Welcome to The Bridgehead!

Jonathon Van Maren

A bridgehead is defined as “a strong position secured by an army inside enemy territory from which to advance or attack.” In today’s culture wars, a bridgehead of truth and common sense is exactly what we need. As Ronald Reagan once said, “When you’re outnumbered and surrounded and someone yells ‘charge,’ any way you’re facing you’ll find a target.”The Bridgehead Radio Program does just that, bringing you cutting edge news, interviews, and insights from the frontlines of the culture wars, and engaging in a sweeping discussion on human rights. Featuring renowned authors, commentators, politicians, intellectuals, historical figures, and more, The Bridgehead talks truth and common sense in a culture where it is badly needed. Featuring conversations with everyone from Peter Hitchens, Mark Steyn, Joel C. Rosenberg, and Gavin McInnes to Rwandan genocide survivor Immaculee Illibagiza, Holocaust survivor and Anne Frank’s step-sister Eva Schloss, and Nazi-hunter Efraim Zuroff, Bridgehead host Jonathon Van Maren takes a hard look at where our culture is and where we need to go.

Jonathon Van Maren is a popular speaker and writer who has been published in The National Post, The Times of Israel, The Jewish Independent, The Hamilton Spectator, LifeSiteNews and elsewhere, and has been quoted and interviewed by many prominent national publications as well as a wide variety of television and radio shows.


Read more

Do some “transgender women” who are biological men commit assault in bathrooms?

By Jonathon Van Maren

Decades after feminism swept the West, transgender rights have now formally replaced women’s rights as the emerging ideology of gender fluidity wipes out any formal conception of what a “woman” is to begin with.

Women and girls who feel unsafe when biological males enter spaces once reserved for females only are being essentially told that they are transphobic and that they should shut up. The University of West England even launched a poster campaign recently urging students to disregard those who look like they may be in the wrong bathroom. When journalist Josephine Bartosch noted that, “UWE are saying that the feelings and fears of women matter less than those who identify as transgender,” she was promptly condemned by the head of the LGBT society.


Read more

Mexico’s pro-life movement battles to keep abortion forces out

By Jonathon Van Maren

As LifeSiteNews reported on February 11, pro-lifers in Mexico narrowly fended off an attempt to change the nation’s constitution in order to further permit abortion as well as redefine marriage and legalize euthanasia earlier this month. Debate on these proposed constitutional amendments, which are being championed by a handful of pro-abortion politicians, has been tabled for the time being, but legislators are under enormous pressure both domestically and internationally to modify Mexico’s constitution and include “reproductive autonomy” as well as “gender identity” as integral human rights, among others.

To find out what was happening on the ground in Mexico, I spoke with Rocío Gálvez de Lara, the national president of Comité Nacional Pro-Vida, Mexico’s largest pro-life organization. Here is our conversation:

LifeSiteNews (LSN): What is the status quo regarding abortion in Mexico?

Rocío Gálvez de Lara (de Lara): Regarding this subject we have to clarify the status of abortion by methods. If we consider chemical abortion, the morning after pill, we have to say that it’s legal in our country to buy these abortifacients without any restrictions. You don´t have even to present a medical prescription given by a doctor. In contrast, if you buy an antibiotic, you have to do so. It’s terrible that such drugs are available to anyone who can afford to buy them, adolescents, young people, any time they want. In 2014, only one company that distributes them reported sales for 5 million pills nationwide.

With respect to the RU-486, we know that women can buy them through the Internet and they deliver to any place in Mexico, so we don’t have official numbers on how many Mifespristone pills are being sold.


Read more

Does Brett Kavanaugh’s latest vote on abortion indicate good news for pro-lifers?

By Jonathon Van Maren

Like many other pro-lifers, I’ve been waiting with bated breath to find out how Justice Brett Kavanaugh will rule on abortion-related cases in order to get some indication of how he might cast his vote on Roe v. Wade. Senator Susan Collins, one of the last remaining pro-choice Republicans, has been promising anyone who will listen that Kavanaugh assured her that he will not vote to overturn Roe, which seems like a strange thing for a judicial nominee to promise. (Based on her description of the conversations, it seems likely that Kavanaugh simply confirmed again, as he has publicly, that Roe is an established precedent, which is true but does not mean that it cannot be overturned.)

Back in December, it looked as if Collins might be telling the truth when Kavanaugh voted with the majority (6-3) to decline an appeal from Kansas and Louisiana over withholding tax dollars from Planned Parenthood. Pro-lifers are used to being disappointed by Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents, but that doesn’t make the betrayals any less painful or infuriating.

I didn’t notice this story when it first broke last week, but there has been some encouraging news since then. Arwa Mahdawi, writing in The Guardian, stated that “Kavanaugh has made it clear he’s coming for Roe v. Wade,” noting that there are only three abortion clinics in Louisiana, but that Kavanaugh dissented from a Supreme Court decision to block a Louisiana law that would have potentially reduced the number of clinics to one:

The US supreme court voted 5-4 to block a Louisiana law that would have dramatically reduced access to legal abortions in the state. Opponents of the law said it would have meant only one doctor would have been eligible to perform abortions in the entire state.

The law in question is called the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act…The statute requires doctors who provide abortions to have active admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles. Which may not sound like a big deal on the surface, but is a sneaky way of making it more expensive and difficult to access legal abortions. It’s an example of what is called a “Trap” (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) law…It is alarming that the Louisiana law was blocked by so narrow a margin, as there is already clear precedent showing it is unconstitutional. The statue is nearly identical to a Texas law the supreme court struck down in 2016, ruling that requiring abortion providers to obtain hospital privileges is unduly burdensome and provides no medical benefit to women.

Also alarming is Brett Kavanaugh’s conduct in the case. While Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, joined the court’s liberals in putting a hold on the Louisiana law, Kavanaugh was not just in favour of the law, he wrote a dissent on his own behalf. This effectively argued that the law should go into effect as it wasn’t clear it would be unduly burdensome and we should just go ahead and see how it played out.

Kavanaugh’s dissent has been taken by many as a clear sign that he is intent on overturning Roe v Wade, the supreme court decision protecting access to abortions. Anger is now mounting towards Senator Susan Collins, who cast the decisive vote confirming Kavanaugh last year. When casting her vote Collins justified her decision by reassuring everyone she was sure Kavanaugh would not overturn Roe v Wade, because he had an unmatched reverence for precedent. The justice’s dissent has made very clear that is not the case.

Kavanaugh’s dissent obviously does not provide us with enough evidence to indicate which way he would vote on Roe, and abortion activists need to keep their followers in a state of panic to ensure that they don’t become apathetic. Chief Justice John Roberts has been a huge disappointment despite coming onto the court with probably the most pristine pro-life record of all the justices (I suspect that he will become the new Kennedy on the court, doling out wins and losses to each side in order to grant the court the appearance of being nonpartisan and above the political fray.) But this is certainly an encouraging sign, and does make me hopeful that Alexandra DeSanctis was right when she wrote in the National Review that Kavanaugh’s vote in December didn’t actually tell us anything about his judicial stance on abortion.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

BREAKING: Investigation fully exonerates Covington Catholic School boys and confirms their account

By Jonathon Van Maren

The Washington Post is reporting that an investigation into the incident between Nathan Phillips, a native elder and professional activist who initially claimed to be a Vietnam War veteran (this turned out to be a lie) and some boys from Covington Catholic High School has cleared the boys, who had just attended the March for Life:

An investigation released Wednesday into an encounter between Covington Catholic High School students and Native American activists at the Lincoln Memorial last month largely supports the students’ accounts of the incident, which prompted immediate and widespread condemnation of the boys after a video of the encounter went viral.

A short video clip showed Nathan Phillips, playing a traditional drum, in an apparent standoff with student Nick Sandmann, who was wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat. The Diocese of Covington and Covington Catholic High School, which arranged the trip, were among those who initially condemned the boys’ actions in the video.

The report, prepared by Greater Cincinnati Investigation, Inc. and dated Feb. 11, employed four licensed investigators for approximately 240 hours to take statements from students and chaperones, as well as to interview third-party witnesses and review about 50 hours of video. Investigators were not able to interview either Phillips or Sandmann in person and instead reviewed the student’s written account.

The investigators said they found no evidence that the students responded in an offensive manner to the black Hebrew Israelites or that they chanted “build the wall.” After asking chaperones, they performed a school cheer, according to the report, to drown out the black Hebrew Israelites.

Other key findings include testimony that the students felt “confused” when Phillips approached them. Investigators said they found no evidence of “racist or offensive statements by students to Mr. Phillips,” though some performed a “tomahawk chop.”

According to the report, one of the chaperones told students that if “they engaged in a verbal exchange with the Black Hebrew Israelites, they would receive detention when returning to school.”

According to the report, most boys bought the red hats bearing President Trump’s MAGA slogan in Washington on the day of the March for Life, an annual antiabortion rally that they attended. In previous years, some students bought “Hope” hats in support of President Obama, the report says.

Now let’s see if mea culpas will be forthcoming from the media vultures who gleefully attempted to destroy the lives of a few teenage boys in order to score a few cheap political points. The boys deserve loud and sincere apologies from those who piled on, especially the celebrities who advocating doxing them (such as the repulsive Kathy Griffin.) I doubt it, but hopefully the more clearheaded members of the media should realize that it is this sort of thing that crushes whatever remains of their credibility and transfers that credibility to Donald Trump and everyone else highlighting the fact that their coverage not infrequently turns out to be Fake News.

And if they can’t learn this very obvious lesson, perhaps they should learn how to code.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Sex doll brothels crop up in Toronto, Vancouver, and Edmonton

By Jonathon Van Maren

The silicon sexual revolution has now officially arrived in Canada, with those who prefer their sex dehumanized and anonymous having the ultimate option in multiple major cities: Sex dolls. Earlier this year, a sex doll brothel opened up in Toronto (I explained why this is so awful and problematic last year), and now the Edmonton Journal is reporting that porn culture is going 3-D in Alberta, as well:

Posters for a sex doll rental business went up along Whyte Avenue late last week, marking the arrival of an intimate niche market in Edmonton.But the advertising for Doll Next Door brings a host of questions about how this latest trend in sexual services will be regulated in Edmonton, if at all. Sex doll brothels and rental services have longer histories in places such as Japan and parts of Europe, but recent ventures in other Canadian cities have drawn mixed reactions.

The business owner advertising the silicon doll rentals in Edmonton said the service offers customers the choice of a two-hour booking or overnight rental with one of five doll models. Customers call, explain what they would like and the doll is then sent in discreet packaging to the customer’s home or a specified hotel. Industry supporters say the dolls have both intimate and physical benefits. Some say people who lack confidence or social skills can explore and become more comfortable with their sexuality in a safe environment.

Kelly Jenny, a sex therapist at Insight Psychological, said she can see the benefits associated with sex dolls, but says they can also be used in a negative way to objectify women. Jenny said current research says about 40 per cent of people using sex dolls say they are their primary form of intimacy…

The business operator, who declined to give his full name to Postmedia, said the dolls are cleaned twice after each rental to stay in line with industry standards. The company’s website states the use of STI protection is mandatory with the dolls. He said he hopes to one day open a sex doll store that uses the brothel model.

A similar business in Toronto was recently opened, closed and subsequently relocated after that city’s council found the original location violated bylaws in Canada’s largest city. Alberta Health Services said the sex doll industry is not currently regulated by health officials.

“Given the relative infancy of this type of business, there are no requirements for AHS regulation of a businesses of this nature, either for approval to open or on a routine basis,” Dr. Kathryn Koliaska, medical officer of health, said in a statement. “We are always here to help operators who have questions and want to work collaboratively to create a safe environment.”

“For heightened health and safety, AHS Public Health recommends rigorous cleaning of doll bodies and the replacement of intimate contact surfaces for each user rather than condoms for enhanced safety reasons,” the statement said. “Provided all cleaning is done after each use with cleaners appropriate to the surfaces, and intimate contact surfaces are replaced each time, risk should be low for contracting a sexually transmitted infections.”

“There is an STI outbreak in Alberta, so taking extra precautions is necessary and recommended,” said Koliaska.

As I wrote last year, this is simply another step towards extracting humanity and intimacy from sex, commodifying it as a product, and marketing it as a consumer good. Late last year a similar service showed up in Kamloops, British Columbia, and Vancouver got its own doll brothel, too.  But because we are so used to that at this point, this sort of story will continue to come and go with scarcely a ripple.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Doctors took a baby girl from her mother’s womb, performed surgery, and put her back. This proves just how insane abortion is.

By Jonathon Van Maren

Earlier this week, the Daily Mirror reported on an incredible operation where a pre-born baby girl was removed from the womb, underwent an operation, and was returned to the womb when the surgery was over. Especially in the context of the exploding conversation surrounding late-term abortion in the United States, this story highlights starkly the stakes in this life-and-death struggle for the soul of our culture:

A mum-to-be has undergone a groundbreaking operation which saw her unborn baby removed from her womb for treatment – before being put back in. The astonishing procedure was done to treat Bethan Simpson’s child after tests revealed the infant had spina bifida.

Bethan, 26, and husband Kieron were first given the option to terminate the pregnancy, before they learned about the operation. Until now the procedure has only been carried out in Belgium, but Bethan – who is due to give birth in April – is one of a handful of mums operated on by a team of Belgian and UK surgeons in London.

A routine 20-week scan showed Bethan, a nurse, her unborn baby’s head was not the right measurement. She was sent to Broomfield Hospital in Chelmsford, Essex, where the baby was diagnosed with spina bifida, a condition where a baby’s spinal cord does not fully development in the womb.

It can affect a child’s ability to walk. She said: “Our midwife made an appointment in London. Fast forward 48 hours, we were in London having scans on her head and spine. With that we were told our little girl had spina bifida. We were offered continuing pregnancy, ending pregnancy or a new option called fetal surgery – fixing her before she is born. We had to do it. We also had to meet some seriously strict criteria. Baby and I went through amniotic fluid tests, MRIs and relentless scans. We got approved and we planned for surgery. Our lives were such a rollercoaster for the next few weeks.”

The journey took the pair and their loved ones through fetal repair for spina bifida at about 24 weeks into Bethan’s pregnancy. Specialists from University College Hospital Great Ormond Street Hospital in London played a key role in the treatment that Bethan was only the fourth mother in the UK to receive.

She said: “I had the most recognised surgeons from around the world from University College London Hospital and Belgium looking after me.” The surgery involved removing the baby from Bethan’s womb and repairing the spinal cord so the baby has a greater chance of a normal life.

The baby was then placed back in Bethan’s womb for the remainder of the pregnancy. Thankfully, Bethan said the operation was a success. Bethan, from Burnham, said: “Sadly 80% of babies in England are terminated when their parents get told their baby has this condition. It’s not a death sentence. She has the same potential as every one of us.

“Yes, there are risks of things going wrong but please think more about spina bifida, it’s not what it used to be. I feel our baby kick me day in and day out, that’s never changed. “She’s extra special, she’s part of history and our daughter has shown just how much she deserves this life.”

A few things to note here. First of all, spina bifida is one of the justifications used by abortion activists and their political lapdogs to insist that late-term abortion is necessary in the first place. This beautiful story highlights the fact that there is always an alternative to barbarism, even though this couple was offered abortion several times. The little girl growing blissfully in Bethan’s womb is fortunate to have parents who were willing to fight for her, rather than accepting the insidious logic of those who believe the imperfect should be removed from the womb and thrown in the garbage.

This little girl’s surgery also highlights the insanity of the idea that our pre-born children derive their value from their location. Consider this: If that surgery had taken place in Canada, the little girl would have been protected by Canadian law while she was outside the womb and being operated on, and would have lost her human rights again when she was placed back inside her mother’s womb. The same doctor who so tenderly worked to make her whole again could have simply dismembered her and crushed her skull after putting her back in her mother’s womb. This is moral schizophrenia with lethal consequences.

The pro-choice ideology has long been left behind by medical advancements, and each new example of a child healed before birth is a glaring reminder of the savagery perpetrated on children just like them by the abortion industry every day across the West.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

The UK’s National Health Service will fund IVF for gay men who want children

By Jonathon Van Maren

The redefinition of marriage and our ever-multiplying sexual minorities continue to push us down the road to the complete commodification of children, where designer babies can be made-to-order and created regardless of the costs. According to the Daily Mail:

Two gay men have been offered IVF treatment by the NHS in what is believed to be the first case of its kind in Britain. The married couple hope to conceive their own baby using sperm from one of them and a surrogate mother who will bear the child.

You’ll notice that language is being twisted to suit the needs of the sexual revolutionaries here. Two men cannot “conceive their own baby.” They can have physicians create a baby in the lab using sperm from one of them and rent a woman to gestate the child, however. The fact that it is a tragedy for children to be raised without mothers is ignored. This is not about the children. This is about gay couples having the right to children if they decide they want one. More:

The NHS will fund the process of a donor egg being fertilised and the resultant embryo implanted into the surrogate mother. The NHS has until recently refused to give gay male couples such treatment because of a blanket ban on using surrogate mothers.

Again, you’ll notice that ethics can be suspended if it serves the purposes of the sexual revolutionaries. If you don’t want your baby, they can suction it out of your womb and toss it in the garbage in no time. If you want a baby but nature is holding you back, they can create one for you. And if the baby you created isn’t up to your standard, you can always have it aborted. An increasing number of children beginning their lives in petri dishes are ending them as they disintegrate into the suction aspirator of the abortionist.

The Scottish Government changed that policy two years ago so any couple, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, is eligible for free fertility treatment. That decision marked the biggest shift since 2013, when NHS guidance across Scotland, England and Wales made IVF available to same-sex couples and single women with fertility problems.

But because of the ban on surrogates, in practice same-sex couples meant only women. They had to demonstrate their infertility by showing they had failed to get pregnant after several attempts with artificial insemination.

The Scottish couple – who The Mail on Sunday has decided not to identify – revealed they were set to undergo NHS treatment when they posted an appeal online for an egg donor. One of the men wrote: ‘Our NHS clinic don’t have any anonymous egg donors, they advised us we would need to find a known egg donor. Any suggestions how to go about it?’

A friend replied: ‘Wow, did not know Scotland were offering this on the NHS!’ The man replied: ‘Yes, it’s a new service they offer in Scotland… we only found out [about it] when the GP referred us.’

Gay rights group Stonewall said: ‘We welcome any move that ensures lesbian, gay, bi and trans people have fair and equal access to fertility treatment.’

A Scottish Government spokesman confirmed fertility treatment was offered to men in same-sex relationships who had fertility problems, including same-sex male couples using a surrogate. But he emphasised the NHS would not find the surrogate.

While a single IVF policy applies to the whole of Scotland, the situation is more complicated in England, where each of around 200 clinical commissioning groups sets eligibility rules. It is thought there have been no cases of IVF treatment for a gay male couple being funded by the NHS in England.

In Wales, fertility treatment for gay couples is in theory available on the NHS, although its policy states that ‘surrogacy IVF will only be provided where no other fertility treatment options are available’ and strictly for ‘medical reasons’.

Josephine Quintavalle, founder of pro-life group Comment On Reproductive Ethics, said: ‘It’s a total distortion of what constitutes a genuine fertility problem… It does seem extraordinary the extremes that people will go to distort nature, to create a child.’

Even basic common sense is frowned upon as bigoted these days. If you say that children are best off with a mother and a father—an extraordinarily obvious observation that simply reflects how nature functions—you are a homophobe. I’d respond by saying there is something grossly misogynist about turning women into incubators and renting out their wombs for the sake of gay men who want to purchase children to complete their motherless families, and something grotesque about the selfishness necessary to claim that you have the right to children no matter what the cost.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

The top 10 ways Bill Nye is wrong about abortion

By Jonathon Van Maren

It’s a sad reflection on the scientific knowledge of our culture that the abortion crowd is falling all over themselves to promote a new video by Bill Nye the “Science Guy,” a former engineer, TV host, actor, and comedian, on abortion. He makes his first scientific mistake in the title of the videoCan We Stop Telling Women What To Do With Their Bodies? Apparently, the science guy is unaware that the human being developing in the womb has a completely separate body, but that doesn’t stop him from spending the next four minutes delivering a diatribe dripping with condescension. His contempt is only matched by his blatant ignorance of embryology and the science surrounding early human development.

Let’s break it down:

1.“Many, many, many, many more hundreds of eggs are fertilized than become humans.”

Right out of the gate, Mr. Nye is getting things wrong by using language that deliberately hides scientific truth. At fertilization, a new human being begins his or her existence. As Dr. Maureen Condic, Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine, writes:

From the moment of sperm-egg fusion [the beginning of fertilization], a human zygote acts as a complete whole with all the parts of the zygote interacting in an orchestrated fashion to generate the structures and relationships required for the zygote to continue developing towards its mature state… The zygote acts immediately and decisively to initiate a program of development that will, if uninterrupted by accident, disease, or external intervention, proceed seamlessly through formation of the definitive body, birth, childhood adolescence, maturity, and aging, ending with death. This coordinated behavior is the very hallmark of an organism.

This is not some little-known fact, this is accepted science. For example, Dr. Keith Moore and Dr. T. Persaud’s embryology textbook Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects, used in medical schools everywhere, states definitively that:

“Although human development is usually divided into prenatal (before birth) and postnatal (after birth) periods, development is a continuum that begins at fertilization (conception). Birth is a dramatic event during development, resulting in a change in environment. Development does not stop at birth; important developmental changes occur after birth—development of teeth and female breasts, for example [all emphases in original].”

So this Nye guy is definitely very out of step with what science tells us.

2.“But if you’re going to hold that as a standard, that is to say if you’re going to say when an egg is fertilized it’s therefore has the same rights as an individual, then whom are you going to sue? Whom are you going to imprison? Every woman who’s had a fertilized egg pass through her? Every guy who’s sperm has fertilized an egg and then it didn’t become a human? Have all these people failed you?”

This is tiresomely stupid, and I suspect intentionally so. Mr. Nye here is just defending his rather feeble ideology rather than any scientific position. The pro-life position is one that is very simple: Human beings have human rights. Human rights should begin when the human being begins. Science, as Mr. Nye may not be aware but the authentic scientific field certainly is, tells us when the life begins. So the pro-life position is simply that we should not be allowed to directly and intentionally kill that human being. Rather than try to address that position, Nye babbles on about us wanting to arrest women who have a miscarriage, a scenario that only exists in his fevered imagination. Besides the fact that no one is advocating for that, I would point out that there is an enormous difference between a human being dying of natural causes and direct action taken by humans to kill other humans. This should be obvious. Mr. Nye’s analogy is the equivalent of us asking if we would sue parents who lose a child to sudden infant death syndrome. This “argument” is like one of those sentences used in my university philosophy course to “spot that fallacy.”

3.“It’s just a reflection of a deep scientific lack of understanding and you literally or apparently literally don’t know what you’re talking about.”

I literally am not sure that he literally knows what he’s talking about at this point. His science is shaky, and his English isn’t the best, either. But I think it’s important to point out here that Mr. Nye has not actually made any coherent scientific point, and certainly not one that relates to abortion in any way. As illustrated above, the fields of embryology and biology, populated by many “science guys” who are not television hosts, comedians, or engineers, and yet still know an enormous amount about human beings in the womb, all state definitively that we know when a new, unique human being’s life begins.

4.“And so when it comes to women’s rights with respect to their reproduction, I think you should leave it to women.”

There’s a lot of Mr. Nye being wrong in one sentence. First of all, he’s insinuating that the whole abortion debate is about women controlling their own reproduction. As I’ve explained before, the abortion debate is actually about whether or not people have the right to kill an already existing human being. That is what is up for debate here—a fundamental question concerning the human rights of the youngest human beings, informed by the established science that Mr. Nye seems so unaware of. As such, this guy’s opinion on why he thinks you should have a specific set of genitals to comment on an issue of intrinsic importance to all humanity cannot be taken seriously by any thinking person.

5.“I’m not the first guy to observe this: You have a lot of men of European descent passing this extraordinary laws based on ignorance. Sorry you guys.”

Huh? Mr. Nye has obviously missed a whole number of things, from the makeup of the pro-life movement—from my first-hand experience, predominantly young women—to the diversity of the movement, to the fact that the laws that are being passed on abortion are based on fields of science that Mr. Nye is clearly completely unaware of. Considering the fact that it is impossible that Mr. Nye has made it thus far in his life of snootiness and condescension without having stumbled into a sonogram photo or ultrasound picture, I’m going to have to assume that he’s just flying by the seat of his pants on purpose. Even if Mr. Nye were right about the ethnic makeup of lawmakers passing pro-life bills, it wouldn’t say a single thing about human life or the ethics of violently ending a human life! This must be why he is referred to as the “science guy” rather than the “philosophy guy” or the “ethics guy.”

6.“I know it was written or your interpretation of a book written 5,000 years ago, 50 centuries ago, makes you think that when a man and a women have sexual intercourse they always have a baby. That’s wrong and so to pass laws based on that belief is inconsistent with nature.”

Sigh. So much to unpack here. Okay, so first of all, no one believes that every time people have sex that they make a baby. Literally no one. No one is trying to pass laws based on that, either. Mr. Nye just made that up on the spot. The Bible, which I assume he’s referencing, speaks of childlessness and the difficulty many people had trying to conceive children so much that he could not have possibly read the Bible, either. And while Mr. Nye is thrashing around on the ground with that enormous straw man, I would note that the embryology texts cited by pro-life advocates were written much more recently than 5,000 years ago. So, while I see that Mr. Nye is trying to sidestep having an honest scientific argument by attempting to falsely claim that our science comes from the Bible rather than from embryology, it’s a rather pathetic attempt at best.

7.“I mean it’s hard not to get frustrated with this everybody. And I know nobody likes abortion, okay. But you can’t tell somebody what to do. I mean she has rights over this, especially if she doesn’t like the guy that got her pregnant. She doesn’t want anything to do with your genes; get over it, especially if she were raped and all this. So it’s very frustrating on the outside, on the other side. We have so many more important things to be dealing with. We have so many more problems to squander resources on this argument based on bad science, on just lack of understanding.”

Talk about frustrating. I feel this guy’s pain. But a few things: One, a lot of people do like abortion. In fact, the abortion crowd both in Canada and the United States have been launching campaigns over the last five years trumpeting the idea that abortion is a good thing. Just this month, there was a “Shout Your Abortion” Campaign. So Mr. Nye might want to check what his comrades are up to before making unsubstantiated statements. And then there’s his argument about our “bad science” again, in spite of the fact that he still hasn’t put forward any of his own. One might even say that his view of the pro-life position is based on a “lack of understanding.”

8.“It’s very frustrating. You wouldn’t know how big a human egg was if it weren’t for microscopes, if it weren’t for scientists, medical researchers looking diligently. You wouldn’t know the process. You wouldn’t have that shot, the famous shot or shots where the sperm are bumping up against the egg. You wouldn’t have that without science. So then to claim that you know the next step when you obviously don’t is trouble. Let me do that again. Let me just pull back. At some point we have to respect the facts.”

I’m not sure what he’s going on about here, but it appears that he’s very irritated by the fact that pro-life advocates have used science to highlight what we knew all along: Human beings developing in the womb are, in fact human beings. (And they have human parents—who would have thought?) So the irony here is that pro-lifers are pointing to the facts, and demanding that they be respected. Mr. Nye is babbling on about European lawmakers and what a frustrated person he is.

9.“Recommending or insisting on abstinence has been completely ineffective. Just being objective here. Closing abortion clinics. Closing, not giving women access to birth control has not been an effective way to lead to healthier societies. I mean I think we all know that.”

It seems Mr. Nye’s rabbit hole has a sharp twist! Now we’re talking about abstinence, or more accurately put, attempting some measure of sexual responsibility. Of course, Mr. Nye is of the view that we can pull together to change our climate, but asking people to pause temporarily in the dropping of their pants is a feat of human ingenuity too enormous to attempt. Closing abortion clinics has been effective in reducing the abortion rate, which is why pro-lifers try to close them in the first place. And of course, Mr. Nye’s entire exercise in begging the question is really all about what your definition of a “healthy” society is. Pro-lifers hold the quaint view that a society in which you can dismember your pre-born children and donate their limbs, organs, and brains for human research is not a “healthy” society by any stretch of the imagination.

10.“And I understand that you have deeply held beliefs and it really is ultimately out of respect for people, in this case your perception of unborn people. I understand that. But I really encourage you to look at the facts. And I know people are now critical of the expression fact-based but what’s wrong with that? So I just really encourage you to not tell women what to do and not pursue these laws that really are in nobody’s best interest. Just really be objective about this. We have other problems to solve everybody. Come on. Come on. Let’s work together.”

First off, Mr. Nye doesn’t understand, as evidenced by the rest of this topsy-turvy monologue. Second of all, as illustrated above, the science is firmly on the side of the pro-life position. This is further evidenced by the fact that Mr. Nye doesn’t even try to firm up his position with any science. And his conclusion is just another tiresome attempt to infuse his ideology into what was supposed to be a scientific discussion: Don’t tell people they can’t kill pre-born human beings, and those human beings apparently have no “interests.”

This is what passes for a “science guy” these days?


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Biological male identifying as female sexually assaults ten-year-old girl in supermarket bathroom

By Jonathon Van Maren

This is the sort of story that should make every parent tremble with rage and remind all of us that there is a real cost to accepting the premises of the transgender movement—and that, as always, that cost will be largely paid by children. According to the UK’s Courier, which obediently and ludicrously refers to a violent male as a “she,” a biological man identifying as a woman named Katie Dolatowski has escaped with a slap on the wrist after sexually assaulting a ten-year-old girl in the women’s bathroom at a supermarket:

The woman – who cannot be named to protect the identity of her child – voiced fury that Katie Dolatowski had been freed to serve her sentence in the community. Dolatowski, 18, sexually assaulted the girl in the toilets of Morrisons, Kirkcaldy.

She grabbed the terrified youngster by the face, shoved her into the cubicle and ordered her to remove her trousers. But instead of being jailed at Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court, Dolatowski, who identifies as a woman but was believed by her victim’s family to be a man, was given community payback and tagging orders.

The mum felt “very, very let down” and said: “I don’t have any confidence whatsoever that he will not go out and do something equally as bad or worse.” The girl had been sledging when the assault occurred on March 4, last year, a month after Dolatowski had filmed a 12-year-old girl on the toilet in another supermarket in Dunfermline.

When she came out of her cubicle, Dolatowski shoved her back in and told her there was a man outside who would kill her mother. The brave schoolgirl, however, punched Dolatowski in the face, stomach and groin and ran to her father and siblings waiting just outside the toilets.

Her mother said the girl was hysterical after the attack and continued to suffer flashbacks. She said: “This is something that will remain with her for the rest of her life. He was stalking the toilets. He went there specifically to attack a child.

“We were so, so lucky that nothing worse happened. It was only her reaction that stopped that. It could have been a five-year-old child that wouldn’t have been able to fight back.”

The court heard Dolatowski had been in the social care system since the age of three and had mental health issues. But the mother said: “A lot of people have been in care but they do not go out and assault children. “I don’t care that he has issues or what his background is, he is a paedophile and he has been let out on a supervision order.”

Dolatowski admitted sexually assaulting the girl and following another girl into the toilets at Asda Halbeath, Dunfermline, on February 8, and trying to film her urinating by holding her mobile phone over the cubicle partition. Banning her from having contact with children, Sheriff James Williamson gave her what he described as a “stringent” community-based sentence, allowing her to be released from Polmont Young Offenders Institution to supported accommodation.

Dolatowski was considered to pose a “moderate risk” of reoffending but Sheriff Williamson said: “I have come to the conclusion that the public will be better protected by the imposition of a stringent community payback order.”

The simple fact is that when you remove all identifiable standards for who is actually a woman and instead say that men with beards and penises can not only identify as women, but gain access to women-only spaces by doing so, you place people in danger. It is insane to think that there are not those who will take advantage of the obliteration of our safety standards, just like the biological men who have decided to identify as women to get sent to female prisons (and rape women there) are doing, and just like this young man who managed to escape jail despite going after female children in the women’s bathroom twice. I’ll bet “Katie” is still allowed in women’s bathrooms, too—you’ll notice that the media and the courts obediently treated this biological male as a woman.

The outraged mother speaks for many of us. The fact that children would be put at risk for the sake of a doomed social experiment advocated by those who wish to do away with the foundations of our civilization is disgusting.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Hungary’s abortion rate plummets as new family policies are brought in: No income taxes for women with 4 kids

By Jonathon Van Maren

Sometime last year, I got a phone call from a reporter from the Huffington Post who was working on a piece that was obviously intended to be a hatchet job directed at the pro-life movement. She quizzed me intensely on the alt-right and abortion, and seemed genuinely surprised when I pointed out that the alt-right is extremely pro-abortion. She then demanded to know if I supported social programs specifically designed to disincentivize abortion. She genuinely didn’t seem to know what to say when I said that I did, and noted that I’d far rather pay taxes to give women the means to keep their children than to fund abortion here and overseas (which Canada does to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year, cash that could be used to help women with options other than abortion.) After a nearly hour-long conversation, the reporter told me she’d send me a copy of the piece she was working on once it was published. I never heard from her.

That is why the media genuinely doesn’t seem to know how to cover the pro-family policies of Viktor Orban in Hungary (although each article hastens to point out that Orban is on the outs with the EU and that he has been accused of being shady during elections.) Orban is essentially using social programs to incentivize marriage and children, and is doing so in response to a plummeting birthrate. From CNBC:

Hungary’s prime minister has announced a raft of measures aimed at boosting the country’s declining birth rate and reducing immigration. Giving his annual State of the Nation address Sunday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban announced a seven-point “Family Protection Action Plan” designed to promote marriage and families.

Measures announced included waivers on personal income tax for women raising at least four children for the rest of their lives and subsidies for large families to buy larger cars. The ‘action plan’ also extended a loan program to help families with at least two children to buy homes. Every woman under 40 will also be eligible for a preferential loan when she first gets married.

The government has also said it will spend more on Hungary’s heathcare system and will create 21,000 creche places. In addition, grandparents will be eligible to receive a childcare fee if they look after young children instead of the parents, Orban said.

“There are fewer and fewer children born in Europe. For the West, the answer (to that challenge) is immigration. For every missing child there should be one coming in and then the numbers will be fine,” Orban said, Reuters reported. “But we do not need numbers. We need Hungarian children,” he said, announcing the incentives program…

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban addresses the supporters after the announcement of the partial results of parliamentary election in Budapest, Hungary, April 8, 2018.

Orban is a well-known critic of immigration and Hungary’s government caused controversy in the European Union, of which Hungary is a member, when it (along with its eastern European neighbors) refused to allow asylum seekers to enter the country during the migration crisis in the continent in 2015…Like other conservative, nationalist governments in Europe, Hungary is worried about migration and its declining birth rate. Eurostat data from mid-2018, the latest available, shows that the birth rate is continuing to decline in the EU as a whole. In 2017, 5.1 million babies were born in the EU, 90,000 less than the year before. In the same year, 5.3 million deaths were registered.

While birth rates remain robust in Ireland, Sweden, the U.K. and France, the lowest birth rates were registered in Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain. Birth rates in Hungary are below the EU average – In Hungary the crude birth rate in 2017 was 9.7 per 1,000 residents, just below the EU average of 9.9 per 1,000 residents.

In 2017, 94,600 live births were registered in Hungary and 131,900 deaths were registered, equating to a population decline of just over 37,000 people, Eurostat data shows.

Orban’s policies have already contributed to a decline in the abortion rate, with LifeSite reporting in 2018 that numbers had dropped by more than a third compared to what they were in 2010—40,449 to 28,500. Divorces also declined, with 23,973 in 2010 compared to 18,600 in 2017 as well as a surge in marriages (35,520 in 2010 compared to 50,600 in 2017.) Interestingly, Orban’s policies prove what Tucker Carlson has been saying to great controversy in the US for a couple of years now: Government’s economic policies play an enormous role in incentivizing or disincentivizing family, and as such social conservatives should consider the role of markets and the government in the breakdown of the family.

A final point: In his seminal book The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, British journalist Douglas Murray makes the point that many Europeans that want children are not having children, and that the elites have made absolutely no attempt to find out the reasons that people are not having kids as well as ways of incentivizing them to do so. Why, Murray asked, are the elites so eager to solve plummeting birthrates in Britain by importing other populations? Viktor Orban is essentially answering that question, and is using the government programs so beloved by liberals to strengthen the family—which is precisely why the elites are so uncomfortable with Orban’s policies, but do not seem to know quite what to say about them.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

This transgender mass delusion will end when enough people simply refuse to play along

By Jonathon Van Maren

We are now collectively beginning to see what takes place when a society is in the grip of a mass delusion. This is not the first time in history that mass delusion has swept through a civilization, but it is undoubtedly the severest case. Elderly women and young mothers are being bullied by the police for insisting that biological men are men. New genders — and I cannot find a single person who can actually name more than a half-dozen of the apparently 50-plus that now exist — multiply almost weekly. Women can have penises. Men can get pregnant. Children should be taken at their word if they are confused about their gender.

Some of the manifestations of what we will one day see as a cultural insanity would be almost funny if totalitarian transgender activists didn’t insist that those of us who chuckle painfully at their hysterics be immediately prosecuted. Like the example of Jessica Samson, a biological man identifying as a woman who made the news in January because he is “regularly reduced to tears” because the UK’s National Health Service is having trouble scheduling him for laser hair removal surgery. (The news articles on this tragedy, of course, all obediently refer to Samson as a “she.”) This surgery, says Samson, is essential, and the inability of the healthcare system to get him this purely cosmetic treatment is “mucking around with people’s lives.”

The 39-year-old Samson’s major complaint is that he has to shave twice a day, which is difficult because he identifies as a woman. “It is difficult to explain why this is a big issue to anyone who hasn’t had trans-thoughts,” he noted. “But I’ve been on hormones long enough for my body to start changing. But I still grow a beard every day and I have to shave twice a day to maintain some sort of normal lifestyle.” Did you catch that? Samson has to shave twice a day because otherwise his face will betray the truth about his sex — that he is a man. That is what he unironically refers to as “some sort of normal lifestyle.”

The National Health Service has come under massive strain attempting to catch up with the range of transgender services that are suddenly being demanded, especially over the past several years. Last week, the Daily Mirror reported that a leading British surgeon is now saying that “transgender women” — biological males — are “entitled” to womb transplants so that they can carry a child. Recently in Brazil, doctors announced the arrival of the first baby that was born using a “donor womb,” which had been transplanted from a deceased donor to another woman. Now, Christopher Inglefield of the London Transgender Clinic says such transplants could quite easily be done for a biological male identifying as female as well.

More than that, Inglefield and several other experts are stating that free wombs for transgender people should be an inalienable right. “(O)nce the medical community accepts this as a treatment for cis-women with uterine infertility, such as congenital absence of a womb, then it would be illegal to deny a trans-female who has completed her transition,” Inglefield stated. “There are clearly anatomical boundaries when it comes to trans women, but these are problems that I believe can be surmounted and the transplant into a trans-female is essentially identical to that of a cis-female.” Further, the Mirror reported, “The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority confirm there are no regulations in place to prevent a trans woman who has received a uterus transplant from having IVF treatment.”

A handful of trans advocates in the medical field, by the way, have been advocating for free wombs for transgender people (funded by you, the taxpayer!) for a couple of years now. Human rights in 2019 are whatever transgender people demand to bend biological reality to their will and transform children into a commodity that people can demand as a right. People often ask me when this delusion will stop pushing further, but it has become increasingly clear that this train has no brakes, it is picking up speed, and it is heading directly toward a sharp curve. We are being told that we must disbelieve our own eyes and suspend common sense in favor of a new ideology that has not yet finished evolving.

As I’ve noted before, one of the interesting things about the transgender delusion is that it is an ideology being imposed from the top-down. Go onto any construction site and start asking the workers there if men can get pregnant, or if women can have penises. Even better, try asking some farmers at a livestock auction whether men can have vaginas or whether a man identifying as a woman should be able to demand a free womb, funded by the taxpayer. You will search long and hard before you can find anyone who actually believes this stuff. Some of them may actually commit the heresy of laughing out loud.

Right now, the majority of people in our society have not yet bought into this nonsense. Trans activists will claim that polls indicate support for their ideology, but as one political analyst once put it, polls are commissioned to shape public opinion, not to measure it. They ask people questions like, “Should transgender people be treated with respect and dignity?” which is something I and everyone else I know would agree with whole-heartedly. They then use the resulting numbers to claim that their ideology is popular. But if they were to ask if pre-teen children should be put on hormone blockers, or whether a man can carry a child, or whether a biological male should be allowed in the girls’ showers at school — that would produce an entirely different series of answers altogether.


Read more

Mom arrested and locked up for 7 hours for disagreeing with trans activist on Twitter

By Jonathon Van Maren

Last month, a docker in Northern England was informed by the police in Humberside that he would be the subject of a formal investigation for tweeting out a limerick about transgender people. Several weeks after that, the police in Suffolk contacted a 74-year-old woman, and an officer asked her to stop tweeting comments critical of transgender ideology, and to perhaps consider deleting some of her previous social media posts. And now, the Daily Mailreported over the weekend, it turns out that a 38-year-old mother was arrested in front of her children and locked up in a cell at the police station by the Hertfordshire Police back in December for having an argument with a transgender activist on Twitter.

Kate Scottow’s story is truly chilling. Three police officers showed up at her home and detained her, carting her off to the station and then interrogating her for having an argument with a transgender activist about “deadnaming,” and for referring to a biological man who identifies as a woman as a man. For this supposed offence, Scottow was arrested, photographed, had her DNA and fingerprints taken, and was locked up for seven hours on December 1 of last year. The arrest took place in front of her ten-year-old autistic daughter and 20-month-old son, who is still breastfed. She is still apparently under investigation, and the police have not returned her cell phone or her laptop, which she needs for her ongoing studies pursuing a Masters’ degree in forensic psychology.

Unbelievably, the Hertfordshire Police has not only confirmed to the media that the arrest took place, but has defended their actions, stating that they “take all reports of malicious communication seriously.” The communications the cops are referring to are an argument between Stephanie Hayden, a “transgender woman” and Scottow, who objected to the idea that people could simply self-identify as another gender. Hayden, who is a biological male, claimed that being referred to as a male was “defamatory,” and reported Scottow to the cops. Scottow has been served with a court order that bans her from referring to Hayden as a male. There is no such thing as free speech in England. Transgender activists are using the cops as their own personal militia.

Scottow, of course, denied that she had harassed or defamed Hayden in any way, and pointed that it is a “genuine and reasonable belief” to point out that human beings “cannot practically speaking change sex.” Despite the fact that this is true, Deputy Judge Jason Coppel banned her from referring to Hayden’s “former male identity.” To sum up: A young mother in England was arrested in her home and in front of her children by three police officers and then “detained for seven hours in a cell with no sanitary products,” which she told them she needed, all for highlighting scientific truths that were accepted even by gay rights activists as recently as a decade ago. It is breathtaking to consider how quickly the state has moved to enforce an ideology that is quite literally still being worked out and revised as we speak by trans activists.

The Daily Mail noted that Scottow’s arrest is “the latest where police have been accused of being heavy-handed in dealing with people who go online to debate gender issues” and highlighted the recent instance of sitcom writer Graham Linehan being given a “verbal harassment warning” by the West Yorkshire Police for also “misgendering” and “deadnaming” Hayden. But even that comment assumes that there is an even-handed way for the police to use the force of the law to bully private citizens into getting into line with the latest insanities of transgender activists. Trans activists insisted that men like Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, who warned that trans activists were totalitarian and wanted to control speech, were transphobic liars. But the fact that British cops are entering the homes of young mothers and contacting old ladies to warn them that the state does not approve of their opinions should send a shiver up every spine.


Read more

Social justice warriors who ignore abortion are a joke

By Jonathon Van Maren

As my friend Sam Sey noted recently, the easiest way to tell that the so-called social justice movement is more concerned about trendiness than justice is the fact that they do not seem to care at all about abortion, a common brutality against the youngest and weakest members of our society. In fact, they are generally enthusiastic about partnering with those who champion abortion as an essential right, claiming that common ground is worth far more than the babies they have buried there alongside the hatchet. Progressive evangelical Rachel Held Evans, for example, who has successfully progressed her way out of Christianity entirely, responded to the outrage at Democratic politicians championing late-term abortion legislation by noting that if she were pregnant with a non-viable son or daughter, she might consider abortion, too. She’s already dying, so might as well kill her appears to be compelling logic to a disturbing number of people.

Social justice warriors of the pseudo-Christian variety, who usually enjoy loudly heaving themselves onto any passing bandwagon, have fallen as silent as a butchered baby with the non-stop news stories detailing the willingness of Democrats to legalize abortion right up until birth. In fact, more than a few have fallen back on tut-tutting that it isn’t infanticide, per se, because the infant is still in the uterus, so conservatives should be careful about spreading fake news, which they consider to be a more important thing to fight than banning stabbing small children in the skull to ensure a dead delivery. The abortion cabal and their Democratic lackies, on the other hand, are doing damage control, hunting about for a euphemism that will disguise the atrocities they have been referring to as “healthcare.” They have decided on “later abortion” as an alternative to “late-term abortion,” apparently assuming that their replacement is less evocative of the sort of baby-crushing involved.

There are other stupid arguments being utilized to defend the indefensible practice of preying on the defenseless, as well. The thing is, the vampiric abortion activists say smoothly, hardly any late-term abortions happen, anyway. Interestingly, this defense concedes the point that there is something repulsive about late-term abortion to begin with, but does not explain why the rarity of an atrocity is somehow a justification for it. Democrat U.S. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington objected to Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would provide strict protections for babies born alive after attempted abortions, on the grounds that such protections already existed. She did not explain, before storming off the Senate floor, why she and her colleagues are so opposed to protections that apparently already exist.

It is one thing to say that late-term abortion is necessary. That already is a lie — no abortion is necessary, and every single abortion ends the life of a precious and unrepeatable human being. The arms being suctioned from the tiny body of a baby in the first trimester are smaller and more delicate, and the corpse of a child at that age collapses far more easily, but there is no moral difference between killing babies of different sizes. But the stone-faced Democratic women sitting as silent as an abortionist’s conscience while President Donald Trump condemned abortion and infanticide during the State of the Union last week was quite something to behold. They reminded me of something Peter Kreeft once wisely observed: Feminists are feminine like cannibals are chefs. Chuck Schumer’s leering grin at Trump’s call for protections for babies in the womb was sickening enough. The carnivorous cabal of women, some of whom are mothers and have felt babies kick within them, was tragic in a particularly ugly way. They, of all people, should know better.

On the other hand, it was truly heartening to hear the President of the United States describe the evil of abortion in clear language and demand that legislators step up and pass more protections for the beautiful children created in the image of Almighty God. It was also wonderful to hear the roar of cheers and applause that greeted his words, because it was a reminder that in this epic battle between good and evil, between those who support babies being suctioned, poisoned, and dismembered from their earliest stages until just before birth and those who see children as America’s most precious heritage, there are many men and women who rejected the empty and ugly lies of those who call for social justice while applauding infanticide. For too long, so-called social justice warriors and progressive politicians have twisted language in order to claim that they are the champions of compassion and of justice, and these past few weeks have exposed them for who they are.


Read more

The police contacted a 74-year-old woman and asked her to delete tweets critical of transgenderism

By Jonathon Van Maren

Remember that incident a couple of weeks ago, when the police contacted a docker from Humberside about his decision to tweet a limerick highlighting the ludicrousness of transgender ideology? Well, it turns out that the British cops are planning to make a habit of this sort of thing. From the Spectator:

Margaret Nelson is a 74-year-old woman who lives in a village in Suffolk. On Monday morning she was woken by a telephone call. It was an officer from Suffolk police. The officer wanted to speak to Mrs Nelson about her Twitter account and her blog.

Mrs Nelson, a former humanist celebrant and one-time local newspaper journalist, enjoys tweeting and writing about a number of issues, including the legal and social distinctions between sex and gender.

Among the statements she made on Twitter last month and which apparently concerned that police officer: ‘Gender is BS. Pass it on’.


‘Gender’s fashionable nonsense. Sex is real. I’ve no reason to feel ashamed of stating the truth. The bloody annoying ones are those who use words like ‘cis’ or ‘terf’ and other BS, and relegate biological women to a ‘subset’. Sorry you believe the mythology.’

The blog, meanwhile, is mainly about death and funeral rituals: Mrs Nelson has officiated at many funerals. One of her blog posts, on 19 January 2018, challenges the statement that ‘transwomen are women’ on the grounds that a person’s proclaimed gender does not change their biological sex.

Mrs Nelson wrote:

‘If a transgender person’s body was dissected, either for medical education or a post-mortem examination, his or her sex would also be obvious to a student or pathologist. Not the sex that he or she chose to present as, but his or her natal sex; the sex that he or she was born with. Even when a body has been buried for a very long time, so that there is no soft tissue left, only bone, it is still possible to identify the sex. DNA and characteristics such as the shape of the pelvis will be clear proof of the sex of the corpse.’

Mrs Nelson told me this about the call from the police:

‘The officer said she wanted to talk to me about some of the things I’d written on Twitter and my blog. She said that some of the things that I’d written could have upset or offended transgender people. So could I please stop writing things like that and perhaps I could remove those posts and tweets?’

‘I asked the officer if she agreed that free speech was important. She said it was. I said that in that case, she’d understand that I wouldn’t be removing the posts or stopping saying the things I think. She accepted that and that was the end of the conversation.’

Mrs Nelson says the that officer made no suggestion that anything she had done was illegal. She says the officer gave no reason for the call.

She later asked the Suffolk force for an explanation, and received, via Twitter, this explanation:

 ‘Hi Margaret, we had a number of people contact us on social media about the comments made online. A follow-up call was made for no other reason than to raise awareness of the complaints. Kind regards, Web Team.’

Shortly after this piece was published, Suffolk Police sent me a statement effectively admitting that they made a mistake by calling Mrs Nelson. A Suffolk Constabulary spokesman said:

“We accept we made a misjudgement in following up a complaint regarding the blog. As a result of this we will be reviewing our procedures for dealing with such matters. We are sorry for any distress we may have caused in the way this issue was dealt with, and have been in contact with the woman who wrote the blog to apologise.”

It’s nice that the cops apologized, but how in the world did they think that harassing private citizens for expressing their opinions was a good idea? What possible justification did they think they had for letting an elderly woman know that her opinions on the transgender ideology—which, incidentally, are far more accurate than the dangerous drivel being pumped out by the mainstream media and their ideological puppet masters—were unwelcome? Think about it for a moment: Police officers actually contacted a member of public and asked her to stop tweeting her thoughts and suggested—a word that seems suddenly sinister in this context—that she perhaps might want to remove them.

Trans activists have managed to mainstream their movement in a mere half-decade, and now it appears that even law enforcement has chosen a side. And not only have they chosen a side, but they have even decided to police speech and let people know when their social media activity has attracted the attention of the cops. If that isn’t a creepy sign of things to come, I don’t know what is.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Trans activists are going to use the latest suicide data to go after Christian schools

By Jonathon Van Maren

Every poll for five years has been showing that the number of teens (and even children) identifying as “transgender” is climbing astronomically, but this latest number – reported by the Washington Post yesterday – is still staggering when you consider the implications:

Transgender teens — those whose gender identity does not align with their biological sex at birth — now represent almost 2 percent of U.S. high school students, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That conclusion stems from the agency’s analysis of data based on a nationally representative sample of 131,901 public school students in grades nine through 12, who were asked a variety of questions about gender identity and personal health and safety issues.

Even the researchers at the CDC were obviously taken aback by their findings, and their resulting recommendations are concerning. Without delving into why this is the case, the CDC reports that “transgender youth,” a broad and hard-to-define category when you factor in the amount of current confusion surrounding gender and sexuality, face far more physical danger and bullying than their peers, and that this reality has understandably devastating consequences. The CDC also vaguely reports that transgender youth feel more “unsafe.”

Then comes the bombshell: Nearly 35 percent report having tried to commit suicide in the past 12 months, the CDC reports. In response to this, the authors of the report “noted that steps should be taken to create safe learning environments and provide access to competent mental-health care and that ‘continued research into the health of transgender youths and development of effective intervention strategies are warranted.’”

When teens are trying to kill themselves, it is quite obviously true that more research is warranted. I fear, however, that any such research will be rigorously policed and constrained by the ideology currently being imposed on our culture by radical trans activists. Trans activists are not interested in the truth, as was so clearly highlighted by their vicious attacks on Dr. Lisa Littman and journalist Jesse Singal for publishing research and reports that questioned their cruel obsession with affirming the confusion of children – and Littman and Singal are not even opposed to transgender ideology on principle.

It is not surprising that children and teens struggling with gender confusion might be afflicted with more mental health struggles than children and teens who are comfortable in their bodies. There are obviously many factors that contribute to gender confusion, and anyone with the best interests of these young people in mind would support research into how this confusion can be reduced, how children can be made more comfortable in their bodies, and how their mental health issues can be adequately addressed. But trans activists have already proven that any research that interferes with their ideological agenda will be smeared as “bigotry” with the help of the obedient media, and the unfortunate academics and psychiatrists who dared to utter such heresies will be targeted.

If you think that is an exaggeration, I would encourage anyone who is interested in getting a grasp of how the transgender movement has swept our culture to pick up a copy of Ryan T. Anderson’s phenomenal and sobering 2018 book When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment. In fact, Anderson points out that sex change surgeries, which are now being referred to in the mainstream press as “sex confirmation surgeries,” have virtually no impact whatsoever on suicide rates despite the fact that these surgeries are presented as life-saving healthcare by trans activists. This evidence, of course, is either dismissed, ignored, or condemned.

In the coming months, we will see trans activists use the CDC report to come after Christian schools. Over the past several weeks, we have seen progressives turn their attention to Christian institutions of learning, which threaten their cultural hegemony and iron grip on the minds of young people. Karen Pence was condemned for teaching at a school which holds to the Christian view of sexuality, and the New York Times began trawling for dirt on Christian schools under the guise of a story on the #ExposeChristianSchools hashtag. This report will now be used to claim that a reasonable, evidence-based approach to gender confusion is causing trans suicides, and that as such, Christian schools – and Christians themselves – pose a danger to “trans” youth.


Read more

Scottish feminists warn that trans activists will wipe out sex-based legislative protections

By Jonathon Van Maren

Scottish feminists are under fire from trans activist for pointing out the obvious: If gender is fluid and you can change your sex simply by saying so, protections based on sex are rendered utterly meaningless. From The Guardian:

The Scottish government risks sleepwalking towards a significant erosion of women’s rights, according to a group of feminist activists and academics that held its first public meeting in Edinburgh on Thursday evening to discuss proposed changes to transgender legislation.

The group, For Women Scotland, claims that it has support from MSPs across the political spectrum who share their concern that the SNP government is failing to consider adequately the implications for the rights of women and girls of proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) 2004, such as allowing individuals to change their legal sex by means of self-declaration.

When the first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, originally pledged to radically reform gender recognition law for trans people in 2016, she said that the move would be as important in her next parliamentary term as equal marriage was to the last. But the proposals were not included in last autumn’s programme for government, which has been taken as an indication of the concern within the SNP.

The intersectional feminist activists Sisters Uncut Edinburgh organised a protest against the meeting, stating: “While For Women Scot do a sterling job of making transphobia look respectable, their actions and statements do real damage to Scotland’s trans and non-binary community.”

Among the 40-strong protest, Red, a charity worker, said: “Groups like this are selling a very weighted narrative, and obscuring the facts. For example, they say that changes to the GRA will allow trans women into women’s spaces, when actually they were allowed before. They are trying to make it seem an immediate and sudden threat.”

Another protester, Cathy, said: “As a trans woman, I feel this whole event is designed to make transphobia appear respectable, and it’s very disingenuous. If a debate is what these people want, then there needs to be mutual respect.”

It must be noted here, briefly, that a “trans woman” is a biological male. A biological male protesting feminists for refusing to adequately recognize his womanhood and that he is just as female as they are has got to qualify as pretty ballsy gaslighting. More:

Speaking to a largely female audience of about 150 within the meeting venue, Susan Smith, of For Women Scotland, said: “We are concerned that the Scottish government is sleepwalking towards a significant erosion of women’s rights, both in terms of proposals to reform the GRA to allow self-identification and the failure to prevent other organisations running ahead of the law and adopting policies which are in breach of the Equality Act.

“We’re not here to quibble about toilets and we’re not here to create trouble for those who have battled crippling gender dysphoria. We welcome extra provisions for other vulnerable groups that don’t involve dismantling existing rights. If we cannot see sex, then we cannot see sexism, we cannot define sexuality, and it is the most vulnerable women who will suffer from this.”

Thursday’s meeting marked the most public expression in Scotland of increasingly vocal concerns around transgender issues.

The meeting also discussed concerns about guidelines for schools, contained in a document, Supporting Transgender Young People, and written in partnership with LGBT Youth Scotland and Scottish Trans Alliance, which say that schoolchildren should be able to compete in the sports events and use changing rooms and toilets for the gender they identify with.

Another feminist campaign group, Women and Girls in Scotland, published their own children’s rights impact analysis earlier this week. It argues that the guidelines undermine 10 articles of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child.

On Tuesday, a group of 25 academics, activists and former MSPs signed an open letter calling on Sturgeon to commit to carrying out a full equality impact assessment of the proposed reforms to the GRA. It noted: “Many individuals responding to the consultation raised concerns about how the proposals could affect the practical operation of the single-sex protections under the Equality Act 2010.”

Last month, the Guardian reported on concerns amongst data experts that proposed changes to the question about sex, to be asked in Scotland’s next census, risk undermining the reliability of the survey and set a difficult precedent for equalities protection.

If trans activists succeed in wiping out our current cultural understanding of sex and gender, they will also destroy nearly all of the legislative gains of the feminist movement. A handful of second-wave feminists understand this, but they are a pretty beleaguered group. There is something strange about watching the Left eat its own. There might be a bit more schadenfreude if you weren’t aware that you are probably next.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Canada’s totalitarian abortion activists, Spain’s abortion rate, and Governor Ralph Northam’s implosion

By Jonathon Van Maren

Here’s the latest roundup of pro-life news from around the world.

In Canada, the totalitarian instincts of radical abortion supporters continue to manifest themselves. In this latest instance of this, a city councillor in Canada’s capital city has decided at the first city council meeting of 2019 to oppose the selection of a pro-life man to Ottawa’s transit commission—specifically because that man was opposed to abortion. Councillor Shawn Menard did not explain what abortion had to do with transit. Seven virtue-signalling local politicians promptly joined Menard in his strange witch-hunt, asking that the transit selection committee reconsider the nominee’s “viability” as a member of the commission based on his irrelevant views on abortion while remaining silent on their view of the “viability” of the babies it is legal to abort in Canada until birth. Fortunately, less hysterical heads prevailed in this instance and the remaining 16 councillors voted against Menard and the erstwhile social justice warriors.

According to the Euro Weekly News, there’s bad news out of Spain:

The number of abortion carried out in Spain has risen for the first time in five years.

An official report showed 4,000 more pregnancies were terminated in 2017 than the year before, resulting in 10.5 abortion per 1,000 women.

The 2017 figure is still lower than the 2010 number of 11.71 terminations per 1,000 women.  That was the same year Spain’s government relaxed abortion laws, legalising them for girls as young as 16 with parental consent.  Spain now has the third highest number of abortions in Europe, after France and the United Kingdom.

The pro-life Family Policy Institute of Spain claims official statistics show more than 2 million abortions were carried out in Spain before 2015.

From C-FAM comes the news that the abortion industry is steadily abandoning its long-standing claim that only women should have a say when it comes to abortion—because we’ve recently discovered that men can get pregnant too, apparently:

The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued medical guidance on abortion intended to reflect the latest scientific evidence in the field. However, its most apparent change was cultural rather than medical. This new report began by insisting it is not only females who can become pregnant, but so can women who think they are men, that is, “those with varying gender identities.”

The guidance further stated that abortion must be provided in a manner promoting health and human rights “including sex and gender equality,” implying a sharp distinction between the two.

In a seeming contradiction, the guidance introduction quotes UN language that “couples and individuals” have the right to decide the spacing and timing of children, however in the following 72 pages, couples are not mentioned even one more time. What’s more, the mother is referred to as the “pregnant individual.”

In short, this means that pro-life men will be told that they need to shut up, and women who are posing as men will be affirmed as men and assured that they, too, can have all the abortions they want. Fortunately, the drive to continue restricting abortion on the state level in the U.S. is continuing apace in 2019. The National Post reports from Iowa:

More than half of the Republican-dominated Iowa Senate has quickly signed on to a constitutional amendment aimed at weakening the state court system’s power to review abortion restrictions, just days after an Iowa judge overturned what would have been the nation’s broadest such limit.

The amendment would expressly state that the Iowa Constitution “does not secure or protect a right to abortion.” Spurred by last week’s legal defeat of a measure seeking to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, it’s a brash attempt at nullifying Iowa Supreme Court precedent declaring that women have a fundamental right to control their own bodies.

Several other conservative states have deployed the tactic of a constitutional amendment, which in Iowa would have to twice clear both chambers of the Legislature before going to voters for ratification.

Finally, calls for the resignation of Virginia Governor Ralph Northam continue. Less than a day after he defended late-term abortion and possibly infanticide during a radio interview in response to a bill put forward by Kathy Tran that would permit abortion until birth, it was discovered that his medical school yearbook page featured a photo with someone in a Klan hood next to a man in blackface. After initially apologizing for the photo (but refusing to reveal which one was him), Northam backtracked the following day and claimed that he wasn’t in the photo, and that he knew this because he remembered a different incident in which he had donned blackface to pose as Michael Jackson so “vividly.”

It seems unlikely that Northam’s career will survive this firestorm as the same Democrats who were more than willing to defend him when he was championing the termination of full-term babies have decided that a racist yearbook photo means that the public “needs time to heal.”


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more