A project is undertaken:

Years of “working through” one’s state of heftiness obviously being preferable to actual, you know, weight loss. Which, one suspects, might have taken less time. But hey, we mustn’t reach for the stars.

Fearlessly, heroically, said garment was duly rocked. The result, needless to say, is “cool-girl style vibes” – a “body-baring sheer look,” complete with what I’m assured are a corset and “strappy, rhinestone heels.”

Other perspectives are available.

When not “pushing boundaries” and invoking the feminism of taking up space “unapologetically,” the author, Ms Margie Plus, is a “confidence activist” and a musician. Those with a taste for pitch correction and overstretched PVC can behold her creativity here.

Via Mr Worstall.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Via Mr Muldoon, a tale of what sounds like mid-life contrivance:

Imagine the fun.

The contriver in question is Amanda Elend, a scrupulously progressive woman whose list of causes is extensive, if somewhat predictable. She tells us,

Ah, the basis of any sound marriage.

Coinciding, oddly enough, with the big four-oh:

The idea of having an identity – one with boutique status and complications that have to be danced around in an affirming manner – is terribly important to Ms Elend. And as we’ve seen, self-definition is very in right now, and quite competitive. Plus, there’s so much potential for chiding and rituals of atonement:

Ms Elend’s children, aged six and nine, were also informed of their mother’s elevation to the role of Fascinating Being:

The word husband is used intermittently. Sometimes it’s partner.

You see, every small child wants a mom whose new pronouns have to be memorised, and who reveals that their family is suddenly conditional, one option among many. A mom who, in middle-age, is still on a journey of self-absorption – sorry, self-discovery – and who could at any moment become a radically different, and altogether more fashionable, kind of entity. Quite what a six-year-old is supposed to do with such information, beyond feeling confused or insecure, is unclear.

To ruminate deeply on the issues of the day:

Among the Judge’s supposedly harmful and traumatising views are his belief that dysmorphic men and autogynephile perverts should not venture into ladies’ toilets and changing rooms, and a refusal to use the preferred pronouns of a transgender sex offender, an enthusiast of pornography featuring children.

Other screamed objections to this “cis-het white man” included the outrage of his being brought “into the classroom building where our students have to go every day to be able to get this degree and participate in this community.” Apparently, mere proximity – even sought-out proximity – to a person with whom they disagree causes students of law, would-be intellectuals, to “feel unsafe.” Demurral, it seems, results in “tearing the fabric of this community.” This, from students and staff who accused the Judge of “wanting an echo chamber.”

Video of this performative, self-applauding wankery – by students and Ms Steinbach, a supposedly grown woman – can be found at the link above, with a longer version here.  Of the four university administrators present at the event – acting dean of student affairs Jeanne Merino, associate director of student affairs Holly Parish, student affairs coordinator Megan Brown, and Ms Steinbach – none saw fit to ask that the invited guest be allowed to actually speak.

Stanford, since you ask, is ranked the second most prestigious law school in the United States, with annual tuition a mere $66,000.

Update, via the comments:

“This is not okay,” says she.

“What the hell’s wrong with you?” Variation on a theme.

What’s striking in both cases, and doubtless in countless others, is the almost farcical air of entitlement. The ludicrous harrumphing. Sort of, “How dare you physically stop me from stealing your property!”

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Via Mr Muldoon in the comments, a shocking revelation:

Not so much overlooked, I think, as warning signs heeded.

As we’ve seen many times, pretending to be a they does rather send a message regarding neuroticism, pretentiousness, captiousness, and the likelihood of disruption. If job applicants in effect announce that they expect anyone nearby to indulge their tedious psychodrama and pretend along with them, this will not always be met with enthusiasm. Demanding that others lie – and ignore or contradict the evidence right in front of them, daily – is, in short, rude. An act of hostility.

Contrary to Ashton Jackson, the author of the article quoted above, and contrary to Ryan McGonagill, the author of the report cited in said article, it’s not a matter of “how much work there is to do around diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging in the workplace.” And I very much doubt it’s about pronoun-stipulators finding themselves disqualified for “being authentic.” It’s more a matter of whether employers would be wise to hire, and trust, people who signal their narcissism, their unrealism, and their inclination to manipulate others.

And employers would do well to remember that The Pronoun Game, so much in fashion, is very often an attempt to bully others, to exert power, by making them say things, publicly and repeatedly, that they don’t for a minute believe to be true.