Also for levity, I saw an X post a couple of years ago which was a snapshot of a shopping site selling a shirt that said "There are more than two sexes".
Then they showed that if you actually wanted to buy the shirt, the first option is to choose men's or women's.
This is so creepy but not surprising. We stopped buying Nike stuff after they supported taking a knee. We buy xx-xy and Athleta and ON instead. Your statements are brilliant. I will repeat them where possible.
Same here. And I distinctly remember that there weren't enough of us willing to boycott Nike products over their support for Kapernick - the stock price barely budged during that debacle. Nike learned the wrong lesson from that experience. They thought it meant that they could support any/all woke narratives. Glad that they are finally having to deal with some pushback. I can live just fine not purchasing Annheiser Busch or Nike products.
I care. This is appalling, Jenn. Reminds me of Fauci's gain of function research funding of EcoHealth at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill subsequently off shored to Wuhan but with continued US involvement and funding.
Related, but not precisely: I really have, in the last 8 or so years, become acutely aware of the capricious nature in which journalists cover certain entities and stories.
I have come to question the foundations upon which I viewed the world previously which could largely be a consequence of "well if the media is covering this, it must be a unique story". Personal journalist/editor political and cultural views have an outsized effect on what the media covers and how.
Maybe it's because journalists in the last decade have truly leaned into the role and view themselves as narrative crafter whose goal is to influence the public (as opposed to it happening as a byproduct ancillary to the cause of reporting on the news). Or maybe I was naive and it always has been so obvious that journalists were seeking to do so.
Thanks for raising this story I likely won't see covered anywhere else.
Great coverage. Then there’s the related debacle of Nike sponsoring the Tucker Center coaching program that indoctrinates coaches to normalize boys in girls’ sports. Not as horrific but of a piece.
How come every normal healthy person is not disgusted by this? I for one added Nike as well as Anheuser Busch to my growing list of boycotted products a few years ago. If I rode a motorcycle Harley Davidson would also be on my list.
They briefly started DEI in California which, seeing as who their main market was, ended in the closing of their flagship shop. Even if they reverse their policies they should not be forgiven for this.
I for one never watched it. In fact if everyone had refused to watch it might have sent a clear message to these woke ignoramuses that we have had enough. Please don't watch this charade. BOYCOTT BOYCOTT BOYCOTT.
If you ever want to know why Nike does what it does these days, you have to dig a bit. When you do, you’ll find that 83% of Nike market shares are held by “institutional investors”, and when you look at who those investors are, you’ll see they’re the usual controlling top trio… but when you dig deeper, you’ll find those three plus the majority of the lesser holders are all inter-held by none other than “each other”! In short, they look like separate investors, but they’re actually a monolithic collective of investors, and they have majority control. From that majority (and you can call it “influence” or “control” or “controlling influence”, either way you slice it, “they” hold the reins) they have installed their preferred people on to the board, and ultimately elevated their preferred puppet (Donahoe) as the top dawg (which mangled everything, and they had to remove him).
In short, Nike is a husk of the company it started off as. The original company grew into something desirable because of its authentic and innovative pursuit of sport, but then the brand grew into an icon and had notable influence on society’s youth culture, and that was desirable to “them”, so it was quietly “captured” (for that societal influence and more)… and now the company is a puppeted facade supporting the well-known globalist agenda of E.S.G., C.E.I., D.E.I., the “green agenda”, the 4th Industrial Revolution, pursuit of transhumanism, and yes, the transgender push.
Once one figures out that Nike has been captured, hollowed out, and is now just another vessel of the larger “WEF agenda”, it all makes sense. With that, one can also figure out how ultimately connected and protected Nike is. Nike is well funded by their “investors”, so it doesn’t matter to the company that it has lost 80% of its peak stock value and 43% of its market cap… it doesn’t slow the company down because the company doesn’t rely on it’s actual business for funding.
The interconnections and ties go deeper, but I’ll leave it there. Nike does what it does (which doesn’t make sense) because it’s not actually Nike anymore… it’s just a brand-front at this point.
Fascinating: 'the company doesn't rely on its actual business for funding.' So if there was an effective boycott, and nobody was buying their product, do you suppose they'd just keep making it and shipping it out, in order to exploit the brand, the logo?
in 2019, Nike cut ties with most of its retailers because the company was transitioning into a digital product company (NFTs, digital storefronts within the Metaverse, Roblox product, etc.). Seems the company was anticipating the lockdowns to be much longer than they were and went all-in (looking to capitalize on it). That failed spectacularly once the country reopened. Nike was caught off guard and compensated by relying on its classical footwear designs; that hype lasted for about a year and then product sales dwindled, inventory backed up, and the distribution center (in Tennessee) had ~500 shipping containers full of unsold product surrounding the facility (rumor was that Nike was buying their own inventory to artificially stoke sales numbers). The company has been dumping older product (meaning selling for at-or-below cost) since then to clear out inventory.
None of those failures, not the plummeting sales, nor other factors have effectively slowed the business. Everything runs at full speed. (It didn’t even affect stock value for quite some time).
If a new boycott was massive, it would be a very difficult illusion for Nike to hide at this point, but if current Nike is anything, it’s a master of opaque illusion and “spin”.
Even if Nike put a billion into funding this "research" by captured and indoctrinated practitioners of a cult, I doubt they could enroll a large enough cohort for study results that could be taken seriously. As well, the puberty blocking study in the UK was abandoned when it became clear that the emotional state of the subjects was deteriorating. This was the first attempt to replicate the Dutch Study, De Vries, et al, 2014--in which those male and female subjects dwindled from 70 to 55 and then 2 died, one from post surgery sepsis and one from post surgery suicide. Another attempt at a replication study was made at Lurie Children's Hospital and Boston Children's hospital concurrently a few years ago, and it was suspended after a couple of attempted suicides (there might have been completed as well) Then, most recently, Johanna Olson-Kennedy delayed publishing any results of a study she took $9.7 million from the NIH to again enroll dysphoric kids in research on blockers in adolescents. Dr. OK herself said she didn't want to publish it because the negative emotional scales recorded in the study wouldn't reflect positively on "the community." I do not see Mr. Harper and Dr. Ackerman capable of handling the highly likely negative emotional impacts on their subjects. Harper has a clear conflict of interest simply as a man who ideates a female persona and Ackerman is far too professionally invested to conduct a study properly. Find new data on the effects of estrogen on males in both animal and human studies at rogdboys.org. It appears that brain shrinkage is common. The lack of medical ethics in the entire enterprise tells us exactly what we need to know about the promulgators of this cult--it's about sex signaling and sexual fetishism.
['T]he negative emotional scales recorded in the study wouldn't reflect positively on "the community" ,' eh?
They're not merely suicidal, they're often homicidal as well. The Nashville shooter was a case in point. I think people are starting to figure it out.
I wonder if United is still trying to recruit potentially suicidal trans pilot trainees? They were a year or so ago. Everyone gives me the stink-eye when I order a double screwdriver on early-morning flights. But honestly, it's just to calm my nerves.
My main takeaway from learning that research is being funded on how to eliminate the retained advantage so-called transgender women have in sports is a tacit admission that the current state of affairs is that transgender women currently have an unfair advantage. The fact that such research is being done should pretty much end the debate on this subject. At this point in time, even those who support the idea of men competing in women's sports know that it is unfair. As for a future point in time when they will supposedly work out this wrinkle, I think the only reasonable solution is to create a separate league altogether for those who have their competitive advantage altered with drugs. In fact, perhaps they should do the same thing for men who take performance enhancing drugs that allow them to out compete other men.
Yes that's all correct. They do know it's unfair and they don't care. Hence the "trans women are women" because then they can make the case "well some women are taller, some are stronger, and some have the strength and speed of men! Trans women are just another kind of woman!" No they are a kind of man.
Beautifully reported, thank you. I don't know how Mom's and dads of young daughters aren't outraged by alll of the trans absurdity. They are silenced at their own schools by idiots and ideologues. Awful.
Just for levity…I saw a tee-shirt yesterday that read: “My sperm all believe that they’re eggs.”
Also for levity, I saw an X post a couple of years ago which was a snapshot of a shopping site selling a shirt that said "There are more than two sexes".
Then they showed that if you actually wanted to buy the shirt, the first option is to choose men's or women's.
😂
Also the man calling himself a woman running it? Yeah he has no skin in the game to produce false claims and results/s
This is so creepy but not surprising. We stopped buying Nike stuff after they supported taking a knee. We buy xx-xy and Athleta and ON instead. Your statements are brilliant. I will repeat them where possible.
Same here. And I distinctly remember that there weren't enough of us willing to boycott Nike products over their support for Kapernick - the stock price barely budged during that debacle. Nike learned the wrong lesson from that experience. They thought it meant that they could support any/all woke narratives. Glad that they are finally having to deal with some pushback. I can live just fine not purchasing Annheiser Busch or Nike products.
Ditto
I care. This is appalling, Jenn. Reminds me of Fauci's gain of function research funding of EcoHealth at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill subsequently off shored to Wuhan but with continued US involvement and funding.
Related, but not precisely: I really have, in the last 8 or so years, become acutely aware of the capricious nature in which journalists cover certain entities and stories.
I have come to question the foundations upon which I viewed the world previously which could largely be a consequence of "well if the media is covering this, it must be a unique story". Personal journalist/editor political and cultural views have an outsized effect on what the media covers and how.
Maybe it's because journalists in the last decade have truly leaned into the role and view themselves as narrative crafter whose goal is to influence the public (as opposed to it happening as a byproduct ancillary to the cause of reporting on the news). Or maybe I was naive and it always has been so obvious that journalists were seeking to do so.
Thanks for raising this story I likely won't see covered anywhere else.
Great coverage. Then there’s the related debacle of Nike sponsoring the Tucker Center coaching program that indoctrinates coaches to normalize boys in girls’ sports. Not as horrific but of a piece.
Yeah also bad
How come every normal healthy person is not disgusted by this? I for one added Nike as well as Anheuser Busch to my growing list of boycotted products a few years ago. If I rode a motorcycle Harley Davidson would also be on my list.
I missed the Harley thing. What did they do?
They briefly started DEI in California which, seeing as who their main market was, ended in the closing of their flagship shop. Even if they reverse their policies they should not be forgiven for this.
Nike?
Nothing surprises me anymore.
Joanna's self written bio...
I am, I am, I am.
He's pretty up front about it.
I watched the Khelif Olympic boxing match in a state of horror.
I just SMH...
I for one never watched it. In fact if everyone had refused to watch it might have sent a clear message to these woke ignoramuses that we have had enough. Please don't watch this charade. BOYCOTT BOYCOTT BOYCOTT.
If you ever want to know why Nike does what it does these days, you have to dig a bit. When you do, you’ll find that 83% of Nike market shares are held by “institutional investors”, and when you look at who those investors are, you’ll see they’re the usual controlling top trio… but when you dig deeper, you’ll find those three plus the majority of the lesser holders are all inter-held by none other than “each other”! In short, they look like separate investors, but they’re actually a monolithic collective of investors, and they have majority control. From that majority (and you can call it “influence” or “control” or “controlling influence”, either way you slice it, “they” hold the reins) they have installed their preferred people on to the board, and ultimately elevated their preferred puppet (Donahoe) as the top dawg (which mangled everything, and they had to remove him).
In short, Nike is a husk of the company it started off as. The original company grew into something desirable because of its authentic and innovative pursuit of sport, but then the brand grew into an icon and had notable influence on society’s youth culture, and that was desirable to “them”, so it was quietly “captured” (for that societal influence and more)… and now the company is a puppeted facade supporting the well-known globalist agenda of E.S.G., C.E.I., D.E.I., the “green agenda”, the 4th Industrial Revolution, pursuit of transhumanism, and yes, the transgender push.
Once one figures out that Nike has been captured, hollowed out, and is now just another vessel of the larger “WEF agenda”, it all makes sense. With that, one can also figure out how ultimately connected and protected Nike is. Nike is well funded by their “investors”, so it doesn’t matter to the company that it has lost 80% of its peak stock value and 43% of its market cap… it doesn’t slow the company down because the company doesn’t rely on it’s actual business for funding.
The interconnections and ties go deeper, but I’ll leave it there. Nike does what it does (which doesn’t make sense) because it’s not actually Nike anymore… it’s just a brand-front at this point.
Fascinating: 'the company doesn't rely on its actual business for funding.' So if there was an effective boycott, and nobody was buying their product, do you suppose they'd just keep making it and shipping it out, in order to exploit the brand, the logo?
100%. Rumor is they already have done that.
in 2019, Nike cut ties with most of its retailers because the company was transitioning into a digital product company (NFTs, digital storefronts within the Metaverse, Roblox product, etc.). Seems the company was anticipating the lockdowns to be much longer than they were and went all-in (looking to capitalize on it). That failed spectacularly once the country reopened. Nike was caught off guard and compensated by relying on its classical footwear designs; that hype lasted for about a year and then product sales dwindled, inventory backed up, and the distribution center (in Tennessee) had ~500 shipping containers full of unsold product surrounding the facility (rumor was that Nike was buying their own inventory to artificially stoke sales numbers). The company has been dumping older product (meaning selling for at-or-below cost) since then to clear out inventory.
None of those failures, not the plummeting sales, nor other factors have effectively slowed the business. Everything runs at full speed. (It didn’t even affect stock value for quite some time).
If a new boycott was massive, it would be a very difficult illusion for Nike to hide at this point, but if current Nike is anything, it’s a master of opaque illusion and “spin”.
Even if Nike put a billion into funding this "research" by captured and indoctrinated practitioners of a cult, I doubt they could enroll a large enough cohort for study results that could be taken seriously. As well, the puberty blocking study in the UK was abandoned when it became clear that the emotional state of the subjects was deteriorating. This was the first attempt to replicate the Dutch Study, De Vries, et al, 2014--in which those male and female subjects dwindled from 70 to 55 and then 2 died, one from post surgery sepsis and one from post surgery suicide. Another attempt at a replication study was made at Lurie Children's Hospital and Boston Children's hospital concurrently a few years ago, and it was suspended after a couple of attempted suicides (there might have been completed as well) Then, most recently, Johanna Olson-Kennedy delayed publishing any results of a study she took $9.7 million from the NIH to again enroll dysphoric kids in research on blockers in adolescents. Dr. OK herself said she didn't want to publish it because the negative emotional scales recorded in the study wouldn't reflect positively on "the community." I do not see Mr. Harper and Dr. Ackerman capable of handling the highly likely negative emotional impacts on their subjects. Harper has a clear conflict of interest simply as a man who ideates a female persona and Ackerman is far too professionally invested to conduct a study properly. Find new data on the effects of estrogen on males in both animal and human studies at rogdboys.org. It appears that brain shrinkage is common. The lack of medical ethics in the entire enterprise tells us exactly what we need to know about the promulgators of this cult--it's about sex signaling and sexual fetishism.
['T]he negative emotional scales recorded in the study wouldn't reflect positively on "the community" ,' eh?
They're not merely suicidal, they're often homicidal as well. The Nashville shooter was a case in point. I think people are starting to figure it out.
I wonder if United is still trying to recruit potentially suicidal trans pilot trainees? They were a year or so ago. Everyone gives me the stink-eye when I order a double screwdriver on early-morning flights. But honestly, it's just to calm my nerves.
Oy veh, Jack! I haven't flown in a decade! I'd probably do the same~
I received my xx-xy tshirt “save women’s sports” today! Stopped buying Nike several years ago.
This is truly so far over the line, I have no words…why are they still pushing this stuff?!!
Dr. Mengele lives on!
My main takeaway from learning that research is being funded on how to eliminate the retained advantage so-called transgender women have in sports is a tacit admission that the current state of affairs is that transgender women currently have an unfair advantage. The fact that such research is being done should pretty much end the debate on this subject. At this point in time, even those who support the idea of men competing in women's sports know that it is unfair. As for a future point in time when they will supposedly work out this wrinkle, I think the only reasonable solution is to create a separate league altogether for those who have their competitive advantage altered with drugs. In fact, perhaps they should do the same thing for men who take performance enhancing drugs that allow them to out compete other men.
Yes that's all correct. They do know it's unfair and they don't care. Hence the "trans women are women" because then they can make the case "well some women are taller, some are stronger, and some have the strength and speed of men! Trans women are just another kind of woman!" No they are a kind of man.
Boycott Nike.
Thank goodness for Trump
Beautifully reported, thank you. I don't know how Mom's and dads of young daughters aren't outraged by alll of the trans absurdity. They are silenced at their own schools by idiots and ideologues. Awful.