The Post-Truth N.Y. Times and Men in Lipstick
Just in time to bring some holiday cheer to America, the New York Times editorial board is crying over the failure of North Carolina lawmakers to repeal H.B. 2.
This is the bill that sends potty-seeking men to men’s restrooms – you know, the way ordinary people might operate – and likewise, women are to visit those facilities reserved for women.
Yet the law is an outrage in the minds of the post-truth Times editors and their progressive supporters, because people should be able to access any desired bathroom depending on “gender identity.”
Hey, I can’t get access to coveted villas in the south of France, despite my “economic identity” as a multi-millionaire. Why is there no justice in this world? Who will come to my defense?
Let’s not count on the inventive officials on the Charlotte City Council, who caused all this uproar in the first place, even though they have shown a unique talent for re-imagining law and reality as they wish it to be. H.B. 2 was passed only to bar rebel North Carolina cities like Charlotte from designating new categories for so-called “non-discrimination” policies without the state’s OK.
In the final days of its legislative session, the outgoing governor and the North Carolina Senate just couldn’t bring themselves to repeal the law – perhaps only affirming the need for the bill in the first place.
It made sense, and repealing it makes no sense.
But the nation’s alleged leading newspaper (which just announced plans to rent out eight floors of space in its Manhattan building to produce needed revenue) called H.B. 2 “cruel and discriminatory.” The headline reads, “North Carolina Doubles Down on Bigotry.”
Amazingly, this sentence seems to steal almost verbatim a quote from Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin in an earlier Times article. Griffin commented on the North Carolina repeal effort that it “doubles-down on discrimination, and makes clear that NC is still closed for business.”
Is the Human Rights Campaign, the major homosexuality promotion group in the U.S., writing editorial content for the New York Times now? This would come as no surprise, of course.
The Times also wrote about North Carolina:
“The Republican-dominated legislature, the General Assembly, would rather allow discrimination against gays and lesbians and peddle malicious stereotypes about transgender people than undo a colossal mistake that has cost the state hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars worth of investment.”
The reality is exactly the opposite. North Carolina has only suffered business losses because of the mean-spirited, bigoted and deviancy-oriented actions of groups like the morally-bankrupt HRC. Joined by state affiliate Equality NC, they persuaded companies and organizations to cooperate with the lunatic idea that men belong in women’s restrooms, and so, jobs and commerce have suffered in North Carolina.
And other liberals are now jumping on this train to nowhere. The NAACP may call for economic boycotts in the state.
And the left thinks that no one will discern the reason for the job losses? Despite the alleged loss of the governor’s race over this issue, eventually the majority of voters will figure out how childish and spiteful this campaign has been. North Carolina voters will eventually refuse to knuckle under to bullying and fake outrage over fake problems … of fake women.
Because let’s get real. Men never need to dress and appear as women.
The group 2nd Vote reported on the companies that succumbed to pressure from Equality NC to oppose H.B. 2 from the beginning, businesses like Marriott, American Airlines, Intel, IBM, Google, YouTube, Facebook, Symantec, Cisco, Salesforce, Pfizer and Bank of America. Then there’s the NBA, NCAA and ACC.
Why did they succumb? Who knows?
Homosexual activists/allies in their human resources departments or on their corporate boards? Or in executive positions? Or political favors demanded by Democrats?
Or fear of the well-known dirty tricks of “LGBTQ” advocates? We’ve seen how these folks operate, and it’s not pretty.
It’s high time to end the forced acceptance of bizarre ideas that are supposedly “essential” to some poor confused person’s identity, but are actually a back-door method of enshrining unstable behavior, all in the name of preventing “discrimination.”
Men never need to dress as women or enter a woman’s restroom, locker room or shower. This is biology denial indicative of mental illness. And no responsible government entity, sports’ association, or company should put a stamp of approval on mental illness enabling female endangerment.
Or going the next step – practicing actual discrimination against those who object to this infringement on the rights of others.
The New York Times article frames the “transgendered” person as a poor unfortunate “struggler” subject to “pernicious” actions by the mainstream. These people who, it is claimed, have no choice except to dress in opposite sex clothing are more likely to be unemployed or live at the poverty level, and less likely to own a home.
But is the solution for the entire universe to change its “discriminatory” opinions and accept men in lipstick and heels?
Or is the answer really simpler and authentically humane? We could encourage such confused men to get counseling that connects them to reality, and urge them to put away the women’s clothes and put on a “new man,” physically and perhaps spiritually as well.
People who have mental health problems usually display the metrics of uneven life management, with trouble succeeding and coping because they have multiple “issues.” The easy solutions don’t work until reality is faced.
Is it cruel to point out that these confused men are not women trapped in male bodies?
Not if people want the truth. But one of the prevailing trends of our times, and the New York Times, is avoidance of the truth. They want to keep believing what they believe even if it’s a pack of lies. And they want the orbit to be recalibrated to revolve around their delusions if necessary.
When the Times and its media acolytes take such deranged positions, we can only conclude that the editors possibly have “issues” themselves.
Pray for them and for the Human Rights Campaign.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read More