The new “Generation Gap.”

Errr. I’m just learning about this. It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw. It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently….I think you’ve got to be sensitive to how difficult this is. There are women who’d say [to a trans woman], ‘You know what, you’ve never had the kind of life experiences that I’ve had. So I respect who you are, but don’t tell me you’re the same as me.’ I hear that conversation all the time.So says Hillary Clinton, in an interview in the NY Sunday Times. To what is she referring? If you don’t like the genitalia you were born with i.e. you are transsexual, and if those genitalia and chromosomes—XY—and your hormones, testosterone and androgen—mark you as a biological male, in what reality can you insist you are female? So what Hillary is actually saying is, “I as a biological female have lived experiences which a transsexual—i.e. biological male who thinks he is or who wants to be female—have not lived. Therefore, we are not the same.”

Hillary disagrees with daughter Chelsea, with whom she wrote the yet to be released Book of Gutsy Women. It’s apparently stories of courageous and trailblazing women. The only blurb I read was from CBSNews, which featured Chelsea’s story about Margaret Chase Smith, a former Senator from Maine. I applaud the idea of the book. Hopefully they will also profile gutsy non-government women. However, that book is tangential to my topic of the “new generation gap”. In fact, generation gap isn’t comprehensive enough–it’s really about objective truth vs. subjective experience, premise #4 of Critical Theory. Hillary is admitting she is having trouble assimilating the CT worldview with her own experience, though she frames that conflict narrowly, by comparing the experience of being a biological woman with the contention of a biological man who wants to be a woman that his life experience qualifies him to know what life as a bio woman is like. This path is fraught with peril. Those who speak out about trans ideology(?), pathology(?), psychology, will get the treatment.

Mikey Harlow, outspoken gay writer and model, has been banned from Twitter permanently. Why? It all started when he posted these few tweets about inconvenient truths that Twitter must not want you to see. “Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people want to be treated the same as everyone else. Radical alphabet people want to be treated differently. That is a key distinction. And that is why sane LGBT individuals take such exception to the latter category,” he wrote. Maybe it was this next post that did him in. Everyone knows you’re not allowed to challenge the new gender theology.

Harlow has received multiple excuses from Twitter. First they said that he was suspended for trying to “evade permanent suspension,” which Harlow claims he doesn’t understand. “How could I be ‘avoiding suspension’? I don’t even know what that is!” Harlow told PJ Media. Twitter then sent him an update to his suspension and changed their story, claiming that Harlow had operated multiple accounts. “That’s ridiculous,” Harlow said. “I have only ever had one account. I do not have, nor have I ever had multiple accounts.” But that wasn’t the last story Twitter would pull out of thin air. Harlow contested the suspension and received another notice from Twitter now claiming that his suspension will be permanent because he engaged in “targeted harassment.” To illustrate this harassment, Twitter presented a months-old Harlow tweet mocking the people criticizing Ivanka Trump for posting cute pictures of her children.

The truth is that the left can’t stand dissent of any kind. And the worst traitors are the ones who belong to the victim groups that Democrats exploit. The gays top that list. When they disregard the approved talking points, they get destroyed. If your ideology is incompatible with reality, logic, reason or good sense, but you are thoroughly invested in it, your likely response is to attack the motives of the critics, who are most of us. If the critics lack courage, that tactic works. It would seem to be working.