Excuse Me, Gov. Hochul, You Can't Really Say That About Black Kids
Dem Strategists Agree That Biden Is Totally Screwed If He Loses This State...
Of Course, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Found This to Be a Racist Conspiracy
Stop Caring
Panama's President-Elect Vows to Close Key Migration Routes to US
COVID Subcommittee Asks Blinken to Declassify Docs That 'Credibly Suggest' Where COVID Ori...
Ilhan Omar Hit With Censure Resolution
'Incubator of Bigotry': Group of Federal Judges Tells Columbia They Won't Hire Any...
Here’s Why One Pharmaceutical Company Will Withdraw Its COVID-19 Vaccine
Emory's Jewish Problem
Georgia Court of Appeals Just Delivered Some Bad News for Fani Willis
New Poll Shows Biden in Trouble With Older Voters in Key Swing State
Why Is the Judge in Trump's New York Trial Muzzling a Key Defense...
Minors Are Being Seduced by Transgenderism on Reddit. Those Who Oppose Get Banned.
RNC Steps Up for Election Integrity
Tipsheet
Premium

Woke Tales: Fake 'Book Ban' Hysteria, Hollywood's New Identity Rules, and an Intersectionality Showdown

As woke nonsense marches through our society, let's examine a few of the latest examples -- starting in Virginia, where Democrats are upset about a law signed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin that, er, requires parents to be informed of any sexually explicit materials in schools.  Here's the Associated Press description of the measure from last year: "A bill that will require Virginia schools to notify parents if their children are assigned books or other materials with sexually explicit content was among more than 100 measures Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin signed into law this week, his office said Friday...Each school board must adopt the policies by Jan. 1, 2023, according to the measure, which uses a definition of sexually explicit content that already exists in state law. It also requires that students be given an alternative assignment at a parent’s request."  

This is somehow being framed by Democrats and leftists as a "book ban:"


Is it "very strange," though?  This is what Democrats have been doing for quite some time now. It's something of an official talking point, as ludicrous as it might be.  Meanwhile, in Michigan, there's a high stakes woke-off underway, in which two 'marginalized' groups are going head-to-head in the same grievance olympics bracket.  Who will prevail in this highly competitive match-up?


How will the wizards of intersectionality play this one?  LGBT activists are accustomed to winning these battles, but will leftists really denounce these 'brown bodies' (to use the Left's very strange parlance)?  Stay tuned!  Shifting to Hollywood, where it's now been formalized that movies will not even be considered for the most coveted award in filmmaking if they don't check various identitarian boxes:

If it were released today, “The Godfather” would possibly have no chance of winning a Best Picture Oscar. That’s because the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is beholden to new inclusivity standards. Starting with the March 2024 awards, movies will not be considered for a Best Picture nomination unless they meet two out of four standards.  One of them is featuring a lead or significant supporting character from an “underrepresented racial or ethnic group,” have a main storyline that focuses on an underrepresented group, or at least 30% of the cast comes from two or more underrepresented groups (women, ethnic minorities, LGBTQ or the disabled)...“It’s completely ridiculous,” one director fumed to The Post. “I’m for diversity, but to make you cast certain types of people if you want to get nominated? That makes the whole process contrived. The person who is right for the part should get the part. Why should you be limited in your choices? But it’s the world we’re in. This is crazy.” Richard Dreyfuss certainly agrees.  In discussing the new standards of inclusion with “The Firing Line” on PBS last month, the veteran actor blasted the rules: “They make me vomit.”

The last several years of Best Picture winners actually already meet the criteria...other films nominated this year possibly would not qualify. “’All Quiet on the Western Front’ would not have been nominated,” said the director of the World War I film with a historically accurate white male cast...“Going further back, think about ‘Schindler’s List.’ Should that not have been nominated since there were no non-white people in the primary roles?” asked the director, referencing the 1993 Spielberg movie which largely features white male actors. “I’m wondering if Jewish people would count for ‘underrepresented racial or ethnic group,’ but it would be up to the Academy to figure that out.” Other macho classics that, these days, would likely fall by the Best Picture wayside: “Gladiator” and “All the President’s Men.” According to Newsweek, past nominees “Ford v Ferrari,” “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” “American Hustle” and “Joker” also would not have cleared the Best Picture bar. 

And then there's this, from a top military commander, publicly bragging that she discriminates against certain states in her personnel-related decision because of her political preferences -- even admitting that she will put less qualified candidates into certain roles, in order to keep others "safe" from the laws she opposes:


On my radio show, I played this audio for Lt. General (Retired) Keith Kellogg and Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), a decorated wounded warrior.  Kellogg called it "way out of line," and Crenshaw ripped it as "craziness."  Both said Burt should be relieved of her command.  Is she referring to laws requiring athletes to compete against their own biological sex?  Or laws restricting sex change treatments for minors?  I'll leave you with a reminder that these supposedly unconscionable views aren't just well within the American mainstream.  They're held by overwhelming majorities of Americans:


Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement