Cross Dressing Woman Beater who broke a woman’s skull named “bravest athlete in history”

MMA fighter Fallon Fox, who twice broke an opponent’s skull to win a match, has been called the bravest athlete in history. Fox, a male to female transgender athlete, destroyed Erika Newsome in a Coral Gables, FL, MMA fight during which he “secured a grip on Newsome’s head… With his hands gripping the back of Newsome’s skull, he delivered a massive knee, bringing is leg up while pulling his opponent’s head down. The blow landed on Newsome’s chin and dropped her, unconscious, face-first on the mat.” That was Newsome’s last pro fight.

Biological Man who is convicted murderer wants to transfer to a woman’s prison

A convicted killer who is serving a life sentence in a penitentiary for men is demanding to be transferred to a women’s prison now that she’s self-identifying as a woman.

Jamie Boulachanis recently transitioned from a man to a woman under Canadian law and will have her case heard in which Correctional Service Canada is arguing Boulachanis shouldn’t be trasferred to a women’s facility–in spite of a Federal Court order–due to public safety concerns and his ability to escape prison.

In 2016 a Montreal jury found Boulachanis, born John Boulachanis, guilty of killing 32-year-old Robert Tanguay back in 1997. For years Tanguay’s body remained hidden, buried in sandpit.

According to the Montreal Gazette, Correctional Service Canada (CSC) is cited Boulachanis history of trying to escape detention, including one case where he escaped his restraints and ran from a prison bus before being tackled by a guard in less than a minute.

Sex offender who identifies as young girl reveals just how dangerous self-ID is

An eight-year-old girl trapped in a grown man’s body claims her collection of child pornography is a first amendment right. This is the logical result of self-identification. If people are what they say they are they can get away with anything. 

Joseph Gobrick is a 45-year-old male sex offender in Grand Rapids, Michigan, claims that he has “always been an 8-year-old girl.” So on top of being a female child, he also doesn’t age. He has self-ID’d himself into immortality. 

Feminists Screaming About “Transgenderism” — Even Though They Birthed It. Written by Selwyn Duke

“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman”
“No biological, psychic or economic destiny defines the figure that the human female has in the bosom of society; it is the whole of civilization that produces this intermediate product between the male and the castrated one that is described as feminine.”
Feminist, Paedophile and Nazi(Vichy France) Collaborator Simone de Beauvoir

https://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/31550-feminists-screaming-about-transgenderism-even-though-they-birthed-it

Say, “Be careful what you wish for” or call it the law of unintended consequences. For decades feminists screamed “I am woman, hear me roar” — now it’s “Hear me squeal — a man just walked through our door!”

The issue? Men claiming womanhood (MCW, a.k.a. “transgenders”) are invading women’s spaces — such as bathrooms, locker rooms and prisons — and are entering female competitions, taking away gold and glory. Examples are MCW who in recent years won “women’s” titles in weightlifting, cycling, sprinting, golf long driving and even a beauty pageant.

This is no pretty picture to feminists. Wizened old Germaine Greer took heat in 2016 for saying that men getting a medical procedure “doesn’t make them a woman.” Ex-tennis star Martina Navratilova is currently being ostracized for writing that having MCW in women’s sports is “insane” and is “cheating.” Feminist writer Meghan Murphy just sued Twitter for banning her for tweeting “Men aren’t women” (my, my, employing white male linear logic!). And feminist Julia Beck (video below) was kicked off a Baltimore LGBT committee for using masculine pronouns when referencing, the nerve of her, a man.

Now, I’ve produced more material inveighing against “transgenderism” than you care to know (and that I care to have written). Yet there’s something here preventing me from endorsing these feminists’ fight unreservedly; it’s a striking blindness to a striking truth afflicting both liberals and most conservatives.

To wit: Feminists are now merely being hoisted with their own petards. They themselves laid the foundation for the transgender agenda they bemoan.

Let’s take a trip down Bad Memory Lane. For approximately three decades, the prevailing feminist doctrine was “gender neutrality” theory; it held that the sexes are the same except for the superficial physical differences and, therefore, raising boys and girls the same way will result in their being identical beneath the skin. This was embraced so radically that as iconoclastic feminist Camille Paglia once related, feminists would corner her on college campuses in the ‘70s, glaring, and swear that hormones didn’t exist and that, even if they did, they couldn’t possibly influence behavior.

Though I never believed it, I was accosted with this theory as a teen and young adult, as many of you no doubt were. It was convenient for feminists. After all, convince people of the sexes’ sameness, the thinking (feeling?) goes, and there can be no justification for keeping women from traditionally male arenas.

The social pressure brought to bear was profound, too. “Gender neutrality” theory was Science™, opposed only by knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, backward Neanderthals. Sound familiar?

The connection to transgenderism should be obvious. The feminists spread notion A, “that the sexes are the same except for the superficial physical differences.” Then transgender activists came along and merely espoused B, a corollary:

If you change the superficial physical differences, you can be the opposite sex.

You can draw a straight line from one to the next — B absolutely, logically follows from A.

Related to this, some feminists complain that if a man can be female just by saying so, it dilutes the idea of “woman.” But did feminism not start this dilution with sameness-beneath-the-skin doctrine?

Moving on, feminists also claimed that not only can a woman do anything a man can do, but, by gum, she can perhaps even do it better. Children were inculcated with this “Girl Power” propaganda via cartoons, films and shows portraying unrealistic, masculinized female characters trouncing 300-pound men with ease.

This belief was applied to sports, too, with feminists claiming that the only reason men perform better is that they’ve had “greater opportunities.” Quack researchers even asserted that women’s marathon times would equal men’s by 1998 and that they’d achieve parity in shorter distances early in the 21st century (in reality, the intersex performance gap actually widened in the ‘90s).

This had the desired effect. When I used to work with kids, I encountered an 11-year-old boy who, it came out, supposed the women’s mile record should be better than the men’s; another lad of about the same age believed that the performance gap between the sexes was “very slight.” In this vein, Sportscience News reported in 1997 that “a pre-Olympic poll of 1,000 adults last May found that66 percent of Americans believe ‘the day is coming when top female athletes will beat top males at the highest competitive levels’ (Tharp, 1996).”

This is serious dislocation from reality. Note here that the 800-meter-run record for 14-year-old boys is better than the women’s world record; that Australia’s national women’s soccer team, then ranked fifth in the world, lost a 2016 scrimmage to an under-15 boys’ team 7-0; and that, more or less, this reflects the general intersex performance gap. But, again, the illusion is convenient for feminists. I mean, if women would equal men athletically but for discrimination, we’d better kick the opportunities and funding for them into high gear, right?

That is, it was convenient — until that desired effect had a side-effect. It’s another corollary: If the sexes’ athletic performances aren’t that much different to begin with, and if women are destined for parity, what’s the big deal about MCW competing in “women’s” sports? What advantage could the MCW really have after the chop-chop and flop reduces their testosterone levels?

No, not everyone believes the above. But enough do — because of feminist brainwashing — to sorely weaken the opposition to MCW in women’s sports.

The last point is that there’s real poetic justice here. Feminists spent decades aggressively invading previously male-only arenas, from the Virginia Military Institute and the Citadel to once exclusively male clubs to boys’ athletic teams to men’s locker rooms (female sports reporters). Now men — albeit those masquerading as women — are invading women’s spaces and the feminists cry foul. For years, however, they did everything they could to portray men and women as interchangeable parts. What did they think would happen?

They didn’t think. They were led by their passions, their emotions, like children, ignoring that ideas have consequences. Just because you’re wholly illogical — and even may dismiss logic as a white-male phenomenon — doesn’t mean your arguments won’t be taken beyond their utility for you and to their logical conclusion.

Yet feminists still haven’t learned. Ever seeking leverage via emotion-based, politically correct appeals, some now have the temerity to call transgenderism a “men’s rights movement” enabled by “straight men” who are “all about the trans.” It apparently eludes them that women currently have greater complicity in advancing transgenderism because they tend to support the leftists pushing it (e.g., percentagewise, women went Democrat 59-40 in the 2018 midterms; men went GOP 51-47).

Then again, maybe men deserve more blame than one may think. If our great-grandfathers had never let feminism rear its ugly head in the first place, we might not be where we are today.

The racist pervert creep Jonathan Yaniv strikes again!

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has announced it is representing another esthetic salon against Jessica Yaniv at the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.

The She Point Beauty Salon, owned and operated by women of the Sikh religion, has become the newest target for Yaniv’s litigation after declining Yaniv a Brazilian wax. Yaniv then demanded a leg wax, but was also refused on the same grounds. In their Tuesday morning Press Release, the Justice Centre notes that leg waxes are performed in private with the client undressed or nude from the waist down. Citing religious and safety reasons, the salon refused Yaniv service. 

The interaction occurred in August 2019, with the claim being filed at the BCHRT in October—the same month Yaniv lost a number of other identical complaints at the Tribunals. The complaints, made against mostly immigrant-owned aesthetic salons, were advanced due to some of the salon’s refusal to provide waxing services to Yaniv’s male scrotum. Other salons were asked to provide services to other parts of Yaniv’s body, but declined. All did so on grounds related to safety and/or religious restrictions on intimate-area touching between unrelated, unmarried males and females.

WOMXN: The Latest Biology Denying newspeak Aimed at Destroying Womanhood

The transgender/gender ideology movement began as the brainchild of three men and one woman who shared a common bond: all four were pedophilia activists.

Transgender activists are now pushing a new term, “womxn,” as a way of further blurring the biological, cultural, and legal lines between the sexes.

“Womxn” is a successor to “womyn,” which has been used by feminists since the ‘70s. The updated term is meant to be more inclusive, as it encompasses “trans and nonbinary” women. That is, men who identify as women.

The entry for “womyn” at dictionary.com notes:

Womyn is recorded as early as 1975 during second-wave feminism. One notable early instance was the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival, which was held annually starting in 1976 until 2015. This was a feminist music festival only open to “womyn-born womyn,” i.e., or cisgender women. It was much criticized for its exclusion of transgender individuals, which exclusion has led to another alternative spelling of women, womxn, meant to include trans and nonbinary women in intersectional feminism.

The “womyn” music festival was eventually forced to close in 2015 after repeatedly being crashed by transgender men.

Daisy Jones, an editor at ViceUK, uses the term “womxn,” which she says “denotes gender fluidity and inclusivity.”

But the idea behind “womxn,” that there is no inherent biological basis behind masculinity or femininity, has been criticized by both conservatives and feminists.

The feminist Women’s Liberation Front, for instance, has come out in opposition to such paragons of the trans movement as men competing in women’s sports, stating of the practice:

“Inferior male athletes are finding ways to earn lots of money and fame at women’s expense. Many countries reward Olympians with cash bonuses, not to mention ad revenue. Men have no place in women’s sports; they are cheats, one and all.”

An anonymous woman who describes herself as a black lesbian prosecutor wrote on Twitter that “the consequences for women are extraordinary” if transgender men are treated the same as biological women, adding:

“Males will then be allowed in women’s showers, sports, dorms, prisons, rape shelters, etc. *All* our sex-based rights wld be forfeit. This is, obviously, a non-starter. We will not submit.”

The pro-homosexual LGB Alliance struck back at the new “womxn” language, arguing that its advocates aim of “expanding the definition of women” makes women’s rights “meaningless.”

The transgender movement seeks to force government, businesses, and the public in general to treat transgenders as the members of the opposite sex they claim to be.

The Obama administration pushed a rule that directed school officials to enforce “gender identity” claims of transgender children on their normal classmates without regard to children’s privacy or parents’ input. President Trump ditched the rule in February.

“If people knowing how biology works somehow invalidates your existence, then you need to seek help,” responded feminist historian Katie Parker. “Everyone is valid as a human being, forcing others to participate in a lie doesn’t increase your ‘validity’. Your worth shouldn’t rely on others to see you as something you are not.”

In some cases, the transgender movement is being used by men who wish to gain advantages they would not normally enjoy while identifying as their own sex.

There is the example from October of this year, for example, of “Rachel” McKinnon, a male philosophy professor and cyclist from Canada who identifies as a woman and was thus allowed to not only compete, but place first at the UCI Women’s Master Track Championship in Manchester.

There is also the case of transgender men who, because they identify as women, expect lesbians to sleep with them. The reluctance of many lesbians to sleep with trans “women” who have male genitalia has sparked outrage from the most extreme social justice warriors.

“At the end of the day, if your reason for not dating any transgender person is because of their trans-status, that doesn’t mean you’re not transphobic — because you are,” said a transgender activist in a video.

The convolutedness of the gender fluidity ideology has culminated in stupefying cases like the recent news of a trans “man” with a “non-binary” partner who gave birth to a baby using a “female” sperm donor.”

39-year-old Reuben Sharpe began living as a man 12 years ago. Sharpe’s partner, a biological female named Jay, identifies as “non-binary” and has had a double mastectomy. The UK couple were assisted in their child-bearing efforts by a trans doctor.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/family/item/34479-womxn-the-latest-lgbtq-newspeak-aimed-at-destroying-womanhood

Violence Against Women: Man Had His Pregnant Girlfriend Murdered Because She Refused to Have an Abortion

An ex-Austin police officer, who was extradited from Indonesia where he fled in 2015, pled guilty to having Samantha Dean, his pregnant girlfriend, murdered when she refused to abort their child.

VonTrey Clark will be sentenced to life in prison without parole. The prosecution had sought the death penalty.

Clark had pled not guilty for years.

Witnesses said he offered $5,000 to have Samantha Dean murdered.

He read his confession Monday in open court packed with the Dean family and supporters.

Clark, a former Austin police officer, “had plead not guilty in the 2015 shooting death of Samantha Dean, a Kyle Police Department crime victims counselor who was seven months pregnant with his child,” the Austin Statesman reported. “Clark was charged with capital murder five months after authorities found Dean’s body with three fatal gunshot wounds behind a vacant office building in Bastrop County.”

Taylor Dean, Samantha Dean’s younger sister, spoke directly to Clark.

“The one person that I can turn to for moral advice or support is gone, thanks to you,” Taylor Dean said. “You stole my favorite person.

“But that’s not all. You stole an innocent child, you stole my niece. It’s incredible that someone so small could bring so much joy,” she went on. “You stole our future memories, too.”

Social justice controls people with the exact same tactics as cults

Vanessa Glavac holds a degree in psychology from the University of Guelph. This is the first installment in a weekly series of articles looking at the psychological techniques that both the social justice movement and cults employ.

The social justice movement has long been mocked as a “cult” by its opponents—but there’s truth to the joke. In fact, the movement uses the same regimen of manipulation techniques that cults use to control their followers.

Cults use a variety of strategies to instill extreme change in members’ attitudes and behaviours, without members’ voluntary approval. These “thought reform” strategies have been studied and documented by clinical psychologist Margaret Thaler Singer and psychiatrist Robert Lifton. They have each identified a series of conditions and strategies for thought reform—most of which are used in the ideology of social justice.

Not everyone who believes in the ideas of the social justice movement are under the control of these thought reform strategies. But you can tell those who have been indoctrinated into the cult by the way they respond to unfamiliar arguments—they yell insults, they shut down the conversation, they ignore your points, and they create nonsensical, circular arguments. These people are under the spell of the cult. 

Conversely, there are other people on the left, even self-proclaimed “social justice warriors” who do not act in this way—they’re willing to debate their perspective. They might concede a point, or adjust their position, or even change their mind when presented with new evidence or arguments. And even where you completely disagree, it’s not hard to follow their line of reasoning. The people in this second group have come to hold their ideas voluntarily, through thoughtful analysis. 

Meanwhile, the people in the first group have been indoctrinated and forced to defend these ideas through a host of psychological and social manipulation strategies.

Most of us are aware of some of these strategies—such as the social rewards gained through virtue signaling, or the social and professional blacklisting that’s inflicted on anyone who steps out of line (i.e. cancel culture). In actuality, this is just the tip of the iceberg. 

For example, consider Robert Lifton’s strategy of “Doctrine Over Person”. Cult members are told to reflect and review their past, through the lens of the group doctrine. They are then taught to rewrite and reinterpret their personal histories accordingly.

Going forward, members are also taught to interpret the world as a whole through the cult doctrine. They’re also taught to ignore their own experiences and feelings, and use critical thinking and contradictory evidence to revise their beliefs. 

If you’ve had any experience with the ideas of social justice, feminism, or racial-sensitivity training, you have likely done this. This process of viewing one’s life through the ideology is listed right in the course syllabus for the Women’s Studies course at MIT.

This becomes even more apparent when you think of the language commonly used in social justice ideology:

Let’s look at this from a feminist perspective…

Society views this as normal, but when examined through the lens of social justice…

If we take an intersectional approach to these events…

In her book, Cults in Our Midst, Singer explains, “in many groups… you will be told to stop paying attention to your own perceptions, since you are ‘uninstructed’, and simply to go along with and accept the ‘instructed’ view, the party line.”

In the ideology of social justice, “uninstructed” corresponds to “unoppressed”. For example, men, holding the status of “unoppressed”, are never allowed to vocalize their perceptions of sexism (or lack thereof). They’re also taught to ignore any perceptions of sexism or sexual harassment that they, themselves, may experience (for example, ‘stupid dad’ stereotypes in sitcoms). The same goes for heterosexuals vs LGBT members, Whites vs racial minorities, or cis vs trans. 

You can see this in the language embodied by intersectional feminist Lara Witt: “I am not Muslim, so I will stay in my lane… As an able-bodied woman, again, I will stay in my lane…”

She recognizes that she is “uninstructed” in each of these realms, and so she is careful not to put too much stock in her own perceptions or opinions. (Her response also illustrates the cult’s strategy of  language manipulation, which I will cover in another installment in this series).

Now, not all of these practices are harmful, in and of themselves. Viewing the world through different perspectives is a good way to expand one’s horizons. So is the recognition that other people may have different experiences than you. However, I can’t say the same for being taught to ignore your own perceptions. 

More importantly—this strategy of “Doctrine Over Person” is just one in nearly a dozen manipulation strategies used by both cults and social justice. Seeing one or two similarities is not surprising, but seeing the full toolkit laid bare is quite disturbing. Over the next few weeks, I’ll be analyzing each manipulation strategy in a series of pieces. 

In my next piece, I’ll lay out how the social justice movement exercises complete control over the environment of recruits, in much the same way cults physically isolate members in secluded communes. 

You’ll be disturbed to see just how completely social justice has taken over members’ daily environments (and your own)—no commune necessary. 

Studies Show Abortion Pill is Dangerous for Women: 24 Women Have Died, Thousands Injured

Abortion activists are pushing to de-regulate abortion drugs at the expense of women’s safety and unborn babies’ lives.

Research published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons this winter indicates that drug-induced abortions have a complication rate four times higher than surgical abortions.

“Physicians who seek to advocate for their female patients’ best interests should become aware that medical abortion results in complications far more often than its proponents acknowledge,” wrote Dr. Ingrid Skop, M.D., a San Antonio obstetrician.

Skop said abortion providers are encouraging women to choose drug-induced abortions, which involve a combination of the drugs mifepristone (Mifeprex or RU486) and misoprostol (Cytotec). They are used to abort unborn babies up to 10 weeks of pregnancy in America.

Currently, about 39 percent of abortions in the U.S. are drug-induced, according to Skop’s research.

Though safety regulations require that a doctor prescribe the drugs, the abortion industry sometimes skirts the requirement by using webcams to remotely dispense them. The method is cheaper for the abortion industry, but women never actually see a doctor in person before taking the drugs.

According to the research, risks include ruptured ectopic pregnancies, hemorrhage, infection and retained pregnancy tissue, which require surgery in as many as one in 20 women. The FDA reports at least 24 women have died along with their unborn babies from the drugs, and thousands more have been injured. In total, the number of adverse events from 2000 to 2018 is now 24 deaths, 97 ectopic pregnancies, 1,042 hospitalizations, 599 blood transfusions, and 412 infections (including 69 severe infections), with a total of 4,195 adverse events reported, according to the FDA.

Abortion activists claim the drugs are very safe, but Skop said the little research on their safety is “heavily biased.” She said only 28 states require abortion facilities to report complications.

“Vocal abortion advocates are aggressively using the court systems and pro-choice media sources to advocate for removal of safety restrictions on abortions,” Skop wrote. “They have also begun to advocate for illegal use of mifepristone and misoprostol when restrictions are in place, despite the demonstrated increase in adverse events that occur when these medications are used without close medical supervision.”

This includes lobbying for mail-order abortion drugs, telemedicine and abortions performed by non-physicians. California recently mandated that the abortion drugs be provided on all public college campuses, and the New York legislature is considering a similar proposal.

Meanwhile, Democrat presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg recently said they would allow the abortion drugs to be sold over the counter.

The ACLU also is suing the FDA and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in a case that could force every pharmacy in America to dispense abortion drugs.

De-regulating abortion drugs also would make women and their unborn babies more vulnerable to abuse. Already, LifeNews has reported on several cases of forced abortions or abortion attempts by men who did not want their partners to have the baby.

Last week, police arrested a California man for allegedly forcing his girlfriend at gunpoint to take abortion drugs to kill their unborn child.

In 2018, a Virginia doctor was convicted of spiking his pregnant girlfriend’s drink with an abortion drug, killing their unborn baby.

In the fall, the pro-abortion news site Mother Jones reported on a similar incident. According to the report, federal authorities caught a New York City woman selling abortion drugs online after a Wisconsin man allegedly bought drugs from her and then secretly slipped them into a pregnant woman’s drink. Both the man and the seller are facing charges.

Skop concluded her report by urging doctors to be aware of the biased information coming out of the abortion industry and to consider their patients’ safety.