Stall Wars

Why are there no urinals in Ladies Rooms? Are they trans-shaming? I think they are! Can we get to work putting a row of urinals in all women’s bathrooms? I don’t want to hear it would be too expensive! What’s the price of an early-stage transitioning man walking into a female locker room and not finding a urinal? We can’t be that hateful, can we? It’s only right, you know…C’mon…it’s 2016!!!!!–Dennis Miller

Of course every business needs to remodel their bathrooms. It’s not like the days of “White” and “Colored” Bathrooms! It’s 2016.

The Age of Big Brother. Where the Government mandate you allow Men dressed as Women into the Bathroom with no proof whatsoever otherwise you’re a “bigot”. It’s a “Civil Rights Issue” to allow Men dressed as Women into a Women’s Restroom so we can’t have them restricted to just the stalls ( I guess they have them since I’ve never been in one) so we must require then to install urinals and the plumbing to match. 🙂

Oh and we need to rename them also. Men’s and Women’s Bathrooms is discrimination against the New Civil Rights of our Transgendered Media-Darlings.

Orwell has a new language to teach all us “bigots” so that we don’t offend the Crybaby Generation with our multiple millenials old “bigotry”.

HE/SHE HIM/HER HIS/HER HIS/HERS HIMSELF/HERSELF
zie zim zir zis zieself
sie sie hir hirs hirself
ey em eir eirs eirself
ve ver vis vers verself
tey ter tem ters terself
e em eir eirs emself

Some languages, such as English, do not have a gender neutral or third gender pronoun available, and this has been criticized, since in many instances, writers, speakers, etc. use “he/his” when referring to a generic individual in the third person. Also, the dichotomy of “he and she” in English does not leave room for other gender identities, which is a source of frustration to the transgender and gender queer communities.

So English itself is discriminatory and “bigoted” as a language in and of itself according to our fine folks (mind you there is no actual language that isn’t by this criteria).

Maybe we should just scrap it for…I don’t know… INGSOC, maybe . 🙂

How do I ask someone what pronouns they use?

Try asking: “What pronouns do you use?” or “Can you remind me what pronouns you use?” It can feel awkward at first, but it is not half as awkward as getting it wrong or making a hurtful assumption.

Now that’s conversation started right out of Emily Post. 🙂

When someone is referred to with the wrong pronoun, it can make them feel disrespected, invalidated, dismissed, alienated, or dysphoric (profound state of unease or dissatisfaction) (or, often, all of the above.)

I’m dysphoric about the New INGSOC. 🙂

It is a privilege to not have to worry about which pronoun someone is going to use for you based on how they perceive your gender. If you have this privilege, yet fail to respect someone else’s gender identity, it is not only disrespectful and hurtful, but also oppressive. (LGBT Resource Center)

So don’t be an evil, oppressive bore, be Politically Correct. 🙂

Yes, one day you may be threatened with prosecution by some liberal for refusing to refer to a transgender who believes she’s a ze so take a few minutes to study the Big Brother pamphlet so you don’t get “re-educated” by a red-hot, “oppressed” Liberal.

Your local Liberal Thought Police Regiment will thank you.

 

Who Needs a Constitution

Conservatives have long accused academics of shredding the Constitution, figuratively speaking, but a Project Veritas sting operation recently caught them doing it literally.

Undercover video released last week showed administrators at Yale, Cornell, Syracuse, Vassar and Oberlin agreeing to rip up copies of the Constitution handed out off campus after an investigator posing as a student described the document as “triggering” and “oppressive.”

“Well, I think that the Constitution means things to different people; like you said it is a flawed document and the people who wrote it are certainly flawed individuals in my mind,” Cornell lead Title IX investigator Elizabeth McGrath says on the video.

Ms. McGrath agrees to rip up the hand-held copy of the Constitution and run it through a shredder after the female “student” asks, “Is there any way that maybe like we can get rid of it somehow or I can just see that like maybe it will be like therapy for me, like if you can like shred it or something?”

Project Veritas president James O’Keefe, known for his undercover video operations against ACORN and the National Public Radio, said the videos showed that the willingness to cut up the Constitution was “not an isolated incident.”

“Using a shredder, scissors, and bare hands to destroy the U.S. Constitution, makes you stop and think: where did we go wrong?,” said Mr. O’Keefe in a Thursday statement. “In this latest investigative series we have been to five schools so far and the results have been frightening at each one.”

Only Cornell reacted the videos with an official statement. Joel M. Malina, Cornell vice president for university relations, said that the administrator, “whatever her personal views,” was “appropriately focused on addressing the apparently urgent need of the person before her and not on any larger political context.”

“The Project Veritas video released today would have you believe an employee was helping a student make a political statement by denigrating the U.S. Constitution,” said Mr. Malina in a Thursday statement. “In fact, the video shows a ‘reporter’ misrepresent herself as a student with a mental health crisis. Under the guise of addressing her mental health issues, the ‘student’ asked the employee to help her shred the document she brought with her that was the apparent source of her anguish.”

At Oberlin, spokesman Scott Wargo called the episode “deplorable” in a comment to the Oberlin Review.

“Posing as a student in crisis, secretly recording a private conversation and then strategically editing the footage in order to support a specific, predetermined agenda is deplorable,” Mr. Wargo said.

College Fix editor Jennifer Kabbany agreed that the investigator had put up the administrators to destroying the Constitution copies, and that none volunteered to do so until it was suggested.

“So they are, on some level, trying to ease her ‘pain,’” said Ms. Kabbany in a Friday commentary. “And in fact that is part of their job descriptions.”

At the same time, she said the biggest surprise was that the administrators actually fell for the Project Veritas con, which she said reveals something about the “whiny” attitude of students on college campuses.

“Because in the end, you have got to laugh out loud at these videos as you listen to this chick moan and groan over the Constitution,” she said in a Friday commentary. “It the most ridiculous thing you’ve ever heard, and these officials swallow it hook, line and sinker.”

Mr. O’Keefe, who makes a cameo dressed up as a copy of the Constitution, said he was also surprised that the operation worked.

“When this idea came up in our newsroom about campus administrators shredding the Constitution because it’s a trigger against students, we didn’t think people would actually fall for it,” he told Campus Reform. “We underestimated just how stupid and politically correct these people are.”

Not necessarily “stupid” just committed to their “superior” ideology and blinded by Orwell to not see it.

 


The Tolerant Left

The Supreme Court’s ruling against the Obamacare abortion pill mandate came as quite a blow to the Obama administration, which has consistently harangued that the mandate is “lawful and essential to women’s health.”

The White House took this argument yet a step further Monday, stating that bosses who decide not to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees will be jeopardizing women’s health.

This First Amendment victory is a huge success for every American. Employers have the liberty to follow their religious beliefs, and women have the freedom to work for whomever they choose to get the health care they “need.”

It’s a very PRO-CHOICE decision. 🙂

But of course this went against THE AGENDA to force it on you for your own good and deny you that freedom of choice, so the left is not happy.

“Women’s medical decisions can now be shaped by the gods their for-profit employers choose to worship.”

“The miseducation that some people have about women ONLY taking BC to prevent pregnancy is so sad- I’m gonna shut up now but seriously- wow”

Because Liberals want zero accountability.  If you ask for it, you should get it.  Not getting it means you’re being judged which means you’re being discriminated against which means you’re being oppressed which means a Republican is behind it.

The Obama administration is simply about the blind expansion of Executive – and Government – power.  The more power they get the less power we – the people – have.

This Supreme Court decision is a narrow victory but “religious liberty” stands just as much for Christians as it does for Jews, Muslims, and even Atheists.

It’s not being made to do something against your beliefs. (BIN)

Hobby Lobby did not object to all contraceptives, just certain types of abortifacients. Hobby Lobby employees are and always were able to buy birth-control pills and contraceptives on their own dime and time.

And we all know that’s “oppressive”! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Michael Ramirez Cartoon.