RUTHFULLY YOURS

s://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/08/disloyal-frontpagemagcom/

In this new Freedom Center booklet, Disloyal: How the Military Brass is Betraying Our Country, author Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, reveals how the U.S. Military’s promotion of Critical Race Theory and efforts to purge “extremists” is endangering America’s future. Greenfield documents the shocking penetration of Critical Race Theory and woke leftist ideology into numerous branches of the American military. He describes how these recent attempts to divide the military by race and condemn the nation it exists to defend, have undermined unit cohesion and military readiness while having a devastating impact on troop morale.

“Disloyal” lays bare the disturbing actions and statements of some of America’s leading military leaders who have capitulated to America’s ideological enemies before even entering the field of battle. Among these are Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who has required both Critical Race Theory and the ahistorical and un-American 1619 Project as core elements of the Pentagon’s military training programs. Also unmasked is Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who vocally rejected the use of the military to put down violent BLM/Antifa riots and later defended the military’s adoption of CRT to Congress, stating, “I want to understand white rage and I’m white, and I want to understand it.”

Nor does the rot stop there. Greenfield reveals how Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday, in an effort to radically transform the U.S. Navy, created “shared” video “conversations” featuring Navy officers lamenting America’s “systemic racism” and “implicit bias.”  Under the leadership of Chief of Staff Charles Q. Brown Jr., the Air Force also now produces official videos promoting CRT struggle sessions and the idea that all enlisted men must confront their “unconscious bias.”

“In a military led by disloyal commanders, America becomes the enemy,” Freedom Center Founder David Horowitz states in the introduction to Disloyal.

“Tragically for our nation, the Biden administration is continuing Clinton and Obama’s destruction of the military,” echoes Greenfield. “Our country is barely surviving a woke government and woke corporations, it will not survive the disloyal military leaders of a woke military.”

This new Freedom Center booklet is an urgent and vital read. [Read in PDF form: HERE.]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/08/trans-activisms-long-march-through-our-institutions/
This article is adapted from the author’s book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality.

Harm to children’s bodies, loss of women’s privacy, and perversion of language are all included in the collateral damage.

For a movement that is supposedly about the latest oppressed minority gaining full human rights, transactivism has progressed remarkably far and fast.

What campaigners mean by “trans rights” is gender self-identification: that trans people be treated in every circumstance as members of the sex they identify with, rather than the sex they actually are.

This is not a human right at all. It is a demand that everyone else lose their rights to single-sex spaces, services, and activities. And in its requirement that everyone else accept trans people’s subjective beliefs as objective reality, it is akin to a new state religion, complete with blasphemy laws.

Even as one country after another introduces gender self-ID, very few voters know that this is happening, let alone support it.

In 2018 research by Populus, an independent pollster, crowdfunded by British feminists, found that only 15 percent of British adults agreed that legal sex change should be possible without a doctor’s sign-off. A majority classified a “person who was born male and has male genitalia but who identifies as a woman” as a man, and only tiny minorities said that such people should be allowed into women’s sports or changing rooms, or be incarcerated in a women’s prison if they committed a crime.

Two years later, YouGov found that half of British voters thought people should be “able to self-identify as a different gender to the one they were born in.” But two-thirds said legal sex change should only be possible with a doctor’s sign-off, with just 15 percent saying no sign-off should be needed. In other words, there is widespread support for people describing themselves as they wish, but not much for granting such self-descriptions legal status. The same poll also asked whether transwomen should be allowed in women’s sports and changing rooms, sometimes with a reminder that transwomen may have had no genital surgery, and sometimes without. The share saying yes was 20 percentage points lower with the reminder than without — again demonstrating widespread confusion about what being trans means, and that support for trans people does not imply support for self-declaration overriding reality.

A poll in Scotland in 2020 suggests that even young women, the demographic keenest on gender self-ID, become cooler when reminded of the practical implications. A slight majority of women aged 16 to 34 selected “anyone who says they’re a woman, regardless of their biology” as closer than “an adult human female, with XX chromosomes and female genitalia” to their conception of what the word “woman” means. (Young men were much less keen on the self-ID definition, though keener than older men. Overall, 72 percent of respondents chose the biological definition.) But that 52 percent share fell to 38 percent answering “yes” to: “Do you think someone who identifies as a woman, but was born male, and still has male genitalia, should be allowed to use female changing rooms where women and girls are undressing/showering, even if those women object?”