Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘LGBTQ’

Immolating Parental Rights and Overruling Truth – OffGuardian

Posted by M. C. on April 12, 2021

How the Jailing of a BC Father Shows the Extremes of Transgender Ideology and the Failure of the Media

Jenn Smith

Abstract: There are important parallels between the 1963 case of the self-immolation of Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thích Quảng Đức and the recent case in British Columbia (2021) of a father who was forced against his will by the court and the state to facilitate the pharmaceutical “sex reassignment” of his teenage daughter. Both cases speak to the desperation of people whose rights were trampled by an invasive all-powerful state and who were ignored by an indifferent and corrupt establishment-beholden media.

A Strange and Distant Memory.

“[Civil Disobedience] seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks to so dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.” Martin Luther King Jr.

The story of Thích Quảng Đức and the now infamous photograph taken by Malcolm Browne of his shocking act of self-immolation during the Vietnam War, has fascinated me from the first moment I saw it.

The photo (see below) shows Quảng Đức, a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk, who lit himself on fire as part of a planned political protest at a busy Saigon road intersection on June 11, 1963. It was truly one of the most visually and emotionally stunning media events of the 20th century. Then-President John F. Kennedy, who would only live another five months himself, said of the photo:

No news picture in history has generated so much emotion around the world.

Unfortunately, the Vietnam War would produce many other startling photographs before it was over.

Photo taken by Associated Press photographer Malcolm Browne, on June 11, 1963, Saigon, South Vietnam.

While many disturbing images came out of the Vietnam War, there was something unique and disturbingly surreal about the Quảng Đức image and what it represented. Unlike few other images in human history, the image of Quảng Đức sitting calmly in the middle of an inferno of his own creation caused much of the world to stop and look. Other now-famous images from that era, almost without exception, portrayed things being done to somebody, in this case it was somebody doing something terrible to himself.

The impact of this photo globally was overwhelming. For a moment people all around the world simultaneously put their hands on their mouths and went silent. What brings a man to do something so horrific to himself and yet with such apparent calm lucidity?

One of the few reporters that bothered to attend the event, David Halberstam of the New York Times, wrote

I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think … As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him.

Why would somebody light themselves on fire for a political cause? What could possibly justify such an extreme act of self-destruction? Who was this person and what motivated him?

In order to understand the case of Thich Quảng Đức and how it relates to the case I am involved with today in British Columbia, you must understand the political landscape upon which it transpired.

Quảng Đức and his fellow monks had been trying desperately for some time to get a corrupt and seemingly indifferent global media to focus on the religious oppression of Buddhists in Vietnam by the Catholic-dominated Diem government. A ban on the flying of religious flags led to a large protest by Buddhists in the city of Huế on May 8, 1963. Some nine thousand people attended the protest which was eventually rocked by an explosion of uncertain origin followed by police and military opening fire on the crowd, killing 9 and wounding many others, including two children who were crushed underneath the wheels of government armored personnel carriers.

Buddhist protestors in South Vietnam in 1963 during the so-called “Buddhist Crisis” that led to the self-immolation of Thích Quảng Đức.

The government blamed the Huế massacre on the Vietcong and the global media either ignored or failed to give the event the attention it deserved. The US ambassador to South Vietnam sided with the Diem government and called government explanations “objective, accurate, and fair,” which was repeated by much of the global media.

The dishonesty and indifference of the media and government became a very pressing and frustrating problem for the Buddhists of Vietnam. The government was now openly slaughtering Buddhist protestors and the media was either ignoring or spinning it in favor of the government.

Indeed, the aforementioned David Halberstam of the New York Times, who would be one of the few journalists to attend the press gathering in Saigon on June 11, had himself subtly implied that the Hue protest might be linked to Communists and that the casualties were caused by an agent provocateur in the crowd rather than government forces.

How could Buddhists get a largely indifferent media to give their situation the attention it deserved? The problem, of course, was solved quite dramatically, but it was not a spontaneous event and only a handful of international reporters were in attendance that day.

The self-immolation of Quảng Đức was part of a strategic plan to force the international media to pay attention. If you look at the photo closely you will see other monks with cameras walking around. This event was carefully staged.

The plan did work, the world media did pay attention, because it was hard to ignore something so dramatic as a man lighting himself on fire in order to protest injustice. Several copycats immolated themselves later that year as well but did not get the same level of attention and in fact led to one official in Vietnam saying that she would…

clap [my] hands at seeing another monk barbecue show.

The flippant attitude was not shared by the rest of the world, and Quảng Đức’s sacrifice ultimately set off a chain of events that led to the end of the Diem government, but one must understand the key to this event was that it forced the global media to pay attention, and that was what caused a shift in public opinion and ultimately helped bring about change.

The story of Thích Quảng Đức returns to me again today because, ironically, a case I have been a part of in British Columbia (BC), Canada, shares some of the same basic features — although not as extreme or visually startling in its outcome as the case of Quảng Đức, the case of a father that has become known by the pseudonym of “Clark Kent” and referred to in court documents under the anonymized initials of “CD”, and who was forced to facilitate the pharmaceutical “sex reassignment” of his daughter against his will and his reaction to that, raises many of the same questions and points to some of the very same motivations and answers.

The Rise of Transgender Ideology and Its Resistance.

“Never has our future been more unpredictable, never have we depended so much on political forces that cannot be trusted to follow the rules of common sense and self-interest – forces that look like sheer insanity, if judged by the standards of other centuries.” Hannah Arendt

On March 20, 2021, my phone rang and I was immediately greeted by a recorded message from a British Columbia (BC) remand correctional facility, essentially a jail that holds prisoners until they can face trial. A disclaimer was read to me that the call would be recorded and subject to review. I had to agree to the terms before the call would be connected. I did so and the voice of a man I had first met in December of 2018 said, “hello, Jenn?”

It was a surreal experience for me because I knew the man well and I knew he was no threat to anybody, and yet here he was calling me from inside a jail. While it had happened sooner than expected, I was in fact not entirely surprised that this tragic situation had finally come to pass, as I had seen it coming for some time. But to understand the travesty and tragedy that has occurred in British Columbia today — which should echo through the corridors of every legislature and courtroom in the world — I will need to take the reader back to the start for a brief summary of how the now-infamous case of AB v CD came to pass and my direct involvement in it.

Brief Background

First, for readers that may not be familiar with this case or myself, I should begin by providing some brief background information, not only on this case but on myself as well and the cause I have been fighting for, as I have been directly involved in this story since before it was in front of any judge, and I indeed wrote the very first story on this case in December of 2018. While I do not want to get too deep into all the complicated details, I believe this to be one of the most important legal and political cases in the world today and as such it deserves some due space and attention.

The case of AB v CD points not only to the most concerning elements of modern transgender ideology and politics, but to the complete failure of both the fourth and fifth estates (the media) in alerting the public to injustice and defending the truth. The act of desperation that ultimately transpired in the case of AB v CD can be shown to have been fueled by the same basic frustrations and forces that drove Thích Quảng Đức to his act of desperation almost six decades ago, but that will be illustrated in due time.

I am a 56-year-old transgender-identified activist. I am male. I present to the world in sometimes androgynous and sometimes feminine ways, but I have never claimed my presentation does or could ever change my sex. While it may be true that at one point I wanted to be a female, I was never able to get to the level of physical reality denial that is necessary to reject one’s biological sex, so I settled for playing the gender role without denying reality or insisting others do so. I am okay with just being male and being transgender, with “transgender” simply referring to a pattern of behavior. I believe this is the only healthy way to express transgender identity, not only for oneself, but for society as well, and the following story will illustrate for you the dangers of doing otherwise. We can play any part we want in this world but for the sake of everybody (including ourselves) we must always remain tethered to truth, particularly when it comes to law and the education of our youth.

I became involved in the political debate regarding transgender issues almost four years ago when I began using my academic background to research and write articles critical of what I call “the transgender agenda,” namely, this shift we have seen in society towards claiming males can be females (and visa versa), and the concerning indoctrination and confusion of our children in that process, not to mention the disturbing totalitarian undertones that seem to be driving it and which I discussed in my widely read essay Synanon, the Brainwashing “Game,” and Modern Transgender Activism.

Being transgender myself, I of course have never opposed the right for adults to dress or express as they like in the world, but I believe there are too many pressures and confusions associated with this behavior for minors to fully process and understand, as such I have always maintained that changing gender is something best reserved for adults. I further believe that particularly the medical or pharmaceutical transitioning (“sex reassignment”) of minors should be illegal because it has permanent life-altering consequences. I regard the mass chemical sterilization of our youth via the use of “gender affirming” drugs as a kind of medical crime, particularly when you understand the demographics of the youths identifying as transgender.

There has been a massive increase in the number of minors identifying as transgender over the last five or six years. This fact on its own is cause for serious concern, but it becomes even more alarming when you begin analyzing just what children are identifying as transgender. According to one study, 52% of “gender dysphoric” youths (minors identifying as the opposite sex) had one or more DSM-listed psychiatric conditions in addition to gender dysphoria. Numerous other studies have made the same basic findings, in other words, these are psychologically troubled youths.

Studies will vary, but researchers testing gender dysphoric youths have reported autism spectrum disorder prevalence at rates ranging from 8% at the low end to a staggering 54.2% at the high end. These numbers however do not become alarming until you realize that the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder in the general population is estimated by the CDC to be 1.7%. For autism rates in transgender youths to average around 30% or even 8% should be shocking to all thinking adults.

No serious person would suggest gender dysphoria causes autism, and the only reasonable answer is that these are psychologically vulnerable children that are falling victim to what is essentially a predatory ideology that turns them into life long pharmaceutical customers. But it gets even worse than this.

I was a foster child in the province of British Columbia (BC) during the 1970s and went through multiple different homes, and I was thus horrified to learn that BC’s leading gender specialist suggested that half of his 1000 minor patients came from the BC Ministry of Child and Family Development, in other words foster children and youths otherwise in the care of the Ministry. While we will not know how those numbers break down with certainty until we can get the subpoenaing power of a National Inquiry which I have been pushing for now for two years, I found this information highly alarming and it has made this subject extraordinarily personal for me.

See the rest here

Jenn Smith is a writer, a public speaker, and a political activist. He lives in British Columbia, Canada. He can be contacted via his blog or his Facebook page.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dear Biden Supporters, It’s Not Too Late to Secede | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on November 20, 2020

Justin Murray

Four years ago, I wrote an open letter to the dismayed supporters of Hillary Clinton in the wake of her loss to Donald Trump. Before celebrating Biden’s win in this year’s election, it’s important to reflect back on the past four years. Remember your frustration, your anger, your fear of someone you believed was unhinged and dangerous being in control of all of the immense powers that are now vested with the federal government of the United States of America. Now ask yourselves this: Do you want that to happen again?

Despite the Biden victory, the Democrat Party at the time of this writing not only failed to change the makeup of the Senate, they lost ground in the House and even lost a governor to the Republicans. Further, the Biden win was not delivered by an outpouring of support by the coveted minority demographics, which Trump won in larger numbers across every ethnic category compared to the prior election, including an astounding doubling of the LGBTQ vote, but by a shift in the voting patterns of white men. Couple this with the complete lack of any real enthusiasm for the prospect of a Biden presidency, and it’s apparent that the Democrat president-elect didn’t win on the strength of the Democrat platform but because enough people were put off by President Trump’s abrasive behavior.

In other words, the Blue Wave not only failed to manifest, it turned into a slightly lower tide.

Because of these trends, short of something major happening over the next four years or the Republicans nominating another Donald Trump–style candidate, a Biden presidency is looking to be a one and done, with a Republican likely finding his way back to office in 2025.

But why is it I’m here, raining on your parades? Simple, it’s to give you advice on how to blunt the pain of this inevitability.


The best way to remove the pain of a future political opponent controlling the machine is to shut down the machine. And by this I mean radically decentralize. As it stands, very little done at the level of DC cannot be done, and done better, at the state level. As it stands, most federal spending is little more than collecting taxes from states and sending it back with instructions on how to use it. Nothing needs to be recreated since the state organs manage the day-to-day operation of all the various programs, and there would be an immediate benefit once the federal bureaucracy has been removed from the equation. All they’re doing, after all, is tumbling the money the state could collect directly itself and skimming off the expenses for all the bureaucrats.

For example, Social Security can be handled by the individual states. Despite the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) claims to the contrary, Social Security is entirely bankrupt and has no assets beyond promises to tax future workers to cover claims, either directly through the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) taxes or through the general fund via the Treasury bonds it claims as assets. Since the assets are fake IOUs, there isn’t anything to transfer back to the individual States. The only difference between the current method and a state-run method is that the tax collection is no longer funneled through a federal-level agency.

Further, by decentralizing, individual states would no longer be at the whims of an unfavored politician’s decisions in Washington. For instance, if the federal government didn’t have a Department of Fish and Wildlife and didn’t have a Bureau of Land Management owning vast tracts of land in states like Washington, the recent stress over the removal of the gray wolf from the federal endangered species listing wouldn’t exist. Certainly, the states could maintain protection of the wolf on state lands, but these laws are not applicable to federal lands. By closing the US Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Bureau of Land Management and returning all the federal lands to the states, Washington could better manage and protect the gray wolf population without having to hope for a friendly administration roughly twenty-five hundred miles away to agree with them.

From a strategic standpoint, Biden could easily do this, as he could force Republicans to accept these small-government proposals to maintain the illusion that they’re supporters of a small federal government and states’ rights. A Democrat president and Republican Senate is a perfect setup for this as Republicans will be forced to agree to maintain their position as small-government proponents (despite immediately abandoning it when in power).

Why, in other words, would you want some future administration not friendly toward your interests controlling the current government, let alone some future expansion you’ve dreamed about with a Biden presidency? Instead of asking him to push for universal healthcare or vast federal law enforcement reforms, why not demand he eliminate that interference from DC so you can easily do it yourself at home? These new agencies will just end up in the hands of a Republican president within the next decade.

Consider Secession

The problem with decentralization is that anything decentralized can be easily centralized again. Closing the Department of Homeland Security or the Drug Enforcement Agency could just be a mere speed bump when a future administration deigns to build them back up again. A much more permanent solution would be to secede from the Union and go it as an independent nation. This way, residents of California, with their lopsided support of Biden, aren’t going to have to hope that their preferred candidate isn’t tainted by the corruption by party members in Pennsylvania. Californians also wouldn’t have to rely on the unlikely prospect of a uniquely unlikable candidate like Donald Trump driving a large percentage of the electorate to the Dems in Wisconsin. Rather, by seceding, with the blessings of a friendly president, the states along the Pacific Coast and in the Northeast can safely insulate themselves from fickle Ohio and Arizona voters who can easily swing national elections to the other party.

The United States is already uniquely situated for a clean split as governance structures exist at the State level. As noted above, States are already handling nearly everything done at the DC level, so the institutions exist to handle this. Breaking up into ten to twelve different nations would not only be a relatively smooth process, it would lead to a happy electorate, as they’re no longer having to compete with culturally different people all over the continent for central policy. California will no longer have to hope that a friendly administration in DC will keep high-speed rail funded while losing the local funding it could have used to the federal maw.

Further, this idea is no longer a radical notion pushed by a few Texans or weird “The South Shall Rise Again” types. It’s gaining traction on all segments of the political spectrum, so it will be just that much easier to gain agreement on a mutual split.

A Golden Opportunity

Biden supporters, this is your opportunity. Instead of endeavoring to gain a short-term endorphin rush of winning, you should push for either radical decentralization or full secession. By doing so, you’ll set yourself up to never have to worry about a Donald Trump coming to power and save yourself another four to eight years of heartache and stress. Can you imagine a world where you’ll never have to worry about a Republican taking over again? That world is not possible if you insist on growing federal power and keeping the Union intact. If anything, that will only make the next Republican administration that much more unbearable for you to live under. Author:

Justin Murray

Justin Murray received his MBA in 2014 from the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Left Is Coming For Christian Schools | The American Conservative

Posted by M. C. on October 23, 2020

Be terrified of this monstrous Catholic jurist, say liberal Catholics (C-SPAN)

Rod Dreher

Oh my God, Amy Coney Barrett is a believing Catholic! The Associated Press brings the shocking news:

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett served for nearly three years on the board of private Christian schools that effectively barred admission to children of same-sex parents and made it plain that openly gay and lesbian teachers weren’t welcome in the classroom.

The policies that discriminated against LGBTQ people and their children were in place for years at Trinity Schools Inc., both before Barrett joined the board in 2015 and during the time she served.

The three schools, in Indiana, Minnesota and Virginia, are affiliated with People of Praise, an insular community rooted in its own interpretation of the Bible, of which Barrett and her husband have been longtime members. At least three of the couple’s seven children have attended the Trinity School at Greenlawn, in South Bend, Indiana.

The AP spoke with more than two dozen people who attended or worked at Trinity Schools, or former members of People of Praise. They said the community’s teachings have been consistent for decades: Homosexuality is an abomination against God, sex should occur only within marriage and marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

Interviewees told the AP that Trinity’s leadership communicated anti-LGBTQ policies and positions in meetings, one-on-one conversations, enrollment agreements, employment agreements, handbooks and written policies — including those in place when Barrett was an active member of the board.

Read it all. 

Let me explain something to the Associated Press: there is this thing called the Roman Catholic Church, and it teaches that marriage is only between one man and one woman. It also teaches that sex outside of a lawful marriage is sinful. It teaches that homosexual acts are sinful. It has done this for almost 2,000 years.

This is not what liberals believe today — and not just liberals. Many people who identify as conservative have shed the historic Christian teaching about homosexuality. Today comes news that Pope Francis has endorsed civil unions for LGBT people. Even so, he has not declared that Catholic teaching about homosexuality and marriage has changed. Still, yes, we have to acknowledged that society at large has changed decisively on this issue. Ours is a post-Christian society, in that most people in it do not understand the Bible as the story by which they live their lives.

But some of us still do. Amy Coney Barrett is one of them. If she is anything like me, she bears no ill will towards gays and lesbians, and counts some as friends. She doesn’t think gays are icky, or anything like that. Her personal and professional life would be easier if she simply accepted what the world now believes. But she tries to be intellectually honest, and she knows that one cannot simply throw aside an authoritative Biblical teaching because it doesn’t suit contemporary cultural beliefs. A believer — certainly a faithful Catholic or Orthodox — is bound to submit to these teachings whether or not she understands them or wishes they weren’t there. Truth is objective, though it must be subjectively appropriated and lived out. A number of Catholics are really members of the Church of What’s Happening Now, and they’ve enjoyed lucrative careers because of it; Amy Coney Barrett is not one of them. If she is confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, it will be despite the fact that people like these AP reporters tried to tear her down for her fidelity to her Church’s teaching.

Look at the way this AP story reads:

Nearly all the people interviewed for this story are gay or said they have gay family members. They used words such as “terrified,” “petrified” and “frightening” to describe the prospect of Barrett on the high court. Some of them know Barrett, have mutual friends with her or even have been in her home dozens of times. They describe her as “nice” or “a kind person,” but told the AP they feared others would suffer if Barrett tries to implement People of Praise’s views on homosexuality on the Supreme Court.

Terrified! Petrified! Frightening! Even though Judge Barrett is a nice and kind person, she’s really a smiley-faced monster, you see.


Turpin-King said she has briefly met Barrett, and they share mutual friends. Some of her husband’s family members are still members of the People of Praise community, and she loves and respects them. Many of Trinity’s teachers were wonderful to her. But the thought of Barrett sitting on the Supreme Court scares her.

“I am deeply concerned about my queer friends. I’m concerned about my own children,” Turpin-King said. “From what I experienced in People of Praise, as a student of one of their schools, everyone needs to be petrified, frankly.”

Everyone! There is not the slightest attempt in this long story to explain why the Catholic Church believes what it does, just to give the other side, and to give readers context for why People of Praise has the policies it does. The reporters know what they’re doing here. They called a well-known left-wing Catholic historian at Villanova, who helped paint a picture of People of Praise as cranky weirdos outside the Church’s mainstream.

Look, there’s nothing wrong with pointing out what ACB believes as a Catholic, even controversial stuff. But this AP story is propaganda. It’s not going to keep her from being confirmed and sworn in, but it is important for the rest of us to understand it as a glimpse into the mindset of liberal elites, as the Catholic journalist Tim Carney tweeted this morning:

Of course they will. Do not ever believe them when they say they won’t. There are good Democrats who say it won’t happen, and they really believe it — I’m thinking of my friend Michael Wear — but the logic of what the Democrats believe, and the force of its activist wing, is going to go that way. The Left sees no goal as more important than non-discrimination, at least not against its preferred victim groups (racial minorities, LGBTs, and others). If they have to smash religious liberty to achieve it, they will, as soon as they are able. Even though they have won the culture war in every significant aspect, they will not be satisfied until they have rubbed the noses of the vanquished in the dirt.

Last year, in my travels (remember when we could do that?), I found myself in conversation with an experienced religious liberty litigator, a fellow Christian. We were talking about how frustrating President Trump was on this or that. I said to the lawyer, “I feel, though, that as this country moves further away from Christianity, the federal judiciary is going to be the last line of defense Christian schools and churches have — and that’s why it’s important to make sure we get good judges who respect religious liberty on the courts, while we can.” The lawyer strongly affirmed this.

I have pretty much decided to vote third party for president (American Solidarity Party). Trump has my state locked up anyway, so I’m thinking that I would like to cast a vote in favor of a party whose platform I really believe in, as opposed to voting for the lesser of two evils, and choosing between the evil of two lessers. Reading this AP story this morning, though, has reminded me again of the contempt the left has for people like me, and our institutions, which they will demonize as a precursor to destroying them. The story has re-centered me on the critical importance of the federal judiciary as likely the last thing standing between Christian schools and institutions, and the progressive mob. I’m going to be thinking about this all the way through to election day, and I hope you Christian readers — especially those in swing states — will too. Though my vote really doesn’t matter in my state, this issue might move it to Trump anyway, given the quality of his judicial appointments. If I were in a swing state, this AP story, and what it symbolizes, would seal the deal for me.

This is who the Democrats are. If the party’s leaders and activists didn’t despise traditional religion so much, I would be open to voting for them (as I’ve voted twice for Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards of Louisiana). But we can’t afford to look at the world through rose-colored glasses. If the Democrats take power and hold it, it will only be a matter of time before they come after traditional Christian (and Orthodox Jewish, and Islamic) schools on anti-discrimination grounds. When they say today that they would never do such a thing, don’t believe them. They’re relying on the Law of Merited Impossibility: It will never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it. 

UPDATE: If they destroy Christian schools, where will parents be able to educate their children away from this kind of propaganda, which is presented to fifth graders in California public schools:

UPDATE.2: I know y’all are all waiting for me to say something about Pope Francis and civil unions. Patience, my preciouses; I have been very busy all day doing book stuff, and I am about to head down to the bayou to give a speech. I haven’t even had time to approve comments yet. I’ll get to it, promise — though I won’t be home till later tonight.

about the author

Rod Dreher is a senior editor at The American Conservative. He has written and edited for the New York Post, The Dallas Morning News, National Review, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, the Washington Times, and the Baton Rouge Advocate. Rod’s commentary has been published in The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, the Weekly Standard, Beliefnet, and Real Simple, among other publications, and he has appeared on NPR, ABC News, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and the BBC. He lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with his wife Julie and their three children. He has also written four books, The Little Way of Ruthie Leming, Crunchy Cons, How Dante Can Save Your Life, and The Benedict Option.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

No, Salon, Hallmark movies aren’t ‘fascist,’ but your magazine proves that wokeness is a new form of ‘cultural imperialism’ — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on January 3, 2020

In August, CNN reported on a study entitled “Robots and Racism” released in 2018 by a team at the Human Interface Technology Lab in New Zealand. The article asserted that it was problematic that most robots were manufactured out of white plastic, since it smacked of imperialism and white supremacy.

Michael Rectenwald

When Hallmark pulled ads featuring lesbian wedding couples, the network was denounced as ‘homophobic.’ But even after agreeing to woke activist demands, its movies were equated with ‘fascist propaganda’ by the media.

The latest in a line of targets that includes the Peloton exercise equipment company – whose stationary bicycle ad raised the ire of feminists for allegedly fat-shaming women – Hallmark has been savaged by the woke brigade. In December, One Million Moms – a division of religious conservative group the American Family Association – pressured Hallmark to remove four ads that end with lesbian wedding couples engaging in the traditional deal-sealing kiss.

The family entertainment network complied – until, that is, the woke crowd caught on to Hallmark’s “wrongthink.” An LGBTQ+ boycott of Hallmark was called – as if the LGBTQ+ community had been avid Hallmark card or movie fans in the first place. But facing the bombardment, Hallmark soon succumbed to the LGBTQ+ activists led by GLAAD.

Hallmark issued a tweet reversing its decision not to air the same-sex wedding ads, and went even further: “Hallmark will be working with GLAAD to better represent the LGBTQ community across our portfolio of brands.”

However, the woke media did not relent. In one of several examples of piling on, Salon politics writer Amanda Marcotte argued that the “family-friendly” channel’s sentimental movies “constitute the platonic ideal of fascist propaganda.” Whatever that means. Who knew that fascist propaganda followed a platonic ideal? Marcotte further suggested that Hallmark’s holiday programming is particularly fascistic: “It’s like watching ‘The Stepford Wives,’ but scarier, since the evil plot to replace normal people with robots is never actually revealed.”

Could it be that Hallmark’s “evil plot to replace human beings with robots is never revealed” because it doesn’t exist? Or that Hallmark’s “very narrow, sentimentalized version of Christmas” doesn’t equal fascist propaganda? Typical of woke rhetoric, it’s Marcotte’s expression that constitutes propaganda, as well as including a logical fallacy. Because some fascist propaganda is sentimental, Marcotte assumes that all sentimentality is fascist. Yeah. Only in the warped worldview of woke hysterics.

The 1944 Italian poster below represents real fascist propaganda. It features a child menaced by the hands of three “evil” forces – portrayed as threats during the interwar years – Judaism, communism, and freemasonry. The head of an innocent and terrified child is lodged within the boot of Italy and featured on a black background of doom. Notice how sentiment is used to elicit bigotry and fear.


To suggest that Hallmark’s “patented holiday season schmaltz” remotely resembles such graphic propaganda represents the hallmark of political illiteracy and historical myopia.

Rather than demonstrating that “empty-headed kitsch fits neatly in the authoritarian worldview,” Salon’s Amanda Marcotte shows that wokeness itself tends toward cultural imperialism, or “the imposition by one usually politically or economically dominant community of various aspects of its own culture onto another, nondominant community.”

Hallmark joins the corpses that continue to mount in the killing fields of wokeness. In January 2019 in the UK, Harry Miller – whose situation and name recall the great American playwrightHenr Arthur Miller and the sex-scandalous American novelist Henry Miller – was investigated by the police for retweeting a trans-skeptical limerick on Twitter. Although not (yet) a criminal, Miller was informed that he was under investigation for thought crimes: “We need to check your thinking,” the Kafkaesque officer told the dock worker.

The casualties from 2019 include not only cultural but also scientific and technological quarry as well. In December, a group of 16 computer scientists – from labs at universities including Cambridge, Oxford, the University of Toronto, and others – wrote a letter to the journal Nature to denounce the use of the term “quantum supremacy” in an article on the “superiority” of quantum over “classical” computing. The use of the word “supremacy,” they wrote, “risks sustaining divisions in race, gender and class. We call for the community to use ‘quantum advantage’ instead.” It’s a wonder that the word “classical” wasn’t also denounced for being “Eurocentric.”

In August, CNN reported on a study entitled “Robots and Racism” released in 2018 by a team at the Human Interface Technology Lab in New Zealand. The article asserted that it was problematic that most robots were manufactured out of white plastic, since it smacked of imperialism and white supremacy.

The litany could go on and on. Soon cumulus clouds will be denounced for their puffy white faces and snow for its white supremacist implications.

The seizure of Hallmark by woke activism amounts to nothing less than the “colonization” of yet another frontier by cultural imperialists. Not satisfied with their incursion into and control over the vast majority of culture, including social media, establishment media, establishment news, and 99.9 percent of Hollywood products, they demand that every expression of humanity conforms to their desiderata.

What will become of Hallmark now that it has agreed not only to run ads with enraptured gay, lesbian, and transgender couples but also that it will bow to the demands for the “inclusion” of everything that its current viewers and card buyers apparently oppose? According to the hegemonic ethos of wokeness, such niche markets catering to specific groups must now be abandoned.

Perhaps it’s due time that traditionalists turn woke rhetoric against wokeness itself and “reclaim their traditional culture” in the next wave of cultural decolonization.

Be seeing you

Christmas Hallmark movie Bingo! | Holidays | Pinterest ...



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Drag Queen Story Hour for Young Children Celebrated as Part of LGBTQ ‘Big Read’ Event

Posted by M. C. on September 24, 2019

Be sure to renew your library card today!

Agoraphobia is an anxiety disorder characterized by symptoms of anxiety in situations where the person perceives their environment to be unsafe with no easy way to escape. Wikipedia

I feel it coming on.

by Dr. Susan Berry

The Hartford Public Library in Connecticut will host two Drag Queen Story Hour events Saturday as part of the library’s celebration of its LGBTQ “Big Read” campaign.

The controversial drag queen events have stirred tensions in many cities throughout the country, such as Chula Vista, California, where an LGBT-activist city official said groups protesting the event were people who hold “white supremacist beliefs.”

Hartford Library CEO Bridget Quinn told the Hartford Courant she is prepared for any protests against the event.

The website of the Drag Queen Story Hour, an event targeting toddlers and young children, specifically states the purpose of the events is to provide children with “glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.”

Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, told Breitbart News the events create gender confusion for children.

“Grotesquely oversexualized and misogynistic drag queens should not be teaching gender confusion to children in public libraries,” he said. “Traditional-minded people and feminists alike ought to oppose the false stereotypes of women being peddled to children by these events. “…

The Drag Queen Story Hour in Hartford will include a question-and-answer period, a craft activity, and opportunity for the children to take a photo with the drag queens, Giganta Smalls and Robin Fierce.

“A drag queen isn’t something you see every day unless you go to shows or watch ‘Ru Paul’s Drag Race,’” Fierce told the Courant. “But we are people, we are here doing our art form and just like any other kind of performer we are palatable to everyone and just want everyone to have a fun time.”

Be seeing you

Drag queens Athena Kills (C) and Scalene Onixxx arrive to awaiting adults and children for Drag Queen Story Hour at Cellar Door Books in Riverside, California on June 22, 2019. - Athena and Scalene, their long blonde hair flowing down to their sequined leotards and rainbow dresses, are reading to …

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »