Jordan Peterson appears of late to be a shadow of the man he once was, specifically in relation to the masculine strongman who took on C16 in Canada during the late 2010s. Peterson is in an odd position as a conservative figure, yet blatantly a radical subjectivist, leading him into the peculiar stance of being a postmodern anti-postmodernist. We discuss his bouts of crying on TV, how Peterson is an odd fit with the Daily Wire, the tendency of claiming feminist talking points after we've been proved right, Peterson’s Jungian conception of god, and how his naive advice for women was reality tested by his daughter Mikhaila, yielding very poor results.

We discuss the Darlington nurses' fight to secure a female-only changing room at work and how their hospital is refusing to implement it, despite the Supreme Court victory and supportive intervention by Minister for Health, Wes Streeting. Plus, the suffragettes, gay male culture, the ‘transman’ on I Kissed a Boy, how people are more likely to befriend those similar to them, why Education and Health sectors are manager top heavy, the atmosphere of dishonesty in intensely bureaucratic working environments, the quagmire that is online lesbian dating, the class context that supports 'good girlism' in Britain, middle-class people’s adultery hobbyism, and Jen proposes GC enforcement officers.

'Political Lesbianism' shares some characteristics with Butlerian Queer Theory, specifically: divorcing biological sex from sexual orientation, performativity, and asexuality and 'fluidity'. We discuss those and in particular 'political lesbians' criticism of butch / femme relationships that rely on the logic of transgenderism. 

We put forward that, would we consider a group of heterosexual men who decide not to be with women, who consider that women oppress them, deciding to live together as friends, even if it includes some same-sex dalliances, would we consider them gay men? Or straight incel male separatists?

We also discuss how 'political lesbianism' scores on the BITE Model of Authoritarian Control that is used to rate 'high demand' groups (cults). 

Plus, 'political lesbianism' as a form of entryism in radical feminism and into lesbian groups / lesbians lives, how when you have access to people’s sexuality you have access to shame, and the 'political lesbian' concept of ‘compsex’ (compulsory sex) that renders lesbians who want to have sex with women as demonic sexual predators.

'Political lesbianism' can be traced back to heterosexual feminists of the 1960s second-wave in the United States. We discus its origin, the way 'political lesbians' change the definition of lesbian to fit themselves, the parallels with transgenderism, the nonsense concept of 'compulsory heterosexuality', denial of sexual orientation, and why due to its unpopularity a raft of euphemisms (such as 'lesbian feminist') are used instead of the term 'political lesbian' to disguise its proponents. Plus, spinsters, lifestylism as a turn away from politics, and Lesbian Nation author Jill Johnston sneaking out of women's communes for nighttime liaisons with men.  

Since the UK Supreme Court ruling clarifying the definition of woman in the Equality Act, trans activists have decided 'transmen' now matter and are using this tiny cohort of women to claim sex-based public toilet arrangements cannot work due to them as a 'gotcha' against the ruling. We discuss the features of the 'gotcha' and how each one fails. We also discuss the superficiality of transgenderism, how photos or TikTok’s don’t mean someone 'passes' in real life, Gendered Intelligence’s lies to 'transmen', the trans to detrans to trans attention-grift arc, and transgenderism’s fundamental relation to the Freudian / Lacanian concept of castration. Plus, we call for prosecutions for GBH and conspiracy to commit child abuse, how ‘bottom surgery’ for ‘transmen’ is the Western version of FGM, and how the gay third sector sold out gay people yet we're somehow meant to pretend we're a community.

Yesterday, For Women Scotland won a momentous victory at the UK's Supreme Court, where it was clarified that 'sex' within the Equality Act refers to biological sex. We discuss why men are so psychosexually unhinged about the outcome, as seen by the dismay and disbelief at a victory secured by middle-aged women, their subsequent crashing out online, and the fermenting of conspiracy theories relating the Gender Critical movement to the American evangelical rightwing because they cannot believe middle-aged women can win political vindications. How the court victory is retrospective justice for trans widows and every woman forced to call her perpetrator 'she' in court. And how all the man-crying about this win shows how transgenderism was almost entirely about reversing the gains of second-wave feminism. Plus, middle-aged women's unparraelled organising skills, JK Rowling as a benefactor for women’s rights, and how GC women will go down in history as political dissidents who won.

We discuss the new criminal and civil accusations levelled at former comedian Russell Brand, and social media influencer and pimp, Andrew Tate. Themes include: how globalisation means rapists can avoid state accountability, Brand’s artful dodger act turned Messiah-like guru, how camp is a performance designed to disarm, why women with financial independence are hated, and whether we think Tate and Brand will get away with their crimes.

State plans for online censorship are a form of DARVO. The same liberals who promoted transgenderism, and have not given two hoots about pornography, are now telling us they care about online misogyny. The BBC as the state's mouthpiece has harboured more child abusers than the average prison wing, but we are to believe these people want what's best for children and young people on the internet? The idea the MSM, police, and government will wield censorious powers in a benign and benevolent way is incredibly unlikely. We discuss the crisis in the MSM and Labour government as they increasingly lose their once prized monopoly over mainstream narratives and their attempt to re-establish the censorship they had before Elon bought Twitter.

What sort of online censorship would we want? Why is the focus of the impact of online misogyny mainly about boys? Plus, the matronising PMCs inability to accept the vibe shift post-Trump, Sussex university’s £580k fine for not allowing free and open discussion of transgenderism, Surrey Pride founder’s sex offences against children, progressives view of history leading to euthanasia, the emptiness of Starmerism, and Hannah calls for Kim Leadbetter to be tried at The Hague. 

We review heralded new Netflix show Adolescence and give our criticisms about its depiction of the cause of male violence against women being, primarily, that boys aren’t loved and supported enough by men. Referencing Victoria Smith’s book ‘Unkind’, we reflect on the myth that violent men are misunderstood men who have not received enough kindness. 

Why was it such a sympathetic portrayal of a murderous boy? And where are the equivalents for crimes committed overwhelmingly by women, such as Munchausen syndrome by proxy? Why promote the myth that violent men are under loved and under appreciated? Also, the idea male violence against women is a problem of a lack of bonding between men is an odd one, when male bonding and their fraternity is the very basis of patriarchal rule over women that produces MVAW in the first place. 

Plus, the internet as a ‘thief in the night’, fathers general lack of involvement in child rearing, the role of families modelling behaviours to children that are carried on into romantic dynamics later on, the responsibility of mothers to discipline sons, the impact of porn consumption at a young age, our hyper-sexual culture brought about by liberals, and the obvious need to ban young children off social media platforms.

Sections of the UK radical-liberal Left are doing somewhat of a u-turn on woke identity politics. Why now? We discuss the total unwillingness of the Left to acknowledge feminist arguments, woke scolds unwavering loyalty to pretending men are women, and the continued ham-fisted burial of the UK Left by their own hand (with some GC exceptions). We ask how anyone interested in politics could have been willing to promote mind-numbing woke discourse for so long? Why did it take such a scale of defeat to realise transgenderism was not going to be a winning ticket to unite the working-class? Especially after so many gender critical leftists warned them for years? What will happen to the radlib Left when Reform win the General Election in 2029? Plus, Novara Media’s opposition to the Cass Review, Channel 4’s buried BLM footage, Bernie Sanders’ former anti-mass immigration stance, the Left's problem with presuming themselves superior, sunk cost fallacies, and The Democratic Party in disarray.