Brava, brava, for bringing the goods and keeping the heat on! FYI, in addition to Mace's efforts, the Protection of Women and Girls Sports Act has been reintroduced for the 119th Congress, and apparently has been fast-tracked for a vote in the House: https://steube.house.gov/press-releases/u-s-rep-greg-steube-reintroduces-his-landmark-legislation-to-protect-womens-sports/ There is some speculation that once it goes to the Senate, Ds in the Senate may have enough votes to filibuster, so it looks like this is a good time for those of us who have D House members and Senators to contact them in support.
I have been wondering to myself what excuses Moulton and Suozzi will come up with to vote no again, notwithstanding their post-election statements. Sorry to be cynical!
It’s not cynical. It’s a realistic concern based on years of watching insincere politicians rule the roost and sell us out at every turn.
If he does a 180 it would be possibly helpful if those of us defending women and kids could think of a way to publicly shame him for his pandering.
I will say, I’d bet my life after his comments that his poor kids probably suffered in whatever fancy ass school they are in here. Massachusetts is drowning in this sickness.
I'm a lesbian who saw the writing on the wall in the late 1970s. A dude in a dress -- whom we'd now call an autogynephile -- came uninvited to our lesbian social group and demanded to be admitted because he was a lesbian. Translation: He was seeking an available vagina because his wife had left him.
What keeps that incident fresh in my memory is the fact that out of a group of about 30 women, only myself and one other, who didn't identify herself, voted against admitting him. Why? They felt sorry for him. We knew how homophobia felt, so we extrapolated. We bleeding heart lesbians wanted to be kind. It was always about wanting to be kind. Besides, what harm could he do? There was just one of him. (Insert laugh track here.)
Why are lesbians so willing to sacrifice women's safe spaces in favor of men in drag? They remain intentionally ignorant so they can continue to be kind. No empathy, no putting themselves in the shoes of incarcerated women who are forced to share a prison cell with a rapist. It's too awful.
Sometimes I think it had something to do with class and exposure to post-modern queer theory. That was a factor in the university town where we lived, but it was also a working class city...
For progressive lesbians, discussion of the risks to incarcerated women is evidence of transphobia. Neither the conversation nor the reality of it can be contemplated. It doesn't happen. It can't happen. It's transphobic even to think about it.
If you haven't seen it, you might enjoy this 5-minute video of Sheila Jeffreys and Lauren Levey discussing their appreciation for Janice Raymond. I'm sharing it here because Lauren descries a scenario in the late 1990s of a man trying to invade her lesbian rap group. At the time, she didn't quite have the analysis to articulate why that was a problem, and she credits Prof Raymond's work with giving her that analysis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNA9pJbVg3k&t=1s
Thanks...I did enjoy it, but it also made me sad and reminded me of how frustrated I was 50 years ago and still am.
I read Raymond's book in the 1980s. She, Mary Daly and Sheila Jeffreys were my sources at that time. (I still have my copy of Sheila's "Unpacking Queer Politics.") The blind spot among lesbians and radical feminists baffles me. Lauren talks about the lack of effective language to explain our position, but she was helped by reading Raymond. I need to read Raymond again, because that's exactly where I am. Ordinary English words have been so redefined by trans ideology that they feel useless. That can't be the end of it. There has to be a way around.
I just read The Transsexual Empire. Raymond had all this down perfectly clearly 45 years ago:
It is more difficult to understand why so many feminists are so ready to accept men—in this case, castrated men—into their most intimate circles.
Certainly, confusion about the erasure of all boundaries is one reason that appeals to the liberal mind and masquerades as “sympathy for all oppressed groups.” Women who believe this, however, fail to see that such liberalism is repressive and that it can only favor and fortify the possession of women by men.
These women also fail to recognize that accepting transsexuals into the feminist community is only another rather unique variation on the age-old theme of women nurturing men, providing them with a safe haven, and, finally, giving them our best energies.
The question arises: are women who accept transsexuals as [male] "lesbian-feminists" expressing gratitude, on some level, to those men who are finally willing to join women and pay for their male privilege with their balls? Gratitude is a quality exhibited by all oppressed groups, when they think that some in the class of oppressors have finally relinquished their benefits to join them.
But, of course, it is doubtful that transsexuals actually give up their male privilege. As one woman put it: “A man who decides to call himself a woman is not giving up his privilege. He is simply using it in a more insidious way.” Furthermore, a man who decides to call himself a "lesbian-feminist" is getting a lot. The transsexually-constructed [male] "lesbian-feminist" is the man who indeed gets to be “the man” in an exclusive women’s club to which he would have otherwise no access.
Women who think that these men are giving up male privilege seem to be naive about the sophisticated ways in which it is possible for men to co-opt women’s energy, time, space, and sexuality. Transsexually-constructed [male] "lesbian-feminists" may be the first men to realize that “if you can’t fight them, join them.”
I added, in brackets, the word "male" and put lesbian-feminists in quotation marks, to clarify that Raymond was talking about men *pretending* to be lesbian-feminists. Raymond used the term "transsexually-constructed" here to mean "male," but we know there is no such a thing as a male lesbian, transsexually-constructed or otherwise.
Elsewhere, Raymond used the term male-to-constructed-female for transgenderist men. Here, she was making the point of them being in the lesbian community.
Also, Raymond was talking about a phenomenon she saw in her own circles--lesbians who were also feminists--rather than either lesbians or feminists in general. She could just as easily have used the word "lesbian," though, as the men she was talking about were not, by any stretch of the imagination, feminists.
Don't use their made-up words. I won't even use their feminized first names. Initial and surname only. I believe these guys get off on hearing others use those feminine names, so it's L. Thomas, R. Levine, M. Bowers, etc. Janice Raymond's work is outstanding, and I believe I was introduced to her in Kara's Substack. "Kindness" has been redefined to mean "Agree with whatever these lunatics say," even if it damages others. I am unable to "be kind" to a male and/or his handmaidens who are unkind to me by playing these games.
I just wanna raise my hand to demonstrate that there is at least one progressive lesbian on the planet, anyway, who is unalterably opposed to all this gender BS. As all of us here know, every bit of this stuff is profoundly REGRESSIVE, and no progressive worthy of the name should have any part of it. Alas.
Thank goodness all my lesbian friends (Dems from boomer to older millennial) never wavered from the age-old truths of sex immutability and the sanctity of sex separated spaces.
Well, time to subscribe so I can chime in. 60yo Black native Californian lesbian feminist athlete lifelong moderate Democrat up until this past election. Did not vote for President this past election. Now Independent. Woke up to what Obama (wtaf) / Biden Title IX changes really meant in 2021. Down the rabbit hole and eyes are wide open. Left all the lesbian/women (Glaad etal NOW etal) orgs after learned their policy on males in female sports. Me , no kids; sister and friends kids grown and none of them exposed to the changes to education downstream of Title IX. Active in lesbian community (clubs etc) when younger, before this new wave, when women knew lesbians are female.
Welcome Inda and similarly, for the first time I did not vote for either presidential candidate (lifelong Dem voter in my 40s). Did a write-in, and was harshly castigated by lefty friends and colleagues, just for the damn write-in. And I live in a solid blue state FFS. They were oh so offended that I refused to cast a ballot for Kamala, because we supposedly needed a woman to be president, no matter how much of a sellout and unpopular she was. Queer academia has done a great job at inverting societal norms and making gays their spokespeople, meanwhile pushing trans on children, and making it seem like a human rights issue. Don’t worry, there are plenty more lesbians like us who won’t stand for this insanity, and we’re coming out of the woodwork. Just not sure what will happen to the young generation of lesbians aka “queer” (Lost cause?)
I hear you EvieU. Since I woke up, I've seen many lesbians, on X of course, all around the world, all generations (yes even some youngins) who know lesbians are female. Many times I mention my demographic to hopefully humbly help expand womens' consciousness, if I can.
Thank you Kara for identifying some of the elected women who are supporting the transgender agenda. Maddeningly, women I've supported in the past with my hard-earned cash, like Ayanna Pressley and AOC have turned on women, colluding in destroying women's shelters, rape services, women's sports, Title IX mandates, safe spaces, etc. Now I've stopped supporting them and have responded to some of their fundraising letters telling them that their support of transgenderism is why. I've also called up local Planet Fitness and told them that I was considering registering all my bookclub members in their Gym, "What was the cost? But first I have to know whether you allow men impersonating women in the women’s areas. If you can't guarantee me that we can't enroll." The Planet Fitness guy was eager to get us to join so he said that he didn't know about the other sites, but he'd guarantee that no men would be in women's areas in his location. I think it might be helpful if we call places like this, claiming interest in joining, but only with the proviso that no men in drag are allowed in women's areas.
We just successfully fired the Democratic Party last November in spite of women who desperately want to save them. Feminists mistakenly thought if we could just get Kamala Harris elected she would fix all this transgender mess. We started with the presidency and now have an opportunity to remove all Democrats who prioritize male rights over female. The question shouldn't be, “How can we save the remnants of our Party?” It should be, “How can we purge the rest of the transition-profiteer-backed misogynists.”
If you are successful in saving the Dem Party from itself, it will continue to drag out this fight by providing partial solutions that hurt women and children. The game plan will be to extend the time it takes for the last of you to peak and come to your senses. They'll keep playing us against each other via social media misinformation. They will successfully extend the profits for transitioning profiteers. They could stretch this fight out another decade at least. But how many women and children will suffer in the interim thanks to those of you who still desperately believe Dems care about us?
If you give Dems your vote in two years (“Must. Retake. The. House!”) regardless of what they do, they will obviously continue the destruction of women's rights. You get what you vote for. What will it take for you to believe them when they tell you exactly how less important your demands are than those who profit from transgender ideology? By voting for them again in two years you will have essentially communicated that you'll never betray them, even as they betray you. Classic battered wife syndrome.
How will elected Dem leaders handle the problem of convicted male rapists who claim to be women and have now been placed in female prisons? Obviously they could continue the practice but remove some of the men after they've raped female prisoners in female prisons. “Look, we fixed the problem!”
How will they “solve” the problem of males beating females in sport? Why, they'll just limit some of the males. Instead of a clear sex category, they'll expend school resources identifying which of the boys are girly enough to compete with the girls.
Instead of figuring out how to save the Dem Party, how about we work to primary every one of them who is digging in his or her heels on this inane ideology? Imagine if you could actually feel good voting for a new set of Dem candidates in 2026 instead of sticking your fingers in your ears to ignore those of us who've been saying for many years that they will never support us.
Kara and others, if you don't want to help finalize the federal bill we've written, you could at least change your perspective and view this as an opportunity to purge bad Democrats. I see you're starting to use some of the terminology we propose. You might actually agree with the entire approach if you took a look at it.
OK, I am going to weigh in here, as it is abundantly clear you are aiming at the wrong target, and this is not the first time I’ve seen you do this. Kara Dansky totally knows the score about the Democratic position on this, is a national (really international) treasure, and is courageous and articulate as well as generous and supportive. And PS, she uses her actual name (as do I), which you do not seem to have the courage to do. If you were willing to come out of the shadows and also to provide links to the organization you are representing and the legislation you are proposing, it is possible you may find allies, who knows, though you definitely need a big attitude adjustment to bring people along. Until then, why on earth should anyone listen to what you have to say?
Come out of the shadows? Our team has reached out to both of you via messages and gotten nowhere. Other people have responded and some have joined our team. Thanks for speaking for Ms Dansky but I'm not “targeting” her in any way. She's obviously both courageous and smart, as are many of us who disagree with you on the effectiveness of trying to change the minds of elected Democrats. We have shared goals but we differ on which strategy will accomplish the objective of restoring sex-based rights. As I said above, my analysis is that the Ds who caused this problem will now pretend to begin “fixing” it by removing some of the men who are terrorizing women in female prisons. They'll address the problem whenever a convicted rapist is caught raping again. Just as the TRAs say about the risk to women and children from males in bathrooms and showers: “Rape is illegal. Wait until it happens and then use the law.” I'd prefer to prevent those rapes, but also prevent voyeurism, which is harder to prove and very destructive to children. You can support the likely drawn out Democratic solution if you like. Perhaps you'll cheer their efforts and encourage people to vote for them again in two years. I prefer to fight them as it's patently obvious that the longer they drag out this fight, the longer they can damage the health of children, the more wars for profit the world we'll be subjected to, the more profits to the ultra wealthy as we stay distracted and the more women's lives are destroyed by oppressive policies. Some feminists convinced themselves that Kamala was secretly supporting trans rights (or as we call it, male rights over female) in order to get elected, whereby she could reveal herself as the hero of American girls and women by restoring sanity. If that's your belief, I respectfully disagree with your analysis.
Our work on other sites like X helped convince 20 million Democrats to not vote for Democrats this year. We're just getting started. The worst candidate in our nation's history just beat the Dem Party. Imagine what we can do when we have a good alternative to Dem policies. But keep supporting them if you want. For the record there are two other feminist groups doing the same thing we are. They also communicate online to suggest collaboration and sometimes garner support while other women who think like you rebuff their efforts. However, I notice that some of the terminology and ideas we promote are beginning to be used even by feminists who think we're on the wrong track. That's a good thing because it means more of you are considering our ideas.
We are finding plenty of allies and partners. If some feminists choose to criticize us, that's fine. We'll just plunk away on the work we're doing without you. I get it that many women really, really want to believe that elected Democrats will do right by us out of the goodness of their hearts. We are more reality based. We are willing to believe the evidence when they intentionally destroy our rights with policies and legislation. YMMV
We intend to offer elected Democrats the opportunity to get on the right side of this issue, so to speak, or get primaried before the midterms. I'm sure some of those politicians we intend to fire are people you'd prefer to just vote for and HOPE for the best. Maybe you believe giving them your unwavering support will help convince them to do the opposite of the policies they've put in place. In those cases, our assessment is substantially different from yours. So we'll get this done with or without your help.
If you feel offended by my comments suggesting a change in perspective or any other idea we promote, perhaps you shouldn't read them anymore. If these ideas bother you, why on earth should you listen to what I have to say? Just stop reading my comments. See you in two years, and may the best strategy win.
The Dems have become part of an authoritarian mass movement that has pseudo religious characteristics. The gender ideology (whatever it is now) is their religion. We could also say they have gone crazy.
sometimes I wonder why lesbians should be more intelligent than anyone else.... if anything, there is a need to belong (and make money) that is stronger than the need to think critically.
The HRC sent out an email to sign a petition to encourage your senators to vote against the ban, but I amended their letter and fixed it:
As your constituent, and a long-time Democrat, I’m asking you to ratify the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, a bill that would ban trans student athletes from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity. Because Gender Identity is a scam, a fad,a lie, and a medical scandal of epic proportions, it should not be encouraged in any case.
School sports are supposed to be about building healthy habits, having fun, and learning how to be part of a team. So-called " Transgender students" who are confused about their sex and have fallen for the lie that is transgenderism, deserve the same chances as other students to learn teamwork, sportsmanship, leadership and self-discipline, and to build a sense of belonging with their peers. They should uphold the most honorable traditions of sport and play with their own sex class.There are sports associations in every state and at every level of competition, and many already have policies in place that allow transgender youth to play in an equitable way with no issues.They should not infringe on women's hard-won rights and should be welcomed into the sex class they are born in. Our families need Congress stepping in to decide which kids belong on which teams, because of the brainwashing on the left: we have no choice if we wish to protect Women's sports..
This bill will help address the harms to women and the brainwashing of homosexual children who are led to enact a lie. It will protect women who are just trying to play sports with their friends. Please encourage any attempt to allow so-called transgender students to play school sports with their same sex peers. Sex is immutable and unchangeable. Gender identity is a fraud.
Brava, brava, for bringing the goods and keeping the heat on! FYI, in addition to Mace's efforts, the Protection of Women and Girls Sports Act has been reintroduced for the 119th Congress, and apparently has been fast-tracked for a vote in the House: https://steube.house.gov/press-releases/u-s-rep-greg-steube-reintroduces-his-landmark-legislation-to-protect-womens-sports/ There is some speculation that once it goes to the Senate, Ds in the Senate may have enough votes to filibuster, so it looks like this is a good time for those of us who have D House members and Senators to contact them in support.
I have been wondering to myself what excuses Moulton and Suozzi will come up with to vote no again, notwithstanding their post-election statements. Sorry to be cynical!
Yes, that will be interesting to watch. My bet is they'll vote no.
It’s not cynical. It’s a realistic concern based on years of watching insincere politicians rule the roost and sell us out at every turn.
If he does a 180 it would be possibly helpful if those of us defending women and kids could think of a way to publicly shame him for his pandering.
I will say, I’d bet my life after his comments that his poor kids probably suffered in whatever fancy ass school they are in here. Massachusetts is drowning in this sickness.
TERFs need to be running for office.
Dem lesbians are the worst on this. So many sellouts propping up pornsick men and this crazy, harmful ideology.
I'm a lesbian who saw the writing on the wall in the late 1970s. A dude in a dress -- whom we'd now call an autogynephile -- came uninvited to our lesbian social group and demanded to be admitted because he was a lesbian. Translation: He was seeking an available vagina because his wife had left him.
What keeps that incident fresh in my memory is the fact that out of a group of about 30 women, only myself and one other, who didn't identify herself, voted against admitting him. Why? They felt sorry for him. We knew how homophobia felt, so we extrapolated. We bleeding heart lesbians wanted to be kind. It was always about wanting to be kind. Besides, what harm could he do? There was just one of him. (Insert laugh track here.)
Why are lesbians so willing to sacrifice women's safe spaces in favor of men in drag? They remain intentionally ignorant so they can continue to be kind. No empathy, no putting themselves in the shoes of incarcerated women who are forced to share a prison cell with a rapist. It's too awful.
Sometimes I think it had something to do with class and exposure to post-modern queer theory. That was a factor in the university town where we lived, but it was also a working class city...
For progressive lesbians, discussion of the risks to incarcerated women is evidence of transphobia. Neither the conversation nor the reality of it can be contemplated. It doesn't happen. It can't happen. It's transphobic even to think about it.
If you haven't seen it, you might enjoy this 5-minute video of Sheila Jeffreys and Lauren Levey discussing their appreciation for Janice Raymond. I'm sharing it here because Lauren descries a scenario in the late 1990s of a man trying to invade her lesbian rap group. At the time, she didn't quite have the analysis to articulate why that was a problem, and she credits Prof Raymond's work with giving her that analysis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNA9pJbVg3k&t=1s
Thanks...I did enjoy it, but it also made me sad and reminded me of how frustrated I was 50 years ago and still am.
I read Raymond's book in the 1980s. She, Mary Daly and Sheila Jeffreys were my sources at that time. (I still have my copy of Sheila's "Unpacking Queer Politics.") The blind spot among lesbians and radical feminists baffles me. Lauren talks about the lack of effective language to explain our position, but she was helped by reading Raymond. I need to read Raymond again, because that's exactly where I am. Ordinary English words have been so redefined by trans ideology that they feel useless. That can't be the end of it. There has to be a way around.
I just read The Transsexual Empire. Raymond had all this down perfectly clearly 45 years ago:
It is more difficult to understand why so many feminists are so ready to accept men—in this case, castrated men—into their most intimate circles.
Certainly, confusion about the erasure of all boundaries is one reason that appeals to the liberal mind and masquerades as “sympathy for all oppressed groups.” Women who believe this, however, fail to see that such liberalism is repressive and that it can only favor and fortify the possession of women by men.
These women also fail to recognize that accepting transsexuals into the feminist community is only another rather unique variation on the age-old theme of women nurturing men, providing them with a safe haven, and, finally, giving them our best energies.
The question arises: are women who accept transsexuals as [male] "lesbian-feminists" expressing gratitude, on some level, to those men who are finally willing to join women and pay for their male privilege with their balls? Gratitude is a quality exhibited by all oppressed groups, when they think that some in the class of oppressors have finally relinquished their benefits to join them.
But, of course, it is doubtful that transsexuals actually give up their male privilege. As one woman put it: “A man who decides to call himself a woman is not giving up his privilege. He is simply using it in a more insidious way.” Furthermore, a man who decides to call himself a "lesbian-feminist" is getting a lot. The transsexually-constructed [male] "lesbian-feminist" is the man who indeed gets to be “the man” in an exclusive women’s club to which he would have otherwise no access.
Women who think that these men are giving up male privilege seem to be naive about the sophisticated ways in which it is possible for men to co-opt women’s energy, time, space, and sexuality. Transsexually-constructed [male] "lesbian-feminists" may be the first men to realize that “if you can’t fight them, join them.”
Thank you. She really gets down to the core issues.
Is this a direct quote?
Oh, yes. It's a direct quote.
I added, in brackets, the word "male" and put lesbian-feminists in quotation marks, to clarify that Raymond was talking about men *pretending* to be lesbian-feminists. Raymond used the term "transsexually-constructed" here to mean "male," but we know there is no such a thing as a male lesbian, transsexually-constructed or otherwise.
Elsewhere, Raymond used the term male-to-constructed-female for transgenderist men. Here, she was making the point of them being in the lesbian community.
Also, Raymond was talking about a phenomenon she saw in her own circles--lesbians who were also feminists--rather than either lesbians or feminists in general. She could just as easily have used the word "lesbian," though, as the men she was talking about were not, by any stretch of the imagination, feminists.
This quote is from Chapter IV: Sappho by Surgery.
Don't use their made-up words. I won't even use their feminized first names. Initial and surname only. I believe these guys get off on hearing others use those feminine names, so it's L. Thomas, R. Levine, M. Bowers, etc. Janice Raymond's work is outstanding, and I believe I was introduced to her in Kara's Substack. "Kindness" has been redefined to mean "Agree with whatever these lunatics say," even if it damages others. I am unable to "be kind" to a male and/or his handmaidens who are unkind to me by playing these games.
I like to use their real names. Because they really don't like that.
I refer to them as “Mr.”
Mr. Thomas. Mr. Levine. Mr. Bowers.
Gets right to the point.
You'll get no argument from me.
No, I hadn't seen it. I'll watch now. Thank you!
I just wanna raise my hand to demonstrate that there is at least one progressive lesbian on the planet, anyway, who is unalterably opposed to all this gender BS. As all of us here know, every bit of this stuff is profoundly REGRESSIVE, and no progressive worthy of the name should have any part of it. Alas.
Thank goodness all my lesbian friends (Dems from boomer to older millennial) never wavered from the age-old truths of sex immutability and the sanctity of sex separated spaces.
Well, time to subscribe so I can chime in. 60yo Black native Californian lesbian feminist athlete lifelong moderate Democrat up until this past election. Did not vote for President this past election. Now Independent. Woke up to what Obama (wtaf) / Biden Title IX changes really meant in 2021. Down the rabbit hole and eyes are wide open. Left all the lesbian/women (Glaad etal NOW etal) orgs after learned their policy on males in female sports. Me , no kids; sister and friends kids grown and none of them exposed to the changes to education downstream of Title IX. Active in lesbian community (clubs etc) when younger, before this new wave, when women knew lesbians are female.
Welcome Inda, and thank you!
You bet, let's go👊🏽
Welcome Inda and similarly, for the first time I did not vote for either presidential candidate (lifelong Dem voter in my 40s). Did a write-in, and was harshly castigated by lefty friends and colleagues, just for the damn write-in. And I live in a solid blue state FFS. They were oh so offended that I refused to cast a ballot for Kamala, because we supposedly needed a woman to be president, no matter how much of a sellout and unpopular she was. Queer academia has done a great job at inverting societal norms and making gays their spokespeople, meanwhile pushing trans on children, and making it seem like a human rights issue. Don’t worry, there are plenty more lesbians like us who won’t stand for this insanity, and we’re coming out of the woodwork. Just not sure what will happen to the young generation of lesbians aka “queer” (Lost cause?)
I hear you EvieU. Since I woke up, I've seen many lesbians, on X of course, all around the world, all generations (yes even some youngins) who know lesbians are female. Many times I mention my demographic to hopefully humbly help expand womens' consciousness, if I can.
Thank you Kara for identifying some of the elected women who are supporting the transgender agenda. Maddeningly, women I've supported in the past with my hard-earned cash, like Ayanna Pressley and AOC have turned on women, colluding in destroying women's shelters, rape services, women's sports, Title IX mandates, safe spaces, etc. Now I've stopped supporting them and have responded to some of their fundraising letters telling them that their support of transgenderism is why. I've also called up local Planet Fitness and told them that I was considering registering all my bookclub members in their Gym, "What was the cost? But first I have to know whether you allow men impersonating women in the women’s areas. If you can't guarantee me that we can't enroll." The Planet Fitness guy was eager to get us to join so he said that he didn't know about the other sites, but he'd guarantee that no men would be in women's areas in his location. I think it might be helpful if we call places like this, claiming interest in joining, but only with the proviso that no men in drag are allowed in women's areas.
We just successfully fired the Democratic Party last November in spite of women who desperately want to save them. Feminists mistakenly thought if we could just get Kamala Harris elected she would fix all this transgender mess. We started with the presidency and now have an opportunity to remove all Democrats who prioritize male rights over female. The question shouldn't be, “How can we save the remnants of our Party?” It should be, “How can we purge the rest of the transition-profiteer-backed misogynists.”
If you are successful in saving the Dem Party from itself, it will continue to drag out this fight by providing partial solutions that hurt women and children. The game plan will be to extend the time it takes for the last of you to peak and come to your senses. They'll keep playing us against each other via social media misinformation. They will successfully extend the profits for transitioning profiteers. They could stretch this fight out another decade at least. But how many women and children will suffer in the interim thanks to those of you who still desperately believe Dems care about us?
If you give Dems your vote in two years (“Must. Retake. The. House!”) regardless of what they do, they will obviously continue the destruction of women's rights. You get what you vote for. What will it take for you to believe them when they tell you exactly how less important your demands are than those who profit from transgender ideology? By voting for them again in two years you will have essentially communicated that you'll never betray them, even as they betray you. Classic battered wife syndrome.
How will elected Dem leaders handle the problem of convicted male rapists who claim to be women and have now been placed in female prisons? Obviously they could continue the practice but remove some of the men after they've raped female prisoners in female prisons. “Look, we fixed the problem!”
How will they “solve” the problem of males beating females in sport? Why, they'll just limit some of the males. Instead of a clear sex category, they'll expend school resources identifying which of the boys are girly enough to compete with the girls.
Instead of figuring out how to save the Dem Party, how about we work to primary every one of them who is digging in his or her heels on this inane ideology? Imagine if you could actually feel good voting for a new set of Dem candidates in 2026 instead of sticking your fingers in your ears to ignore those of us who've been saying for many years that they will never support us.
Kara and others, if you don't want to help finalize the federal bill we've written, you could at least change your perspective and view this as an opportunity to purge bad Democrats. I see you're starting to use some of the terminology we propose. You might actually agree with the entire approach if you took a look at it.
OK, I am going to weigh in here, as it is abundantly clear you are aiming at the wrong target, and this is not the first time I’ve seen you do this. Kara Dansky totally knows the score about the Democratic position on this, is a national (really international) treasure, and is courageous and articulate as well as generous and supportive. And PS, she uses her actual name (as do I), which you do not seem to have the courage to do. If you were willing to come out of the shadows and also to provide links to the organization you are representing and the legislation you are proposing, it is possible you may find allies, who knows, though you definitely need a big attitude adjustment to bring people along. Until then, why on earth should anyone listen to what you have to say?
Come out of the shadows? Our team has reached out to both of you via messages and gotten nowhere. Other people have responded and some have joined our team. Thanks for speaking for Ms Dansky but I'm not “targeting” her in any way. She's obviously both courageous and smart, as are many of us who disagree with you on the effectiveness of trying to change the minds of elected Democrats. We have shared goals but we differ on which strategy will accomplish the objective of restoring sex-based rights. As I said above, my analysis is that the Ds who caused this problem will now pretend to begin “fixing” it by removing some of the men who are terrorizing women in female prisons. They'll address the problem whenever a convicted rapist is caught raping again. Just as the TRAs say about the risk to women and children from males in bathrooms and showers: “Rape is illegal. Wait until it happens and then use the law.” I'd prefer to prevent those rapes, but also prevent voyeurism, which is harder to prove and very destructive to children. You can support the likely drawn out Democratic solution if you like. Perhaps you'll cheer their efforts and encourage people to vote for them again in two years. I prefer to fight them as it's patently obvious that the longer they drag out this fight, the longer they can damage the health of children, the more wars for profit the world we'll be subjected to, the more profits to the ultra wealthy as we stay distracted and the more women's lives are destroyed by oppressive policies. Some feminists convinced themselves that Kamala was secretly supporting trans rights (or as we call it, male rights over female) in order to get elected, whereby she could reveal herself as the hero of American girls and women by restoring sanity. If that's your belief, I respectfully disagree with your analysis.
Our work on other sites like X helped convince 20 million Democrats to not vote for Democrats this year. We're just getting started. The worst candidate in our nation's history just beat the Dem Party. Imagine what we can do when we have a good alternative to Dem policies. But keep supporting them if you want. For the record there are two other feminist groups doing the same thing we are. They also communicate online to suggest collaboration and sometimes garner support while other women who think like you rebuff their efforts. However, I notice that some of the terminology and ideas we promote are beginning to be used even by feminists who think we're on the wrong track. That's a good thing because it means more of you are considering our ideas.
We are finding plenty of allies and partners. If some feminists choose to criticize us, that's fine. We'll just plunk away on the work we're doing without you. I get it that many women really, really want to believe that elected Democrats will do right by us out of the goodness of their hearts. We are more reality based. We are willing to believe the evidence when they intentionally destroy our rights with policies and legislation. YMMV
We intend to offer elected Democrats the opportunity to get on the right side of this issue, so to speak, or get primaried before the midterms. I'm sure some of those politicians we intend to fire are people you'd prefer to just vote for and HOPE for the best. Maybe you believe giving them your unwavering support will help convince them to do the opposite of the policies they've put in place. In those cases, our assessment is substantially different from yours. So we'll get this done with or without your help.
If you feel offended by my comments suggesting a change in perspective or any other idea we promote, perhaps you shouldn't read them anymore. If these ideas bother you, why on earth should you listen to what I have to say? Just stop reading my comments. See you in two years, and may the best strategy win.
Dems are committing suicide over this issue. It’s very perplexing.
The Dems have become part of an authoritarian mass movement that has pseudo religious characteristics. The gender ideology (whatever it is now) is their religion. We could also say they have gone crazy.
sometimes I wonder why lesbians should be more intelligent than anyone else.... if anything, there is a need to belong (and make money) that is stronger than the need to think critically.
The HRC sent out an email to sign a petition to encourage your senators to vote against the ban, but I amended their letter and fixed it:
As your constituent, and a long-time Democrat, I’m asking you to ratify the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, a bill that would ban trans student athletes from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity. Because Gender Identity is a scam, a fad,a lie, and a medical scandal of epic proportions, it should not be encouraged in any case.
School sports are supposed to be about building healthy habits, having fun, and learning how to be part of a team. So-called " Transgender students" who are confused about their sex and have fallen for the lie that is transgenderism, deserve the same chances as other students to learn teamwork, sportsmanship, leadership and self-discipline, and to build a sense of belonging with their peers. They should uphold the most honorable traditions of sport and play with their own sex class.There are sports associations in every state and at every level of competition, and many already have policies in place that allow transgender youth to play in an equitable way with no issues.They should not infringe on women's hard-won rights and should be welcomed into the sex class they are born in. Our families need Congress stepping in to decide which kids belong on which teams, because of the brainwashing on the left: we have no choice if we wish to protect Women's sports..
This bill will help address the harms to women and the brainwashing of homosexual children who are led to enact a lie. It will protect women who are just trying to play sports with their friends. Please encourage any attempt to allow so-called transgender students to play school sports with their same sex peers. Sex is immutable and unchangeable. Gender identity is a fraud.
Sincerely,