Transgender college swimmer who swam as a man for 3 years now crushing the competition at women’s meets

After three years of competing as a male, a transgender swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania switched to competing as a female and is now dominating the competition, the Daily Wire reported this week.

What are the details?

Senior swimmer Lia Thomas, formerly known as Will Thomas, reportedly broke multiple school and conference records during a Nov. 20 swim meet against Cornell University and Princeton University.

According to SwimSwam, Thomas “blasted the number one 200 free time and the second-fastest 500 free time in the nation on Saturday, breaking Penn program records in both events.” The swimming blog later noted that Thomas’s times in both races marked new Ivy League records, as well.

Thomas also reportedly “swept the 100-200-500 free individual events and contributed to” Penn’s first-place finish in the 400-meter freestyle relay. Thomas’s time in the 200-meter free was “only half a second off the NCAA A cut” and was “the second-fastest women’s 200 free time in the nation so far this season,” the blog added.

Earlier in the month, Thomas reportedly “took home a pair of gold medals in the 200 free and 100 free with margins of 5.4 seconds and 1.3 seconds” in a meet against Columbia University.

Keep reading

Trans lobby group Stonewall brands lesbians ‘sexual racists’ for raising concerns about being pressured into having sex with transgender women who still have male genitals 

For many, it was a brave and long-overdue airing of an important and distressing subject: a painstaking investigation into claims that predatory trans women have been pressuring lesbians for sex, published on the BBC News website.

But a leaked email shows that the influential trans lobby group Stonewall attempted to suppress the investigation before it had even been published – and made the extraordinary claim that debating the issues was equivalent to ‘sexual racism’.

This latest move to try to stifle free speech will add to growing concerns about the influence of Stonewall, which is paid millions of pounds for advising public bodies – including Government departments, police forces and universities – plus a range of private companies.

Stonewall started as a campaign group for gay rights and has been widely applauded for its vital work.

Today, however, it is dominated by the campaign for trans rights and controversially sets out to promote self-declared ‘gender identity’ – the doctrine that people are whatever gender they say they are – ahead of biological sex.

It supports the belief, for example, that people with penises can be lesbians and those with vaginas can be gay men. Those who disagree, says Stonewall, are bigots.

Such is Stonewall’s influence that a former aide to Boris Johnson has claimed the group has been allowed to dictate Government policy by advisers who present him with ‘skewed’ pro-trans information.

Earlier this month, the BBC followed several other high-profile bodies, including Whitehall departments, in dropping its membership of Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme.

Under the scheme, employers pay the lobby group to help ‘embed LGBTQ+ inclusion’ in the way they work.

Keep reading

Cornell University Offering Baskets of Free ‘Mxnstrual’ Products in Men’s Restrooms

Cornell University is now offering baskets of free menstrual products in all public women’s, men’s and “all-gender” bathrooms on campus.

Signs on the baskets use the made-up term “mxnstrual,” though organizers of the “Free Period Products” project now say that they will be changing their signs because they decided that “menstrual” is “not a gendered term.”

The “Free Period Project” team is comprised of members of the Gender Justice Advocacy Coalition and Student Assembly Infrastructure Fund Commission, according to a report from the Cornell Daily Sun.

“The impetus behind the initiative is simple,” GJAC president Clara Drimmer ’22 wrote in an email to The Sun. “Toilet paper is free in any public bathroom. Why shouldn’t period products be free for all people who need them?”

Originally, the products were only offered in women’s and gender neutral restrooms.

Keep reading

When mob rule dictates that we must all cheer a male homecoming queen, it’s clear that society is close to collapse

The unchallenged compliance afforded by many in endorsing previously unthinkable scenarios – like teenage boys being crowned homecoming queens – should set the alarm bells ringing as to where our civilization is headed.

Zachary Willmore of Rock Bridge High School in Columbia, Missouri hit the headlines last week by becoming the first male student to be crowed homecoming queen during a homecoming game.

In a video shared widely on Twitter, the crowd appears to cheer wildly as the young gentleman receives his tiara while dressed in a “beautiful gold gown and homecoming sash” on the busy football field.

While it’s possible the volume of the cheering is from genuine exultation, we might assume that a healthy percentage is borne from a ‘fearful compliance’. While it is all very well that a man should put on a dress and reverse the notion of a ‘homecoming queen’ (as a badge of progressivism) one might still ask, in the most hidden corners of the consciousness, to what end?

While this is not written in any way as an attack on Mr. Willmore, there is a greater cultural phenomenon at work of which he is undoubtedly taking advantage. You can make the case that it is nothing more than a superficial act of kindness to give a young man this bizarre accolade, without any wider ramifications, but we all know that isn’t true.

Nothing exists in a vacuum. Is it fair to the female homecoming queen hopefuls? Is it fair to the football team whose game is now overshadowed by social justice politics? Is it fair to the crowd, who find themselves in a public situation of forced moral conformity (obedience)? There are still many people who don’t see gender norms as a disposable nuisance, who realise their essentiality.

These purposeless showboating acts often get shoehorned unexpectedly into public events of which they play no real part. They are manufactured detraction from an actual occasion (in Willmore’s case, a football game) – a chance for the needy to garner attention.

I am recalled once more of the wedding I attended where the bride’s lesbian sister – a bridesmaid – spent the greater part of her speech not talking about the bride, but about her own struggles to be accepted as gay, culminating in crying about herself.

Despite the narcissism, the LGBTQ+ context forces a ‘standing ovation’ of applause, as the crowd senses the Pavlovian trigger-sentiment for ‘disadvantaged heroism’. Everyone nervously clapping as long and hard as they can, eyes darting from the corner of faces – frozen in false smiles – trying to detect any lack of enthusiasm from anyone else. Inwardly thinking: Am I going mad?

Keep reading

Superman Now Bisexual: Don’t Need ‘Another Straight White Savior,’ Writer Says

The Man of Steel is coming out as bisexual, DC comic writer Tom Taylor revealed Monday, saying that creating “another straight white savior” would be a “real opportunity missed.”

In the upcoming “Superman: Son of Kat-El,” the current Superman, Jon Kent, starts a gay relationship with Jay Nakamura, and the pair share a kiss in issue #5, IGN reported:

Fans of the series probably won’t be surprised to learn Jon is entering into a relationship with Jay Nakamura, a hacktivist who idolizes Jon’s mother Lois and has already lent his new friend a helping hand. And as this image shows, the two friends will become something more when they share their first kiss in issue #5.

Taylor told IGN that he’s had “queer characters and storylines rejected” in the past but knew he didn’t want another straight white male as his superhero.

“Over the years in this industry, it probably won’t surprise you to hear I’ve had queer characters and storylines rejected. I felt like I was letting down people I loved every time this happened” Taylor told IGN. “But we are in a very different and much more welcome place today than we were ten, or even five years ago. When I was asked if I wanted to write a new Superman with a new #1 for the DC Universe, I knew replacing Clark with another straight white savior could be a real opportunity missed.”

Keep reading

It’s Time to Acknowledge Anti-White Racism

Recently, Michael Tesler commented on “The Rise of White Identity Politics.” Tesler’s analysis draws on years of research into racialized politics, and he shows convincingly that there is a rise in white identity politics and that this rise is tied to “perceptions of anti-white discrimination.” However, when trying to explain why perceptions of anti-white bias might also be on the rise, his analysis falls flat. Supposedly, it has something to do with Republicans and Donald Trump.

Never once does the author speculate whether “perceptions” of such discrimination might be on the rise because anti-white racism is becoming increasingly common. In other words, perhaps white Americans are accurately perceiving a real phenomenon that is now pervasive in schools and the workplace.

Anti-White Racism, by Definition

As any student of George Orwell knows, no authoritarian government can ever gain complete control unless it commandeers people’s thinking through the manipulation of language. Thus, the dystopian powers in “1984” deliberately turned the meaning of words upside-down in a process known as double-think.

The same process is happening today with the words used to discuss racism. In true Orwellian fashion, Ibram X. Kendi (pictured) insists that the only way to fight racism is to embrace racial discrimination in perpetuity. This “anti-racism,” as he calls it, is as likely to stamp out genuine racism as Orwell’s Ministry of Truth was apt to stamp out falsehoods.

In order to understand what is going on, we must call to mind the traditional definition of racism: the stereotyping, denigrating, marginalizing, or excluding of persons on the basis of race. Look up any definition of racism prior to the racial awokening taking place in the last decade, and it will be: 1) race neutral; and 2) involve some act of free will—relating to word, deed, or belief.

The definition of racism has undergone a radical change in a short time. According to the new eighth-grade curriculum for the Albemarle County (Va.) School District, racism now means: “The marginalization and/or oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people.”

Perhaps the most jarring aspect of this new definition is that it is no longer race-neutral. It is now impossible, by definition, for white people to be the victims of racism. The definition itself constructs a “racial hierarchy” whereby only people of color may be victimized, and only “white people” may marginalize or oppress.

But there is something even more insidious about the new definition. Since the “marginalization and/or oppression of people of color” is no longer committed by word, thought, or deed — but is based instead on an inescapable “socially constructed racial hierarchy” that always “privileges white people” — it means that white people are engaging in racism simply by being white (and hence privileged) within this impersonal system of marginalization and oppression.

A person of color is a victim of racism, by definition. A person identified as white is a racist, by definition. Therefore, not only does the new definition fail to capture the full meaning of racism; the definition is itself an example of the anti-white racism being taught to our children.

Keep reading

Cambridge University Press Advocates For Bestiality.

The article by Kathy Rudy, titled “LGBTQ. . .Z?” was published on March 25th 2020 by Cambridge University Press and taken from Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, Volume 27, Issue 3, Summer 2012.

This issue was a Hypatia “Special Issue: Animal Others,” published in 2020 under Cambridge Core. The Cambridge Core is described on its website as “the home of academic content from Cambridge University Press.”

The article’s abstract claims that bestiality is a “new form of animal advocacy” and relies on “queer theory” to make its argument. The article’s abstract states:

“In this essay, I draw the discourses around bestiality/zoophilia into the realm of queer theory in order to point to a new form of animal advocacy, something that might be called, in shorthand, loving animals. My argument is quite simple: if all interdicts against bestiality depend on a firm notion of exactly what sex is (and they do), and if queer theory disrupts that firm foundation by arguing that sexuality is impossible to define beforehand and pervades many different kinds of relations (and it does), then viewing bestiality in the frame of queer theory can give us another way to conceptualize the limitations of human exceptionalism. By focusing on transformative connections between humans and animals, a new form of animal advocacy emerges through the revolutionary power of love.”

The piece seems to have had comparatively few views on Cambridge Core but was tweeted over 400 times.

Keep reading

Medical Journal Declares That Parents Should Lose Their Authority to Object to Transgender Surgery for Children

A major medical journal in the United States is facing widespread criticism after it published an article declaring that parents should lose their “veto power” to object to their children trying to seek gender-altering surgical procedures, Breitbart reports.

The Journal of Medical Ethics published an article titled “LGBT testimony and the limits of trust,” authored by Dr. Maura Priest, a professor of philosophy and bioethics at Arizona State University (ASU). In the article, Priest claims that “it is no longer the job of physicians to do their own weighing of the costs and benefits of transition-related care,” as “only the patient can make this assessment, because only the patient has access to the true weight of transition-related benefits.”

Furthermore, Priest declares that “taking LGBT patient testimony seriously also means that parents should lose veto power over most transition-related pediatric care.” Priest had expanded on this assertion in a pre-publication draft, where she said that “guardian veto power over identity-affirming care [results] in injustice whenever such power means one trans child is denied the care that another receives.”

The article was called out for its authoritarian overtones by numerous commentators on social media. Daily Wire host Elisha Krauss said that “if you want to change my child mentally, hormonally, and physically, you’re going to have to go through me.” Author Tom Quiggin declared that “they are out to get your children,” while commentator Derek Hunter said that “leftists want everyone to be wards of the state.”

Keep reading