As the specter of state-sanctioned execution reportedly looms over eight women in Iran, President Trump has issued a direct appeal to Tehran, marking a high-stakes moment of personal diplomacy amid ongoing conflict.
The move comes as the international community faces increasing pressure to address the Iranian regime’s brutal internal crackdown, which has reportedly claimed the lives of thousands of dissidents.
Taking to <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116442908819175250">Truth Social</a>, President Trump addressed the Iranian leadership directly, linking the fate of the condemned women to future diplomatic relations. &#8220;To the Iranian leaders, who will soon be in negotiations with my representatives: I would greatly appreciate the release of these women,&#8221; Trump wrote. He urged the regime to &#8220;do them no harm,&#8221; adding that such a gesture &#8220;would be a great start to our negotiations.&#8221;
The president&#8217;s intervention highlights his preference for direct, personality-driven negotiations, even as the U.S. remains engaged in a broader military and economic effort to pressure the regime. However, while the White House leverages the looming negotiations for humanitarian concessions, prominent activists are setting their sights on the Vatican.
Famed Iranian dissident Masih Alinejad launched a scathing public appeal to Pope Leo XIV, criticizing what she perceives as a tepid response from the Holy See regarding the regime’s &#8220;straight-up brutality.&#8221; Alinejad challenged the pope’s silence on the execution of protesters and the abuse of women, asking if such acts qualify as a &#8220;massacre&#8221; or if the Vatican is &#8220;still workshopping the language.&#8221;
&#8220;When the people who actually claim to speak for God stay quiet… it kinda sounds like God’s on mute,&#8221; Alinejad wrote. &#8220;Are you going to say something about it, or is this one of those moments where silence is the safest prayer?&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
So, dear Pope, quick question:
You’ve got these guys in Iran who say they’re doing God’s work… by hanging protesters at sunrise and beating women into forced confessions. Apparently, that’s what “holy” looks like now.
And I’m just wondering, when people get executed for asking… <a href="https://t.co/AYdPmp8RJt">pic.twitter.com/AYdPmp8RJt</a>
&mdash; Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih/status/2046553813398491632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Pope Leo XIV has previously addressed the region with a focus on de-escalation rather than direct condemnation of the regime&#8217;s tactics. In mid-January, as the regime massacred thousands of Iranian citizens, the pope <a href="https://angelusnews.com/news/vatican/pope-leo-iran/#:~:text=11%2C%20Pope%20Leo%20said%20his,continue%20to%20claim%20many%20lives.%22">remarked</a> that his thoughts were with Iran and Syria, noting that &#8220;ongoing tensions continue to claim many lives&#8221; and calling for &#8220;patiently nurtured&#8221; dialogue. Following the commencement of U.S. military actions, the pope warned of a &#8220;tragedy of enormous proportions,&#8221; urging both the U.S. and Iran to halt the &#8220;spiral of violence&#8221; before it reached an &#8220;irreparable abyss.&#8221;
Critics argue that the pope’s emphasis on &#8220;mutual threats&#8221; and &#8220;responsible dialogue&#8221; creates a false moral equivalence between a democratic state and a despotic regime that hangs its own citizens at sunrise. As the execution date for the eight women reportedly <a href="https://x.com/DavidAltonHL/status/2045958462727700619?s=20">approaches</a>, the contrast between Trump’s transactional plea and the pope’s calls for &#8220;authentic dialogue&#8221; has intensified the debate over how the West should confront Tehran’s domestic atrocities.

MixCollage-21-Apr-2026-10-44-AM-9104

Dissidents Slam Pope’s Silence As Trump Intervenes To Save Iranian Women From Execution

Donald Trump

execution

Iran

Pope Leo

Women

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

Feminism

Gavin Newsom

governor

Harvey Weinstein

Opinion

Tradwives

Woke Culture

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

Academics who do not know what a woman is should not be the taxpayer-funded gatekeepers of women’s history. But ever since Congress authorized the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum in 2020, the Smithsonian Institution has made it clear that gender ideology matters more than biological truth in its version of women’s history.
Congress’s next move on the project is to grant the Smithsonian federal land on the National Mall for the museum. In a House Natural Resources subcommittee hearing last month on the subject, Congressman Tom Tiffany (R-WI) pressed a Smithsonian Institution representative with a simple question: “How can we be sure that the women celebrated in the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum are not men?”
The Smithsonian staffer dodged the question, and subcommittee members ripped the congressman for what they deemed a baseless inquiry. But the question hit the nail on the head: the Smithsonian pretends that men can be women.
While the brick-and-mortar Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum has yet to earn a permanent building, the Smithsonian’s mobile exhibits prove Rep. Tiffany correct. In its 2023 exhibit “<a href="https://americanhistory.si.edu/explore/exhibitions/girlhood/gallery">Girlhood: It’s Complicated</a>”, the Smithsonian exhibited <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-troubling-case-of-jazz-jennings-the-medias-first-transgender-child">Jazz Jennings</a>, a trans-identifying male reality TV star.
Jazz was <a href="https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/jazz-jennings-was-transitioned-at-2-and-had-surgery-at-17-my-new-vagina-fell-apar">socially transitioned</a> by his parents at age two, pumped with puberty blockers at eleven, and surgically mutilated at eighteen.
<div id="attachment_566557" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-566557" class="size-large wp-image-566557" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/06/GettyImages-1138982204-864x576.jpg" alt="BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA - MARCH 28: Jazz Jennings attends the 30th Annual GLAAD Media Awards at Beverly Hills Hotel on March 28, 2019 in Beverly Hills, California." width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/06/GettyImages-1138982204-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/06/GettyImages-1138982204-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/06/GettyImages-1138982204-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2023/06/GettyImages-1138982204.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />David Crotty/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images</div>
Here’s what the Smithsonian has to say about Jazz:
<blockquote>For many, the rigid rules about what it means to be a girl are too small and too simple. Jazz Jennings is one of those girls. She shares her girlhood with millions of Americans on television and reminds us that girls can be assigned male at birth and that girlhood comes in many forms. Jazz always knew she “was a girl trapped inside a boy’s body.” As a toddler, she felt a roar of emotions at not being able to communicate what she was experiencing. But Jazz was lucky because her family listened, learned, and supported her.</blockquote>
First, Jazz is not a girl. He was deceived at just two years of age. Second, girls cannot be “assigned male at birth.” Girls are young human females; sex is immutable, not “assigned.” Finally, no toddler is &#8220;a girl trapped inside a boy’s body.” 
If the Smithsonian flunks a single-room exhibit, how can they be trusted with an entire building? The Smithsonian’s feature of Jazz in its “Girlhood” exhibit is flagrantly disqualifying.
The institution’s problem boils down to its own academics and advisors. On the website’s featured “Biographies: Every Woman Has a Story” page, Smithsonian-associated scholars hail men and historical “women.” First in the list is Roderick “Lavergne” Cox, a trans-identifying male actor described by the Smithsonian as “assigned male at birth,” and “the first openly transgender person nominated for an Emmy.” The Smithsonian made a distinct choice to acknowledge “Lavergne” as simultaneously male and “woman.”
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman?elementPosition=7&amp;row=7&amp;rowHeadline=Featured&amp;rowType=Portrait+Show+Carousel">WATCH: Matt Walsh&#8217;s groundbreaking documentary &#8220;What Is A Woman?&#8221; on DailyWire+</a></h3>
The Smithsonian also features seven other males: United States Congressman Timothy “Sarah” McBride and Biden-era Assistant Secretary for Health for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Richard “Rachel” Levine, “the highest-ranking openly transgender government official in U.S. history,” <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/cecilia-chung">Cecilia Chung</a> (a California based advocate for sex-rejecting procedures), <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/marsha-p-johnson">Marsha P. Johnson</a>, <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/andrea-jenkins">Andrea Jenkins</a>, <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/sylvia-rivera">Sylvia Rivera</a>, and <a href="https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/janet-mock">Janet Mock</a>. It is unacceptable that eight men are hailed as historical women on a taxpayer-funded “.gov” website.
<div id="attachment_1069997" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1069997" class="size-large wp-image-1069997" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2252864900-864x576.jpg" alt="Visitors outside the Smithsonian Institute's National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC, US, on Friday, Dec. 26, 2025. The White House is raising the pressure on the Smithsonian Institution to turn over extensive internal records as part of a broader effort to assert control over how US history is presented - and threatening to withhold congressionally authorized funding if it doesn't comply by Jan. 13. Photographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2252864900-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2252864900-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2252864900-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/GettyImages-2252864900.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
If the Smithsonian Institution — with its hordes of PhD-clad ideologues — cannot acknowledge that a woman is an adult human female, it should not be trusted to narrate women’s history, especially with the taxpayer’s dime on federal soil.
The Smithsonian’s demonstrated radicalism must be top of mind as Congress works to authorize the construction of the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum. On March 18, the House Committee on Administration held a markup to advance the authorization, this time, however, with <a href="https://x.com/CWforA/status/2034336481561502017?s=20">an amendment</a> offered by Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) to prohibit the new museum from portraying men as women. The bill passed in committee, but Democrats uniformly voted “No.”
How ironic. Democrats care more about transgender ideology than a long-awaited women’s museum.
The Smithsonian Institution cannot be trusted with women’s history. If the Women’s History Museum goes up, Congress must do its due diligence to ensure that it operates under a strict, brazenly explicit federal authorization requiring that no male be presented as a “woman” in its exhibits — no exceptions. Better to have no museum at all than one that presents males as “women.”
* * *
Hannah Lape is Legislative Strategist for <a href="https://concernedwomen.org/">Concerned Women for America</a>, the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization. On X: @CWforA

35th Annual GLAAD Media Awards New York – Arrivals

Should Taxpayers Fund A Women’s Museum That Features Jazz Jennings?

American History

Federal Government

Gender Identity

Girls

Smithsonian Museum

Transgender

For years, Britain has prided itself on avoiding America’s bitter abortion wars. That pride came from a “settled” law that the public took as a “pragmatic compromise.” But a recent vote in Parliament has shattered that illusion, generating the first national debate in the United Kingdom on the issue in almost 60 years.
Since 1967, abortion has been permitted in Britain for any reason up to 24 weeks (almost 6 months) — already far later than in most of Europe — with complete allowance up to birth in cases involving serious risk to the mother’s life or health, or fetal disability.
But last week, Britain’s House of Lords backed a change that decriminalizes abortion outside the existing legal framework. In plain terms, while abortions carried out through the NHS will still operate within a regulated general 24-week limit, no laws will exist to deter women from ending their pregnancies outside that system — including at full term, for any reason whatsoever.
This isn’t hypothetical. It has already happened.
In 2010, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19621675">Sarah Catt,</a> 35, from North Yorkshire, aborted her baby at 39 weeks — days before her due date. She didn’t carry out this abortion because of any medical crisis. She and her baby were perfectly healthy. Rather, she had the abortion because she was having an affair, and didn’t want her partner to find out.
Sarah was prosecuted under the law for killing her viable, late-term baby, but the changes pushed through by politicians means she will be fully pardoned — as if her actions were never immoral.
These cases are rare. But they matter, because they expose the very boundary the law once enforced — and what can happen when that boundary disappears.
The activism in support of the recent vote to change the law gained momentum in the past few years due to a small increase in the number of women investigated for potentially illegal abortions, following the introduction of pills-by-mail or &#8220;pills-by-post.&#8221; This Covid-era scheme enabled women under ten weeks pregnant to order abortion pills by phone, and take them with no in-person examination or medical supervision.
Following the pandemic, the government made the scheme permanent — despite evidence that it opened women’s health up to far greater risk. Around 20 women <a href="https://righttolife.org.uk/news/over-10000-women-needed-hospital-treatment-after-using-abortion-pills">per day</a> in 2020 had to be admitted to the hospital after taking the pills alone at home. Ambulance dispatches and emergency calls responding to abortion pill concerns <a href="https://www.gbnews.com/news/ambulance-dispatches-and-999-calls-responding-to-abortion-pill-concerns-have-risen-by-64-since-2019-gb-news-investigation/359311">rose by 64%</a> following the scheme’s introduction.
Without scans or examinations, ectopic pregnancies requiring urgent medical care are missed; and crucially, gestational ages are not confirmed. Relying on women to self-report how far along their pregnancy carries a minefield of risks.
The court case of Carla Foster exposed the danger of this approach. Carla, 44, obtained abortion pills after telling a provider she was less than ten weeks pregnant. In reality, she was around 34 weeks along. She took the pills at home to end the life of her fully-developed baby in utero, went into labour, and delivered a stillborn daughter, whom she later named &#8220;Lily.&#8221;
Lily was viable, healthy and pain-capable. She could have survived if simply allowed to be delivered alive. Foster later described being “haunted” by the experience. Nobody wants to see women go through this trauma; nobody wants to see developed babies, capable of survival, being killed at this late stage. The pills-by-post scheme should have been scrapped to prevent this happening again. Instead, parliamentarians removed the legal deterrents that prevent more women from following in Carla’s footsteps.
Across most of the continent, abortion on general grounds is limited to the first trimester — typically between 12 and 15 weeks. Britain’s 24-week limit is already by far one of the most permissive. Stripping away the legal enforcement of that limit is not a minor adjustment, but a radical departure.
Perhaps most striking is how out of step this is with public opinion. While most Britons support legal abortion in some circumstances, <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2183929/abortion-birth-voted-lords-legalised-infanticide">less than</a> 1% support abortion up to birth for any reason. 
In other words, this is not the result of overwhelming democratic demand. It is a top-down redefinition of moral boundaries — one that the public has barely begun to grapple with.
Even in Britain’s typically muted political landscape, alarm bells are starting to ring. Senior figures, from Reform MP Suella Braverman to Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservative Party, have broken the long-standing bipartisan reluctance to engage on this issue, warning that removing legal guardrails up to birth goes too far. In a country that has spent decades avoiding this debate, that shift alone is telling.
The British parliament has sent a signal that no abortion, no matter the reason, can ever be judged as immoral. The British public will now have to decide if they agree — or if it’s time to finally reopen the conversation, and look into how our laws can be better structured to support both mothers and their babies to thrive.
* * *
Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) is a writer and commentator from Great Britain.

UK Parliament Ahead of 2025 Budget

Could Full-Term Abortion Become Reality In America? The Debate Just Shifted.

Abortion

Abortion Drug

Great Britain

Leftists

Parliament

United Kingdom

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

Movies

Sometimes a news event comes along that is so chillingly horrific that it confirms the presence of the devil in our midst. Thursday’s murder of a young woman by the state through euthanasia certainly qualifies.
This particular case also contains a warning: it is happening in Europe as a result of societal trends that are also gathering speed in America. These include family breakdown, secularization, the growth of the state, and the resulting embrace of a culture of death by the bureaucracy, the media, and the Left.
And this was not a one-off. Noelia Castillo Ramos, in Spain, is the second young woman in less than three years to be euthanized by a European state.
In fact, the two cases are alarmingly similar. Noelia and Milou Verhoof, who was euthanized in the Netherlands in 2023, were both raped as mere girls, understandably fell into depression, and eventually asked the state to help kill themselves. And the state was only too happy to oblige.
The case of Noelia — killed at a hospital near Barcelona — has drawn worldwide attention online, which is itself proof that the desire to cling to life is a basic human instinct.
Noelia suffered a lot in her life. The Spanish government took custody from her parents 12 years ago when she was just 13, after they divorced, fell into hard times, and lost their house. Her father, Gerónimo, drank at the time, according to news reports.
The Catalan regional government, of which Barcelona is the capital, then placed her in a state-supervised youth center. It was there that Noelia was gang-raped by three young men who were reportedly illegal aliens.
Nothing happened to her aggressors, but Noelia was never the same. She plunged into a severe depression, and suffered as well from borderline personality disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
In 2022, Noelia tried to end her life by throwing herself from a fifth-floor window. She survived, but ended up a paraplegic, stuck in a wheelchair and suffering great pain.
She then demanded euthanasia, which Spain’s current government of Socialists and communists legalized in 2021. Noelia’s father opposed it, arguing that her many disorders prevented her from making an informed decision, and pursued the case till the end in the courts.
On Thursday, a Barcelona judge denied a last-minute request to halt the proceedings. Around 6:00 pm, doctors at Hospital Residència Sant Camil in Sant Pere de Ribes, near the Catalan capital, gave her a lethal injection that stopped her breathing and her heart.
Noelia, in other words, was asphyxiated by the same state that took her away from those who loved her — and then either could not or would not protect her.
For the Left, this was a victory. The newspaper El País wrote caustically about the Abogados Cristianos, the Spanish Foundation of Christian Lawyers, which worked with Noelia’s father to stop the euthanasia. In typical lapidary style, the paper wrote:
<blockquote>For a year and a half this organization [Abogados Cristianos] has been behind the father’s legal battle to prevent the assisted death of Noelia, who suffers from paraplegia. … Advised by the ultra-Catholic group Abogados Cristianos, the man has entangled his daughter in a legal maze that has kept her alive, against her will, for 601 days.</blockquote>
For Spain’s main leftist newspaper, this was about “dying with dignity.” The court battle “prolonged the suffering of a young woman who has never wavered in her decision and who has received scientific endorsement from the independent professionals who make up the Catalan Guarantee and Evaluation Commission (CGAC).”
And this has indeed been a battle between those who believe that the state, led by technocrats, has the right to impose its choices on the family, even to make life-and-death decisions, and those who believe in a higher order. Good and evil, some might say.
Bestselling Spanish author Irene Gonzalez, a friend and insightful observer of Spanish life, called it a “state execution.&#8221; She wrote on X:
<blockquote>The State separated her from her parents — who loved her — yet failed to protect, shelter, or provide her with psychological or emotional support. She was a vulnerable young woman whom the State left in a state of absolute defenselessness; its solution is simply to get her out of the way. Euthanasia appears to be the execution — the final step in a case involving abduction and torture — carried out with the haste of a system eager to erase the traces of what the “State” is truly doing in the name of a dignified death.</blockquote>
America, look at Europe — and beware.
* * *
Mike Gonzales is the Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum Senior Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

A Barcelona Judge Refuses For The Third Time To Suspend Euthanasia For Noelia Castillo

The State Took Her From Her Family. Then It Decided She Should Die.

Child rape

Europe

Euthanasia

Heritage Foundation

Immigrants

Rape

Spain

Joy Reid did a side-by-side comparison of the United States and Iran, and her overall takeaway was that if American women were better off than their Iranian counterparts, they were not better off by much.
Reid, who was ousted from her regular gig with liberal network MSNBC before NBC News jettisoned the now rebranded cable news network (MS NOW), argued that the United States had secret police just like Iran and was just as oppressive when it came to how women were treated — although she listed off the &#8220;oppressive&#8221; policies impacting American women and did not mention one of the many that affect Iranian women. The only real difference, she claimed, was that American oppression came at the hands of Christians and Iran&#8217;s oppressive regime was rooted in Islam.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Joy Reid: America is a Christian form of Iran &amp; women may have be better off there <a href="https://t.co/mDAheewOPU">pic.twitter.com/mDAheewOPU</a>
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2033542969509191976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;We get told, particularly when it comes to Arabs and Muslims and Africans, that people are just diabolically evil for no reason, right? That they do things because they hate our freedoms. We were told this about Iraq, that they just hated us for no damn reason at all,&#8221; Reid said, suggesting that the narrative was invented out of whole cloth in order to justify American actions.
&#8220;Now, I’m not saying that that regime is not bad, but, by the way, our regime is not good,&#8221; Reid continued. &#8220;Our regime has secret police. They have secret police. Our regime is oppressing women, taking away abortion rights, taking away women’s rights in like 26 states — some states where they’re trying to have the death penalty for having an abortion.&#8221;
Reid acknowledged briefly that the Iranian rulers &#8220;also oppress women,&#8221; but omitted the <a href="https://iranhumanrights.org/2025/03/gender-apartheid-in-iran-is-crushing-womens-lives-and-futures/">extent of that oppression</a>. A number of the regime&#8217;s laws — and the punishment for breaking them — only apply to women.
<ul>
<li>Women must adhere to a mandatory dress code that requires covering their hair, arms, and legs in public. The regime&#8217;s so-called “morality police” — along with surveillance cameras — enforce the rule, and women who disobey could face hefty fines, prison sentences of five to 15 years, or be barred from travel. In 2022, for example, the morality police arrested Mahsa Amini for allegedly wearing her hijab improperly, and she died after they brutally beat her. Nationwide protests followed.</li>
<li>Women can be arrested or thrown in prison for social media posts showing them without their hijabs or for posting dance videos online.</li>
<li>Women must also wear a hijab when appearing in films or on television, because Iranian law requires the covering in all public media.</li>
<li>Women are not permitted to sing solos in front of mixed audiences, meaning that female performers are restricted to performing at female-only events or recorded performances.</li>
<li>Women have often been banned from attending men’s sporting events, especially soccer matches, leading to a number of women being arrested for dressing as men in order to attend such events.</li>
<li>Many women require permission from a father or male guardian to marry, regardless of their age at the time, if it is their first marriage.</li>
<li>Girls can legally be married at 13, but a younger girl can be forced to marry if her father or a judge decrees it.</li>
<li>Married women are not permitted to leave the country or obtain a passport without first getting written permission from their husbands.</li>
<li>A woman’s testimony in court is only worth half of a man’s testimony.</li>
<li>Women typically inherit less than men, meaning that daughters usually receive only half the inheritance that would be given to sons.</li>
<li>The Iranian constitution bars women from ever becoming president, and women are not permitted to become judges.</li>
<li>Married women can be legally barred from holding a job if their husbands claim that their work conflicts with their family obligations.</li>
<li>Men can file for and obtain divorces for any reason, but women risk losing inheritances and child custody — and are rarely granted divorces anyway.</li>
</ul>
Reid, clearly unbothered by that, went on to claim, &#8220;They have the highest rate of women who are in STEM careers. We’re kicking women out of the military, out of university. We’re saying that DEI means women can’t be hired for high positions in the sciences.&#8221;
While it has been claimed in viral social media posts that 70% of STEM graduates in Iran are women, data from the <a href="https://databrowser.uis.unesco.org/view#indicatorPaths=UIS-EducationOPRI%3A0%3AFOSGP.5T8.F500600700.F&amp;geoMode=countries&amp;geoUnits=IRN%2CUSA&amp;browsePath=EDUCATION%2FUIS-EducationOPRI%2Fgraduates&amp;timeMode=range&amp;view=line&amp;chartMode=single&amp;tableIndicatorId=FOSGP.5T8.F500600700.F&amp;chartHighlightSeries=&amp;chartHighlightEnabled=true&amp;chartIndicatorId=FOSGP.5T8.F500600700.F">United Nations</a> shows that 25% of Iran&#8217;s STEM graduates are female.
&#8220;So we’re marginally better,&#8221; Reid concluded. &#8220;And we’re doing it for Christianity, they’re doing it for Islam, right? So, it’s like we don’t get told those things because it would take away the kind of American exceptionalism narrative that makes it easy to take our people and send them off to die in a war that we have nothing to do with, that we don’t want.&#8221;
The Daily Wire&#8217;s Isabel Brown fired back at Reid, saying, &#8220;Forgive my Christian ignorance but when was the last time a woman was BEATEN TO DEATH BY THE MORALITY POLICE for a sliver of her hair showing in a Christian country?&#8221;

2024 ESSENCE Festival Of Culture™ Presented By Coca-Cola® – Day 3 – Ernest N. Morial Convention Center

Joy Reid Says Iranian Women Are As Free As Americans — The Brutal Reality Says Otherwise

Joy Reid Compares U.S. And Iran Side By Side, Concludes America Is Just Barely Better

Joy Reid

Media

Politics

United States

Women's Rights

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.

Sheryl Sandberg

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

Culture

Motherhood

At the high-profile United Nations Commission on the Status of Women this week, the United States was the only nation in the world to vote against a woke document that failed to define what a woman is and promoted gender ideology and diversity, equity, and inclusion principles, The Daily Wire can first report.
Thirty-six nations are members of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, and every single year during the commission, there is an agreed-upon document that focuses on topics affecting women around the world, including injustices.
This year&#8217;s document was a disappointment to Bethany Kozma, Director of Global Affairs (OGA) at the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as the other members of President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration who had traveled to the commission in New York.
The document was filled with mentions of DEI, gender ideology, and ambiguous language about &#8220;reproductive rights,&#8221; but was bereft of language unique to womanhood, according to Kozma. &#8220;No mention of motherhood or unique female experiences,&#8221; she said, adding, &#8220;and it failed to define what a woman is.&#8221;
In short, The Daily Wire has learned, it was not aligned with the Trump administration&#8217;s policies and views on these issues. Since the president took office again in 2025, the United States has clearly defined what a woman is, banned boys from girls&#8217; spaces and sports, fought back against transgenderism in the medical world, and shut down many DEI projects in corporations and academia.
&#8220;The UN Commission on Women is supposed to be for women, yet for years, it’s been co-opted to include men pretending to be women,&#8221; she explained. &#8220;Many countries claim to support and empower women, yet some of them cannot even answer the simple question: &#8216;What is a woman?'&#8221;
&#8220;Thanks to the moral leadership of President Trump, the tide is changing and we&#8217;re standing up for women and girls,&#8221; she emphasized. &#8220;And I really was hopeful that we could come to an agreement.&#8221;
Kozma and her delegation from the United States worked hard to participate in good faith, offering amendments to the document that they knew some countries might sign onto. Natalie Dodson, senior advisor to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., shared that their delegation worked aggressively to negotiate with the other countries in order to include language defending the integrity of women.
&#8220;The text was not something that the U.S. liked at all,&#8221; Kozma explained. &#8220;It would not have been something that we would have ever put out on behalf of the United States government, but we had offered several amendments that were just very common sense.&#8221;
One amendment that they had been asking for, over and over, was an amendment that essentially defined men and women so that there would be no ambiguity.
<div id="attachment_1056463" style="width: 2570px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1056463" class="size-full wp-image-1056463" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-scaled.jpeg" alt="" width="2560" height="1920" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-scaled.jpeg 2560w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-300x225.jpeg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-768x576.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-1536x1152.jpeg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/IMG_6039-2048x1536.jpeg 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px" />Members of the United States Delegation at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.</div>
The Commission on the Status of Women wasn&#8217;t interested in the American amendments, Kozma and Dodson explained to The Daily Wire. Minutes before midnight on Sunday night, the council sent the final draft to the United States without acknowledging any of the American red lines that Kozma&#8217;s team had outlined.
And when it came time to vote on the amendments, which were intended to be voted on separately, the council bundled all the amendments together. Some nations might have voted for one amendment but not another, and bundled together, the amendments failed.
During Monday&#8217;s vote, the United States was the only nation in the world to vote against the document. Six nations abstained: Côte d&#8217;Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Mali, Mauritania, and Saudi Arabia.
Kozma believes it was a deliberate attempt at &#8220;isolation&#8221; by the council to make the United States look like &#8220;we won&#8217;t don&#8217;t defend women and girls.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m really proud of us,&#8221; she told The Daily Wire over the phone. &#8220;We were the only country that was voting to protect women and girls.&#8221;

World Leaders Gather For The 80th Session Of The United Nations General Assembly

U.S. Stands Alone Defending Women In Gender Identity Fight At United Nations

Department of Health and Human Services

Social Issues

U.S.

United Nations

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.
***
If you were to ask legacy media or many prominent Democrats, they’d tell you that young men are getting radicalized. Yes, many young men are isolated and pessimistic about their futures. Some are falling down content rabbit holes that normalize misogyny and antisemitism. But while men are listening to provocateurs such as <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-commentary/nick-fuentes-tucker-carlson-young-men-1235462101/">Nick Fuentes</a> to cope with their low societal cachet, young women are getting radicalized too.
There’s evidence that men have actually stayed relatively stable, while women have lurched left with the widespread adoption of social media and the collapse of marriage. Most concerningly, a new <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/women-political-violence-digital-online?utm_source=Twitter&amp;utm_medium=Organic_Social">study</a> shows that it’s not incels or deadbeats living in basements who are more tolerant of political violence. It’s women.
Between their romanticization of alleged murderer Luigi Mangione and their dangerous intimidation of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, many young women today are consumed by political causes. All over <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@baddienodaddiee/video/7601331198400548151?q=F%20ICE&amp;t=1771795237682">TikTok</a>, young women are <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@maceygalat/video/7593847976573914423?q=F%20ICE&amp;t=1771795237682">documenting</a> their <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@sonsmakenaa/video/7550929450666396941?q=girl%20whimsy&amp;t=1771792022330">political rage</a> for issues that have nothing to do with their immediate family, bills, or other priorities. And for the most part, there is little tolerance for other viewpoints. Egged on by radical professors on college campuses, some women would even theoretically support the assassinations of their ideological opponents.
Asked by her professor for a hot take on Charlie Kirk’s death, a female student at Oberlin College <a href="https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/1967959781802733885?s=20">reports</a> that she said, “We need to bring back political assassinations. Some people should be afraid to express their opinion.”
Free discourse, which inevitably allows both good and bad ideas to spread, is disliked disproportionately by women. Female students are more censorial than male students, according to a 2022 <a href="https://www.fire.org/news/2022-college-free-speech-rankings-gender-differences-censorship-attitudes">analysis</a> from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. This was regardless of whether the speaker was liberal or conservative. However, female students opposed platforming conservative speakers by an especially large margin compared to male students, the study showed. Almost 60% of women said promoting an inclusive society was more important than protecting free speech, while 71% of men felt the opposite, a 2019 <a href="https://kf-site-production.s3.amazonaws.com/media_elements/files/000/000/351/original/Knight-CP-Report-FINAL.pdf">report</a> by the Knight Foundation found.
Anyone who has experienced <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/10/26/feminism-cancel-culture-helen-andrews/">cancel culture</a> knows it’s just another word for the policing of social mores, something that women instinctively do. But do women foster inclusion through gentle influence? Though they lack physical leverage, women today use social punishment via shaming, stigmatizing, or by leveling allegations with life-ruining potential (but discouraging due process).
According to a recent study, women in the U.S. are willing to go further to preserve what they believe to be proper norms. Conducted by the Network Contagion Research Institute at Rutgers, the study found that under certain conditions, women were more likely than men to express support for political violence. Challenging the cultural assumption that the fairer sex opts for diplomacy over confrontation, the study shows that women would support vigilantism to spur political change or eliminate people they deem to be threats. Female respondents were approximately 21% more likely than males to express some justification for murdering New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and nearly 15% more likely to justify murdering President Donald Trump.
We know from history that women are just as capable as men of encouraging violence against ideological enemies if they’re convicted enough about the righteousness of their cause. Many <a href="https://scholarworks.uni.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1135&amp;context=universitas">notorious perpetrators</a> of the Rwandan genocide in 1994 were women. 
Psychologically speaking, women are more susceptible to <a href="https://medium.com/@ashoftime/why-young-women-moved-left-while-young-men-stayed-sane-8f445b2fce89">consensus pressure</a>. Women average higher on agreeableness and neuroticism, or sensitivity to negative emotions including social rejection cues, while men average higher on tolerance for disagreement and social conflict. Women are also more empathetic, which, combined with their inclination toward herd mentality, means they tend to lean more liberal. The rise of technology, and specifically the smartphone, has multiplied the effect. 
Now with the world at our fingertips in seconds, people are getting caught in online echo chambers that affirm their beliefs. Social media has become a negative feedback loop, especially for women. Platforms abound with women lamenting and “raising awareness” for things outside their control, drumming up upset and panic that exponentially grows as the algorithm feeds it to more women. Rinse and repeat. And though there are a plethora of content corners on the internet, women are getting stuck in collective outcry, which is being rewarded by companies and institutions that take them seriously. A lot of content serves to egg on women to take out their cameras and either capture or become the next viral moment, too.
Renee Good was fatally shot by an ICE officer in Minneapolis after antagonizing him and then accelerating her car toward him as her partner filmed it. In response, many women posted incitements to violence against agents online. While we should have a debate about ICE training, many female TikTokers seemed shocked to learn that lethal force could be used if they interfere with an active federal law enforcement operation. But social media has made them believe that this is all a <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2026/02/18/affluent-white-female-liberals-are-living-in-a-made-up-world/">game</a>. They think they can obstruct armed officers for the thrill of fighting &#8220;oppression,&#8221; then press pause when they’ve decided they’re done playing. But it doesn’t work that way. Real life has real consequences.
A large part of the female influencing world insists to impressionable screen-addicted women that every political issue demands a DEFCON 1 reaction. They are convinced that everyone else should be just as worked up as they are, even at the <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2026/01/14/angry-young-women-vanguard-of-lefts-toxic-empathy/">expense of their families</a>. I’ve seen firsthand how apolitical creators who’d rather mind their own business are scolded in the comments for not making political statements, almost always on progressive issues. It is healthy to be detached from things that don’t affect your home or your zip code. That attitude was typical of most Americans before the social media age.
The NCRI data indicate that doomscrolling on social media is sowing revolutionary thinking in young women, contradicting the prevailing narrative that mainly young men are being primed online to legitimize political violence. To be sure, men are statistically more likely to be <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1037/1089-2680.8.4.291">physically aggressive</a> and get arrested for <a href="https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-42">violent crimes</a> at higher rates. They’ve faced great societal headwinds too — from a romantic recession to dropping college enrollment — that you’d think would make them ready to rage. And yet, the study suggests that women have reconciled the possibility of domestic terrorism with a law-abiding civil society, irrespective of political affiliation, more than men have. They’re getting hooked on online narratives that glamorize political violence as heroism rather than what it really is: fundamentally incompatible with a functioning republic.
***
Caroline Downey is a columnist and video personality at National Review. She is also a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum and a 2025-2026 Novak fellow with the Fund for American Studies.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Luigi Mangione supporters pack NYC court for murder hearing

Who’s Really Embracing Political Violence

Political Violence

Upstream

The Iranian women’s national soccer team made a statement Monday night as they stood silently during the playing of their country’s national anthem.
Their silence spoke volumes ahead of the opening match of the Women’s Asian Cup in Queensland, Australia. None of the women sang as the song was played, choosing instead to look ahead with serious expressions. The crowd applauded at the conclusion of the song, and the team manager, Marziyeh Jafari, was spotted smiling on the sidelines. 
She was later approached by reporters but had no comment, The Guardian <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/mar/03/iran-women-football-team-decline-to-sing-national-anthem-before-asian-cup-tie">reported</a>.
The team lost its game against South Korea 3-0, the outlet noted. This was their first game since air strikes began in the Middle East, killing the nation’s longtime Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
“Our heart goes out to them and their families. It’s a difficult situation, and it’s really brave of them to be able to be here and to perform,” Australian player Amy Sayer said. “They put on a really strong performance, even with the political climate that’s going on and the struggles that they might be going through.”
President Trump has estimated that Operation Epic Fury could last four to five weeks, but has said it could continue longer to permanently eliminate Iran’s capacity to have a nuclear weapon. America’s intervention has had mixed reactions at home, but was celebrated in the streets of Iran after it was announced that Khamenei had been killed.
Many reactions to the women’s soccer team refusing to sing the anthem focused on how poorly the regime treated women of their nation, <a href="https://x.com/SamanthaTaghoy/status/2028624631922393332">noting</a> that their silent protest was what “real feminism” looked like.
“A defying silence… the Iranian women’s football national team REFUSED to sing the anthem of the Islamic regime. Side note: By the time their next game comes up, they probably don’t even have to wear those hijabs anymore,” one commenter <a href="https://x.com/Tarikh_Eran/status/2028539904230060340">wrote</a>.
“These brave women risk a lot with this display,” another person <a href="https://x.com/13jeep24Bob/status/2028822151395000355">chimed in</a>. “After having been treated worse than dirt for years by their country, thanks to President Trump, they may have a chance at a much better future. Meanwhile ‘freedom loving’ severe left wing women &amp; men in our country cheer for the oppressive Iranian regime who has murdered 10’s of thousands of their fellow countryman. What is wrong with this picture?”

Iran soccer team

Iranian Women’s Soccer Team Stands Silent During National Anthem

Iranian Women's Soccer Team Stands Silently During Islamic State's National Anthem

Menu