SJW Leftists Say: How Dare You Decide With Whom You Have Sex?
The natural extension of the Party of Brute Force’s war on conscience went on full frontal display this week. A crowd filled with social justice warriors (SJW) insisted that a woman have sex with a specific man lest she be a branded on her forehead with a B for bigot.
As Mark Hemingway writes at the Federalist, (it’s a great piece and you should read it all), August Ames, a young woman who performed pornography for a living, had the audacity to announce on social media she didn’t want to have sex with a particular man. For her, it was risk-avoidance because the man is a what pornographers call a “crossover actor” meaning he has also had sex with men on film for money.
HIV infection is higher among gay men and, in this young woman’s life, she could use all the risk avoidance she could muster. Social Justice Warriors and members in good standing of the Party of Brute Force were outraged. How dare August Ames would choose for herself with whom she had sex: she was, many said, an anti-gay bigot and many told her she should kill herself.
August Ames, whose real name was Mercedes Grabowski, did just that. She ended her life. She was 23.
This young woman who claimed to have been raped by her Grandfather, then handed over to a the foster parenting system at the age of 12 — after she complained about being raped — may not have killed herself solely because of the demands of Social Justice Warriors. But, can we actually doubt that a sexual abuse victim who had followed a path of extreme hyper-sexuality commonly taken by survivors of sex abuse (which a collection of professionals argue is a way these survivors take charge of their bodies) was shaken to her core when a group of strangers demanded she have sex with the men they decided she should?
SJW Leftists Say: How Dare You — a Lesbian — Not Offer Yourself Up For Sex with Men?
Were this an isolated case, the Party of Brute Force argument would be moot. Yet, this is simply an extreme case of the erasure of two things by the left — the individual conscience and the conscience of women.
I interviewed on my radio show the first women to come out as gay while holding a command position in the United States Military. She told my audience that, in San Francisco, a group of leftist men who are proudly non-surgical “women”– men who have no intention of having their penises removed — were actively harassing and threatening women in a lesbian dating group. They wanted them to allow these men to join. The men explained that it was a disgusting act of violence for a lesbian woman to refuse sex with a “woman with a penis.”
My guest, fortunately, was not one to be bullied and she continues in her “weird partnership” with evangelical women to oppose the left’s ongoing attempt to burn to the ground her application of her own conscience.
Women and girls have been directed by the left to welcome fully intact, biological men (the only kind of men) into their showers at places like gyms and public pools. In Washington state, the ironically titled “Human Rights Commission” has published a diktat that announces women are not to question the appearance of a naked man in their showers. What if for some reason a woman has a problem with that diktat? Oh, like being a rape survivor, or a twelve-year-old girl naturally shy about her body, or just someone who doesn’t want to get naked with some dude. Well, then it is she who must seek out other accommodations. If a woman or girl does seek out other accommodations, they surface themselves as — you guessed it — a raving bigot.
SJW Leftists Say: How Dare You Decide What Art You Create?
In the Supreme Court this week, the left has been arguing that Jack Phillips, a man who bakes cakes to sell to the public and also creates works of art on cakes commissioned by specific customers, must surrender his moral conscience to their depiction of “justice.”
Phillips has never refused to sell cakes to gay people. Anyone can buy from his display case and Phillips has never asked about their personal lives. But, when it comes to creating art — which is unquestionably self-expression, also known as speech — Phillips has moral guideposts that serve his individual conscience. He will not create cake art that celebrates divorce, Halloween or what he feels are adult-themes.
Now would Phillips make cake art that celebrates a wedding between two men that violates his conscience as informed by his religious beliefs? As they tried to do to August Ames — who killed herself — the left is trying to do the same to Phillips. The left wants to take from Phillips what James Madison called “the most sacred of all property” — his conscience.
Worse, they intend to see him bend to their will not to save a life, not to protect a life, not to assure equal access to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The sole intent of the left is to stomp out the existence of any form of public display of individual, moral discernment that is contrary to their good think.
Jack Phillips is a man — oh, sorry, a Cis Male — but he has much in common with women under attack by the Party of Brute Force. In turn, he has much in common with the sad case of a 23-year-old young woman who chose to take her own life.
PS: A Preemptive Response To The Comment-Section SJW Team
No, you cannot make a comparison between the most common cases of abortion and the Party of Bruce Force tactics. Unless it’s a case of pregnancy via rape or incest-rape (where women or girls were forced into a sex act), in which case I feel women should have complete autonomy over what to do about the pregnancy. Limiting abortion of convenience is in no way similar to the cases above.
A woman has a series of choices in her relationships: to date or not, to become intimate or not, to wait to have sex until marriage or not, to use contraception or not. After the woman makes these decisions, and a pregnancy occurs, she now carries the life of another. That simply changes the equation. It’s unfair, perhaps, of biology to have created that circumstance, but that is the reality.