A conference at Portland State University

THE Revolution is so bewilderingly fast-paced it is impossible at times to tell whether you are encountering fact or fiction. Here’s a late-breaking bulletin, which a reader says is true. At Portland State University, a conference intended to be a “comparative critical dialogue” between revolutionaries of various stripes reportedly turned ugly Sunday when two transgender males attacked feminists. The men said they believe in traditional sex roles. According to a website called GenderTrender:

The women were attacked in a coordinated assault as they sat at a table which sold feminist books and literature. The men destroyed the books and marked up the table display with permanent markers. One of the women was also marked up by the men. Predominantly male conference onlookers by all reports allowed the attack to take place, watching in stunned silence. Two males affiliated with the same group as the feminists -Deep Green Resistance- were also in attendance and the “trans women” threw a projectile at the head of one of them.

According to reports, the transgender males or “trans women” took issue with the feminist content in the Deep Green Resistance materials. Specifically, a portion of the materials reflected the feminist position that social roles based on sex are undesirable and harmful to women.

The transgender males believe that social roles based on sex are natural and innate and that it is instead the unchanging nature of biological sex that is undesirable. They believe that women should not criticize social roles based on sex, in deference to the feelings of men like themselves who embrace such roles. The men reportedly stated that all feminist writing and voices should be silenced by males with force if necessary, and they then proceeded to do just that.

Conference organizer Brandon Speck posted a statement on Facebook today following yesterday’s attack. He claimed that women should not be able to disseminate materials that might offend those men who support sex-roles. He claimed that the women deserved to be attacked for offering materials that contained feminism. He stated that no feminists should be permitted to sell books that men might not like. He said that as a man he had no authority to dictate the behavior of other men who might choose to assault women who offend them.

Presumably, if this is not an inventive hoax, Speck would not be so happy if real women objected to the feminists. But because the transgendered are higher on the scale of cultural victimization, they have a legitimate grievance. If men become women, feminism may be defeated.

Interestingly, the behavior of the “trans women,” who said they believe in traditional sex roles, wasn’t very lady-like. If they believe sex roles are “innate,” how did they manage to be so aggressive?

The average state university is an insane asylum. If this story is not true, it is plausible.

—- Comments —-

Alex writes:

The liberal hierarchy is about which group has a higher destructive power for the revolution to wield against traditional society. Feminists have served the revolution very well, but now the sexual perverts of all kinds have a higher potential to inflict further damage on the remnants of traditional society, through homomarriage, replacing Father and Mother on birth certificates with Parent 1 and Parent 2 and then adding boxes for more parents, a new wave of equality legislation, homodivorce bonanza for lawyers who’ll then repay the Evil Party with donations, etc. So of course the freaks and perverts now trump feminists in any conflict with them.

Poor feminists. They thought it was about them or women’s rights or some other such silly nonsense. It’s always about the revolution, and their usefulness to it has been trumped.

Thomas F. Bertonneau writes:

It’s plausible, yes, and state universities are insane asylums, but when I did a Google search on various formulas that might designate the incident, the only references that I found were the GenderTrender website and a few mirrors thereof. If it were real, I assume that references to it or stories about it would have appeared in Portland or other Oregon newspapers. I can find none. I would be sceptical of it.

Laura writes:

I don’t think it’s true because the account is well-written.

A reader writes:

The conference did take place.

Laura writes:

Thank you. It appears from the Facebook page that the account above is true.

Jay from Goshen writes:

Thank you! You named it! Giving the current situation a proper name resolves a lot. We are in the throes of a genuine full scale revolution.

No wonder my head is spinning.

Regarding the feminists who were attacked by the freaks (aka “transwomen”) all I have to say is, serves them right. Or to quote a hero of the left (Malcolm X), the chickens are coming home to roost.

It is wrong and ungentlemanly of me ever to support an attack on women, but sorry, that’s how I feel. Consider my ugly words confessing to a sin.

 Laura writes:

I can’t take credit for calling it a revolution. Many others have. Still the word is not used nearly often enough. We are in the midst of an all-encompassing revolution. It is cultural, political, social and scientific. No area of life, no single human being, remains untouched. The Revolution exists first and foremost in the heart and mind. We have all experienced it on a deep inner level.

Jay adds:

I looked for a news account of the attack and couldn’t find one. The fact that this crazy conference took place isn’t proof that the attack took place. That said, it sounds not only plausible but predictable. I believe it happened, and was either hushed up or too negligible for the local papers to cover. If it happened once, it will happen again. There is a lot of suppressed (in the media) violence from the left.

Laura writes:

The Facebook page refers to the controversy.

Buck writes:

In the long run, it doesn’t matter whether or not the attack was real or virtual, or even whether or not there was an actual event. (It was not on PSU’s busy events calender for May 10, 11, and 12.) The bizarre concepts and theories (cisgender privilege?) are being formulated and spread like an STD. And, as always, after these (initially) preposterous ideas incubate within academia, they will, without fail, eventually drive an actual public policy.

Like this bizarre schism, others will evolve out of our unconstrained modern liberal memeplex. Things will grow “curiouser and curiouser” as ever deeper in to the hole we go.

If you have time to kill and don’t mind be drained of a partial day’s hope and mental health, scout down that hole by following a thread. Click the last link on the GenderTrender page, then through multiple links on the Facebook pages, to the Red and Black Cafe, pass through the the Burning Hearts Media site (where it’s suggested that videos may show up), then on to this and this.

Jay from Goshen writes:

Laura writes:

ATD would be better. The diseases are academically transmitted.

Jay writes:

I’m stealing it.

No idea when I’ll get the chance to use it, but I’m sure it will be soon.

Buck writes:

Agreed. ATD is perfect.

Clark Coleman writes:

When I read the story, I could not keep track of the identities of the parties involved. If someone is described as a “transgender male,” do I interpret this as a male who has been transformed into a female, or as a female who has been transformed into a male? By the end of the article, my solution was to vow not to read such articles in the future. I don’t feel any particular hostility towards such disturbed individuals, nor do I think that I can do anything for them, so my attitude is one of indifference. They live in a different world, and there are few of them. I just don’t care to spend time on them.

Laura writes:

There are many, many stories like this in the news (here’s another one). They are all disturbing and generally I think Mr. Coleman’s approach is the best. Transgenderism has become a form of mass psychosis.

Paul writes:

Just today I attended a legal seminar about transgender discrimination. The term is used to describe a heterosexual male who likes to dress as a female. Such people are not transsexuals, people who have surgery in an attempt to change their gender. As the article indicates, cross-dressers don’t approve of homosexuals. What was interesting, but fully expected based on the vogue climate, were two judges who weighed in on the side against transgender discrimination. One (and no doubt the other thought the same, based on his statements) incredibly posited the argument that the intent of the drafters of Title VII was irrelevant. In other words, judges should ignore the fact that the drafters had no intention of prohibiting discrimination based on homosexuality or similar statuses. Yet the very same judges routinely talk about the intent of the drafters when they do what they want to do.

Jay writes:

If as you say “transgenderism has become a form of modern mass psychosis,” then the time for adopting the Coleman approach has passed. Normally I would agree with Clark Coleman – go about one’s business, unaffected – but these are not normal times. When a lawyer (such as your commenter Paul) writes that he attended a conference on “transgender discrimination,” it shows that things have reached the point of overflow into general society.

Speaking of law – perhaps you’ve been to a discount dress store that is so prevalent nowadays, in malls and shopping centers. Sometimes these places have common fitting rooms. How would you like to try on a dress next to a “transitioning” male? One day you will, and the law will be on HIS side, not yours. At least I think so. Ask Paul.

Please follow and like us: