Maggi Goreng and Teh Ais for you everyday.
-Will always call you boss."

H. Pearl Davis on Twitter - "Yes you’re less attractive at 35 than at 25 as a woman. This used to be common sense 50 years ago."

Glamorous OnlyFans star Daniella Hemsley flashes her breasts after Kingpyn boxing win in Dublin - "OnlyFans star Daniella Hemsley has left boxing fans stunned by flashing the crowd after securing her first win over Aleksandra Danielka.  The 22-year-old outpointed rival Danielka in the loser's bracket of the Kingpyn High Stakes tournament in Dublin on Saturday night... Hemsley apologised for her astonishing actions in her post-fight interview, saying emotions just got the better of her.  'I got a bit overwhelmed, I just wanted to express myself,' she said... 'It's going be an interesting night as a parent having to explain to their kids what just happened,' one fan wrote on Twitter... Boxing superstar Claressa Shields also wasn't a fan, writing on Twitter: 'Wow….. this is a step backwards for women's boxing. Stop this s**t.'.. The social media star isn’t the first to celebrate a boxing win this way, with Aussie Tai Emery pulling the same stunt last September."
Slut shaming! If you criticise anything a woman does, you're a misogynist!

Meme - "Toilets around the world
Japan
China
America
Dubai *instagram models*"

Meme - "when his height starts with 5"
"When her cup size is a passing grade"

Meme - Katarina @Kkatarinako: "Men, do yourself a favor: If you own an Android phone, Wait at least three dates before using it in front of her. I can't even count on my both hands How many stories I've heard from women That curved the perfect man just because he had an android phone"

Meme - "Honey, did I ever tell you that you cook well?"
"Awww, no babe."
"So why do you keep cooking?"

Meme - "For the 1st date, take her swimming. *woman with and without makeup*"

Meme - "Nah I don't have anything to do with my ex
Kicked him out. He got the big L"
"You let him inside you. You carried around his baby for 9 months, gave birth to his legacy and now you're taking care of it. Mean while he's out with another girl while you're stuck caring for his kid. You sure about that? You sure he got the L?"
"fuck you"

Meme - Oracion Puja: "So you can flirt but you're not ready for a relationship?"
Xavier: "I go for morning exercise doesn't mean I'm ready to run a marathon."

Meme - AlopeciaAwareness @BlackedOut_: "This lady at my job pissed cause she put her boyfriend out last night and he ain't have nowhere to stay so he goes to the casino and hit for 10k now he keep FaceTiming her counting the money"
Cinderace Supremacy: "How y'all on the man's side when he clearly in the wrong???"
j @jblack0666: "men > women"

Meme - "My (21F) boyfriend (22M) said he would put $5 aside every time we have sex so that "the amount of money I get from him will depend on me."
I (21F) was told by my bf that he (22M) would put a certain amount of our country's currency (the equivalent to $5 USD) aside every time we have sex, so "the amount of money I get from him will depend on me". We have been together for just over a year now. I was taken aback by this but I thought he was joking because I had told him I could charge him $30 (as a joke) for saying that this female friend of his is prettier than me (for the second time this year). Honestly I meant it as a joke at first but the more I thought about it, the more uncomfortable I became. The more uncomfortable I became, the more I actually looked back at the things he that I brushed off. One thing in particular that stood out was when forgot my birthday which was in May. In his defense, it was his brother's and close friend's birthday on the same day, and he was at both celebrations (True. I know them, but we are not close). I also joked about charging him $30 for that too, but the whole "putting aside money thing" came up when I joked about charging him for the pretty comment he made. He's not budging and I can't tell if it's a joke or not. I feel confused as this is my second serious relationship. How do I to him about this?"

Meme - "The WF you want
The WF that wants you"

Meme - "Jessica
My boyfriend cheated on me
I can't believe this
All men are dogs"
"..."
"Say something"
"Meow"

Swiss gymnastics bosses launch BAN on photographers taking 'suggestive' photos of gymnasts - "A ban has been imposed by the Swiss Gymnastics Federation (STV), which will prohibit the taking of 'suggestive' photos.  The ban is being introduced in an attempt to keep the focus on the gymnast's poses and positions, according to German outlet Bild.   The STV claim in their new guideline that the main intention is to prevent images of the gymnast's 'crotch' and that they hope to remove 'otherwise ethically sensitive' photos from being published... Pictures of gymnasts in a pose that sees their legs spread upwards - which you might see on the uneven bars or balance beam - will be banned, with images of a splits pose dependent on the angle of the picture."
If it's indecent for female gymnasts to be photographed in that position, the corollary is that it's indecent for female gymnasts to display that position. So they should either wear more or not display that position

Meme - "No one:
Jonah Hill's EX: Hey, guys! I'm gonna show you these 18 month old breakup texts full of communication and then I'm gonna keep going and show texts of me getting jealous that he found a new girlfriend when we were friends and then I made sure to wait til his new girlfriend had the baby before saying anything because I'm a saint and needed Jonah to pay my therapy bills until I could come forward. Then I'm gonna claim abuse and get a bunch of people to bash someone because I'm a clout trout."

Meme - Jonah Hill: "Please stop posting half nudes and hanging out with morally dubious people."
The entire internet feminarchy: "He emotionally abused her!"

Meme - Sasha Rosa" "Older single women telling women in their & that they are too young to marry is a Set up. For the young women, be careful who you take relationship advice from. Misery loves company."

Meme - Gap mami: "If I'm getting $800 in child support $700 going to me and my needs How can I be a good mother if I'm not feeling and looking right?"

Links - 3rd August 2023 (2 - General Wokeness [including Nigel Farage de-banking by Coutts])

Arab Regimes Are the World’s Most Powerful Islamophobes – Foreign Policy - "In 2017, at a public panel in Riyadh, the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed, issued a warning about Islamists in Europe. “There will come a day that we will see far more radical extremists and terrorists coming out of Europe because of lack of decision-making, trying to be politically correct, or assuming that they know the Middle East, and they know Islam, and they know the others far better than we do,” Zayed said. “I’m sorry, but that’s pure ignorance.” The message was clear: European leaders would face a future endemic of Islamic extremism if they continued to tolerate the presence of what he described as radical extremists and terrorists in the name of human rights, freedom of expression, and democracy...   It’s just one example of an often-overlooked trend: the culpability of Arab and Muslim governments in fueling anti-Muslim hate as part of their campaigns to fight dissent at home and abroad. By trying to justify repression and appease Western audiences, some of these regimes and their supporters have forged an informal alliance with conservative and right-wing groups and figures in the West dedicated to advancing anti-Islamic bigotry."
From 2019. Time to let terrorists kill you because not to do so would be Islamophobic

Nigel Farage latest: Rishi Sunak calls Coutts 'wrong' as he insists banks must back free speech - "Rishi Sunak criticised Coutts for its “wrong” decision to close Nigel Farage’s accounts as he insisted banks must back free speech.  Coutts closed the former Ukip leader’s accounts after deciding his views “do not align with our values” and considering a dossier detailing his comments about Brexit, his friendship with Donald Trump and his views on LGBT rights... Nigel Farage has demanded an apology from the BBC after it reported that his Coutts bank account was closed for financial, rather than political reasons... The former Ukip leader has said he will be complaining to the corporation and also said it needed to correct a story published earlier this month that appeared to have been briefed out by Coutts.  Simon Jack, the corporation’s business editor, cited “people familiar with Coutts’ move” claiming that it had been a “commercial” decision to close Mr Farage’s personal and business accounts because he did not have enough money... a Treasury minister hinted that banks’ licences could be under threat if they close the accounts of customers who are doing no more than exercising their legal right to free speech... “Only those with acceptable views will be able to participate fully in society. I am effectively de-banked. How do I pay my gas bill? What have I done wrong? I haven’t broken the law. I happen to have an opinion on issues that is more popular outside the M25 than it is in inner London postcodes... Monthly press checks were made on me. My social media accounts were monitored. Anything considered “problematic” was recorded. I was being watched.”"

Political views should not be a bar to banking services | Financial Times - "The internal document obtained by Farage shows that Coutts, which is known for its prestigious clientele, factored in the former UK Independence party and Brexit party leader’s opinions on Europe, immigration, and Donald Trump in their decision to close his Coutts account... Private financial firms have the right to bar customers who may pose a reputational risk due to involvement in criminality or corruption. This does not apply to Farage, however. And, though the memo shows the bank also considered financial thresholds and costs in their deliberations, it suggests continuing to “bank” the ex-Ukip leader was not compatible with Coutts “given his publicly-stated views that were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation”. Late on Thursday, the NatWest chief executive Alison Rose apologised to Farage for what she called “deeply inappropriate comments”. Individuals have the right to lawful free speech, and banks, regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, have a duty to treat customers fairly. The Farage case also highlights a broader problem around how banks deal with high-profile customers. They must comply with the “politically exposed persons” regime — relating to individuals who could abuse their profile for private gain, and launder the proceeds. Banks have to carry out often costly enhanced scrutiny of PEPs, alongside their families and associates... The upshot is an anti-money laundering regime that is both failing to clamp down sufficiently on “dirty money” flows and unfairly penalising the innocent. Britain’s Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has revealed he, too, was refused a bank account under the regime. Difficulties opening bank accounts also only serve to blight further the attraction of entering politics... As for NatWest — in which the UK government still holds close to a 40 per cent stake — its inclusivity efforts would do better to focus on widening access to its banking services, including for the 1mn-plus British adults who have no account at all."
So much for his falling below the wealth threshold. Imagine if he hadn't obtained the memo

Dame Alison Rose: NatWest boss quits after admitting Farage leak to BBC - "Dame Alison said earlier that she made a “serious error of judgment” when she discussed Mr Farage’s relationship with private bank Coutts, owned by the NatWest Group, with a BBC journalist... “the first rule of banking is you have to respect the privacy of the customer. You also have to respect the GDPR regulations. They were both broken, very clearly, by the boss of NatWest.”... Sir Howard initially said the board members had decided the chief executive retained their “full confidence” but her position became ever more uncertain after the Chancellor and Downing Street were said to have “serious concerns” over her conduct... The BBC and its business editor Simon Jack apologised, saying the reporting had been based on information from a “trusted and senior source” but “turned out to be incomplete and inaccurate”."
I remember for a week or two when liberals were crowing about Farage lying and mocking him for being poor

Dame Alison Rose: the bank boss who steered Coutts’ diversity drive - "As the former trainee who worked her way up to become the first female boss of a major British lender, it is Dame Alison Rose who holds ultimate responsibility for Nigel Farage’s bank account closure.  Since taking the helm at NatWest, which owns Coutts, the 53-year-old has overseen their pivot towards saving the planet and putting diversity at the heart of the business... rather than focus solely on the financials of the lender, still a third owned by the taxpayer, she decided that the bank must involve itself in debates over climate change and LGBT rights... Her approach has been evident in the bank’s policies for employees, with staff allowed to identify as men and women on different days as part of a series of LGBT-friendly diversity measures.   Double-sided lanyards were offered to staff who identify as non-binary, so that they could alternate between different identities... Coutts was founded in 1692 and is the eighth oldest bank in the world"
Liberal gospel is that sexual orientation is immutable, but sexual identity can change daily

Nigel Farage and Coutts: Dame Alison Rose must now resign as head of NatWest - "After Alison Rose was appointed the first female chief executive of RBS (later NatWest) in 2019, she announced that “tackling climate change would be a central pillar” of her leadership. Had Rose misread the job spec? Did she think, perhaps, that she had assumed control of Extinction Rebellion rather than a leading capitalist institution?   No, it was apparent that Rose saw her role as primarily ideological rather than tediously financial...  the bank ended new loans for oil and gas extraction, a ruinous piece of virtue signalling which hampered the British people’s access to their own bountiful natural resources. Meanwhile, Norway, a country blessedly uncaptured by Marxist EDI – Equality, Diversity, Inclusion – zealots, is drilling like crazy in its part of the North Sea. (Guess which country the UK now buys half of its oil and gas supplies from at a cost of £40 billion a year? Green purity don’t come cheap, you know.) Not that paying the gas bill is much of a concern for Dame Alison. Last year, her pay packet was £5.25 million, a big chunk of that courtesy of the taxpayer, who owns 39 per cent of NatWest (and thus Coutts) since its bailout during the 2008 financial crisis... A friend who used to be extremely senior at Coutts, and still keeps in touch with former colleagues, says that the scandal over the private bank terminating Nigel Farage’s account was “depressingly inevitable. The forces of woke have wrought havoc there,” he says, “The trouble is members of staff are bullied into compliance with these ‘progressive’ edicts.”   My friend is appalled at the naivety and delusions of the present executives. “These people think they are invulnerable and have little awareness of the outside world. They talk to themselves and listen only to sycophants who will never gainsay them. If what they are said to have done to Farage is accurate it’s disgustingly disgraceful. I’m ashamed of what the bank has become.” 440 Strand (Coutts HQ where men in smart frock-coats still greet you at the door) had a previous flirtation with diversity back in the Seventies and Eighties when it banned the recruitment of public schoolboys. “Absurd. They were the very people who made up a large part of their client base!,” snorts my source. That daft idea was overturned because privately-educated males were rather good at smooth-talking wealthy clients, who valued good manners and discretion above all. More recently, such discrimination has made a comeback. Human Resources departments have been totally captured by EDI, a virulent virus from the US, and City firms have taken to rejecting a whole raft of talented British people in pursuit of “inclusion”.   “Basically, if you’re a brilliant white boy who went to a good school, forget it,” claims one hugely successful banker, a white man who went to a great school, natch. “They’d genuinely rather have a less qualified ethnic minority who can’t even compose an email to the clients because it helps with their ESG Rating.”... Do we suspect that Coutts is likely to have more than a few unsavoury clients “not aligned with our values”? A Chinese tycoon who puts Uyghurs in a concentration camp, perhaps? An Iranian potentate who authorises the mass hanging of gay people and disappears ex-wives in the concrete foundations of his new palace? For them it could well be, “Tea or coffee, Mr Mass Murderer, do you take sugar?” But a Brexit leader who commanded the votes of millions and now hosts a hugely popular show on GB News – Ugh, let’s show him the door! Home Secretary Suella Braverman is right to say the Coutts scandal exposes the “sinister nature” of the “diversity, equity and inclusion industry”. The Farage farrago will undoubtedly lose the bank clients. Serious wealth does not like publicity. “It may score Brownie points with the Islington dinner-party circuit who are not Coutts’ customers anyway,” observes my source, “but it will lose a whole raft of landowners who are naturally conservative, and families who have banked with Coutts for generations. They will be horrified. ‘Why on earth should my political views influence the holding of my account?’, that will be their attitude.”   So why are our banks and other financial institutions in the grip of EDI, a self-righteous, quasi-Communist ideology which despises so many of their clients? One of the UK’s most senior bankers tells me he prefers to call it DIE... How dare bankers in their fifties behave like teenage Maoists with other people’s money.   On a wider level, those of us who thought that the “culture wars” were just something waged by Leftie teachers or right-on theatre groups will have realised that the woodworm of woke is gnawing away at the foundations of all our institutions. People need to wake up to woke. The dangers that EDI and ESG pose – to our international competitiveness, to our economic success, to freedom itself – are profound.   “Sometimes,” says the senior banker, “I want to give up and see how long this millennial generation can manage without destroying everything our civilisation has achieved over the last 400 years.”... Thomas Coutts must be spinning in his grave. He was always prepared to bank anyone, especially those who were being persecuted and even went to Paris at the height of the French Revolution to help beleaguered aristocrats."

How the ‘sinister’ rise of diversity and inclusion turned Coutts against Nigel Farage - "“It is totally wrong for a bank or any company – in particular a public one and partially owned by the state – to exclude someone because their ‘values’ do not align with theirs or their ‘purpose’.  “This idea of companies’ ‘purpose’ is, I think, very sinister. It opens the door to the creation by businesses of an Orwellian dystopian environment… and the [creation of] thought police where everyone has to be on ‘message’.”... Nikhil Rathi, chief executive of the FCA, also told MPs that “you’re not able to discriminate on the basis of political views”, adding that “the law is clear”...  the Farage saga could now leave City executives and regulators asking questions about the influence of DE&I. And, like in Coutts’ case, whether it could cause reputational headaches further down the line."

Nigel Farage is the latest victim of Britain’s chilling new state ideology - "The Coutts papers read as if written by gullible schoolchildren with a Marxist teacher. Criticising BLM is “incit[ing] race hate”. Wikipedia is cited as if it were a reliable source – as is the far-Left boycott group “Hope not Hate”. Even the repeated comment that Farage is “polite to staff” is revealing, as if they find it surprising from someone with his opinions.   But the Farage affair has also highlighted the decline in our culture of freedom. Far too few people spoke up when he first made his allegations. All too many (step forward Jon Sopel) were ready to believe the feeble and, in the light of events, clearly misleading Coutts “explanation” for its actions, relayed by the BBC. And many actively rejoiced in his “debanking” – a horrible neologism, by the way, hopefully going down the memory hole fast... All too quickly, we are going down the road to a different kind of society – to a hyperpoliticised society, in which politics gets into everything. We are beginning to forget what it was like to live in a country where people disagreed about politics but otherwise could get on with their lives. Already a whole range of Leftist opinions are the norms, the accepted world-view of supposedly right-thinking people.   Sure, you can disagree with them, but don’t then expect to live the same kind of life as other people. Don’t expect to work in the public sector. Don’t expect to get a decent job in a big company. And, of course, don’t necessarily expect to keep your bank account. Vaclav Havel’s 1978 essay, The Power of the Powerless, describes a greengrocer who displays the slogan “Workers of the World, Unite!” Havel points out that the shopkeeper doesn’t really think that, and the real message is in fact “I am afraid and therefore unquestioningly obedient”. But the meaningless semantics are important in maintaining his own self-esteem: “What’s so wrong with the workers of the world uniting anyway?”... In the end, unless we draw a line, the easiest thing will be to keep your opinions to yourself, mouth the official ideologies on diversity, equity, climate, and multiculturalism, and get on with your life. So it’s important to say it like it is. Nigel Farage’s opinions are as valid as anyone else’s – and they would be even if they were not widely held. They don’t need excusing and they certainly don’t need stigmatising."

Nigel Farage claims three loved-ones have had their bank accounts closed over Brexit - "Nigel Farage told MailOnline today that three members of his family have recently had accounts closed by UK banks - as lenders were accused of dumping customers who say things they don't like on gender and LGBT issues or Brexit."

Suella Braverman: Coutts’ closure of Nigel Farage’s account is ‘sinister’ - "Mr Farage is thought to be just one of thousands of people who have been denied bank accounts for political reasons. They include children of little-known Tory peers who were told they could not have a bank account after being asked about their parents."

Suella Braverman MP on Twitter - "The Coutts scandal exposes the sinister nature of much of the Diversity, Equity & Inclusion industry. Apparently anyone who wants to control our borders & stop the boats can be branded ‘xenophobic’ & have their bank account closed in the name of ‘inclusivity’. Natwest & other corporates who have naively adopted this politically biased dogma need a major rethink . This is also an issue for the public sector too, which is why I’m reviewing our policies at the Home Office."
Of course, lots of leftists were upset at her tweet. Some even accused her of not having all the facts

Meme - Throwaway @BioTerrorGreen: "Reactionaries implicitly are afraid of space because it's black"
TARD @Mythotard" "If space was black we'd be giving it way more money than we do currently"

href="https://ifunny.co/picture/bt8ibRjfA?s=u&utm_source=pocket_saves">Meme

- "It's not British, it's Pidgin English, a 'broken' form of English."
"pidgin languages aren't broken, kinda gross to describe it that way"
"lol, I'm a Nigerian and we call it broken English, sometimes just broken sef instead of Pidgin English."
"white women policing a Nigerian/the people that actually use the language about what the language should be called will always be funny to me"
I remember when a Chinese woman tried to police the South African use of "coloured"

href="https://ifunny.co/picture/CZkwJREfA?s=u&utm_source=pocket_saves">Meme

- The 13/51+ Project @the1351project: "For my new followers I worked in a major national park for 3 years. Saw 1 black female in 3 years at this park with millions of visitors a year. It's zero to do with money. Hiking is free. If you ask a black person why they dont hike or backpack they all say the same thing..."
"Shaniqua Posting Delusions @DeludedShaniqwa: Turns out rural racism is when rural whites tell blacks to stop littering and playing loud music Turns out rural racism is when rural whites tell blacks to stop littering and playing loud music Natalie Morris: Wrote about rural racism, the colonial legacies that mar the British countryside, and the groups working to tackle hate and hostility:"
"Nigerian-born Enoch Adeyemi, co-founder of Black Scottish Adventurers, recently shared his experiences of hiking with a large group of Black men, revealing they are constantly subject to spurious complaints about “littering”, condescension and demands to stop playing music. “Why should I turn off my music? Just because white Scottish people enjoy nature one way, that doesn't mean Black people have to enjoy it exactly the same way,” he told the Daily Mail."

Founder of black Scottish hiking team slams 'racist' white ramblers who 'assume his group litters' - "The Nigerian-born hiker also slammed park rangers, claiming they 'perpetuate the cycle of ignorance' by taking such complaints seriously and confronting them about it.  Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority said their rangers have the same approach for all individuals and groups, regardless of ethnicity or background.  But added that they 'strive to make the National Park a place that is accessible and welcoming to all' and take Mr Adeyemi's complaints 'very seriously'... 'When we go hiking we don't see other black people hiking. Hiking is seen as a white people thing - not that there's anything wrong with that.  'White people generally hike, black people generally don't, it is what it is... 'For most folks, hiking is about going up quietly and coming down quietly.  'For us, we're playing music all the way, to the point where you don't feel like you're going up the mountain... 'I just think, don't tell me sorry, when you got that complaint you should have shut it down.  In addition, he believes there may also be cultural differences at play - saying that Africans tend to be more 'animated' and speak louder."
Activities that harm - Forestry and Land Scotland - "  A lot of the time people don’t realise they could be impacting wildlife.    Colin Edwards, our National Environment Manager, is asking people to be mindful of the potential disturbance and harm when they’re out and about... Nearly half the people surveyed hadn’t realised that their noise could impact the species around them. Many species are very sensitive to noise and disruption.  Using firecrackers or playing loud music while in the forest can impact the health of those around you.    We're asking people to be more aware of the amount of noise they make and be more considerate not only the animals but those living and enjoying the park with you."
Damn racist Scottish government!

Marginalising the majority - "It’s the accusatory nature of a great deal of progressive commentary that makes it so obnoxious. On the face of it, it sounds absurd to take offence at an article which maintains that Britons from ethnic minorities can feel uncomfortable in rural areas. Yet an article in The Lead with the headline “Black and brown hikers are taking back Britain’s countryside” is so fiercely combative that one can do nothing else. It stands in your face daring you to react.  First, what’s with that headline? “Taking back”? Did it belong to them? Have I missed a giant chunk of British history? Why must it be “taken” at all? Is this some sort of weird game of “capture the flag”?  One can take headlines too seriously, of course, but the article does include this striking claim:
Traditional ecological knowledge is appropriated by mainstream environmental and conservation movements. Collier says Black people are dispossessed of nature while, simultaneously, white people are taking their knowledge and refashioning it as exclusively theirs.
No examples are presented in support of this. I’m not saying that it’s impossible that British farmers, conservationists et cetera have drawn on the wisdom of farmers and ecologists from elsewhere. I don’t know, but it seems plausible. The author presents this as if it is some kind of ubiquitous phenomenon, however, as if British people had not been developing their knowledge of their rural areas for thousands of years themselves... If someone wants quiet and someone else wants to play music, they can’t both have what they want. If you’re playing music, then I don’t have quiet. As music can be listened to anywhere else — or, indeed, through a novel device called headphones — I think it is extremely fair that the former should prevail.   It’s a term that crops up later in the piece that really got my noggin joggin’. An activist demanding greater minority representation in countryside-related institutions says, “There have to be people of colour, the global majority, appointed into these positions where they can be decision makers. If they do not represent the global majority, they cannot understand and they will not act to address these barriers.”  What is this “global majority” thing? The term has been promoted as an alternative to “ethnic minority”, which is seen as marginalising people from immigrant backgrounds. Westminster Council announced last year that it would adopt “Global Majority” rather than “BAME” (black, Asian and minority ethnic).   Yet if “ethnic minority” marginalises people who have immigrant backgrounds — arguable in itself — “global majority” ends up marginalising people who don’t. Indeed, it does it in a far more explicit manner. “Ethnic minority” is a relative term. If a white British person moves to Indonesia, he or she has joined an ethnic minority. “Global majority”, on the other hand, has been defined as referring to black, Asian and “brown” people. I suppose it’s possible that progressives would accept that in Africa, white, Asian and “brown” people represent the “global majority”, but I can’t see it happening. I suspect the term also smuggles in the idea that British institutions should represent the world rather than Britain... The Anglican Communion is international, of course, but the Church of England is exactly that.  “Global majority” — like “People of Colour” — gestures towards a fictional unanimity. “Ethnic minorities”, for the most part, is seen in the plural sense, referencing a diverse mixture of groups (which, of course, themselves encompass diverse individuals). “Global majority” implies that there is some sort of cohesion within groups that often have little in common and, indeed, sometimes don’t get along (as in Leicester, last year, where Hindu and Muslim men bitterly feuded). It’s an ambition disguised as a description.  This term should have no place in our discourse, especially in the work of state and tax-funded institutions. Question it before it’s everywhere."

Meme - Greg @HarmfulOpinion: "WHiTe SuPrEmAcY is looking pretty diverse these days."
Los Angeles Times: "Column: Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy. You've been warned"
The New Yorker: "The Rise of Latino White Supremacy"
Al Jazeera: "Why white supremacists and Hindu nationalists are so alike"
The Nation: "Asian American Conservatives Have Become Key Allies of White Supremacy"

Meme - John Whelan: "When they say they're coming for your children, they're pushing buttons to provoke and laugh at the ensuing right wing hysteria."
Richard Fisher: "maybe, its a very strange approach. Do you make the same excuses when people chant 'the Jews shall not replace us'? Are they just pushing buttons to provoke the Left? And anyway, since when did kiddie fiddling become a left/right issue? It is interesting is it not that you think that only the right wing could be worried about their kids and the left wing are happy to have them groomed. Thats weird I'm left wing and the lefty people I know aren't into kiddie fiddling. I guess it is different where you live?"
The left always gets a free pass

Eliminating child support for Black fathers in CA will make more hurting single mothers and kids: Larry Elder - "Eliminating Black fathers' child support debt in California will only serve to further break down the Black family and harm single mothers and their children, Republican presidential candidate Larry Elder said.   The California Reparations Task Force’s final report released last month included a recommendation to eliminate interest on past-due child support as well as any accrued interest on existing child support debt for Black residents of the state. It also suggested providing forgiveness for some low-income debt holders... The Reparations Task Force didn't offer recourse for single parents who wouldn't receive the full child support payments they're owed... The report stated that "discriminatory" laws "have torn African American families apart" and that there's a "disproportionate amount of African Americans who are burdened with child support debt."... "I just see a bunch of people asking for money, a bunch of people making demands of people that had nothing to do with whatever plight they're complaining about," Elder said. "It's asinine." "The whole panel was designed to basically extract money from other people. And that's exactly what they've done. Black people are just eternal victims in America," he added. "We're not responsible for our own conditions right now as we speak.""
Liberals will just blame the worse outcomes on racism, to further their agenda

External locus of control contributes to racial disparities in memory and reasoning training gains in ACTIVE - "Racial disparities in cognitive outcomes may be partly explained by differences in locus of control. African Americans report more external locus of control than non-Hispanic Whites, and external locus of control is associated with poorer health and cognition. The aims of this study were to compare cognitive training gains between African American and non-Hispanic White participants in the Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly (ACTIVE) study and determine whether racial differences in training gains are mediated by locus of control. The sample comprised 2,062 (26% African American) adults aged 65 and older who participated in memory, reasoning, or speed training. Latent growth curve models evaluated predictors of 10-year cognitive trajectories separately by training group. Multiple group modeling examined associations between training gains and locus of control across racial groups. Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, African Americans evidenced less improvement in memory and reasoning performance after training. These effects were partially mediated by locus of control, controlling for age, sex, education, health, depression, testing site, and initial cognitive ability. African Americans reported more external locus of control, which was associated with smaller training gains. External locus of control also had a stronger negative association with reasoning training gain for African Americans than for Whites. No racial difference in training gain was identified for speed training. Future intervention research with African Americans should test whether explicitly targeting external locus of control leads to greater cognitive improvement following cognitive training."
Damn racism and white supremacy! Liberals telling black people they're victims means they will be more empowered!

Meme - "Western game dev has been here."
"How can you tell?"
"Ugly women."

Meme - "1999
Just because we're homosexual doesn't mean we should be harassed. We just want to blend in and live our lives in peace
Sounds entirely reasonable to me
2003
We're gonna hold a pride parade through your city to celebrate our lifestyle
Fine with me
2008
We've made up a dozen new genders and pronouns to match. It's now a hatecrime if you don't refer to me as 'xe/xim/xis' (also latinos are now called latinx)
Umm....
2012
We're gonna paint our flag on all your pedestrian crossings. We will charge anyone who leaves skid-marks on them with a hatecrime.
Seriously?
2014
We demand representation. All TV shows, movies, and video games must have at least one LGBT character (also we made your favorite childhood cartoon character gay)
Sounds real petty bro
2016
You are no longer allowed to say "faBBot" online anymore, even if you're in a closed group of friends who can handle banter
Wait you're policing my speech now?
2018
#protecttranskids We demand that you give your son puberty blockers if he likes wearing dresses
Okay this is fucked up
2021
It is now federal law that men who wear wigs can participate in female sports. Any woman athlete who opposes this is a bigot
I've created a monster"
The "myth" of the slippery slope strikes again