Oh, Chase. I worked at the ACLU from 2012 to the end 2014, and she started there in 2013. So we must have overlapped by over a year. To the best of my recollection, we never crossed paths at the time.
In response, Chase went on a Twitter screed. She said: "A note about Kara Dansky, this anti-trans discourse, and why I am eternally disappointed in 'liberal' non-allies. This panel of so-called 'liberals' and 'feminists' talking about why the existence of trans people threatens women is a perfect example of how dangerously unsupported trans people have been in movements for justice. We continue to situate the existence of trans people, the bodies we have, the truth of our medical care, the vulnerability of our lives, as something to debate and place in opposition to the needs of non-trans women. We allow people like Kara Dansky who uses her ACLU credentials to legitimize her violent vision for trans death to be seen as a victim and the purveyor of some truth that exists behind the pages of our advocacy for trans existence. Meanwhile our so-called allies share the unscientific polemics of Jesse Singal and Alice Dreger and make space for the Kara Danskys to consolidate power in an already hateful world where our bodies and lives are subject to the biased whims of others."
The following year, I was poised to file an amicus brief in a court case and I needed the consent of the parties to do so. I emailed the parties. In response, I received an email from Chase that read, simply: "Kara, Plaintiffs consent to the filing of WHRC's brief. Thank you, Chase."
Last year, I was in NYC to support Maud Maron's resolution before the city to reevaluate a 2019 policy allowing boys to compete in girls' sports. Chase yelled at me from across the room, addressing me by name.
It's been an interesting decade, to say the least.
Chase is easily triggered. This is because history is erased and that's inconvenient when other people refuse or forget to erase it.
From The New Yorker piece in 2020:
"He remembers little of his childhood and adolescence."
Joan is Chase's mother.
From The New Yorker: "(He continues to be protective of Joan. I met her on my visit to Newton, but she was the one person he didn’t want me to interview.)"
"The summer after graduating from high school, he worked at J. P. Licks, an ice-cream parlor in Newton Centre, where some of the other employees were students at Oberlin College, in Ohio. “They were all queer,” Strangio recalled. “Or at least some of them were.” So, it seemed, was he."
Chase Strangio is inevitable if the "trans" lie is tolerated in any way.
She is inexorable unless we tell everyone, including adults, that they cannot be in the wrong body and they cannot "live as" the opposite sex and they do not have a "gender identity" because it does not exist.
Kara, describing you as having a "violent vision for trans death" is a crazy reversal of reality. The violence from trans activists and their allies is only going to get worse as we continue to fight for our rights. https://sallyja.substack.com/p/nothing-says-woman-like-a-man-in
The other thing that's so interesting about the "violent vision for trans death" is that just a year later, she was giving me her consent to file an amicus brief. If she really thought I had a "violent vision for trans death," shouldn't she have alerted the authorities? Shouldn't she had alerted the people at the court that such a person was attempting to file a brief? Shouldn't she have, at a minimum, withheld her consent for me to file and force me to seek permission of the court (which she totally could have done)? Chase doesn't believe I have a "violent vision for trans death" any more than anyone else does. But if you're Chase, you just get to lie and lie and lie.
"It's very much a top-down, male-driven thing. There's billions of dollars behind it. There are very rich men who are benefiting from it. And there are some really creepy, fetishistic men who have a lot of power and a lot of money who are driving it. I think it's very wealthy, very fetishistic men who are driving this whole thing...
The one guy is named Martine Rothblatt...he's behind a large part of it... Rothblatt thinks he's going to turn us all into cloud people, that we're all going to exist in the cloud, and that we're not going to have any need for human bodies. And that's partly why they're going after women. In the words of Jennifer Bilek, she founded the 11th Hour Blog, they are colonizing our sex. These very wealthy men are colonizing our sex to make it disappear."
It's motivated reasoning. When your Theory of the World is a totalizing "Male dominance over female subordination", you're kind of locked in to concocting elaborate explanations connecting all social phenomena dots to that theory.
"Porn and biotech obliteration of women" is Kara's "Transwomen are women."
Strangio is explicit in what's driving her crusade: Queer revolutionism against liberal assimilationism. And yet you, Kara, continue to ignore that and insist Trans™ is pervy, pornsick, rich fetishists who seek to play God with human biology for their transhumanist cyborg AI biotech vision of the future.
Come to your senses, Kara. It's Queer Theory, just like LGBCourage says.
For anyone reading this, I have no idea who this guy is. Regardless, he is a complete nuisance. He regularly harasses me on X, and I have muted him. He also has no idea what he's talking about, and frequently attributes positions to me that I do not hold.
This it the title of Chapter 4 of my book "The Reckoning": "The Queering of the American Political Left." The following paragraphs appear in that chapter:
"All “gender identity” flows from something called “queer theory”—a branch of philosophy whose essential tenet is that sex is a social construct that is not grounded in material reality. Following on a movement toward an embrace of postmodernism (sometimes referred to as poststructuralism) in academia, “queer theory” began to flourish in the nineties and is still with us today. Its creation is frequently attributed to French philosopher Michel Foucault, although Foucault was not alone in popularizing it. Gayle Rubin, another queer theorist, teaches at the Institute for Research on Women and Gender at the University of Michigan. Her research interests include “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender studies, ethnography of queer populations, urban sexual geographies, histories of sexology, and feminist theory and politics.”
Perhaps the most well-known contemporary proponent of “queer theory” in the U.S. is Judith Butler, Distinguished Professor in the Graduate School and formerly the Maxine Elliot Chair in the Department of Comparative Literature and the Program of Critical Theory at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1990 (six years after the death of Foucault), she published a book called Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, which brought “queer theory” into the mainstream. Professor Butler’s very extensive biography on the U.C. Berkeley website takes great pains to let us all know that she goes by “they/them” pronouns, as though she is some sort of academic committee all on her own. Meanwhile, in the land of material reality, she is an individual human being who is also a lesbian and in a long-term relationship with a woman, who is also an individual adult human female person (i.e., a woman)."
Its very clear to me that political progress of the trans movement is driven by a coalition of groups pursuing their own objectives - that includes the queer-theory-academics/activists, And the AGP horde, followed closely by the pedo-normalisation brigade.
What they all have in common is the desire to abolish boundaries and bend objective-realism enough to allow people to do whatever they want by abolishing normativity and judgment under the guise of inclusion.
Kara, please. I've been following you for years, fully dedicated to your mission. Until your recent distancing from Jennifer Bilek after her crazed descent into anti-Zionism, she was your guru for the shadowy forces behind trans. And you still subscribe to Bilek's crackpottery, you just don't mention her name anymore.
Nine days ago, in your talk with Cynthia Dill about the origin of trans insanity:
"The why question is a little bit complicated. But it really boils down to follow the money. When you look into this, this is an industry. It's a multi-billion at least, might have reached a trillion dollar industry, that is essentially being pushed by mostly men, but plenty of women, who are very wealthy and are affiliated with pharma, medical supply companies, a lot of tech, and a man named Martine Rothblatt."
In other words, cyborg AI biotech transhumanism. Not the radical queer political agenda. Unless you think Rothblatt et al. is also behind the queer postmodern turn in 3rd-wave feminism. Do you think that's the why for that too?
You are a complete nuisance and I am in not in the habit of arguing with anonymous nuisances. You frequently harass me on Twitter, which is why I muted you. You claim that I deny that many women play a huge role in perpetuating "trans," which isn't true. I have never denied that.
Jennifer Bilek has never been my "guru."
Yet you goad and goad and goad. We have done several rounds of this on Twitter, and it's a complete waste of time. I don't even know who you are.
I'm done arguing with you on this post, which is about Chase, not about your issues with me. My positions are clear. "Trans" can be chalked up to queer theory, an industry, and pervy men. All three are true.
I put a lot of my work into my books and behind a paywall on Substack, which is why you don't know what I truly think (you just assume you do). The reason I put my content behind a paywall is that this is all I do, all day, every day. I TERFd myself out of a career in 2019, and haven't had paid work ever since. I couldn't get paid work in my field if I tried.
If you bothered to pay me for the work I do, day in and day out, you would know that last summer, I posted an entire Substack about the women of the cult of trans. But you won't. You would rather harass and goad me wherever you can find me.
You're an annoying anonymous creep and I'm blocking you. Leave me alone.
I will now leave the good people of the LGB Courage Coalition to their good work and stop distracting everyone, something you are not capable of, evidently.
I see Chase is an opportunist who is absolutely delighted with presenting as a straight white male - top of the heap, rather than being a Lesbian down at the cultural bottom. I don’t think it’s right to refer to Chase as she/her. Everyone has the right to define themselves, and as part of civil society, I believe we should respect that.
However, I don’t think that medical procedure should ever be brought to the courts. Consider the outcomes (that SOTUS didn’t consider because they are not doctors) of the overturning of Roe v Wade; women who want children and are having complications/emergencies in their pregnancies and are denied care, which in many cases leaves them unable to bear children. Science is ever developing and not absolute, but a legal decision is strict and finite without exceptions. The two are not compatible. If we care, then why aren’t we having consciousness raising groups (yes, I’m a 65 yr old Lesbian activist) for these girls? Here’s a possible title: “Don’t fit in? Don’t want to wear a skirt and makeup? Thinking about puberty blockers? Maybe you’re Butch. Come down to the Pride Center and meet other girls like you. Facilitated by a Butch Lesbian.”
I couldn’t agree more, third person pronouns are you trying to tell me how I should speak of you when you are not there and I am a biological realist, to describe you as the wrong sex would be me going along w your delusion when you are not even there and is positively Orwellian.
When pressed, my pronouns are I/you/we. Third person pronouns are used to gossip behind someone's back - which is immoral.
Although I am not LGB, I have have always been a cognitive nonconformist (Aspergers/gifted?), and thus experienced social engineering in school system as offensive "conversion therapy", and have always been sympathetic and comfortable with gender nonconforming individuals. The trans movement is primarily homophobic, but has also been going after youth similar to how I was at that age.
Recommend the book "Irreversible Damage' by Abigail Shrier. It will give you a better understanding of where all of this came from, why girls would rather identify as trans than lesbian, and why we don't let trans activitists control the language. I'm a 63 year old butch. What's happening here is well beyond being righted by consciousness raising groups.
None of her thoughts on this issue make any sense due to the fact that they are internally inconsistent. She thinks there is no such thing as the sex-binary, but would be insulted if someone said she is not a "man." She thinks there is no sex-binary, but insists that anyone who calls themself a girl or a woman (whether due to immature thinking, trauma, internalized homophobia, brain-washing, sexual fetishism, self-hatred, confusion or any number of reasons) MUST be allowed into female-only sports. If there is no sex-binary, she should be arguing for an end to single-sex sports, prisons, locker rooms, etc. Furthermore, she argues that there is no sex binary, and that a penis is just an unusual body part for some women, but her argument falls apart because, if there is no sex binary, there is no such thing as a woman with a penis. According to Strangio, there are just people - and we cannot define anyone as male or female, man or woman, boy or girl - yet she argues that people are male or female, boy or girl, man or woman if they say so. Which is it?
My last point is this. How can she argue so strenuously that some children need estrogen, breast implants, testicle removal, penis-flaying, etc., and other children need testosterone, double mastectomies and phalloplasties (ie. fake penises created from the flesh of the forearm or inner thigh) when there is no such thing as a boy or girl/man or woman? She's not arguing that some kids are "really" boys or girls, but don't look like it and feel sad because they are so atypical for their sex. She's arguing that these categories don't exist. How then can she even justify these medical interventions. What is the end goal? Is her argument that some children just really, really want softer skin, breasts and vaginal-like genitalia while others want beards, deeper voices, etc., and that this is purely cosmetic? If so, how can she possibly say this is "life-saving" care, unless she believes any and all cosmetic procedures are life-saving, that all people must get publicly paid for cosmetic procedures of any kind, whenever and whereever they want them, even as children.
And Leftist revolutionary tactics instruct their stooge soldiers of political warfare (Social Justice Warriors, Trans activists, antifa etc.)
“Your activism is your opponent’s reaction” basic Saul Alinsky.
So, internal inconsistency is something of a feature rather than a bug. The sophist rubbish is built to piss people off and while it can’t stand up to logic or argument it does suffice to entrance the cultists who have been vulnerable (social isolation, anxiety etc) and subjected to (often CHILD) abusive “education”=indoctrination.
Note well the trans activists have a standing policy of NO DEBATE. This prevents them facing opposition in news/media subject to fairness doctrine, outlets can’t find anyone to represent the “ other side”.
You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. Up close it’s children being broken, but this is just a slice of the philosophical sophistication of resentment: burn it all down so we can build back better
This type of illogic is why they avoid debating. But the counter arguments you are making to their assertions are catching on. It’s only a matter of time before the whole house of cards falls apart.
Bravo 👏. My brain is exploding. Even I am confused yet it makes perfect sense. They have no idea what they are saying, therefore neither do we and they get what they want by force.
"If there is no sex-binary, she should be arguing for an end to single-sex sports, prisons, locker rooms, etc."
That's what I keep wondering. Oh, there's no such thing as the sex binary—but wait, we must continue to have women's restrooms and sports teams for men to invade.
Strangio wants revolution and the dismantling of the society she lives in but with none of it inconveniencing her. She wants to keep all her fame, influence, the conveniences she enjoys and the well-paying job she is failing at while playing-acting at revolution and sacrificing and hiding behind others - in this case, children - to keep up the act.
I haven't followed Strangio's career, so this is my first opportunity to evaluate her competence, and I am not impressed. I don't understand how she acquired all the fame and influence you mention, except for the fact that online influencers are often shallow and not particularly bright.
Recall those two NYC "protestors" from a few weeks ago who were mocking the Black woman who wanted to be able to get through the blocked streets to work. "Oh no, work!" Turns out they were both well-to-do Trustafarian types.
This is the first major substantive takedown of Chase Strangio I’ve seen that doesn’t just chip away at her arguments but blasts through the very foundations of queerness and gender ideology. It’s long overdue.
Criticizing Strangio’s public persona—her tortured hair, her cultivated gay-male affect—isn’t ad hominem; it’s analysis. Her aesthetic is the message. It’s performative rebellion weaponized against social norms, not just for shock value but as a form of ideological warfare. She may be the first and only bitchy gay man ever born trapped in a woman’s body—but it’s a parody, a theatrical claim that gender is a costume and sex a suggestion.
The fact that she’s on record denouncing civil marriage as a “violent institution” is especially revealing. If anything confirms that sex is real and immutable, it’s that particular flavor of anti-marriage rhetoric—it’s straight out of 1990s lesbian radicalism. Urvashi Vaid said much the same: that gay men seeking marriage equality were selling out the revolution, and needed to reject patriarchal structures instead. It wasn’t persuasive then, and it’s grotesque now when repurposed by the ACLU’s ferocious lady lawyer in the service of child medicalization and erasure of sex-based rights.
Gay men didn’t fight for decades to be told—by the left or the right—how to live our lives. We wanted freedom. Not queer theory, not utopian re-engineering. Just freedom grounded in material reality, mutual respect, and adult autonomy. Thank you for this demolition job.
After reading Strangio's argumentation I am thinking that she is not particularly good at it. Woke people in general live in a world that falls apart when critical thinking is focused upon it. Very much "a house of cards" as the article described, and very definitely unstable, like the minds of its creators.
In her interview with Celeste Lecense after Skrmetti, as reported by Benjamin Ryan, when asked how she was, she said "I was like, you know what I need is to go to a gay town." I wonder what the 'gay town' would think of that?
Great summary of her upside-down world, thank you.
Yeah, I read that, it’s bc deep down Strangio knows she’s a lesbian. But you don’t get to opt in or out of womanhood. I an a gender non conforming butch but I am still a female a woman. There is no right or wrong way to be a girl.
We need laws. Social justice is a swinging pendulum without legal power.
Parents who raise their children with gender woo-woo should lose those children.|
Doctors who slip puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones to minors should spend decades in prison.
Surgeons who remove or butcher healthy body parts in the name of "gender affirmation" should go to the gas chamber.
Young adults who get on TransTok and decide that maybe they're "trans" should be deprived of internet access and grounded until their majorities, with absolutely non-affirming psychiatric care after hospitalization.
"Trans" is sickness. We are finally coming to recognize it as such, long after so many European countries closed their gender clinics. It's time to set intolerance of this disorder into law, federal law, and to restore respect for truth and for reality.
Speaking as a healthcare provider, I can attest to the fact that most of us will drop any line of work that becomes a target of lawsuits or licensing board complaints. The latter are not as much of a threat to doctors practicing GAC in blue states, but the lawsuits still are.
This issue arose in the context of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons pulling back from endorsing gender surgeries in July, 2024. Leor Sapir reported on this development in the City Journal the following month:
In his report, Sapir discusses how being "part of a multidisciplinary team" that included mental health professionals might affect the level of legal responsibility surgeons are assigned for decisions to operate on shared patients. Sapir says, "It is likely a matter of time before judges come to appreciate how this area of medicine operates and refuse to let surgeons off the hook when they assert that they were relying on mental health professionals to determine medical necessity."
Meanwhile, we have heard from increasing numbers of whistle blowers and other investigators that the professional involvement and opinions of mental health professionals have been progressively decreased by many prominent gender clinics in the U.S. It isn't clear to me, or probably to a lot of other people, to what extent new patients at a gender clinic are evaluated by mental health professionals or what the evaluation consists of. Psychologists and psychiatrists were originally (1970's in my experience) asked to submit opinions to surgeons regarding patients' psychological stability, including the stability of their decision to live as an opposite-sexed person, and even ability to "pass" post-surgically. At this point we have no scientific basis for forming an opinion that a patient will or won't benefit from gender surgery, or will remain stable in a cross-sexed identification, so mental health professionals should not be writing letters stating those kinds of opinions.
Returning to Sapir's point about what judges might say in a malpractice case against the surgeons, it is clear that surgeons are ethically and legally responsible to do their own evaluations on each patient regarding medical necessity and potential benefits and risks of every surgery they perform.
I couldn’t agree with you more. Physicians and psychiatrists are the origin, and promulgators of the atrocity - no philosopher, no lawyer, no sociologist ever sterilized a child.
about six weeks ago, the new president of Mount Holyoke College was flaunting DEI bans by parading Strangio as a guest speaker at the queer womens college on Instagram. they're all dying on this hill. only, they're not dying.
humble brag: when I commented: "Respectfully, President Holley, will viewpoint diversity be allowed?" entire Instagram account disappeared.
I left the USA in 2010 (Palin), the yer after the "trans" cult started. Though I had dated several transsexual men, I had never to my knowledge met a transgender person and hope to go to my grave without breaking that record. Their representatives I see online are absolutely repellent to me and I could not work in an office where I was expected to partake in pronoun rituals. I would not last a week.
Strangio couldn’t be more like a comic book supervillain, if she were in the next Marvel movie.
And her mentor in evil, George Soros, as well his odd and awkward son, Alex, complete the perfectly nefarious family dynasty, for supporting and mentoring her in realizing her destructive fantasies.
Photos of Soros and Abedin seem staged for public consumption of their gravitas as our new de facto rulers, rather than the projection of love or commitment. If anything, they appear cold and distant, almost wax-like.
Shocking to see this article on the AP, because it delineates many of the currently divisive NGOs Soros funds, including Strangio’s ACLU.
This kind of comment—invoking George Soros and his son as shadowy puppet masters behind everything from the ACLU to global unrest—is precisely the conspiratorial thinking that discredits legitimate critiques of gender ideology. Whatever one thinks of Soros’s politics or philanthropy, the leap from “he funds left-leaning organizations” to “he is a nefarious mastermind installing de facto rulers” is pure fantasy. It’s a narrative MAGA influencers have flogged for years because it simplifies complex social change into a tale of evil elites and helpless victims.
As someone who is deeply critical of the ACLU’s turn under Strangio—especially its abandonment of sex-based rights and medical ethics—I want that critique to stand on its own merits. Blaming “Soros” for everything Strangio has done only serves to muddy the waters, alienate moderates, and give gender ideologues an easy way to dismiss us all as conspiracy theorists.
Let’s not undermine the gender-critical cause by trafficking in ideas indistinguishable from QAnon. The facts are damning enough. We don’t need to invent puppet strings where open ideology and institutional capture are already doing the damage.
While it is true that the alt-right sinks into conspiratorialism regarding Soros, it is nevertheless a fact that rich men push money where they want political advancement of their values. Same story with the Pritzker family and that Rothblatt dudinaskirt.
First off, I didn’t say that Soros and Strangio are closely affiliated, only that it would explain the ACLU and its bizarre push of ‘rights’ for trans identified men, inclusive of housing rapists in women’s prisons.
I also stipulated that one couldn’t make up a better cast of characters for a Marvel movie depicting criminal masterminds seeking to undermine society, a la the Joker in any Batman movie, than these real life people.
I mean, come one, a name like Chase Strangio?
Before you accuse my playful, yet conspiratorial post as undermining the gender critical movement, how many feminists undermine the gender critical cause with petty infighting?
Many women fighting the gender delusion have their own delusional belief that the Democratic party is simply misguided in their quest to trans the country’s children and can be convinced to reverse course with good old fashioned protests?
The Democrats are clearly operating under the direction of their moneyed backers. Case in point, are AOC and Bernie Sanders, who under the auspices of fighting oligarchs, have been silent on the medal of freedom given to Soros, an oligarch with documented efforts to influence our judiciary.
Likewise, Pritzker, the governor of Michigan and presidential hopeful, himself, is a huge donor behind this movement, in addition to being heavily invested in companies that profit off gender altering cosmetic surgeries.
Perhaps, people who cry conspiracy theorist, in an attempt to seem somehow sane or mainstream are simply carrying water for the very deep pockets pushing that which they fight against?
How many purported conspiracy theories have actually come true, just in the past few months to a year?
This is good news. Rationality is finally reasserting itself. I’ve been waiting for this to happen.
That said, the right needs to give up on demonizing marijuana. I very much doubt that genie will go back in the bottle. Used moderately, it causes far less harm to the body than alcohol.
Oh, Chase. I worked at the ACLU from 2012 to the end 2014, and she started there in 2013. So we must have overlapped by over a year. To the best of my recollection, we never crossed paths at the time.
In early 2019, I was on a panel at the Heritage Foundation called "The Inequality of the Equality Act: Concerns from the Left." We couldn't find a single liberal or moderate think tank who would host the panel, so we reluctantly accepted HF's invitation to do it there. NBC covered it. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/conservative-group-hosts-anti-transgender-panel-feminists-left-n964246.
In response, Chase went on a Twitter screed. She said: "A note about Kara Dansky, this anti-trans discourse, and why I am eternally disappointed in 'liberal' non-allies. This panel of so-called 'liberals' and 'feminists' talking about why the existence of trans people threatens women is a perfect example of how dangerously unsupported trans people have been in movements for justice. We continue to situate the existence of trans people, the bodies we have, the truth of our medical care, the vulnerability of our lives, as something to debate and place in opposition to the needs of non-trans women. We allow people like Kara Dansky who uses her ACLU credentials to legitimize her violent vision for trans death to be seen as a victim and the purveyor of some truth that exists behind the pages of our advocacy for trans existence. Meanwhile our so-called allies share the unscientific polemics of Jesse Singal and Alice Dreger and make space for the Kara Danskys to consolidate power in an already hateful world where our bodies and lives are subject to the biased whims of others."
The following year, I was poised to file an amicus brief in a court case and I needed the consent of the parties to do so. I emailed the parties. In response, I received an email from Chase that read, simply: "Kara, Plaintiffs consent to the filing of WHRC's brief. Thank you, Chase."
Last year, I was in NYC to support Maud Maron's resolution before the city to reevaluate a 2019 policy allowing boys to compete in girls' sports. Chase yelled at me from across the room, addressing me by name.
It's been an interesting decade, to say the least.
Thank you for sharing this.
I’ve taken to pointing people towards Dreger’s book. This article may not be Galileo’s middle finger, but it is mine. Thank you for all you do Kara.
Chase is easily triggered. This is because history is erased and that's inconvenient when other people refuse or forget to erase it.
From The New Yorker piece in 2020:
"He remembers little of his childhood and adolescence."
Joan is Chase's mother.
From The New Yorker: "(He continues to be protective of Joan. I met her on my visit to Newton, but she was the one person he didn’t want me to interview.)"
"The summer after graduating from high school, he worked at J. P. Licks, an ice-cream parlor in Newton Centre, where some of the other employees were students at Oberlin College, in Ohio. “They were all queer,” Strangio recalled. “Or at least some of them were.” So, it seemed, was he."
She.
Anyone who uses the phrase “non trans women”, has zero credibility.
Anyone who uses the word "transphobia" is below the salt.
Chase Strangio is inevitable if the "trans" lie is tolerated in any way.
She is inexorable unless we tell everyone, including adults, that they cannot be in the wrong body and they cannot "live as" the opposite sex and they do not have a "gender identity" because it does not exist.
There is no way around this.
Kara, describing you as having a "violent vision for trans death" is a crazy reversal of reality. The violence from trans activists and their allies is only going to get worse as we continue to fight for our rights. https://sallyja.substack.com/p/nothing-says-woman-like-a-man-in
The other thing that's so interesting about the "violent vision for trans death" is that just a year later, she was giving me her consent to file an amicus brief. If she really thought I had a "violent vision for trans death," shouldn't she have alerted the authorities? Shouldn't she had alerted the people at the court that such a person was attempting to file a brief? Shouldn't she have, at a minimum, withheld her consent for me to file and force me to seek permission of the court (which she totally could have done)? Chase doesn't believe I have a "violent vision for trans death" any more than anyone else does. But if you're Chase, you just get to lie and lie and lie.
Kara in her talk with Bridget Phetasy:
"It's very much a top-down, male-driven thing. There's billions of dollars behind it. There are very rich men who are benefiting from it. And there are some really creepy, fetishistic men who have a lot of power and a lot of money who are driving it. I think it's very wealthy, very fetishistic men who are driving this whole thing...
The one guy is named Martine Rothblatt...he's behind a large part of it... Rothblatt thinks he's going to turn us all into cloud people, that we're all going to exist in the cloud, and that we're not going to have any need for human bodies. And that's partly why they're going after women. In the words of Jennifer Bilek, she founded the 11th Hour Blog, they are colonizing our sex. These very wealthy men are colonizing our sex to make it disappear."
Cue to 42:00.
https://youtu.be/R9CNyZCrv_Q?si=se7u4xKMfX9QCZQw
Yes, once you realize what's actually going on it's difficult to believe that people can actually think this way and not be in an insane asylum.
It's motivated reasoning. When your Theory of the World is a totalizing "Male dominance over female subordination", you're kind of locked in to concocting elaborate explanations connecting all social phenomena dots to that theory.
"Porn and biotech obliteration of women" is Kara's "Transwomen are women."
Beware of people using phrases such as "We continue to situate . . ."
Strangio is explicit in what's driving her crusade: Queer revolutionism against liberal assimilationism. And yet you, Kara, continue to ignore that and insist Trans™ is pervy, pornsick, rich fetishists who seek to play God with human biology for their transhumanist cyborg AI biotech vision of the future.
Come to your senses, Kara. It's Queer Theory, just like LGBCourage says.
For anyone reading this, I have no idea who this guy is. Regardless, he is a complete nuisance. He regularly harasses me on X, and I have muted him. He also has no idea what he's talking about, and frequently attributes positions to me that I do not hold.
This it the title of Chapter 4 of my book "The Reckoning": "The Queering of the American Political Left." The following paragraphs appear in that chapter:
"All “gender identity” flows from something called “queer theory”—a branch of philosophy whose essential tenet is that sex is a social construct that is not grounded in material reality. Following on a movement toward an embrace of postmodernism (sometimes referred to as poststructuralism) in academia, “queer theory” began to flourish in the nineties and is still with us today. Its creation is frequently attributed to French philosopher Michel Foucault, although Foucault was not alone in popularizing it. Gayle Rubin, another queer theorist, teaches at the Institute for Research on Women and Gender at the University of Michigan. Her research interests include “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender studies, ethnography of queer populations, urban sexual geographies, histories of sexology, and feminist theory and politics.”
Perhaps the most well-known contemporary proponent of “queer theory” in the U.S. is Judith Butler, Distinguished Professor in the Graduate School and formerly the Maxine Elliot Chair in the Department of Comparative Literature and the Program of Critical Theory at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1990 (six years after the death of Foucault), she published a book called Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, which brought “queer theory” into the mainstream. Professor Butler’s very extensive biography on the U.C. Berkeley website takes great pains to let us all know that she goes by “they/them” pronouns, as though she is some sort of academic committee all on her own. Meanwhile, in the land of material reality, she is an individual human being who is also a lesbian and in a long-term relationship with a woman, who is also an individual adult human female person (i.e., a woman)."
Can't it be both???
Its very clear to me that political progress of the trans movement is driven by a coalition of groups pursuing their own objectives - that includes the queer-theory-academics/activists, And the AGP horde, followed closely by the pedo-normalisation brigade.
What they all have in common is the desire to abolish boundaries and bend objective-realism enough to allow people to do whatever they want by abolishing normativity and judgment under the guise of inclusion.
Kara, please. I've been following you for years, fully dedicated to your mission. Until your recent distancing from Jennifer Bilek after her crazed descent into anti-Zionism, she was your guru for the shadowy forces behind trans. And you still subscribe to Bilek's crackpottery, you just don't mention her name anymore.
Nine days ago, in your talk with Cynthia Dill about the origin of trans insanity:
"The why question is a little bit complicated. But it really boils down to follow the money. When you look into this, this is an industry. It's a multi-billion at least, might have reached a trillion dollar industry, that is essentially being pushed by mostly men, but plenty of women, who are very wealthy and are affiliated with pharma, medical supply companies, a lot of tech, and a man named Martine Rothblatt."
In other words, cyborg AI biotech transhumanism. Not the radical queer political agenda. Unless you think Rothblatt et al. is also behind the queer postmodern turn in 3rd-wave feminism. Do you think that's the why for that too?
Cue to 11:00.
https://youtu.be/CIM_uFZ8vUw?si=JWBJP7bwWa4dn5Ib
You are a complete nuisance and I am in not in the habit of arguing with anonymous nuisances. You frequently harass me on Twitter, which is why I muted you. You claim that I deny that many women play a huge role in perpetuating "trans," which isn't true. I have never denied that.
Jennifer Bilek has never been my "guru."
Yet you goad and goad and goad. We have done several rounds of this on Twitter, and it's a complete waste of time. I don't even know who you are.
I'm done arguing with you on this post, which is about Chase, not about your issues with me. My positions are clear. "Trans" can be chalked up to queer theory, an industry, and pervy men. All three are true.
I put a lot of my work into my books and behind a paywall on Substack, which is why you don't know what I truly think (you just assume you do). The reason I put my content behind a paywall is that this is all I do, all day, every day. I TERFd myself out of a career in 2019, and haven't had paid work ever since. I couldn't get paid work in my field if I tried.
If you bothered to pay me for the work I do, day in and day out, you would know that last summer, I posted an entire Substack about the women of the cult of trans. But you won't. You would rather harass and goad me wherever you can find me.
You're an annoying anonymous creep and I'm blocking you. Leave me alone.
I will now leave the good people of the LGB Courage Coalition to their good work and stop distracting everyone, something you are not capable of, evidently.
“violent vision for trans death”?
The persecution complex is very real, and harmful to individuals who hold it.
Imagine the amount of self-hate it takes to destroy not only your own body, but the bodies of others, because you can't accept that you are a lesbian.
Indeed. The inherent homophobia of either the parents or those themselves who go down this path to avoid who they really are is at the heart of this.
I see Chase is an opportunist who is absolutely delighted with presenting as a straight white male - top of the heap, rather than being a Lesbian down at the cultural bottom. I don’t think it’s right to refer to Chase as she/her. Everyone has the right to define themselves, and as part of civil society, I believe we should respect that.
However, I don’t think that medical procedure should ever be brought to the courts. Consider the outcomes (that SOTUS didn’t consider because they are not doctors) of the overturning of Roe v Wade; women who want children and are having complications/emergencies in their pregnancies and are denied care, which in many cases leaves them unable to bear children. Science is ever developing and not absolute, but a legal decision is strict and finite without exceptions. The two are not compatible. If we care, then why aren’t we having consciousness raising groups (yes, I’m a 65 yr old Lesbian activist) for these girls? Here’s a possible title: “Don’t fit in? Don’t want to wear a skirt and makeup? Thinking about puberty blockers? Maybe you’re Butch. Come down to the Pride Center and meet other girls like you. Facilitated by a Butch Lesbian.”
Everyone has the right to define themselves anyway they desire, accurately or not.
And I have the right to ignore it as being ridiculous.
I couldn’t agree more, third person pronouns are you trying to tell me how I should speak of you when you are not there and I am a biological realist, to describe you as the wrong sex would be me going along w your delusion when you are not even there and is positively Orwellian.
When pressed, my pronouns are I/you/we. Third person pronouns are used to gossip behind someone's back - which is immoral.
Although I am not LGB, I have have always been a cognitive nonconformist (Aspergers/gifted?), and thus experienced social engineering in school system as offensive "conversion therapy", and have always been sympathetic and comfortable with gender nonconforming individuals. The trans movement is primarily homophobic, but has also been going after youth similar to how I was at that age.
Bingo
Recommend the book "Irreversible Damage' by Abigail Shrier. It will give you a better understanding of where all of this came from, why girls would rather identify as trans than lesbian, and why we don't let trans activitists control the language. I'm a 63 year old butch. What's happening here is well beyond being righted by consciousness raising groups.
One of the first books I read on the topic.
None of her thoughts on this issue make any sense due to the fact that they are internally inconsistent. She thinks there is no such thing as the sex-binary, but would be insulted if someone said she is not a "man." She thinks there is no sex-binary, but insists that anyone who calls themself a girl or a woman (whether due to immature thinking, trauma, internalized homophobia, brain-washing, sexual fetishism, self-hatred, confusion or any number of reasons) MUST be allowed into female-only sports. If there is no sex-binary, she should be arguing for an end to single-sex sports, prisons, locker rooms, etc. Furthermore, she argues that there is no sex binary, and that a penis is just an unusual body part for some women, but her argument falls apart because, if there is no sex binary, there is no such thing as a woman with a penis. According to Strangio, there are just people - and we cannot define anyone as male or female, man or woman, boy or girl - yet she argues that people are male or female, boy or girl, man or woman if they say so. Which is it?
My last point is this. How can she argue so strenuously that some children need estrogen, breast implants, testicle removal, penis-flaying, etc., and other children need testosterone, double mastectomies and phalloplasties (ie. fake penises created from the flesh of the forearm or inner thigh) when there is no such thing as a boy or girl/man or woman? She's not arguing that some kids are "really" boys or girls, but don't look like it and feel sad because they are so atypical for their sex. She's arguing that these categories don't exist. How then can she even justify these medical interventions. What is the end goal? Is her argument that some children just really, really want softer skin, breasts and vaginal-like genitalia while others want beards, deeper voices, etc., and that this is purely cosmetic? If so, how can she possibly say this is "life-saving" care, unless she believes any and all cosmetic procedures are life-saving, that all people must get publicly paid for cosmetic procedures of any kind, whenever and whereever they want them, even as children.
Love this post! Would love even more to see Strangio respond in person to your well-made arguments! LOL!
I would love to have a public debate with Strangio!
I get screamed at enough, thanks
"themself" is not a word
Oops.
@HippieSq I appreciate your comment and agree.
And Leftist revolutionary tactics instruct their stooge soldiers of political warfare (Social Justice Warriors, Trans activists, antifa etc.)
“Your activism is your opponent’s reaction” basic Saul Alinsky.
So, internal inconsistency is something of a feature rather than a bug. The sophist rubbish is built to piss people off and while it can’t stand up to logic or argument it does suffice to entrance the cultists who have been vulnerable (social isolation, anxiety etc) and subjected to (often CHILD) abusive “education”=indoctrination.
Note well the trans activists have a standing policy of NO DEBATE. This prevents them facing opposition in news/media subject to fairness doctrine, outlets can’t find anyone to represent the “ other side”.
You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. Up close it’s children being broken, but this is just a slice of the philosophical sophistication of resentment: burn it all down so we can build back better
The next new thing is never the thing,
The thing is always the revolution
This type of illogic is why they avoid debating. But the counter arguments you are making to their assertions are catching on. It’s only a matter of time before the whole house of cards falls apart.
Bravo 👏. My brain is exploding. Even I am confused yet it makes perfect sense. They have no idea what they are saying, therefore neither do we and they get what they want by force.
"If there is no sex-binary, she should be arguing for an end to single-sex sports, prisons, locker rooms, etc."
That's what I keep wondering. Oh, there's no such thing as the sex binary—but wait, we must continue to have women's restrooms and sports teams for men to invade.
Strangio wants revolution and the dismantling of the society she lives in but with none of it inconveniencing her. She wants to keep all her fame, influence, the conveniences she enjoys and the well-paying job she is failing at while playing-acting at revolution and sacrificing and hiding behind others - in this case, children - to keep up the act.
I’ve come to see that as the basic fault of the revolution. There is always a privileged class in the end.
I haven't followed Strangio's career, so this is my first opportunity to evaluate her competence, and I am not impressed. I don't understand how she acquired all the fame and influence you mention, except for the fact that online influencers are often shallow and not particularly bright.
Recall those two NYC "protestors" from a few weeks ago who were mocking the Black woman who wanted to be able to get through the blocked streets to work. "Oh no, work!" Turns out they were both well-to-do Trustafarian types.
This is the first major substantive takedown of Chase Strangio I’ve seen that doesn’t just chip away at her arguments but blasts through the very foundations of queerness and gender ideology. It’s long overdue.
Criticizing Strangio’s public persona—her tortured hair, her cultivated gay-male affect—isn’t ad hominem; it’s analysis. Her aesthetic is the message. It’s performative rebellion weaponized against social norms, not just for shock value but as a form of ideological warfare. She may be the first and only bitchy gay man ever born trapped in a woman’s body—but it’s a parody, a theatrical claim that gender is a costume and sex a suggestion.
The fact that she’s on record denouncing civil marriage as a “violent institution” is especially revealing. If anything confirms that sex is real and immutable, it’s that particular flavor of anti-marriage rhetoric—it’s straight out of 1990s lesbian radicalism. Urvashi Vaid said much the same: that gay men seeking marriage equality were selling out the revolution, and needed to reject patriarchal structures instead. It wasn’t persuasive then, and it’s grotesque now when repurposed by the ACLU’s ferocious lady lawyer in the service of child medicalization and erasure of sex-based rights.
Gay men didn’t fight for decades to be told—by the left or the right—how to live our lives. We wanted freedom. Not queer theory, not utopian re-engineering. Just freedom grounded in material reality, mutual respect, and adult autonomy. Thank you for this demolition job.
Thank you for your strong words. I agree
Great article, very well written!
After reading Strangio's argumentation I am thinking that she is not particularly good at it. Woke people in general live in a world that falls apart when critical thinking is focused upon it. Very much "a house of cards" as the article described, and very definitely unstable, like the minds of its creators.
Beautifully stated and utterly true. I have restacked.
Thank you as always for your kind words.
Great piece of writing. On point! Could not agree more.
In her interview with Celeste Lecense after Skrmetti, as reported by Benjamin Ryan, when asked how she was, she said "I was like, you know what I need is to go to a gay town." I wonder what the 'gay town' would think of that?
Great summary of her upside-down world, thank you.
Yeah, I read that, it’s bc deep down Strangio knows she’s a lesbian. But you don’t get to opt in or out of womanhood. I an a gender non conforming butch but I am still a female a woman. There is no right or wrong way to be a girl.
She and her ilk have ruined all the "gay towns" and can f right off. We actual LGB's are fighting for our cultural survival and she's not invited.
We need laws. Social justice is a swinging pendulum without legal power.
Parents who raise their children with gender woo-woo should lose those children.|
Doctors who slip puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones to minors should spend decades in prison.
Surgeons who remove or butcher healthy body parts in the name of "gender affirmation" should go to the gas chamber.
Young adults who get on TransTok and decide that maybe they're "trans" should be deprived of internet access and grounded until their majorities, with absolutely non-affirming psychiatric care after hospitalization.
"Trans" is sickness. We are finally coming to recognize it as such, long after so many European countries closed their gender clinics. It's time to set intolerance of this disorder into law, federal law, and to restore respect for truth and for reality.
I believe if the doctors are held responsible this will come to an end.
Elevate malpractice costs to formidability.
I’d rather win on morals and truth, but whatever ends it.
Speaking as a healthcare provider, I can attest to the fact that most of us will drop any line of work that becomes a target of lawsuits or licensing board complaints. The latter are not as much of a threat to doctors practicing GAC in blue states, but the lawsuits still are.
And also, mental health professionals should refuse to write letters of readiness for the medical professionals to cover their a$$es with.
This issue arose in the context of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons pulling back from endorsing gender surgeries in July, 2024. Leor Sapir reported on this development in the City Journal the following month:
https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-consensus-no-longer
In his report, Sapir discusses how being "part of a multidisciplinary team" that included mental health professionals might affect the level of legal responsibility surgeons are assigned for decisions to operate on shared patients. Sapir says, "It is likely a matter of time before judges come to appreciate how this area of medicine operates and refuse to let surgeons off the hook when they assert that they were relying on mental health professionals to determine medical necessity."
Meanwhile, we have heard from increasing numbers of whistle blowers and other investigators that the professional involvement and opinions of mental health professionals have been progressively decreased by many prominent gender clinics in the U.S. It isn't clear to me, or probably to a lot of other people, to what extent new patients at a gender clinic are evaluated by mental health professionals or what the evaluation consists of. Psychologists and psychiatrists were originally (1970's in my experience) asked to submit opinions to surgeons regarding patients' psychological stability, including the stability of their decision to live as an opposite-sexed person, and even ability to "pass" post-surgically. At this point we have no scientific basis for forming an opinion that a patient will or won't benefit from gender surgery, or will remain stable in a cross-sexed identification, so mental health professionals should not be writing letters stating those kinds of opinions.
Returning to Sapir's point about what judges might say in a malpractice case against the surgeons, it is clear that surgeons are ethically and legally responsible to do their own evaluations on each patient regarding medical necessity and potential benefits and risks of every surgery they perform.
I couldn’t agree with you more. Physicians and psychiatrists are the origin, and promulgators of the atrocity - no philosopher, no lawyer, no sociologist ever sterilized a child.
The parents believe the MDs. They should be able to! But on this topic,they cannot!
about six weeks ago, the new president of Mount Holyoke College was flaunting DEI bans by parading Strangio as a guest speaker at the queer womens college on Instagram. they're all dying on this hill. only, they're not dying.
humble brag: when I commented: "Respectfully, President Holley, will viewpoint diversity be allowed?" entire Instagram account disappeared.
What is the only possible response to the use of the term "queer" by true believers? Why, it's LOL, of course
It's a big, silly Trojan horse! Somebody needs to midjourney that image right now!
Thank you @momblogauthentic
Thanks for this very wonderfully informative article.
Thank you for another brilliant article. Would that this was posted all over MSM. We can but hope.
Nicely written.
I’d caution against interpretation of her though: when someone is delusional, everything bends to the delusion.
She cannot make true statements about sex.
She needs help.
I left the USA in 2010 (Palin), the yer after the "trans" cult started. Though I had dated several transsexual men, I had never to my knowledge met a transgender person and hope to go to my grave without breaking that record. Their representatives I see online are absolutely repellent to me and I could not work in an office where I was expected to partake in pronoun rituals. I would not last a week.
The pronouns and land acknowledgments are signaling of cultic adherence and thereby qualification for “Inclusion❗️”
So no worries about not lasting you probably couldn’t get hired… which is to say get in on the grift of DEI Didn’t Earn It.
You have to be broken, say by a degree in grievance optimization and best qualified by hallucinations of intersectional victimization
Strangio couldn’t be more like a comic book supervillain, if she were in the next Marvel movie.
And her mentor in evil, George Soros, as well his odd and awkward son, Alex, complete the perfectly nefarious family dynasty, for supporting and mentoring her in realizing her destructive fantasies.
Photos of Soros and Abedin seem staged for public consumption of their gravitas as our new de facto rulers, rather than the projection of love or commitment. If anything, they appear cold and distant, almost wax-like.
Shocking to see this article on the AP, because it delineates many of the currently divisive NGOs Soros funds, including Strangio’s ACLU.
https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-religion-race-and-ethnicity-george-soros-black-lives-matter-3a8b5ed85cb845960e7388e2ea4ec4e5
This kind of comment—invoking George Soros and his son as shadowy puppet masters behind everything from the ACLU to global unrest—is precisely the conspiratorial thinking that discredits legitimate critiques of gender ideology. Whatever one thinks of Soros’s politics or philanthropy, the leap from “he funds left-leaning organizations” to “he is a nefarious mastermind installing de facto rulers” is pure fantasy. It’s a narrative MAGA influencers have flogged for years because it simplifies complex social change into a tale of evil elites and helpless victims.
As someone who is deeply critical of the ACLU’s turn under Strangio—especially its abandonment of sex-based rights and medical ethics—I want that critique to stand on its own merits. Blaming “Soros” for everything Strangio has done only serves to muddy the waters, alienate moderates, and give gender ideologues an easy way to dismiss us all as conspiracy theorists.
Let’s not undermine the gender-critical cause by trafficking in ideas indistinguishable from QAnon. The facts are damning enough. We don’t need to invent puppet strings where open ideology and institutional capture are already doing the damage.
While it is true that the alt-right sinks into conspiratorialism regarding Soros, it is nevertheless a fact that rich men push money where they want political advancement of their values. Same story with the Pritzker family and that Rothblatt dudinaskirt.
There was a Substack article recently talking about the very fact that modern democracy has sunk into a my-billionaires vs your-billionaires battle: https://voicesuncovered.substack.com/p/the-party-of-hypocrisy-how-democrats
First off, I didn’t say that Soros and Strangio are closely affiliated, only that it would explain the ACLU and its bizarre push of ‘rights’ for trans identified men, inclusive of housing rapists in women’s prisons.
I also stipulated that one couldn’t make up a better cast of characters for a Marvel movie depicting criminal masterminds seeking to undermine society, a la the Joker in any Batman movie, than these real life people.
I mean, come one, a name like Chase Strangio?
Before you accuse my playful, yet conspiratorial post as undermining the gender critical movement, how many feminists undermine the gender critical cause with petty infighting?
Many women fighting the gender delusion have their own delusional belief that the Democratic party is simply misguided in their quest to trans the country’s children and can be convinced to reverse course with good old fashioned protests?
The Democrats are clearly operating under the direction of their moneyed backers. Case in point, are AOC and Bernie Sanders, who under the auspices of fighting oligarchs, have been silent on the medal of freedom given to Soros, an oligarch with documented efforts to influence our judiciary.
Likewise, Pritzker, the governor of Michigan and presidential hopeful, himself, is a huge donor behind this movement, in addition to being heavily invested in companies that profit off gender altering cosmetic surgeries.
Perhaps, people who cry conspiracy theorist, in an attempt to seem somehow sane or mainstream are simply carrying water for the very deep pockets pushing that which they fight against?
How many purported conspiracy theories have actually come true, just in the past few months to a year?
This is good news. Rationality is finally reasserting itself. I’ve been waiting for this to happen.
That said, the right needs to give up on demonizing marijuana. I very much doubt that genie will go back in the bottle. Used moderately, it causes far less harm to the body than alcohol.