530 Comments
Commenting has been turned off for this post

About 3 years ago I was a good blue-voting lefty in most ways, and I really enjoyed Victor Davis Hanson's history lectures, which made me aware of Hillsdale College on YT, and thus I accidentally bumped into Abigail's talk there and then her book, Irreversible Damage...

...At first I suspected she must be some kind of "right-wing conspiracy nut" because that was my knee-jerk bias towards anything I perceived as GOP/conservative. But she blew my fuzzy little mind, and I thank her for opening the 1st door that lead to other doors etc. resulting in a much more sane (or "based" as they say) view of the society in which we're ensconced. So to Ms. Abigail Shrier, I say thank you for waking me up.

Of all the authoritarian left politicians vying for high office, Newsome scares me the most. He's the potential US equivalent of Trudeau, and has that surface glib & photogenic appeal that can inspire confidence in those gullible enough to buy the b.s. he's selling. The importance of exposing what he and his ilk are doing to children and to parents' rights, along with exposing the institutional complicity behind their deranged ideology cannot in be overstated. Great expository writing, and I highly recommend Abigail's books, though I haven't gotten to the new one yet.

Expand full comment
Jul 21·edited Jul 21

Democrats are using the same pretext with this that they have used for years in opposing parental notification for abortion. That it could put the minor girl in some kind of danger from intolerant, punitive parents. They craft laws around what they perceive as the very worst parents--who are the minority--and in doing so punish the majority who are good parents.

Think about what they are saying with this argument. That most parents are terrible people, and it is the benevolent government's job to "protect" children from their own parents. They completely miss the irony of their own stance. If a minor child purportedly has such awful parents, shouldn't the child be removed from the home entirely?

They are always telling us to "trust" women in making their own reproductive decisions, yet when that decision results in a child, well, the politicians are the ones who know what's best for it, not the mother. And they will drive a wedge between her and her child.

For the Marxist Democratic party, reproductive rights end with birth. They'll take it from here, thank you very much. Because they own your kids, not you.

Expand full comment

This is a belief system, and these people are cultists. The only thing that makes a person transgender is their presumably sincere belief that 'being born into a body of the incorrect gender' is possible and that this condition affects them. There is less scientific evidence of it than there is on the life of Jesus. The government has no business or, for that matter, lawful authority to promote any belief system. The cultists, via social media, advise the children to threaten suicide to get their parents to comply. They imply the phantom threat of abuse if anyone in authority resists or communicates the truth to their family. Now, they've infiltrated the government in California who have magically given themselves this power to keep information about their children from parents. It must end and there must be consequences for those in government promoting it. In reality, there is no lawful authority to do any of it and there are many protections from it in the law when you recognize it for what it is; a belief system, one that children are being indoctrinated into through the public's school systems. What children are brought up to believe is a matter for their parents and schools have no role in it. Federal funding for California's schools should be withheld, hospitals, universities and doctors promoting it for profit should lose their licensing and accreditations. You don't need a crystal ball or Ouija board to see what the next evolution of self-empowering government can be if this is successful.

Expand full comment

One of the incoherent, cultist aspects of the ideology is that sometimes transgenderism is presented as a metaphysical claim, and other times as a social construct... It seems to depend on who the ideologues are speaking to and which method of manipulation they think best to employ in a given circumstance.

Expand full comment

Even the authors of this bill e.g. Weiner knew that in order to get it passed it had to be wrapped up in a bow, so they falsely titled it

"The Safety Act". So shameful.

Expand full comment

Well written. Also see Michael Schelleberger's video.. https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2024/7/17/save-california

Expand full comment

Leftists are awful. Over and over and over again.

Expand full comment

I believe evil is the more apt term.

Expand full comment

In the second paragraph the law was incorrectly quoted. The quote should finish the sentence to be accurate, "...without the pupil’s consent unless otherwise required by law, as provided.". Careful, choosing to leave that out seems a lot like something legacy media would do to craft a bias narrative.

Expand full comment

California Democrats, the governor, legislature, and teachers' unions, are involved in a progressive social experiment aimed at destroying the family. Like all their social experiments, these clowns are trying to destroy our society and our culture. Sadly, as of now, they're succeeding. It's time the people wake up and start rejecting their insanity. Anyone who votes for a Democrat for any office is contributing to this disgraceful effort.

Expand full comment

Anatomy of a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad law: CA bill AB 1955: The “Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth" act. A new California law that purportedly protects gender diverse children and supports their families -- while actually doing the opposite.

https://carolinacurmudgeon.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-terrible-horrible-no

Expand full comment

Elon Musk is a hero! He has reposted and pinned a Dave Lee X post which references this FP article:

Regarding California's AB 1955 signed into law this week, @AbigailShrier argues (in an article linked below) that it:

1. Mimics the tactics of child predators by isolating children from their parents.

2. Undermines parental rights and the parent-child relationship.

3. Potentially puts children at risk by encouraging secret gender transitions without parental knowledge or support.

4. Ignores growing evidence and international trends cautioning against pediatric gender transitions.

5. Disregards public opinion, which largely supports parental notification in such cases.

6. May lead to political backlash against Democrats, as exemplified by the author's interview subject who switched party affiliation.

Elon Musk replies:

AB 1955, authored by pedophile-apologist Scott Wiener and which @GavinNewsom just signed into law in California, is a child predators dream

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1814657489297719696

Expand full comment

One need not be a Conservative or a Republican, or even a moderate to recognize that stripping parents of their rights to supervise their child's medical care and to give it to an instrument of the state is a step towards totalitarianism. If I were a Californian with children in public school, I'd be racing for the border (with them in hand) without delay.

Expand full comment

There is no constraint on progressive Dems here in CA. Dems have a super majority in state government. When I vote in local and state elections, I often have to leave those questions blank or write in a candidate because there is no conservative candidate on the ballot. It has been like this for many years. I would like to see a story about why the CA GOP allows this.

I would also like to see LGBQ orgs push pack on trans activist extremism. They seem to have just accepted that trans issues overlap with sexual orientation issues and now everyone is saying “LGBTQ, LGBTQIA+” etc. I believe this is going to be detrimental to LGBQ causes. We already have places like Iran pushing gender transition in a country that sometimes kills people for being gay. There are many people that support gay rights, but do not support biological males on their daughters sports team. My sense is that trans activists tend to be more extreme than most LGBQ activists. Most LGBQ orgs have historically advocated for things I can support, like having a community support center, organizing pride parades, advocating for health systems to do more to address HIV treatment, etc.

Expand full comment

They've all rolled over to the "T" insanity. For instance:

"The Trevor Project: Undercover Mom"

https://www.pittparents.com/p/the-trevor-project-undercover-mom

It isn't 1980.

Expand full comment

Hopefully this drives a stake in the heart of Newsome’s further political career.

Expand full comment

It won't.

Expand full comment

Bari. If you are serious, then reach down and HELP this woman!

https://www.yvetteforsenate.org/

She is running against Weiner. Help her! Otherwise it's just f-ing words and more words. Do something that matters here! Support this woman with your voice!

Expand full comment

Good to know. Thanks!

Expand full comment
Jul 20·edited Jul 20

Weiner is not all bad. Yes, I don’t agree with some of the legislation impacting minors. Weiner has actually done more than most Democrats when it comes to reducing negative impacts of over regulation. The CA Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has become a farce that prevents anything and everything and it is a major reason our housing is so expensive and why infrastructure projects take decades, if they ever get done… Weiner is the only Democrat I can think of that has stood up to biodiversity extremists on CEQA issues. Still, it is nice to see that a conservative candidate might actually be on a ballot in SF.

Expand full comment

Going with an over used comparison - Hitler:

"1932–1940: People's Car project

Volkswagen was established in 1937 by the German Labour Front (German: Deutsche Arbeitsfront) as part of the Strength Through Joy (German: Kraft durch Freude) program in Berlin.[4] In the early 1930s, cars were a luxury—most Germans could afford nothing more elaborate than a motorcycle, and only one German out of 50 owned a car."

"In 1934, with many of the above projects still in development or early stages of production, Adolf Hitler became involved, ordering the production of a basic vehicle capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph). He wanted a car every German family would be able to afford.[6] The "People's Car" would be available through a savings plan at 990 ℛ︁ℳ︁ (US$396 in 1938)—about the price of a small motorcycle (the average income being around 32 ℛ︁ℳ︁ a week).[9][10]

It soon became apparent that private industry could not turn out a car for only 990 ℛ︁ℳ︁. Thus, Hitler chose to sponsor an all-new, state-owned factory using Ferdinand Porsche's design (with some of Hitler's design suggestions, including an air-cooled engine so nothing could freeze). The intention was that German families could buy the car through a savings scheme ("Fünf Mark die Woche musst du sparen, willst du im eigenen Wagen fahren" – "Five Marks a week you must set aside, if in your own car you wish to ride"),"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen

So, working to get German families in affordable cars was good. Did that make Adolf Hitler a good guy?

Expand full comment

Hey Robin, we f__ the kids!

Robin: Oh, alright. But CEQA!

Expand full comment

Thank you, Spartacus. I replied to Robin. I hope it helps open her eyes.

Expand full comment

This law is in place in Washington State as well. What a disaster.

Expand full comment

I have to admit that my wife and I are products of the private school system as are my now adult children, so I can't say I have any experience in the policies of the public school system.

But I have to ask this question. Why did we as parents and citizens, allow public school employees to decide anything? Their task should be nothing more than to teach reading, writing, arithmetic, science and athletics to our children. Morals and values are taught at home and they are taught by actions more than the spoken or written word. The very function of a parent is to teach, and provide a safe environment for a child to grow up to function as an intelligent and responsible adult. When did we as parents, outsource this basic function?

Parenting doesn't come with a manual, but one of the most important items to understand about parenting is the word "No". Children never like to hear "No", but it's use by parents is simply as a placeholder, to first postpone and then gradually allow decision making until the child that they teach and mentor has the capacity and understanding of the rights, realities and most important, responsibilities that come with the word "Yes". That includes the capacity to understand right and wrong.

Right and wrong is a value, a choice that recognizes the rights of others and limits our use of the word "Yes" even as adults. It has been traditionally shaped and molded by many factors, most importantly religion, or some belief that there is something bigger and more important than ourselves. It has been traditionally enforced by the state. Without this framework, we are little more than animals.

In our system of government, the rights of the individual are paramount, and the state are employees, hired to implement our decisions, not impose their own regardless of whatever credentials they possess. And government's failure to understand that role is at the heart of our current problems. Government's job isn't to solve our problems, that's our job. Government's job is simply to encode and enforce our decisions.

One of the important parts of adulthood is the capacity to understand that there exists something bigger than ourselves, that regardless of age, the word "No" still applies to each of us. We cannot function as a society without that understanding.

In that context, most of our current problems stem from bad hiring decisions. When we hire people that believe they know better than we do about every facet of life, that their job is to impose their beliefs and values on us and not implement ours, then we open ourselves up to any and all tyrannies that result.

Perhaps we can start to solve our problems by making better hiring decisions, starting in November. The road to making a better society for all of us starts with hiring employees that understand they are our short term servants, not our long term masters.

Expand full comment