You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Politics’ category.
1. Compared to what?
2. At what cost?
3. What hard evidence do you have?
This is such a good turn. Dissent against gender ideology is breaking into the mainstream. Reprinting here to boost awareness.
“As a kid, I was your classic tomboy. I wore short hair, boys’ clothes, and spent most of my time running around outside with my mostly male friends. But it went deeper than that. I fantasized about being the prince and not the princess in Disney stories, and as my body started developing, it didn’t match my expectations.
I would have easily fit the diagnostic criteria for childhood gender dysphoria — back when there actually were diagnostic criteria and before today’s “affirming” approach that does away with any veneer of caution.
Article contentWhen I hit puberty, I started to develop feelings for girls, reinforcing the sense that I was different. By that point, Canada had become a much more accepting place, and I am grateful for that. I just wanted to be left alone to figure things out for myself.
And I did figure things out. At 16, I met my girlfriend and we’ve been together ever since. I am 34 now, and we recently got married and am expecting a child. It has been something of a fairy tale, and we both got to be the princess.
At the same time, there was also an ideology growing around me that could have radically altered my course in life. The idea that some people are “born into the wrong body” was going mainstream. I initially bought into this idea. It was positioned as a natural extension of gay rights. How? I didn’t really know, but it seems like the good, progressive thing to believe.
I wondered into my late 20s whether transition was something I should have done and if I would one day wake up miserable because I was supposed to be a man. After all, so many of the women who were transitioning seemed to be so much like me.
But then I started to hear about “trans kids.” I instinctively knew that it was wrong for youth under 18. It is wrong to medicalize them, and it is wrong to confuse them about their sex at a vulnerable age.
That was more than five years ago, and I’ve been an advocate for preserving young people’s bodies and fertility ever since. For a long time, it didn’t feel like this topic would ever get the attention it deserved. Slowly but surely, the conversation started to reach a wider audience.
Last year, New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe both introduced policies on name and pronoun changes in schools. While these “social transition” steps seem harmless, they are psychological interventions that can encourage a child to lock in their identity and proceed to more permanent changes.
Early this year, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced the most comprehensive set of policies in Canada focusing on the areas of schools, medicine and sports. Recently, she announced that legislation will be tabled this fall
I am grateful to Smith and I applaud her courage in the face of attacks. The premier is constantly accused of hatred and bigotry for seeking to preserve the bodily integrity of youth under 18 and their ability to make fully informed decisions when they reach adulthood.
Article contentSmith has helped move the needle. In a political climate that can get vitriolic, it was far from a safe bet to introduce these policies.
It’s time for the other perspective to be offered. I am a married lesbian and I support Smith. I am grateful for her willingness to take on this issue.
I got lucky. I was able to grow up without the influence of activists making me believe that I should change my body because of my gender nonconformity. My baby and my ability to carry her are the biggest blessings of my life.
For so many young girls, this opportunity has been taken from them. Smith’s proposed legislation will help prevent this from happening to others, and we all owe her a great debt for that.
-Eva Kurilova is a freelance writer who has been engaged with the province’s gender policies.”
“We demand that our right to safety and fair competition on the court be upheld”
We refuse to participate in any match that advances injustice against female athletes.”
“We decided that we’re going to stand in solidarity with other teams that have already forfeited and that we wouldn’t participate in a game that advances sex-based discrimination or injustice against female athletes,” Liilii said.
This is the way. Not participating in a a system that is endangering your rights and safety these ladies are sheroes.
The faux-feminists and men’s rights activists currently in power in British Columbia need to be voted out ASAP. Ms.Boyle decided that female only spaces AT A RAPE CRISIS centre were wrong in EXCLUDING MEN from their lodgings and services.
This half baked fuck-wittery needs to be very, very, far away from the levers of political power.
Devon Eriksen can be counted on to write some thought provoking and challenging ideas.
This is the socialist worldview in a nutshell.
Socialists believe the following:
1. All progress is social. This means that all human problems are solved by rearranging collective human behavior.
2. How to rearrange human behavior to solve problems is already known.
3. Problems therefore exist because there are people who don’t want to behave in this known fashion.
4. Therefore, problems exist because certain people are in the way of progress. Socialist politicians may be grifters who believe in nothing, but their (living) voters, the socialist true believers, hate you, and this is why.
They believe you, your existence, your non-compliance with their plans, is all that stands between humanity and paradise. This is why they will always murder you if they have power. This is why unchecked socialism always leads to the censor, the secret policeman tapping your phone, the neighbors dragged away in the night, the torture chamber, the gulag, the mass grave. Because if you think that nothing stands between you and paradise but stubborn people, then you think you can murder your way to paradise.
When a socialist demands socialism, you either comply or you do not. If you do not comply, he wants to murder you. If you do not comply, then the socialist policy he enacts not only fails to bring about paradise, it makes things worse, so he demands a further socialist policy. If you do not comply, he wants to murder you. If you repeatedly comply, then eventually things get very bad indeed, and the socialist casts about for someone to blame. Surely there must be some non-compliant person around here somewhere. Some counter-revolutionary. He must be found and murdered, and then paradise will be attained.
This isn’t about religion. “Religion” is merely the label they paste on your non-compliance. If you were an atheist, they’d just use another label. That giant finger in the drawing isn’t your beliefs. It’s you. They think you are evil. Not wrong, evil. And they want to kill you. Not all of them think they do, of course. There’s a group called “democratic socialists”, who append the word “democratic” to the front, to mean “I don’t want to kill you, I only want to use the political process to force you to comply.” But when they do, your society enters the same downward spiral described above.
So they eventually decide to kill you.
They will always, eventually, reach the point where they decide to kill someone. Because they always think their utopian plans will work if they kill just one more person, and their utopian plans will never actually work no matter how many people they kill.
What actually works isn’t socialism, it’s technology. Here’s how:
1. All progress is technological. This means that all human problems are solved by figuring out a better understanding of the universe, and creating a piece of technology based on that understanding.
2. Creating new science and technology is hard, and requires a lot time, money, and effort.
3. Problems therefore exist because not enough time, money, and effort has yet been invested to produce the necessary technological breakthrough.
4. Therefore, there is absolutely, positively, 100% no way to solve all human problems right now by acting differently. But we can optimize society for technological progress.
In other words, the “star trek future” isn’t waiting for us to become atheists, because atheism doesn’t produce technology faster or better than any religion that isn’t anti-technology. That “star trek future” is instead waiting on us to invent warp drives, teleporters, and matter nanoassemblers. And every single piece of progress that humanity has achieved came not from social activism, but from technological advancement. The 40 hour work week was merely demanded by unions. It was actually enabled by industrial technology.
Democracy, republicanism, and other forms of populist government were merely demanded by revolutions and philosophies. They were enabled by the rifled firearm. And so on. For every positive change in society and civilization, there is one or more critical pieces of technology that allow it to happen. Once that technology exists, the change is trivial. When it does not exist, forcing that change is disastrous, not positive. A 40 hour work week would exterminate a civilization of bronze age agriculturalists. Democracy would destroy a medieval kingdom. Progress is technological progress.
This is why socialism must be stopped.
Because socialism interferes with technological progress, which is the real driving force behind progress of any kind.
You cannot murder your way to utopia.
Whelp..
Tweet #1 – NDP in full righteous name calling fury.
Tweet #2 – The pigeons coming home to roost.
This is your brain on “anti-racism” and “DEI”.
Just say no.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…