Via Nikw211 in the comments, some classroom incongruity:

Parents of kids at Edison High School in Huntington Beach, California say this video was played to their kids in math class. The kids clearly didn’t want to watch this pride video so the teacher threatened them with Saturday school to get them to watch it. pic.twitter.com/FUnB9DKYrN

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) June 11, 2023

To paraphrase, but only very slightly:

Not a good look, really. Presumably, the conceit is that any gay pupils will somehow feel affirmed – rather than, say, mortified, or made complicit in something that’s naff and contrived, a vaguely weird imposition. And note that the teacher is the one scolding the kids for being “inappropriate.”

But imagine being a gay kid in the class, possibly a gay kid not entranced by ‘progressive’ politics. Suddenly, the classroom is a world of rainbows and cringe, something the rest of the class groans at and resents having to sit through, again – and it’s all supposedly being done for your benefit. It does rather suggest an unhappy dynamic.

The video, made by other students, and apparently shown in all classes, is presented as both a sentimental review of time spent at the school and an appeal for tolerance and “acceptance” – of cuddling lesbians, glitter-adorned transsexuals, and people with imaginary genders and pronouns. “Don’t forget to love each other,” intones the narrator. It’s very much framed in ‘Pride’ terms – i.e., in terms of social and political “change.” Of “fighting,” alongside “allies,” against unspecified dark forces. As if the purpose of being at school were to become some kind of activist.

Presumably, the forces being fought against include people who think that time in a maths class could perhaps be better spent.

Several people have commented on Twitter and YouTube that the video is unobjectionable and in no way “propaganda.” Well, seen as a child, without wider context, perhaps. But it seems to me that the readiness with which the children have internalised ‘Pride’ and its rainbows and non-binary woo as something unassailably benign illustrates rather well just how effective the propaganda has been.

That the ‘Pride’ movement is intensely political, increasingly extreme – one might say unhinged – and entails rather more than “tolerance” and “acceptance,” is not acknowledged, of course. Apparently, it’s all hugs and sparkles, and being nice.

That the same banners, the same rainbows, the same compelled groupthink, are invoked and deployed to sterilise and mutilate children, and to actively deceive parents, and to make a farce of women’s sports and women’s intimate spaces – for instance – remains unmentioned. And once you’ve demonstrated your acceptance of the flag and all that it entails, what could possibly go wrong? Because it’s all just so nice.

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

Lifted from the comments, a small but telling thing:

“I’ve not done anything wrong.” Why has this become so normal? pic.twitter.com/GKHzIozlRj

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) May 7, 2023

Regarding which, sH2 replied,

Well, indeed. We do seem to be witnessing an upsurge in such sly provocations, and almost always from the same kinds of people with the same kinds of views – an eerie uniformity. And so, Narcissistic Glitter Bint can invade someone’s personal space and shower them, and their children, with some substance – in this case, glitter – and do it repeatedly, against their wishes, while saying, rather triumphantly, “I’m not touching him.”

The dynamic is basically, “You, unlike me, have some self-restraint, which gives me an advantage, therefore I shall test it and see how far I can go.” It’s the psychology of a child unaccustomed to consequences.

Left uncorrected, it’s a psychology that can quickly become quite vile. As seen, for instance, here.

Update, some variations on a theme:

In the comments, we mentioned the videos of Chris Elston (“Billboard Chris”), filmed at Portland State University, in which students who disagree with him – our supposed intellectuals of tomorrow – feel entitled to harass and threaten, and to throw water on him, and to steal his phone and other belongings.

This related video, embedded below, is ostensibly less dramatic, but in some ways more instructive. The charming songbird seen early in the video, and in those above, is Chrissa Mae Kalal, a student, adjunct employee, and self-styled “trans refugee from West Virginia.” Schooled in the role of persecuted saint, Mr Kalal – formerly Chris Burney – spends an awful lot of his time disrupting and physically blocking other people’s conversations – say, around three minutes in, by repeatedly shoving his bike at the legs of the participants while looking enormously self-satisfied – and generally harassing them in a gratuitous and fairly creepy way.

As one does when one is a Higher Being and stipulator of pronouns.

Note too the equally divine creature in the pink mask, who, around six minutes in, also seems unhappy about strangers having a polite conversation.

This brave woman at Portland State University ended up in tears, afraid of the backlash she’ll get for agreeing with us.

She doesn’t know what’s going to happen to her, and says sharing these views in university will get her a bad grade.

She has to fear for her future for… pic.twitter.com/aC58mIoW4X

— Billboard Chris 🇨🇦🇺🇸 (@BillboardChris) May 9, 2023

It’s worth noting that the man with the bicycle, the lovely Chrissa, and his masked accomplice – the one circling the conversation and ‘accidentally’ barging into its participants, repeatedly – are trying to intimidate the young woman in the video. And judging by her nervousness, and the need for continual looks over the shoulder, they’re doing a fairly good job of it.

Needless to say, what you’re seeing is pathological – one might say malevolent – and yet, for some, it’s a marker of woke status, a progressive ideal. And the behaviour above isn’t the result of some fit of temper or a one-off aberration. It isn’t done reluctantly or under duress. It’s practised and calculated. It reveals a sadistic ingenuity.

Hence the grinning and the self-satisfaction.

Or, Display Purposes Only.

Via Twitter:

Presumably, the statue above, which resembles its sculptor Aske Kreilgaard and is described by the museum as a “nourishing man,” and which was originally created to celebrate International Men’s Day, is meant to have some symbolic value. A message of sorts.

The decision to adorn what was once the Women’s Museum with a, shall we say, transitioning figure, this “nourishing man,” is likely an attempt to comply with prevailing fashions regarding those individuals who are somewhat at odds with their physical selves. A trans-friendly gesture. Or, as the museum puts it, somewhat coyly, a sign of “gender inclusivity.”

It occurs to me, however, that a man being given large doses of cross-sex hormones and subsequently developing facsimile breasts isn’t going to lactate anything remotely nourishing for a child. Given sufficiently high doses of female hormones, and given sufficiently zealous pumping, some men can be made to secrete a substance from their nipples, albeit unreliably and in very limited quantities – but the resulting discharge is of no nutritional value to an infant.

As Dr Maja Bowen notes here,

Given that the statue is apparently intended as both fashionable and symbolic, and a nod to the sexually dysmorphic, then an obvious reading of that gesture, rendered in stone, is that the actual feeding of the infant is of no great consequence. At best, a secondary concern. Sort of, Screw the hungry baby. Let’s focus on affirming the dysmorphic man. And which, it has to be said, is an odd message to send.

The ladies at Reduxx also have some thoughts.

Update, via the comments, from transgender Reddit:

Note the word successfully. To which, one might ask, for whom?

In other we’re-letting-the-mentally-ill-teach-your-children news:

The teacher in question, a dysmorphic man named Ashlee Renczkowski, is apparently prone to “phases of depression,” and was, in his words, “having bad thoughts.” And hence of course the comments about shooting the children in his care, grades six through eight, presumably with the three firearms in his possession. The ostensible cause of this rather severe mood swing was a social media post in which unnamed people were “talking negatively” about Mr Renczkowski’s sexuality and professed womanhood.

And any reservations about Mr Renczkowski are, clearly, unfounded.

When not “feeling cute and beautiful” and exploring the possibilities of a “zero-depth vaginoplasty,” Mr Renczkowski boasts of “giving students a safe place.”

Some ironies are just a little too on-the-nose.

Mr Renczkowski has since been removed from the school and his weapons confiscated.

And in other, entirely unrelated news – when a sociology researcher discovers the wrong kind of things:

Readers are invited to guess the area of research before clicking the link.

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.