You Are the Population They Want to Control thumbnail

You Are the Population They Want to Control

By Robert Malone

Worldwide birthrate per 1,000 people follows a very predictable trend. In “developed” and/or wealthy nations, the birthrate is low and in nations at the lower end of the economic development scale, the birthrate is high. Nothing new there.

Many countries, including the US, have birthrates that either are too low to sustain current population levels or are stable. Since 1970, the population of people born in the US has been stable at below 300 million. In fact, some estimates show a decline in population. All of the population growth in the US during this time period has been due to immigration. That is why the USA has grown to 336 million people in 50 years. This trend has only increased in recent years.

There were a record 44.8 million immigrants living in the US in 2018, making up 13.7 percent of the nation’s population. This represents a more than fourfold increase since 1960, when 9.7 million immigrants lived in the US, accounting for 5.4 percent of the total US population

For Jill and I growing up in a blue state, we were indoctrinated at an early age by the public school system that having two children was the responsible thing to do to save the planet from overpopulation. That careers were more important than having a large family. That women would find more fulfillment in a education and career, as opposed to staying at home. That women should defer motherhood until college and a career were firmed established. That this was the responsible path to take. Today, young women receive the same messaging from our government, our schools systems, and mainstream corporate media.

This messaging by the US government is still as strident as when I was in my youth 50 to 60 years ago.

The truth is that UN’s Agenda 2030 asserts that migration is a human right. What this means in practicality is that persons born in countries with high birthrates have a right to migrate into wealthy countries with low birth rates.

To begin – migration is not a “human right.” Property laws and nation states exist for a reason. To assert otherwise is to assert that there is a one-world government which is in control of migration. Another usurpation of authority by the UN and the WEF.

This nation’s rules and regulations, our very Constitution do not apply to non-citizens. This is by design. Let’s abide by our Constitution and Bill or Rights, not UN agreements, such as Agenda 2030, which was signed by a US president and never ratified by the Senate.

Our country has done a fine job of convincing the American populace that large family size hurts families and individuals in aggregate. We were told that the reward of that, for better or worse, would be a stabilized population over time and preservation of the American way of life, environment, cultural heritage and associated economic opportunities for US citizens. And yet still they persist. This week, Kamala Harris specifically stated that a reduced population was key to children being able to breath and drink clean water. This is not the first time she has asserted this false narrative.

When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breath clean air and drink clean water.” – Kamala Harri

Yet, the Biden border crisis grows ever more urgent and the rate of illegal immigration continues to surge. It is a no brainer to think that an option to reduce population might be as simple as reducing immigration, if that was their true intent.

The truth is that the US has a vibrant and amazing culture. A heritage built on independence, free speech, shared values, and strong work ethic. This heritage can easily be diluted by too much immigration. Just look what is happening France right now. Open migration policies have worked to cause a vast instability within the nation. France literally can no longer integrate so many people, with such different sets of cultural norms into their core national culture. This is not progress.

Under globalism, the heterogeneous cultures throughout the world are being weaponized as a way to destroy diversity; a path towards enabling a single, globalized government controlled by the UN and the WEF. Which is precisely what open borders, the immigration policies of the UN and even Kamala Harris’ statements seem to be working towards. It is time to end this nonsense and get back to a closed and orderly immigration system.

There are over 8 billion people in the world. The US can not take all those that wish to immigrate. To think otherwise is foolish.

America has to be an independent and free nation. We need to rely on Americans for our goods and services. A strong economy is one that meets its own needs internally. Whereby goods, services, medical care, and energy are produced domestically. A strong nation doesn’t need to import low-wage earners to do its dirty work. The bizarre directive of reducing the naturally born population while importing new immigrants serves no functional purpose except to further globalize the USA.

By accepting large numbers of immigrants while reducing our own American population, we further regress as a nation, and we will continue to accelerate economic devastation of both middle class and urban poor citizens. A new world order where migration is a right, borders are open and the UN controls the ebb and flow of populations is ceding American nationalism and will destroy the American experiment in self-governance.

Our government needs to stay out of the business of enforcing population measures.

Which brings me to the mRNA genetic shots. People worry that the mRNA jabs have some sequence or component, such as the lipid nano-particle or genetic code, which are causing sterility. And that these were intentionally designed to cause a decrease in fertility worldwide. This is not a completely unrealistic fear.

For years, there have been rumors of abortion vaccines and anti-fertility vaccines being developed in India and Africa. With evidence being presented for and against these rumors. But we do know for sure that China used forced sterilizations and forced abortions on its own citizens. Now, China worries that their population levels are crumbling rapidly. Government controls on family choices are immoral. The idea of a vaccine to control population is repugnant.

Which brings me to a newly published Nature paper that shows that using adeno-associated viral vectored techniques, cats can be permanently sterilized. In this essay, I don’t want to get into the science behind this (let’s defer that to a later essay) but I do want to discuss the ethics of developing “gene therapy” techniques that rely on viral vectors for sterilization.

To begin with, such a fertility gene therapy technique using adeno-associated virus (AAV) “gene therapy” vectors could be accidentally or purposefully modified to be infectious. This requires a recombination event (rescue) of another related adenovirus, which could be a wild type. Once that happens, the viral vector could be replication competent: ergo infectious. Although AAV “gene therapy” vectors are not a full replicating virus; the truth is that in a research setting, using the full virus to create infectious products is relatively simple. It could be as simple as missing a purification step or a recombination event. If such a product were to escape or be released into the general cat population, it would be a disaster. If such a vector had a rescue event in an injected animal, it could literally create a new virus. What happens if it were to infect on other feline species, such as cheetahs, big cats, cougars or bobcats? There is a scenario whereby it could decimate the population of an endangered species or all the cats . Furthermore, there is a possibility that such a virus could jump species – even into humans. Adeno-associated viruses are respiratory viruses, so can spread easily. What happens then?

Not to mention, we already know that NGOs and governments are willing to consider reducing population via vaccination or forced sterilization. Who is to say whether an organization, perhaps even one with the “best of intentions” in mind (or believing that “the ends justify the means”), would be willing to go there. After what we have experienced over the past three years, I would consider it in the realm of possibility. Kamala Harris, Bill Gates and the WEF and UN all have made their positions crystal clear. Population reduction is imperative.

There must be more regulatory controls on biological research for both animals and humans.

But in the meantime, we have to consider that the government doesn’t really care about population control. You can know them by their actions, not their words. Their words endorse low birthrate as a pathway to population stabilization, but their actions enable rampant population growth due to immigration. The DATA indicate that what they really are striving for is a New World Order, whereby the UN becomes the dominant force of the world, with nation states nestled under their organizational structure. One in which out-migration combined with regional population control via government-enabled birth control (via both pharmaceuticals and deployed propaganda) is designed to augment that process of enabling populations born in economically disadvantaged regions to gain control of more economically advanced nations and infrastructure while destroying the cultures and politico/economic structures which have historically enabled the economic development of these more advanced regions.

*****

This article was published by the Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

Author -Robert W. Malone is a physician and biochemist. His work focuses on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research. You can find him at Substack and Gettr

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Montana State Library Commission Cuts Ties With American Library Association Over New ‘Marxist Lesbian’ President thumbnail

Montana State Library Commission Cuts Ties With American Library Association Over New ‘Marxist Lesbian’ President

By Joshua Arnold

The Montana State Library Commission voted Tuesday to withdraw from the American Library Association based on that organization’s new president, who is a “Marxist lesbian” by her own description.

The lopsided vote (5-1, with one abstention) represents the first time a state entity has withdrawn from the 147-year-old nonprofit.

“Our oath of office and resulting duty to the Constitution forbids association with an organization led by a Marxist,” the commission told the ALA.

After winning an election to become the president of the ALA from 2023-2024, Emily Drabinski celebrated in a now-deleted tweet, “I just cannot believe that a Marxist lesbian who believes that collective power is possible to build and can be wielded for a better world is the president-elect of the @ALALibrary. I am so excited for what we will do together. Solidarity! And my mom is SO PROUD[.] I love you[,] mom.”

Drabinski later confirmed in an interview that the “Marxist lesbian” label is “very much who I am and shapes a lot of how I think about social change and making a difference in the world.”

“Queer theory informs new strategies for teaching the library catalog from a queer perspective,” Drabinski wrote in 2013, in an article titled “Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction,” which was published in the peer-reviewed quarterly journal Library.

Drabinski speaks frequently on topics such as “organizing for change,” “teaching the radical catalog,” “decolonizing the library catalogue,” “herstory through activism,” and “critical librarianship.”

In 2019, she co-authored a research article in Transgender Studies Quarterly documenting “a collective effort by a handful of catalogers” to revise library catalogue practices “so that binary gender was not encoded into the metadata of library records.”

“The ALA has been promoting progressive ideology for many years,” Meg Kilgannon, Family Research Council senior fellow for education studies, told The Washington Stand. “Their annual conference has had breakout sessions on how to feature racist and sexualized content frequently. The reelection of an openly Marxist president, who ran for the job promising to inject her militant views into the organization, was the last straw in Montana.”

At the commission’s June 22 meeting, Commissioner Tom Burnett proposed to consider withdrawing from the ALA at a special meeting, which was scheduled for Tuesday.

“Marxism stands in direct opposition to the principles of the Constitution of the United States,” said Burnett. “It’s fair to discuss and learn about Marxism, not to affiliate with Marxist-led organizations.”

“I believe that the national association has been polarized,” agreed Montana Superintendent of Public Instruction Elsie Arntzen, another commissioner. “We do not need to be tethered to a national organization that does not honor our great state, our values, or our nation as being America.”

Kilgannon said public libraries are especially important in a state like Montana, a mostly rural state with long months of winter weather.

“The public library is where movies are checked out, books are checked out, community fellowship happens, especially when the weather is bad,” she said. “When politics enter this space or ideology takes over, it alienates the people libraries are supposed to serve.”

During an hour of public comment, many speakers supported the decision to withdraw from the ALA.

“I think this is a really good move to send a really clear signal to our national organizations that we are not in agreement with the direction they are taking these organizations,” said parent Cheryl Tusken.

Tusken drew a parallel to the Montana School Boards Association’s withdrawal from the National School Boards Association last year.

After NSBA leadership conspired with the Biden administration to draft a letter asking it to investigate concerned parents as domestic terrorists, 30 of its 49 member state associations “distanced themselves from the NSBA’s letter,” and 26 states took “further action … to withdraw membership, participation, or dues from NSBA.”

Even though the NSBA appointed a new CEO and issued an apology, many of those state associations formed their own alternate interstate association instead of returning.

“We are grateful to them for their leadership in setting a standard other states should follow,” said Kilgannon. “The National School Boards Association learned this the hard way. Amazingly, other education groups have failed to learn from that example or the millions of parents across the country who are speaking out.”

The Executive Board of the Montana Library Association issued a statement opposing the decision to withdraw from the ALA. However, not every Montana librarian shared its position.

One Montana librarian submitted an email comment, concealing his identity “due to fear of retribution.” He complained that he had watched “my profession go from honorable to shameful,” as “libraries all over the country and within Montana have shifted from serving communities to serving power.”

The anonymous librarian lamented that he noticed a “change in my co-workers who had become aggressive to the point of supporting violent acts (I have evidence of this I am not willing to share in an email).” He said he had “become fluent in critical pedagogy” to “adapt to the rapidly deteriorating conditions in my workplace and surroundings.”

In April, Montana found itself embroiled in a tense cultural controversy that drew national attention when the Legislature worked to enact a law to protect minors from irreversible, harmful gender-transition procedures.

A trans-identifying lawmaker accused his colleagues of having “blood on your hands” and urged on protesters who were disrupting proceedings. The protests only grew more heated after the Legislature censured the representative because he refused to apologize.

It “said a lot” that the librarian was afraid to use his or her name, Commissioner Tammy Hall noted, “because of the personal attacks this person would be open to if they didn’t follow what I would call ‘the woke agenda being promoted by the ALA to our librarians.’”

“Parents all over the country are waking up to the fact that many in organizations like ALA are not willing to entertain other ideas or accommodate differences,” Kilgannon added. “The best course of action now is to leave the organization, take your funds and brain power with you, and use that money to serve the people in your state.”

*****

This article was published by The Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Movie Review: The Sound of Freedom thumbnail

Movie Review: The Sound of Freedom

By Neland Nobel

From seemingly out of the blue, an independent film about child sex trafficking has eclipsed some heavyweight Hollywood productions for the summer box office draw. In actuality, we learn the film was produced some five years ago and it took all this time and struggle to get it to the big screen.  Why such a struggle?

Like many of you, we have heard about the film and the criticism that it was simply a front for the blatherings of Qu Anon conspiracy advocates.  But most of this is coming from talking heads on left-wing TV networks and we discounted much of what they said.

Besides, The Prickly Pear had run some important articles (here and here) about the film, so we decided to see it for ourselves.

There have also been anecdotal reports of “funny business” by some theatres to suppress viewership.  We had our own experience and can’t verify the experience in the video below.

We saw the show at a multiplex in Arrow Head Mall in West Phoenix.  As we attempted to purchase for a matinee show, we were shown a diagram of a full theatre with just two seats available, right up against the big screen in the extreme right-hand extreme corner.  We decided to take them knowing that a visit to the chiropractor would likely follow almost two hours of stressed necks.  After all, we were late getting to the facility and felt that was the penalty for tardiness.  But once we were in, we found at least a half dozen empty seats and moved to more comfortable seating.  Why would theatres do that?  Was this deliberate or just incompetence? Aren’t they dying to win back customers?

We were glad to find seating. Wow, what a movie!

Both my wife and I felt we could not recall ever seeing a movie as moving as this one.  It is extremely well-acted.  We marveled at where the producers found these child actors and actresses. Jim Caviezel is outstanding and believable.

This is no date night movie.  The theme is a dark one, and that is perhaps what is drawing the ire of the Left.  It suggests there are boundaries when it comes to sexual behavior and the children are off limits.  This happens to be a big topic right now in our society and the Left seems hell-bent on sexualizing children.  For what ends are debatable but the attempt is undeniable.

Some, of course, will not tolerate any “God Talk” in a movie, although they are quite happy to see lots of secular moralizing about “global warming”, racism, and gay rights.  But we found really no political content in this movie.

There is mention of God only twice I can recall.  One involves the statement that “God’s children are not for sale.”  One would have to be really jaded to object to that.  The movie does not do a lot of moralizing but the story itself carries the burden.

We are very hard-pressed to see why so many critics either ignore or criticize this movie.  You would think if there was any subject where a bipartisan consensus could be achieved, it would be in opposition to child sex slavery.

Conservatives need to support all the forms of new communication that help break the monopoly of the Left on our culture. See the film and support its producers.  Moreover, see this film because it is powerful and beautiful art that tells an important story and you are well justified to see it on those grounds alone.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Gallup Poll Reveals Americans’ Plummeting Confidence in Public Schools thumbnail

Gallup Poll Reveals Americans’ Plummeting Confidence in Public Schools

By Kerry McDonald

Americans have soured on public schools, but there are alternatives.

Americans have soured on public schools. That’s the takeaway from Gallup polling results released earlier this month showing that Americans’ confidence in public schools is at a low point, with only 26 percent of respondents indicating a “Great deal/Fair amount” of confidence in that institution.

Indeed, public schools join three other institutions that are also at or tied with their record lows, including the police, large technology companies, and big business. Along with the presidency, public schools are now among the most politically polarizing institutions in the US.

On a positive note, confidence in small businesses remained high, topping the list of institutions tracked annually by Gallup. It’s not surprising, then, that more parents are turning away from public schooling and choosing smaller, low-cost private schools and related out-of-system learning models, like homeschooling.

It’s also not surprising that there is growing support among Americans for school choice policies that enable education funding to follow students instead of going to school systems. 2023 has become a record year for school choice, with several states now joining Arizona in passing universal education choice legislation for all K-12 students.

Even in states without robust school choice policies, like where I am in Massachusetts, parents are continuing to choose education options beyond their assigned district schools. This exodus may have accelerated during the school closures of 2020, but it’s hardly disappearing. Demand for alternatives to public schools remains high, and education entrepreneurs are rising to meet that demand throughout the US.

“Families are in search of programs that can deliver personalized, high-quality instruction to their children,” said Ada Salie, who launched a learning center in Massachusetts in 2021 and is opening two additional locations across the state this fall. “As alternative education programs, we can pivot quickly in response to the needs of our students, and allow them to learn in the ways that serve them best.”

Salie’s program, Life Rediscovered, offers full- and part-time programming for homeschoolers, including many who have recently opted out of public schooling. Her program offers a blend of academic support, student-led projects, abundant time outside, and a cohesive, mixed-age community of learners and hired educators. This model is attractive to many families, with Salie’s three locations now at or near capacity.

Salie credits much of her expansion success to grants she has received from the VELA Education Fund, a national, philanthropic non-profit organization that supports entrepreneurial parents and teachers who are building unconventional, out-of-system learning models. Since launching publicly in 2019, VELA has issued grants to more than 2,200 everyday entrepreneurs, totaling more than $26 million. “We would not have had the confidence to go ahead with opening more sites without funding from VELA,” said Salie.

With back-to-school season just around the corner, parents don’t need to be tied to a school assignment that doesn’t meet their expectations. There is a growing number of inexpensive private schools and alternative education models all over the US, representing a wide variety of educational philosophies and approaches. I recently spotlighted 35 of them across five cities, from the busy streets of New York to the quiet crossroads of Grants Pass, Oregon.

Confidence in public schools may be fading at least in part due to their politically polarizing characteristics that inevitably create a battle of wills among diverse constituents with different preferences and worldviews. A decentralized education ecosystem, by contrast, allows families to choose what is best for their children without forcing their preferences upon others.

As faith in large, centralized institutions wanes, look to the entrepreneurs and small business owners who are creating what people want, in education and elsewhere, while reducing polarization and social strife.

*****

This article was published by FEE, The Foundation for Economic Education, and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Rules For Dealing With Crisis thumbnail

Rules For Dealing With Crisis

By Ken Veit

Editors’ Note: Ken Veit is a man of immense experience. A trained actuary, he managed an international firm for many years as well as a successful local business.  He has worked and traveled extensively abroad and is one of the most well-read people we have ever met. In a world that could use some wisdom, Ken can help.

Herewith are “Ken’s Rules” which I have accumulated over the years. There are 3 sets. One has to do with handling crises and which we all experience. A second set covers doing business internationally, an area where my expertise was hard-earned through many faux pas. The final section covers relationships with women, an area of great mystery for most men, including myself.

First Set: HANDLING CRISIS

Don’t panic.

Don’t lie, especially not to yourself. The situation is what it is. Deal with it.

Stop the bleeding. (Sometimes expressed as, “When you are in a deep hole, stop digging.”)

Focus on fixing, not blaming. If the crisis is your fault, don’t waste time beating yourself up.

Don’t try to shift blame. The truth usually comes out in the end.

Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

Don’t waste time bewailing your bad luck. It happens to everyone from time to time. This is just one of those times for you.

Focus on the big problem and ignore things that are unimportant but give a false sense of comfort when you deal with them.

Face courageously what you will do if everything happens that you dread most.

Do not hesitate to ask for help from anyone. Don’t expect a hero to appear or try to be one yourself.

Be aware of who might cheer if your crisis becomes a disaster.

Second Set: RULES FOR DOING BUSINESS INTERNATIONALLY

The Golden Rule is global in scope.

Assume nothing. Things that are unacceptable or illegal at home may be OK elsewhere, and vice versa.

Trust but verify (Ronald Reagan). That cuts both ways. Foreigners may need to feel they can trust you before they offer friendship. American informality and seeming instant friendship can confuse them.

Respect local cultures. Try the local food, even if the thought turns your stomach. It is OK to not like it, but unless you show respect, you will never be accepted. You haven’t lived until you have tried swallowing a sheep’s eyeballs.

Avoid arrogance. No one likes being made to feel inferior. As American culture has displayed more unattractive features in recent years, it is more and more inappropriate to act as though foreigners are “natives” or less sophisticated. In fact, for all our technological brilliance, the U.S. is falling behind much of the world in its cultural superiority.

Talk less; listen more. You will be surprised at how much you must learn.

Humor makes friends. Every culture loves to laugh, but be careful, because humor varies widely from one place to another. Laugh with, not at.

All peoples need a sense of belonging. Be inclusive, not superior. Foreigners may be as uncertain about you as you are of them.

Identify a reliable local guide who can tell you when you are making a fool of yourself. This is harder than you think, both for you and for them.

Learn to say “Please”, “Thank you”, and “Sorry” in the local language, and pronounce them correctly.

Third Set: RULES FOR MAINTAINING GOOD RELATIONS WITH WOMEN (Things to remember)

They always want options before deciding.

They don’t always ask for what they want. They expect you to know.

They are more likely to respect rules than men (who typically seek ways around rules).

They are amazingly able to talk and listen simultaneously, a skill most men lack.

They prefer men just listening to their complaints with sympathy, rather than necessarily trying to fix them.

They notice little things that most men are oblivious to or simply ignore. When a wife says, “Oh! There is no cap on the toothpaste again”, a man can safely interpret this as the filing of a domestic grievance.

In an argument, logic alone may not move them unless their feelings are also convinced.

They generally are more loyal than men and probably work harder than their male counterparts, perhaps because they feel they are still on probation in a man’s world. Anything a male boss can do to dispel such apprehensions with feelings of security will yield a big dividend.

They generally enjoy nurturing more than men, and they are more aware of the level of harmony (or disharmony) in a group. They appreciate that skill being acknowledged.

They are formidable enemies. “Hell hath no fury…” does not just operate in sexual breakups.

They find humor in a man sexier than physical attractiveness. Walt Disney explained this in the cartoon character Jessica Rabbit.

They resent being treated as somehow lesser than men, as hothouse flowers needing protection, or as potential bedmates.

I must caveat the last set of observations as being those of an old man from an era that is now past. It may well be that women today are as ambitious, arrogant, competitive, competent, focused, grasping, intimidating, inspirational, mendacious, objective, obnoxious, realistic, risk-seeking, and scheming as any man. I can only speak of females as I have experienced them. I confess to appreciating the sharper and more worldly women of today but regret that it has often come at the cost of a reduction in their softer side. As women like to nurture their men, so men like to feel they are protecting their women.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

‘Sound of Freedom’ Rings: Jim Caviezel’s Sex Trafficking Thriller Punches Out Indiana Jones at July 4 Box Office thumbnail

‘Sound of Freedom’ Rings: Jim Caviezel’s Sex Trafficking Thriller Punches Out Indiana Jones at July 4 Box Office

By Tyler O’Neil

Angel Studios’ “Sound of Freedom,” an action thriller exposing the child sex slave trade featuring “Passion of the Christ” actor Jim Caviezel, sold more tickets heading into its opening day July 4 than the blockbuster wannabe “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny.”

“As exciting that it is to hit the number 1 spot for this summer opening, it doesn’t even come close to the excitement that the number means for awareness of this issue,” Jordan Harmon, co-owner of Angel Studios, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Wednesday.

“Sound of Freedom” topped the charts with $14.3 million in ticket sales at 2,634 theaters on the Fourth of July, according to Box Office Mojo. “Indiana Jones” came in second with $11.7 million at 4,600 theaters. Disney’s “Elemental,” with $2.8 million at 3,650 theaters, was a distant third.

Harmon said Angel had internal data showing that the film would likely bring in “significantly more than anybody projected,” but “this blew us away.”

“The early projections had the Sound of Freedom at $10 million for the whole week, to do $14-plus million on opening day is wild,” he added. “We’re thrilled to death, there’s a lot to do and there’s awareness to be brought to this incredible cause.”

“That number is a reflection of the lives that will be rescued from this darkness,” Harmon declared.

“Sound of Freedom” tells the story of Tim Ballard (Caviezel), a former agent at the Department of Homeland Security who rescued hundreds of children from sex slavery. Ballard has warned that the Biden administration’s border policy and its transgender ideology aid and abet the evils of the global child sex slave trade. As an actor, Caviezel has spoken out against the legacy media for burying such important issues.

Yet some news outlets have questioned the Caviezel film’s impressive haul, claiming that some of the tickets don’t count. Deadline’s Anthony D’Alessandro had the top two spots reversed, claiming that Indy “officially wins” with $11.698 million and “Sound of Freedom” takes a respectable second with $11.5 million. Why the disparity?

“Angel Studios is a using a crowdfunding platform to spur its ticket sales. Known as Pay It Forward, the patent-pending technology from the distributor is billed as empowering moviegoers to purchase tickets for other people,” the Deadline reporter explained.

Angel Studios launched Pay It Forward for the movie “His Only Son,” and it uses the program to enable viewers to purchase episodes of the hit streaming series about Jesus, “The Chosen,” so others can watch it for free online.

Angel Studios CEO Neal Harmon touted Pay It Forward in his statement on “Sound of Freedom” hitting the top spot at the box office. The company’s press release reads: “Angel Studios’ Pay It Forward Technology Propels Sound of Freedom to #1 movie in America July 4th.”

“The industry’s tossing and turning to even understand what we’re doing,” Jordan Harmon told The Daily Signal. “They don’t really know how to even process that we’ve created a new way for box office to increase drastically.”

With Pay It Forward, there are three potential buckets of tickets: tickets for July 4 showings that audiences purchased, tickets that people purchased through Pay It Forward before July 4 that were claimed for July 4 showings, and tickets that people purchased through Pay It Forward that are still available for people to claim for showings after July 4. These unclaimed tickets may play a similar role to pre-purchased tickets, when someone buys a ticket on July 4 for a showing that will take place at a later date, such as July 8.

Since distributors report their own box office numbers, “every studio probably has its own methodologies,” Harmon explained. While most distributors probably count “butts in seats” for the gross box office, Angel Studios has its own method of counting Pay It Forward tickets.

Harmon said “it doesn’t really matter” how Angel counts the ticket sales because “we’re never going to double-count tickets or purchases.” He reiterated that Hollywood doesn’t know what to make of Pay It Forward because “it’s never been done before.”

The Angel Studios film “His Only Son,” which tells the story of Abraham and his son Isaac, outpunched “Creed III” at the box office earlier this year.


Disney did not respond to a request for comment about the Pay It Forward numbers by publication time.

*****

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Hobbs Doubles Down On Executive Orders For LGBTQ Community thumbnail

Hobbs Doubles Down On Executive Orders For LGBTQ Community

By Daniel Stefanski

Unwilling to work with the Arizona State Legislature, Governor Katie Hobbs has again chosen to exercise unilateral power in the pursuit of her progressive plans.

On Tuesday, Governor Katie Hobbs announced that she signed two Executive Orders to “restore rights and protect LGBTQ+ Arizonans.” According to Hobbs’ Office, the Orders “ensure the state employee health care plan covers medically-necessary gender-affirming surgery” and bar “state agencies from funding, promoting, or supporting conversion therapy against LGBTQ+ Arizonans.”

In a press release, the governor said, “Our LGBTQ+ community should never have to face hate and discrimination, and I will do everything in my power to fight for full equality. The State is leading by example on this issue, and we will continue working until Arizona is a place where every individual can participate equally in our economy and our workforce without fear of discrimination or exclusion.”

Legislative Republicans, already working through their options for addressing Hobbs’ recent Executive Order on abortion, were quick to react. Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen did not mince his words in response to the state’s chief executive’s latest action, tweeting, “Instead of helping struggling AZ families plagued by inflation, the governor just issued an order for taxpayers to cover the cost of elective, sex reassignment surgeries. This illegal, out of touch, unprecedented overreach did not receive proper JLBC review as required by law.”

The Arizona Senate Republicans Caucus echoed its leader, writing, “Hobbs continues to show just how tone deaf she is with the majority of hard-working Arizonans. Her weak leadership abilities are on full display with every executive order and ignorant veto she drops.”

The Center for Arizona Policy immediately issued a statement to call Hobbs’ action a “dangerous power grab,” stating, “Governor Katie Hobbs should have run for the Arizona Legislature if she wanted to make law. Arizona lawmakers who represent Arizonans throughout the state are tasked with passing new laws, not the Governor. This power grab is not only partisan, but it is unwise and dangerous. What she calls “conversion therapy” amounts to basic counseling for those struggling with their gender. It is likely unconstitutional to tell therapists what they can say and citizens what therapy they can seek. It is also unconscionable to block coverage for counseling and health services sought by state employees and their dependents.”

The pro-life, pro-family organization added, “Hobbs also appears to be encouraging irreversible and experimental sex-change surgeries and drug therapies at a time when European countries are increasingly pulling back because of the damage done to so many. We also continue to see more and more people detransition after regretting the permanent effects of such drug therapies and surgeries.”

Many Democrats around the state cheered on the governor’s move, including Representative Nancy Gutierrez, who tweeted, “I was happy to be there today and witness these Executive Orders by Governor Hobbs! Our community will get the care they desire and be able to use their health insurance. I’m also grateful that no other child will subjected to harmful conversion therapy.”

Arizona Republicans now find themselves facing a Democrat governor who is growing increasingly bolder about pushing the bounds of her constitutionally stipulated authority. Just two months ago, Hobbs went through what some might consider as the lowest moments of her fledgling administration, vetoing a wildly popular (and overwhelmingly) bipartisan “Tamale Bill,” signing a state budget that allowed Republicans to protect key priorities (such as the ESA program), and losing her chief of staff.

However, the events of the past calendar week have seemed to buoy the governor’s previously diminishing political capital, starting with her Executive Order to “centralize all abortion-related prosecutions under the Attorney General.” On Monday, after taking the weekend to contemplate a plan of response, Senator Jake Hoffman, the Chairman of the Committee on Director Nominations, announced that he was cancelling Tuesday’s hearing and requested a meeting with the Hobbs’ administration “to discuss any additional overreach (her) office intends to take requiring complicity from Executive Directors.”

After a report circulated that this meeting was “not likely” to occur, Senator T.J. Shope tweeted, “Oh…so much for that Open Door Policy we’ve heard about over and over again. I guess Governor Hobbs would rather fight it out in an adversarial court setting as opposed to an adult conversation in an office setting.”

Not to be forgotten – legislative Republicans and Governor Hobbs recently were battling over a Prop 400 solution – a fight that has been pushed to the rear-view mirror with her calculated Executive Orders at the end of this month.

*****

This article was published by AZ Free News and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Go See ‘Sound of Freedom’ for the Truth on Millions of Trafficked Children thumbnail

Go See ‘Sound of Freedom’ for the Truth on Millions of Trafficked Children

By Catherine Salgado

The movie Sound of Freedom will finally come to theaters the week of July 4, based on the stories of real-life heroes and their work to free children from the hellish and lucrative world of child trafficking.

Toward the end of the trailer above, actor Jim Caviezel (who played Jesus in the magnificent Passion of the Christ) says that “an estimated 2 million children are trafficked” every single year. These children are raped, abused, tortured (and many of them later killed by having their organs harvested). The fact that anyone could do such horrific things to any other human being is unimaginable, but to do it to innocent children is a truly Satanic level of evil.

As Caviezel said, the movie is “heartbreaking” but tremendously important, because these children’s stories need to be known as a first step toward justice and help for them. Caviezel said he hopes for 2 million attendees at the movie’s opening, one for every precious child trafficked annually. It has taken Caviezel and the others behind Sound of Freedom years to bring this movie to the public, because they’ve been canceled and delayed. The powers-that-be don’t want you to know about this trafficking, but you need to know.

Sound of Freedom will be in theaters for the week of July 4, Independence Day. In honor of our Founders who were willing to sacrifice everything to secure freedom to themselves and others, make the small sacrifice to go see Sound of Freedom and learn about the most innocent victims in need of liberty.

Search for locations and buy tickets HERE. You can also pay for someone else’s ticket as a donation to help spread the word and ensure as many people as possible attend. As Caviezel urged, let’s start a movement to ensure that “God’s children are no longer for sale.”

*****

This article was published by Pro Deo et Libertate and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

‘We’re Here, We’re Queer, We’re Coming for Your Children’: 6 Scenes From NYC Pride Events thumbnail

‘We’re Here, We’re Queer, We’re Coming for Your Children’: 6 Scenes From NYC Pride Events

By Gigi De La Torre

Editors’ Note: There are uncomfortable scenes that we must share with you. If not, you might not know the extent to which sexual extremists are taking their argument. Otherwise, you might think we are mean and against gay people. Earlier, we had written about this subject (see Get Your Bedroom Out of My Government) and made the point that a proper concept of liberty suggests that you are free to do what you want to do as long as you do not harm others or use force or coercion. Society has reached its level of tolerance with “pride.” What consenting people do in private should be respected, but this invasion of our schools, and ghastly public displays deserves strong condemnation and resistance. Further, some 21 Federal Agencies and numerous local authorities have sanctioned “pride events” and the flying of pride flags on government buildings. We need to get the “bedroom” of the LGBTQ crowd out of our government and especially out of our schools. Their movement now is using coercion by hijacking the government and is doing harm to our children and to society at large. Enough.

New York City held its 53rd Pride parade Sunday.

Here are some of the scenes from that parade and related events shared on social media.

1. ‘We’re Here, We’re Queer, We’re Coming for Your Children.’

In a clip that has gone viral on Twitter, marchers at the New York City Drag March, which was held Friday, chanted, “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”

One holds a sign that says, “Drag isn’t for CISsies.”

2. Twerking

Men wearing almost nothing but Speedos twerked and danced on a parade float sponsored by the Chinese Rainbow Network, an organization that claims to be the “largest Mandarin speaking LGBTQ+ network in North America.”

The float also featured a woman wearing a red dress and boot stilettos pole dancing.

At the end of the float, one woman fully dressed stood in the corner and filmed the others sexually dancing on her phone.

3. ‘Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Don’t Assume Your Kids Are Straight!’

Some marchers shouted, “One, two, three, four, open up the closet door! Five, six, seven, eight, don’t assume your kids are straight!”

Kids wearing pink shirts and rainbow gear marched along with the adults.

One little girl on a man’s shoulders wore a transgender pink, white, and blue flag as a cape.

4. ‘Stop Touching Me!’

K. Yang, an activist advocating for female rights, was verbally harassed and assaulted while protesting in the middle of a Pride gathering.

The video shows ralliers closely shouting in Yang’s face, swatting her signs down and stomping on them, and grabbing and pushing Yang. Yang repeatedly shouted, “Stop touching me.”

5. ‘Clothing Optional’ Water Party

A massive reportedly “clothing optional” water party took place in Washington Square Park. Attendees are seen wading in one of the park’s fountains.

6. We’ll Love Our Son Even If He’s Straight.’

A couple paraded their child down the street, holding a sign saying, “We’ll love our son even if he’s straight.”

They were followed by a group of men clad in leather underwear.

*****

This article was published by DailySignal and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Genital Mutilation for the Masses thumbnail

Genital Mutilation for the Masses

By TT Exulansic

The gory details and irreversible horrors of “gender-affirming” surgery laid bare.

Gender identity ideology, the worldview surrounding the core belief that sometimes men are women and other times women are men, have gotten the foothold that it has because people naturally trust that medical authorities, especially surgeons, know what they are doing. We believe that if patients were being harmed, those patients would certainly speak up first. Proponents of gender ideology claim that fewer than one percent of people regret surgical sexual transition, often contrasted with the 20 percent regret rate for knee surgery. But is this purportedly low regret rate reflective of reality? Rather than prove that sex-organ origami is wildly successful, what this reflects is that patients who are subjected to these highly-experimental procedures are unable, for whatever reason, to express levels of regret one would reasonably expect from an evidence-based surgical intervention.

Could it be that other factors, including withdrawal of community support and loss of reputation and standing, once one becomes known as a “transphobe” who was “never really trans,” are discouraging patients from being open about their regret? Could mental illness or emotional immaturity be preventing these individuals from rationally evaluating their situation or acknowledging and naming their emotions? Having looked at dozens of these first-hand narratives of individuals who “do not regret their surgery,” yet take to the internet to warn others anyway, I have concluded that these patients fear backlash for saying their actual, authentic truth out loud. Even people who suffer horrific complications requiring unimaginable revisions—likened to open hot dog buns by the surgeons themselves, as Ashton Williams discovered—are loath to say, “I regret having my arm skin cut off, stitched up, and sewn to my pubic area, and it was foolish of me to dream of peeing standing up at all costs.” But instead, she dreams of the day when it will all have been worth it, when she will look back on this hardship as a “bump in the road.”

Gender-affirming surgery patients face community scorn if they discuss the harm being done to them, their bodies, their pain levels, their wallets, their career or educational advancement, and their sexual-urologic function. The opportunity cost of the time spent dilating, tending to a colostomy bag, or financing a revision, is significant. And yet, patients who discuss the cost are cast as contributing to the zeitgeist that is “taking life-saving healthcare away from trans kids.” A predictable comment on any such surgical narrative is, “Be careful! Your story might be used by a transphobe to hurt trans people.” “Regretters,” as some term them, detransitioned or not, are accused of being “cis” because only “true trans” benefit from these interventions (making them tests of faith). The same network which “doxxes” (publicizes documents containing identifying information about) activists pushing back against gender identity ideology is ready and willing to subject even members of the trans community who have given their literal pound of flesh to this same mistreatment. For a movement so focused on the importance of inclusivity and tolerance, they are quick to scorn and shirk those branded non-believers.

Doxxing ignites firestorms many of us, including myself, have been subject to. This behavior seeks to divest us of our jobs, our homes, and our sense of personal safety as punishment for misgendering and other crimes. I have had the names and addresses of myself and my family members identified and circulated. As a former trans person who has become a vocal critic of the ideology and its attendant policy demands, I have received threats and other attempts at intimidation, such as frivolous professional complaints from foreign nationals and harassing phone calls. I’ve had long-time friends condemn me as a bigot on the basis of my gender-critical views, despite knowing first-hand that I would aid and befriend a trans-identifying person.

Surgical Simulacra

So what are these surgeries? Let’s discuss them in more depth. Graphic description of genital modification surgery will follow. Reader discretion is advised. Many of these interventions were initially designed for and continue to be performed on people with disorders of sexual development, some of whom are minors. It is important that people with a medical necessity for obtaining these surgeries still have access to them, in light of legislative attempts to ban these interventions. However, these interventions have the same complications regardless of the reasons for obtaining them, and there is a significant complication rate for genital construction performed for any reason. The following will be a discussion of these surgeries as they relate to transgender-identifying individuals. These surgeries all fall under the general category of “bottom surgeries.”

Vaginectomy is performed on trans-identifying female patients alone or as part of another procedure. Using either a scalpel or a laser, the interior wall of the vagina is surgically excised, and the remaining flesh is then sewn together so that it scars shut. Patients are typically told this eliminates the need for routine pap smears to check for cervical cancer. Hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) including removal of the cervix may or may not be done at this time.

Hysterectomy is the removal of the uterus. For trans-identifying females, this is either for non-medically necessary alleviation of “dysphoria” (a Greek term meaning “bad mood”) or in many cases, it is made medically necessary through the administration of cosmetic doses of testosterone, which cause fibroids to form, resulting in pain. These fibroids can form after just a few years on testosterone, as confirmed via dissection of removed uteruses of trans-identifying women. A child put on testosterone in middle school may require a hysterectomy before she graduates high school. Testosterone (a known human teratogen, i.e., a substance which causes birth defects) can also change the endometrial tissue (the tissue which is excreted during menstruation), raising the risk of endometrial cancer. This has been confirmed by microscopic examination of uteruses removed from trans-identifying young women. The ovaries also become scarred due to exposure to high doses of testosterone. In addition to pain, fibroids can cause excessive bleeding and reproductive problems such as uterine-factor infertility and pregnancy loss. Oopherectomy, removal of the ovaries, may or may not be completed at this same time. Either procedure can put the trans-identifying woman into early menopause and place her in an increased risk category for early-onset dementia.

Metoidioplasty is a surgery performed on female-to-male transgender individuals. The vaginal tissue may be discarded or utilized in urethral lengthening (see below). The clitoris, which has been irreversibly enlarged through the use of cosmetic testosterone, is “released” from the connective tissue that holds it in place, allowing the head of the clitoris to point outwards from the body when erect. The inner labia are then sewn together, partially or fully, and connected to the elongated and “released” clitoral head, leaving a tube down the middle through which the individual can complete the holy trans rite of “standing to pee.”

Phalloplasty is a term that refers to the construction of a neophallus using skin from elsewhere on the body. This skin may be a transplanted radial forearm free-flap phalloplasty, a rotated (non-free) flap of skin from the abdomen, or transplanted from the leg or back. When transplanted from the leg, the thickness is typically excessive, resulting in a girth that has been likened by recipients to being the size of a soda can, requiring multiple “de-girthing” procedures that involve liposuction. Of course, if the person gains weight, their neophallus may again enlarge. The phalloplasty recipient also faces the issue of “shrinkage,” as the lack of connective tissue structure of a penis means that over time, the transplanted skin will change in size and shape to become smaller. This has been documented in photos by recipients and their providers, published in peer-reviewed journals and to social media platforms like Reddit. This lack of structure also makes the individual prone to pressure sores internally, which result in strictures where the skin inside the tube has become inflamed and scarred together, obstructing the flow of urine and requiring an individual to wear a second, suprapubic catheter that goes into the bladder through the abdomen, as well as a catheter inside the skin tube to keep it open.

Repeated insults to the bladder itself in some cases result in severe and recurrent bladder stones, all of which may contribute to the eventual loss of the bladder and need for a permanent urostomy bag. Additionally, individuals who get vaginectomy are vulnerable to fistula, which is an abnormal connection between two areas of the body. For one person I interviewed, “Ryan,” a fistula formed between the excised vaginal space, the “natal” (original) urethra, and the colon, allowing bacteria from the colon to repeatedly infect the urethra and bladder. To prevent sepsis, Ryan’s doctors re-routed the intestine to a stoma, or opening, cut in the side of the abdomen, to which a colostomy bag was attached to collect stool. This reduced the frequency of infections, but did not stop them. At the time of the interview, Ryan had been living half a life due to this imposed, severe digestive disability for a year and a half, with no end in sight.

Overall phalloplasty complication rates range from 60 percent to 100 percent higher when performed on females versus males, depending on the nature of the complication, with studies loath to provide an overall complication rate across complication subtypes. The studies that do provide such a figure estimate rates as high as 76 percent. “[C]urrent evidence of the various phalloplasty surgical techniques and their expected postoperative outcomes is weak.” Even without complications, “post void dribbling,” which many “trans men” liken to a “squirt gun” they have to “milk,” was found by one study to occur in 72 percent of female phalloplasty recipients.

One unfortunate phalloplasty recipient has needed eight surgeries (and counting) including the initial and all the revisions. She also spent five weeks in the hospital, of which two were spent in the ICU on a ventilator during COVID because her arm-skin phalloplasty had predictably become septic. She nearly lost her leg from a giant blood clot that formed as a result of a combination of factors, including the sepsis and the extended time spent immobile. The clot was likely partly a result of testosterone poisoning, which may have caused her, as she stated in a video response to me, to discontinue testosterone shortly after that incident. Yet this individual is still looking forward to having an erectile device implanted into this transplanted skin tube. These erectile devices, which are acting within floppy arm skin, are typically either balloon-based (requiring a pump to be implanted in the labial skin which has been revised to look like a scrotal sack) or a rod that clicks into place, similar to a futon frame. Romantic partners of phalloplasty recipients that have agreed to be in their videos state it does not work well for sexual intercourse, and this reality can leave recipients despondent.

In addition to phalloplasty, recipients often get additional cosmetic procedures so that the skin tube more closely mimics a real penis. These may include “medical tattooing,” which seeks to create the appearance of veins or the glans from a distance. They may also get additional surgical interventions to create the cosmetic shape of a penis via additional nips and tucks. Nerves from the location of the graft site may also be transplanted and joined (similar to soldering) to the clitoral nerve itself, which may require severing the clitoral nerve from the tip of the clitoris, resulting in loss of clitoral sensation (in addition to the loss that occurs when the phalloplasty “buries the clitoris”). This may result in some amount of sensation in parts of the skin tube. Since it is an arm or leg skin tube, however, it does not acquire the erogenous sensitivity or specificity that a real penis has. Recipients will describe having mild sensation at the tip or base, to the extent they can feel if something is touching it or not.

In both phalloplasty and metoidioplasty, patients are increasingly asking that their vaginas be left open and accessible, known as a “vagina-sparing” procedures. One metoidioplasty patient had her vagina “spared,” and subsequently, she became pregnant from having heterosexual intercourse with her male husband. She expressed in a video, “we did not think it was possible and were very shocked,” because in her mind, she was a gay man having sex with another man. Her baby was exposed prenatally to her cosmetic testosterone use, which she resumed against medical advice shortly after her infant had to be born prematurely. Her daughter has had developmental issues, including apparent motor and speech delays, as well as plagiocephaly (misshapen head), which required a prescription helmet.

Buccal grafts may be required during phalloplasty, metoidioplasty, or vaginoplasty (explained below), all with the aim of providing the mucous membrane lining that is present in normal genitalia. Consequences of this procedure include nerve damage, scarring, and impaired ability to chew, control the muscles of the mouth, or speak clearly.

Urethral lengthening is a procedure done during metoidioplasty as well as phalloplasty (explained below). The purpose is to connect what’s termed the “natal urethra,” otherwise known as the urethra, to the skin tube extension so that the individual can pee from the tip of the skin tube. This may be completed in various ways. The doctor may utilize tissue from the vagina. The doctor may also implant a straw in the arm of the patient for several months in hopes of creating a tube around the straw, which will then transplant with the rest of the arm skin during a radial forearm free-flap phalloplasty. The surgeon may also utilize skin from the inside of the cheek (buccal graft) or mastectomy (“top surgery”) to create this new urethra. Because this tissue did not develop for the purpose of carrying urine through a skin tube, the neo-urethra and neo-phallus lack the internal structure to sustain itself and have a tendency to scar together as well as create holes or cul-de-sac pockets in which urine collects and bacterial infections can thrive. This neo-phallus is not regularly flushed with semen as in a healthy male, nor does it have normal tension and pressure of a healthy male urinary stream, both of which make neo-urinary tract infections easier to develop and harder to eliminate. These infections create conditions which promote chronic bladder and kidney infections, and from there an infection can advance to one or multiple episodes of sepsis (systemic bacterial infection circulating in the blood throughout the body). Sepsis can result in brain and other organ damage as well as necessitate amputation of limbs.

Men’s Department

Transgender vaginoplasty is a procedure in which tissue from the penis, scrotum, mouth, other portions of the digestive tract (sometimes from a pig), or a tilapia fish is used to line an excavated hole in a man’s pelvis. Patients such as Jazz Jennings, child star of the show I Am Jazz, will often start with a penile inversion, in which the bulk of the internal portion of the penis and the glans is removed, the shaft skin is separated and inverted, and the urethra is split open and connected to the shaft skin to create a wider canal, all of which is then sewn to the posterior of the pelvic wall. Unlike a woman’s vagina, penis shaft and urethra skin is, of course, not very stretchy, which allows these structures to resist the pressures of urination as well as engorgement with blood occurring during erection. Once these tissues are removed, dissected, and inverted, the tendency of this tube is to become inflamed. Inflamed tissue that stretches scars and calcifies. The doctors want it to scar to the interior of the pelvis (or else the result is neo-vagina prolapse), but this tendency to scar means it will also try to shrink, reducing in length and girth.

To compensate for this, doctors advise vaginoplasty recipients to dilate using rods of a fixed length and graded girth. Dilation involves lying back and inserting this rod into the neo-vagina in an attempt to either expand the internal volume or at least prevent collapse. This process is extremely time consuming, and dilation regimens seem to vary greatly from patient to patient, ranging from one hour a few times a week to multiple hour-long sessions per day. This process is typically painful and may be ineffective. Like the strictures that form in the skin tube neo-urethra of the neo-phallus, this penile-inverted skin tube was not designed to be resting against itself for long periods. This is, however, unavoidable. Therefore, the tissue within this tube is prone to strictures, or what doctors will call “vaginal stenosis” to get insurance to pay for the revision as a result of pressure necrosis (the tendency of tissue is to inflame, die, and scar to surrounding tissue as a result of extended periods of pressure).

This can make dilation impossible, resulting in a warm, moist, non-self-cleaning pocket that is an ideal environment for bacteria which is now adjacent to a shortened urethra, capable of causing chronic infections and sepsis. Additionally, dilation, which is sometimes performed by physicians under anesthesia so that more force can be used, may cause tears or fistulas between the neo-vagina and other structures such as the urethra or rectum. One unfortunate vaginoplasty recipient I covered learned he had a recto-”vaginal” fistula when he farted through it. This fistula was allegedly caused by the anesthesia-enabled, surgeon-performed dilation.

At this point, gender doctors may recommend a revision. This revision may be what is known as a “colon vaginoplasty.” In a colon vaginoplasty, an eight-inch segment of colon is removed, and the remaining colon is rerouted to the rectum and recombined (creating a risk of fistulas and internal infection which may show up years later). This colon segment is then sewn shut at one end and is used to replace the scarred, shrunken, strictured, and fistula-ridden inverted penile shaft skin. It is advertised as “self-lubricating,” but as one recipient explained, what the doctors may not tell patients is that this lubrication is tied to food consumption, not sexual arousal.

Orchiectomy is the removal of the testicles. Orchiectomy is typically performed to eliminate a biological source of unwanted male hormones and to salvage the tissue present in the testicles, including a portion of skin called the “vagina” (Latin for “sheath”), to be repurposed to line the neo-vagina.

Nullification surgery is a term for a procedure performed on either male or female people that results in an outcome that is reminiscent of female genital mutilation. The penis, vulva, vagina, and testicles, as applicable, are completely removed, and the overlying tissue is sewn together to create a smooth surface with a small hole for urination. This may be done in the name of “eunuch” gender identity. Eunuch is a term which traditionally refers to a castrated male with no penis, but in this modern era, of course, sex is not gender and so “gender identity,” which would include “eunuch gender identity,” is not limited to any particular “sex assigned at birth.”

Cui Bono?

As if the horrors of the surgeries themselves were not enough, the reality is that these interventions are mind-bendingly expensive, entirely cosmetic, and medically unnecessary, yet are covered by insurance (including tax-funded insurance such as Medicaid and Medicare because not funding these surgeries demanded by the trans lobby is considered “discrimination” equivalent to not covering medically-necessary care for a car accident victim who happened to be Asian). Some recipients have posted medical bills totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars accrued in just a few years, sometimes months—even during the COVID-19 pandemic—of which they brag they paid up to their deductible of, for instance, $5,000. Many are rushing to get as many cosmetic modifications as possible before they age off of their parents’ policy (which typically occurs at age 26). The reader is encouraged to recall a time where they or a loved one were denied or delayed coverage for a medically-necessary treatment, such as one which returned mobility, independence, or reduced chronic pain. Did their insurance cover gender-transition related drugs and surgeries at that time?

Transgender surgeries are medically-unnecessary interventions, not intended to diagnose or treat a medical problem, performed on physically healthy tissues for reasons of gender identity or subjective psychological distress perceived to be related to a sense of gender identity (two distinct justifications, only one of which requires a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, a term referring merely to the distress a person with a perceived conflict may experience). Not every trans-identifying person receiving these interventions is professionally diagnosed or experiencing subjective distress. When no distress (“dysphoria”) is present, individuals are able to still access these procedures via an Orwellian process called the “informed consent model,” which does not require a psychological evaluation to rule out delusional disorders or confirm a gender dysphoria diagnosis.

When these interventions are performed on detransitioners, who no longer claim to experience a conflict in identity versus body, these interventions may not be covered. In fact, trans activists fight to remove guaranteed coverage for so-called detransitioners from laws guaranteeing “trans healthcare.” Gender-affirming surgeries, or as some call them, sex lobotomies, are as Byzantine as they are treacherous, an endless complexification of human-to-boondoggle body modification that the taxpayer and insurance purchaser, ultimately, have to fund, both directly at the time of the surgery, and forever after, as foolish and confused people purchase disabilities that are not as reversible as their good health once was.

*****

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

University Erases ‘L’ in LGBTQ, Redefining Lesbians as ‘Non-Men’ thumbnail

University Erases ‘L’ in LGBTQ, Redefining Lesbians as ‘Non-Men’

By Jarrett Stepman

The woke well is bottomless.

Johns Hopkins University recently updated the “LGBTQ Glossary” in its so-called inclusive language guide with a new definition for “lesbian.”

A lesbian, according to the famed Baltimore university’s guide, should be referred to as a “non-man attracted to non-men.” A broad definition, right?

The guide states that “while past definitions refer to ‘lesbian’ as a woman who is emotionally, romantically, and/or sexually attracted to other women, this updated definition includes non-binary people who may also identify with the label.”

No more “women” or “womyn” or any of that. Just complete erasure of the “L” in “LGBTQ.”

In the war on women, isn’t it ironic that the latest shots are being fired by that fanatical campus Left? One wonders how much longer the “G” has to keep its place in the gender ideology pantheon before the new letters come for the old.

The move by Johns Hopkins University was mocked by “Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling, a liberal feminist who has become “she who must not be named” to many of her once-adoring fans (or is that “not-he who must not be named?” It’s hard to keep track).

It’s important at a modern university to know what counts as blasphemy, you see. Saying “lesbian” isn’t nearly inclusive enough. Somebody, somewhere might be offended. And that somebody is likely to be a transgender man, who is in the upper echelons of intersectional hierarchy.

Wouldn’t you know it, the program director of “LGBTQ+ equity and education” at Johns Hopkins University is Paula Neira, a transgender man. That is, Neira was born a man, but now says he identifies as a woman.

I’d say this is an example of how an institution is returning to the Dark Ages, but that’s really an insult to the Dark Ages. We now live in the age of diversity, equity, and inclusion, when all common sense is abandoned for fanatical ideological commitment.

Johns Hopkins removed the LGBTQ Glossary after it gained online attention. As usual, when left-wing media picked up on the story, it became about how Johns Hopkins backed down to the backlash rather than the obvious absurdity of the university’s message.

The glossary page has been updated.

“While the glossary is a resource posted on the website of the Johns Hopkins University Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI); the definitions were not reviewed or approved by ODI leadership and the language in question has been removed pending review,” the page now reads.

This wasn’t even the only campus absurdity at Johns Hopkins in the past month.

On May 30, the New York Post reported that employees of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine “have been issued a new guidebook with a list of 50 different pronouns—including ‘aerself’ and ‘faerself’—that staff may use after a new ID badge policy was implemented.”

Among other pronouns in the guidebook were “xe, ve, per, and ae,” and it gives recommendations for using such a pronoun in a sentence, like “I gave faer the key.”

We’ve clearly hit the Newspeak stage of the revolution.

American higher education is consuming itself with absurdities and contradictions. Unfortunately, our ideologically compromised higher education establishment shapes and feeds into all other elite institutions.

This is the established, secular church of the modern West.

But maybe it’s time we disestablish this church. Once the power of the woke gatekeepers is broken—in universities, corporate America, and government—maybe then we can begin to restore our free society.

*****

This article was published by The Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Reparations thumbnail

Reparations

By Bruce Bialosky

Anyone who has previously read my columns will quickly conclude that I believe reparations (as being currently discussed) are a tragically stupid idea. You have probably read a multitude of opinions telling you why that is so. You are about to get a significantly different take on the issue.

The first aspect comes from my reading of a novel years back which I believe is The Winner by David Baldacci. It is combined with my personal and concurrent experience. Remember a good novel often has a significant basis in fact.

The premise concerns a genius criminal who figured out how to fix the Powerball lottery. He realizes that if he fixed it for himself, he would soon get caught. He also realized that the vast majority of people who buy lottery tickets are financial underachievers, so to speak. He would hand-pick someone from that underachieving population and create a deal with them. He would rig the lottery so the person would win and then the person would turn the money over to him to manage, ultimately splitting the monies 50/50. That is basically how the story goes until a smart detective comes on the scene.

The smart detective noticed a pattern that there were these people who would win the lottery and retain their wealth many years later. Here is the true part: that just does not happen. Nearly all people who win these sums — unless it is the mega multi-million-dollar winners — have little winnings left in just a few years or less.

Every friend and relative comes out of every sinkhole to gladhand for money. Every con artist in the world surrounds them to separate them from their money. These “winners” are generally people who do not have a trusted financial advisor to protect them from the wolves and they have no means of determining who they should turn to as a trusted advisor. I have experienced people with money not knowing who to turn to. This part of the plot line was so true to me.

I had someone who was referred to me who had won $350,000 in the lottery. He came too late. By the time he came to me, he had invested almost all the monies: He bought public pay phones. This was right after I had gone to my annual continuing education class at the usual location. They always had an alcove packed with wall pay phones. When I arrived that year, I found the pay phones were all gone as no one was using them any longer. My thought was what a sucker this person was to put his money into this investment and why had he not come to me six months earlier so I could save him from himself.

For my money, the same likely outcome applies to reparations. You drop the kind of dough the reparations people are proposing for some Californians; and, considering their background in financial affairs, five years later for most of them it will all have gone poof.

If the recipients of reparations are not financial underachievers, then why would they be recipients of funds; obviously they have not been harmed by the perceived grievances. They have systems in place to protect their wealth with qualified and reliable personnel.

The amounts that are being talked about are just numbers that are being thrown around for attention. They are stalking horses for the real numbers which will be significantly reduced. Politicians can then say, “See how good we are? We cut those crazy numbers in half, a third or whatever.” The real answer should be “No, we are not committing taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars to this travesty.” That will not happen.

In addition, I believe this will just be the beginning. Different groups will come from all over fully sold on their rationale that they should be recompensed. A group is already stating they deserve money for the land that sits under Dodger Stadium. Without the building of Dodger Stadium on that site the land would be of little value.

Members of Congress led by Cori Bush have proposed $14 trillion for reparations as if it were a trivial amount.

For my money, there are three simple solutions to the conditions plaguing blacks in California as there are across the country:

1. Stop having 80% of children outside of marriage. Put a premium on fathers.

2. Rid the black community of the racist public school systems controlled by the racist teachers’ unions. Give them universal school choice.

3. Stop telling them they are victims. I grew up in a disadvantaged household and my mother never told us or permitted us to have a victim mentality. If you keep telling people they should believe they are victims, they will ultimately believe it.

Reparations will only reinforce in their minds that victim mentality. That is what the proposers of these plans want so as to achieve perpetual power over them. These proposals are as bad as they get for the reasons above, and a good deal more.

*****

This article was published by Flash Report and is reproduced with permission from the author.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

An Estimated 200K Babies Saved from Abortion Since Dobbs thumbnail

An Estimated 200K Babies Saved from Abortion Since Dobbs

By Catherine Salgado

Once again in America do unborn babies have the right to life, as the Declaration of Independence said all men have. A recent estimate said around 200,000 babies have been born instead of aborted since the landmark June 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision overruling the infamous Roe v. Wade and Casey. That’s 200,000 precious, irreplaceable human beings saved from brutal murder in the womb!

“An estimated 64,443,118 abortions were carried out during the 50 years after Roe v. Wade, according to National Right to Life,” a horrific death toll. I noted last year that the number of babies lost to abortion is 52 times more than the total of all US war casualties, combined. That’s mind-blowing genocide. But Dobbs was the first step toward a more pro-life America.

Across America, pro-life crisis pregnancy centers outnumber abortion clinics by an estimated 3 to 1, all those centers ready and eager to help mothers with supplies, medical care, adoption services, and other aid for their unplanned pregnancies. There’s a waiting list of literally millions of couples waiting to adopt babies—including down syndrome babies—in the US too. Having an abortion puts women at risk of mental health issues, suicide, drug abuse, and other serious issues, and it’s never necessary to save a mother’s life. Abortion is not a solution—it’s murder. But pro-death Democrats don’t want you to know that.

“[LifeNews, June 26] As the nation celebrates the first anniversary of the Supreme Court decision returning abortion to democratic control, national leaders celebrated the birth of tens, or hundreds, of thousands of unborn children saved by pro-life laws.

Although precise estimates vary, “the best guess that we have is about 200,000 children were born this year that would not have been born” apart from the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, said Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) at a news conference Tuesday. ‘That’s 200,000 kids. That’s 200,000 smiling faces on playgrounds. That’s 200,000 silly songs, starting in kindergarten. That’s 200,000 families that will be blessed with looking in the eyes of a child.’

The Dobbs decision, which took the shackles off voters and lawmakers to enact life-saving protections for the unborn, eliminated 96% of abortions in the 13 states that enacted pro-life protections between the June 24 decision and year’s end, The Daily Caller found. Although abortion rates had risen early in 2022, state pro-life laws prevented 32,260 abortions in the first six months following the ruling, according to the WeCount report from the Society of Family Planning released in April. A total of 25 states have since enacted some pro-life protections, since they ‘now have an opportunity in the United States to see this message in the hands of lawmakers and the people,’ Family Research Council President Tony Perkins told Newsmax on Friday.

Saving 200,000 babies — the upper end of an estimate analysis from Susan B. Anthony Pro-life America — would be enough people to fill a city the size of Grand Rapids, Michigan; Vancouver, Washington; or Chattanooga, Tennessee.”

Let us pray that babies will continue to be saved from abortion as Democrats try to bring back universal abortion on demand and infanticide (Democrat states are more pro-abortion than ever). Dobbs wasn’t the end of the fight, it was only the beginning.

*****

This article was published by Pro Deo et Liberate and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Popular Genetic Testing Pits Unborn Siblings Against Each Other, And The Highest Scorer Gets To Live thumbnail

Popular Genetic Testing Pits Unborn Siblings Against Each Other, And The Highest Scorer Gets To Live

By Jordan Boyd

Technology that replaces the inherent value of life with a numeric placeholder makes the precious gift of living seem expendable.

What would you say if you discovered that your parents chose to birth and raise you over any of your other siblings because they believed your genes to be superior?

That’s exactly what Pennsylvania couple Malcolm and Simone Collins did for their third child, Titan Invictus, who, as an embryo, was selected for implantation based on the results of a preimplantation genetic test (PGT).

The specific brand of polygenic screening that the Collinses bought attached physical scores to certain portions of the embryo’s DNA which reportedly predict the likelihood a child has of contracting diseases and illnesses like cystic fibrosis, cancer, diabetes, schizophrenia, and depression. A composite numeric score projecting the overall health of the embryo was also provided.

“We already had all of our embryos that we needed to have seven kids. We had 26 embryos, good to go. But we did a whole new round just to be able to do this because it’s so much additional information,” Simone explained in a recent interview with Vice News.

You read that right. This family manufactured 26 lives, only to undergo yet another round of physically draining IVF, and then paid thousands more dollars so they could handpick the child with their preferred genetic makeup. As VICE noted, that could include optimizing “traits like intelligence.”

The Collinses didn’t just settle for the “simple report” they received from biotech company Genomic Prediction. Instead, they filled out their own data sheets with calculations that they believed would lead them to the best outcome — er, child.

“The Titan here, who turned out to be the one we selected, had the best score from our own internal, like, additional data calculations and Genomic Prediction’s best,” Simone cheerfully explained.

“Oh my gosh, hey Titan. You’re number one!” the Vice interviewer replied.

Handpicked breeding has long been under scrutiny for multiple reasons, but that hasn’t stopped it from becoming a normalized part of the reproductive technologies scene.

The Collinses didn’t edit any of their child’s genes, a technological process that, despite knowingly “wreak[ing] chromosomal mayhem,” has become cheaper, easier, and more popular for potential parents to use to fulfill their designer baby dreams. They did, however, pit their child and her microscopic siblings against each other in a biological battle that belittled their future children’s very souls and being. And they did that just a few years after the first baby chosen by her parents after undergoing PGT testing with polygenic screening as an embryo was born.

Genetic testing is often marketed to parents as a tool that will help them give their kids “the best chance at life.” The less-acknowledged consequence of these unreliable screenings is that they provide parents with justification for depriving their already created children of life altogether, based on the physical qualities their unborn child may or may not possess.

The Collinses claim they plan to “keep on having kids at a similar cadence until this no longer proves biologically possible.” At first glance, that objective seems commendable since more than 1 million embryos have little to no future outside of freezers.

Considering Simone’s age, however, the Collinses’ nearly three dozen babies stuck in cryo tanks will only be born if they commit to several multiples pregnancies, something that hurts the embryos’ and mother’s chance of survival, or opt for renting another woman’s womb. Those embryos that do not get implanted in Simone or a surrogate will eventually be ditched or handed over to researchers who will destroy them.

Pandora’s Box Is Open

Simone and Malcolm operate by a strange list of rules, like refusing to name their daughters “strictly female names because data shows that it has a lot of negative outcomes” and committing to advancing a global natalist agenda. “According to [the couple’s] calculations,” Business Insider reported, “as long as each of their descendants can commit to having at least eight children for just 11 generations, the Collins bloodline will eventually outnumber the current human population.”

Media outlets, which dubbed the Collinses the “’elite’ breeding couple,”  either try to write off the couple’s obsession with breeding as a product of their “terminally online” presence or accuse them of advancing the “alt-right” agenda.

The Collinses reject allegations that their use of genetic testing equates to eugenicism. Yet, there’s no denying that they are using, enabling, and promoting technology that replaces the inherent value of life with a placeholder that’s based on generated numbers and, when desired, is made expendable.

If that sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the same rationale used by infamous eugenicist and Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, whose legacy lives on through those who promote abortions based on the baby’s sex or race, or the assumption that the baby’s “quality of life” might not be worth living for.

Humans are not commodities to be discarded or manipulated. That’s why several states have already banned the murder of children based on pre-birth diagnostics, which have an exceptionally high error rate.

Embryos, similarly, are not experiments to be tinkered with — especially by the people who ordered their creation. Yet, the same laws protecting babies in utero from discrimination don’t apply to preimplantation genetic testing on embryos.

Many European countries bar or at least regulate genetic testing. In the U.S., however, as long as someone can pay to sift through and possibly even tinker with their child’s DNA, they are allowed to do it. In fact, researchers are already pondering how they can expand the technology’s reach so that it’s not “only available to couples who can afford” it.

Innovation That Injures

The Collins family is proudly among the rich who believe science and technology will help mend falling birth rates and help humans create capabilities beyond their current physical and mental limitations.

“The reason why you see Silicon Valley people disproportionately being drawn to this is they’re obsessed with data enough, and wealthy enough, to be looking at things — and who also have enough wealth and power that they’re not afraid of being cancelled,” Malcolm told The Telegraph in April.

In other words, as one media outlet noted, “the evolutionary logic associated with transhumanism is an important theme in their plans.”

The problem with attempting to “solve” Americans’ increasing infertility with reproductive technologies that reduce humans to their capabilities is that it monetizes and multiplies irreversible depravity.

Children created via assisted reproductive technologies are often distanced or completely deprived of their mother and father in harmful ways. Even those who will be raised by their married biological parents like Malcolm and Simone must live with the knowledge that the only reason they were not sentenced to stagnant tenure on ice was because of their genetic traits.

That’s not “progress” that so many in the multimillion-dollar fertility industry brag about. In fact, it’s merely a reversion to the kind of reasoning that has led to the deaths of millions of humans — born and unborn — across the globe.

*****

This article was published at The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Get Your Bedroom Out of My Government thumbnail

Get Your Bedroom Out of My Government

By Neland Nobel

Those old enough might remember in the early days of the sexual revolution, the common refrain was to “get the government out of the bedroom”.

The thought was that the police powers of the state had no business involving themselves in the private sexual practices of consenting adults.

This principle was applied first to heterosexual relationships and later was applied successfully to gay and lesbian relationships.

This generally “libertarian” view is based on basic principles of liberty.  There is a private sphere in life, that government should not intrude into, as long as violence, coercion, and fraud are not involved. Private acts which do not intrude upon the rights of others, are to be permitted, with the consent of adults participating.

There may well be moral reasons to object to this behavior, but it was believed that these religious precepts should not be enforced by the state.  This thinking went even further though, when moral objections by private actors were also disallowed.  This may well have been a mistake.

Now it seems, states like Colorado wish to force a baker against his will to make cakes for gay weddings.

The thinking on some of these matters has become so twisted it becomes easy to violate laws because there seems to be little consistency.

One cannot “discriminate”, and soon we saw the destruction of the Boy Scouts from two opposite sides.  One side attacked them because they did not show common sense by having Scoutmasters that were attracted to young men being in charge of young men, an obvious incentive for abuse.

Then they got attacked because they would not allow gay men to be in charge of young boys.

Indeed, society seems quite confused as to what government should be allowed to do in regulating sexual behaviors and what private organizations are allowed to do.  Within this confusion, a small determined group of sexual radicals has staked out territory that does not belong to them.

And a small minority that felt it was discriminated against, now wishes to discriminate against the vast majority of citizens.

Part of the problem is the application of civil rights laws where they don’t apply.  Being Black is a skin pigment, not a set of behaviors.

One cannot deny services to a Black man in interstate commerce.  But I am not required to do business with you if I don’t like the way you behave or what you are offering.

Here is a problem to challenge your thinking: is it OK not to hire a male gay therapist to take care of a young autistic boy?  A boy that is nonverbal, naïve, and socially completely helpless?

Commonsense suggests parental discrimination should not only be allowed, but it would be foolish not to exercise it. In any case, the parents should have the choice.

However, there is no interest relating to private or public safety invading the home of a quiet lesbian couple, exposing them to prosecution or public humiliation.  Their private acts do not, and most likely cannot violate the rights of anyone else.  Moreover, it is just none of the government’s damn business or that of private individuals or organizations.

Besides this evolution in legal thinking, the novel argument was made that gay people were “born that way”, and that not having free will on the matter, it was unjust and just plain stupid to make them guilty of a crime.  They are just doing what they are compelled to do and the sex drive is quite powerful.

Because of that concession, it was argued that their sexual practices were just as valid as the majority’s normative heterosexual activities and that gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry and form long-lasting relationships.  This was thought would be beneficial both to the individuals involved, and society at large.

Many homosexuals felt finally their sexual practices were “equal” in validity to the normative majority and they were now out of the closet and “proud” of their sexual practices.

This is a bit odd, because the majority of heterosexuals never expressed “pride” in their sexual proclivities.  They were doing what is most natural for all animals that reproduce to continue the survival of their species.

The counterargument is that heterosexuals were never discriminated against so therefore they have no reason for “pride.”

Humm.  Jews don’t strip naked in parades as recompense against past discrimination, nor do the Chinese, Italians, or Irish.  American Indians would seem to have a special claim to get naked in parades. Past discrimination is not a permission slip to be publically obnoxious.

“Pride” as practiced today (lots of randy videos up on Twitter) is very public.  Apparently, only gays have the right to offend in our society today.

A few years back my wife and I got caught accidentally in such a parade while just strolling around Zurich.  The Swiss are pretty self-controlled lot but this was over the top.  Most participants were older men in thongs.  With some difficulty, we sought refuge from what was quite a wrinkled and tawdry display.

Then society moved another step, this time in another direction, and it gets even a bit more confusing.  Now we are told people are not “born that way”, but rather sexual desires are chosen solely by the internal “identification and feelings” of the participant.  Further, the person having these feelings is the sole judge of their own condition, and all parental influence and medical advice must “affirm” the conclusion made by the internal “feelings and sensibilities” of the person.

Are people born gay or is it chosen?  You can’t have it both ways.

The claim is further expanded to the affirmation of the internal feelings of children, who have no idea what it feels like to be a man or a woman.  Such young people are too inexperienced to give informed consent.

However, lacking parental consent, or informed consent of the child, teachers now secretly “affirm” the child’s new “identity” and doctors will “affirm” by cutting off their sex organs.

What other medical condition allows the patient to determine their own medical diagnosis absent any tests or scientific proof other than self-described feelings?  What other medical condition requires physicians to play along with hysteria?

Now the government wants taxpayers and insurance companies (both of which the public funds) to pay for sex change operations.

We have come a long way from “getting the government out of the bedroom” and letting consenting ADULTS indulge in PRIVATE sex acts, as long as NO HARM is done to anyone else.  Now we have the government encouraging and subsidizing certain sexual proclivities that are both public and harmful.

Moreover, the idea of sexual privacy has met “pride.”  What was supposed to be limited to private bedrooms, perhaps certain controlled clubs, now is as public as a 4th of July parade, replete with floats, flags, and crowds of children.

Today we must put up with public displays of vulgarity and sexual provocation in public because we too must show pride in these proclivities and fetishes.

No, we don’t.

The movement now has its own month of mandatory celebration month where corporations and sports teams compete with each other for the approval of a tiny sexual minority.  So much for being marginalized.  Did you get to vote on this month-long celebration?

California is considering legislation, that if parents do not “affirm” the sexual identity of their children, that state with its guns can come to take your kids from you.  And they can brainwash your kids in schools against your consent and without your knowledge.

Transgenderism is now so powerful of a social movement, they have their own flag, which our government dutifully places alongside the nation’s flag.  We even display it overseas at our embassies.  Can you think of any other group with such power and privilege?  Having and displaying your own flag is a very PUBLIC act.

So, it would seem, the bedroom activities of LGBTQ+ are now in our government, which not only displays flags but run school curricula to inculcate children.  Our armed forces even put on drag shows, at public expense.

Our President solemnly intones that “Transgenderism is the soul of the nation.”

This is no longer “private” and it requires coercion and punishes those who don’t consent.  One can easily lose one’s job if the correct required pronouns are not used at a publically funded university.  The FBI will start monitoring non-compliant families and put them on a terrorist watch list if they object to LGBTQ indoctrination in schools.

To oppose this group is “hate”, which involves curtailing the freedom to speak for the vast majority.

For a group that says it is “marginalized,” they have the support of the major news networks, have their own flag, their own political party, and even their own film studios.

Apple even makes sure that “pride month” is marked on my personal calendar, without my permission or consent, just in case I am not aware of the mandatory celebration about to take place.

Some of this is being socially reinforced but much of this is now being legally enforced using the police powers of the state.

Today sexual revolutionaries don’t like consent but require compulsion.  Moreover, they seemed determined to direct their attention to our children and grandchildren.

Conservatives can object on solid grounds that public compulsion should not be allowed, that these acts are not private, and that the movement seeks to recruit children who cannot give informed consent.

The alphabet alliance does not hold logically together.  The QT portion of the alliance regularly mocks and degrades women.  It is the new misogyny. And we think there are many gays and lesbians who are appalled by the brazen behavior, boorish proclamations, and the endangerment of children.

We hope they start speaking up more forcefully.

The QT portion of the coalition also demands that the rest of us believe falsehoods.  The idea that men can have babies, that they menstruate, and can change their DNA by simply putting on a dress is nonsense.  Yet school districts insist on putting feminine products in boys’ bathrooms and letting men compete in women’s sports.

Again, the state and its agencies should not be involved in subsidizing a nonsensical secular religion using our tax dollars.  Nor should they be putting the state’s imprimatur on these activities.  If the Bible cannot be read in class, then rainbow propaganda should not be in classrooms.

There are many steps that must be taken to untangle the logic and law which got us where we are today.  But for one small minority to endanger the lives of children and make their acts public, is a clear violation of the first principle that launched the sexual revolution in the first place.

Now we must reverse the process.  We need to get the coercion out of the process. The first step is to get the LGBTQ+ bedroom out of our government.

In particular, the QT needs to be divided from the rest.  While that is a job best left to those within the coalition, most of the demands for government involvement are coming from the QT brigade.  When the government starts spending public funds and uses its police powers, it becomes the business of all citizens.

What should be protected are the private acts of consenting adults, that do no harm and do not violate the rights of others.

However, public displays of indecency and the grooming of our children should not be permitted, and certainly not sponsored, endorsed, or subsidized by our government.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Katie Hobbs’ Office of Tourism and the Arizona Lottery to Sponsor ‘Child-Friendly’ Drag Show thumbnail

Katie Hobbs’ Office of Tourism and the Arizona Lottery to Sponsor ‘Child-Friendly’ Drag Show

By Jordan Conradson

Katie Hobbs’ Office of Tourism and the Arizona Lottery is set to sponsor an all-ages drag show this weekend in Flagstaff, Arizona.

The “Pride In the Pine’s Official After Party” event is at the Orpheum Theater in Flagstaff on June 17 at 9 pm. AZ Free News reports, “The event is open to all ages, with those under 16 years old requiring a parent or guardian chaperone. Cost of admission is $14 plus fees.”

This is the latest in Katie Hobbs’ anti-children and anti-Arizona campaign during pride month. To kick off June, Katie Hobbs rolled out LGBTQ flags and multiple pride flags outside her office at the Capitol above the American flag and state flag, likely in violation of the U.S. flag code.

Last week, The Gateway Pundit reported that Hobbs vetoed a bill that would require Arizona public schools to “provide a reasonable accommodation to a person who is unwilling or unable to use specified facilities designated for their sex in a public school building or multi-occupancy sleeping quarters while attending a public school-sponsored activity.” Because of this, young female students may be required to use restrooms and locker rooms with male students who “identify” as females.

Earlier this month, Hobbs also vetoed a law making it illegal to film or facilitate sexually explicit acts in government buildings and classrooms months after a teacher in Arizona was fired for shooting a porno in her classroom and posting it to OnlyFans. Students were reportedly “mortified over the situation.”

Arizona Free News reports,

Hobbs selected an executive officer from Arizona Community Foundation, one of the event sponsors, to be director of the Office of Tourism in January: Lisa Urias. Hobbs appointed Tereza Fritz last month to oversee marketing for the lottery. Fritz hails from Western Alliance Bank and formerly worked for Lavidge marketing company.

The event is part of the 27th annual Pride in the Pines. Drag queens featured in the event include DJ Lezbein McKenzie, Anya C. Mann, Salina Es Titties, and Dillon Duvet, as well as Miss Gay Arizona America 2022 winner Janee Star…..

*****

Continue reading this article at The Gateway Pundit.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

In Loco Parentis Gone Loco thumbnail

In Loco Parentis Gone Loco

By Peachy Keenan

This isn’t your parents’ parental authority.

You had a baby? Look at you—you’re the captain now!

Or are you?

The words on a poster taped to a teacher’s classroom door at a New Jersey public school expose the precarious corner American parents have been painted into. “If your parents aren’t accepting of your identity, I’m your mom now.” The poster featured a drawing of a mama bear tending to her bear cubs, who are each painted the color of a different LGBTQ flag.

Parents, I have bad news. You’ve got competition. Someone posted a job listing looking for a new authority figure in your house, and they hired everyone who applied. Lots of other adults, most of them unpleasant strangers, would like to raise your children for you—or at least get your children to hate you.

This may already be happening—and you’ll be the last to know! All your hard work to keep creeps, perverts, and kiddie-sniffers away from your kids may get reversed in an instant when you’re not looking.

Some parents are okay with this. They can barely handle “adulting” themselves and are thrilled not to make any tough parental decisions. Abdicating their natural role as master and commander of the household is lazy, but it’s a defensive posture. They live in terror of accusations from other parents of “closed-mindedness,” or worse, being a prude.

American parents have either forgotten their innate, God-given authority over their household or surrendered it in the face of relentless pressure over many years from the outside. Just as millennia of trickling snowmelt can hollow out mighty granite mountains and turn them into canyons, a half-century of unchecked influence by feminists and far-left progressives have chipped away at the role of parents in their children’s lives. What is left is a barren wasteland, a valley of shadows, where mothers and fathers have been reduced to nothing more than the oldest dependents in the house.

Your job as a parent is not easy, but it’s simple: feed, nurture, love, and protect. In the face of life-and-death danger—say, an escaped tiger or an ax-wielding lunatic—probably 100 percent of parents would risk their lives for their children, even die, without hesitation. So why are so many reluctant to defend their children from less obvious, but equally dangerous, scenarios?

You can tell when you’re about to be trampled by elephants. It’s trickier when the trampling is invisible and being committed by a young teacher with peace stickers on xe/xer’s car. I’ll grant that having pro-nouns in your bio is not quite the same red flag as cruising a playground in a car with no door handles on the inside, but it’s still a red flag parents need to fear.

People who manage to produce offspring are too often seduced into voluntarily surrendering their authority over them. They allow various “experts” to hold sway over their kids. Exhausted and confused, they willingly hand their kids off to the local public school teachers’ unions, the DEI struggle-session facilitators, the storytelling drag queens, and the sex-education consultants who arrive at school with teaching props, including wholesome kid-friendly items like dildos and anal lube.

They all share a common goal: to dilute your authority and increase their own. They aim to groom America’s children from birth to become compliant consumers of all they wish to sell them: bespoke genders, any-term abortion, strictly enforced racial hierarchies, a lifetime of therapy, prescription drugs, and whatever political and social ideology they choose to upload into their brains.

God forbid you are the only parent at your school who keeps your fifth grader home on Share Your Favorite Sex Toy Day. What will people say?

Allow me to remind you gently: it’s your job to steer the ship, avoid icebergs, prevent scurvy, and stave off mutinies. Parenting is not a game. There is no do-over. You are all that stands between your small charges and the roiling storms ahead—and the band of purple-haired nonbinary pirates that’s about to storm the deck.

Sexualized Early and Often

Imagine being the only one at the PTA meeting who stands up and objects to your second grader studying detailed diagrams of adult genitalia, or your middle schoolers instructed on how to grant consent to anal sex. (These are real sex ed guidelines introduced in New Jersey public schools in 2020.)

Your choices are stark: assert your authority over your children and get called a bigot or go along with the madness and let them take your child to places you don’t want them to go.

How bad is it? Bad enough that Tiara Mack, a “reproductive justice advocate” and “child sex educator” running for state senator in Rhode Island tweeted this in 2021: “Really excited for the house sex ed bill hearing later today. Teaching comprehensive, queer inclusive, pleasure-based sex ed was a highlight of my time teaching.”

This is who wants to talk to your six-year-old about how to “pleasure” themselves and their partner!

The first step in any cult, or any abusive relationship, is to get the victim to sever ties to their outside friends and family. Maybe you’ve seen this happen to people you know. They suddenly change their phone number, delete their social media, and have a new friend now—one that has them spellbound. Once children come to believe their mom and dad are clueless bigots and racists who are holding them back from being who they are, the cult leaders own them.

Government-run public schools have accomplished “regime change” in America and transformed us, slowly, from a society centered around the family, where the schools work for the parent, into a society centered around government employees, where families are required to supply the raw goods for the teachers’ unions to mold as they see fit.

Year after year, their assembly lines have been left unsupervised to churn out freshly minted graduates. These graduates move on to college, where their high school indoctrination is hardened and polished by professors. The end product is a citizen who will go to his grave believing a set of Ministry of Truth–approved lies: “whiteness” is intrinsically evil, abortion is health care, there are dozens of genders, America was founded on racism and must be dismantled, marriage is oppressive and bad for women, children hold you back, and unchecked sexual “exploration” with a variety of partners of every gender is the surest path to emotional happiness.

Sane people have a terrible choice to make: exercise parental authority over what their children are taught and risk financial ruin, social blackballing, and permanent cancellation—or allow their kids to be turned against them.

When a teacher or government official replaces the parent as the ultimate authority in the child’s life, all bets are off. Educators know that any adult with the authority to influence a child has the power to expose said child to any radical or extreme ideas they want.

To them, you are the extremist if you don’t think young children need to learn about sex and gender dysphoria yet. You are the extremist if you question a teacher or school administrator’s choice of books to read or lessons to teach. You are an extremely racist extremist if you’d rather not force a five-year-old to feel bad about the color of his skin and apologize for it.

In California, students in middle school can ask their school to change their names and genders in the school computer system, and the school is not permitted to inform the parents. The school authorities and the teachers are legally allowed to conspire with eleven-year-olds in sixth grade to induct them into a cult and keep it secret. Literally “it’ll be our secret,” a classic groomer move.

These government educational bureaucrats may not drive window-less vans and carry dirty magazines and candy bars to lure young boys (although let’s be honest, some do), but they are even more dangerous. Any parents who send a child into an environment like this, either knowingly or blindly, are forfeiting their authority over their kid.

The Regime’s child-catchers are prowling the locker rooms and cafeterias looking for lost, confused pre-teens to cart off to Pleasure Island, where they can get transformed into donkeys without their parents’ consent.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Disney is working on a new version of Pinocchio where he asks the Blue Fairy to turn him into a real girl.

Parental Surrender

Too many sentient adults seem to simply wait for a new update to the operating system to decide what to do with their kids. They unquestioningly accept the Current Parenting Thing, the rancid gruel served up as “education” at the local public school.

They surrender their kids to the authorities, in all their forms: teachers, principals, pediatricians, drag queens reading stories, social media influencers, YouTubers, Disney, Netflix, TikTok, the Kardashians—anyone who is credentialed as a “kid expert” or “important” now holds more sway over American kids than their own mothers and fathers. “Who am I to tell my kids how to behave, or what to learn, or how to think about the world? I’m just a random person who had a baby. I made plenty of mistakes in my life. How can I possibly ask my children to obey me?”

This is why we can’t have nice things. This is why healthy toddlers were kept in COVID masks for two years while they sat in sandboxes alone, outside, in rain or sleet. This is why you see massive brawls happening at middle schools, where kids punch their own teachers. This is why children are indoctrinated into the cult of trans, coached and groomed to say their pronouns, to switch genders, to explore various “sexualities” and “identities.” This is why mothers pimp out their own children as “drag kids” and put little boys in princess dresses and post the photos on Instagram while thousands of likes wash over them.

This is what abdicating the parenting throne looks like. Childless weirdos have taken over every institution we look to for guidance on how to raise good citizens, and no, I’m not talking about Catholic priests.

It has become only too clear what this absence of parental authority has wrought. Truly insane people have taken over the American education system, Big Pharma, and Big Tech. They know the best way to reach the Final Solution of the American family is to focus on young, impressionable minds.

We are enjoying the fruits of their labor now: an explosion of teen depression and suicide, an epidemic of children who are confused if they’re boys or girls, and an incredible 40 percent of Gen Z reporting that they are some letter in the ever-expanding alphabet soup known as LGBTQ+.

Everywhere, in every way, the fertile, fallow minds of children are being terraformed by people who identify as “fur baby” parents.

I wouldn’t let fur baby parents walk my dog, let alone educate my eight-year-old.

Authority Atrophied

This is why you must exercise your parental authority early and often. You must speak up!

No, I don’t want you to ask my teenage son if he’s comfortable with his gender during his doctor visit.”

No, you can’t wear your sister’s Elsa dress to school today, because boys don’t wear dresses, now get in the car and never ask me that again.”

No, you can’t buy those shorts that display the entire lower half of your rear end.”

No, you can’t have a TikTok account, and if I find it on your phone, say goodbye to the phone.”

Parental authority makes you the heavy in the house and the bouncer at the door. Pull on your big boy pants and lay down the law, or the law is going to lay down all over you.

*****

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Target Makes Itself A Target thumbnail

Target Makes Itself A Target

By Neland Nobel

As we pointed out not long ago, we think we may be at “peak wokeness.”  Corporations are really beginning to get stung.  If you want to become a soldier in the culture wars, you must expect to take some incoming fire.  But for years, Conservatives sat on their weapons too confused to fire back.  Corporations thought it would always be so.

As evidence, we cited that Conservatives have become awakened themselves, and are now coordinating economic boycotts without any centralized leadership.  Social media has allowed a degree of unity many felt impossible to get from Conservatives, who typically are both pro-business and about as hard to guide as stray cats.

The reaction has been slow in coming, with Conservatives engaging in skirmishes in isolation from each other while suffering multiple offenses committed against them without drawing many reactions from such disparate companies like Nike, Disney, and North Face.  Not anymore.

While there are many offending corporations to choose from and thus a “target-rich” environment,  the reaction against Bud Light seems to be of a whole measure of magnitude different, not only in size but in intensity.  And, it was almost instantaneous.

Clueless executives thought it was a temporary public relations crisis that could be solved by issuing a camo-colored beer can, reissuing traditional Clydesdale horse scenes with the flags flying, and other sops to placate angry customers.  None of these clumsy maneuvers have worked and the boycott has persisted for weeks and we suspect may be permanent. Insulting your clients and putting transgenderism first has proven to be a monumentally costly mistake.  What construction worker after hours wants to be caught dead with a beer identified as transgendered?

Budweiser and its marketing arm appear amazingly ignorant or perhaps contemptuous of their customers.  However, the latest flap has some involved in a bit of a panic.

The rebellion it would seem has been among white working-class and college students.

Since Conservatives don’t control the culture as the Left does, from a tactical standpoint it is best if we concentrate our fire on a few corporations at a time, hoping that we hurt them severely and cause a change of attitude in the boardroom.

The next target seems to be Target, a most appropriately named corporation. To date, the company has lost over $15 billion in market capitalization, harming employees and executives alike that own the stock, as well as the investing public. Shareholders should be enraged with management. Hopefully, the next front will be the constant and growing legal expense of shareholder lawsuits.

Some have tried to minimize the meaning of these losses, suggesting it has been a soft stock market. While it is true it has been a largely sideways market except for Big Tech and all things AI, this assertion is clearly false. Over the past few weeks, Walmart stock has dropped about 2 1/2%  while Target has dropped almost 20%.  Clearly, it is the actions of Target executives and not the stock market.

At this point, we should add that we don’t care what consenting adults do in private as it relates to sexual behavior.  Live and let live.  However, when that behavior becomes aggressively public, people start to lose their jobs for failing to use approved pronouns, the law is invoked, and an attempt is made to recruit children; then an important demarcation line has been reached.  This crosses the line into doing harm to others.  Your freedom to swing your arms stops when you start hitting other people.

Target’s offense goes beyond their promotions of all things homosexual during the Left’s mandatory celebration of “pride.”  This corporation went into the sexualization of children of the worst kind.  They just didn’t produce hooker-like wear for little girls, which is also quite bad.  Rather, their sexualization went into transvestitism and transgendering of children.  It didn’t help that the designer is a Satanist. Most parents object to schools or corporations sexualizing children, even if it is normative heterosexual sex. But to push transgenderism on little kids, was a bridge too far.

In this case, the response is much more on the part of mama bears as it is by male customers, and again, this reaction has been slow in coming.  Women, being a bit more compassionate, just did not see the threat of transgenderism and its goal of erasing women or its depraved desire to recruit children. It has gone well beyond the acceptance of homosexuality and into outright pederasty.

We wonder how long it will take the other “partners” within the LGBTQ+ community to discover how contradictory and dangerous this alliance has become.  There is some fleeting evidence of that with organizations such as Gays Against Groomers. And, most experts acknowledge that the vast majority of children suffering from sexual dysphoria grow out of it and the small remainder likely will be gay.  Moreover, the social blowback created by transgender philosophy may well harm the progress gays and lesbians have made over the years.

The economic calculation by the corporation is bizarre.  As the Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, the most recent census data shows about 1% of couples are homosexual. We can only guess that an even smaller percentage are same-sex couples with children.  And, it is likely there is even a smaller percentage of transgendered couples with children.

With such a tiny part of the market for children’s clothing and household goods, why would a corporation risk its market share to cater to such a small minority?  Because it is not an economic calculation rather it is a political signal that Target wants to align itself with the values and practices of the transgender community and the Left in general.  Either that or they thought they could pander to the Left calculating Conservatives would stay asleep and never fire back.

Moreover, as Fox Digital News has uncovered, Target backs many other outright communist causes.  They have been a big supporter of Black Lives Matter and executives control a budget that flows through a non-profit corporation that supports the disestablishment of the US military, and the destruction of Mt. Rushmore, and they seem to support just about everything that is un-American.  They also just seem to hate white people and everything they have contributed to the country.  They even support the ending of Israel as a Jewish state. It seems as if Howard Zinn and Hamas live within their corporate culture.

While most of what you read about is the disgust Conservatives have with Target, it now appears they are being attacked by the Left as well.  It seems Target is insufficiently “woke” and now over 200 LGBTQ organizations are angry with Target. 

Given the asymmetry in buying power between heterosexual and transgendered households, this put the company into a most uncomfortable bind.

History may not always repeat exactly, but one feature of cultural revolutions is that the revolutionaries sooner or later get around to eating their own.

We will let the Left carry their own grievances. But from a Conservative perspective, this hapless corporation is a super target for our collective wrath.  And, it is a name and a cause easy to remember.  They wish to be active participants in the culture war and they are the aggressor. They went to war with us.  My family was happy to shop there for years.

War is never a one-way street.  There will be casualties on both sides.  Lucky for us, we still have plenty of choices from whom to purchase what we need.  They need us, we don’t need them. $15 billion in losses should just be the beginning. 

Sears, Montgomery Ward, Radio Shack, Blockbuster Video, Comp USA, Borders, Woolworths, and many others, have all died at the hand of the free market’s creative destruction.  Target must die at the hand of Conservative Americans.

Make yourself a promise not to shop there.  You’ve got to do this for the children and for the country.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

WHO Says LGBTQ/Sex Ed Starts…At Birth?!?! thumbnail

WHO Says LGBTQ/Sex Ed Starts…At Birth?!?!

By Catherine Salgado

The World Health Organization (WHO), which is beholden to and enamored of the genocidal Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and whose horrendous advice triggered the destructive COVID-19 measures such as masking and lockdowns, has more awful advice for you. According to the WHO, “sexuality education starts from birth.”

It’s never too early to teach your infant about sex and how they should chop off body parts! And this is the organization to which governments (including the Biden administration) want to give complete control over pandemic responses in future?

Notice the mention in the screenshot below of “early childhood masturbation” and “gender identity.”

“[The UK Telegraph, May 13] Outrage over WHO advice on sexuality for infants

Guide argues that ‘sexuality education starts from birth’

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is under pressure to withdraw guidance for schools recommending that toddlers ‘ask questions about sexuality’ and ‘explore gender identities.’”

God help us.

*****

This article was published at Pro Deo et Libertate and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Leaked Policy Exposes Fox News Stances on Woke Ideology thumbnail

Leaked Policy Exposes Fox News Stances on Woke Ideology

By Mary Margaret Olohan

Fox News employees are allowed to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex, and are permitted to dress in alignment with their preferred gender. They must also be addressed by their preferred name and pronouns in the workplace.

These are just a few of the policies outlined in the company handbook, dated January 2021, a copy of which was shared with The Daily Signal. Fox also offers to help employees come up with a “Workplace Transition Plan” to ease their gender transition at work.

The revelations come amid conservative consternation at Fox Digital’s use of activist language like “gender-affirming care” in stories on its website, as well as the site’s consistent use of female pronouns for biological males like TikTok celebrity Dylan Mulvaney and swimmer Lia Thomas (formerly known as Will Thomas).

Fox also drew strong backlash for a June 2022 on-air segment praising a child’s gender transition as an “inspiration to others.” That segment briefly depicted California state Sen. Scott Weiner, a far-left Democrat who led the move to soften sex offender registry requirements for sodomy with minors, and highlighted the activist claim that a child might commit suicide if he or she is not permitted to transition.

The Daily Signal talked to current and former Fox employees who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the company.

“They want you to think it’s this place that supports traditionally conservative values,” a former producer for “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” told The Daily Signal. “But in reality, they’re pushing this nonsense behind the scenes.” 

Carlson’s show was canceled on April 24, days after he delivered a viral speech at The Heritage Foundation’s 50th-anniversary gala. Fox News Media has not given a reason, simply stating that the two parties “agreed to part ways.”

A source who still works at Fox News told The Daily Signal that after Carlson’s show was canceled in April, producers for the new 8 p.m. “Fox News Tonight” program was told not to bash Mulvaney. That directive came from high-level executives, the source said. 

Fox News did not respond to The Daily Signal’s multiple requests for comment.

Under the category “Gender Transition,” Fox’s employee handbook promises that the company is dedicated to “expanding and strengthening” efforts to “sustain a more inclusive work environment.” The Fox employee handbook is posted on Workday, where employees can see company guidelines or policies, a former employee told The Daily Signal.

“Employees who are transitioning their gender have the right to be open about their transition if they so choose, and to work in an environment free of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation, and without fear of consequences or transphobia for living openly,” the policy says.

Citing the Human Rights Campaign, one of the most prominent LGBTQ organizations in the country, the Fox handbook defines a slew of LGBTQ terms, including cisgender, gender expression, gender-fluid, gender identity, gender non-conforming, gender transition, LGBTQ, non-binary, and transgender.

For the past several years, Fox received a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, “the nation’s foremost benchmarking survey and report measuring corporate policies and practices related to LGBTQ+ workplace equality.” A former Fox News employee told The Daily Signal that the company frequently mentions this perfect score in employee training materials.

“Fox News devotes hours of programming to attacking ‘woke companies,’ but ironically Fox is as woke as the rest of them,” another former Fox News employee told The Daily Signal, emphasizing that Fox viewers would be “astonished to find out what the company is like.” 

Fox’s policies appear to be aligned with the legal requirements in New York City, where the company is headquartered, as well as California, where a large number of its employees work.

The New York City Human Rights Law requires employers to use the name, pronouns, and title with which a person identifies, regardless of their biological sex. It is a violation of the NYCHRL to intentionally or repeatedly refuse to use a person’s preferred name, pronoun, or title.

Additionally, the New York City law requires that people “be permitted to use single-gender facilities, such as restrooms or locker rooms…that most closely align with their gender, regardless of their gender expression, sex assigned at birth, anatomy, medical history, or the sex or gender indicated on their identification.”

If a biological woman objects to sharing a bathroom with a trans-identifying man, her objection will not be considered a “lawful reason to deny access” to the trans-identifying individual: “In those circumstances, a covered entity may offer alternatives for the individual expressing discomfort, by, for example, providing a single-occupancy restroom to change in.”

The law also specifically states that it is “unlawful” to require a trans-identifying person to use a single-occupancy restroom “because they are transgender, non-binary, or gender non-conforming.” New York also outlines the “Workplace Transition Plan” mentioned in the Fox handbook.

California’s Fair Employment and Housing Council adopted new regulations in 2017 pertaining to trans-identifying employees. These regulations similarly include an employee’s bathroom use, transitioning, dress, preferred name, and pronouns. 

For example, on bathroom use, the regulations state: “Employers shall permit employees to use facilities that correspond to the employee’s gender identity or gender expression, regardless of the employee’s assigned sex at birth.”

And on names and pronouns, the regulations give individuals a means to take action against their employer: “If an employee requests to be identified with a preferred gender, name, and/or pronoun, including gender-neutral pronouns, an employer or other covered entity who fails to abide by the employee’s stated preference may be liable.”

Traffic on Sixth Avenue passes by advertisements featuring Fox News personalities, including Bret Baier, Martha MacCallum, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Sean Hannity, adorn the front of the News Corporation building. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Employees who are attempting transitions are encouraged to “inform and educate” their co-workers about their experience, according to the Fox policy obtained by The Daily Signal, which emphasizes that only transitioning employees may disclose that they are trying to change their biology, and anyone who might know about their colleague’s gender transition must respect that person’s right to privacy.

Fox’s handbook notes that the man or woman attempting to transition may find the experience “stressful and trying,” and states that “with advance preparation, the road for someone to be able to express their true self can be made smoother.”

Fox also offers to help employees come up with a workplace gender transition plan.

“During the initial and any subsequent meetings, you and the Company should develop and maintain a Workplace Transition Plan,” the handbook says. “This Plan will outline the steps that need to be taken to ensure a successful transition at work.”

Those steps include when employees want to start using a different bathroom aligning with their gender identity and assuming a new gender identity at work. It also provides employees with time off for treatment (possibly hormonal treatments, like testosterone and estrogen) or medical procedures (such as the removal of breasts or testicles, facial feminization or masculinization, or the creation of fake genitalia).

Additionally, Fox and the employee would plan out “the manner in which, and to what extent, coworkers and non-employees in the workplace will be made aware of your transition,” and when the company will change the employees’ name or make other “administrative or personnel changes.”

Fox employees can go by their preferred name and pronouns, the handbook states, at least to the “extent possible.” But for apparently logistical reasons, until a transitioning employee gets a legal name change, their legal name (often referred to by LGBTQ advocates as a “dead name”) must remain on the company payroll, insurance, and personnel documents.

The handbook explicitly states that any employee “may access the restroom corresponding to their gender identity.” 

“If a transitioning employee expresses a desire for increased privacy they will be provided access to a single occupancy restroom where available,” the handbook says. “However, no employee shall be required to use a single-occupancy restroom if they do not wish to do so.”

The former Fox employee who spoke with The Daily Signal scathingly critiqued the network for running “hours of programming attacking companies for having leftist policies.”

“Fox is no different,” the former employee said. “It’s a standard American mega-corporation with all the same types of policies and employees as those other companies.”

The Daily Signal sent Fox’s corporate public relations staff detailed questions about the policy and the accusations from former employees last week. As of publication, Fox did not respond.

The handbook specifically acknowledges that “individuals who are transitioning their gender will be encouraged or required by their health care practitioner to live full-time in their impending gender role before gender reassignment surgery can be performed.” This is called “Real Life Experience” or “Real Life Test,” Fox notes. Fox employees are told that they are “permitted to express their gender” in accordance with company dress code policies.

Tucker Carlson speaks during 2022 Fox Nation Patriot Awards at Hard Rock Live at Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino Hollywood on Nov. 17, 2022 in Hollywood, Florida. (Photo: Jason Koerner/Getty Images)

When trans-identifying TikTok star Mulvaney was first gaining prominence last year, producers for “Tucker Carlson Tonight” had to fight to be able to refer to Mulvaney with male pronouns in the show’s chyrons, the former “Tucker Carlson Tonight” producer told The Daily Signal. 

Carlson’s team also fought to be able to host The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh on trans issues, the producer said, but the team was repeatedly met with resistance from Fox on this due to Walsh’s frank condemnation of transgender ideology. This may have also been due in part to Fox’s view of The Daily Wire as a competitor, the former producer suggested.

In a phone interview with The Daily Signal, Walsh said he was aware of the alleged blacklisting and believes it began after he slammed Fox for the June 2022 segment praising a child’s gender transition. Since then, Walsh appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” a few times, but he was aware that Carlson’s team had to fight for these appearances.

“Fox’s viewers think that Fox shares their values,” Walsh said. “And it’s very clear that that’s just not the case. Gender ideology is as far radical Left as you can possibly go. They have embraced radical leftism in its most extreme form.”

“There’s no daylight at all between Fox News and MSNBC when it comes to gender,” Walsh added. “And I think that’s something that Fox’s viewers need to know. … If it were up to me, Fox would get the Bud Light treatment.”

*****

This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.