Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Cat exits bag, takes a bow, retires from stage.

You push an idea that makes it look ridiculous, makes the idea of identifying as something that you’re not look so ridiculous and preposterous and obscene….

It’s not the “ridiculousness” of “identifying as something that you’re not” that’s the issue. It’s the fact that that it is unhealthy and dangerous to do so that is the problem. Pointing out the ridiculousness is an act of desperation to get those authorities and institutions which support and enforce trans ideology to recognize the impossibility of the ideas they are forcing on society. In my own comments here at B&W, I’ve used examples like changing species, becoming invisible, or claiming to be made of antimatter. These are extreme examples intended to grab attention, to grab the lapels of the powers that be to try to shake some sense into them, because gender ideology’s core claims, that humans can change sex, and that one can be born into the “wrong” body, are just as extreme and impossible. But to even say any of this is deemed “hateful,” “bigoted,” and “transphobic.”

It is anything but kind to force society to accept the unhealthy, dangerous, impossible, and yes RIDICULOUS tenets of trangenderism. But it’s not the silliness and ludicrousness of the basis for these claims that is the problem (though that should have been enough to dismiss them tout court). It is the danger posed by the continued enactment and enforcement of their demands to the health and well-being of individuals and their families, as well as the ongoing corrosion and destruction of public institutions, and democracy itself. These dangers are not hypothetical or conjectural. They can be measured by the price paid in flesh and blood, women’s freedom and safety, the stifling of public discourse, and the surrender of goverments and corporations themselves to the inordinate power and influence of transgender ideology. They have brought the Trojan Rainbow Gender Unicorn into the heart of governance, business, and media and have used these captured entities to defend their claims and demands by attacking their opponents, going Full Orwell with the power of the police, the courts, and the media. Sex is “assigned at birth.” Criticism is genocide. Resistance is hatred. Stealing anything and everything belonging to women is a “right.” Lies are truth. Mutilation is medicine. Fantasy is reality. Tell me again that we’re the “baddies.” It is not hateful to resist something that is itself hateful. And yes, gender ideology is hateful. And harmful. Just ask women. It is not unkind, evil, or bigoted to refuse to accept and repeat lies.

Genderists accuse their opponents of using “protecting children” or “protecting women’s rights” as some sort of ruse or smokescreen to camouflage the “true purpose” of resistance to their agenda: “hatred” of trans people. Yet genderists are the ones who have to distort and reinvent language itself to hide the truth of their own agenda from the unsuspecting and the gullible. Even from themselves. It’s all euphemisms and lies. We didn’t invent “top surgery.” They’re the ones who have to hide the fact that at the core of their belief system, they’re supporting and promoting the mutilation and sterilization of children, and the destruction of women’s rights. That’s a lot to hide, and a lot to force everyone else to swallow. Yet to a frightening degree they have, for the moment, succeeded. But they have not won. And they never will, because you can’t defeat reality. You can try to hide it, paper it over, and punish those rude enough to point out the true state of things, but that reality will always be there, effortlessly demonstrating the dishonesty and impossibility of their position. You can’t turn the world upside down by trying to force everyone to stand on their heads. You will never fool gravity. And given the harms that have already been inflicted upon both children and women by trans ideology, I’d say that that’s a pretty good goddamned reason to oppose genderism. How do they argue for it? How do they make their case. That’s right, THEY DON’T. Because they can’t. That’s the whole point of “NO DEBATE!” They have nothing but bullying, lies, and emotional blackmail. They oppose any studies of the actual rates of success of the supposedly “lifesaving, gender-affirming care” they champion. They force women to call their male assailants “her” or “she” and force women in prison to be housed with dangerous, male criminals convicted of violent, sexual crimes because these sexual predators suddenly claim to be women. If it wasn’t cruel sadism, it would be laughable.

CIVIL SERVANT 1: Hey, let’s put violent, male rapists into women’s prisons!

CIVIL SERVANT 2: Yes, what a great idea! Make sure they put on a wig and some lipstick first, so nobody will notice!

CS1: Nobody important anyhow!

CS2: Women? PHHHFT! As if!

BOTH: HAHAHAHA!

You’d never accept it as satirical fiction; it’s just too over the top. Any editor having this cross their desk would fire their client and send them packing. Yet here we have the state-sanctioned, judicial and carceral equivalent of enacting Swift’s proposal to barbecue and eat Irish babies.

Is any of this “kind” or “good”? With this kind of track record, WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULDN’T OPPOSE GENDERISM? Would they have been able to force any of these horrific results without lies, bullying, and intimidation? These are but a few of the signal “victories” of self-styled, trans “rights,” “social justice warriors.” How are these outcomes “just” or good for “society”? They aren’t. But they did get the “war” part right, because war it is. Call it a “culture war” if you will. But as far as society goes, this is a war of self defence, because they shot first.

This again. The BBC needs to learn to call it out as well as stop doing it itself.

Charity boss apologises to rape survivors over crisis centre failings

But declines to step down, so her apology is fake as a 3 dollar bill.

A charity chief executive has apologised “unreservedly” to rape survivors affected by failings at support centre in Edinburgh.

Bollocks. She has nothing but reservations.

Sandy Brindley, of Rape Crisis Scotland, said she found out the centre was not following national standards last October and paused referrals 11 months later when the review said safeguarding was a problem.

So she did nothing for 11 months. What a peach.

She told BBC Scotland’s Drivetime programme there was no reason why transgender people could not work in rape support centres, but that services must also provide women-only spaces.

That’s the part where smoke came out of my ears, yet again. The issue is not “transgender people”; the issue is men. She knows this of course, she just refuses to stop cheating and sidestepping and playing games this way. Fuck her apology.

There’s a very interesting thing here at the beginning.

I haven’t watched the whole thing, but the bit that grabbed me is all I need. The guy on the left of the screen, apparently Jonathan Lis, says this:

This is an attempt, by people who hate trans people –

Sharp interjection from the woman in the navy blue blazer, who is (I think) one of the hosts: “What?!”

Lis goes on:

You push an idea that makes it look ridiculous, makes the idea of identifying as something that you’re not look so ridiculous and preposterous and obscene that obviously no one would ever believe that it could take place in schools –

There. That’s what interests me. Look what he admitted. That trans people are identifying as something that they’re not.

Oops.

Originally a comment by Steven on But every dot was connected.

Stories are what they have instead of thinking.

There are, perhaps, two fundamental ways that humans understand things

– tell me a story

– show me a picture

Republicans have always communicated in stories. Stories are accessible, and relatable, and compelling; far more so than, say, policy proposals or white papers. This is one reason that Republicans keep getting the votes of people whose interests they oppose: they tell them stories that they want to hear.

Even more powerful than stories are keywords or tropes: short phrases or words that have come to stand for a whole story. Willie Horton. There’s a bear in the woods. They’re eating the dogs.

One advantage of speaking in tropes is that they serve as dog whistles: they give the speaker plausible deniability if they later want to disavow the substance of the story.

An even bigger advantage is that the use of keywords validates the story. When a single word or phrase evokes a whole story, the listener tends to accept that story uncritically–after all, it’s a story that they already knew. (If they didn’t already know the story then the keyword wouldn’t mean anything to them.)

The Republicans’ problem is that–for whatever reason–they aren’t getting much traction with their stories right now. Back in the day, people really were afraid of communist subversion, but no one is taking the Haitians-eating-dogs thing seriously. Even the boy who was killed by an unlicensed immigrant driver is seen as a tragedy, not the vanguard of an invasion.

Trump’s problem is that he can not, in fact, connect the dots any more. Through some combination of indiscipline, desperation, and dementia, his parole has fallen below the minimum threshold necessary to generate the keywords and sequence the stories. Even his supporters are sitting there and thinking, WTF? Or just getting bored and leaving. (Boredom being a sure sign that Trump is no longer evoking interesting stories in their minds.)

Skirts are not an invitation to stealth photography. Who knew?

Many people do not realise that upskirting is a crime and fail to take the offence seriously, a senior police officer has warned.

Detective Superintendent Kate MacLeod from City of London Police said upskirting is abuse, and can escalate into “far worse” behaviour.

She nabbed a guy doing it at the British Museum last month.

There were so many images on his phone that she believes members of the public must have seen him filming victims on previous occasions before he was finally caught. “Upskirting is still a relatively new offence, and a lot of people won’t be aware it exists,” she said.

Men, maybe. I doubt many women are unaware. I’ve known at least since I was a teenager that skirts are a trap. Girls and women are often required to wear them, yet they make girls and women vulnerable in a really creepy way.

“People don’t realise the severity of the crime. We talk about violence against women and girls, and I think a lot of people think that has to be physical violence. But actually this is still abuse, albeit seemingly low level, and those behaviours can escalate into something far, far worse.”

Not seemingly to me. I don’t think it’s a bit low level.

The invisible accordion playing goes into overdrive.

Also hilarious – he tells us he gets everything wrong.

And they didn’t correct her once, and they corrected me everything I said, practically –

Now why might that be, Bozo?

Sure, in theory, it could be because they are Unfair to donalds. But it could also be because YOU GOT EVERYTHING WRONG.

Think about it, accordion-boy. Put the hands down for a second and think. You’re ignorant and lazy, plus you’re dishonest, so how surprising is it really if every damn thing you say is either wrong or a lie?

Ew. I missed this one.

The reactions from Republicans over Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris have ranged from sour to feigned disregard, but one particularly disturbing response from the right came from none other than Elon Musk.

On Tuesday night, the pop star announced in an Instagram post that she would vote for Harris in November. Swift, 34, signed off her statement as “childless cat lady,” a clear swipe at GOP vice presidential nominee JD Vance, who has mocked and dismissed women without biological children.

Shortly after that, 53-year-old Musk — who has endorsed Donald Trump — inserted himself into the discourse in the sleaziest way possible, writing on X: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.”

That’s right. A woman does something a man doesn’t like, so he rebukes her with his dick. A woman says something, so a man says he will rape her.

Originally a comment by Sackbut at Miscellany Room.

I came across this review in Inverse magazine about a Netflix movie called Uglies. The focus of the review is how this is a 2014-style movie that came out ten years too late, for reasons I don’t understand. Apparently there was a YA (“young adult fiction”) dystopian craze ten years ago?

The movie features a dystopian society in which all citizens are required at 16 to undergo cosmetic surgery to become “Pretty”, after which they move to City, an idyllic community where nothing goes wrong and everyone is happy. The central teen character starts questioning the merits of being Pretty, and the motivations of Dr Cable, the person in charge of the project. She flees and joins a resistance group that has discovered the surgery is more than cosmetic: it affects the brain, making people more docile and less able to think for themselves.

The reviewer thinks the story line is ambiguous enough that people can make of it what they wish, but it screams “transgender ideology” to me. This is enhanced by the fact that Dr Cable is portrayed by Laverne Cox, a well-known trans-identified male actor. The review notes as much:

It’s a great villainous scheme within the story, but from the outside looking in, it’s hard for it not to feel icky: Laverne Cox, a trans woman, is playing the role of an evil mastermind brainwashing children into getting life-changing surgeries without them knowing the true side effects. It doesn’t take that much of a leap to turn this beautiful supervillain into a right-wing talking point.

Perhaps it could be a right-wing talking point, but surely it’s a point for anyone opposed to unnecessary cosmetic surgery done to meet societal demands rather than medical needs, and that’s not unique to one side of the political spectrum.

Hoooooooooo-boy.

Trump: I don’t think I’ve ever said this before. So we do these rallies. They’re massive rallies. Everybody loves, everybody stays till the end. By the way, you know, when she said that, well, your rallies people leave. Honestly, nobody does. And if I saw them leaving, I’d say, and ladies and gentlemen make America great again and I’d get the hell out, ok? Because I don’t want people leaving. But I do have to say so I give these long sometimes very complex sentences and paragraphs but they all come together. I do it a lot. I do it with raising cane. That story. I do it with the story on the catapults on the aircraft carriers. I do it with a lot of different stories. When I mentioned Doctor Hannibal Lecter. I’m using that as an example of people that are coming in from Silence of the Lambs. I use it. They say it’s terrible. So they say so I’ll give this long complex area for instance that I talked about a lot of different territory… You know, for a town hall, there’s a lot of people but the fake news likes to say, the fake news likes to say, oh, he was rambling. No, no, that’s not rambling. That’s genius. When you can connect the dots. Now, now, Sarah, if you couldn’t connect the dots, you got a problem. But every dot was connected and many stories were told in that little paragraph

I listened to the whole thing to confirm that he really did say “When I mentioned Doctor Hannibal Lecter. I’m using that as an example of people that are coming in from Silence of the Lambs.” He really did.

Note the “I do it with a lot of different stories.” He’s one of those guys – the ones who tell stories – the ones who think they have a vast mental archive of fabulous stories, and who pin you down and bore you with them every chance they get. Run from those guys. Head for the hills. Stories are what they have instead of thinking.

The ACLU explains:

Today, United States District Court Judge Richard Young granted the ACLU of Indiana a preliminary injunction in its case representing Autumn Cordellioné, a transgender woman currently in the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction (DOC). Ms. Cordellioné sued the state after the DOC’s denial of gender affirming surgery. 

The ACLU of Indiana argued in court earlier this year that Indiana’s law banning gender-affirming surgery in prisons, passed in 2023, violates the Eighth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  

The court agreed that Ms. Cordellioné and the ACLU of Indiana established that gender-confirming surgery is a medically necessary treatment option for some individuals with gender dysphoria.  The Judge issued an order that the DOC must provide Ms. Cordellioné with gender-affirming surgery at the earliest opportunity. 

I wonder what they mean by “medically necessary.” How can “gender confirmation” be medically necessary? How can “gender dysphoria” be a medical issue?

They’re mashing together thoughts in the head and medical treatment for illness or injury. Drugs can change thoughts, to be sure, but is a delusion about the self really something that medically requires the mutilations that gender enthusiasts call “gender affirming”? Is it really something that requires prescription of off-label drugs? Is it really something that requires all this drastic medical intervention to help the patient pretend to be something the patient is not?

Clearly the ACLU thinks so, but I think the ACLU is delusional and reckless.

The US Constitution’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment imposes a duty on the states “to provide adequate medical care to incarcerated individuals.”  

And is trying to help incarcerated individuals change sex really adequate medical care? What if instead it’s reckless endangerment?

More excellent PR for the giant toddler:

“I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Sunday.

Definitely want that guy handling national security.

After the debate between Harris and Trump had wrapped on Tuesday night, Swift threw her support behind the Democratic vice president.

…

Swift said she was driven to publicize her “actual plans for this election as a voter” after she became aware that Trump had pushed misinformation suggesting that he was getting her vote.

Last month, Trump shared an AI-generated image of Swift in an Uncle Sam outfit giving a fake endorsement to his campaign, along with other images promoting the idea that he’d won over some of her fanbase. “I accept,” he said in posting the images. He’s since denied knowing anything about the images.

Sir, sir, you posted the images. You can’t tell us you know nothing about them.

The good news is it’s temporary. The bad news is…

Trans and non-binary faces unveiled on Fourth Plinth

Hundreds of plaster casts of transgender and non-binary people have been unveiled as the latest installation on the Trafalgar Square Fourth Plinth in central London. Called Mil Veces un Instante (A Thousand Times in an Instant) the sculpture was created by Mexican artist Teresa Margolles and features the faces of 726 trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming people.

The plinth was built in 1841 to display a permanent statue of William IV, but money ran out.

Which is just as well, because who the hell even remembers who William IV was? Or cares?

It was empty until 1999 when it became the location for an ongoing series of temporary artworks, including pieces by David Shrigley, Rachel Whiteread and Antony Gormley.

Temporary. Yay. Can we take this one down now?

Mil Veces un Instante was made by applying plaster directly onto the faces of the models, many of whom were sex workers, so the material became infused with the sitters’ hair and skin cells.

Oh good. Good good good. Let’s make “sex work” something we canonize in public spaces. Next up: statues of men who like to beat up and/or rape women.

Reduxx reports:

Indiana Department Of Corrections Ordered To Arrange Transgender Baby Killer’s “Gender Surgeries” After ACLU-Backed Lawsuit

Who knew baby killing was a civil liberty?

That’s a cheap shot, because the “civil liberty” is the gender surgery bit not the baby killing bit, but the horror of the contemporary ACLU brings out the cheap shot-monger in me.

The ACLU has successfully fought to have a transgender baby killer be given taxpayer-funded “gender affirming” surgeries. Yesterday, the United States District Court of Indiana ruled that Autumn Cordellioné, born Jonathan C. Richardson, had been subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” by being denied the various plastic surgeries he had demanded.

When did non-medical plastic surgeries to change appearance become so essential that not getting them is cruel and unusual punishment?

Richardson is currently serving a 55-year sentence for the murder of his 11-month-old stepdaughter. As previously reported by Reduxx, Richardson had been left to care for the child while her mother was at work…

…

The baby would later die at the hospital, with the cause of death determined to be asphyxiation by manual strangulation. Richardson was booked awaiting a court hearing, and would later tell a prison official “all I know is I killed the little fucking bitch.”

Well no wonder the ACLU is standing up for his sacred right to be a woman.

If you’re going to make your profits by sending massive container ships darting around the world, you need to make sure you do it safely.

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking more than $100 million from the two corporations that owned and operated the container ship that destroyed Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge in March.

The two companies, Grace Ocean Private Limited and Synergy Marine Private Limited, “sent an ill-prepared crew on an abjectly unseaworthy vessel to navigate the United States’ waterways,” the suit reads. “They did so to reap the benefit of conducting business in American ports. Yet they cut corners in ways that risked lives and infrastructure.”

…

In the civil lawsuit, the Justice Department goes into detail about how failures on the ship led to the disastrous collision and slams the two companies for not reporting issues with the ship.

“This tragedy was entirely avoidable,” the department wrote, adding that “none of the four tools that might have averted disaster—the rudder, the propeller, the anchor, or the bow thruster—was working or operating as it should have been.”

Jeezus. That’s like driving on the freeway when your steering wheel and brakes don’t work.

Wadhwa admits. (Look at the size of those hands.)

Uh huh.

If only all these stupid women would realize that our oppression in being seen as men is exactly the same as their oppression in being subordinated as women. Why can’t they grasp this very simple point??? Stupid cows.

This Victoria Bucholz/Karla Marx person is interesting, in an irritating way.

He’s in the history department at Mount Royal University, and a drag queen. (So if he’s a drag queen why is he trying to force people to call him a woman? Drag queens are, obviously, not women – that’s what the “drag” part means.)

Last February:

The newly formed QriTical Research Hub at Mount Royal University is hosting History with a Drag Queen next Thursday, February 8th at MRU’s West Gate Social. Doors open at 6:30 PM.

This event will be a teach-in hosted by the fabulous Karla Marx! 

Karla is a drag queen, burlesque artist, and comedian, using the art of drag to shed new light on the histories of fascism and the contemporary rise of global fascist politics. 

He’s a drag queen. Drag queens are not women.

Developed and embodied by Dr. Victoria Bucholtz (History Dep. MRU), Karla Marx is known for her comedic brilliance, riveting historical analysis, and cheeky approach to educating through entertainment.

Oh I see. Bucholtz is not the drag queen, Marx is. Bucholtz merely “embodies” the drag queen. They’re the same person, but that’s a minor technicality.

Karla Marx is inviting you, the audience, to learn more about the ideologies and impacts of fascism, and to think critically and carefully about the role that “sexual anxiety” is playing in our current social and political landscape.

Which means what? You know. Wicked people saying men are not women: that there is “sexual anxiety” and it’s the road to fascism and it’s all women’s fault. Bitches.

 Taking inspiration from Jason Stanley’s book, How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them (2018), fascist leaders often position themselves as the protectors of women and children against “dangerous homosexuals.” In the context of growing and loudening anti-2SLGBTQIA+ movements in Canada – often under the guise of “protecting the children” – this teach-in will offer individuals a chance to better understand the functioning of “sexual anxiety” in right-wing movements.

I wonder if Bucholtz ever pauses to wonder if he’s the fascist leader.

Lauren Smith at Spiked:

Elizabeth Pitt was employed as a social worker by Cambridgeshire County Council. In January 2023, Pitt, who is a lesbian, attended a meeting of the council’s LGBT employee group. A colleague piped up to say that his dog is ‘genderfluid’.

What would that even mean? Dogs aren’t gendersolid so how can they be genderfluid? Dogs don’t know from gender. Dogs don’t know from ideology; dogs know what they smell.

Pitt decided to call this out as nonsense. This then sparked a heated debate about gender identity more broadly, during which Pitt and another co-worker shared their gender-critical views, criticising things like transwomen being allowed to compete in women’s sports or to enter female bathrooms.

For those of us with an ounce of common sense left, these views will sound perfectly reasonable. But Pitt’s trans-Dachshund-owning co-worker lodged a formal complaint with the council. He described her remarks as ‘offensive’ and ‘nasty opinions’. Another colleague who had been present at the meeting said she had a ‘really aggressive tone’.

Ever been to a workplace meeting? An aggressive tone is not unusual there.

As a result, Pitt was formally disciplined by her employer. Apparently, her opinions were ‘non-inclusive and transphobic’. She was also told that her comments caused ‘significant offence’ and had a ‘detrimental impact on the mental health and wellbeing’ of her colleagues. She was subsequently banned from attending any more events held by the LGBT group and from contacting its members.

In response, Pitt took Cambridgeshire County Council to a tribunal. This week, a judge concluded that her treatment ‘amounted to harassment / direct discrimination’ on the grounds of her gender-critical views – a ‘philosophical belief’ that is protected by the Equality Act 2010. As a result, Cambridgeshire council will not only have to pay out £55,910 in compensation and to cover Pitt’s legal costs, but it will also have to implement staff training on ‘freedom of belief and speech in the workplace’.

Learn the lesson, Cambridgeshire council!

Hmm. What’s the chain of reasoning here?

[Trump] accused President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris of inviting assassins to target him when they warn that he is a threat to democracy.

He told Fox News Digital on Monday without evidence that the alleged would-be shooter “believed the rhetoric of Biden and Harris, and he acted on it.” Trump went on: “Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country — both from the inside and out.”

…

Trump’s running mate advanced an even blunter argument.

“The big difference between conservatives and liberals is that … no one has tried to kill Kamala Harris in the last couple of months, and two people now have tried to kill Donald Trump in the last couple of months,” Ohio Sen. JD Vance said. “I’d say that’s pretty strong evidence that the left needs to tone down the rhetoric and needs to cut this crap out.”

Is it though? Two examples out of millions of Dem voters isn’t really strong evidence that anything. If two people out of millions get a headache after eating a banana, medical researchers aren’t going to get all excited about a new avenue of investigation. Two out of millions of anything is just…not not random.

Would I be making similar inferences if two people had tried to shoot Biden or Harris? Probably. I’d be wrong.

But if Democrats are to blame for sometimes going over the top, Trump has made a political brand out of the most outlandish rhetoric uttered by a president or ex-president in the modern history of the United States. The scale and intensity of his invective dwarf anything that the Democrats have flung at him. He calls Harris a “fascist” in almost every public appearance — for instance, he said on August 26 in Virginia that “we have a fascist person running who’s incompetent.” He used similar rhetoric on August 23, August 17, and August 3 in campaign appearances.

Oh he’s just joking.

More on the delicate flower “Karla Marx” –

No no, child, she declined to say that trans women aka men are women. This is because men are not women. She’s not a phobe for knowing that men are not women. You’re a buffoon and a bully for demanding that she say they are, and volubly scolding her when she declines.

Classic.