Lifted from the comments, via pst314:

Ms Watson, now not so young herself, tells us,

The specifics of this pressure, allegedly pervasive, overpowering and entirely social in nature, are unclear. No examples are forthcoming. The physical realities of reproduction are, however, less mysterious.

The idea that Ms Watson, or likely anyone she knows, any of her multi-millionaire celebrity peers, is being pressured by others, by a brutal society, to get married and presumably have children – and that such hypothetical pressure constitutes “violence” – is, shall we say, difficult to believe.

It seems rather more likely that Ms Watson, 35, is, like many of her self-involved peers, struggling to process her own age-related anxieties. At 35, that fertility window is closing quite rapidly and options that have perhaps been taken for granted, or deferred as insufficiently fashionable, will soon expire.

As someone quips in reply,

Update, via the comments:

EmC adds,

Well, quite. I don’t follow these things closely, but my impression is that there’s a class dynamic in play. That, for some, getting married and having children during the window of optimal viability is now considered low-status, proletarian, somewhat déclassé, especially among women with progressive leanings.

As if this time were obviously better spent pursuing a statusful career and asserting some womanly empowerment, or, in Ms Watson’s case, indulging in activism of a faintly ludicrous kind, claiming to be “self-partnered” rather than single, and insisting that bewigged men are somehow women.

My impression of any social pressure, any class convention, is that it goes in a different direction to the one being claimed. At least among ladies of Ms Watson’s political persuasion. Readers may wish to speculate as to whether childlessness and middle-aged regret will also, in short order, be deemed “violence” and something to complain about during celebrity interviews.

And for some reason, this came to mind:

Something about the dynamic, perhaps.

And in classroom surrealism news:

Because a mentally ill, self-harming woman, one seemingly forever on the verge of tears, is now a “positive example of masculinity.” A role model for primary-school children.

Lifted from the comments, which you’re reading, of course:

Said the man flashing his arse to elementary-school children.

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

And speaking of not-at-all unbalanced cross-dressing men:

That would be this chap here, Mr Sasha Yates, whose behaviour didn’t appear to concern the progressive ladies who rushed to his defence to ensure he kept his job after initial complaints. And thereby kept his access to the schoolgirls’ changing rooms, where a bewigged Mr Yates paraded around in his own bra and panties, much to the girls’ discomfort, and while asking those teenage girls about their underwear and menstrual cycles.

The same progressive ladies who denounced as “hate” and “transphobia” any expression of concern, and who elevated themselves with the airing of modish views, their ostentatious displays of inclusivity, while screwing over the schoolgirls being harassed by a cross-dressing creep. Because in the Progressive Pecking Order, expressing discomfort with sexual boundary violations is terribly low-status when the culprit is a man pretending to be a woman.

Or as one progressive lady put it, following complaints of disturbing behaviour,

I’ll give you a moment to process that one. To savour the implications.

To those of us less practised in progressive dissembling, the above would seem to translate as, “It’s okay for the teenage girls in our care to be creeped on repeatedly by a cross-dressing pervert, and consequently left feeling violated and upset, because we have guidance counsellors. And a box of tissues. Also, cross-dressing perverts are very fashionable right now.”

That these sentiments were expressed with great confidence – by a woman – and were left entirely unchallenged by the reporter – also a woman – is quite a thing. It does, I think, tell us something about progressive priorities and which groups are deemed of much less importance.

Still, at least we can savour the irony of claims by Mr Yates’ defenders that we should look at “her [sic] character, not her [sic] gender…”

Readers may recall that Mr Yates’ homemade pornography – which he saw fit to send to a concerned parent, as one does – featured our burly cross-dresser using a kitchen sink as erotic apparatus, and while smoking methamphetamine and asking, coquettishly, “Am I a good meth whore?” A question that every parent hopes to hear from someone entrusted with the care of their children.

Following his self-inflicted exposure and subsequent resignation, supposedly for “ongoing health reasons,” Mr Yates took to a fetish forum to boast of his “coming out” as a “meth whore” – thereby titillating others with an “exposure fetish” – and while simultaneously positioning himself as the victim of a cruel, unfeeling world:

Nature is healing, buddy.

Mr Yates is currently seeking employment as a “transsexual escort.” “I am,” says he, “definitely interested in being pimped out to as many men as possible.”

Again, words that every parent longs to hear.

Whether the schoolgirls whose underwear so intrigued Mr Yates, or their parents, are likely to receive an apology from the school district, or from any of the progressive ladies who dismissed their concerns and accused them of bigotry, remains unclear.

Above, Mr Yates being affirmed by progressive ladies.

And in can-anyone-else-smell-paedophilia? news:

Pictures of mentally ill, self-mutilating men. In kindergarten settings. To facilitate discussions. With pre-school children.

Strange is a good start. Other descriptors are available.

Should any readers be trying to think of reasons not to raise an eyebrow, it should be pointed out that roughly half of sexually dysmorphic male prisoners – so-called trans women – are there for sexual offences, including, quite often, offences against children – a rate that is much higher than that for the male prison population in general, whether for adult sexual offences or paedophilia.

Likewise, dysmorphic men and women report severe childhood abuse, often childhood sexual abuse, at rates far higher than is found in the wider population. Adults who have been violated as children are in turn much more likely to have, shall we say, issues regarding normal boundaries, and to act inappropriately with minors.

The consequences of which aren’t exactly hard to find. To say nothing of child abusers who invoke some sudden-onset transgenderism once their activities have been discovered and interrupted.

In light of which, encouraging small children to “accept others as they are” – a euphemism for not being wary of sexually dysmorphic men, a demographic among which paedophilia is much more common – seems rather unwise. For reasons we’ve seen many times. Yet this pre-emptive dulling of any wariness is the stated goal of the poster’s creator, illustrator and activist Tyler Feder.

As one might.

However, this is the bedlamite timeline, and so,

And,

At which point, the words foxes and henhouse spring to mind.

And it has to be said, “Your Four-Year-Old Children Will Look At Our Pictures Of Weird, Naked Men” is an odd flex. A peculiar hill to die on. 

If you read the full Reduxx article, linked above, it doesn’t get any more reassuring. The smell does seem to persist.

Update, via the comments: 

As someone who isn’t by temperament easily scandalised or particularly prudish, I nonetheless find myself in the position of having to say, “Er, are you sure about this? This seems all kinds of weird and inappropriate.”

And it seems to be happening more often than I’d expected.

Sharp-eyed readers may also note the assumption that exposure to, and familiarity with, the subject of transgenderism – and by extension, autogynephilia, and drag queens, and cross-dressing more generally – will invariably make one feel great warmth towards these phenomena – and the things that often go with them.

When in fact, the opposite may be true. And not infrequently.

Update 2:

In the comments, Aelfheld adds, 

Well, even if we assume implausibly benign motives, which may be a bit of an ask, premature exposure to sexuality, even in its more humdrum forms, isn’t generally regarded as beneficial. And it seems to me that transgender people would have an easier ride, and a less contentious group reputation, if they observed the obvious courtesy and stayed the hell away from children.

And yet, as we’ve seen repeatedly, many schools seem to be actively recruiting the psychologically marginal – say, attention-craving men in painted nails and make-up who think “looking cute” is the highest function of those employed as a primary-school educator.

And then there’s the peddling of dysmorphic cartoon pornography to middle-school children, without parents’ knowledge or consent, via which eleven-year-olds are introduced to “vagina slime,” fellatio, and “strap-on hotness,” and the joys of masturbating while driving.

Or middle-school librarians who seem convinced that eleven-year-olds need to know how to whore themselves – and to know that whoring is both valid and empowering. Because they may be transgender and may have to pay for hormones and surgical mutilations.

If this all sounds rather lurid and improbable, do follow the links.

Oh, and frottage-seeking drag queens.

And this hiring of the inapt, the incongruous and inadequate, is done as if it were a way for schools to display their own sophistication and fashionable status. As if this “queering” of children’s minds, this erosion of reality, of probity, of normal boundaries, could have no downsides, no dubious effects.

And of course we’ve encountered things of this kind:

Again, at risk of sounding stuffy, these feats of posturing and perversity do not strike me as wholesome, or a path to a brighter, more fragrant tomorrow.