It’ll Be Our Little Secret
When we picked up our daughter, it was clear on her face that something was incredibly wrong.
Colorado mother Erin Lee describes her discovery of what her 12-year-old daughter is being taught:
She explained to my daughter that if she is not 100% comfortable in her female body, then she is transgender… She then told the kids that parents aren’t safe and that it’s okay to lie to them about where they are… She explicitly asked the kids who they’re sexually attracted to. There were 11, 12 and 13-year-olds in the room when this happened.
She doubled down, [saying] that parents aren’t safe, that heterosexuality and monogamy are not normal, and she then proceeded to hand out her personal contact information to the kids, encouraging them to connect with her without their parents’ knowledge, by cell phone, by email, and by chat platforms like WhatsApp and Discord, where parents can’t see the communication. She also sends them invites to her secret meetings through these channels.
This predacious stranger, it turns out, had absolutely no qualifications to be speaking with children about sexuality. She’s not a licensed therapist or counsellor, she’s not a full-time teacher in the district. Her only qualification is that she’s a lesbian.
A longer video, which may be somewhat eye-opening, can be found here. And a YouTube version here.
The described events, including subsequent meetings with the self-styled instructor, the school’s principal, and members of the school board – and the inevitable accusations of “homophobia,” “transphobia” and “intolerance” – don’t get any less concerning. One might say creepy.
Update:
In the comments, Mags notes this,
She explained to my daughter that if she is not 100% comfortable in her female body, then she is transgender
And adds,
I didn’t know any 12 year old who was ‘100% comfortable’ in their body. It’s called puberty.
Well, indeed. To seize on children’s normal, sometimes fraught, period of adjustment – during which all kinds of anxieties kick in, and during which you’re not even entirely sure how long your legs are going to be from one week to another – and to steer those pubescent children into believing that they may therefore be transgender – indeed probably are – is grotesque.
Taken at face value, the incident does convey an inversion of reality that’s common among ‘activist’ educators and educational bureaucrats. And so, a “safe space” is one in which middle-school children are ideologically groomed by strangers, presumptuous misfits, conspiratorially, in secret, and while actively avoiding their parents’ knowledge or consent.
As we’ve seen many times, hiding things from parents has become a recurring theme.
Update 2:
“I knew this woman was evil, but I didn’t see this coming,” [Erin Lee] said. “This teacher and Kimberly [Chambers] forced us to pull our child out of school by creating an unsafe environment, then discussed sending Child Protective Services into our home because we pulled her out, at our most vulnerable moment as a family—that they caused.
What, no Duke?
*opens back gate, starts yelling for Duke…*
One each Sophie Lewis (who may have been seen here before) has Deep Thoughts™…
From here. She is apparently also responsible for this hot mess.
I think Barry McGuire was blathering about that last bit back in ’64, so 58 years is a hell of a long verge.
Sophie Lewis (who may have been seen here before) has Deep Thoughts™…
Ms Lewis, our “writer/theorist,” has indeed been mentioned here before.
Ms Lewis, our “writer/theorist,” has indeed been mentioned here before.
Spasiba, I thought she sounded familiar.
Meanwhile, and somewhat related to the power of a gestator*, Madonna has NFTs for sale (Extremely NSFW and bizarre).
*(That, or the worst infections I have ever seen)
“That, or the worst infections I have ever seen”
Nice, er…bush?
*ducks*
Sophie Lewis: that is the highest level of obfuscation of what is essentially murder that could be prevented by using birth control. Note that the dems just voted in the Senate for a bill that would allow abortion up until birth. Celebrate “the beauty & power of a gestator’s decision to unmake life”? Should we also celebrate the beauty and power of a partner’s decision to unmake marriage? How about the beauty and power of a person to unmake the life of that annoying drug dealer on the corner or the pushy boss? And “gestator”? OMG these people are twisted.
As the old joke goes…and the other 22% are liars.
…could be prevented by using birth control. Note that the dems just voted in the Senate for a bill that would allow abortion up until birth.
Regardless of one’s stance on the issue, anyone in any state can go into any drugstore and get the Plan B pills (which, contrary to what the “body positive” clowns say, does not have a weight limit), or go to a doc-in-a-box or Planned Parenthood and get BCPs, diaphragms, IUDs, implants, or condoms for little or nothing, so why abortion seems to be a sacred cow and ne plus ultra of birth control is a bit of a mystery.
And “gestator”? OMG these people are twisted.
“Anthrogenesis”…
I thought she sounded familiar.
And if I draw attention the fact that Ms Lewis, like so many of her Marxoid peers, seems to be… unwell*, I hope you won’t think me ungallant.
*Joan used the word depraved, which isn’t, I think, unfair.
*(That, or the worst infections I have ever seen)
It takes a certain kind of genius to outdo the entire Japanese hentai industry in one go.
Antiwork anthrogenesis deromanticizes care by vindicating withdrawals of gestational labour-power
Those are certainly all words.
and the other 22% are liars
I was going to say “…or are just faking it because it’s fashionable and gets them attention”, but that is a kind of lying, isn’t it.
Read through this article regarding Amazon selling sexually explicit clothes for children. Unless I missed it somehow I didn’t see any mention of concern about the safety of the children who are modeling this stuff. Where are the parents?
I was going to say “…or are just faking it because it’s fashionable and gets them attention”, but that is a kind of lying, isn’t it.
And feeling a compulsion to feign mental illness in order to be noticed, or to win the approval of one’s peers, doesn’t exactly suggest a balanced individual.
@Directrix Gazer
Trent certainly seems all in on Covidiocy as well. His choice of reposts on off-war topics don’t give me a good feel. While familiar with it, I don’t read ChicagoBoyz blog but will try to remember to check it out.
Philosophy student has philosophy student Deep Thoughts™.
Anyone who doesn’t see that these two things are exactly alike is just a transmisogynist.
[ Compiles Friday Ephemera, presses schedule button. ]
“transmisogynist”
Here. Take two and call me in the morning…
Farnsworth: the 78% of genderqueer (whatever the hell that is) have mental health problems is blamed at the link on “inequities” but these people are not oppressed. There are no inequities. Most are white and young. It is just an excuse that has causation backwards.
Re the philosophy student:
But what follows from here? Should all trans women athletes be banned from female sports because of what their birth certificates say, as Florida’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act entails?
It’s not what their birth certificates say, it’s what their chromosomes say, whether they like it or not.
“But what follows from here? Should all trans women athletes be banned from female sports because of what their birth certificates say, as Florida’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act entails?”
The advantage of XY in sports, especially when the testosterone level set as the cutoff is still way higher than for females and transitioning does not affect height etc, is so extreme, that a handful of trans athletes are setting records (swimming, weight-lifting, biking) that no XX female will ever beat. So yes, ban them.
the safety of the children who are modeling this stuff.
My first thought, too, but when I took a second look at the first image of the sweatshirt, it is NOT printed on the shirt. The child is modeling a generic, non-printed shirt and the “slogan” is added via photoshop or other graphics app on the image. This is actually pretty standard with a lot of sellers of custom-message t-shirts and other apparel.
Makes me feel a little better, but when parents find out about what happened to their kids image, maybe they’ll rethink the modeling career.
nice bush
Home-made dildo gone feral?
[ Compiles Friday Ephemera, presses schedule button. ]
Pronounced sked-jule, not shed-yule. [ Glances over, verifies there is a clear path to the door. ]
And if I draw attention the fact that Ms Lewis, like so many of her Marxoid peers, seems to be… unwell*, I hope you won’t think me ungallant.
I do like the appellation “lizardoid aliens”.
[ Glances over, verifies there is a clear path to the door. ]
[ Sound of an enormous spherical boulder rapidly approaching. ]
There is an inversion of morality here. It is not stunning and brave to accept that one got pregnant and raise the child with love, or to resist the temptation to burn things down, or to act with decorum so other people feel comfortable. No. It is stunning and brave to abort, to deface churches, to shoplift, to scream at strangers. Stunning yes, brave no.
Madonna has NFTs for sale (Extremely NSFW and bizarre)
It seems like an excessively involved way to remind the world that she is insane. But perhaps I should be a bit more sympathetic: She built her career on being a skank. As the novelty of her mediocre singing lost its appeal and her looks deteriorated, she became increasingly desperate for public attention and adulation. It’s a terrible thing to base one’s life and career on ephemera, and especially ephemera of little or no value.
Speaking of looks…:
“Still, Claire hated Charlotte Brontë’s comment that she would have given all her talent to be beautiful. That condemned you always to play somebody else’s game—and, when your looks failed—finally to lose.”
No. It is stunning and brave to abort, to deface churches, to shoplift, to scream at strangers. Stunning yes, brave no.
Do not treat these people as fellow citizens who are innocently mistaken. Treat them as enemies.
Another option, the one that I embrace, is to let trans women athletes compete in women’s sports – and to just accept the “unfairness” of doing so. Life is not fair, as the old adage goes, and sports are no exception.
Or trans women athletes could compete in men’s sports. Life is not fair. Or ultimately, remove all sex, weight and height categories and have everyone compete against everyone else. Life is not fair. Deny transgender rights altogether. Life is not fair.
Hey this is fun and easy and goes a long way to explain why extremist ideologies originate in academia.
It seems like an excessively involved way to remind the world that she is insane.
The difficulty is that she no doubt thinks she is a Deep Thinker™, Thought Leader™, and Profound Artist™ and not at all a narcissistic nitwit.
Speaking of looks…
Portland pin up girl (I think).
o extreme, that a handful of trans athletes are setting records (swimming, weight-lifting, biking) that no XX female will ever beat. So yes, ban them.
My former high school coach coached our girls’ team to be the state champions one year. He was, and should be, quite proud of that accomplishment such that he organized a big 40 year anniversary reunion several years ago. Many of us have reunited on Facebook because of that and it has been an generally positive experience. However Coachy, who is now a lawyer (foreshadowing?), could not resist the opportunity at times to spout off on politics and certain details of his personal life…like 23AndMe notifying him that he had a child from a one night stand a couple years just before he started coaching us. He even felt the need to spout off about the recent somewhat controversial firing of the Miami Dolphins (black) head coach. Yet he has said absolutely nothing, pro or con, about this assault on women’s sports, and women’s swimming specifically. He was greatly admired, especially by the girls’ team. They had “We Love Coach ***” shirts back then that the girls wore. He had a legacy that was respected. Now…not so much.
I’m friends with a number of the girls (ironically?) from back then. There’s been some interesting sidestepping in conversations lately. When we get together we mostly talk of those days, especially as we hadn’t been in contact in the intervening 30-40 years much so don’t really know each other’s kids, etc. Lately it seems, in the last 2-3 years, his name comes up less and less often. Except in the mentions of certain things that I was not previously aware of. My being younger and not “one of the girls” back then, I was unaware that he had been fooling around with one of his students, whom he did marry…and divorce. Which might be why he practices family law now. He was so proud to strut around about being the leader of a girls swimming team. But something uncomfortable, something that should be right in his wheelhouse comes up and it’s crickets from him. Which was something else I probably could have predicted back in the day. I was one of the few that saw somewhat through his BS when he made certain tough-guy coaching rules and then dropped them when they became inconvenient. Bah…but that’s all principled…”principled” people these days. Nothing matters and no one cares. Except the lefty harpies. They are the only ones who seem to stand for anything. Is it any wonder that they’re winning.
“Antiwork anthrogenesis deromanticizes care…”
This is how this sounds in my head.
“Antiwork anthrogenesis deromanticizes care…”
The premise is that if you use big words that hide what you are really saying, people will be both impressed and deceived. Instead, it just sounds like gibberish (as Sam captures well). “Anthrogeneis” my ass.
Except the lefty harpies. They are the only ones who seem to stand for anything. Is it any wonder that they’re winning.
The lefty harpies are the only ones who seem to stand for something because their something is the only thing currently allowed to be stood for without consequences. For everything else, there’s risk and trade-offs.
people will be both impressed and deceived.
If Ms Lewis wrote clearly, without all the mannered convolution, people might think her just another messed-up degenerate. Not a lofty “theorist.”
The premise is that if you use big words that hide what you are really saying, people will be both impressed and deceived. Instead, it just sounds like gibberish (as Sam captures well). “Anthrogeneis” my ass.
Except that (most) people are impressed and deceived. That honest, relatively intelligent people see through this is completely irrelevant to its effectiveness on a broader scale. Mock them all you want, the people being impressed are not listening. The dishonest, relatively intelligent people who see through this don’t care and (mostly privately) mock your observation. It’s all about #Winning.
The lefty harpies are the only ones who seem to stand for something because their something is the only thing currently allowed to be stood for without consequences. For everything else, there’s risk and trade-offs.
They are only “allowed” because, be it their obtuseness or whatever (see my previous post just now) they persist. Conservatives…”conservatives” quit once they are ahead…in their own heads. If conservatives…”conservatives” would get some backbone there would be fewer risks overall. Backbone will only come when we insist, even demand it, of each other.
If conservatives…”conservatives” would get some backbone there would be fewer risks overall.
I’ve lost count of the number of “conservatives” and libertarians I’ve known whose ruling principle seemed to be “Don’t fight to win. Instead, always give commies another chance to regroup and try again to destroy us”.
If conservatives…”conservatives” would get some backbone there would be fewer risks overall.
True. But how does someone get “backbone?” I understand that having backbone means having a sense of moral certainty. Many (most?) conservatives lack this certainty. They regard moral issues like self interest and the profit motive as something to be excused or “harnessed” for the greater good.
Until enough people can defend self-interest as a good thing (as it requires things like honesty and integrity, productivity and being just), the downward spiral will continue.
I’ve lost count of the number of “conservatives” and libertarians I’ve known whose ruling principle seemed to be “Don’t fight to win. Instead, always give commies another chance to regroup and try again to destroy us”.
Agree – there do seem to be a lot of those, especially if they are in government, or in any position whatsoever to do anything.
Although the consequences I was thinking of were the ones visited upon the protestors at the Capitol, on Jan 6. Those people stood for something, alone, mocked by the right, and vilified by the left, and as a result, are paying some very high legal and financial prices for their standing up for something. After the Summer of Love and St. George, Code Pink at US Senate hearings, those poor deluded fools thought they too had the right to protest government in a public place. Boy were they ever wrong. And they are the example that makes the little guys think twice before sticking their heads above the trenches. Not everyone has the backbone for pointless slaughter.
And for an example of another sort of mental disease, Stephen King announces that he stands with the Ministry of Truth.
I should clarify that on the small scale, the conservatives do seem to have found some backbones in some cases. The parents in VA who got torqued about what was going on in their schools and booted Governor Blackface. The parents in – SF I think – who got the woke school board booted out. But then you get some national backbone on the right (or not-left) that isn’t the correct kind of backbone, because Mean Tweets or something, and it all seems to fall apart.
True. But how does someone get “backbone?” I understand that having backbone means having a sense of moral certainty. Many (most?) conservatives lack this certainty. They regard moral issues like self interest and the profit motive as something to be excused or “harnessed” for the greater good.
I like to keep the moral issues separate but often they bleed over so let me present the obvious but most uncomfortable (for me at least) issue. This is a point that I often gloss over because…well of my own stupidity but also a lack of backbone facing the other direction. I will try to be concise but I will likely lose some people more conservative than myself with this and…well…let the “hypocrisy” fly…and going with probably my weakest argument for backbone but I think it’s the best example. First and foremost, reserve the moral backbone for the important issues that have considerable support even amongst non-conservatives. One of those biggest issues being abortion. The absolutist position, where even RU486 or whatever is called “murder”, is a political loser. What I find most frustrating about this, and what makes me quite suspicious in regard to our political leaders that speak to it is that were the hard pro-life positions willing to give a little and accept legislation banning late term abortions, I firmly believe that many, many late term abortions would have been avoided and many lives saved. The way those at the most politicized side of the pro-life side of this issue will turn on those willing to compromise makes me question their true commitment to the issue. It is somewhat akin to the GOPe saying they wanted to build the wall yet all that time were somehow unable to get the wall built. Then Trump comes along and we find out they didn’t really want to build the wall. It was all BS. In fact it has been reveled that Bill Kristol and a great number of other “thought leaders” were lying about Roe v. Wade all along, just like with the wall.
The second thing being, make damn sure that you know what you are talking about. Listen to the other side. Not the crazies on the other side, but those with whom you may very much disagree who however at least know their facts. Even if their facts are wrong, you still need to know what they actually believe. But the key here is not to rely on the logic of better facts. Those you keep in the back pocket. Hit with emotion. Not gooey-woozy emotion but something you can back up later with facts. Hit with one then the other.
One HUGE example of this, which frustrates the hell out of me is only getting used in the last couple months is the “Trump told people to drink bleach” hoax. The minute I suspect someone with whom I speak is the least bit unreasonable, I ask “Did Trump tell people to drink bleach”. Don’t let them say it’s irrelevant to the subject at hand. It is HUGELY relevant to understanding what they think a “fact” is. If they reluctantly or unexpectedly agree, keep pushing. Ask why ever so many people, including POTUS and his spokesmorons believe this. Why was this obvious made up BS perpetrated by the news media for a couple of years now. Then hit them with Hunter Biden laptop issues, etc. etc. etc. Push them. Make them defend their position. Many of them will weasel on their position. Make them take a concrete position. Ask them to say one thing that they firmly believe that they think you disagree with them on.
And to be clear, it doesn’t need to be a verbal (or otherwise) brawl but you need to be prepared for one. And don’t be afraid to use any personal dirty tricks if necessary. This BS about “not getting pulled down to their level” has its place among respectable people in an atmosphere of respect. Outside of that, you need to be ready to hit back hard. So far I’ve gotten at least three leftists to give up and delete their facebook accounts. That’s three less people spreading their BS to a wider audience.
Oh, one other thing….be careful get too far into the weeds on stuff. Facts, no matter how solid, that would to them seem to be coming out of nowhere will not help unless tied to some well known, well respected source.
The difficulty is that she no doubt thinks she is a Deep Thinker™, Thought Leader™, and Profound Artist™ and not at all a narcissistic nitwit.
To paraphrase a jibe from an old movie criticism column, just what does Madonna have between her legs that she thinks makes her so special?
So far I’ve gotten at least three leftists to give up and delete their facebook accounts.
Bartender, he drinks free all evening. Send me the tab.
Maybe I should purchase DVD’s before the American left censors it into pointlessness
It’s already started with The Simpsons, I believe, by removing the Michael Jackson episode. I wonder if Apu will be next.
Bartender, he drinks free all evening. Send me the tab.
One was my sister-in-law, the other was my ex-boss…well, boss of my ex-boss. Who technically speaking had been a racist/sexist POS himself, in a pathetic mild sense, but got all wokey-woke after HR came after him many years ago.
Just to be complete…The third guy I didn’t really know.
Wait, what?
It’s already started with The Simpsons…
Sigh. I don’t feel the urge to watch all that often, but maybe should be proactive.
Also: the Yes Minister series seems to be out of print. Damn. Or maybe it’s due to China supply chain problems. I’ve noticed book release dates pushed back because of exactly that.
Wait, what?
What’s next? A woke dramatization of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? The Menace of the Papist Conspiracy? Freemasons ditto?
the Yes Minister series
Watch the Climate Change™ episode if you can find it.
Watch the Climate Change™ episode if you can find it.
Even better than the Euro-Sausage?
I don’t see a climate change episode in the list of episodes.
Regardless, it seems like it may be time to learn what tech is needed to play the DVD’s sold in the UK.
https://climatecite.com/yes-prime-minister-on-climate-change/