Jen, thanks for bringing this distorted, biased and inaccurate exhibit at the Smithsonian to light for what it actually is. And thanks also for calling out the financial support the exhibit received from Nike, the reportorial support from the New York Times and CNN in their accusations against Jillian Michaels.
This exhibit represents federally sanctioned (interactive) propaganda by the Smithsonian - and demonstrates that despite federal policy changes - the institutional posture of culture, corporations and media regarding biological differences in men and women have not returned to reality. Please keep showing the courage to speak out against this unfairness to women in sports.
I heard Jillian Michaels yesterday but I had no idea how extensive this exhibit actually is... and wtf Nike. I just published a story today about a brave athlete standing up to Nike and their roster of hypocritical all-stars. https://aynsrants.substack.com/p/standing-taller-than-the-nba-with
I meant the commenter, who apparently has titled her substack, Ayn's Rants, a reference to Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged. I'm sure you do good puns too. Thanks for everything. Did you hear that an MS 13 gang member arrested in DC is now suing the president for not recognizing his "identity?" Let's think of some puns on that~
It's amusing how they are intentionally vague in the response options for the polls they took and presented the results of - "fair" or "foul" (this cute, sports-like category ostensibly mapping to yes/no sounds like a parent trying to speak the same language as their teenager, with 90% success in hiding the underlying disgust and superiority - and failing utterly). How do you answer a Yes/No question with a fair or foul response - "do transgender athletes upset the competitive balance?", to which I would respond "Yes", but it is unclear whether that should translate into "fair" or "foul". I think it is foul that this is happening in sports today, but my yes answer seems to align generally with the fair response (that is, this is a fair statement, so yes). I'm sure this is by design. Likely a Yes/No poll would have given a predominantly Yes response, guessing well above the 60% return they are showing in foul (which I'm still not sure where this was supposed to land).
Not so fast with "museum visitors voted on the side of common sense."
"As of January (when these photos were taken), 60% of visitors said that males in women’s sports upset the competitive balance. And 58% said that testing for sex in sports is fair."
What about the 40% who didn't agree? Imagine that the survey was about the earth being flat: wouldn't we worry like mad if 40% didn't agree?
I was a member of the Smithsonian and used to enjoy reading their magazine. After Jan 6 there was a highly inaccurate editorial written by the editor of the magazine about all the Capitol police that were killed, blah blah blah. I wrote a letter that day and canceled my subscription. Never going back, the institution is fucked up.
And the males who fathered children, but now compete in the women's category of say, a masters (meaning middle age category) martial arts competition. My ex-husband, who claims to be me, the mother of our 2 sons, has been doing exactly that for 25 years. A little hobby to accompany his job as the COO of a tech company, which he just recently retired from. He joined this company pretending our sons didn't exist, which worked because I had their health and dental coverage on my benefits. I never bought Nike so my boycott means very little. Here's testimony of trans widow #73, revealing the danger to all women in the sphere of a crossdressing man with a sexual fetish.
I am so disappointed in the Smithsonian. We have always touted it as a wonderful place to learn about culture and history. Now? Do I even take my grandchildren? What other surprises might blindsided the unsuspecting tourist?
Jen, have you always been sure you're a female because you are, or because you think you are?!
Did you need a chromosome test to convince yourself? I doubt it. I doubt any doctors even really needed to examine you to be sure. I think this is the case for the vast majority of people, the exception being the Caster Semanyas of the world.
I suspect doctors knew that Caster Semanya was male, even without a swab test, but it was considered unkind to say so. (I call her a her because her ambiguities affected the way she was raised and doubtless legitimately perceived herself from her first awareness until at least the onset of puberty, by when it would be psychologically difficult to accept otherwise). But clearly she has an unfair advantage competing against women who don't have testes, and shouldn't be allowed to do so.
I support swab tests because they are so much less invasive than prior identification methods. But we all know what we know, without swab tests, or even undressing, in almost all instances. It's just sad that we live in a world that has been gaslit into thinking we might need to do them as a matter of routine. No one thinks either Simone Biles or Riley Gaines needs testing.
I haven't seen that exhibit, but went to the Museum of American Art in DC as few years ago and every single display said something negative about American history, or about America. I had been there many years before and it wasn't like that. It made me not want to go back.
This is a problem in all our museums -- except the newly reopened Frick. It's been going on for years, I used to become incensed, now I turn a blind eye to the blurbs and just look at the art.
For a couple of years after the BLM riots, every museum and arboretum I belong to -- and it's a lot -- would email me a questionnaire asking me to tell them how they could serve me better, using code words like "community" and "inclusion"; so I told them.
Translated, So I told them off.
As for men who think they're women: They're not, say I.
As a result, I still entertain warm feelings for old friends but almost never see them anymore. I position myself in reality; they feel only a self-righteous compassion that in the long run does no good for anyone. The twain just isn't meeting, and there's no good in arguing with people whose self-esteem relies on how nice they are.
Unreal. And so disappointing. I love the Smithsonian museums. Also I used to love Scientific American. And NPR for that matter. So sad to see them all captured by this nonsense.
The cheek swab is MOSTLY accurate. In chimera conditions, two zygotes are originally present in the uterus, but one of the twins stops growing and is absorbed by the stronger twin very early in gestation. An anatomically typical baby is born, with no one ever suspecting that some of the baby's cells have the DNA of the vanished twin.
It is completely possible for an anatomically normal female to have XY chromosomes in her cheek lining. It's not her, it's the twin brother she absorbed early in gestation.
This isn't a reason to abandon cheek swabs however. Just follow up with anatomical scans and blood tests if the cheek swab test comes up with unexpected results.
I don’t buy Nike anymore. It’s been a long time since I’ve bought Nike, and I won’t. I refuse to do business with them.
Right there with you. I also took it one step farther and burned all my Nike stuff in a my outdoor fire pit.
Nike is not only wrong headed but arrogant as well. I haven’t and won’t buy merch from Nike.
Nike has been decidedly weird for a long time.
As a shareholder in two companies that compete with Nike, I just say to Nike: ‘keep it up’
I like this!
Jen, thanks for bringing this distorted, biased and inaccurate exhibit at the Smithsonian to light for what it actually is. And thanks also for calling out the financial support the exhibit received from Nike, the reportorial support from the New York Times and CNN in their accusations against Jillian Michaels.
This exhibit represents federally sanctioned (interactive) propaganda by the Smithsonian - and demonstrates that despite federal policy changes - the institutional posture of culture, corporations and media regarding biological differences in men and women have not returned to reality. Please keep showing the courage to speak out against this unfairness to women in sports.
I heard Jillian Michaels yesterday but I had no idea how extensive this exhibit actually is... and wtf Nike. I just published a story today about a brave athlete standing up to Nike and their roster of hypocritical all-stars. https://aynsrants.substack.com/p/standing-taller-than-the-nba-with
Read your post with great interest. What a great human being. What a contrast to the Nike sellouts, especially Kapernick.
Clever pun in the blog title!
Wait, did I pun? Accidental pun?
I meant the commenter, who apparently has titled her substack, Ayn's Rants, a reference to Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged. I'm sure you do good puns too. Thanks for everything. Did you hear that an MS 13 gang member arrested in DC is now suing the president for not recognizing his "identity?" Let's think of some puns on that~
It's amusing how they are intentionally vague in the response options for the polls they took and presented the results of - "fair" or "foul" (this cute, sports-like category ostensibly mapping to yes/no sounds like a parent trying to speak the same language as their teenager, with 90% success in hiding the underlying disgust and superiority - and failing utterly). How do you answer a Yes/No question with a fair or foul response - "do transgender athletes upset the competitive balance?", to which I would respond "Yes", but it is unclear whether that should translate into "fair" or "foul". I think it is foul that this is happening in sports today, but my yes answer seems to align generally with the fair response (that is, this is a fair statement, so yes). I'm sure this is by design. Likely a Yes/No poll would have given a predominantly Yes response, guessing well above the 60% return they are showing in foul (which I'm still not sure where this was supposed to land).
Not so fast with "museum visitors voted on the side of common sense."
"As of January (when these photos were taken), 60% of visitors said that males in women’s sports upset the competitive balance. And 58% said that testing for sex in sports is fair."
What about the 40% who didn't agree? Imagine that the survey was about the earth being flat: wouldn't we worry like mad if 40% didn't agree?
Fair but at least it was a majority.
We might be less than one generation away from the majority reversing toward insanity
I was a member of the Smithsonian and used to enjoy reading their magazine. After Jan 6 there was a highly inaccurate editorial written by the editor of the magazine about all the Capitol police that were killed, blah blah blah. I wrote a letter that day and canceled my subscription. Never going back, the institution is fucked up.
And the males who fathered children, but now compete in the women's category of say, a masters (meaning middle age category) martial arts competition. My ex-husband, who claims to be me, the mother of our 2 sons, has been doing exactly that for 25 years. A little hobby to accompany his job as the COO of a tech company, which he just recently retired from. He joined this company pretending our sons didn't exist, which worked because I had their health and dental coverage on my benefits. I never bought Nike so my boycott means very little. Here's testimony of trans widow #73, revealing the danger to all women in the sphere of a crossdressing man with a sexual fetish.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDa2mIMtnEY&t=623s
I watched the entire video. Look forward to part 2. Yes I liked and subscribed. Thank you for what you are doing.
I am so disappointed in the Smithsonian. We have always touted it as a wonderful place to learn about culture and history. Now? Do I even take my grandchildren? What other surprises might blindsided the unsuspecting tourist?
Jen, have you always been sure you're a female because you are, or because you think you are?!
Did you need a chromosome test to convince yourself? I doubt it. I doubt any doctors even really needed to examine you to be sure. I think this is the case for the vast majority of people, the exception being the Caster Semanyas of the world.
I suspect doctors knew that Caster Semanya was male, even without a swab test, but it was considered unkind to say so. (I call her a her because her ambiguities affected the way she was raised and doubtless legitimately perceived herself from her first awareness until at least the onset of puberty, by when it would be psychologically difficult to accept otherwise). But clearly she has an unfair advantage competing against women who don't have testes, and shouldn't be allowed to do so.
I support swab tests because they are so much less invasive than prior identification methods. But we all know what we know, without swab tests, or even undressing, in almost all instances. It's just sad that we live in a world that has been gaslit into thinking we might need to do them as a matter of routine. No one thinks either Simone Biles or Riley Gaines needs testing.
I haven't seen that exhibit, but went to the Museum of American Art in DC as few years ago and every single display said something negative about American history, or about America. I had been there many years before and it wasn't like that. It made me not want to go back.
This is a problem in all our museums -- except the newly reopened Frick. It's been going on for years, I used to become incensed, now I turn a blind eye to the blurbs and just look at the art.
For a couple of years after the BLM riots, every museum and arboretum I belong to -- and it's a lot -- would email me a questionnaire asking me to tell them how they could serve me better, using code words like "community" and "inclusion"; so I told them.
Translated, So I told them off.
As for men who think they're women: They're not, say I.
As a result, I still entertain warm feelings for old friends but almost never see them anymore. I position myself in reality; they feel only a self-righteous compassion that in the long run does no good for anyone. The twain just isn't meeting, and there's no good in arguing with people whose self-esteem relies on how nice they are.
Unreal. And so disappointing. I love the Smithsonian museums. Also I used to love Scientific American. And NPR for that matter. So sad to see them all captured by this nonsense.
FUCK NIKE AND ESPECIALLY FUCK THE SMITHSONIAN
I agree with Jillian. Bravo for speaking truth to power. Not easy. No more Nike for me.
The cheek swab is MOSTLY accurate. In chimera conditions, two zygotes are originally present in the uterus, but one of the twins stops growing and is absorbed by the stronger twin very early in gestation. An anatomically typical baby is born, with no one ever suspecting that some of the baby's cells have the DNA of the vanished twin.
It is completely possible for an anatomically normal female to have XY chromosomes in her cheek lining. It's not her, it's the twin brother she absorbed early in gestation.
This isn't a reason to abandon cheek swabs however. Just follow up with anatomical scans and blood tests if the cheek swab test comes up with unexpected results.
Maybe “the Smithsonian” was a psyop all along. We’re DONE with all the pervs calling the shots. New Sheriff.