..
Putin responds to questions at the Valdai Discussion Club
Western 'progressivism' reminds him of early Soviet days
‘Monstrous’ newspeak about gender in the West
“Those who risk saying that men and women still exist, and that this is a biological fact, are virtually ostracized” in the West, Putin said, calling the situation “a total phantasmagoria.”“This is not to mention things that are simply monstrous,” he added, “like when children are taught from an early age that a boy can easily become a girl and vice versa. In fact, they are indoctrinating them into the alleged choices that are supposedly available to everyone – removing parents from the equation and forcing the child to make decisions that can ruin their lives.”
This is borderline crime against humanity – all under the guise of ‘progress’
He added that the situation reminds him of the ‘newspeak’ invented by the “Soviet culture-warriors” in the 1920s, in hopes of redefining people’s values and creating a new sense of consciousness.
Cancel culture and reverse racism
Another Western practice that reminds Putin of the early Soviet days was the push for “social justice” through affirmative action and cancel culture.
“The fight against racism is a necessary and noble cause, but in the modern ‘cancel culture’, it turns into reverse discrimination, reverse racism,” Putin said. “We see with bemusement the process unfolding in countries that have grown accustomed to viewing themselves as flagships of progress.”
It is with puzzlement that in the West today we see practices that Russia has left in the distant past
This should strike us all with a moment of fear as we begin to see the similarities between the early Soviet years and today's 'progressivism'. At the end of 1917, the Cheka was founded in Russia. The Cheka would soon grow into a source of constant paranoia for Stalin, and would evolve into the KGB in 1954.
Under the KGB and Stalin, millions of people would simply disappear for the flimsiest reasons. Many of them spent years, if not the rest of their lives in the Siberian or Arctic gulags with little or no connections with their family. Some were able to take their family with them for a very mean and difficult life.
Can that happen in 21st century western society? It already has! Edward Snowdon and Julian Assange are prime examples.
WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange is a political prisoner and the process against him is a crime against journalism, said a group of academics, politicians, journalists and advocates convened ahead of his extradition hearing.
“What we’re witnessing is a murder,” NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden told the ‘Belmarsh Tribunal’ in London on Friday, appearing via video link.
“Everywhere we look, from Afghanistan to economics, from pandemic to pervasive surveillance, the obvious has been made unspeakable,” he added, because speaking up would put one in the same category as Assange, a “political criminal” charged for “the transgression of choosing the wrong side.”
If you love truth, you're as much of a criminal as Assange and risk sharing his fate
Sochi, RUS
Gay & lesbian NHS staff say they feel ‘unsafe’ and ‘scared’
by organisation's pro-trans stance, LGB Alliance warns
21 Oct, 2021 13:32
- April 18, 2020 © Reuters
Several gay and lesbian staff at the National Health Service (NHS) have said they feel “unsafe” and “scared” by the organisation's support for transgender activists who argue that it's possible to be a biologically male lesbian.
During a conference hosted by the LGB Alliance in London on Thursday, quotes from anonymous NHS staffers who opposed the health service’s current LGBT policies were displayed by retired hospital CEO and “proud lesbian” Kate Grimes during a discussion.
“I saw them advertising Pride week and I actually felt scared,” declared one nurse, who has spent 35 years working for the NHS, while an unnamed doctor said, “I feel unsafe, I feel sad.”
Another woman said she had “never felt more concerned about being out as a lesbian than now,” while a board member of an NHS hospital said the situation for lesbians is “so much worse” today than it was previously.
I can’t even have a discussion and I feel scared as a woman and as a lesbian. I can’t talk about it safely and that feels much more scary. So I have no hope.
For several years, the NHS has emphasized gender identity in its employee policies and has called for discrimination against transgender people to be ‘challenged’ – but debate has swirled about exactly what is classified as discrimination.
“It is unacceptable for colleagues and managers to refuse to recognise, for any period of time, a member of staff as belonging to the gender in which they are currently living,” warned one Scottish branch of the NHS in 2017, threatening managerial “procedures to deal with the situation” if an employee falls afoul of the policy.
It also said that transgender people should be recognised as the gender that they identify with even if they haven’t “undergone any hormonal or surgical treatment or have a Gender Recognition Certificate.”
Which can change from one day to the next!
Such policies have been criticised by many woman, who argue that it minimises the identity of biological women and puts them at risk, citing incidents where women have been sexually assaulted in bathrooms by predators claiming to be transgender or ‘gender-fluid’.
Another quote displayed at the conference on Thursday showed an NHS senior manager calling out the NHS for supporting people who accuse her of being a “genital fetishist,” while others said they felt the need to “monitor” everything they said.
Gay women who have expresed opposition to the idea of having a relationship with trans women who have a penis have been branded ‘genital fetishists’ by some pro-trans activists, who argue that its discriminatory to turn down a partner based on their biological sex.
That language reminds me of INCEL logic. Good grief!
The LGB Alliance was formed in response to the shift in LGBT organisations towards gender identity and claimed that “today’s LGBTQ+ movement is dominated by gender identity extremism.”
“Those who take a different view, including trans dissenters, are hounded out. We strongly reject this mindset,” the organisation declares on its website.
The LGB Alliance’s first conference drew a bipartisan crowd. SNP MP Joanna Cherry, conservative journalist Andy Ngo, author Helen Joyce, and former UKIP deputy leader Peter Whittle were just some of the figures in attendance, while the Labour Party group Lesbian Labour and the Free Speech Union also had a presence.
Protesters, however, accused the conference of being a “hate festival” and Cherry’s SNP colleague, Kirsty Blackman, was among those protesting outside the venue.
US representatives censored after calling transgender
‘1st female four-star’ admiral a man on Twitter
23 Oct, 2021 16:39
Two US representatives – Jim Banks (Indiana) and Marjorie Taylor-Greene (Georgia) – were censored by Twitter after arguing that transgender Admiral Rachel Levine should not be considered the first four-star female officer.
After Surgeon General Vivek Murthy celebrated Levine’s appointment as “the first female four-star officer to serve in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps” on Tuesday, Congressman Jim Banks criticized the description.
“The title of first female four-star officer gets taken by a man,” Banks, a Navy veteran who served in Afghanistan, said.
In a follow-up tweet, he added, “Calling someone that was born and lived as a man for 54 years the first ‘female’ four-star officer is an insult to every little girl who dreams of breaking glass ceilings one day.”
Though the follow-up post remains online, Twitter removed Bank’s first post calling Levine a man, claiming that it violated its “rules against hateful conduct.”
Isn't calling Levine a woman hate speech toward all those born female?
Banks’ congressional colleague, Marjorie Taylor-Greene, was also censored by Twitter for arguing that “a dude who lived the first 50 years of his life as a man isn’t the first female anything.”
Twitter soon cracked down on the post, claiming it “violated the Twitter Rules about hateful conduct,” and removed the ability for users to like, share, or reply to Taylor-Greene. Unlike Banks’ post, however, the social media network did not remove the congresswoman’s comments entirely, ruling it to be “in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.”
Prior to being appointed a four-star admiral in the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps (PHSCC) on Tuesday, Levine was appointed assistant secretary for health in the Joe Biden administration in March. Before that, Levine had served as secretary of the Pennsylvania Health Department.
A transgender as Assistant Secretary of Health? Am I the only one who sees a problem with that?
Levine transitioned from a man into a transgender woman in 2011.
‘Out of touch with reality’: Tulsi Gabbard rips fellow Democrats
after Congress imposes new rules on gendered language
5 Jan, 2021 23:39
US Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is calling out her party for pushing through a new code of conduct that essentially denies women exist by requiring gender-neutral language in Congressional rules.
“It's the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for women to deny the very biological existence of women,” Gabbard said on Monday night in an interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
New guidelines introduced by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday and passed Monday by Congress in a party-line vote endeavor to “honor all gender identities” by making all pronouns and references to familial relationships gender-neutral. For instance, “seamen” has been changed to “seafarers,” and House rules have been scrubbed of such words as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister.”“Aunt” and “uncle” will be replaced by “parent's sibling.” Lawmakers also must inculcate such words as “parent-in-law,”“stepsibling” and “sibling's child” to replace “mother-in-law,”“stepsister” and “niece.”“He” or “she” references to House members are instead “such member,”“delegate” or “resident commissioner.”
“It's mind-blowing because it shows just how out of touch with reality and the struggles of everyday Americans people in Congress are,” Gabbard said. “Also, their first act as this new Congress could have been to make sure that elderly Americans are able to get the COVID vaccine now… , but instead of doing something that could actually help save people's lives, they're choosing instead to say, 'Well, you can't say mother of father in any of this congressional language.' It's astounding.”
Congress also has made permanent its Office of Diversity and now requires all committees to discuss in their oversight plans how they will address “inequities on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age or national origin.” Committees also must “survey the diversity of witness panels at committee hearings to ensure we are hearing from diverse groups of experts as we craft legislation.”
Gabbard has run afoul of Democratic Party orthodoxy repeatedly in the past two years, opposing the impeachment of President Donald Trump, speaking out against election fraud, opposing regime-change wars and blasting the controversial Netflix movie ‘Cuties’ as “child porn.” She embarrassed party favorite Kamala Harris, now vice president-elect, in a Democrat presidential debate in 2019, and the Iraq War veteran called former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the “queen of warmongers” after Clinton suggested that she's a Russian asset.
Gabbard, who didn't seek a new term in Congress, was attacked as a “transphobe” and “bigot” after introducing a bill last month to limit participation in women's sports to biological females. The movement to “deny the existence of biological women – it defies common sense, it defies basic, established science, it just doesn't make any sense,” she told Carlson on Monday.
“No wonder they called you a Russian spy,” Carlson replied. “It's dangerous to have you in the Democratic Party. I'm sorry you're leaving [Congress].”
Republicans praised Gabbard's latest contradiction of Democrat talking points. “Can we please trade Mitt Romney for her?” one Twitter user asked. Brazilian entrepreneur Daniel Gonzalez called her “the best Democrat since JFK.”
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California) was among the many Republicans who opposed Pelosi's rules changes. “This is stupid,” he said. “Signed, a father, son and brother.”
Democratic priorities are way out of whack!
=====================================================================================
Biden administration unleashes pseudo-national ‘Gender Strategy
Report’ to weaponize ‘equity’ where ‘democracy’ no longer works
23 Oct, 2021 10:33
By Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23 and on Telegram.
The Biden-Harris administration has declared war on gender inequity and, as with previous wars on nebulous concepts, it’s finding the ‘enemy’ everywhere. A strategy paper warns no country is safe from US-style gender equity.
In an opening letter from President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, the pair note that while the US is currently wallowing in the “worst economic collapse since the Great Depression,” the really important part is that women’s participation in the labor force is down to its lowest level in 30 years. Never mind previous eras’ different views on women working outside the home – it’s this statistic that counts.
Peppered with calls to “build back better” – one wonders where the administration would be without such a sparkly catchphrase, given that it’s deployed on almost every page of both the National Strategy document and the cover letter released on Friday – the plan released by the administration claims its target is “to advance the rights and opportunities of women and girls around the world.” Indeed, it can’t seem to decide whether its aims are truly national (focused on the US) or international (countries like Afghanistan are frequently mentioned).
The National Strategy suggests other countries will be weighed in the balance of this gender-focused building-back-better and found wanting, true to the pattern demonstrated by the wars on drugs and terror. Never mind that this is utterly unrelated to any sort of “national” strategy, unless one considers Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and Central America to be parts of the US, just as Biden promised Americans that their country was “back,” they’re being told now that the time has come to return to spreading the American Way (“gender equity,” in this case) around the world, just like it used to spread “democracy” until that term got too toxic for its own good.
The administration, the paper insists, ultimately wants to “ensure that a focus on gender is mainstreamed across the work of the federal government” – a pledge that means precious little despite the warm fuzzy vocabulary in which it is nestled. A “whole of government effort” will be required to implement this gender control, starting with strengthening data collection and working in conjunction with Congress, local governments, and even foreign governments and NGOs to implement this “bold vision” (which no one voted for) across Our Democracy™.
The administration appears to be trying to leverage “gender equity” into a license to intrude into the average American’s life on heretofore-unseen levels, from digging through household finances (to make sure women are adequately remunerated for their work) to restricting Second Amendment rights (to protect women from the guns of their violent husbands or boyfriends) to shredding what’s left of online privacy (to protect women from gender-based harassment and cyberstalking online).
It’s not as if the US doesn’t have room to grow regarding its treatment of women, of course. If the Biden administration really does want to improve its abysmal rating on maternal mortality – currently ranked the worst among first-world countries – it should be praised for doing so, but much of the text surrounding the expansion of access to women’s healthcare focuses instead on building Obamacare back better. Rather than adopt some version of Medicare for All, a policy that enjoys broad support across party lines, the Biden administration seems determined to reanimate a poorly written legislative giveaway to insurance companies that unjustly imposed sky-high healthcare costs on individuals who could not afford them.
While some of the policy’s goals are laudable, at least on the surface – no one’s going to argue with “eliminating gender-based violence” for example – others seemingly make no sense. How is the government supposed to “promot[e] gender equity in mitigating and responding to climate change”? And what exactly do women stand to gain from programs like universal pre-K, in which kids are socialized in ways lots of parents increasingly find appalling? A call for expanding benefits for women-owned businesses sounds commendable enough until one notices how easily the current system is gamed, with female figureheads placed atop the standard old boys’ clubs that have always run major industry.
“A growing body of evidence confirms that the status of women is correlated with the security of nations—and countries that violate women’s and girls’ rights are more likely to be unstable,” the strategy reads, stating what would appear to be the obvious as it calls for greater female participation in leadership from Congress to the private sector. But forcing this down the country’s throat is not going to solve the problems; indeed, like affirmative action, it will only increase negative opinions of the women who do attain high stature, creating the perception that they were handed such positions on a silver platter in order to fulfill a quota.
Perhaps most threateningly, the Biden administration is promising to wield the big stick of budget over those government departments that don’t go along with its performative ‘gendermania’, declaring the “Gender Policy Council will partner with the Office of Management and Budget to facilitate implementation” of the all-encompassing new strategy. Every agency will be required to set and eventually achieve three goals related to the new objectives. The heavy-handed strategy is already echoed all over the private sector, where even big-time investment banks like Goldman Sachs are refusing to work with companies whose boards of directors aren’t overflowing with the requisite percentage of “diverse” members. The only diversity which cannot be permitted under any circumstances is the diversity of opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment