Sing it!

When guest talks go bad:

A psychiatrist said in a lecture at Yale University’s School of Medicine that she had fantasies of shooting white people, prompting the university to later restrict online access to her expletive-filled talk, which it said was “antithetical to the values of the school.”

The talk, titled “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind,” had been presented by the School of Medicine’s Child Study Center as part of Grand Rounds, a weekly forum for faculty and staff members and others affiliated with Yale to learn about various aspects of mental health.

The title doesn’t sound entirely reasonable or well judged.

“This is the cost of talking to white people at all — the cost of your own life, as they suck you dry,” Dr. Khilanani said in the lecture, which drew widespread attention after Bari Weiss, a former writer and editor for the opinion department of The New York Times, posted an audio recording of it on Substack on Friday. “There are no good apples out there. White people make my blood boil.”

Any good peaches out there? Grapefruits? Cherries?

“I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step, like I did the world a [fucking] favor,” she said, adding an expletive.

I like the exquisite politeness of that “relatively.” Not completely guiltless, you understand, just relatively.

Later in the lecture, Dr. Khilanani, who said she is of Indian descent, described the futility of trying to talk directly to white people about race, calling it a “waste of our breath.”

“We are asking a demented, violent predator who thinks that they are a saint or a superhero to accept responsibility,” she said. “It ain’t going to happen. They have five holes in their brain.”

So Yale made the video of her talk available only to the people who were eligible to attend it.

Dr. Khilanani posted several videos on TikTok addressing what she called Yale’s “suppression of my talk on race.” In her email, she called on Yale to release the video, and she said in a phone interview that Yale should not have been surprised because “they knew the topic, they knew the title, they knew the speaker.”

That is a point. Why did they invite her in the first place?

Is this just more cancel culture? No, because of the fantasies about shooting people. If a GC feminist did a talk ranting about fantasies of shooting people I wouldn’t defend her.

How can we ever match their eloquence?

On the one hand Trump is more absurd than ever, on the other hand he’s more dangerous than ever.

Donald J. Trump, the former president of the United States, commutes to New York City from his New Jersey golf club to work out of his office in Trump Tower at least once a week, slipping in and out of Manhattan without attracting much attention.

The place isn’t as he left it. Many of his longtime employees are gone. So are most of the family members who once worked there with him and some of the fixtures of the place, like his former lawyer Michael D. Cohen, who have since turned on him. Mr. Trump works there, mostly alone, with two assistants and a few body men.

What kind of “work” does he do there? Composing “statements” like the one saying Mark Zuckerberg requested not to be invited to dinner?

Still blocked from Twitter and Facebook, he has struggled to find a way to influence news coverage since leaving office and promote the fabrication that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

Giving a slurred speech while wearing questionable trousers is part of His Struggle.

He has pressed conservative commentators and writers to echo his claims that the election was rigged. His focus has intensified in recent weeks, coinciding with the empaneling of a special grand jury by Cyrus Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, into his businesses.

A grand jury does tend to concentrate the mind, to borrow Samuel Johnson’s phrase.

Last week, he shut down his blog after hearing from friends that the site was getting little traffic and making him look small and irrelevant, according to a person familiar with his thinking.

He is small and irrelevant. Dangerous, but still small and irrelevant.

He has been so eager for an audience that he is even billed as a speaker who will appear live, via Jumbotron, at a rally in New Richmond, Wis., where the other headliners are Diamond and Silk, the MAGA movement social media stars, and Dinesh D’Souza, who received a presidential pardon from Mr. Trump for a felony conviction of making illegal campaign contributions.

Celebrity Jumbotron!

“If you’re a one-term president, you usually go quietly into the night,” said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian. “He sees himself as leading the revolution, and he’s doing it from the back of a golf cart.”

The golf cart revolution will be televised.

Trump issued a solemn Statement. Short, but solemn.

Cool. Zuckerberg requested no more dinners, and Trump is complying. Whatever.

It is however quite rude and dismissive to refer to anyone as “his wife” and nothing else. Most women are not as empty and useless as Melania Trump, or indeed Donald Trump.

Tell me more about the residential accommodation one.

That’s so interesting, because by giving a trans woman the option of being in a single sex flat that is an all women flat, they remove that option from the women in the flat. He gets his preferred option and they lose theirs.

Why is that fair, again? I just can’t seem to grasp it.

It’s been sorted and Marion has what she needs for now.

What a glorious progressive movement, am I right?

Excellent post by Lily Maynard on The Curious Case of Marion Millar.

It’s all good; I’ll just whet your appetite with her take on Joss Prior:

Joss’s attack on women is a triple whammy, the epitome of bigotry – attacking women for their age, their politcs (entirely speculative) and their perceived intellectual capacity.

I imagine Joss’s idea of a feminist protest would have been a parade of 20-year-old bikini girls sporting full make-up and perfectly coiffed hair, chanting ‘transwomen are women!’

While explaining astrophysics to the people in the bleachers.

Prior- no spring chicken himself- is also disparaging about the number of women in the photo. I’m told that others were present who were not photographed, but bloody hell –   just yesterday someone was threatening to shoot gender critical women with a ‘gun’! It’s pretty damn brave that these women dare show their faces at all! And with just six day’s notice, on a week day, when most women are either at work or have kids to ferry to and from school. In the middle of a pandemic. And where, exactly? Central Edingburgh? No: Coatbridge. A town in the lowlands of Scotland, about nine miles outside Glasgow. I’ll just hop on my bike…

…

For Women Scotland tell me, “It was just some friends and supporters outside the police station, so not really a protest as such.”

My favourite response was an… ahem… old photo of Prior in formal dress with the caption ‘bored, middle-aged dullard’?

If that seems harsh, bear in mind that Prior was not above doctoring a picture created by The Famous Artist Birdy Rose to make it look as if she had drawn Millar giving a Nazi salute.

It’s difficult to be harsh enough to Joss Prior.

H/t Sackbut

Susan Dalgety in The Scotsman:

Why have I spent the last 24 hours sharing despairing texts with some of Scotland’s most successful women, each as bewildered as I am? Women who have won awards for their work, women who have spent their entire adult lives overcoming prejudice, women who are the social, economic, and political equal of any man. Warrior queens every one of them. And now scared to speak out.

I could point to a Coatbridge police station, where on Thursday, Marion Millar, a 50-year-old feminist, was charged with malicious communications after posting allegedly “homophobic and transphobic” tweets, but the story doesn’t start there.

I could direct you to Johann Lamont’s powerful parliamentary speech where she argued successfully for the survivors of rape and sexual assault to have the right to choose the sex, not the gender, of the person who examines them after an attack. But the story didn’t start there either.

See also Joan Mcalpine.

Women who argue that biology is real and that our sex is the basis of inequality are dismissed as bigots. Women who marched alongside their gay brothers and sisters in the campaign for equality are accused, by some of the people they marched with, of causing a moral panic by asserting their sex-based rights.

Women have lost income, been shunned by their professional peers and pilloried for standing up for their sex-based rights. And one woman now awaits trial in Glasgow Sheriff Court on July 20.

It is now, she concludes, time to fight back.

Marion Millar put up a GoFundMe about 3 hours ago – the donations flooded in – so of course GoFundMe took it down.

Glinner sums up:

I hate that Marion Millar is going through hell at the moment, but I’m delighted she’s about to draw attention to the tactics used by trans rights activists, the ideologically captured police who empower and enable them, and the silicon valley companies that hold women down while this theft of their rights and resources is underway.

When she finally does get it going, share it everywhere. Use it to peak friends and family. Let’s get the light flooding in on this dangerous cult that has done so much in the darkness. The accelerating demise of Stonewall and the imminent demise of Mermaids were both only possible because women like Marion fought like tigers against what amounts to an ideological coup, and a fraud comitted by Stonewall that took in the whole country.

Self-ID has been held back in Spain and Germany, and feminist groups inspired by the UK movement are popping up everywhere. The ripples from this case will be felt all over the world, so Marion, don’t lose heart. This is a dying movement, certainly in the UK, and you’re about to deliver the final blow.

Location changed to PayPal.

Updating to add: hold off on donating for now because evil people are setting up fake accounts and running off with the cash.

Again with this crap.

Valentina Petrillo could this year become the first openly transgender woman to compete at the Paralympics. For the visually impaired Italian, selection for the national squad would be a dream come true – but she says she understands why other athletes may have doubts and questions about racing against her.

“I’m happy as a woman and running as a woman is all I want. I couldn’t ask for more,” says Valentina Petrillo.

“I’ve got a fire inside me, that pushes me. An emotional strength. Obviously, my body’s not what it was at 20 when I was at my peak, but my happiness pushes me to go further, to go beyond my limits.”

But what Petrillo wants and Petrillo’s happiness isn’t the only issue.

The BBC does eventually get to the part about women who say it isn’t fair, but the part about Petrillo’s happiness and womanyness is what comes first.

I feel a need to learn something about these here Yogyakarta principles we hear so much about.

So I’m reading.

In 2006, in response to well-documented patterns of abuse, a distinguished group of international human rights experts met in Yogyakarta, Indonesia to outline a set of international principles relating to sexual orientation and gender identity. The result was the Yogyakarta Principles: a universal guide to human rights which affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply. They promise a different future where all people born free and equal in dignity and rights can fulfil that precious birthright.

Two words there I don’t understand – “binding” and “must.” On what basis do the people who drew up the principles have the authority to make them binding and to say that all States must comply?

Wikipedia gives some background:

The website promoting the Principles notes that concerns have been voiced about a trend of people’s human rights being violated because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. While the United Nations human rights instruments detail obligations to ensure that people are protected from discrimination and stereotypes,^[4] which includes people’s expression of sexual orientation or gender identity, implementation of these rights has been fragmented and inconsistent internationally. The Principles aim to provide a consistent understanding about application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity.^[5]

Those two things don’t go together though. They shouldn’t be formulaically paired that way as if they’re the same and have the same kinds of impacts on other people, because they’re not and they don’t.

The Yogyakarta Principles were developed at a meeting of the International Commission of Jurists, the International Service for Human Rights and human rights experts from around the world at Gadjah Mada University on Java from 6 to 9 November 2006. The seminar clarified the nature, scope and implementation of states’ human rights obligations under existing human rights treaties and law, in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity.

Again – not the same. Should not be treated as a pair.

The YP website explains each principle. On the page for principle 3 we get:

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities shall enjoy legal capacity in all aspects of life. Each person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom.

Yet again – not the same thing, should not be treated as a pair. It’s not even clear that “gender identity” is as solid a concept as sexual orientation is, let alone sex.

No one shall be forced to undergo medical procedures, including sex reassignment surgery, sterilisation or hormonal therapy, as a requirement for legal recognition of their gender identity.

Boom – there you have a “principle” that has turned out to be massively destructive of women’s rights. It’s too bad they didn’t manage to think about that back in 2006.

No status, such as marriage or parenthood, may be invoked as such to prevent the legal recognition of a person’s gender identity.

In other words children and spouses have no interests in this question.

No one shall be subjected to pressure to conceal, suppress or deny their sexual orientation or gender identity.

How are we defining “pressure”? Because if we define it broadly enough that means women are not allowed to say that men are not women. Again: more thought needed here.

States shall:

… b)     Take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to fully respect and legally recognise each person’s self-defined gender identity;

Seriously?

It’s bonkers.

Naomi Wolf pushed the vax conspiracy theorizing too far.

Ofsted is out.

Stonewall raised “concern” with Ofsted that inspectors do not always discuss trans issues with primary school children, The Telegraph can reveal.

Ahhhhhhhh now that’s damning. Stonewall was complaining to Ofsted that inspectors weren’t pushing primary schools to groom children.

The LGBT charity questioned an exemption in the school watchdog’s guidance allowing inspectors to avoid asking children as young as five about topics such as gender transitioning if a headteacher “reasonably believes” it is sensitive for pupils.

In an email to Ofsted, released under freedom of information laws, Stonewall said: “We are concerned that exempting inspectors from speaking to pupils about certain protected characteristics could undermine their ability to effectively assess a primary school’s compliance with the Equality Act 2010.”

In other words schools have to indoctrinate small children into the trans ideology or they won’t be doing their duty by “certain protected characteristics” and Stonewall will have to punish. What power-drunk shits these creeps are.

In the email to Ofsted, seen by The Telegraph, Stonewall’s director of education and youth wrote: “We know that some students who are bullied (for whatever reason) do not disclose this to teachers, so it is difficult to envisage how inspectors could make assessments on whether homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying is prevalent in schools, without being able to speak to pupils about all protected characteristics.”

Yes that will definitely solve the problem. “Johhny, do you bully any classmates because you’re biphobic? Do you bully any classmates because you’re homophobic? Do you bully any classmates because you’re transphobic? Jenny, does Johnny bully you because you’re bi? Does he bully you because you’re a lesbian? Does he bully you because you’re trans?” Makes you wish you could be a kid again.

Meanwhile, more public bodies have quit Stonewall’s diversity scheme. They include the Post Office, NHS Highland, Swim England, three police forces and several councils.

Police Scotland should quite Stonewall’s diversity scheme. Yesterday.

When Channel 4 goes…

Channel 4 has become the latest organisation to pull out of the diversity scheme run by the charity Stonewall.

In US-speak “scheme” is mostly a pejorative. That’s less true in the UK but I still smirk at calling Stonewall’s (cough) campaign a “scheme.”

The broadcaster, which has been praised for its programmes highlighting LGBTQ issues, said it was withdrawing from the “diversity champions” scheme.

…

Yesterday Moon Beever, a law firm, severed its ties with the charity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission and the employment dispute service Acas have withdrawn for “cost reasons”, and the DVLA and the housing department have also pulled out.

…

Frances Coulson, senior partner at Moon Beever, told the legal blog RollOnFriday: “After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme.”

“Some disquiet” – there’s that suave understatement again.

One more exit:

A law firm has ended its membership of a diversity scheme run by Stonewall citing concerns over its recent actions, saying it can no longer support the LGBTQ+ charity.

Moon Beever, based in Gray’s Inn and specialising in insolvency work, was one of 77 firms signed up to Stonewall’s Diversity Champions scheme.

But Frances Coulson, the firm’s Senior Partner, told RollOnFriday that Moon Beever had relinquished its membership.

“After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme”, she said. 

“This in no way detracts from our commitment to diversity and equality, but in common with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Departments we no longer feel that we can support Stonewall”, said Coulson.

The NY Times:

CeCe Telfer is hoping to qualify for the United States Olympic trials, which begin June 18 in Eugene, Ore. The asphalt road is her primary training facility.

In 2019, Telfer became the first openly transgender woman to win an N.C.A.A. title; she was a fifth-year senior at Franklin Pierce University, a Division II school in Rindge, N.H. Now she is among a handful of transgender women seeking to reach the Tokyo Games, which begin in late July.

In other words in 2019 Telfer stole an N.C.A.A. title from a woman, and now he hopes to steal a place at the Tokyo Games from a woman.

Recent clashes over transgender athletes have made it more important for Telfer to capitalize on her opportunity for elite competition.

While people are still pretending it’s fair.

“It’s important for me to do it for these kids,” Telfer, 26, said while sitting on the back porch of her college psychologist’s house. “It’s important for me to do it for my people — whether it be women, Black people, transgender people, L.G.B.T.Q. people — anybody who is scrutinized and oppressed.”

Whether it be women? Really? But women are the people he’s doing his best to cheat.

At the start of the 2018-19 school year, Telfer said, she walked into her coach’s office with a friend and asked to compete with other women. She expected the coach to balk. Instead, she recalled, he responded: “Finally.”

Telfer was overcome with emotion.

Her excitement, she said, was tempered by a backlash. Parents of Telfer’s competitors objected, saying she had an athletic advantage.

There’s a reason for that. He does have an advantage. It’s called being male.

Citing supposed competitive advantages, but little evidence that transgender athletes were dominating women’s sports, lawmakers in more than 30 states have introduced bills aimed at barring transgender women and girls from competing on teams that match their gender identity.

Bolding mine. These fuckers. Of course they’re not “dominating” all of women’s sports (yet): this has only just gotten started. It doesn’t matter that they’re not dominating all of it: just a little cheating is still cheating.

On the one hand Marion Millar is charged with a crime for disbelief in trans ideology on Twitter, on the other hand Trump is banned from Facebook for two years. Which of the two is really a threat to anyone?

Facebook has extended former President Donald Trump’s suspension for two years and says it will only reinstate him “if the risk to public safety has receded.”

The decision comes after Facebook’s Oversight Board told the company it was wrong to impose an indefinite ban on Trump after the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Facebook says it is setting new rules for public figures in times of civil unrest and violence, “to be applied in exceptional cases such as this.” Trump has received the maximum penalty under those rules, “given the gravity of the circumstances” leading to his suspension. Because the company took his Facebook and Instagram accounts down on Jan. 7, they will remain suspended until at least Jan. 7, 2023.

I’m seeing some “Don’t gloat lefties it will be your turn next.”

That could be true, but it’s far from necessarily true. It’s pattern-detection, but there’s more than one pattern here. The pattern could be: “I know, let’s just silence everything we dislike.” But it could also be: “This guy actually incited a riot that got people killed and came way too close to a literal successful insurrection so we really need to stop giving him this particular channel.” If it’s “everything we dislike” then yes, we’re all vulnerable, but if it’s “he’s an ex-president who incited what almost became an insurrection” then we’re not. Patterns are important, but so are particulars.

Trump says he has the best particulars.

Facebook’s decision “is an insult to the record-setting 75M people, plus many others, who voted for us,” Trump said in an emailed statement, misstating the number of votes he received in the 2020 presidential election. (It was just over 74 million votes.) He also continued his baseless attacks on the legitimacy of the election.

So he’s saying it’s an insult to the people who didn’t vote for him as well as the ones who did. Nah. He tried to spark an insurrection in order to steal the election, so no, I don’t consider myself insulted by measures to curb his ability to try that again.

Do we believe him?

I can’t say I do.

No misogyny in trans activism though. Oh no no no, what would ever give anyone that idea.

Ah yes how dare women be middle aged. Bitches. They should all drop dead at 25 because what possible use are they after that? Stupid old ugly dullards.