Sociologists and other complete wastes of space are working around the clock to try to determine why women are no longer having babies, aside from the fact that babies wake them up all the time and crap all over everything.
The birthrate has been dropping everywhere except in sub-Saharan Africa and Israel. If present trends continue, scientists predict the world&#8217;s population will soon be reduced to nothing but black people and Jews, blissfully enjoying an earthly paradise, where every basketball player can find an accountant, although no one will know how to tie a Windsor knot.
Some researchers feel that the so-called birth dearth is the result of the widespread use of online pornography. Columbia University sociologist Dr. Roland Fapmeister has been studying the effects of porn for the last seven years, ten, and eleven hours a day.
In a report to the United Nations panel titled, &#8220;Why There Are So Many Damned Israelis All Over the Place,&#8221; Dr. Fapmeister said:
<blockquote>
There can be no doubt that many men have come to prefer porn to actual sex, because the women in porn have such spectacular bodies it’s enough to make a man insane with desire so that he can’t stop coming back again and again and again to watch these magnificent creatures do anything you want in bed, and with real enthusiasm too, they don’t just roll their eyes and play along and then make snide remarks about how they could have married Bill Burley from High School, who was a real man. Afterwards, you can turn them off, so they don’t start complaining about why you haven’t taken out the garbage or how come you can’t get a real job instead of locking yourself in the bathroom for hours, making disgusting grunting noises that make them think you’re up to something creepy, even when you tell them it’s scientific research, for crying out loud.
</blockquote>
Dr. Fapmeister says the porn sites most appealing to men are those that depict women doing things real women often won’t do, like making dinner or showing them some respect.
Feminist sociologist Dr. Shrill Screamington says the baby famine is actually a good thing. It’s a sign of female empowerment, proving that women are no longer chained to staying at home serving husbands who love them but can instead stay in the office serving employers who could back their Mercedes over them and never notice the bump. The employer, however, might think the parking lot needs resurfacing, text his personal assistant about it, and wonder why she never gets back to him.
Dr. Screamington says that while it is true that feminism has led many women to spend their youths in a fluorescent hell of cubicle drudgery until they find themselves languishing in a solitary middle age marked by a sense of unspeakable emptiness made all the more unbearable by the unacknowledged but inescapable fact that it’s the result of their own self-certain but altogether misguided choices, including that nose ring that sent all the best marriage prospects running for their lives, there have also been many feminist triumphs. For instance, Americans are now so comfortable with seeing females in power that over 150 women are serving in Congress despite the fact that each and every one of them is crazier than a hamster on LSD.
At The New York Times, a former newspaper, sex columnist Susan Horwich agrees with the feminist position. In a recent speech to the &#8220;Society for Increasing Human Misery in the Name of Fairness,&#8221; Ms. Horwich said her weekly Times columns will continue to urge women to abandon institutions like marriage and religion that have imprisoned them in traditional roles as homemakers and mothers, and instead live lives of sterile promiscuity until there are no babies at all and the earth is a smoking ruin filled with nothing but basketball players and accountants, at which time, Satan will return to carry Ms. Horwich like a lover into an eternity of flames, as he promised he would when she sold him her soul in return for the Times job.

Feminist

The Triumph Of Feminism: Loneliness And Bad Nose Rings

Feminism

Pornography

sociology

The New York Times

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is drawing renewed attention online after appearing at an Eid al-Adha celebration in New York City wearing a hijab alongside New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Video from the Wednesday event in the Bronx — portions of which fall within Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional district — showed the congresswoman speaking onstage while wearing the Islamic head covering as Mamdani stood behind her in a kurta styled after an Arsenal soccer jersey.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="AOC wears hijab for Eid, one of Islam’s holiest holidays" width="422" height="750" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/55dSVypBSKo?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The appearance quickly circulated online given Ocasio-Cortez’s status as one of the Democratic Party’s most outspoken leftist figures and self-described feminists in Congress.
Eid al-Adha is one of Islam’s holiest observances and commemorates the Prophet Ibrahim’s (Abraham’s) willingness to sacrifice his son in obedience to God. The holiday began this week and is being celebrated by Muslims worldwide through Friday.
Ocasio-Cortez has <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-abortion-ban-alabama-woman-sexuality-feminism-1426902">spent years warning</a> that women’s rights and personal freedoms are under threat in America, frequently attacking conservatives over what she characterizes as patriarchal politics and authoritarian social policies.
Mamdani, the country’s highest-profile Muslim politician, has continued generating controversy recently over his <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mamdanis-latest-slap-in-the-face-to-jewish-voters?author=Hank+Berrien&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Mamdani%E2%80%99s+Latest+Slap+In+The+Face+To+Jewish+Voters">anti-Israel</a> activism and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mamdani-wants-to-decide-who-deserves-to-keep-their-property?author=Brecca+Stoll&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Mamdani+Wants+To+Decide+Who+Deserves+To+Keep+Their+Property">socialist</a> political positions.
The event itself was aimed at outreach toward Muslim voters and communities in New York City, where both Mamdani and Ocasio-Cortez maintain strong support among activists.
The clip of the two politicians at the Bronx celebration rapidly gained traction across social media platforms Wednesday evening, becoming the latest flashpoint in ongoing cultural and political fights surrounding identity, religion, and Democratic politics.

SEE IT: Feminist AOC Wears Symbol That Oppresses Women

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Muslims

New York City

Zohran Mamdani

Actress Milly Alcock is once again reacting to criticism of her upcoming female-led superhero movie, “Supergirl,” by blaming Christian dads and saying she’s glad to have triggered them.
The 26-year-old <a href="https://variety.com/2026/film/features/milly-alcock-supe">spoke</a> to Variety last week about backlash ahead of the film&#8217;s release next month, insisting much of the criticism stems from her being a woman.
“I guess women know that this is just how it’s always been, unfortunately,” Alcock told the outlet. “And it’s from a lot of people whose profiles have no photo, who are burner accounts. Or someone’s name and then ‘Dad of four, Christian,’ which is hilarious to me.&#8221; 
&#8220;But I mean, whose opinion do you really care about? If you’re p***ing the right kind of people off, you’re doing OK,” she added.
This led to more reactions on social media. 
“I miss the days when actors and actresses wanted you to see their movies. Now they do everything they can to make you not want to go. Sometimes even before the first scene is shot,” one person <a href="https://x.com/SimonPhoenix77/status/2057885125480792300">observed</a>.
“In other words, they&#8217;re preemptively creating the narrative that this movie&#8217;s failure was caused by fan backlash to these comments rather than the movie itself being terrible. Got it,” another <a href="https://x.com/ChristandGuitar/status/2057808024635359667">said</a>.
DC Studios co-chairman and CEO Peter Safran praised Alcock&#8217;s handling of the criticism.
“I called her and just said, ‘You’re doing great! You’re handling it beautifully. You’re never going to make everybody happy. Just be true to yourself,’” he told Variety. “And I really do think she’s handling it well. I would also recommend, don’t wallow in it. It never makes you feel good.”
The “Supergirl” star preemptively <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/milly-alcock-vanities">blamed potential criticism</a> of the film on misogyny during a Vanity Fair interview published in March in a tactic described as “pre-release critical armor.”
“It definitely made me aware that simply existing as a woman in that space is something that people comment on,” Alcock said when asked about the “inevitable backlash” she’d face. 
“We have become very comfortable having this weird ownership of women’s bodies. I can’t really stop them. I can only be myself,” Alcock added.
The remarks were compared to Rachel Zegler’s controversial comments ahead of Disney’s “Snow White” being released.
Alcock also described &#8220;Supergirl&#8221; as a more personal story centered on Kara Zor-El, who she says is “given this incredible responsibility and doesn’t know how to deal with it.” 
“She’s not trying to save the world — she’s just trying to save her own,” Alcock told Vanity Fair. “This film is an excellent reminder that the world can be crumbling around you, but you can be the hero of your own story.”
The interview inspired many negative reactions on social media, with critics calling out Alcock for complaining about backlash that hadn’t even happened yet.
“These movies are so bad that they have to start attacking the fans before the movie even comes out,” one person <a href="https://x.com/NewsPolitics/status/2039035489760460880">said</a> at the time.

Milly Alcock

‘Supergirl’ Star Says She’s Glad To Trigger ‘Christian’ Dads

Celebrities

Entertainment

Hollywood

Movies

Actress Olivia Munn is complaining that a male co-star objected to a scene in which her character saves his, leading to a dispute on set. 
The 45-year-old ranted about the unnamed colleague during a recent appearance on “The Drew Barrymore Show.” 
“There have been a few times where I’ve been filming something, and my character was either like CIA, or a cop, or something, and there’s been scenes where my character has been the one to save the other character,” Munn told the talk show host, noting that the scene involved her and the co-star fighting side by side in a bunker. 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Olivia Munn Gets Candid About Aggressive Breast Cancer and How it Inspired Her to Let Down Her Guard" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AWemBThqhgc?start=223&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
“If you read the script, it was that he was guarding his side, I was guarding my side, then we switch sides and then there’s a guy that was coming for him who was gonna shoot him in the back, so I shoot him,” she went on. “And then we’re about to shoot and, somehow, I guess he didn’t read the script, and in that moment, he realized, ‘Wait, wait, wait. Hold on. She can’t save me. No, no. She can’t save me.’”
Munn claimed that her colleague was “combative with the director” and held up production for close to an hour. The actress lamented that he had “no insecurity about being obnoxious and everyone hearing this and being like, ‘She can’t save me! We’re not doing this.’”
“Finally, after like 45 minutes of just stopping down, I said, ‘OK, how about instead of my character saving you, it’s just that we switch because it’s time for us to switch and so this is my guy to get,’” she told Barrymore. “And he was like, ‘OK.’”
Online commenters called out Munn for her complaints, criticizing what they view as a double standard in Hollywood.
“So it’s totally cool for a woman to feel like she doesn’t need to be saved by a man, but it’s bad if a man thinks he doesn’t need to be saved by a woman? Did I get that right?” one popular reaction <a href="https://x.com/Variety/status/2042056151936987227">said</a>.
“And if Olivia Munn refused to be ‘damseled’ in a scene, you bet your bippy it would be a tale of female empowerment,” another <a href="https://x.com/Scribe_Light/status/2042056424440918201">agreed</a>.
Many commenters called Munn out for not naming names, leading them to question the story entirely.
Calling out colleagues without naming them has become a bit of a pattern for the “X-Men: Apocalypse” star. Last summer, she <a href="https://variety.com/2025/film/news/olivia-munn-male-director-ruin-career-1236445139/">complained about</a> a director she worked with on HBO’s “The Newsroom” who she claimed tried to sabotage her.
“I was on the one-yard line for the movie, and my manager calls me and says, ‘Hey, you’re gonna get the role. But first, I guess there’s another director who they know and he says that on “The Newsroom” you were late all the time and really combative,’” Munn said at the time. 
“I lived seven minutes from there. I was never late. I was like, ‘I know who this is.’ He just was trying to bash me. And I told my reps, ‘Please tell the directors this.’ And then I still got the role. But I will always remember that just because of our conflicts of how we approached a role, he wanted to ruin my chances of getting anything else.”

Olivia Munn

Olivia Munn Calls Out Male Co-Star Who Refused To Be Rescued By A Woman

California Governor Gavin Newsom Interview On The Circuit

How Gavin Newsom’s Entire Political Career Is About To Be Destroyed — By His Wife

How Gavin Newsom's Entire Political Career Is About To Be Destroyed — By His Wife

2028 presidential election

California

Gavin Newsom

governor

Harvey Weinstein

Opinion

Tradwives

Woke Culture

Women

The party that put biological men on women’s podiums, erased the word “woman” from federal guidance, and whose Supreme Court Justice couldn’t define the word “woman” — is now outraged that Donald Trump fired two underperforming cabinet secretaries. Who happened to be women.
The moment President Donald Trump removed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi from their posts, progressive media conveniently remembered what a woman is and erupted with righteous fury. These are the same commentators who mocked these women for wearing crosses and appearing on television. They spent years calling them racist, unqualified MAGA props. And the same movement that cannot define what a woman is now claims to be their defender, finally discovering their inner feminist. And who is the mascot of this movement but none other than Jennifer Seibel Newsom, who, unsurprisingly, preaches that Trump has launched a “War on Women.”
This narrative doesn’t survive contact with reality.
Seibel’s narrative doesn’t abide the fact that a group of men was the first out the door. Matt Gaetz was forced out eight days before he ever took office. Mike Waltz, the first Senate-confirmed appointee actually fired, exited in May 2025 after the Signal chat scandal. (He was subsequently reassigned as UN Ambassador.) Just this week, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth ousted Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George — a four-star general with over 35 years of service — in the middle of an active conflict with Iran. Dan Bongino served as FBI Deputy Director, delivered results including cracking a four-year-old cold case on the January 6th pipe bombs, and departed on his own terms. These are not the headlines of an administration waging war on women. These are the headlines of an administration that holds everyone accountable.
Look at who is still in the room. Susie Wiles — the first female White House Chief of Staff in American history — is running the operation while battling breast cancer. Karoline Leavitt, the youngest Press Secretary ever, is nine months pregnant and still at the podium. Brooke Rollins, Linda McMahon, and Tulsi Gabbard are all still delivering. Trump built a cabinet with eight women in top-tier roles at the outset — roughly one-third of his team, more than most Republican presidents before him. These women aren’t relinquishing power. They hold some of the most consequential jobs in the federal government because they earned them.
What exactly are Noem and Bondi guilty of? Noem’s tenure included congressional testimony blowups and a $220 million self-promotional ad campaign that looked more like a reelection vehicle than a border enforcement effort. Bondi frustrated the White House with slow progress on the Epstein files and pursuing cases against Trump’s political opponents — the core of her mandate. This administration declared war on DEI from day one and fired Biden holdovers because they undeniably obstructed the agenda. Noem and Bondi were held to that same standard.
Now consider the source of the outrage. Jennifer Seibel Newsom’s monologue lamenting the “devaluation of women” fell on deaf ears — after all, she spent two years slamming these same women. The media now mourning Noem and Bondi called them unqualified MAGA Barbie bigots throughout their entire tenures. Where was the feminist solidarity then?
Compare that to Biden’s record: a vice president famously “unburdened by what has been” — because she’d accomplished virtually nothing. A health secretary who insisted men could become women. A diversity agenda that counted biological males as women. They padded the numbers while magically erasing the category entirely.
What the Left is really angry about isn’t that two women were fired. It’s that this White House refuses to play Identity Politics. That refusal exposes the  hollowness of their so-called “empowerment.” Real power isn’t handed out by quota. It’s earned. Susie Wiles didn’t become the first female Chief of Staff because of a diversity mandate. She got there because she’s the best in the room.
Jennifer Seibel Newsom can lecture us about the patriarchy. But she might start by explaining why the movement she represents spent two years trying to destroy the very women she’s now defending.

2024 California Conference For Women

Feminism Is Never Having To Say You Support Women — Or Not

Identity Politics

Jennifer Newsom

Trump Administration

“Supergirl” star Milly Alcock is already facing pushback after preemptively blaming potential criticism of the film on misogyny. 
The remarks have drawn comparisons to Rachel Zegler&#8217;s pre-release comments ahead of Disney&#8217;s &#8220;Snow White,&#8221; which sparked similar backlash.
Fans are calling out Alcock for her recycled feminist arguments after her recent <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/story/milly-alcock-vanities">interview</a> with Vanity Fair. 
“It definitely made me aware that simply existing as a woman in that space is something that people comment on,” the 25-year-old actress said when asked about the “inevitable backlash” she’d face. 
“We have become very comfortable having this weird ownership of women’s bodies. I can’t really stop them. I can only be myself,” Alcock added.
Alcock assumed people wouldn’t like the movie because she’s a woman, but her description of the plot points to a different criticism fans have raised. She said her character, Kara Zor-El/Supergirl, is “given this incredible responsibility and doesn’t know how to deal with it.” 
“She’s not trying to save the world—she’s just trying to save her own,” Alcock told Vanity Fair. “This film is an excellent reminder that the world can be crumbling around you, but you can be the hero of your own story.”
The interview inspired many negative reactions on social media, with critics calling out Alcock for complaining about backlash that hadn’t even happened yet.
“These movies are so bad that they have to start attacking the fans before the movie even comes out,” one person <a href="https://x.com/newspolitics/status/2039035489760460880?s=43">observed</a>.
“Actors really need to go back to just promoting the movie and staying away from anything else, because this type of discourse does nothing but harm its chances,” another person <a href="https://x.com/reviewsdino2/status/2039357302365446654">agreed</a>.
“I suspect she&#8217;ll face backlash about ‘simply existing’ in a movie that doesn&#8217;t look interesting and which is part of a cinematic universe that&#8217;s already struggling with the disinterest of general audiences following a lackluster Superman and various TV shows that few people even noticed happened… but saying it&#8217;s ‘simply existing as a woman’ certainly works better for generating some sort of buzz,” a third commenter <a href="https://x.com/HarfangDneiges/status/2039323848621916611">wrote</a>. 
Another comment <a href="https://x.com/RecruitBoss/status/2039048717525762381">noted</a>, “This is called pre-release critical armor. Any criticism of this movie will be branded as sexist or misogynistic. They use race and gender as critical armor to protect their poorly written scripts from legitimate criticism.”
Zegler became a legend following the disastrous release of Disney&#8217;s &#8220;Snow White&#8221; in 2025. The movie was bad, but additionally, the lead actress made it all worse by disparaging fans and the original storyline ahead of its release. The negative press for Zegler is believed to have contributed to the abysmal box office results.
The “Supergirl” description from Warner Bros. says, “When an unexpected and ruthless adversary strikes too close to home, Kara Zor-El, aka Supergirl, reluctantly joins forces with an unlikely companion on an epic, interstellar journey of vengeance and justice.”
The film opens in theaters nationwide on June 26.

Another ‘Snow White’? The Fight Superhero Star Picks With Fans Before Movie Hits Theaters

Box Office

Warner Bros

I spent the day watching more of “The View” than I ever have before in my life.
Turns out, the insufferable hosts of this failing network show, on Disney-owned ABC, took it upon themselves to spend seven uninterrupted minutes on national television <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/daily-wire-host-fires-back-after-the-view-melts-down-over-her-support-for-young-families?author=Virginia+Kruta&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Daily+Wire+Host+Fires+Back+After+%E2%80%98The+View%E2%80%99+Melts+Down+Over+Her+Support+For+Young+Families">bashing me</a> by name, and anyone else with the audacity to promote marriage and parenthood to Gen Z.
I’ve been a content creator since 2019, covering some of the most contentious issues in the American culture war, and I’ve gotta be honest: I never thought this, my most wholesome, pro-America take, would be the thing I’d get attacked for.
Last week, I joined a panel of incredible women on stage at CPAC to discuss the importance of the American family, and was asked specifically to talk about what it’s going to take to save America. My answer was one <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/daily-wire-host-torches-the-view-over-claim-only-rich-women-can-afford-kids?author=Virginia+Kruta&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Daily+Wire+Host+Torches+%E2%80%98The+View%E2%80%99+Over+Claim+Only+Rich+Women+Can+Afford+Kids">I often repeat</a> in speeches or interviews, and reflects a simple timeless truth — we must renew the importance of the family as the cornerstone of society again to a generation that’s being lied to about it. Addressing a crowd older than myself, I said this:
<blockquote>If you’re not encouraging your children to grow up and have the courage to grow up to get married and have kids — more kids than they can afford, before they think they’re ready, it is high time to start.</blockquote>
Before long, Whoopi Goldberg &amp; company would be furious and virtually foaming at the mouth over the very idea that I promote marriage and motherhood to my generation, and dedicated an entire segment of everyone’s favorite “View-erless” show to launch an attack. 
The “anti-family” segment on &#8220;The View&#8221; opened with Whoopi predictably labeling me a racist – because, clearly, I must only want more white people to have children as a white woman myself. That’s obviously not true. 
But it’s a curious criticism coming from Whoopi Goldberg, an ardent supporter of the abortion industry, which grew in America specifically as a way to kill black babies in the womb at the hands of renowned and infamous eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.
In 2022, Black women made up about 40 % of all abortions reported in the U.S. – in New York City today, as Whoopi Goldberg runs her mouth on television from the heart of Manhattan, you are more likely to be aborted as a black baby than you are to be born… all in the name of racial progress and equity, right?
Let me be clear: the only racial component to any of this is the continued desire by the abortion industry to convince black women it’s more empowering to end the lives of their children than to give birth to them.
Moving through the panel, Sara Haines spent her time on air reminding viewers that having kids is a choice. That’s true. But what about my choice, and that of literally billions of other women around the world, to get married and have children? The very notion is seemingly unfathomable to the women on this miserable panel.
In other words, if you make the choice to “want” kids – it’s the wrong choice. You’re less of a woman. You aren’t a feminist. You don’t support equality. You deserve to be publicly SHAMED, which is exactly what they proceed to do to me.
Ironically, every woman but one around that table has children of their own. And every one of them is either in a long-term relationship or has been married. They somehow make it work as working moms. They have had the courage to commit their lives to someone they love. They get to snuggle their babies at the end of a long day of work — so, why isn’t it worth pursuing for you?
For the rest of the segment, all of the hosts collectively wasted air throwing out every anti-natalist argument to see what would stick.
They lied, saying having children is somehow beneath women, that we as a sex (amazing, how suddenly we can all define woman, right?) have come “too far” to still be sucked into the innate, natural, instinctual desire to have a beautiful baby and share your life with someone.
They lied, claiming childcare costs a whopping $400,000 a year, so must be financially inaccessible to anyone outside of the 1% of the 1%. For the record, it costs about $10,000-$15,000 on average a year… but I wouldn’t expect a woman screaming at me in an $800 jacket to know.
They lied, saying if you want a baby you must be in an abusive, oppressive marriage to an evil, misogynistic man–and someone ought to help you escape with a divorce attorney. To clarify: I love my husband, and no one is more supportive of my motherhood journey or my career.
They lied, saying that I must not understand how tough having kids are because I have a mere one-year-old, who “just sleeps all day.” News to me, after over a year of my life not sleeping all the way through the night.
They lied, saying that breastfeeding ruins your boobs. I know Whitney Cummings remains deeply concerned about my breasts – after 11 months of breastfeeding my daughter, they’re doing just fine.
They lied, of course, to claim we’re facing an overpopulation crisis, which is objectively the opposite of our current reality. In fact, over half of the world’s countries and areas now have fertility rates below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman. These countries represent over two-thirds of the global population, and that number is expected to increase to over 90% by the end of this century.
By 2030, nearly 45% of American women aged 25-44 are projected to be single and childless.
It’s not hard to understand why – virtually every single influencer, television show, movie, college professor, woke pastor, politician, and mainstream media outlet today is dedicating massive air time to trying to convince you NOT to have kids.
Why? Because they want you miserable and lonely. They are intentionally seeking to brainwash you into what my friend &amp; fellow mom Allie Beth Stuckey calls “Toxic Empathy,” so you think you&#8217;re a better person and more compassionate for essentially hating children.
In fact, getting married and having kids is better for everyone in the long term. One study found that having kids increases your wealth by 23% throughout your life. Young married moms are three times happier than their unmarried, childless counterparts. Statistically, married, religious couples with children have the most satisfying intimate lives.
Most importantly, the joy and purpose we experience in sharing our lives with our children is unparalleled anywhere else in our often empty and meaningless society.
How dare we want that for the next generation, right?
I further find no coincidence that this segment aired this week at the start to Holy Week as we walk toward Christ’s Passion on the cross this Friday and His resurrection into heaven on Easter Sunday. The family is the most beautiful example we have of God’s perfect design for humanity. His love is exemplified for us as we lay down our lives for one another, humbling ourselves to serve our spouses and our children. The family, as a result, presents an unparalleled threat to the demonic forces of evil and darkness in our world.
St. John Paul II said during his tenure as Pope, “As the family goes, so goes the nation, and so goes the whole world in which we live,” and “The future of humanity passes by way of the family.”
&#8220;The View’s&#8221; attack on the family and those promoting it is just the latest example of spiritual warfare being waged against what is good and true and beautiful, and we must remain deeply committed to sharing the timeless truth of God even in today’s culture.
Mother Teresa once famously said, “If you want to change the world, go home and love your family.” These words have always been meaningful to me, but certainly have packed a huge gut punch this week as I reflect on the unexpected backlash to such a simple message I shared on stage last week.
It’s a call to action for all of us to ponder, and determine what course we will walk as we work to build our own American Dream as a generation among Gen Z.
The truth is, there’s no better advertisement for the joy of a God-centered marriage than the alternative being blast on full display from the set of &#8220;The View&#8221; – would you rather live among the misery, contempt, and judgment of these angry middle aged women, or pursue purpose and fulfillment in marriage and motherhood while you can?
So, thanks to the ladies of &#8220;The View&#8221; for giving me another opportunity to address this issue. In case it wasn’t clear, I stand by everything I said at CPAC. And in case you’re still unsure at this point, let me reiterate:
Have the courage to fall in love, get married, and make more babies.
It’s good for the world, and even better for you.

JOY BEHAR, SARA HAINES, WHOOPI GOLDBERG, ROBIN WRIGHT, SUNNY HOSTIN, ALYSSA FARAH

I Told Gen Z To Get Married And Have Kids — ‘The View’ Lost Its Mind

I Told Gen Z To Get Married And Have Kids — 'The View' Lost Its Mind

Children

Marriage

Planned Parenthood

The View

Whoopi Goldberg

Sheryl Sandberg thinks women are stupid. The former chief operating officer of Meta and the founder of the nonprofit Lean In, based on the ideas in her 2013 book, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, is back in the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/business/sheryl-sandbergs-lean-in-sheds-quarter-of-staff-will-focus-on-manosphere-fight-1baf7d84?mod=e2tw">news</a>, this time (again) voicing her disappointment in the fairer sex’s inability to conquer corporate America.
Sandberg has pivoted from her claims that women aren’t fulfilling the DEI prophecy because of a systemic failure in American corporate culture (patriarchy!), to aiming her sites on the manosphere and pushing back on the “tradwives” movement. In a recent LinkedIn post, Sandberg writes:
<blockquote>
The problem with the romanticized vision of the tradwife is that it signals to women that to be a good wife, partner, or mother, you have to do it full-time. 
This gives working women one more burden to carry on top of everything they already manage: guilt. Arianna Huffington says it best: “As a working mother, it feels like they take the baby out and put the guilt in.” As I told People magazine last week, I’m worried that the glamorization of the tradwife trend risks putting that guilt back into women — guilt that many of us have worked long and hard to shed.
</blockquote>
As a full-time working mom of three (4- and 2-year-olds and a one-month-old that I’m holding while writing this essay) who has never taken a maternity leave and has felt the intense pressure of being a good — or at least not so bad — mom, wife, employee, and colleague, Sandberg is partly right about the guilt; she just wants to own all of it.
Twenty-first-century feminists emphasize choice the same way Henry Ford offered color options for the Model-T: You can choose any path, as long as it’s the one prescribed by the Lean In feminists.
It’s been over a decade since Sandberg proclaimed that she does not “believe two countries run by women would go to war. Full stop,” and she’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyohphFqRJU&amp;list=PLKlRp-ywAMm6-0HCixmEqXiqZtdNPCpng&amp;index=2">still</a> making the case that more women in positions of power and influence would make for a better world — especially for women. First, it’s obvious by this statement that Sandberg has never seen an episode of The View, and second, she’s denying an inherent truism of human nature: that the most cruel and unforgiving people toward women are…other women.
Note to my fellow women: Sheryl Sandberg is angry at you for taking her advice and exercising your agency just as readily as any man’s. The trouble is you chose unwisely in the eyes of the pseudo-empowering world of Lean In feminism.
Sometime after Anne-Marie Slaughter wrote her revealing 2012 Atlantic essay, “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/">Why Women Still Can’t Have It All</a>,” (to which Sandberg’s book is a reply), society pivoted from the “Mommy Wars” of the 1990s to flattening the sexes into androgynous groups where there should be no differences in the types of ambitions or motivations between sexes. So, when outcomes are disparate by sex, there must be something wrong with the individual or the system. It couldn’t possibly be because women have a natural tendency to choose maternal roles or prioritize home and child care over professional advancement. Women have been duped again! Don’t you understand that deep down under all that maternal instinct is a girlboss destined for the C-Suite?
In the journal Fairer Disputations, Elizabeth Grace Matthew <a href="https://fairerdisputations.org/vocation-not-identity/">writes</a>, “Modern feminists’ failure to acknowledge the well-established desire of most women to spend more time mothering and less time working involves no mystique, but an unwillingness to recognize women’s average differences with men. Declining marriage rates, a fertility crisis, and increasing rates of female anxiety and unhappiness are all perpetuated by a hegemonic bill of goods about women’s desire for a functionally androgynous identity.”
Sandberg wants to guilt women into denying their intuition, ironically, something society fully acknowledged with the oft-used phrase “women’s intuition.”
I was a Division I collegiate athlete, a U.S. Marine, and a working professional, all so-called “male-dominated” activities (one might label the “manosphere”). No one told me I was less than; no one challenged my ability based on sex. What I did hear was other women trying to convince me I would fail because the deck was stacked against me, or that if I came to the realization that being a tech overlord wasn’t my true ambition, I was a tool of a sexist system. There is nothing more toxic than a supposed feminist saying you shouldn’t try because you’re set up for failure. That’s nonsense and a lie.
In reality, women need to follow their instinct despite the upside-down, passive-aggressive, pantsuit messaging from their fellow travelers. The real threat to women carving their own paths and finding fulfillment, purpose, and happiness isn’t the patriarchy, the manosphere, or tradwives; it’s women like Sheryl Sandberg who don’t believe average American women have the capacity or mental wherewithal for making the “correct” choice for themselves, their families, or their careers, and who get angry when they don’t want to be Sheryl Sandberg.
That women are exercising real choice and have life ambitions outside the boardroom signals a shift away from the guilt-ridden Lean In feminism lie and shows that we’re not as stupid as Sheryl Sandberg wants us to be.

Sheryl Sandberg Visits “America’s Newsroom”

Sheryl Sandberg Champions ‘Choice’ Except When It’s One Specific Choice

Culture

Girlboss

Lean In

Sheryl Sandberg

Boy Scout Shirt with Rank Badge and Merit Badges

Everything In Society Has Been Feminized, And It’s Been A Total Disaster. Here’s Proof.

Everything In Society Has Been Feminized, And It's Been A Total Disaster. Here's Proof.

Animation

Boy Scouts

J.R.R. Tolkien

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
The rise of Ozempic is as much a story of American ingenuity as it is of our culture’s posture toward its food. For every excess pound Americans gain, the pharmaceutical industry is just a few steps behind, developing band-aid after band-aid for our crisis of chronic disease. Yet while our alarm bells only recently began sounding over the obesity epidemic and its cascade of related health issues, the roots of our disordered relationship with food run decades deeper, back to the <a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/political/convenience-culture-crisis-how-second-wave-feminism-helped-make-america-sick">second wave</a> of feminism and the rise of a convenience-driven culture that ushered in mass dependence on ultra-processed foods. This deeper crisis is not one we can medicate ourselves out of: We are a nation that has deliberately forgotten how to feed itself.
Feeding America well is less about nostalgia than stopping a tangible, observable public health and environmental crisis. By now, data regarding our obesity, hypertension, and related deaths, diseases, and disorders saturates popular discourse almost too deeply to bear repeating, but the fact that our poor health has become a cliché doesn’t make it any less true. Much of this crisis, unsurprisingly, begins in the kitchen. The “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/garden/new-lost-generation-the-cooking-illiterate.html">cooking illiterate</a>,” a term coined by the New York Times, is reproducing faster than ever, with younger generations decreasingly likely to know how to cook. <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/food/do-millennials-really-not-know-how-to-cook-with-technology-they-dont-really-have-to">More than a quarter of millennials</a> say they couldn’t make a cake from a box mix, and <a href="https://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/food/do-millennials-really-not-know-how-to-cook-with-technology-they-dont-really-have-to">under a third of 18-to-29-year-olds</a> say they feel “confident” in the kitchen. It isn’t an issue of free time, either; <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/america-addicted-food-delivery-takeout-plastics-coronavirus_n_5ed013eec5b64f10cb090b29">the COVID-19 lockdowns led to a spike in DoorDash and Uber Eats</a>, not a renaissance of home cooking.
Our obsession with convenience culture is not a coincidence. Rather, it’s the direct result of devaluing work such as homemaking, caregiving, and food preparation, traditionally women’s work, as lesser forms of work. This shift then combined with rising dual-income households to create a cultural and logistical void in domestic food production as households’ mothers entered the workforce. Industrial food companies were all too quick to rush into that void, seeking markets for post-WWII manufacturing capacity. Corporate interests aligned all too conveniently with the “you can have it all” ethos, promoting shelf-stable, processed foods as “freedom” from and “progress” beyond the home. This cultural transformation was hardly intentional; in many ways, it was barely even a conscious one. Nevertheless, markets picked up on our demonstrated preferences, and our homemade food was replaced by manufactured supplements that quickly became substitutes.
Industry replaced the family kitchen, filling a vacuum with promises that were too good to be true. Additives and preservatives were marketed as “science,” frozen and boxed meals were sold as “liberation,” and the rise of the microwavable dinners framed speed as ingenuity. Generational skills eroded as cooking, gardening, and food knowledge were outsourced, and food quality plummeted as additives, preservatives, artificial ingredients, refined seed oils, and industrial-scale commodity crops became dietary staples. Systems once centered around nourishment came to serve America’s new favorite god: efficiency.
With our food sequestered away in boxes and plastic, cobwebs began to grow around tables where we soon forgot how to commune. Feeding ourselves became a necessary evil rather than an excuse to socialize, exacerbating <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/16643">America’s declining social capital</a> along with its biomarkers. Rates of metabolic disease climbed along with the number of ingredients in our staple foods and our <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/youre-eating-out-of-season-and-its-costing-you-more-than-you-think">distance</a> — physical and cognitive — from our foods’ origins. Today, <a href="https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/children-struggle-to-name-common-vegetables-survey-shows-ctxv3z3kg?gaa_at=eafs&amp;gaa_n=AWEtsqccnk_ELKc_OqByRR6uQ4YjzfobSGBhOu1floda0nEiqjZQMeW7GkMjReIAtDg%3D&amp;gaa_ts=6938c117&amp;gaa_sig=Y0jubow8RBDTeD5iIV-dOChvetUmJaIwJepvhCVvLAtwF0h5Ak-jYAqVLkYec1YGKuNXw48aCzhmDBdEbOSXjA%3D%3D">less than a third of children aged 7-11</a> can identify a beet or a zucchini, though few kids have the same struggle recognizing logos for McDonald’s or M&amp;M’s. The decline in familiarity with food may have begun with the decline in farming and cooking, but it has accelerated over just a few generations to a full-fledged outsourcing of our culinary and nutritional autonomy.
The consequences of our predicament are difficult to overstate. Our country is now unsuccessfully battling parallel rises in childhood chronic disease, allergies, autoimmune disorders, and metabolic illness, and our decline in food literacy means that children who don’t know where food comes from can’t learn from their equally clueless parents. While the biotech industry may be able to patch up some of our health issues, it cannot heal a sick culture. Our loss of connection to food is also an atrophy of cultural rituals, among them shared meals, family identity, and an intergenerational knowledge transfer we cannot rebuild with an injectable, pill, or patch. All of this is underscored by our deteriorating relationship with the land we call home, as industrial food production has increased our land degradation, reliance on synthetic inputs, and biodiversity loss, reinforcing a cycle where the cheapest calories are the least nutritious and most environmentally damaging.
Making America healthy again will require rewiring the broken systems that have made her sick. We need to fix the regulatory frameworks that make it easier to produce processed food at scale than to support small farms, diversified agriculture, or nutrient-rich perishables. We need to address the permitting barriers currently hindering regional food processing, regenerative farm expansion, and the infrastructure needed for local food systems. Most of all, we need to accept that a healthy America requires aligning food policy with human health and environmental integrity — not just agricultural output — and we need to write agricultural policy that reflects that. Ultimately, success would look like an inversion of the industrial food supply chain that prioritizes export capacity and shelf-stability over nutrient density and ecological health.
And yet policy alone cannot save us. The real work begins in the home, with the deeply pro-human and pro-family pursuits of reclaiming shared meals and rebuilding a relationship with what we eat. Promoting food literacy, normalizing cooking as a basic life skill, and restoring the dignity of the farm and the kitchen are all efforts that will need to begin from the ground up, not an executive order or a farm bill. Restoring agency over the food that sustains our bodies and communities is a project that will take several generations and, if we’re successful, save several more.
America cannot be healthy again until families, communities, and institutions reclaim the ability to produce, prepare, and understand real food. We’re mistaken to believe that the fallout we’re enduring is merely biological, and equally mistaken to believe its solutions are merely political. Our country’s health is a project capable of nourishing a nation starving socially, culturally, and environmentally, if we choose to pursue it. Restoring it promises both the work and the reward of a lifetime.
***
Danielle Butcher Franz is CEO of the American Conservation Coalition. As a founding member of ACC, Danielle has dedicated her career to building bridges between traditional conservative values and environmental advocacy.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

GettyImages-1974650688

The Weight Loss Shot Is Rising, But What Happened To The American Family Table?

Food

Upstream

Former Meta executive Sheryl Sandberg said the popularity of the “tradwife” lifestyle could be “detrimental to women, and further asserts that these “very, very, very, sexist” gender roles need to be revised.
Sandberg claimed that the rise of the tradwife trend has caused more harm than good. &#8220;The message that is going out is that in order to be a good wife or a good mother, you need to do it full time,&#8221; the former Meta exec <a href="https://people.com/sheryl-sandberg-the-tradwife-trend-is-not-a-fresh-idea-11922052?taid=69b0a187f9dd4700017de416&amp;utm_campaign=peoplemagazine&amp;utm_content=new&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter.com">told</a> People. &#8220;And the truth is that that is a decision almost no women can afford to make.&#8221;
&#8220;If you look at the percentages of women who need to work outside of the home to support their families, it&#8217;s the great majority of women,” Sandberg went on. “And so these messages that &#8216;this is how you have a successful marriage, that this is how you have six children,&#8217; I think, are very detrimental to women.&#8221;
The 56-year-old tech exec is best known for serving as Meta&#8217;s chief operating officer from 2008 to 2022. She is also the founder of LeanIn.org, a non-profit organization dedicated to “offering women the ongoing inspiration and support to help them achieve their goals.&#8221;
She went on to clarify, &#8220;I don&#8217;t think they are meant that way &#8230; there are so many messages that tell women what their place is that limit their ambition…and this is potentially, inadvertently, one of them.&#8221;
&#8220;If you have the resources and you want to be a tradwife, that&#8217;s great,&#8221; Sandberg told the outlet. &#8220;That&#8217;s for you to decide.&#8221;
She went on to repeat the popular leftist talking point that traditional gender roles were the real villain of the story. 
&#8220;We need to be realistic and we need to not use new ideas to reinforce what are old, outdated and very, very, very sexist notions of what roles are,&#8221; Sandberg said, adding that she thinks terms like “tradwife” make women who choose to work feel guilty.
&#8220;Let&#8217;s be clear: You are not harming your marriage and you are not harming your children by working and by being ambitious,&#8221; she insisted.
One of the most infamous examples of the tradwife trend going viral online is social media influencer Hannah Neeleman, better known by her social handle and business name, Ballerina Farm. She just made headlines again for announcing she was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nine-kids-thats-fine-but-theres-one-thing-the-debate-is-missing">pregnant with her ninth child</a>.
Neeleman has received criticism from the Left for being “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mom-of-8-ballerina-farm-founder-defends-her-life-choices-marriage-after-scathing-expose">a hammer blow for feminism</a>,” but she’s also earned a decent number of critics on the conservative side. They argue that because her husband’s family is very wealthy, she’s not exemplifying the sacrificial life of a stay-at-home mother.

Former Meta Exec Claims Tradwife Ideal Is ‘Detrimental,’ Says Women Must Be ‘Realistic’

Former Meta Exec Says Tradwife Ideal Can Be ‘Very Detrimental’ To Women

Motherhood

Menu