The Tedious Whine of the Non-Binary Hairy Actress

gender hairy actress

When did people in drag get so whiny? I mean, Ru Paul is not a whiner, neither was Divine. They didn’t position themselves as pushing new beauty standards and Ru Paul still doesn’t to my knowledge. Drag queens play with gender and appearance and gender roles and are having fun and doing theater that is both free wheeling satire and social commentary. They LIKE to offend. They were not pushing for social acceptance. Divine was not screeching that all men had to marry wives that look like her though many do.

So, this new whiny attitude of “please open your mind and accept my hairy face and ass in a dress as beautiful – I am non-binary” is very unbecoming. This “please PLEASE see me as a beauty queen” is not a rebel cry of “fuck you” but rather — “please PLEASE PLEASE fuck me!” (excuse the French but nothing says sex like French). Anyway… since when was queer not a fuck you but a “cry for acceptance”? Didn’t it used to be called “gender fuck”? As in “fuck you — not PLEASE PLEASE LIKE ME!” Whiny!
Continue reading

Advertisements

And, Jenner is a Republican too!

US flag

I’ll admit that I have yet to watch the Bruce Jenner interview with Diane Sawyer that is making headlines today.  I am very burned out on trans issues and mostly I yawn when I hear of a news story.  Even so, I have to admit that apparently, we are making progress.   There’s no question that today it is easier and more acceptable to medically transition than it was when I began in 1989.   Certainly, people who change their sex and legal and social gender are still pariahs, on both the left and the right – but we are more accepted than we have ever been and certainly more visible.   Continue reading

This makes me want to live in a shack in Montana with a shotgun and a Min Pin

_80283917_oldlady
Apparently, the “Vagina Monologues” have been canceled and for this reason at Mount Holyoke College:

“Since the 1990s, students from Mount Holyoke College, an all-women’s school in Massachusetts, have staged an annual production of The Vagina Monologues. Not this year. The college is retiring the ritual over concerns that the play—penned by Eve Ensler in 1996 as a way to “celebrate the vagina” and women’s sexuality—is not inclusive enough.

In a school-wide email from Mount Holyoke’s student-theater board, relayed by Campus Reform, student Erin Murphy explained that “at its core, the show offers an extremely narrow perspective on what it means to be a woman … Gender is a wide and varied experience, one that cannot simply be reduced to biological or anatomical distinctions, and many of us who have participated in the show have grown increasingly uncomfortable presenting material that is inherently reductionist and exclusive.” ”

Ah, OK. Apparently because some trans people have not yet had, or do not wish to have SRS (sex reassignment surgery) for whatever reason, medical or personal or financial, and this makes them different from non-trans people… so this play must be canceled.

Look I am not particularly a fan of “The Vagina Monologues” — I have never seen it and don’t possess a burning desire to do so, though I might see it if the opportunity presented itself. If it was within walking distance of my house…

Apparently, the opportunity won’t be there for anyone attending Mount Holyoke who wants to see it there. And, worse, it is for stupid reasons. Here the well-reason article in “Reason” that I learned this from:
http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/15/womens-college-cancels-vagina-monologues

This is so egregiously stupid that I am nearly speechless. “Inclusiveness” and even “diversity” are overrated. Not every play or performance is pertinent to every person, that’s life. Also, the vast majority of people with vaginas are born female women with female congruent gender identities. This is a fact of life, and I actually see no problem with it at all. Most likely some bullies on campus, waving the flag of PC “non-binary” gender got a hold of the board and rammed this through. That said, hey — it’s their school, whatever! I am against this on principle however. And, would certainly like to make it known that not all trans men agree with this. Also, I do live my life, day to day, identifying largely with MEN who were not born with vaginas, meaning non-trans men. In other words, someone does not have to be exactly like me to be someone I identify with. Which is good, otherwise, since I am a mixed race, man of transsexual history, who is mixed race in such a way that I have met very few people exactly like me, except for siblings, I honestly don’t think I would ever have anything at all in this world to identify with. A long time ago, I decided to be my own person, and I don’t solely depend on my race, class, ethnicity, sex or gender to define who I am. Those things are not even always the important things… I know we live in a strange world now, which increasingly says otherwise, and I am against that line of thinking, which is narrow and which puts people into boxes that are constricting — all often in the name of “inclusivity”. Of course, it is also good that more art is coming out made by so-called trans people, but that doesn’t mean that art made by people who are not “trans” has no bearing on our lives. This is insane.

The California Association of Scholars report on UC Campuses

A disturbing report about the UC campuses that is not hard to believe,most unfortunately. See especially the downloads of the studies, linked to in the article.

We’re in trouble.

Note: I’ve had someone point out to me that there may be problems with this article in that UC Berkeley appears to have more courses in western civ (at least from the perspective of European history) than purported here. However, check this out. There is something to it. I know that David Horowitz has been noticing this issue for some time, and was ahead of the curve on this problem. He has stated that while there are few conservative professors in the Humanities, that most left wing professors don’t teach in a biased way. He said only around 10% do, but I do think that can be a crucial 10%. Of course, some departments are more heavily biased toward a left-wing perspective than others. In any event, the reports bear looking at and the article is certainly of great interest.

______________________________________________________
NEW STUDY SHOWS RADICALS RULE AT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA by by DAN GAGLIASSO.

The California Association of Scholars, a division of the National Association of Scholars, have just released an incendiary report showing that all nine of the University of California’s campuses have been compromised by too many politicized courses and radical faculty members. CAS members include a number of current or past professors from the UC system who have taught at UC-Berkeley, UCLA, UC-Santa Cruz, and UC-San Diego.

Conservatives have long complained of a strong liberal bias in college classrooms, and this new study shows just how far off track it has gone in one of the most prestigious public university systems in the country. You can read the full CAS 81-page report here.

CAS’s president John Ellis knows very well of what he speaks; he’s a professor emeritus of German Literature from UC Santa Cruz. “The quality of education at the University of California has been jeopardized by political activism,“ Professor Ellis said in a phone interview. “Dogmatism is rapidly displacing open-minded inquiry, especially in the social sciences and humanities, to the severe disadvantage of students.”

A Crisis in Competence: The Corrupting Influence of Political Activism in the University of California isn’t trying to purge the system of differing left of center opinions. The well-documented study just hopes to even the playing field so students get a quality education – an education that has standards and teaches students to look at all sides of the issues. The CAS report emphasizes common sense observations that seem to be beyond the grasp of the assumed intelligent members of the UC Board of Regents.

One observation points out that “a political science department with one half of the spectrum of political thought missing cannot be considered a competent department.” It seems only a Marxist professor with an agenda and no common sense would disagree with that idea from this new study. Unfortunately, as the study shows, there are a lot more Marxists now teaching in the University of California system than you would think.

The CAS report took the time to carefully vet the studies it cites from various institutions, including George Mason University, the Center for the Study of Popular culture, and many others. They even scoured carefully scrutinized and recorded students complaints on the subject, many of which you can read here.

Here a just a few of the conclusions about the University of California system that CAS came to:

There has been a sharp increase in faculty members who self-identify as radicals. This has led to “one party” academic departments, such as at Berkeley, where left-of-center faculty members outnumber their right-of-center colleagues in Political Science by a ratio of 28:2, in English 29:1 and in History 31:1. A number of these professors are openly avowed Marxists! (Has Van Jones applied for one of these positions?)

Many curricula promote political activism, in violation of UC regulations. Critical Race Studies at UCLA’s School of Law, for example, aims to be a “training ground” for advocates committed to racial justice theory and practice (sounds like Harvard during the Professor Derrick Bell/Obama years).

Several departments attempt to erase the study of Western tradition. History majors are now not required to take a survey course in Western civilization on any of the nine University of California campuses. Four more UC campuses have dropped their American History requirements (many UC students cannot even answer basic questions about American or World History).

Suppression of free speech is commonplace. Speakers at UC Berkeley who have been shouted down by protesters include Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Secretary of State Madeline Albright, and Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Conner (but Columbia welcomes Iran’s Ahmadinejad to speak with open arms).

Radical and left-of-center UC professors favor hiring like-minded new academics and block the hiring of new professors who don’t “think the right way.” (Why would a conservative incur the enormous debt and hassles pursuing a Ph. D. if the possibility of a professor’s job is little or nil?)

The advancement of “social justice” is now the open aim of a number of UC faculty members and even whole departments in the system (if a student asks questions or writes answers or papers that challenge these professors and their radical assumptions they can expect a poor grade).

The UC curriculum has been gutted because too many professors now show an open preference for promoting a partisan political agenda. These are just a few of the important issues confronting the UC system that the CAS study raises and documents in very credible fashion.

Resident conservative Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post compared the 25th anniversary of the publication of Allan Bloom’s groundbreaking The Closing of the American Mind to the release of the new CAS report. She astutely pointed out that, “…the left systematically has dumbed its side down, to the point where supposedly well-educated elites are untrained and unaware of our country’s history and constitutional traditions.”

______________________________________________________________

The rest here and comments of course: New study of UC System proves radical professors rule

No binary gender for Occupy San Francisco!

I”m watching a livestream of arrests being made of Occupy San Francisco protesters who  occupied a building on Turk Street in San Francisco last night. The camera man observing, who is an Occupy SF person, states as he observes a protestor being led away by police from the building to the police van, “Another protestor, a woman, being led out of the building… I say “woman”, ah – just to make a judgment but ah, I’m not too much into the binary gender thing…”

I think it was a dude (as in a man) talking but don’t quote me on that.

Funny now how people feel they have to apologize for calling someone, who looks female, a woman. Which may mean they recognize that people are men or women, a no no.

Guess the far left, at least in San Francisco,  has absorbed the anti-binary sentiments of various political gender benders. Please, do LEAVE ME OUT OF IT!! I hope to never be blamed for this silliness. I do believe in the binary. A loose and slightly bendy binary, but  — a binary.

All those reading who have no idea what I am talking about, you are not missing out on much. Believe me on this one!

Phyllis Chesler speaks out against Israeli Apartheid Week and other Academic Delusions

So-called “Israeli Apartheid Week” happened last week at University of Toronto. There are other universities and places worldwide now where it’s also occurring. I don’t want to give the thing more publicity here, so you can look it up on your own if you wish. There’s plenty online about the week of anti-Israel panels and “cultural work”, what it is, and why it is. I’ve certainly taken a good long look and listen. I’ve listened to more than a few panels online and even watched Judith Butler’s keynote at University of Toronto on youtube. You can’t say I don’t pay attention to the side I despise, although I must admit, sometimes — I wonder why I make myself sit through these things. Well, I’ve always been attracted to those I perceive to be adversaries, I’m eternally curious about the opposition, particularly since not too long ago, all things left were mostly not the opposition. Or, so I thought…

I have always been a bit queasy about Israel bashers though, even in my past. I have noticed an escalation of anti-Israel sentiment in the past few years and this has further pushed me away from some of my former comfort zones politically.

One of the people I started reading a few years ago who I have found immensely inspiring on this issue is Phyllis Chesler. I’ve read some of her work online and books, but never heard her speak. I figure since I’d listened to Butler, I should give Chesler her time, and of course, I was moved by her speech and informed. She’s been through a lot in her political feminist journey and if I have even half her courage, I’ll have a lot. She’s lost most of her feminist friends along the way, even being snubbed at funerals of friends in common who have passed away. She is privy to whispered calls from closeted Israel supporters who are also leftist feminists, who can’t dare to risk or give up the things that she has. And, what has Chesler lost? Not only almost all her friends but also grants and publishers and speaking engagements — and some sense of safety when she is actually invited and able to speak at public events. She now has body guards at speaking events due to real physical threats. Her friends now? Besides a few good and very, very few lingering friends from her more orthodox leftist past, she mentions here that she has Christian friends now, and Orthodox Jews. Yes, Christian… And ironically, she works mainly now with dissident Islamic feminists and not western feminists. All her values are absolutely as they always have been: freedom, human rights and women’s rights — but these she believes are no longer served predominantly by the left. And, unfortunately, I must agree.

Her speech here, more eloquent than anything I might say here, and well worth listening to inside this link to her site. An antidote to the Israel Apartheid week cant:

The New Anti-Semitism
When Middle East Politics Invade Campus

Note: The site has an audio recording and a video recording, and I found the audio recording more reliable and less glitchy. Although, YMMV.

are we heading to matriarchy – no really!

So, are we moving into a world where women dominate family life AND the workplace? Where women make more money than men, are better educated and skip out on marriage because no man is good enough? Well, apparently, we may almost be there, or that is where the trends are pointing. Girl children are now increasingly preferred to boy children, in the United States but even in some Asian countries, and — boys and men are floundering. Young women are in universities, and young men — are boys not men, too distracted by some erratic impulse of life to sit still long enough to graduate or even begin to study. Apparently, some universities and colleges are even beginning to create affirmative action for boys just to get more of them enrolled! And, women CEOs, while still relatively rare, make more money than male CEOs because they are rare and are prized. There are even more women committing violent crimes and — I’ve noticed, sex crimes — as more and more grown women end up in the news for predation on 14 year old boys!

While I doubt that women will ever equal the violent crime rate or sexual offender rate of men, they are entering a new era.

In the world of alternative sexualities… Someday soon , will lesbians make more money than gay men? That would be interesting as lesbians have historically been in mini-ghettoes of relative poverty on places like Valencia Street (in the 90’s) that were then fairly poor — before recent gentrification set in, while gay men were in the shiny Castro area — with more disposable income. Possibly, that will change as well in time. Maybe, it is already beginning to although this article confines itself to the larger mainstream world of heterosexuals, which hardly sounds mainstream any more. Not the world of my parents, and apparently – increasingly not even the world of my own youth. Although my generation battled to begin a quest for women’s equality, I never thought I would see the possibility of women’s domination beginning to crystalize in my own lifetime. Still, only a possibility but not actually a remote one.

Even in politics, conservative right-wing women are certainly ascendent — which is interesting given that the liberation of women has always appeared to be anything other than a conservative project.

I missed this article when it came out, but it is not that old, only from last year. It’s fascinating and goes into detail about these trends, many of which I was vaguely aware of, and some – that I had no idea were occurring. This is well worth a read as it is well-written, comprehensive, and eye opening. From The Atlantic by Hanna Rosin:


“Earlier this year, women became the majority of the workforce for the first time in U.S. history. Most managers are now women too. And for every two men who get a college degree this year, three women will do the same. For years, women’s progress has been cast as a struggle for equality. But what if equality isn’t the end point? What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to women? A report on the unprecedented role reversal now under way— and its vast cultural consequences

Not sure what this will do for or to – the victim politics aspect of feminism, but I guess, we may just find out!

Feminism and Sharia

The silence of most feminists in the west regarding the treatment of women in many Islamic countries, or the actual rationalization of that treatment, has exasperated me. A closer look reveals the emptiness of feminism’s promise to women, all women, of gender equality. Like many movements on the left, feminism has another agenda beyond the equality of women and the loosening of restrictions concerning gender roles. I think that Caroline Glick in this excellent article, “The Feminist Deception”, connects the dots. She writes:

Nowhere is fraud at heart of feminist movement more apparent than in silence of inhumane treatment of women who live under Islamic law.

Making the rounds on YouTube these days is a film of a group of manly looking women preparing for and conducting a “flash dance” in a Philadelphia food store. The crew of ladies, dressed in tight black clothes and sequined accessories, arrives at The Fresh Grocer supermarket, breaks into a preplanned chant ordering shoppers not to buy Sabra and Tribe hummus and telling them to oppose Israeli “apartheid” and support “Palestine.”

From their attire and attitude, it is fairly clear that the participants in the video would congratulate themselves on their commitment to the downtrodden, the wretched of the earth suffering under the jackboot of the powerful. They would likely all also describe themselves as feminists.

But if being a human rights activist means attacking the only country in the Middle East that defends human rights, then that means that at the very basic level, the term “human rights activist” is at best an empty term. And if being a feminist means attacking the only country in the Middle East where women enjoy freedom and equal rights, then feminism too, has become at best, a meaningless term. Indeed, if these anti-Israel female protesters are feminists, then feminism is dead.

IN 1995, then first lady Hillary Clinton spoke at the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. There Clinton seemed to embrace the role of championing the rights of women and human rights worldwide when she proclaimed, “It is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights…If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, let it be that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.”

Yet as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton – like her fellow self-described feminists – has chosen to single Israel out for opprobrium while keeping nearly mum on the institutionalized, structural oppression of women and girls throughout the Muslim world. In so acting, Clinton is of course, loyally representing the views of the Obama administration she serves. She is also representing the views of the ideological Left in which Clinton, US President Barack Obama, the human rights and feminist movements are all deeply rooted.

Since the height of the feminist movement in the late 1960s, non-leftist women in the West and Israel have been hard-pressed to answer the question of whether or not we are feminists. Non-leftist women are opposed to the oppression of women. Certainly, we are no less opposed to the oppression of women than leftist women are.

But at its most basic level, the feminist label has never been solely or even predominantly about preventing and ending oppression or discrimination of women. It has been about advancing the Left’s social and political agenda against Western societies. It has been about castigating societies where women enjoy legal rights and protections as “structurally” discriminatory against women in order to weaken the legal, moral and social foundations of those societies. That is, rather than being about advancing the cause of women, to a large extent, the feminist movement has used the language of women’s rights to advance a social and political agenda that has nothing to do with women.

So to a large degree, the feminist movement itself is a deception.

The deception at the heart of the feminist movement is nowhere more apparent than in the silence with which self-professed feminists and feminist movements ignore the inhumane treatment of women who live under Islamic law. If feminism weren’t a hollow term, then prominent feminists should be the leaders of the anti-jihad movement.

Gloria Steinem and her sisters should be leading to call for the overthrow of the antifemale mullocracy in Iran and the end of gender apartheid in Saudi Arabia.

_____________________________________________________

The entire article here, and it is well worth reading in its entirety. The Feminist Deception