Tag: political correctness

Woman Says Planet Fitness in New Hampshire Canceled Her Membership After Alerting Them to Man in Women’s Locker Room

After reporting that someone she believed to be a man was inside the women’s locker room at a Planet Fitness, a woman says her longtime membership was canceled.

Judy Walcott told Fox News Digital, “I was shaking. Like I was actually trembling because it freaked me out that bad.”

After initially reporting the issue, she was told that the staff could not do anything about it due to company policy.

Walcott raised the issue again with another staff member a few days later and was called “transphobic.”

Per Fox News:

“She showed concern until I started telling her that there was a creepy guy in the ladies’ shower on Saturday, nobody checked him out… then before I could say anything else, she interrupted me, telling me she ‘thought’ she knew who I meant and what a wonderful woman that is,” Walcott told Fox News Digital.

She said the conversation went downhill from there, alleging the staff member did not address her concerns and instead “repeatedly” called her “transphobic” before she decided to walk away.

A couple of hours later, Walcott said, the gym’s manager called her to tell her that her membership had been canceled for a “policy violation.”

Walcott checked her member portal and found a ‘Member cancellation or freeze form.”

A copy of that document, which Fox News Digital cannot authenticate, shows an April 15 cancellation request with a request effective date of May 16. In the comment field, the form says, “Nondiscrimination Trans.”

This is not the first time the national fitness chain has put political correctness above the safety of women.

In 2024, The Gateway Pundit reported that the company banned a woman for taking a photo of a “transgender” biological man shaving in the women’s locker room at a Fairbanks, Alaska, location.

Keep reading

King’s Speech 2026: Britain’s Monarchy Reads a Doomed Agenda as Starmer Clings to Power

For many years, it was called the Queen’s Speech and delivered year after year by Queen Elizabeth II. Now it’s the King’s Speech — the traditional State Opening of Parliament where King Charles reads out the government’s planned laws. The Prime Minister’s team writes the whole thing, so it’s really their agenda, not the King’s personal views. Think of it like a presidential address to Congress, but with all the robes, crowns, and centuries of tradition.

This year’s speech, delivered on May 13, 2026, felt particularly awkward. Just six days earlier Labour had been hammered in the local elections — losing over 1,000 council seats while Nigel Farage’s Reform UK stormed ahead with more than 1,100 gains and took control of several councils. Keir Starmer is clearly fighting for his job. Dozens of Labour MPs are already calling for him to go, four ministers have resigned, and the party looks in open revolt. Yet there was the King in full ceremonial dress, reading out Starmer’s wishlist as if everything was business as usual.

The optics aren’t great. Critics are right to worry that the monarchy is getting dragged into Labour’s internal mess at a time when trust in institutions is already low. When the head of state appears to back the government’s plans just days after voters delivered a clear rejection, it raises serious questions about whether the Crown is staying truly neutral.

Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic should pay close attention to the six main priorities. Far from listening to last week’s verdict at the ballot box, Starmer’s team looks completely tone-deaf to the issues that drove so many people toward Reform UK.

Keep reading

It’s Time For Reparations For Taxpayers Forced To Pay Reparations

Reparations have become quite popular among the “white guilt” liberal set who insist the rest of us pay for crimes 21st century Americans did not commit. The redistribution of wealth schemes driven by identity politics are popping up in leftist-led cities across the country. They seem to be making critical race theory charlatans and professional race-baiters a lot of money while sowing more division and discrimination.

How about reparations for taxpayers forced to pay unjust reparations?    

Take Evanston, Illinois, for example. The Chicago suburb teeming with self-loathing, wealthy white liberals and misplaced Big 10 football and basketball teams in 2019 became the first U.S. city to launch a reparations program. The city of some 75,000 souls has committed $20 million to the cause of assuaging its guilt for past transgressions of segregating and redlining black residents. 

The money is supposed to compensate today’s black residents for past racial injustice. The recipients were not enslaved nor are they necessarily victims of discrimination. But they get a hefty check, regardless. 

‘Incredible’

In its latest round of redistribution with one-sided representation, Evanston announced in February that it will be issuing $25,000 individual payments to 44 people, according to the city’s Reparations Committee. The money, Fox News reported, comes from $276,588 in Evanston’s real estate transfer tax, a collection from the sale of property in the college town. The city also levies a tax on cannabis sales, although that revenue stream reportedly hasn’t been sufficient to meet the reparations wish list.

City leaders would also like to strap a tax on Delta-8 THC products —  weed lite, if you will — to keep the reparations train rolling. 

Last June, the Reparations Committee announced it had doled out a total of $6.36 million “to ancestors and direct descendants of the Black Evanston community,” the Evanston Roundtable reported. 

At the time, Tashiek Kerr, assistant to the city manager, (not to be confused with the assistant to the regional manager), said Evanston officials had met with “116 out of 126 residents in the direct descendants group,” the newspaper reported. “These residents are related to Black Evanston residents who lived in Evanston from 1919 through 1969.” 

A total of nearly $3 million was disbursed to those residents, with another 135 recipients sharing $3.5 million, all black applicants who claim to have faced discriminatory housing practices. The payments are supposed to be used for housing assistance — mortgage payments, down payments, home repairs and the like. 

The committee’s chairwoman, Robin Rue Simmons, described the funding totals as “incredible.” The audience burst into applause, the Roundtable reported. 

Here’s the phrase that pays: 

“However, recipients in the next round are wondering when it will be their turn. Rue Simmons said it is undetermined due to funding,” according to the newspaper. 

And so it goes with the history of reparation proposals and plans. Like all leftist money grabs, it’s never enough. (*See the expansion of welfare, affirmative action, the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977”, etc.) 

Keep reading

Ideological Insanity Has Gotten WAY WAY WORSE In The UK…

A major exam board has now signed off on gender-neutral language in GCSE French, Spanish and German exams – despite the terms being completely alien to how those languages are actually spoken in their home countries.

The move, buried in new specifications for 2026 exams, hands students the green light to ditch standard masculine and feminine forms in favour of made-up “inclusive” pronouns, nouns and adjectives.

Yes, you read that right. They’re letting students make up their own parts of foreign languages in exams.

Staff at Pearson Edexcel have explicitly permitted teens to use “inclusive” pronouns, nouns and adjectives in both written and oral GCSEs. Yet as the article linked above makes clear, “the French do not pander to the same bid for inclusivity, with all their grammatical concepts being strictly categorised into gendered variants.”

Adjectives must match the noun in masculine or feminine endings. Gender-neutral terms simply do not exist in grammatically correct French or Spanish.

Keep reading

Outrage: According to Liberal NPR, Colleges Flag Black Students For Admission, Continuing Affirmative Action

According to a report at The College Fix, “Admissions offices are sifting through college essays and working to find black students without drawing legal challenges, guests on a recent National Public Radio segment admitted.”

This practice is discrimination, yet some colleges proudly engage in this practice.

There’s even a racial code language, according to this report.

“In college admission, trauma is shorthand for blackness,” National Public Radio reported as part of its “Code Switch” show focused on racial identity issues.”

In this National Public Radio report, “Host Gene Demby interviewed former Georgetown University admissions officer Aya Waller-Bey for the April 25 episode.”

“Waller-Bey recently completed her doctorate in sociology at the University of Michigan, where she studied “how Black students make sense of racialized expectations to narrate trauma in college personal statements,” according to her bio.”

In addition to the coded language used, they admitted to continued affirmative action and racial preference.

“Admissions officers are looking through essays for stories about being “first-gen” or “low-income,” Waller-Bey said. That is because schools are trying to figure out a way around the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that affirmed racial discrimination in higher education is illegal.”

Admissions then “advocates” for particular students based on race.

This is very racist and illegal, but they are boasting about engaging in anti-white and anti-Asian discrimination.

Waller Bey then implied that even that is racist against Black people, asking “black students and other groups to talk about their pain is itself painful.”(As if no other races and ethnic groups have gone through trauma)

She then said this trauma “is often incredibly valuable for organizations and institutions.”

Either way, the Supreme Court has found these racial preference admissions to be unconstitutional. Fairness and colorblind admissions are the opposite of racism.

Keep reading

The Most Direct Social Engineering Propaganda You’ll EVER See

A new Channel 5 drama series has delivered what many are calling peak social conditioning: a classroom scene where a teacher is berated by students for failing to instantly adopt preferred pronouns and for daring to stage Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream.

A clip, shared widely on social media, shows an old-school drama teacher clashing with pupils over basic biology, literature, and “respecting identities.”

In the footage, a student corrects the teacher when she uses the wrong name for a student who has decided to swap genders and adopt new pronouns: “Their name is Dee now actually,” one student explains, adding “you just deadnamed them Miss.”

The teacher responds: “I’m sorry. I’ve known you as Daphne for two years and can’t click a switch. I am trying.”

Another insufferable student fires back: “You shouldn’t have to try. You either see them or you don’t. I think you should apologise.”

The teacher then puts her foot in it again and states: “I just did, and am sure she can fight her own battles!”

“It’s they not she… It’s about respecting other people’s identity,” the student lectures.

Later, students challenge the Shakespeare choice, with one suggesting “There’s a consent issue. Titania is drugged before sleeping with Bottom… It’s also anti-feminist portraying women as submissive and dependent on men… to a modern audience it could be quite triggering.”

The scene perfectly captures the absurdity: instant language policing, classic literature deemed harmful for not meeting 2020s standards, and virtue-signalling students demanding deference.

This isn’t subtle. It’s overt social engineering dressed as entertainment.

Keep reading

Judge Halts Colorado AI Law After First Amendment Challenge

A federal judge has frozen enforcement of Colorado’s first-in-the-nation AI law, the statute that would have required developers to police their own models for “algorithmic discrimination” and to inform the state of “foreseeable risks” before the rules took effect on June 30.

Judge Cyrus Y. Chung signed off on a joint request from xAI and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser on April 27, putting the law on ice while state lawmakers draft a replacement.

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

The order was filed in xAI v. Weiser. The state agreed not to enforce SB 24-205 against xAI, or to issue rules under it, until at least 14 days after the court rules on a forthcoming preliminary injunction motion.

The June 16 scheduling conference was cancelled. The deadlines in the case are suspended.

This is a significant retreat as Colorado spent two years insisting the law was a model for the country. It was the only state AI statute named in President Trump’s AI executive order last year. Now the state is asking a court to stop the clock while its own governor’s policy group drafts a bill to repeal and replace it.

The law itself is the reason the climbdown looks the way it does. SB 24-205 told developers of “high-risk” AI systems they had to take “reasonable care” to prevent algorithmic discrimination, with one carveout that has done more work in the lawsuit than any other clause: the law exempts discrimination intended to “increase diversity or redress historical discrimination.”

The state forbids one kind of discrimination by an algorithm. It permits, and arguably requires, another. The developer is left to figure out which is which, with the attorney general’s office deciding after the fact.

xAI sued on April 9, calling the statute a First Amendment problem dressed up as consumer protection. The company’s complaint is more blunt than most filings of this kind. “SB24-205 is decidedly not an anti-discrimination law,” the company’s attorneys wrote. “It is instead an effort to embed the State’s preferred views into the very fabric of AI systems.”

The argument is that Colorado isn’t regulating outputs neutrally. It’s choosing which viewpoints an AI model is allowed to produce, then enforcing the choice through “onerous policy, assessment, and disclosure requirements,” in the words of the Justice Department’s filing.

The DOJ moved to intervene on xAI’s side, the first time the federal government has joined a constitutional challenge to a state AI regulation.

Keep reading

Wisconsin attorney general suggests blue haired non-binary ‘time-traveling pleasure activist’ can teach state staff about ‘microaggressions’

Wisconsin‘s woke Attorney General has encouraged staff members to read a book co-written by a self-described ‘non-binary mystic and pleasure activist.’

The book ‘Subtle Acts of Exclusion,’ co-written by Dr Tiffany Jana and Dr Michael Baran, was included in the curriculum for ‘Associate Culture Staff’ Training under Attorney General Josh Kaul’s 2023 Equity and Inclusion Plan, which remains in effect through December, the Heartland Post reports.

It aims to address ‘insidious and damaging’ actions in the workplace, including microaggressions and unfounded assumptions.

The Wisconsin Department of Justice will now ‘maintain a monitoring and reporting system to ensure the overall compliance with the equity and inclusion mandates,’ Kaul wrote in the Equity and Inclusion Commitment Letter. 

‘We expect each DOJ employee to be an active participant in the implementation of this program and be accountable for complying with the objectives of this Equity and Inclusion Plan,’ he wrote when the plan was first being published.

The plan ‘reflects the principles of the department and it places into action our intent to be a better and stronger organization, one that is truly diverse, inclusive and applies principles of equity so all members of the DOJ community can experience a sense of belonging,’ it says.

But the inclusion of Jana’s book has sparked backlash, as it was revealed she sells $600 an hour ‘solo time travel sessions’ and offers $75 an hour ‘tarot/oracle readings.’

‘My mission is to empower and liberate minds, hearts and bodies through joy, love, knowledge and spiritual wisdom,’ she writes on her site. 

Keep reading

Judge Blocks Enforcement Of Colorado’s New DEI-Driven AI Law

A federal judge has temporarily blocked the State of Colorado from enforcing a first-of-its-kind artificial intelligence law.

Colorado is prohibited from taking enforcement actions on alleged violations of the law occurring up to 14 days after the court issues a ruling on the company xAI’s motion for a preliminary injunction, judge Cyrus Y. Chung ruled on April 27.

The Department of Justice had said the state law, which was set to go into effect on June 30, would have required AI developers and deployers to “discriminate based on race, sex, & religion—all in the name of DEI.”

DEI is an acronym for “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Brett Shumate, an assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s Civil Division, called the suspension a “huge win for the American people.”

“Colorado immediately caved and agreed not to enforce the law against ANY AI company,” Shumate wrote in a X post on May 1.

Gov. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) signed into law the Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence in May 2024 and issued a statement sharing his reservations about how it could impact Colorado.

In the statement, he urged the General Assembly to revise and delay implementing it until January 2027.

“I am concerned about the impact this law may have on an industry that is fueling critical technological advancements across our state for consumers and enterprises alike,” Polis wrote.

However, the legislation was not revised; instead, it was delayed until June 30, 2026, which prompted tech billionaire Elon Musk’s company xAI, which created Grok, to sue the state on April 9.

The unedited legislation was months away from going into effect when xAI asked the court to block the law from being enforced.

The Justice Department added its name as a plaintiff alongside xAI on April 24, marking the first time the DOJ had stepped into a case that challenged AI on a state level.

Both alleged that Colorado’s law would have caused unconstitutional “algorithmic discrimination” and asked a court to block it from being enforced.

“Laws that require AI companies to infect their products with woke DEI ideology are illegal,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon, who works under the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.

“The Justice Department will not stand on the sidelines while states such as Colorado coerce our nation’s technological innovators into producing harmful products that advance a radical, far-left worldview at odds with the Constitution.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Polis and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser for comment.

Keep reading

Liberal Insanity: Michigan Town Spends $18,000 in Taxpayer Cash to Rip Out Over 600 ‘Racist’ Neighborhood Watch Signs, Mayor Calls Them ‘Expressions of Exclusion’

The liberal city of Ann Arbor, Michigan, has spent $18,000 in taxpayer funds to remove more than 600 “Neighborhood Watch” signs after city officials declared the crime prevention signs “expressions of exclusion” that allegedly promote racial profiling and make people of color feel “unwelcome.”

The signs were yanked from front yards and public spaces by city crews over the past few weeks, with the final one removed last week.

Ann Arbor Mayor Christopher Taylor personally helped remove the last sign alongside two city council members.

In a video statement posted to Instagram to virtue signal, Taylor declared, “Frankly, neighborhood watch signs are expressions of exclusion, and they’re inconsistent with our values. Ann Arbor is a welcoming community. We don’t want to push people away. We want to welcome folks in.”

Council Member Cynthia Harrison, who is Black, strongly supported the removal.

In the announcement video, Harrison stated, “There are people that look like me, and those from my community that have been questioned, quite frankly, in their own neighborhood by others, you know, wondering what they’re doing there.”

“This is just representative of our values and how we want people to feel in Ann Arbor,” Harrison continued. “We do welcome everyone to the city of Ann Arbor, but most importantly, we want everyone to feel welcome, and just the removal of these signs is a huge step in that direction.”

The city council voted 10-0 in December to direct staff to remove every single Neighborhood Watch sign by July 15.

Officials unanimously approved the $18,000 expenditure earlier this year, drawing the money from the city’s general cash reserves rather than from the police or street maintenance budgets.

Ann Arbor officials claim the Neighborhood Watch program, launched nationwide in the 1970s amid rising crime concerns, has been “defunct” and inactive for decades.

The officials also cited research showing the signs do not actually reduce crime and instead “reinforce biased surveillance practices” and create distrust toward people of color.

Keep reading