Suzanne Moore is not enormously impressed by Alastair Campbell.

Post-Blair, Campbell has made a career as some sort of management consultant, banging on about leadership. His thuggishness has never been toned down. Not even in his diaries. Him physically fighting Peter Mandelson during an argument over what the leader should wear while canvassing has always stuck in my head. He has no time for women except the “totty” him and his Westminster cronies rated. On Clare Short, for instance, he wrote “God she does turn my stomach”.

…

He was disastrous and bullying as a leader of the Remainers trying to get a second referendum, again shouting over distinguished female journalists.

Now he is reincarnated alongside Rory Stewart in a podcast for centrist dads: The Rest is Politics. They are meant to be opposites: it’s just that Rory also once ran a bit of Iraq as a gap year hobby or something and his arrogance is more patrician.

Both of them belong to the (adopts caveman voice) “Funny chaps… Women” brigade, who regard women as a lesser species. In the most recent podcast, Campbell explains that the fact that trans issues played a part in the Democrat loss was relayed to him by his US pal, the former diplomat and journalist James Rubin. A man told him something, so Campbell listened.

Rubin apparently told Campbell: “You guys don’t get just how big this woke thing is but you haven’t got it nearly as big…” Campbell then muses: “The $25 million spent on ads about trans, Trump talking about kids going in as boys in the morning and coming back as girls in the afternoon, the dressing room stuff and all that. I think we underestimated how much that was getting through to people.”

The fact that for 10 years women have been campaigning, losing their jobs and have been vilified for refusing an extreme trans agenda has passed him by. All of this was presumably, in his eyes, a Right-wing plot, or a silly culture issue – until it caught his attention this week.

It caught his attention so he chatted with another man about it.

Oh how exciting, another first.

Delaware state Sen. Sarah McBride won the state’s only House seat Tuesday, NBC News projects, making her the first openly transgender person elected to Congress. 

But so very much not the first man elected to Congress.

There are a lot of available firsts in this kind of thing. The first person from an obscure small town in Iowa; the first person who failed algebra in 9th grade; the first person who has a cat named Ronald Krump – one could go on in this vein forever.

Meanwhile, McBride is a guy elected to Congress and women continue to be both ignored and mocked.

And here we go: Even Worse Than Last Time in action. The Beast appoints a Fox News jock Secretary of Defense.

President-elect Donald Trump stunned the Pentagon and the broader defense world by nominating Fox News host Pete Hegseth to serve as his defense secretary, tapping someone largely inexperienced and untested on the global stage to take over the world’s largest and most powerful military.

The news was met with bewilderment and worry among many in Washington as Trump passed on a number of established national security heavy-hitters and chose an Army National Guard captain well known in conservative circles as a co-host of Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends Weekend.”

Of course he did. He considers himself qualified to be president, so why wouldn’t another tv personality be qualified to take over the world’s largest and most powerful military?

Hegseth’s choice could bring sweeping changes to the military. He has made it clear on his show and in interviews that, like Trump, he is opposed to “woke” programs that promote equity and inclusion. He also has questioned the role of women in combat and advocated pardoning service members charged with war crimes.

Because war crimes are a good thing and we’re proud of them.

Originally a comment by Mike Haubrich on Often struggling.

This reminds me of the Arch Bishop of MPLS-St. Paul, John Nienstedt, who vigorously defended the Church against charges of priestly abuse (including moving notorious priests around without warning the new parishes.) He had sent a sermon around the state for priests to read on the Sunday before the vote on a state amendment banning same-sex marriage that reminded Catholic voters about the canonical position on the issue (gays must remain celibate to avoid sinning.) I heard him defend the position on a radio call-in on Minnesota Public Radio, about how the law can be painful to follow sometimes but there you go.

Shortly after, there were photos showing him in compromising positions with young men, and he was forced to resign. The church declared bankruptcy in order to avoid paying claims.

There’s something about granting heavenly authority over humans that encourages them to commit heinous acts, isn’t there?

I’ve been thinking about this 10 Stupid Goddy Rules in the Classroom thing, and what would be better in classrooms. I don’t necessarily think any homilies or bits of moral advice should be on the walls of classrooms, but I’m not adamant about it. Maybe it’s useful to have them. So what kind of thing should they be?

My hunch is some form of “don’t be shitty.” Maybe a bulletin board that could have posters that change every few days, with small manageable iterations of “don’t be shitty.” Help each other; don’t make fun of anyone; share; remember what it feels like to be teased or bullied. Blah blah; that kind of thing. Tiny chapters from the large book of Remember Everyone Has Feelings Just As You Do. Basically trying to coax children to be decent to each other – trying to nudge children into being not like a trump.

It annoys the bejeezus out of me that legislators think it’s a good idea to plaster walls with God shouting “ME ME ME ME OBEY ME” rather than mild advice on how not to be one of the mean kids.

Last June we were talking about Louisiana’s plan to force “the 10 commandments” on school children.

The AP version:

Louisiana has become the first state to require that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school classroom under a bill Republican Gov. Jeff Landry signed into law Wednesday.

The GOP-drafted legislation mandates that a poster-size display of the Ten Commandments in a “large, easily readable font” be in all public classrooms, from kindergarten to state-funded universities.

Opponents question the law’s constitutionality, warning that lawsuits would be likely to follow. Proponents say that the purpose of the measure is not solely religious but that it has historical significance. In the law’s language, the Ten Commandments are described as “foundational documents of our state and national government.”

Nonsense. Let’s not forget: the first four – 40% of the total – are purely goddy. Of course the measure is religious; it can’t not be.

The first four: no gods other than me, no idols, no blasphemy, remember the sabbath. Nearly half the vital foundation of morality is about pampering the bossy prickly vain jealous put me first goddy figure. Nearly half is not morality at all but the terms the new dictator imposes.

Of course that dreck has no business in schools, let alone being mandated in schools.

Today the bill hit a speed bump.

A coalition of parents attempting to block a state law that would require that the Ten Commandments be displayed in public school classrooms by next year have won a legal battle in federal court.

U.S. District Judge John deGravelles issued an order Tuesday granting the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction, which means the state can’t begin its plan to promote and create rules surrounding the law as soon as Friday while the litigation plays out.

The judge wrote that the law is “facially unconstitutional” and “in all applications,” barring Louisiana from enforcing it and adopting rules around it that obligate all public K-12 schools and colleges to exhibit posters of the Ten Commandments.

It’s hard to see how the libertarian wing of the Republicans could stomach such a law.

Gov. Jeff Landry signed the GOP-backed legislation in June, part of his conservative agenda that has reshaped Louisiana’s cultural landscape, from abortion rights to criminal justice to education.

The move prompted a coalition of parents — Jewish, Christian, Unitarian Universalist and nonreligious — to sue the state in federal court. They argued that the law “substantially interferes with and burdens” their First Amendment right to raise their children with whatever religious doctrine they want.

Including zero.

Receive HOW much in grant money for writing fatuous speculative anti-woman blather????

Nearly two million pounds, that’s how much.

Welby has resigned.

Justin Welby spent his 11 years as Archbishop of Canterbury trying to prevent the global Anglican communion from fracturing, often struggling to please liberals or conservatives as they fought over homosexual rights and women clergy.

But in the end he was brought down by an issue from the church’s past rather than its future: the failure to investigate an abuse scandal that dated back decades…Welby said he had had “no idea or suspicion” of the allegations before 2013, the year he became archbishop. But the independent Makin Report, published on Nov. 7, concluded it was unlikely he would have had no knowledge of the concerns regarding Smyth’s behaviour in the 1980s.

That’s unclear. Is it unlikely that Welby, in the 1980s, had no knowledge? Or is it unlikely that Welby now had no knowledge of Smyth’s “behaviour” aka violent child abuse in the 1980s?

Educated at Britain’s most prestigious private school, Eton, Welby worked in the oil industry for more than a decade before being ordained in 1992. He was made the senior prelate of the Church of England in 2013, becoming the spiritual head of 85 million Anglicans in 165 countries.

Interesting career-life move – oil industry to priesthood. Each somewhat demonic, but in different ways.

His time at the head of the Anglican communion was turbulent as he was forced to navigate a schism that erupted as he enabled women to become bishops and allowed churches to bless same-sex couples. He said he had decided not to carry out such blessings himself, out of responsibility for the wider church, adding: “This is where you have to be a politician.”

But the move angered the conservative branch of the global communion, most notably African churches where homosexuality is taboo, and a conservative group of Anglican church leaders said last year it had no confidence in him.

Too liberal one minute, not liberal enough the next.

“Liberal” may not be the right word for opposing and exposing child abuse, but it is a conservative impulse to side with the institution rather than its victims, and to conceal the harms perpetrated by the institution on its vastly less powerful victims.

Archbish urged to get out.

The archbishop of Canterbury has been urged to stand in solidarity with abuse victims by resigning after a report into a cover-up in the Church of England. A petition started by three members of the General Synod – the church’s parliament – calling for Justin Welby to quit has reached more than 10,000 signatures.

An independent review published last week concluded John Smyth [might] have been brought to justice had Welby formally reported the abuse to police a decade ago.

But he didn’t, so Smyth went elsewhere to torture more boys. It seems Welby’s god hates children and loves their torturers. Beware of people who think they have a pipeline to Mister God.

Over five decades between the 1970s until his death, Smyth is said to have subjected as many as 130 boys and young men in the UK and Africa to traumatic physical, sexual, psychological and spiritual attacks, permanently marking their lives.

But improving their souls?

No, of course not.

More on Smyth from the Guardian last week:

John Smyth, a powerful and charismatic barrister, sadistically abused private schoolboys who attended evangelical Christian holiday camps in the late 1970s and early 80s. When the abuse was discovered, Smyth was allowed to move abroad with the full knowledge of church officials, where he continued to act with impunity.

And “abroad” as we just saw meant Africa. “Tut tut John, you can’t do that sort of thing here; off you go to Africa, where children need to be tortured.”

Smyth, who died in 2018, was chair of the Iwerne Trust, which funded the Christian camps in Dorset. A secret review carried out by the trust in 1982 described “horrific” beatings of teenage boys, mostly carried out in Smyth’s shed at his Winchester home.

So that’s more than 36 years (more because the abuse has to have started well before the secret review) that Smyth was allowed to torture children. Isn’t religion wonderful?

Winchester college, one of the UK’s leading private schools, whose pupils were among the alleged victims, was informed of the allegations but neither the college nor the trust reported Smyth to the police. Instead, the headteacher asked Smyth never again to enter the college or contact its pupils.

Smyth moved to Zimbabwe, where in 1992 he faced charges of killing a 16-year-old boy who was found dead in a swimming pool at a holiday camp in 1992. The case was dismissed and he later moved to Cape Town.

Nice for him, not so nice for the children of Cape Town.

From July 2013, “the Church of England knew at the highest level about the abuse that took place in the late 1970s and early 1980s. John Smyth should have been properly and effectively reported to the police in the UK and to relevant authorities in South Africa,” the report said.

It identified several “thematic concerns”, including abuse of positions of trust and power, excessive deference to senior clergy, failures of leadership and a cover-up over an extended period.

Because that’s how religion works. It’s hierarchical, with an imaginary god at the top and the fictional god’s putative representatives at the next level, above other humans. Of course they abuse such trust and power; who wouldn’t?

In a statement, Joanne Grenfell, the C of E’s lead safeguarding bishop, and Alexander Kubeyinje, its national director of safeguarding, said: “We are deeply sorry for the horrific abuse inflicted by the late John Smyth and its lifelong effects, already spanning more than 40 years.

Now that it’s been exposed. What were you doing before that?

Disruption.

There’s already a judiciary subcommittee on the “weaponisation of the federal government” in Congress to investigate the “censorship industrial complex” – the idea that big tech is “censoring” Republican voices. For the past 18 months, it’s been subpoena-ing academics. Last week, Elon Musk tweeted that the next stage would be “prosecutions”. A friend of mine, an Ivy League professor on the list, texts to say the day will shortly come “where I will have to decide whether to stay or go”.

Trump’s list of enemies is not theoretical. It already exists. My friend is on it. In 2022, Trump announced a “day one” executive order instructing “the Department of Justice to investigate all parties involved in the new online censorship regime … and to aggressively prosecute any and all crimes identified”. And my friends in other countries know exactly where this leads.

Another message arrives from Maria Ressa, the Nobel prize-winning Filipino journalist. In the Philippines, the government is modelled on the US one and she writes about what happened when President Duterte controlled all three branches of it. “It took six months after he took office for our institutions to crumble.” And then she was arrested.

What we did during the first wave of disruption, 2016-24, won’t work now. Can you “weaponise” social media when social media is the weapon? Remember the philosopher Marshall McLuhan – “the medium is the message”? Well the medium now is Musk. The world’s richest man bought a global communication platform and is now the shadow head of state of what was the world’s greatest superpower. That’s the message. Have you got it yet?

I’ve got something.

Brianna Wu speaking up for women…but of course he considers himself a woman, which he isn’t, so his speaking up for us is speaking over us, so no, not requested, not wanted, not needed, absolutely not appreciated.

Originally a comment by Bjarte Foshaug on The spirit of vengeful reprisal is the totality of his beliefs.

The part about learning Russian was not entirely a joke btw. Earlier today I filled up two 15 liter water jugs. The Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection recently sent out a leaflet asking all citizen to stock up on water, durable food items, hygiene products, matches, candles, firewood etc. to be prepared to survive for up to a week without electricity, tap water, open stores etc. in case of a “crisis or war”, so if it’s just my paranoid delusion, at least It’s not just me.

To my country, and Europe in general, one obvious implication of Trump’s return to power is that our NATO membership no longer offers us any strong protection against Russia. All I can do is hope that the nuclear arsenals of France and Great Britain will make Putin think twice about attacking, but honestly, if I were Putin, even I wouldn’t put much stock in their willingness to use them. As others have pointed out, outsourcing our security concerns to America will go down in history as one of the greatest blunders ever, almost as bad as outsourcing our manufacturing sector to China.

Trump’s promised trade-war with Europe, tariffs on European goods etc. is also likely to trigger a recession that will almost certainly lead to increased support for the already powerful, pro-Putin, right-wing populist movements of Europe like Rassemblement National and Alternative für Deutschland. A tiny country like my own, which cannot fight a war on our own for very long no matter how much we spend on national defense (far too little, admittedly), may soon find itself out of allies, and, of course the threat from our own far right is only too real.

Love it or hate it, one of the most memorable movie experiences of my life was the battle of Helm’s Deep from the Lord of the Rings movie Two Towers. The main battle itself was, of course, entertaining enough, but to me the most memorable part was the tense, claustrophobic feeling inside the fortress while Saruman’s vast army was approaching, the lights of thousands of burning torches were appearing on the horizon, and the sound of thousands of marching feet kept getting louder every minute. It’s one of those scenes you really have to see in a good cinema to get the full effect: Seeing it on a computer screen or even a large TV doesn’t do it justice. That’s kind of how this feels, except that this time it’s for real, and there is no Gandalf, or Éomer, or Treebeard coming to the rescue. The enemy is not yet inside the fortress, or even at the gates, but the torches are on the horizon and the sound of marching feet is getting louder by the minute…

Dang, for imperturbably immovable male confidence this really takes the biscuit.

Punch line:

“I don’t know as much about it as you do, and I will tell you what to do anyway.”

Biscuit taken as no other biscuit has ever been taken.

Adam Gopnik wrote this in the New Yorker before the election:

Think hard about the probable consequences of a second Trump Administration—about the things he has promised to do and can do, the things that the hard-core group of rancidly discontented figures (as usual with authoritarians, more committed than he is to an ideology) who surround him wants him to do and can do. Having lost the popular vote, as he surely will*, he will not speak up to reconcile “all Americans.” He will insist that he won the popular vote, and by a landslide. He will pardon and then celebrate the January 6th insurrectionists, and thereby guarantee the existence of a paramilitary organization that’s capable of committing violence on his behalf without fear of consequences. He will, with an obedient Attorney General, begin prosecuting his political opponents; he was largely unsuccessful in his previous attempt only because the heads of two U.S. Attorneys’ offices, who are no longer there, refused to coöperate. When he begins to pressure CNN and ABC, and they, with all the vulnerabilities of large corporations, bend to his will, telling themselves that his is now the will of the people, what will we do to fend off the slow degradation of open debate?

Trump will certainly abandon Ukraine to Vladimir Putin and realign this country with dictatorships and against NATO and the democratic alliance of Europe. Above all, the spirit of vengeful reprisal is the totality of his beliefs—very much like the fascists of the twentieth century in being a man and a movement without any positive doctrine except revenge against his imagined enemies. And against this: What? Who? The spirit of resistance may prove too frail, and too exhausted, to rise again to the contest. Who can have confidence that a democracy could endure such a figure in absolute control and survive? An oncologist who, in the face of this much evidence, shrugged and proposed watchful waiting as the best therapy would not be an optimist. He would be guilty of gross malpractice. One of those personal-injury lawyers on the billboards would sue him, and win.

What any plausible explanation must confront is the fact that Trump is a distinctively vile human being and a spectacularly malignant political actor. In fables and fiction, in every Disney cartoon and Batman movie, we have no trouble recognizing and understanding the villains. They are embittered, canny, ludicrous in some ways and shrewd in others, their lives governed by envy and resentment, often rooted in the acts of people who’ve slighted them. (“They’ll never laugh at me again!”) They nonetheless have considerable charm and the ability to attract a cult following. This is Ursula, Hades, Scar—to go no further than the Disney canon. Extend it, if that seems too childlike, to the realms of Edmund in “King Lear” and Richard III: smart people, all, almost lovable in their self-recognition of their deviousness, but not people we ever want to see in power, for in power their imaginations become unimaginably deadly. Villains in fables are rarely grounded in any cause larger than their own grievances—they hate Snow White for being beautiful, resent Hercules for being strong and virtuous. Bane is blowing up Gotham because he feels misused, not because he truly has a better city in mind.

Trump is a villain. He would be a cartoon villain, if only this were a cartoon. Every time you try to give him a break—to grasp his charisma, historicize his ascent, sympathize with his admirers—the sinister truth asserts itself and can’t be squashed down. He will tell another lie so preposterous, or malign another shared decency so absolutely, or threaten violence so plausibly, or just engage in behavior so unhinged and hate-filled that you’ll recoil and rebound to your original terror at his return to power. 

And that’s where we live now.

Villainy inheres in individuals. There is certainly a far-right political space alive in the developed world, but none of its inhabitants—not Marine Le Pen or Giorgia Meloni or even Viktor Orbán—are remotely as reckless or as crazy as Trump. Our self-soothing habit of imagining that what has not yet happened cannot happen is the space in which Trump lives, just as comically deranged as he seems and still more dangerous than we know.

Comforting.

And we chose this. That’s what the US is – the country that chose this. In 2008 it chose Obama and in 2024 it chose this.

Originally a comment by Freemage on What the United States really is.

3) The Harris campaign didn’t do enough to convince the Latino community that Harris was going to help them with their economic problems. The campaign assumed that because of Trump’s disgusting comments about Latino people, that this community automatically wouldn’t vote for him: they were wrong. Enough Latinos decided Trump was “stronger on the economy”, and decided to vote him in spite of his vile rhetoric.

Kamala Harris lost the Latino vote.

I’d say the biggest issue is the very notion of ‘the’ Latino vote, honestly. Democrats keep wanting to treat Hispanic-Americans as if they are a single voting bloc, like they do African-Americans. But Latinos have no overriding common historical trauma the way Black Americans do. Instead, they’re at least a half-dozen different sub-groups with agendas that make a very low-overlap Venn Diagram when it comes to what they want to hear. And I could see in the final months of the campaign that the Trump camp was doing a better job of addressing key sub-groups specifically (using lies, of course, but targeted lies on Spanish radio and TV).

Let me put it this way–you know that comedian who made the crack about Puerto Rico being a floating island of garbage, the one that everyone figured was going to secure “the Latino Vote” for Harris? Yeah, I estimate about 10-20% of my Mexican-American neighbors would’ve laughed at that joke, and maybe even made it themselves. And more still wouldn’t be more than generically offended about it, because in their minds, it wasn’t a joke directed at them, because they aren’t Puerto Rican.

And this sort of difference is rife within the broader Hispanic-American population. Hell, Mexican-Americans, in particular, have a non-trivial percentage of their population that are full-on with Deport Them All (where “Them” means undocumented immigrants)–because after all, they or their parents came here legally, and they are just as resentful as the local WASPs are at what they perceive as line-jumping.

Iraq wants 9-year-old girls raped.

Iraq is poised to slash the legal age of consent from 18 to nine, allowing men to marry young children.

Young girls, that is. I really doubt Iraq is allowing men to marry young boys.

The proposed legal change also deprives women of rights to divorce, child custody and inheritance.

Iraq’s parliament, which is dominated by a coalition of conservative Shia Muslim parties, is preparing to vote through an amendment that would overturn the country’s “personal status law”. The legislation, also known as Law 188, was heralded as one of the most progressive in the Middle East when it was introduced in 1959 and provides an overarching set of rules governing the affairs of Iraqi families, regardless of their religious sect.

As well as bringing down the legal marriage age, the amendment would also remove women’s rights to divorce, child custody and inheritance.

Isn’t it interesting how much of religious law is all about subordinating women? Gotta keep those bitches from spreading for every random guy within 5 miles, yeah?

The governing coalition says the move aligns with a strict interpretation of Islamic law and is intended to protect young girls from “immoral relationships”.

Nope nope nope nope nope. It’s intended to protect men from wasting resources on some other guy’s kid.

Athraa Al-Hassan, international human rights legal adviser and director of Model Iraqi Woman, told The Telegraph she is “afraid” Iraq’s system of governance will be replaced with a new system known as the Guardianship of the Jurist – a Shia system that puts religious rule above the state.

The system is the same one that underpins the regimes in Afghanistan and Iran, where a Guardian Jurist serves as supreme leader of the country.

That’s called “theocracy.” That’s a big word, I know, but we can all learn it. The-oc-racy: rule by god, aka goddy rule.

Libya goes full Afghanistan.

Libya’s interior minister has announced the reintroduction of the morality police to the streets to enforce what he called “society’s traditions” and restrict women’s freedom of movement.

On Wednesday, Emad al-Tarabulsi said the patrols would resume next month. They would target people with “strange” haircuts, ensure women wear “modest” clothing, and prevent gender mixing in public spaces. He also suggested that women would be barred from travelling within the country without a male guardian, adding that those “seeking personal freedom should go to Europe”.

That, or be male.

Since 2011, Libya has seen a decline in religious freedoms in the predominately Muslim country.

The circulation of non-Islamic religious materials, missionary activity and speech considered “offensive to Muslims” is illegal. In May, the GNU’s General Authority of Endowments and Islamic Affairs established what it called the “Guardians of Virtue” to protect Islamic values.

Like hatred of women for instance.

Originally a comment by Bjarte Foshaug on Drag them and burn them he says.

As Timothy Snyder put it, they are clearly (from memory) preparing the ground for worse things to come. I don’t know to what degree it’s a conscious strategy (as opposed to instinctual, trial and error etc.), but anyway it’s a prime example of the weaponization of cognitive dissonance: Signal your illiberal and authoritarian agenda in advance while making sure there is just enough plausible deniability to give you an alibi (”it’s just trolling”, ”not to be taken literally” etc.). Get your followers into the habit of going along with, excusing or explaining away, even actively applauding increasingly dehumanizing and violent rhetoric, unambiguous, shameless lies, blatant corruption, openly authoritarian and illiberal behaviors etc. until such trangressions have definitely become normalized, legitimate, within the range of acceptable behavior. Then, once the actual violence begins, your followers have no face-saving way of turning back. Claiming ignorance is definitely not an available option at this point, nor, for that matter, has it been since before Trump was first elected back in 2016. The guy is many things, but subtle is not among them.

I take no comfort in the idea that there will be another election in four years, nor in the idea that a president can only serve for two terms. That was under the old rules. The rewriting of the rule book has already begun, and with foxes now in complete control of all the henhouses the way things have always worked in the past is hardly a reliable indicator of what can or cannot happen in the future. The same trends we have seen in the U.S. have already killed democracies elsewhere, and judging by everything we have observed so far I see little to support the American exceptionalist idea that ”it can’t happen here”.

I often worry that I’m becoming a bit of an ”alarmist”, a ”doomsayer”, an ”apocalypticist” etc., but in this case, as it turns out, even my pessimism didn’t go far enough. As I have previously stated, I would have been surprised if Trump didn’t win the election, but I also predicted that he wouldn’t win the popular vote. I stand corrected.

Of course Trump himself is not going to live forever, but Trumpism is going to be with us for the rest of our lives, and with a popular majority now having a stake in defending their choice, just like the other frequently prophesied ”Peak Tr…”, I wouldn’t count on ”Peak Trump” to happen anytime soon.

Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? at Miscellany Room.

Another neighbourhood vignette. Trans bullshit makes me cranky. Maybe at this point I’m spending too much time looking for it, but its omnipresence makes it hard to avoid. Today’s encounter with it took place in a local store selling handicrafts. Right at the door was a little Pride Progress flag (complete with the Intersex yellowtiangle with purple circle). Beside it was a happy rainbow sticker assuring those in need of such reassurance that You Are Safe Here. Of course this wasn’t telling everyone entering the store that the building they were entering was up to code and therefore unlikely to burst into flame or collapse onto us during our shopping visit. No. This is a different kind of “safety” we’re talking about here, and this “safety” is reserved for Special People, as the sticker was gaudily announcing that the store was not just a retail establishment, but also a 2SLGBTQIA+ Safe Space. One wonders if there are any regulations or guidelines for that. Not just any old place can be a daycare centre, for example. Restaurants here are required to display the results of the latest health inspection. Somehow I doubt there is any such certification or registration needed, and that any store can simply “identify” as a safe space, with no need to fulfil any requirements other than a desire to advertise one’s piety and righteousness. You just slap on a sticker here and there and voila, you’re an Ally! And, despite the rest of the flag, I think at this point. these displays of obedience and loyalty are all about the Trans. If it was about gay rights, you’d just have the good, old fashion Pride Flag, except that it’s now insufficiently “inclusive”, and about as welcome as a Swastika flag, or the Confederate one, as it is verboten to have anything LGB without the T.

These stickers operate on several levels at once. However much of a “welcome” they might be for the target audience, they are also a warning. They mean, theoretically, that the staff will not only not challenge trans bullshit, but also defend and enforce it. I would expect any sticker-displaying establishment large enough to have separate male and female bathroom facilities would allow men-pretending-to-be-women to use what, until recently, would have been exclusively female spaces. If anyone questions their use of women’s spaces, staff will defend the intruder, rather than the intrudeed upon. So, not “safe” for women, then.

More insidiously, these stickers play into the trans victimization and fragility narrative. If the store is a “safe space,” then by implication everywhere else is hostile. THE WHOLE WORLD IS OUT TO GET YOU! COME INSIDE: YOU’LL BE SAFE HERE! As if hatred falls from the sky like rain, and stores with stickers are offering life-saving shelter from the storm. But there’s more than one storm brewing, as women well know, having had their own safety eroded in favour of the validation of delusional males.

Do trans activists really assume that any store without a sticker is “unsafe”? Is that even the actual point? Displaying such stickers advertises putative allyship, but it also shows surrender and obedience to gender ideology. It represents a promise to comply. This puts pressure on other shopkeepers to announce their own stores’ “safety”.

Most of the products were fairly typical craft items, mostly handmade. Felted, knitted, or crocheted animals, jewelery, candles, soaps. You get the picture. But one item was a “Rainbow Certified” tote bag emblazoned with the slogan “Support LGBTQ+”, with fluffy clouds, flowers, and a rainbow. (The company’s website informs me that Rainbow Certified is a queer owned small business who makes apparel & accessories for the LGBTQ+ community. I feel excluded already. Am I allowed to even look at this tote bag? Why yes, I am. Read on.) Perhaps I’m reading too much into this, but notice that it’s not a simple statement in which the person carrying the bag is declaring “I support LGBTQ+”, but a demand that the viewer do so. It might be printed in a 60’s-esque flower-power kind of font, but it’s still a demand, and a forced-teaming one at that. Read and obey. Cutesy pushy is still pushy. Push someone else.

Shopping doesn’t usually make me this crotchety, but I get tired of all of this public display trans crap. It feels like swimming through a treacly sea of lies. Lies that I’m supposed to accept and believe. We’re supposed to be happy with our own coercion. All the rainbow colours and glitter hide an underlying malice and darkness that comes to the fore in accusations of bigotry and hatred. As I’ve commented before, the Progress Pride flag feels like the flag of a hostile, occupying force, passed off as the banner of a well-meaning, public-spirited campaign of kindness, compassion and concern. Look more closely, and the actual focus of that “compassion” and “concern” is very narrow. Its demands are enforced with very little kindness, and at a very steep cost to women and girls.

Trump Attorney General Hopeful Vows to Drag Bodies Through the Street

Mike Davis, a right-wing activist considered a leading candidate for Trump’s attorney general, on Wednesday threatened to (legally) “drag their dead political bodies through the streets” and burn them, referring to enemies of Trump and the right.

He did say that.

Davis, a former clerk for Justice Neil Gorsuch who calls himself “Trump’s viceroy,” is not likely to show any restraint in exercising retribution on behalf of the president. He’s already threatened special counsel Jack Smith, who oversaw the investigation and prosecution of Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election as well as his mishandling of classified documents, to “lawyer up.”

The fact that a legal troll like Davis is considered a front-runner to head the Justice Department reveals how many conservative lawyers Trump burned through during his first term and after his attempts to cling to power following his 2020 election loss. Many of these lawyers either want nothing to do with him now, or are facing disbarment and criminal charges for their efforts to help Trump. The lawyers who have stuck around are more MAGA true believers than top conservative legal minds.

These lawyers will be tasked with tearing down any legal obstacles to Trump’s agenda as well as that of his far-right allies. These include whatever checks on the presidency exist in law, and whatever regulations stand in the way of business leaders tied to conservatism. As Davis’s post demonstrates, they will also help to bring the full force of the DOJ against Trump’s enemies.

Even if Davis isn’t picked to be the next A.G., he will undoubtedly be a part of Trump’s legal army, which will have a big agenda. There’s already talk of a mass pardon of January 6 rioters, and other Trump allies have enemies lists of their own. A plan to purge the federal workforce of those who would oppose him has already been devised, too. Thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Trump faces few, if any, legal constraints, and we’re about to find out what still stands in his way.

Convicted felon wins election, high jinks ensue.