LOL!

(06-07-2015 05:26 PM)demolition Wrote:  I came across this article earlier today and I was just singularly amazed at how non-objectionable this article was, and yet how uniform the SJW narrative was in the comments section:

http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/jenn...1506040047

The article basically asserts the common sense that Jenner is a man. Meanwhile take a look at the comments: Are people really this psychotic? This utterly milquetoast article is called 'hateful' or 'oozing with hate' by a majority of commenters there. Being this ignorant and psychologically damaged should disqualify you from being considered a human being (hell, half these people want to be considered 'animals' to begin with).

From a curious glance at the comments section I am surprised at how similar they all are. It seems to me this is a well-organized attack and not some random group of people voicing their opinions. We are well on our way to 2+2=5.

(06-07-2015 06:55 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  I'm shocked at how utterly-normalised this tranny crap has become in the space of under two years. There was an article in my paper yesterday about a child in 3rd class (8 years old) at a Catholic School who had decided to become a girl, and now the school, the government and some kind of 'Gender Diversity Clinic' from one of the big hospitals here were all supporting the child - a boy running in races against other girls - and shaming the parents for their transphobia.

It's simply an avalanche on the topic. Where is all this coming from? Or it is all coming from Feminist and Lesbian parents trying to turn their boys into girls because of Evil Penis?

Now the idea that what was previously considered a mental illness is simply 'a choice' by all right thinkers, this gives them their foot in the door to normalise pedophilia. Look at Mattress Girl's mother linking to her daughter naked and having sex without shame. Progressives have no boundaries.

NEXT STOPS:

PEDOPHELIA
ZOOPHILIA

The minds of the people are already being lubricated, but so far the parents are balking at giving little 8 year old Annie the right to have sex with the nice uncle that she met online. We will see how long the forts will hold. Judging by the Trans-battle that they have already won - not too long. I give it 20 years tops.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/08/rush_lim..._marriage/

Rush Limbaugh may be warning, but NY-Beta-Times is bringing out the mind-lube:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinio....html?_r=0

Quote:Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime

^ This is why I've never understood why it's considered informal, irrational and inappropriate to use the slippery slope argument when arguing a case.

For example, in my Oral Communication class I took freshman year of college, when we were preparing a persuasive speech, we were given a list of tactics to not use when arguing our point. This was one of them:



I understand that extreme accusations would be pointless (like "If Johnny smiles at a girl on the playground, then when he grows up he'll make hundreds of rape/sex tapes"), but there's also a lot of truth that comes from the slippery slope argument, especially with what AnonymousBosch and Zelcorpion are saying.

(06-07-2015 06:55 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  I'm shocked at how utterly-normalised this tranny crap has become in the space of under two years. There was an article in my paper yesterday about a child in 3rd class (8 years old) at a Catholic School who had decided to become a girl, and now the school, the government and some kind of 'Gender Diversity Clinic' from one of the big hospitals here were all supporting the child - a boy running in races against other girls - and shaming the parents for their transphobia.

It's simply an avalanche on the topic. Where is all this coming from? Or it is all coming from Feminist and Lesbian parents trying to turn their boys into girls because of Evil Penis?

Now the idea that what was previously considered a mental illness is simply 'a choice' by all right thinkers, this gives them their foot in the door to normalise pedophilia. Look at Mattress Girl's mother linking to her daughter naked and having sex without shame. Progressives have no boundaries.

This is what I'm talking about. History has shown the slippery slope argument to actually work and make sense, so why rule it out?

For a college university to completely rule out the slippery slope argument, probably because it seems too 'conservative' and 'right-winged', is just retarded and immature.

It's not just college universities, I've heard that it's not valid in an argument a few times. I remember that lame progressive english comedian, russell howard, using it as part of his comedy once as well.
I actually thought, yeah you can't predict the future, so that's not a good path to take in an argument.

But now that I've come here and seen what's happening when you allow one thing to happen and then another follows, like normalising transexualism, has made me change my mind.

I think its pretty sick messing with nature like that., post op people are like walking human experiments to me.

I am not making slippery slope arguments out of a "destruction of morality" argument.

I am making them because I read it occasionally in elite books and statements that family and the bond between father, mother and children has to disappear. I also might point you to Brave New World where joint masturbatory classes were held. There are other examples.

Feminism didn't just happen, just as the push of homosexuality and transgender crap did not just happen sliding on a slippery slope. It takes massive power and money to embed their agenda in pretty much anything from media, entertainment and academia - all across the globe against the will of the people, even against the will of academic circles or against money making potential (gay/trans agenda adds nothing to the box office to cater to 1-2% of the population).

I don't think slippery slope is a logical fallacy ever used by most people. I think people try to bring it up because it confuses most people and shuts down debate.

In fact we can logically make the case:

A > B

Thus:
A > E

^ That's a logical fallacy.

But, if people say,

A > B
B > C
C > D
D > E

Thus:
A > E

^ That's perfectly valid.

And people have made the case many times about gay marriage. If the argument is just two consenting adults, why can't siblings marry one another? Or parents and children? As long as they are adults, what's the big deal?

ok that helps me understand that a bit better. I definitely see how you could apply that to gay marriage now.

However, I still feel like most liberals will still just shout it down and fail to understand your point, before calling you a homophobic prick in a fit of rage.

Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy, but it's not at all irrational to project (and thus be concerned about) the potential repercussions or future consequences of a course of action. Human life requires that we reflect upon the meaning and impact of our decisions constantly.

(06-08-2015 10:33 AM)Goldhawkstar Wrote:  I understand that extreme accusations would be pointless (like "If Johnny smiles at a girl on the playground, then when he grows up he'll make hundreds of rape/sex tapes"), but there's also a lot of truth that comes from the slippery slope argument, especially with what AnonymousBosch and Zelcorpion are saying.

I'm not using a Slippery Slope argument at all. I've observed and noted the way this process of progressive normalisation happens since I was a teenager, and have watched it infiltrate and destroy every traditional power structure ever since. During my degree studies, I studied Cultural Marxism, (and heard Feminists at the time talk about it endlessly), which was designed to destroy traditional power structures effectively, but which now - twenty-five years later - apparently doesn't exist and is just some 'Right wing nutjob conspiracy theory'.

So, when I say pedophilia is coming, it's not a slippery slope. It's noticing the very tactics designed to infiltrate, subvert and normalise Correct Thought - the very arguments that has convinced society that a man putting on a dress makes him 'a woman' in under two years, when we already had the word Transvestite for this, (and no-one ever considered a Transvestite an actual woman) - starting to enter the mainstream dialogue via powerful media structures such as the Huffington Post, the New York Times and Showtime. These think pieces are designed to make the reader reconsider pedophilia.

This is how it starts: New Research Shows they're not Bad People > They can't fight their programming -> we need to have compassion for them -> stigmatised word for pedos replaced with 'enlightened' one -> public shaming for using stigmatised word -> educated people need to be tolerant -> love is love -> support these people or you're ignorant -> you're pedophobic! -> Leftist president sends congratulatory tweet.

Programming people is that easy: most people are herd animals living in fear of social ostracism and have no fixed beliefs. A large component I'd consider Thought-Avoidant, they simply want thought dictated to them. They'll readily except 2+2=5, because they have no interest in doing any math themselves. Just pat them on the head and tell them what a clever child they are.

Now, notice what is happening with transexuality: children are being allowed to make huge life decisions about their sexual future before they even hit puberty.

If I was eight years old, and decided I wanted to be a robot, no-one would entertain the idea for a second. Why is a young boy wanting to be a girl being taken any more seriously by parents and doctors, other than the fact the parents stand to gain massive narcissistic supply from others recognising what Good, Progressive Parents they are, particularly when there's mountains of evidence that show transitioning doesn't ease the gender confusion and often ends in suicide?

I believe the endgame here is about normalising young children being allowed to have legal control over their sexual choices despite their parents wishes. This will set the precedent to allow them to enter into sexual relationships with adult partners, should they choose to do so.

(06-08-2015 04:28 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(06-08-2015 10:33 AM)Goldhawkstar Wrote:  I understand that extreme accusations would be pointless (like "If Johnny smiles at a girl on the playground, then when he grows up he'll make hundreds of rape/sex tapes"), but there's also a lot of truth that comes from the slippery slope argument, especially with what AnonymousBosch and Zelcorpion are saying.

I'm not using a Slippery Slope argument at all. I've observed and noted the way this process of progressive normalisation happens since I was a teenager, and have watched it infiltrate and destroy every traditional power structure ever since. During my degree studies, I studied Cultural Marxism, (and heard Feminists at the time talk about it endlessly), which was designed to destroy traditional power structures effectively, but which now - twenty-five years later - apparently doesn't exist and is just some 'Right wing nutjob conspiracy theory'.

So, when I say pedophilia is coming, it's not a slippery slope. It's noticing the very tactics designed to infiltrate, subvert and normalise Correct Thought - the very arguments that has convinced society that a man putting on a dress makes him 'a woman' in under two years, when we already had the word Transvestite for this, (and no-one ever considered a Transvestite an actual woman) - starting to enter the mainstream dialogue via powerful media structures such as the Huffington Post, the New York Times and Showtime. These think pieces are designed to make the reader reconsider pedophilia.

This is how it starts: New Research Shows they're not Bad People > They can't fight their programming -> we need to have compassion for them -> stigmatised word for pedos replaced with 'enlightened' one -> public shaming for using stigmatised word -> educated people need to be tolerant -> love is love -> support these people or you're ignorant -> you're pedophobic! -> Leftist president sends congratulatory tweet.

Programming people is that easy: most people are herd animals living in fear of social ostracism and have no fixed beliefs. A large component I'd consider Thought-Avoidant, they simply want thought dictated to them. They'll readily except 2+2=5, because they have no interest in doing any math themselves. Just pat them on the head and tell them what a clever child they are.

Now, notice what is happening with transexuality: children are being allowed to make huge life decisions about their sexual future before they even hit puberty.

If I was eight years old, and decided I wanted to be a robot, no-one would entertain the idea for a second. Why is a young boy wanting to be a girl being taken any more seriously by parents and doctors, other than the fact the parents stand to gain massive narcissistic supply from others recognising what Good, Progressive Parents they are, particularly when there's mountains of evidence that show transitioning doesn't ease the gender confusion and often ends in suicide?

I believe the endgame here is about normalising young children being allowed to have legal control over their sexual choices despite their parents wishes. This will set the precedent to allow them to enter into sexual relationships with adult partners, should they choose to do so.

Right. So you're not just blindly saying "I think Y will happen because of X"; you're applying actual experiences and things you've observed growing up. You've witnessed how feminists, SJWs, and everything in between pushes their desired social propaganda, and it works. It's not an accusation - it's a fact. They have a process that they go about to normalize things over a certain amount of time that, previous to that time, would be taboo and forbidden. Just a couple years in the past, "Caitlyn" Jenner would not be considered a woman, 'she' would be considered a tranny.

I also see your point about pedophilia being normalized. Leftists have recently embraced the idea that a child has the ability to decide if they are homosexual at as young of an age as kindergarten. The way social propaganda is pushed onto society, this will inevitably lead society's view on the independence of a child's sexuality to broaden. I can see how that could lead to an acceptance of pedophilia.

I agree. Good insightful thinking.

^ I logged onto News.Com a few minutes ago, and... you're shitting me! ... there was another of these Pedo think pieces, trying to present both sides of the issue, but the tactics are a dead giveaway.

Quote:According to the website, “the Virtuous Pedophiles forum provides a place where paedophiles can discuss living with their attraction, but with the shared understanding that sexual activity with children is wrong and that we are not trying to make it more acceptable.”

Mr Devin explains that the stigma of paedophilia often “prevents many paedophiles from seeking treatment, which leads to more molestation.”

“Many paedophiles suffer from things like self-hate and low self esteem. Many are even suicidal. They view themselves as monsters for their sexual thoughts, even if they don’t act on those sexual thoughts. I wanted them to have access to help,” Mr Devin explains.

Yeah, they're not trying to normalise anything, he says, whilst accurately hitting my Third Subversion Predictor above "We need to have compassion for them". Who gives a fuck if kiddy diddlers have low self-esteem?

Quote:“I do not think anyone’s attraction to children is a choice. My attraction to children is not a choice. I wish I was not attracted to children,” Mr Devin says.

Second Predictor: "They can't fight their programming." They were born this way!

Luckily, another crim psych later in the article says "It's a choice!" and "Don't medicalise the problem!", whilst the article snarkily rejoinders that "it's in the DSM-5!" (For subversion to be effective via sympathy engendered by stigmatisation, it needs to be clearly recognised as a psychological condition and not a crime of choice first - as Transexuality and Homosexuality originally were).

The article shills hard for the online Pedo Network, giving them a place to gather. Through unity, comes political advocacy.

It certainly is unusual deliberate subversion in action just how much recent discussion of this is popping up in the mainstream media.

It will come - they go smarter about it for now by pushing the age down - first in homosexual relationships where it's acceptable for a 15 year old to have sex with a 30 year old. The same leniency is given to gays, but of course never to a man who fucks a 16 year old girl.




Severel points embedded in comedy: gay, trans & INTERGENERATIONAL SEX

They are not going to call it paedophelia, because that word has too many negative connotations. I read also somewhere that the word GAY a few decades ago was never used to describe homosexuals. They pushed it deliberately because it had a positive spin - to be gay in the 1950s just meant to be happy and upbeat.




Movie about a 17 year old girl who gets into a relationship with an older woman.

The pushing of boundaries is first done slowly, until one day - you get 6 year old boys, who get mutilated and indoctrinated by their lesbian adopted mothers about being actually transgender.

They will probably do the attack on multiple levels - as AB put it - first normalizing it, generating sympathy, creating new words so it sounds better, then pushing partly rational arguments at first like lowering of the age of consent (since humans are sexually mature at 15-16 and if it's legal to have sex with a fellow 16yo then it's not irrational to have legal sex with a 20 year old or older). But of course it won't end there and they will push it below the age of sexual maturity where evil truly begins.

It is similar to acceptance of homosexuality. Most people probably wouldn't think that all homosexuals should be incarcerated - live and let live. But then they pushed forward straight into trans- and crazy-evil-land.

Ah well - not much we can do about it except teaching our folk a better way and staying away from all of that.

Edit: - before I forget 50 SHADES OF GREY is also pedophelia hiding in plain sight according to some psychiatrists who deal professionally with abused children.

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/...of_gr.html

The reason for this is the actual main heroine of the story who uses infantile words of a 12 year old - talking about doing cartwheels, having childish interests and never ever having any sexual experience before - not even masturbation. Dr. Judith Reisman makes some convincing points there:

Quote:The problem for her, and it was a BIG PROBLEM, was that the narrator in the story, was in fact, an underage girl. My friend indicated, based on the use of language in the narration, that this girl was likely no more than 12 or 13 years of age. I made mention that the girl in the story was actually getting ready to graduate college. My friend, a woman with years of experience as a clinical psychologist, whose expertise I had personally witnessed a number of times over the years, shook her head and told me that she would not be able to convince me by simply talking about it. She said I should read the book myself, but do so with the eyes of somebody whose job it had been for many years to try and protect children. As someone who has seen over and over the signs of abuse, and the damages of abuse. Because there are always warning signs. I know that. How many times have I heard people horrified in saying "I can't believe I didn't see that" "How couldn't I have known?" Or even worse, "I knew something wasn't right but I didn't want to believe they were capable of doing something like that."

Quote:The female character has no sexual experience. None. She is given the age of 21, but that age is itself a cover. Her true emotional age is much-much younger. She has never even masturbated. She has never even experienced an orgasm. That alone is one of the greatest attractions to the pedophile. That is the psychology of that kind of act. You get off on taking purity.

The top of the food chain have figured out how to profit in money and power off human depravity.

In order to increase this they need more depravity.

I don't want to believe it's a conscious effort, but the decline seems very well orchestrated.

Some of the shit coming about now is absolutely revolting. A total perversion of what human life should be.

The idea that 50 Shades is covert pedo stuff is absolute nonsense. Grown women talk like that all the time. Reference mattress girl's Facebook messages for starters.

Check out the chart attached to this article and try to convince me nothing is happening behind the scenes:


Then you start censoring people. Sorry Clint, you are not allowed to joke about Ms. Caitlyn Jenner. All your language are belong to us.


And an article touting the latest beautiful and touching show on ABC Family, Becoming Us. A reality show about daddy becoming mommy #2. So brave.

These are all articles trending just today. I think if you look at that homosexual acceptance chart and created one for transsexual activity, it would be vastly accelerated. We are degenerating at an exponential pace. Like Moore's law, but the worst application of Moore's law ever.

(06-09-2015 06:15 AM)aphelion Wrote:  The idea that 50 Shades is covert pedo stuff is absolute nonsense. Grown women talk like that all the time. Reference mattress girl's Facebook messages for starters.

That's the opinion of some psychiatrists who deal with pedophiles.

Personally I am not absolutely sure it is that, but on the other hand - who knows? Have to read the book to make up my mind. If it's that, then it is a first-rate social programming that is really an advanced level from Edward Bernays days, but on the other hand we might expect that area to have some advances too.

(06-07-2015 08:05 PM)Luvianka Wrote:  LOL!

That aint gonna stop him. Remember, he married Hillary. Any man that could bang Hillary could literally bang anything.

Am I the only one who hears the 'supporters' and people who say 'I don't understand it but I hope he's happy' and non-haters and thinks...

This is all a big joke on him, and he has no idea. All these people are thinking exactly what I'm thinking, "fucking weird, but whatever", they're just saying it in a pandering way.

It's like listening to a bunch of women talking about each others' problems, knowing it's all a facade. You have the single chic talking about her relationships and how she can't find a guy who won't cheat on her and the stay-at-home-mom-friend nodding in understanding, and we all know she's thinking, "you're such a slut".

Bruce has no idea the whole world is pandering. That the people saying it's fucking weird are simply saying what everyone else is thinking. That the whole world pandering is just like a bunch of women sitting around nodding faking understanding.

Almost nothing big happens in America without someone profiting from it. I think it may be the American way. So, these large pushes for gay-marriage and transgender acceptance: who is making the money and how much? How is gay-marriage and transgender acceptance monetized? Generally, to make a lot of money you need to market to either the very rich or the poor. What product or service are the interests behind these movements trying to get us to buy? I'm really curious.

(06-09-2015 10:59 AM)Menace Wrote:  Almost nothing big happens in America without someone profiting from it. I think it may be the American way. So, these large pushes for gay-marriage and transgender acceptance: who is making the money and how much? How is gay-marriage and transgender acceptance monetized? Generally, to make a lot of money you need to market to either the very rich or the poor. What product or service are the interests behind these movements trying to get us to buy? I'm really curious.

Well, one possibility is that it is being used as a loss leader. I don't usually take the "Jews rule the world" type of posters all that seriously because of several reasons, the first being that it is a really big world and trying to control it, or even influence it, would be a very big job it seems. On the other hand, look at the last names of the people who own these companies and push these agendas and it does make me wonder about some of those theories.

I recently saw a video on some website posted by a white nationalist. At first I thought it would be some stupid rant or something but it turned our to be a mash up of what looked to be interviews with historians in the way they do it on certain History Channel shows.

These historians were talking about Berlin and Weimer Germany is very detailed ways. One thing I didn't realize is that during that time Berlin was known as the sex and decadence capital of the world. This was mostly pushed by Jewish immigrants apparently and sold to a lot of other Europeans and Americans due to the inflation of their economy which caused large disparities in currencies.

Apparently, according to the historians, there were streets known and advertised for nothing more than the type of sex you could by. These ranged from streets populated with brothels specifically for pregnant women, to brothels and show specifically with trannies, and even streets where the sole attraction was pedophilia and zoophilia.

This happened rather quickly, within a less than two decades, and caused the more conservative and traditional Germans to flee to the country. This caused a lot of resentment, especially with the more conservative veterans, and when the economic crash accelerated we had a veteran rise in prominence and gain a following. We all know what happened after that.

Anyways. I too really wonder who is pushing this shit.

As far as pedophilia being normalized. I don't really see that happening. How are they going to get past women when it comes time to lower the age of consent laws. How are they going to get past families?

I can see other things happening but not that. It is one thing to be told as a normal middle class American that you shouldn't judge what the tranny down the road or the gays next door do in their bedrooms. It is quite another thing to tell those same Americans to be ok with little johnny getting touched by the pedo next door. Most normal people, especially family members, would kill before allowing that.

I don't think pedo agenda will be fast like Tranny or Homosexual. You would have to gradually lower the age of consent which would probably help guys with sexually mature yet underage women. Hell they probably could marry earlier and have a stable family like in the past, which these people DO NOT want. Its better men don't have that option although women might. Older women would never allow this as well.

Don't know if anyone posted this yet, but Lord Jamar was droppin redpill gems about this topic 2 weeks ago

Some real words of Truth from James Howard Kunstler this week:

Quote:This shoot was about my life and who I am as a person. It’s not about the fanfare….”

— Caitlyn (formerly Bruce) Jenner

It was, perhaps, only coincidental that the shy, elderly, Olympic decathlon champion and Wheaties box icon ended up on the cover of America’s glossiest glossy magazine attended by a squadron of make-up artists, costumers, publicists, drapers, lighting designers, endocrinologists, agents, and managers under the direction of supreme photographic commander Annie Liebowitz. And, perhaps, another coincidence that the E! Network is producing an eight-part reality show (“docu-series”) on the journey of America’s new transgender sweetheart from sweaty, hairy, testosterone-jacked athlete to air-brushed pin-up “girl.” I guess fanfare is sometimes just the unexpected cherry-on-top of life’s big creamy cake.

But doesn’t it all raise the question: why is it so important for the nation’s cultural stage managers to make the case that a life of sexual confusion is the highest-and-best way of being in this world? It’s everywhere. A day does not pass lately when The New York Times fails to run a front-page story about the triumph of transgender life. One easy theory might be that old chestnut about folks out on the “cutting edge” always needing a new way to épater le bourgeois, shock and horrify the middle class (into the recognition of their pathetic, mind-numbing dullness.) Maybe the middle class doesn’t have enough to think about with keeping a step ahead of the re-po man, or being billed $30,000 to give birth in a hospital, or working 70 hours a week.

The best explanation (not mine originally), may be that in a “liminal” moment of history, when great scary trends and events trigger society’s existential dread, all kinds of boundaries dissolve. And sex, being among the humanity’s most compelling drives, fraught with heavy cultural regulation, ends up being the means of expression for our collective anxiety over the dissolution of things. It also happens that America today is at once an exceptionally pornified society and an exceptionally puritanical one. Rome under Caligula did not have the internet, enabling 12-year-olds to spectate on every imaginable sex act. But neither did the witch-obsessed settlers of the Massachusetts Bay Colony have the equivalent of the young woman (Emma Sulkowicz by name) who idiotically lugged a mattress around the Columbia University campus as a combination political protest / senior art project to draw attention to her dubious rape case (which was dismissed by Columbia’s own administrative kangaroo court).

The tension between these forces of extreme prurience and extreme Puritanism must be immense, probably intolerable, especially for the young who, even in the most settled times, are beset by insecurity over their sexual development — of how to grow into a man or a woman in the world. It’s also interesting that we want to talk about “sexuality” all the time — if media chatter can be taken for public “conversation” — but only in highly circumscribed ways. Overstep the conventional thinking du jour, and you invite a tsunami of censorious opprobrium… which I will now proceed to do.

For instance, I would propose the theory that homosexuality is lately promoted as a desirable way of being in the world because it allows those who behave that way to avoid and escape a primary source of tension in human life: the difficult relations between men and women. These tensions inevitably fluoresce in adolescence, and so now the choice is offered to opt out. I’d expect gay opinion to argue that opting into that way of being in the world actually generates greater tensions and torments, and that may indeed be so — but it is often the case with avoidance behavior that it invites unhappy complications.

I would also propose that the Caitlyn (Bruce) Jenner spectacle represents “peak transgender.” Now that the culture stage managers have made the point that the paragon of maleness — a ten-sport Olympic champion — can opt late in life to become a simulacrum of femaleness (with strange overtones of sexual availability, but to whom, or to what?), there’s nowhere further to go… we finally come to the actual long-sought edge of the cutting edge and drop off into an abyss.

Or maybe this is all just the result of life’s supreme test: keeping up with the Kardashians. After all those years of slip-sliding in Clinique Anti-blemish solution and L’Oreal True Match, poor Bruce just caved, surrendered, resorted to the tactic that could tempt even the most driven competitor: if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

All right, now I will step aside and endure all the punishment I have invited for venturing to have some opinions on these matters.

I don't agree we've fallen off the edge of this yet though. We have not reached peak transgenderism yet, much less peak "progressivism."

OSHA has issued guidelines stating that private businesses should allow employees to use the designated restroom for the gender with which they identify.

Is this the peak? Or are we mid-plummet into the abyss? I can't tell.