Wednesday, March 22, 2017
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
Monday, March 20, 2017
Sunday, March 19, 2017
Saturday, March 18, 2017
S.J.W And Feminist Vs Man In The Women Rest At DISNEYLAND In Calf Room Epic Fail, Real Women Lose Again And Fake Women Win Again
I didn't know if I was going to write this blog or not. A part of me was scared it'd be shared as some transgender hot piece about yet another homophobic mom lashing out at Disney and then I'd have to deal with the wrath of the internet telling me to kill myself. So let me be clear. This isn’t that story. This is a story about a biological man in the women’s restroom, but we need to discuss some gender issues.
I’ve lived in Los Angeles for over a decade and have seen my fair share of transgender/gender fluid people. They in no way offend me. I'd consider myself pretty progressive and tolerant of most things...except maybe people who identify as a person wearing socks with sandals. We all have our line in the sand and that's totally mine. But how transgender people feel, how they choose to dress or any surgeries they get, don't infringe on any parts of my life, so I support their decision to live as they see fit. I've also seen my fair share of transgender women in the women's restroom before. Not ALL the time. But over the past few years, I'd say 4-5 that I noticed. Men...who were in some stage of transition and making every attempt to be a woman from mascara to heels. Transgenders who certainly felt comfortable in the women's room and probably frightened to go into the men's. At these times, I smiled…I peed...and life went on. But 2 weeks ago something very different happened.
I was at Disneyland with my son, my friend and her son. We were over in California Adventure in the food court area. We’d just finished eating and decided to pee before we headed out to The Little Mermaid. I went to the bathroom while she watched our boys in their strollers, and then I did the same. (For anyone who’s tried to fit a stroller in a bathroom stall, you get it).
I was off to the side waiting with the two boys, when I noticed a man walk into the restroom. My first thought was “Oh shit, he’s walked in the wrong restroom by mistake. lol” He took a few more steps, at which point he would’ve definitely noticed all the women lined up and still kept walking. My next thought was, “Maybe he’s looking for his wife…or child and they’ve been in here a while.” But he didn’t call out any names or look around. He just stood off to the side and leaned up against the wall. At this point I’m like, “WTF? Ok there is definitely a very large, burly man in a Lakers jersey who just walked in here. Am I the only one seeing this?" I surveyed the room and saw roughly 12 women, children in tow, staring at him with the exact same look on their faces. Everyone was visibly uncomfortable. We were all trading looks and motioning our eyes over to him…like "What is he doing in here?” Yet every single one of us was silent. And this is the reason I wrote this blog.
If this had been 5 years ago, you bet your ass every woman in there would’ve been like, “Ummm what are you doing in here?”, but in 2017? The mood has shifted. We had been culturally bullied into silenced. Women were mid-changing their baby’s diapers on the changing tables and I could see them shifting to block his view. But they remained silent. I stayed silent. We all did. Every woman who exited a stall and immediately zeroed right in on him...said nothing. And why? B/c I and I’m sure all the others were scared of that “what if”. What if I say something and he says he "identifies as a woman" and then I come off as the intolerant asshole at the happiest place on earth? So we all stood there, shifting in our uncomfortableness…trading looks. I saw two women leave the line with their children. Still nothing was said. An older lady said to me out loud, “What is he doing in here?” I’m ashamed to admit I silently shrugged and mouthed, “I don’t know." She immediately walked out, from a bathroom she had every right to use without fear.
So there lingered this unspoken doubt everyone had….that .00001% chance this wasn’t a man. Let me be clear. This was totally a man. If this wasn’t a man, this was a woman who had fully transitioned via surgery and hormones into a man and had also gotten an Adam’s apple implant, chest hair and size 9-10 shoes ....and at that point, wtf are you doing in the women’s restroom? And let me be clear, my problem wasn’t JUST that there was a man in the restroom. Its that he wasn’t even peeing, washing his hands or doing anything else that you’d do in a restroom. He was just standing off to the side looking smug…untouchable... doing absolutely nothing. He had to have noticed that every woman in the long line was staring at him. He didn’t care. He then did a lap around the restroom walking by all the stalls. You know, the stalls that have 1 inch gaps by all the doors hinges so you can most definitely see everyone with their pants around their ankles and vagina clear as day.
And just as a side note….can we stop making bathroom doors with built in peep holes? I don’t particularly want to see people wiping their asses or changing tampons. Why is this even a thing?
So yes... there were women and small children using the restroom and this man was walking around knowing no one would say anything. So here I am…writing this blog, because honestly I need answers. We can’t leave this situation ambiguous any more. The gender debate needs to be addressed... and quickly. There have to be guidelines. It can’t just be a feeling. I’m sorry. I wish it could, but it can’t. I’m fine going by “if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck…it’s a duck." Even if that means he/she put on a beak and glued feathers…I get it, you’re trying to be a duck so you’re cool. But this notion that we’re shamed into silence b/c we might offend someone, has gone too far. There was a man in the bathroom. Not transgender. There was a man who felt entitled to be in the woman restroom, because he knew no one would say anything. There were 20-25 people by the time I left, who were scared and uncomfortable by his ominous presence. And the only thing stopping us, was our fear of political correctness and that the media has told us we don’t know what gender is anymore. I never want to be in the position again. Im not asking for permission to tell transgender people to get out my bathroom. I need to know it’s ok to tell a man, who looks like a man, to get the f*&% out. Gender just can't be a feeling. There has to be science to it. DNA, genitals, amount of Sephora make up on your face, pick your poison, but as a very progressive woman...I'm sorry it can't just be a feeling when theres but a mere suggestion of a door with a peep hole separating your eyes from my vagina or my children's genitals.
SINCE THE SAME QUESTIONS KEEP GETTING ASKED OF ME I THOUGHT I'D CLARIFY WITH AN UPDATE:
*Why didn't you just leave? A big reason I didn't leave the restroom was because maneuvering two separate strollers anywhere isn't exactly an easy feat. In fact, it's nearly impossible. If you've ever tried, when you push them, they move in opposite directions. It's a shitshow. Had I felt like my life was in imminent danger, obviously I would not have just stood there, I would've figured something out. We all would've.
*"It's your own fault for not saying anything. I would have spoken up." Sure. Don't we all wish we could always do and say the perfect thing? lol Well unfortunately in the real world, it doesn't always work out that way. And like many of you, I thought of the perfect thing to say around 11pm that night when I was running it over and over again in my mind trying to fall asleep. Funny how it always works that way, eh? I've thought long and hard about everything that happened since then and found that I would probably reacted the same way if I had to do it over. I wasn't in the position to say something, standing there manning two toddlers. I couldn't risk putting them in the middle of that situation should he have reacted poorly. But I didn't write this blog only because of how I reacted. I take full responsibility for MY actions whether you think I was right or wrong. I wrote this blog not just because of my reaction, but because of how every. single. woman. reacted. As some have suggested, I had no way of knowing what was in their minds or why no one said anything. And you're right, but they didn't. Not one. For one reason or another none of us spoke up, women of all walks of life and some without children. Not one spoke. I froze. We all froze. If you don't think that's important, then I'm not sure what to tell you.
*"He was clearly a perv, you're stupid for not kicking him out" He wasn't being overtly "pervy" or aggressive towards anyone. It wasn't apparent what he was doing anything at all besides standing there. He wasn't drunk and stumbling around acting aggressive or taunting anyone. That would've been clear. Yes he did a lap around, but he wasn't lingering over a particular stall with his hands in his pants. It felt like he was looking for someone, so my gut kept saying he was waiting for someone. Still not ok, but also not a life or death situation. He was just there. I should also note that although my story is long, this all transpired in about a minute...minute and a half.
*"This isn't a trans issue, so why did you bring them up at all?" I believe trans women issues ARE women's issues. Situations like this are the very reason trans women have fought for bathroom rights to begin with. To pee, not in the presence of men. If we continue down this path, I do worry that the backlash could strip them of their rights. Perhaps I went overboard on explaining how my problem wasn't with the new trans bathroom rules...calling attention to it as if it was. But lets be honest...I'd of been damned if I did and damned if I didn't. If I hadn't mentioned them, people would've accused me of being transphobic and disingenuous with my intent.
*Why did you even write this? What are you asking for besides clicks to your dumb mom blog?" Gender must be clearly defined to keep women safe. We can not tell women they don't know what a man is anymore. We can not coddle this small fraction of people (people who are men, "identify as women", but have made no external attempt to show that) at the risk of women and children everywhere. The wrong men will take advantage of this loophole and put others in danger. My situation wasn't dire, but for others it could be. We can not put doubt in women's minds regarding their ability to recognize and identify a man. In a world where 99.9% of sexual assault is done by men, we must to have the right to "assume someone's gender". And I will not waiver in that stance.
Friday, March 17, 2017
Thursday, March 16, 2017
Man pulls down Congressman’s Stolen rainbow flag and stomps on it, There Nothing That Can Be Done Here, Texas v. Johnson (1989). Flag Burning Constitutes Symbolic Speech That Is Protected By The First Amendment.
A man pulled down a rainbow pride flag from a U.S. Representative’s Capitol Hill office yesterday.
The man, who has not yet been identified, entered the office of Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-CA). The man told staff members that the rainbow flag is “immoral” and “disgusting,” especially since the rainbow flag was being displayed near that American flag, Lowenthal said.
He then grabbed the flag, threw it on the ground, and repeatedly stepped on it.
Facts and Case Summary - Texas v. Johnson
Facts and case summary for Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989). Flag burning constitutes symbolic speech that is protected by the First Amendment.
FactsGregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag, if such action were likely to incite anger in others. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case.
IssueWhether flag burning constitutes "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.
The majority of the Court, according to Justice William Brennan, agreed with Johnson and held that flag burning constitutes a form of "symbolic speech" that is protected by the First Amendment. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech.
In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
Justice StevensWriting for the dissent, Justice Stevens argued that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns, and thus, the government could lawfully prohibit flag burning.
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Transmasculine/feminine is a non binary gender identity that some adopt if they feel uncomfortable identifying fully as binary trans but they feel mostly male or female. If there was a kinsey scale for gender identity from 1-5 it would be analogous to 2 or 4 on the scale or even 1.5 or 4.5. It's a personal choice that depends on a person's subjective feeling and there are no criteria that places one person as binary trans and another as transmasculine/feminine...
Transmasculine and transfeminine are catch-all phrases, too. Transfeminine identities cover all trans people on the feminine end of things, from non-op, nonbinary individuals to mtf transsexuals; and the opposite is true of transmasculine individuals.
More often than not, though, Eveline is absolutely correct - because most people I've known to use transmasculine/transfeminine as opposed to transmale/ftm/transman or transfemale/mtf/transwoman are not comfortable with the latter terms, or don't identify on the binary.
Think of transgender as one big umbrella, and transmasc/transfemme as two smaller umbrellas under that umbrella.
It’s a simple request. Homosexual have been claiming that they are homosexual by nature. That is, their genetic makeup puts them in the same sexual character as heterosexuals even though the plumbing is all wrong. Since heterosexuals can get married, it stands to reason that a third sex like homosexuality/lesbianism should have the same rights. Nature overrides human-made moral and legal conventions. That’s the narrative.
Since the legal door was opened wide for homosexuals to get married with the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision in 2015, the door should be opened for all other genders. (I’m not sure how gender got mixed up with sex. Foreign languages have gender, not sex. I’ll leave that to the linguists to figure out.)
Here’s the problem. There are only two sexes. Only women can reproduce, but they need a man to do it. If that isn’t enough empirical evidence, then a person can’t be convinced by any rational, logical, or scientific argument. What’s in a person’s head is not what’s in his or her DNA and between their legs.
Contrary to all science, Facebook has come up with dozens of gender options that have been created out of thin air. There is not a shred of science to support any of them. The oddest thing is that the smart folks at Facebook came up with the list. This should tell you something. Sometimes smart people are stupid.
I don’t see Interspecies Sex or Adult-Child sex. But give them time. They are logically inevitable given the operating assumptions of the gender-fluid class.
Homosexuality used to be a crime against nature. Not anymore. It’s a protected right, and if you refuse to acknowledge it in word or deed, you could lose your job or business. “Bake me a gay wedding cake or get sued.” In England, you can be convicted of political heresy by quoting the Bible and preaching the gospel if you bring same-sex sexuality into the discussion.
Here are 58 lawsuits waiting to happen:
- Cis Female
- Cis Male
- Cis Man
- Cis Woman
- Cisgender Female
- Cisgender Male
- Cisgender Man
- Cisgender Woman
- Female to Male
- Gender Fluid
- Gender Nonconforming
- Gender Questioning
- Gender Variant
- Male to Female
- Trans Female
- Trans* Female
- Trans Male
- Trans* Male
- Trans Man
- Trans* Man
- Trans Person
- Trans* Person
- Trans Woman
- Trans* Woman
- Transgender Female
- Transgender Male
- Transgender Man
- Transgender Person
- Transgender Woman
- Transsexual Female
- Transsexual Male
- Transsexual Man
- Transsexual Person
- Transsexual Woman
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
Monday, March 13, 2017
Crazy Woman Shouts At Sean Spicer About ‘Fascist Trump’ In Apple Store "We have a great country," Spicer said, brushing her off. "Such a great country that allows you to be here.
L.M.A.O, At S.J.W, Special Snowflake, that a small list, so who the real Fascist Dictator?
Bill Maher: Bush Should be Impeached for 9/11, Iraq, Fascism
Ron Paul is a Fascist!
Obama-The Next Fascist Dictator
A crazy woman filmed herself confronting White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer on Sunday at an Apple Store in Washington DC.
“How does it feel to work for a fascist?” 33-year-old Indian-American Shree Chauhan said. “Have you helped with the Russia stuff? Are you a criminal as well? Have you committed treason too, just like the president?”
“We have a great country,” Spicer said, brushing her off. “Such a great country that allows you to be here.”Spicer goes on to ignore her while she continues to whine and harass him.
Sunday, March 12, 2017
In 1981, a flush of gay infections announced the American AIDS epidemic. A debate ensued: should homosexuIn 1981, a flush of gay infections announced the American AIDS epidemic. A debate ensued: should homosexuality be suppressed by closing gay bars and baths, outlawing homosexual activity, and rigorously enforcing laws against public sex, etc., thus dampening opportunities for homosexuals to spread the disease? Or should it be mainstreamed by "reducing discrimination" – passing LGBT legal protections, admitting gay activists into positions of power, etc. – and hence provide incentives for homosexuals to voluntarily help society and themselves by "being careful"?
Saturday, March 11, 2017
S.J.W Special Snowflake Susan Hennessey Guest Rules Climate Change Is Our Biggest National Security Threat?,,
Late on Tuesday’s edition of MSNBC’s Hardball, panelist and Brookings Institution fellow Susan Hennessey offered a jaw-dropping assessment that “the single biggest national security threat is climate change” as it’s been the reason behind many of the recent global tensions.
Look, for all the Trump administration's sort of focus on refugees, the single biggest national security threat is climate change. We've seen that the ways in which climate change has either sparked conflicts or has made existing conflicts worse again and again. This has been a major DoD priority,” Hennessey hyped.
CNN's Trigger Lesbain, Special Snowflake Sally Kohn Gets Burned by Weather Experts for Making Bogus Climate Change Claim
Sally Kohn is known for saying wonky and demonstrably false things on air and in her Twitter feed, whether it’s promoting the “hands up, don’t shoot” meme, comparing Christians to ISIS, or saying she wanted her young daughter to “copy the Caitlyn Jenner model of femininity.”
Friday, March 10, 2017
Dem Rep Introduces Bill to Block Trump from Using Federal Funds to Pay for Border Wall, But Will Not Block Federal Funds To Planned Parenthood?
Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI) is slated to introduce legislation Thursday that would block President Trump from using federal funding to pay for a wall along the Mexican border.“I am not in favor of the wall, but if there is a wall, then I do not want the United States of America to pay for the wall,” Moore told CBS News, saying that American taxpayers should not be burdened by Trump’s campaign promise.
The legislation is called the “No Taxpayer Funding for the Wall Act,” which would prohibit any federal funding, including funding already set aside for that purpose, from going to the wall. The bill has reportedly already gained the support of three dozen Democrats.
Moore is also hoping to gain support from Republicans who are worried about the cost of the border wall.
“My bill gives amazing opportunities, I think, to people like Jim Jordan to opt out of building the wall,” she said, referring to the Republican lawmaker from Ohio. “I’m trying to mobilize some interest in my bill from deficit hawks.”
Other Democrats have scrutinized Trump’s plan to build a border wall, especially over its potential cost.
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asking the agency to brief the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on how it plans to pay for the border wall by March 13, the Hill reported.
“I request that DHS provide a briefing for the committee regarding DHS’ acquisition process and funding for this requirement,” McCaskill wrote in a letter to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, also asking for a formal estimate of the wall’s cost.
The Trump administration is considering a plan that would cut funding to the Coast Guard, the Transportation Security Administration, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency in order to pay for the border wall and other methods of immigration enforcement, the Washington Post reported.
Thursday, March 9, 2017
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews came out swinging, during Monday’s Hardball, against conservative radio host Mark Levin for being the source of President’s Donald Trump’s claim of having his tower wiretapped by the previous administration. The 71-year-old Matthews postured like a schoolyard bully, towards the top of his program, as he mocked Levin for the sound of his voice. “Well, that's a voice to be believed,” Matthews declared after playing an audio clip of Levin talking about Obama.
The notion that Mark Levin is a news outlet, or that Rush Limbaugh is a news outlet. And that's their way of disgracing legitimate media. By say those are just other news outlets. By saying those are just other news outlets. It's not The New York Times, it’s not The Washington post, it’s not The Wall Street Journal, it’s not the L.A. Times, it’s not a major news network it’s Mark Levin.“I know what talk radio guys do on left and right, mostly on right. They rile people up with outrageous charges and nobody keeps count of them,” Matthews ranted. He continued to besmirch Levin’s reputation by lumping him in with the unhinged Alex Jones.
This isn’t the first time Matthews has targeted Levin for abuse. In January 2016, the wacky Matthews slammed Levin as “one of the most distasteful human beings out there.”
If Matthews’ ridiculous analysis of Levin is to be taken seriously (and it shouldn’t), it would be the pot calling the kettle black. He scorned talk radio as a disgrace to legitimate media that just riles people up with “outrageous charges.” Yet Matthews himself spread fake news when he falsely claimed that Judge Merrick Garland “never got a conversation with a Republican,” even though he met with 16 of them. And after Trump signed his first executive order travel ban Matthews announced that “we’re all crusaders now.”
As for his accusation of Levin being a “distasteful human being,” Matthews is infamous for his below-the-belt assaults on Senator Ted Cruz. During the GOP primaries, he chided the Senator, claiming, “...there’s a troll-like quality to Cruz. He operates below the level of human life.”
A few months later, he equated Cruz to Lucifer, noting that Cruz was “one in the tail and cloven hooves.” And at the end of his program, he continued driving home his discontent for the man. “Senator Ted Cruz, Lucifer, the devil, Satan, Beelzebub, the very personage of evil, the leader of the underlife, the chief resident of hell, Lucifer,” he said.
Matthews might want to look in the mirror before he complains that someone talks just to “rile people up with outrageous charges” and “disgracing legitimate media.”