We are what we hate, 7/24/15

  1. Free tampons for confused men
  2. He called him “Caitlyn”
  3. Battle of Indiana explained
  4. Banning Dante
  5. We are what we hate


Your tax dollars at work:

This blog post refers to individuals who menstruate as women because the author wanted to highlight gender inequality in health care. We acknowledge that not all individuals who menstruate identify as women and that not all individuals who identify as women menstruate, but feel this generalization is appropriate considering the gendered nature of most health care policies.

(Editor’s note to Zoey Freedman: Free tampons would slow flow of gender inequality, UCLA Daily Bruin; H/T Carl Trueman)

Normal people could not even make this up. Most normal people probably aren’t even aware that this kind of gender nuttiness is becoming a shibboleth.

Doubt it? Try speaking ill of Bruce Jenner’s excellent transgender/reality TV adventure among a group of college-educated people (Ivy League, ideally) under age 24.

(I express no opinion on the need for free tampons for the fair sex to, ahem, “slow the flow” of anything.)


Speaking of sexual dysphoria and mutilation:

Nero: “Having castrated the slave boy Sporus and willing even to change his nature to feminine, [Nero] took him to wife by the usual ceremony of marriage with a dowry and bridal veil.” The Roman historian continues: “This Sporus, adorned with ornaments of an empress and conveyed in a litter, he accompanied around the courts and markets of Greece and later around the image makers’ mart in Rome, kissing him fondly again and again”

(Suetonius in the Lives of the Caesars VI, via R. V. Young, Saint Nero, Patron of Gay Marriage)


In the last week, two interesting polls have appeared, one from the Associated Press and the other from the Washington Post, on Americans’ reactions to the Supreme Court’s June ruling in the same-sex marriage case, Obergefell v. Hodges. Taken together, the polls reveal that America is more divided on the question than first appeared. And the polls reflect an unfortunate, new religious dimension in American politics.

All that said, these polls seem significant to me, for three reasons. First, they demonstrate that opposition to the Court’s decision is not a fringe phenomenon …

Second, the results hint that some people who oppose the Court’s decision may do so out of concern for religious freedom. In the AP poll, for example, 56 percent said that religious liberty should take precedence over gay rights …

Finally, there is an unmistakable partisan divide. In the AP poll, a large majority of Democrats gave priority to gay rights, while a large majority of Republicans said religious freedom is more important. The extent of the divide is truly startling. “By a 64-32 margin, most Democrats said it’s more important to protect gay rights than religious liberties when the two are in conflict,” the AP reports. “Republicans said the opposite, by 82-17.”

This polarization is worrisome ….

(Mark Movesian) The polarization is itself worrisome, but I am particularly stunned and appalled that Democrats exalt “gay rights” over religious liberties by two to one.

  • Here starteth and endeth the explanation for the Battle of Indiana.
  • More reason (along with Democrats being enthusiasts for abortion) why I can’t vote Democrat even if I’m increasingly hesitant to vote Republican.


I should have seen this coming, in light of a recent publishing event:

Mustn’t let the little dears catch wind that there was once sanity upon the earth.


The bright, prolific and sometimes frustratingly obtuse Peter J. Leithart (nobody can accuse him of slavish adherence to a party line) has written one of his best blogs, We Are What We Hate. Conclusion:

[W]hat happens when the country splits in two, and each half of the country claims to be the embodiment of the American Way? What happens when each side sees the other as a basic threat to America, and therefore as a proper object of loathing? What happens when the American Way of Life no longer provides a cultural consensus, when every item in our national creed is deeply contested? What happens when our civil religion no longer has the power to keep us civil?

Come to think of it, this kind of neatly ties together today’s items, and directly corresponds to Item 3, so let’s call it a wrap.

* * * * *

“In learning as in traveling and, of course, in lovemaking, all the charm lies in not coming too quickly to the point, but in meandering around for a while.” (Eva Brann)

Some succinct standing advice on recurring themes.