Legacy media made another feeble attempt to malign Justice Amy Coney Barrett on the eve of the release of her new book. But contrary to the whispers of palace intrigue surrounding the Court’s Dobbs decision, her book, &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Listening-Law-Reflections-Court-Constitution/dp/0593421868/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ILSOy3KahPQkW1N9rrNO_q4yhhX-A5gHnGstjpJkVxIJEAnrRe9w_lF2EUAzY8ASQZ9CZqVDHgKZt8ve0nfVVfwqI92ZVk_q0-xS0_0MvGjhlohklgHmlqVEi16JQXap9StaJ9rMCJYS5c-zfbRU2u7nrMK7Ps-ryfWBC5LGZTDLoJ6JVQxpOU7zm2FeSFITwHaNi6WP9-IfOtCiQoJ3-HjnOJseV05XFTe7FBtb5Jo.5_511Qkt6JuwwSSsSnxDilB7c5pvyEXA08tcA6xNPMM&amp;qid=1757008559&amp;sr=8-1">Listening to the Law</a>,&#8221; is a window into the careful legal reasoning and conscientious commitment to the law that has defined her career. It reminds us that liberty depends on intellect, conscience, and the steady moral vision women of faith uniquely bring to public life. Barrett embodies these traits, and they are mirrored in women across the country who refuse to be cowed. 
Barrett’s convictions never wavered when she was maligned for her Catholic faith. During her Seventh Circuit confirmation, Senator Dianne Feinstein warned of the “dogma living loudly” in Barrett — a jab she met with intelligence, poise, and unflinching calm. Her Supreme Court confirmation displayed the same razor-sharp clarity. While many American women see in Barrett traits they recognize in themselves — dedication, moral clarity, and attention to conscience — there will only ever be one ACB. I recognized it in small, ordinary ways, too. A friend once gave me a coffee mug that read, “The Dogma Lives Loudly Within Me”—a playful badge of honor. Even when the mug was accidentally shattered by a child unloading the dishwasher, the sentiment remained intact, much like the enduring faith of women who live their convictions quietly but resolutely, holding conscience above convenience.
In &#8220;Listening to the Law,&#8221; Barrett reflects on family, faith, and the role of law in society. She recalls her great-grandmother, a widowed mother of thirteen during the Depression, noting that “No generation starts afresh; each is shaped by its predecessors.”
<div id="attachment_968825" style="width: 394px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Listening-Law-Reflections-Court-Constitution/dp/0593421868/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ILSOy3KahPQkW1N9rrNO_q4yhhX-A5gHnGstjpJkVxIJEAnrRe9w_lF2EUAzY8ASQZ9CZqVDHgKZt8ve0nfVVfwqI92ZVk_q0-xS0_0MvGjhlohklgHmlqVEi16JQXap9StaJ9rMCJYS5c-zfbRU2u7nrMK7Ps-ryfWBC5LGZTDLoJ6JVQxpOU7zm2FeSFITwHaNi6WP9-IfOtCiQoJ3-HjnOJseV05XFTe7FBtb5Jo.5_511Qkt6JuwwSSsSnxDilB7c5pvyEXA08tcA6xNPMM&amp;qid=1757008559&amp;sr=8-1"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-968825" class="size-large wp-image-968825" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-384x576.jpg" alt="Credit: Sentinel Books" width="384" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-384x576.jpg 384w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-200x300.jpg 200w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-768x1152.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-1024x1536.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-1365x2048.jpg 1365w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-1360x2040.jpg 1360w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-40-PM-5434-scaled.jpg 1707w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 384px) 100vw, 384px" /></a>Credit: Sentinel Books</div>
She observes that “Law is but one piece of what it takes to make a healthy society, and it (like everything else in life) exists in the midst of relationships.” She underscores that the Constitution commits us to pluralism through protections like those guaranteed by the First Amendment, which “requires the government to tolerate all opinions and all religions.” To critics who “suggest that people of faith have a particularly difficult time following the law rather than their moral views,” Barrett reiterates her understanding that “the guiding principle in every case is what the law requires, not what aligns with the judge’s own concept of justice.” Such resolve, she shows, can be met exactly because of the humility that derives from faith. And her own grounding in a large, loving family shines through — the book is dedicated simply to “Jesse,” her husband — a tribute both understated and profound.
When it comes to safeguarding America’s first freedom, Barrett’s rigor is urgently needed. Sooner rather than later, the Supreme Court will revisit Employment Division v. Smith. Authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, for whom Barrett clerked, Smith held that sincerely held religious objections do not exempt people from complying with “neutral and generally applicable laws.”
In practice, Smith has often crushed religious liberty, particularly regarding anti-discrimination laws tied to sexual orientation and gender identity. Barrett’s careful attention to conscience — the “feminine genius” St. John Paul II celebrated—is precisely what the Court needs to craft a workable framework for protecting the free exercise rights of those whose beliefs are countercultural. The stakes are far from abstract: the religious convictions of real women hang in the judicial balance.
Consider Cathy Miller, a Christian baker from California, fined for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage, who has asked the Court to hear her case this term. Or the Little Sisters of the Poor, who still refuse to include abortifacients or contraceptives in their health care plans despite the authoritarian demands of the Affordable Care Act’s “contraceptive mandate,” holding fast to Church teaching. Lori Smith, a Colorado website designer, refused to create speech she did not believe in — and won at the Supreme Court. Jessica Bates, a widowed Oregon mother, was blocked from fostering children because she would not embrace gender ideology — until the Ninth Circuit, of all places, vindicated her. These women were not seeking to impose beliefs on others, but to defend the right of all Americans to live out their faith without government coercion. They stand as sentinels between the state and the citizen’s conscience.
Backing them are brilliant women lawyers and scholars who turn principle into action. Kristen Waggoner, president of Alliance Defending Freedom, has argued multiple Supreme Court cases. Lori Windham of the Becket Fund shields institutions and individuals from government overreach. Legal scholars like Mary Ann Glendon, Nicole Garnett, Helen Alvaré, and Stephanie Barclay provide indispensable intellectual firepower. Protecting religious liberty is neither abstract nor optional. It demands moral clarity, expert advocacy, and strategic rigor.
&#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Listening-Law-Reflections-Court-Constitution/dp/0593421868/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ILSOy3KahPQkW1N9rrNO_q4yhhX-A5gHnGstjpJkVxIJEAnrRe9w_lF2EUAzY8ASQZ9CZqVDHgKZt8ve0nfVVfwqI92ZVk_q0-xS0_0MvGjhlohklgHmlqVEi16JQXap9StaJ9rMCJYS5c-zfbRU2u7nrMK7Ps-ryfWBC5LGZTDLoJ6JVQxpOU7zm2FeSFITwHaNi6WP9-IfOtCiQoJ3-HjnOJseV05XFTe7FBtb5Jo.5_511Qkt6JuwwSSsSnxDilB7c5pvyEXA08tcA6xNPMM&amp;qid=1757008559&amp;sr=8-1">Listening to the Law</a>&#8221; shows that defending liberty requires both intellect and conscience. Barrett’s reflections illuminate the careful reasoning and moral clarity she brings to public life. Just as the other women highlighted here confront cultural and legal pressures with courage and fidelity, Barrett’s reflections on the law remind us that protecting religious freedom — our First Freedom — depends on women of faith. Through courage, attention to conscience, and steadfast commitment to the common good and the rule of law, they ensure liberty endures for generations to come.
* * *
Andrea Picciotti-Bayer is Director of the <a href="https://conscience-project.org/">Conscience Project.</a>
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Correction: A previous version of this article stated Kristen Waggoner was the former president of Alliance Defending Freedom. She is, in fact, the current president of the ADF.

MixCollage-04-Sep-2025-01-28-PM-1170

The Dogma Still Lives Loudly: Amy Coney Barrett And The Witness Of Women Of Faith

Amy Coney Barrett

Books

Dobbs

First Amendment

Supreme Court

Women

&#8220;Harry Potter&#8221; author J.K. Rowling planted a red flag on the clear message radical trans activists are sending to women and girls when they demand access to single-sex spaces that are meant to be for women only.
Rowling, whose support for sex-based rights and privacy has often put her at odds with the trans community, said that the obvious takeaway was as simple as it was insidious: women, to them, were little more than costumes that afforded the wearers everything that went along with actually being women.
&#8220;The message to girls everywhere: you are a costume that any man can put on. Once he’s wearing it, he gets to take your rights,&#8221; Rowling&#8217;s post was concise.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The message to girls everywhere: you are a costume that any man can put on. Once he’s wearing it, he gets to take your rights. <a href="https://t.co/BlQvL8bbyR">https://t.co/BlQvL8bbyR</a>
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1958821381971300800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 22, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The <a href="https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/neo-nazi-womens-prison-changing-gender-vj5zvwm89">article</a> Rowling shared to back up her statement was published in The Times and detailed the story of a man who was headed to a women&#8217;s prison in Germany just months after claiming that he was, in fact, a woman.
Marla-Svenja Liebich, 53 — who went by the name Sven until December of 2024 — was the leader of a banned local Nazi group called Blood and Honour in Saxony-Anhalt. He has campaigned for Russian President Vladimir Putin and cheered on the war against Ukraine.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=summer&amp;utm_content=editorialsummersale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">End of Summer Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
Liebich was arrested on several charges including inciting hatred, criminal insults, and &#8220;trying to sell a baseball bat over the internet as a &#8216;deportation aid.'&#8221;
Despite previously claiming that trans-identifying people were &#8220;parasites on society,&#8221; Liebich made use of a recently-changed policy in order to adopt his new identity. While in years past, trans-identifying individuals had to present evidence from two doctors in order to change gender on official government documents, a new policy adopted last November allows individuals to simply fill out a form at a local government office.

“Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore” World Premiere – Arrivals

JK Rowling Flags Harmful Message Trans Activists Are Sending To Women: ‘You Are A Costume’

JK Rowling Flags Harmful Message Trans Activists Are Sending To Women: 'You Are A Costume'

JK Rowling

Politics

Social Issues

Transgender

Women's Rights

Anyone who watched TV in the 1990s is familiar with the slow-motion “Baywatch” run meant to highlight the enviable physiques of the lifeguards at Malibu beach.
The most famous slow-motion jogger, of course, was Pamela Anderson, who went on to have a public profile laced with several high-profile rock romances, a blonde bombshell image, lots of makeup and tight clothing, and, predictably, a sex tape.
Her long-running sex symbol status is what makes Anderson’s newest iteration so extraordinary. Gone are the over-plucked eyebrows, glittery makeup looks, and skimpy outfits. And instead of simply toning down her look into a more polished yet styled version of the 90s version, the actress did a complete 180 and started walking around with a totally bare face that appears natural and shows signs of aging.
Anderson, 58, now looks more like a kindly grandmother at the grocery store than she does like the <a href="https://www.biography.com/actors/a65563161/playboy-pamela-anderson-against-porn" target="_blank" rel="noopener">record holder</a> for most times posing nude for Playboy (14, if you were wondering). She’s also enjoying what appears to be a later-in-life romance with Liam Neeson, which looks sweet enough to melt even the most cynical hearts.
Anderson has been discussing her change in appearance openly ever since it began. She described her over-styled &#8217;90s look as a “defense mechanism.”
Spurred in part by the death of her longtime makeup artist Alexis Vogel in 2019, the celeb said her decision to ditch the cosmetics was “freeing, and fun, and a little rebellious too.&#8221;
&#8220;Because I did notice that there were all these people doing big makeup looks, and it’s just like me to go against the grain and do the opposite of what everyone’s doing,” she <a href="https://www.elle.com/fashion/a44775298/pamela-anderson-interview-2023/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> Elle in 2023.
She also spoke about being confronted with her own reflection, saying, &#8220;I’m kind of laughing at myself when I look at the mirror. I go, ‘Wow, this is really&#8230;what’s happening to me?’ It’s a journey,&#8221; she told the magazine. &#8220;But I feel rooted for. I feel good. I’m in a good place.”
In a Vogue interview about going makeup-free at Paris Fashion Week, she explained that her transformation wasn’t a protest. It was personal.
“I just thought, ‘I’m doing this for all the girls out there.’… This is it.”
&#8220;You kind of have to challenge beauty sometimes,&#8221; she told the outlet. &#8220;You know, if we all chase youth, or we&#8217;re chasing our idea of what fashion magazines [want] and everything, we&#8217;re only gonna be disappointed or maybe a little bit sad. So I feel like this is it.&#8221;
Anderson also discussed her plan to forge a path for other women in her age bracket.
&#8220;I feel as a woman and a woman of my age, and a woman in the public eye&#8230;it&#8217;s also your job to be a model of everything,&#8221; she shared. &#8220;Just all sorts of choices. So I am just being me, kind of who I am, in all these great clothes running around Paris.&#8221;
Other celebrities celebrated the move, with Jamie Lee Curtis calling Anderson’s bare face “an act of courage and rebellion” and Scarlett Johansson saying it was a “powerful message for women to see other women rejecting standard beauty norms.”
It’s true that there’s something especially powerful about the unmasking of a star who once embraced the beauty industry to such an extreme. Anderson also seems to reject Hollywood’s relentless obsession with looking young, saying the pursuit is ultimately “futile.”
It stands in stark contrast to some of Anderson’s contemporaries, who are still dancing, dressing, and acting like they did in their 20s, often with mixed results (ahem, Madonna).
Followers are also rooting for Anderson’s relationship with Neeson, who was seemingly drawn to that same sincerity. Their relationship carries the same refreshing quality as Anderson’s beauty revolution.
That’s saying a lot, considering that Anderson has been married five times.
People started noticing the chemistry between Anderson and Neeson on the set of “The Naked Gun” reboot, where Neeson <a href="https://www.glamour.com/story/pamela-anderson-and-liam-neeson-are-dating-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">praised</a> Anderson by saying “I can’t compliment her enough, I’ll be honest with you. No huge ego. She just comes in to do the work. She’s funny and so easy to work with. She’s going to be terrific in the film.”
Anderson offered a glowing review of her own, calling her co-star “the perfect gentleman.”
Recently, the pair even pretended to make out on Today as rumors of their romance persisted. Neeson called their connection “lovely,” while Anderson <a href="https://people.com/pamela-anderson-and-liam-neeson-pretend-to-make-out-on-the-today-show-11780821" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> of their connection, &#8220;I think I have a friend forever in Liam. And we definitely have a connection that is very sincere, very loving, and he&#8217;s a good guy.&#8221; So far, the duo has brushed off any attempts to define their relationship, but it’s obvious just by looking at them that their connection is strong.
To be clear, this isn’t about Anderson becoming some sort of saint. She’s still contradictory. The celeb has been criticized for railing against pornography while insisting that posing nude in Playboy is acceptable because it’s “<a href="https://www.biography.com/actors/a65563161/playboy-pamela-anderson-against-porn" target="_blank" rel="noopener">highbrow</a>.” She was married to avid Trump supporter Kid Rock for a year, but she’s also a fervent supporter of PETA and an animal rights activist. And despite <a href="https://www.christianpost.com/news/pamela-anderson-says-she-once-wanted-to-be-a-nun.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">saying</a> she once considered becoming a nun and says prayers every morning, Anderson does not openly practice any specific faith.
To sum up, Anderson isn’t becoming a right-wing influencer anytime soon, but her transformation does point to a very Christian concept: redemption.
Pamela Anderson’s transformation from a sex symbol defined by tabloid headlines to an introspective, grounded woman who has openly reflected on her past mirrors, in many ways, the Christian concept of forgiveness of sin. In Christianity, forgiveness isn’t about erasing history, but about redemption: a cleansing that allows a person to step forward no longer bound by who they once were.
Anderson has spoken candidly about her mistakes and struggles, yet her new chapter embodies grace, renewal, and the reclaiming of dignity, which is very much like the believer who, after confessing and repenting, is restored to a new life in Christ.
Her story shows how a person can be fully known, flaws and all, and still be met with compassion, transformation, and a fresh start free from judgement. And that is a truly beautiful thing to behold.

Late Night with Seth Meyers – Season 12

Bombshell Redeemed? Pamela Anderson And The Power Of Grace

Christianity

Feminism

Hollywod

Pamela Anderson

The following is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
* * *
With the first female umpire now working in baseball, it’s time to take a look at how women have made historic strides in the world of professional sports by ruining everything.
You see, in the past, professional sports provided a safe method for wives to get their husbands out of the damned way by placing them in front of the television where they could watch something completely meaningless that wasn’t porn. That way, the wives could get their work done, and if they occasionally dropped in on the TV room with a sandwich and a beer, their husbands would happily devote the rest of their lives to their support and happiness. Later, over dinner, the husbands could describe every play of the game in agonizing detail, which would give the wives time to mentally organize their schedules for the week, since they didn’t have to listen to a word their husbands were saying because it was just about a guy on TV hitting a ball with a stick for some reason. At least their husbands hadn’t spent the day watching some naked girl pretend to enjoy getting strangled during sex, which would only give them bizarre ideas about how they should spend the rest of the weekend.
Now all that has changed. Women are invading every aspect of sports so that men can watch other men doing useless things for no reason while thinking about sexual strangulation at the same time. For instance, after ball games, attractive female sportscasters are now assigned to interview players so male viewers can listen vaguely to some athlete saying, “You’ve gotta take it one game at time,” while simultaneously wondering what the female sportscaster would look like if she were wearing some ridiculous leather contraption and a pair of handcuffs.
Having more women athletes on the field has also changed the nature of sports by ruining everything. Sports used to reflect masculine values like winning and also more winning. But now sports also have to reflect female values which run the gamut from incomprehensible to non-existent depending on the woman’s mood on any given day. For example, when gymnast Simone Biles quit the Tokyo Olympics because she had some girly problem called the twisties, most men felt this was tantamount to losing which, according to many sports analysts, is approximately the opposite of winning. But no. The men were swiftly informed that, in fact, Simone Biles had been very brave to quit like a girl over her girly twisties. And ever since then, Olympic women’s gymnastics has included Quitting as an event, along with Crying, Hugging the Winner as if You Were Happy for Her, and Giving Men a Look that Says they Better not say Something Insensitive or There’ll be Hell to Pay.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h3>
In women’s basketball, Caitlin Clark has completely transformed the game by causing people to realize there’s such a thing as women’s basketball. To thank her, black women players have been repeatedly beating the living crap out of Clark for being talented while white. This turns out to be a game that men will actually watch because it involves women wrestling with each other, so now men are showing up at women’s basketball games and hurling sex toys down at the court, which has also made the women’s game more popular by including sex toys. Even so, a woman’s basketball game remains the least popular American event that isn’t a colonoscopy, and when the players recently marched outside the stadium holding signs that said “Pay us what we’re worth,” they discovered they actually owed the league $15,000 apiece.
To prove that it’s not only women who ruin everything in sports, the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings have hired two male cheerleaders. So now, instead of an occasional amusing glimpse of pretty girls prancing around the sidelines in an intriguingly suggestive way, Vikings fans are being treated to two prancing homosexuals, something no sentient creature wants to see except other homosexuals who aren’t even watching sports because they’re homosexual.
And as for the first female umpire, so far her ball and strike calls have been about one and a half percent less accurate than the average male’s, which is being hailed as really great for a girl, and should transform the sport completely, by ruining everything.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fifth installment, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/After-That-Cameron-Winter-Mysteries/dp/1613166869/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3EGZUC370LG46&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Y_NI0mDOKeowShheDQTVx5NH-fAeimJoCD56_T0Acpl8C0mup7uJf-nGGSRLEItaaekoDnvS2vWLMa4Zd2UBXQ8Y-g-P502jOWz-Y8IX3ZQsdlO7WMLrg1xIhNoKmjCorSWUR4C2l_RbiZ7apJ1MfPzGOrrEf7AdAXX6xwnJRVP_XqUfWuMuVthTWscaU3P4vgmS86-96n-721enHfX12CFQWTajqFbVnrsDkexfUf4.6_gTH6h1Bb9Pn375QdF_VAVZSayDvjQBBKGXE-MTiFo&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=klavan&amp;qid=1754049918&amp;sprefix=%2Caps%2C80&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">After That, The Dark,</a> is now available for Pre-Order. Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=summer&amp;utm_content=editorialsummersale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">End of Summer Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>

Indiana Fever v Connecticut Sun

Caitlin Clark Penalized For Being Talented While White

Andrew Klavan

Baseball

Humor

Satire

Simone Biles

Sports

Women's Basketball

For Uber, it’s time to get either new lawyers or new executives, because its new “Women Preferences” policy is obvious sex discrimination that violates the law. If we owned stock in the company, we’d sell it to avoid a loss from the big-dollar lawsuits that are sure to ensue for this ham-fisted “equity” scheme.
Recently, Uber <a href="https://www.uber.com/newsroom/women-preferences/">announced</a> that in the interests of making its “platform better for women,” it is implementing a “Women Preferences” pilot program that will give women riders &#8220;more ways to choose rides with women drivers&#8221; and women drivers the option “to request trips with women riders, including during peak earning hours like evenings.” In other words, Uber will be empowering its drivers to ignore, that is, discriminate against, male riders. Kind of reminds one of a time when taxi drivers all too often sped up and drove past black residents trying to hail them for a ride. Now, such conduct is prohibited by law.
The only difference between the racist taxi drivers of old and the sexist Uber drivers of new is that the digital “drive-by” discrimination is based on sex instead of race. But both are prohibited under the law.
Uber’s announcement claims this new policy is “designed to give women riders and drivers more choice, more confidence, and more flexibility.” However, “more choice, more confidence, and more flexibility” does not provide a company with a license to violate state and federal anti-discrimination laws.
Uber also brags in its announcement that it started this program in, of all places, Saudi Arabia. You know, one of the world’s most discriminatory countries, where women are treated as second-class citizens.
Yes, you read that right. Uber started its “Women Preferences” pilot program in the unenlightened Middle Eastern nation only after Saudi Arabia finally gave women the right to drive in 2019. That’s a remarkable delay, given that the first woman to be <a href="https://transportationhistory.org/2022/03/02/women-in-transportation-history-anne-rainsford-french-bush-automotive-pioneer/">issued</a> a driver’s license in the District of Columbia (Anne Rainsford French) received it in 1900. But what more would one expect from a nation that didn’t grant women the right to vote for the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35075702">first time</a> until 2015?
Uber’s lawyers seem to need a refresher on the law.
As a company incorporated in California, Uber is subject to the state’s <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&amp;sectionNum=51">Unruh Civil Rights Act</a>, which prohibits discrimination by all business establishments open to the public in California. Among others, it applies to hotels, restaurants, stores, theaters, taxis, and yes, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft. California-based businesses that serve the public must treat everyone equally — regardless of their race, religion, sex, or disability, among other protected characteristics.
What’s more, federal law — the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/civil-rights-act">Civil Rights Act of 1964</a> — prohibits discrimination in public accommodations as well. And while sex is not a protected category under Title II of the Civil Rights Act (like race is), Title VII of that same Act prohibits sex discrimination and harassment in employment contexts. That means that male Uber drivers who are not provided with the same sex-selective rider options as their female colleagues may have a claim for discriminatory treatment under that federal law, as well.
This isn’t the first time that the rideshare company has been accused of violating civil rights law. In 2017, Uber <a href="https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/uber-pay-44-million-resolve-eeoc-sexual-harassment-and-retaliation-charge#:~:text=The%20pre%2Dlitigation%20agreement%20was,retaliation%20after%20January%201%2C%202014.">agreed</a> to pay out $4.4 million in fees to settle a class-action lawsuit charging that the company had failed to adequately address sexual harassment by its drivers against female passengers. The same year, Uber software engineer Susan Fowler wrote a blog post that went viral in which she <a href="https://time.com/5784464/susan-fowler-book-uber-sexual-harassment/">accused</a> the Silicon Valley-based company of sex discrimination and harassment — both violations of Title VII.
And in 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Uber, alleging that the company had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by charging wait time fees to riders with disabilities who took longer to get in Uber vehicles. Uber eventually agreed to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/uber-commits-changes-and-pays-millions-resolve-justice-department-lawsuit-overcharging-people#:~:text=(Uber)%20to%20resolve%20a%20lawsuit,discriminatory%20fees%20due%20to%20disability.">settle</a> the lawsuit, and paid millions in compensation to affected riders.
Uber’s new policy also allows riders to “select the ‘Women Drivers’ option when requesting a ride.”
If you want to avoid a taxi, bus, train, or airplane because you don’t like the race or sex of the driver or pilot, you can do that. While that might evidence questionable moral beliefs, it doesn’t violate state or federal law — after all, consumers exercise preference in the market all the time. But the private companies and local governments who own those taxis, buses, trains, and airplanes cannot engage in the same type of discriminatory “preferencing.”
Uber is rolling out this program in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Detroit, and says it is doing so “after extensive testing and feedback from global markets like Saudi Arabia, Germany, and France, where women-only options have been well received.”
Uber’s conduct in “global markets like Saudi Arabia” is blatantly illegal in the United States, regardless of whether it’s “well received” or not.
* * *
Hans von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Justice Department.
Sarah Parshall Perry is the Vice President and Legal Fellow of Defending Education and former counsel to the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Crowdsourced taxi driver talking to a passenger in the back seat

Uber’s New ‘Women Preferences’ Program Violates Civil Rights Law

Uber’s New 'Women Preferences' Program Violates Civil Rights Law

Civil Rights

Discrimination

Heritage Foundation

Saudi Arabia

Silicon Valley

Uber

Anyone paying attention to the fight for women’s sports already knows that Riley Gaines isn’t backing down. And as the nation starts to wake up, she’s no longer alone.
The 12-time All-American swimmer and tireless women’s advocate has become a household name by doing something simple but radical: she’s speaking the truth. Now, Gaines is teaming up with XX-XY Athletics, the only athletic brand unapologetically championing biological women, to launch a collaboration that’s as bold and brave as she is. 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Riley Gaines&#039; Be Bold Collection Is Here" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tuEEVWfPcMQ?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 retro-inspired Be Bold collection is infused with red, white, and blue to showcase unapologetic pride in this nation. But the brand and the styles aren’t just fashion — they represent a cultural pushback. And according to XX-XY founder Jennifer Sey, the timing couldn’t be more perfect.
“The first drop launched on June 23rd, the anniversary of Title IX. So it&#8217;s a celebration of all that Title IX represents, the opportunity it presented for women and girls across the country,” Sey told The Daily Wire in an exclusive interview. “And it sort of highlights the fact that we need to continue to fight to uphold it. We’re not going backwards.”
Not long before the collection’s June release, the Department of Education ruled that the University of Pennsylvania <a href="https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-announces-university-of-pennsylvania-has-entered-resolution-agreement-resolve-its-title-ix-violations#:~:text=This%20action%20follows%20the%20Department's,the%20Trump%20effect%20in%20action.">violated Title IX</a> by allowing a biological male to compete on the women’s swim team, therefore robbing female athletes of records, awards, and their dignity. 
The school was forced to apologize and restore honors to athletes like Gaines. Shortly after, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/red-states-set-to-defend-womens-sports-at-supreme-court">announced</a> it would hear two landmark cases involving men competing in women&#8217;s sports. Sey said it’s all proof that the cultural tide is turning, and that this collection will help capture that truth.
“The world is shifting under our feet,” she said. “That’s in large part due to Riley’s work.”
Sey has a background in standing up for what’s right. A former elite gymnast and the first whistleblower in her sport to expose abuse, she spent decades at the helm of major brands like Levi’s before founding XX-XY Athletics in 2023 with a singular mission: to stand up for real women.
“I looked around at all the big brands pretending to champion female athletes, and none of them really did. They make money off of it, but behind the scenes, they treat women with astonishing disregard,” she said.
With Be Bold, Sey is hoping to turn that hypocrisy on its head.
The collection wasn’t just inspired by Gaines. It was built with her.
“She was totally involved,” Sey said of the line of fitness apparel. “The red, white, and blue color scheme? That’s all her. The name Be Bold? That’s how she signs her books. We leaned into her favorite pieces and her signature style.”
<div id="attachment_951509" style="width: 586px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-951509" class="size-large wp-image-951509" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664-576x576.jpg" alt="Cropped performance tank" width="576" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664-576x576.jpg 576w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664-300x300.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664-150x150.jpg 150w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664-768x768.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5664.jpg 1200w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px" />XX-XY Athletics</div>
Gaines’s go-to item is the cropped performance tank, Sey says, stressing that all the pieces both make a statement and support real athletes who need their sportswear to work as hard as they do. These are high-quality items designed for female athletes who have both principles and high standards.
Another standout from the collection is the oversized concert tee, a nod to both Gen Z-approved oversized street style and old-school Americana. The back of the tee features the 37 words of Title IX, a fashionable protest.
<div id="attachment_951511" style="width: 586px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-951511" class="size-large wp-image-951511" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385-576x576.jpg" alt="Title IX tee" width="576" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385-576x576.jpg 576w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385-300x300.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385-150x150.jpg 150w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385-768x768.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Title-9-T_7385.jpg 1200w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px" />XX-XY Athletics</div>
And for the non-athletes, there are plenty of options for a more casual look, like a vintage-inspired velour tracksuit straight out of 1972.
“When I was on the national team in the very early 80s, velour tracksuits were our dress sweats that we wore to march out at major international competitions,” Sey recalled. “So we definitely allude to them with some of the styling…we definitely use 1972 as a grounding point.”
<div id="attachment_951513" style="width: 586px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-951513" class="size-large wp-image-951513" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit-576x576.jpg" alt="Velour trackuit" width="576" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit-576x576.jpg 576w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit-300x300.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit-150x150.jpg 150w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit-768x768.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Velour-tracksuit.jpg 1200w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px" />XX-XY Athletics</div>
This collection isn’t just about Riley, nor is it just a fashion statement. It’s about offering a platform to female athletes who’ve been abandoned by major brands and sports teams too afraid to take a side.
“One of the things we pride ourselves on is we scoop up athletes that no one else will touch. We will platform and empower the female athletes,” Sey said. “So they don&#8217;t feel so alone. Oftentimes they&#8217;re the only ones on their team or in their community [speaking up]. But when they realize there&#8217;s this network of women across the country who are doing the same thing, it&#8217;s incredibly powerful to have that.”
<div id="attachment_951507" style="width: 586px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-951507" class="size-large wp-image-951507" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634-576x576.jpg" alt="leggings and tank" width="576" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634-576x576.jpg 576w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634-300x300.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634-150x150.jpg 150w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634-768x768.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Riley-leggings-and-tank_5634.jpg 1200w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px" />XX-XY Athletics</div>
Sey says Gaines will continue working closely with the brand to identify and support more athletes who have the courage to speak up.
“At the end of the day, we&#8217;re all about supporting female athletes. I mean, that&#8217;s what it comes down to,” she said.
XX-XY’s gear isn’t just for show. A runner recently completed the Boston Marathon in under three hours wearing one of their tanks. That same style shows up in the new Be Bold collection, but this time reimagined in patriotic hues.
The idea behind Be Bold is simple but subversive: give everyday Americans an easy way to express support for truth, fairness, and biological reality without having to say a word.
“The reason I started the brand, or at least part of it, was I felt like if we could create something really cool that was also world-class products, we could give people an easy way to sort of rep their advocacy,” Sey said. “The mainstream brands do this. Why can&#8217;t we do it?”
Sey, who’s been targeted by critics and called every name in the book. But she says the backlash isn’t stopping her. 
“Noisy doesn’t mean right,” she said. “You’ve got to screw up your courage and stand by women and girls.”
The Gaines collaboration is just the beginning. Sey teased more limited-edition drops on the horizon, plus a deeper partnership with Riley that goes beyond just appearing in ads. 
<div id="attachment_951515" style="width: 586px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-951515" class="size-large wp-image-951515" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group-576x576.jpg" alt="Gaines group" width="576" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group-576x576.jpg 576w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group-300x300.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group-150x150.jpg 150w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group-768x768.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/07/Gaines-group.jpg 1200w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 576px) 100vw, 576px" />XX-XY Athletics</div>
When asked where she dreams of seeing pieces from the Be Bold collection show up, Sey didn’t hesitate.
“We would love to see someone wear any item atop a podium at an NCAA championship,” she said, “Or walking into the Supreme Court wearing a Title IX tee, that would be amazing, right?”
As the legal battles heat up, broader cultural beliefs continue to influence how this topic is perceived in the general public. Sey says the silent majority is finally starting to speak up. 
“You know, I think this movement for common sense is sort of billed as right-wing by the mainstream media. But the fact is, it&#8217;s not. It&#8217;s a really broad-based coalition. You can&#8217;t have 80% of Americans [agreeing] and have it only be the right. It’s just regular people.”
The Be Bold collection is available now at <a href="https://www.xx-xyathletics.com/pages/riley-collaboration">xxxyathletics.com</a>.

Riley Gaines

Be Bold: Riley Gaines and XX-XY Athletics Drop Americana-Themed Collab To Celebrate Title IX

Be Bold: Riley Gaines and XX-XY Athletics Drop Americana Themed Collab To Celebrate Title IX 

Athlete

Culture

Title IX

It is a testament to the rampant wildfire that is political correctness: &#8220;International Non-Binary People&#8217;s Day.&#8221; Yes, that is a thing. Since 2012, this day lands on the “PC calendar” as July 14th. 
As a medical professional, I must point out an obvious, if inconvenient, conflict: Human beings are sexually dimorphic — biologically male or female — with rare genetic or anatomic conditions being an exception (e.g., <a href="https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/swyer-syndrome">Swyer Syndrome</a>,<a href="https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22199-androgen-insensitivity-syndrome"> Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome</a>). By elevating subjective feelings on gender above objective sex differences, this day reflects the broader cultural shift that values political correctness over biological facts.
Plus, through this PC lens, girls who are gender-nonconforming are encouraged to identify as non-binary or male; they are told that their personality is incompatible with being female. That is wrong. In an attempt to expand &#8220;inclusion,&#8221; we are slowly erasing womanhood. This is evident most in the propagation of gender-neutral language that has gotten out of hand. 
As a board-certified OB/GYN physician, I am, by definition, a women’s healthcare specialist. Read that again, slowly: women’s healthcare specialist. 
More importantly, I am the father of two intelligent, compassionate, and talented young women. Notice I didn’t say “menstruating people,” “people with a uterus,” or any other fashionable euphemisms. 
And in that pursuit, medicine — the field entrusted with science, truth, and care — is making a critical, potentially devastating mistake: erasing women. 
Gender-neutral language has become trendy in media, education, public policy, and now in medicine. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (<a href="https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/policy-and-position-statements/statements-of-policy/2022/inclusive-language%20Inclusive%20Language%20%7C%20ACOG">ACOG</a>), for example, states it “will move beyond the exclusive use of gendered language and definitions.” The American Society of Reproductive Medicine (<a href="https://www.asrm.org/practice-guidance/practice-committee-documents/inclusive-language-and-environment-to-welcome-lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-queer-questioning-intersex-and-asexual-patients/">ASRM</a>) offers similar guidance.
Ironically, when language avoids or replaces the word “woman,” especially in contexts centered on women’s lived experiences — pregnancy, motherhood, menstruation — it ceases to be inclusive. It becomes erasure.
This is biologically inaccurate, linguistically confusing, and ethically wrong. It must stop.
Terms like “pregnant people,”  “birthing people”, “menstruators,” and “chestfeeders” are billed as inclusive. But they send a quieter, more harmful message: that “woman” is a word too controversial or exclusive to use.
This reframes womanhood as something to dilute in order to accommodate others — when in reality, specificity and inclusion are not mutually exclusive.
This matters not just symbolically, but materially. Women’s health has long been under-researched and underfunded. When language becomes so neutral that it no longer identifies women as the primary subjects of reproductive care, advocacy efforts lose their power.
If it&#8217;s now politically incorrect to say “maternal mortality disproportionately affects Black women,” and we must instead say “birthing people,” we obscure the social and biological realities that demand urgent attention. Precision in language is not exclusion. It is clarity.
Ironically, this expansion of gender-neutral language is profoundly anti-woman. A movement that can’t say the word “woman” cannot fully fight for women. 
Think this is just one disgruntled OB/GYN’s opinion? Think again. 
<a href="https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/">J.K. Rowling</a> — a woman and lifelong advocate for women’s rights — was globally vilified for opposing terms like “people who menstruate.” 
And just this month (June 2025), a peer-reviewed paper in Sexual and Reproductive Health warned that “desexed” language is confusing, alienating, and potentially harmful — even to the very populations it intends to help. As those authors write:
<blockquote>Desexed language is likely to have an adverse impact on people with low health literacy and language skills, risk alienation, and cause confusion… It may even cause harm to transgender and gender-diverse people who also need clear health communications.</blockquote>
Similar sentiment has been stated by <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-violence-against-women">Reem Alsalem</a>, a Jordanian independent consultant and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. Alsalem stated:
<blockquote>Erasing women and women-specific language and needs based on their sex is not only wrong, but also demeaning, regressive and constitutes one of the worst forms of violence that women and girls can experience.</blockquote>
Even the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/%20Defending%20Women%20From%20Gender%20Ideology%20Extremism%20And%20Restoring%20Biological%20Truth%20To%20The%20Federal%20Government%20%E2%80%93%20The%20White%20House">U.S. government</a> recently declared: “It is the policy of the United States to use clear and accurate language that recognizes women are biologically female and men are biologically male.”
Similarly, my home state of Texas recently <a href="https://txvalues.org/breaking-texas-senate-passes-womens-bill-of-rights/">passed legislation</a> that defines man and woman based on biological reality. This is not “anti-trans.” It is pro-woman. Pro-girl. Pro-truth.
Yes, there is fresh momentum on protecting women and women’s rights. This is good news. On July 1, 2025, for example, the <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5380157-penn-trans-women-sports-upenn-trump-mcmahon-lia-thomas-ncaa-title-ix/">University of Pennsylvania</a> — which was found in violation of Title IX regulations — agreed to restrict trans athletes from participating in women’s sports. That is a win for women’s sports everywhere.
In the effort to include everyone, let’s not lose sight of the people who fought longest and hardest to be heard: women.
Say the word. Use the word. Because avoiding it doesn’t create justice — it creates silence. And silence has never been a friend to women.
* * *
Hector Chapa, M.D., F.A.C.O.G., is a nationally and internationally recognized physician scientist in the field of Obstetrics and Gynecology. He is a graduate of UT Southwestern Medical School with specialty training at Parkland Hospital. He is a Board-Certified Obstetrician &amp; Gynecologist and serves as clinical associate professor at Texas A&amp;M College of Medicine in Bryan-College Station, Texas. Since 2016, he has served as the OBGYN Clerkship Director (BCS Campus). In 2018, he became director of interprofessional education.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Hospital Patient Talking with Doctor and Family

Say The Word: Why The Term ‘Woman’ Remains Vital In Women’s Healthcare

Say The Word: Why 'Woman' Still Matters In Women’s Healthcare

Gender

Gender Pronouns

Health Care

Medical

Pregnancy

Defense Department Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson torched The Atlantic over a hit piece claiming that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is making policy changes that will effectively &#8220;sideline&#8221; women in the military.
Staff writer Missy Ryan shared the article along with the following tease line, on X: &#8220;NEW: Will Pete Hegseth&#8217;s &#8216;War on Woke&#8217; sideline women in the military? A team appointed by Hegseth to look at fitness/combat standards will review and possibly redo the &#8216;women in combat&#8217; study that led to the integration of ground combat roles 10 yrs ago.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NEW: Will Pete Hegseth&#8217;s &#8216;War on Woke&#8217; sideline women in the military? A team appointed by Hegseth to look at fitness/combat standards will review and possibly redo the &#8216;women in combat&#8217; study that led to the integration of ground combat roles 10 yrs ago. <a href="https://t.co/HlQo4B1Bzi">https://t.co/HlQo4B1Bzi</a>
— Missy Ryan (@missy_ryan) <a href="https://twitter.com/missy_ryan/status/1943298384762425494?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The article suggested that Hegseth was so driven to remove &#8220;woke&#8221; culture from the military that he was willing to undo years of &#8220;progress&#8221; that had ultimately led to women serving in combat roles.
Wilson responded first by mocking the outlet for apparently updating the article with a new headline, and suggested that its first effort had not been &#8220;woke&#8221; enough.
&#8220;.@TheAtlantic headline wasn&#8217;t woke enough so they changed it,&#8221; she posted, sharing screenshots of the original and the update, in side-by-side format.
The original headline read, &#8220;Will Pete Hegseth&#8217;s &#8216;War On Woke&#8217; Sideline Women?&#8221; — and the updated version read, &#8220;The Backdoor Way That Pete Hegseth Could Keep Women Out Of Combat.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheAtlantic</a> headline wasn&#8217;t woke enough so they changed it. <a href="https://t.co/2gKhbWctoy">https://t.co/2gKhbWctoy</a> <a href="https://t.co/jL6xMhYD6j">pic.twitter.com/jL6xMhYD6j</a>
— Kingsley Wilson (@PressSecDOD) <a href="https://twitter.com/PressSecDOD/status/1943336054389436886?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In a follow-up post, Wilson noted that she had given the outlet a comment for the story — but that it had been selectively edited prior to publication.
&#8220;.@TheAtlantic also didn&#8217;t want to run my whole statement because it would have discredited their story,&#8221; she said, sharing the full statement: &#8216;Military standards across the board have largely been ignored by leadership of the past. Under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth, the U.S. military is getting back to basics and restoring the warrior ethos. Our standards for combat arms positions will be elite, uniform, and sex neutral because the weight of a rucksack or a human being doesn&#8217;t care if you&#8217;re a man or a woman. We will not compromise our standards to satisfy quotas or an ideological agenda—this is common sense.'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheAtlantic</a> also didn&#8217;t want to run my whole statement because it would have discredited their story:
“Military standards across the board have largely been ignored by leadership of the past. Under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth, the U.S. military is getting back to… <a href="https://t.co/6I2rK5CGqo">https://t.co/6I2rK5CGqo</a>
— Kingsley Wilson (@PressSecDOD) <a href="https://twitter.com/PressSecDOD/status/1943336313417015519?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The only part of Wilson&#8217;s statement that was used was her description of  to goal standards for combat positions: &#8220;elite, uniform, and sex neutral, because the weight of a rucksack or a human being doesn’t care if you’re a man or a woman.&#8221;

President Trump Visits Fort Bragg To Honor U.S. Forces

Defense Department Press Secretary Torches The Atlantic For Selectively Editing Statement

Combat

Media

Military

Pete Hegseth

The Atlantic

The New York Times, a former newspaper, recently ran a story with this headline: “Men, Where Have You Gone? Please Come Back.” The sub-headline was: “So many men have retreated from intimacy, hiding behind firewalls, filters and curated personas, dabbling and scrolling. We miss you.”
Now, I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “Oh, Klavan, you smoking hot hunk of hilarity, a joke is a joke, but do you really expect us to believe that that was a headline in the same former newspaper that has spent the last forty years denigrating men and marriage and promoting a sexual culture of such degrading perversion that it could only be intended to cause even a fully operational male to recoil horrified from sexual communion as if he were Ben Affleck in the moment he suddenly realized he had left the really nice Jennifer for the Jennifer with the admittedly spectacular body but with the kind of personality that could make even a fully operational male recoil horrified from sexual communion as if he’d spent the last forty years reading the New York Times?&#8221; And okay, sure, even I’ve forgotten where that sentence began, but the point is, no, I’m not making this up.
This article wondering why men had retreated from intimacy into a world of solitary stimulation utterly devoid of emotional content was written by Rachel Drucker, a woman who spent part of her career working for Playboy and its affiliated hard core porn outlets, enticing men to retreat from intimacy into a world of solitary stimulation utterly devoid of emotional content. She writes (and this is a real quote, I’m still not even making stuff up yet): “I remember when part of heterosexual male culture involved showing up with a woman to signal something — status, success, desirability. Women were once signifiers of value, even to other men. That dynamic has quietly collapsed.”
So — baffled by this mystery — the New York Times did what they usually do in such circumstances: they sent their reporters to find out what men think, by interviewing women.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h3>
For instance, they spoke with Karen Screamy-Hate-Face, President of the Society for Harridans who are Intolerably Loud, or S-H-R-I-L. Ms. Screamy-Hate-Face said, “I can’t for the life of me figure out why I can’t get a date with one of these toxic snakes. I’ve got the pink hat, all the right tattoos and plenty of insight on how to make men be better than they are. What do those bastards want from me? Tenderness?”
The Times also interviewed the holder of the Guinness Book World Record for highest body count, Karen Spikenose, who told them, “Frankly, I think most men are just too sexually insecure. They’re always afraid I’m going to compare them to all the men I slept with yesterday. But really, I’m the sort of girl who usually takes each man separately. It’s more time-consuming, but I feel it makes for a more intimate seven minutes.”
And they interviewed divorce attorney Karen Crotchfangs, who told us, “I just think men don’t know what they really want. They say they want a feminine girl like me who gets all made up for a date and wears pretty dresses and lets them pay for dinner, but then the minute they see my penis they run for the hills. Sometimes without even finishing their drink.”
In the end, however, despite its considerable reportorial power, the New York Times somehow could not solve the mystery of why men no longer feel that women add value to their lives.
Now, part of our job here at the Daily Wire is to bring you the kind of material that outlets like the New York Times simply can’t provide. Like journalism. So we immediately sent our reporters out into the field, and when they didn’t come back from the field but simply went prancing off across the grass picking flowers and weaving garlands of daisies for one another’s heads, we sent out some more reporters to interview a prominent man on why he had retreated from intimacy. Unfortunately, the man just kept sobbing violently and crying out, “What was I thinking? I could have had the nice Jennifer!”
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1613165536?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_thcv_3&amp;storeType=ebooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Woman Underground.</a>” His most recent nonfiction release is “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Cain-Finding-Literature-Darkness/dp/0310368340/?_encoding=UTF8&amp;pd_rd_w=nMYjR&amp;content-id=amzn1.sym.bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_p=bc3ba8d1-5076-4ab7-9ba8-a5c6211e002d&amp;pf_rd_r=133-8344803-2786917&amp;pd_rd_wg=7a8J3&amp;pd_rd_r=5791ea0f-6d96-4732-9d6a-3a4e6b348bb5&amp;ref_=aufs_ap_sc_dsk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Kingdom of Cain: Finding God in the Literature of Darkness.</a>” (May 2025, Zondervan/HarperCollins). Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Man sitting under the table and using mobile phone.

New York Times Investigates Retreat Of Men By Talking To Women

Gen Z

New York Times

Relationships

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth laid into a reporter who asked why he hadn&#8217;t specifically congratulated the female pilots who had been a part of the United States&#8217; recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities after they stated: &#8220;The early messages that you sent out only congratulated &#8216;the boys.'&#8221;
Hegseth, in the hours after the mission had been completed, touted the success of &#8220;our boys on those bombers&#8221; – and The New York Times, among others, complained that not all of those involved had been male.
Times Pentagon reporter John Ismay, most notably, wrote, &#8220;In the briefing, Hegseth referred to B-2 pilots as ‘our boys on those bombers,’ yet both men and women have been trained to fly them.&#8221;
When that topic came up during Thursday morning&#8217;s briefing, Hegseth bowed his head slightly, laughing, before responding.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
. <a href="https://twitter.com/SecDef?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecDef</a> gave the PERFECT response when asked
&#8220;Why not acknowledge female pilots that participated, early messages congratulated the boys?&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/BAqwj6bfdV">pic.twitter.com/BAqwj6bfdV</a>
— DOD Rapid Response (@DODResponse) <a href="https://twitter.com/DODResponse/status/1938223290931143052?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 26, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Why not acknowledge the female pilots that also participated?&#8221; the reporter asked. &#8220;The early messages that you sent out only congratulated &#8216;the boys.'&#8221;
&#8220;So, when I say something like &#8216;our boys in bombers&#8217; — see, this is the kind of thing the press does,&#8221; Hegseth replied. &#8220;Of course, the Chairman mentioned a female bomber pilot. Fantastic. She&#8217;s fantastic. She&#8217;s a hero. I want more female bomber pilots.&#8221;
&#8220;I hope the men and women of our country sign up to do such brave and audacious things,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;But when you spin it as because I say &#8216;our boys in bombers&#8217; as a common phrase – I&#8217;ll keep saying things like that, whether they&#8217;re men or women. I&#8217;m very proud of that female pilot, just like I&#8217;m very proud of those male pilots.&#8221;
&#8220;I don&#8217;t care if it&#8217;s a male or a female in the cockpit, and the American people don&#8217;t care,&#8221; he concluded. &#8220;But it&#8217;s the obsession with race and gender in this department that&#8217;s changed priorities, and we don&#8217;t do that anymore. We don&#8217;t play your little games.&#8221;

‘We Don’t Play Your Little Games’: Hegseth Smokes Reporter Asking Why He Didn’t Mention Female Pilot

'We Don't Play Your Little Games': Hegseth Smokes Reporter Asking Why He Didn't Mention Female Pilot

gender ideology

Iran

Israel

Stealth Bomber

Planned Parenthood has long been synonymous with abortion, profiting from the violent destruction of preborn children. But now, the nation&#8217;s largest abortion chain has added another sinister revenue stream — mutilating young people in the name of “gender-affirming care.” It is past time for Congress to cut off the more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer funding that Planned Parenthood receives annually. Americans should not be forced to subsidize an organization that ends the life of preborn babies and irreversibly harms confused young people.
Planned Parenthood’s <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/news/report-details-planned-parenthood-record-abortions-funding/">total revenue</a> for 2023-24 was $2.03B, nearly the same as the previous fiscal year of 2022-23 at $2.05B. They took in a staggering $498 million just in donations in 2022 — and instead of improving the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/15/us/planned-parenthood-clinics.html">horrific conditions</a> inside its clinics, it funneled much of it into advancing its radical political and legal agenda. In 2024 alone, the abortion giant spent <a href="https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/pressroom/statement-from-planned-parenthood-action-fund-on-presidential-election-results#:~:text=Planned%20Parenthood%20advocacy%20and%20political%20organizations%20made%20a%20record%2Dbreaking%20%2469.5%20million%20investment%20during%20the%202024%20election%20cycle.">$69.5 million</a> to defeat pro-life Republican candidates and policies.
<h3>Abortion: The Business of Death</h3>
According to its 2023-2024 <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/news/report-details-planned-parenthood-record-abortions-funding/">annual report,</a> Planned Parenthood performed 402,230 abortions in the 2022 to 2023 fiscal year. This breaks down to an average of 1,102 daily abortions, nearly 46 hourly, and one every 78 seconds Its business model revolves around ending innocent lives, and they are unapologetic about it. The science is clear: from the moment of fertilization, a unique human life begins. Yet Planned Parenthood treats preborn children as disposable. Their so-called &#8220;care&#8221; consists of poisoning or dismembering the youngest members of our human family.
This brutality is not an unfortunate byproduct of their work — it is their core business. Despite offering <a href="https://lozierinstitute.org/fact-sheet-planned-parenthoods-2023-24-annual-report/">fewer legitimate healthcare</a> services each year, Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers continue to rise. Women in crisis deserve real support, not an organization that profits from their despair by ending their children’s lives.
Defunding Planned Parenthood is not about limiting healthcare access; it is about redirecting taxpayer dollars to organizations that actually serve women and children. Yet, year after year, Congress continues to funnel hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into this abortion behemoth.
<h3>Gender Transitions: The Business of Mutilation</h3>
As if poisoning and dismembering preborn children weren’t evil enough, Planned Parenthood has also become one of the largest providers of cross-sex hormones, pushing powerful, life-altering drugs onto vulnerable teenagers with little to no medical oversight. According to <a href="https://www.thefp.com/p/how-did-planned-parenthood-become?utm_source=chatgpt.com">insurance claim data</a>, Planned Parenthood has prescribed gender transition hormones to at least 40,000 young adults in just one year, often after brief, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/undercover-investigation-planned-parenthood-prescribing-hormones-minors-minimal-oversight">superficial consultations</a>.
One of us, Chloe, knows firsthand the devastation of this industry. As a teenager, she was encouraged to believe that she was born in the wrong body. Medical professionals — including those at organizations like Planned Parenthood — fast-tracked her onto puberty blockers, testosterone, and eventually a double mastectomy, all before she was old enough to legally drive. She was told it would bring her happiness. It didn’t. It left her with permanent scars, a deep voice, a damaged body, and the realization that she had been betrayed by the very people who claimed to help.
Planned Parenthood is not providing informed, compassionate care. They are running a conveyor belt of gender transition services, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfoZCtbvdhM">pushing vulnerable young people</a> toward a medical pathway that results in permanent sterilization, sexual dysfunction, and lifelong regret. Many of those who detransition, like Chloe, find themselves abandoned by the medical community that once rushed them into these procedures.
<h3>No More Taxpayer Funding</h3>
The American people should not be forced to pay for the destruction of innocent lives or the mutilation of confused young people. Planned Parenthood has shown time and time again that it is not a legitimate healthcare provider. It is an ideological machine that profits off death and suffering.
According to a recent <a href="https://lozierinstitute.org/fact-sheet-planned-parenthoods-2023-24-annual-report/#_ftn14">report</a> from the Lozier Institute, &#8220;Taxpayer funding in the form of government grants, contracts, and Medicaid reimbursements hit $792.2 million, over $2 million per day&#8230;&#8221;
European nations such as Sweden, Finland, and the United Kingdom are now restricting the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors, recognizing that the evidence supporting them is weak and the risks catastrophic. Yet, in the U.S., Planned Parenthood continues to push these treatments at record rates, all while receiving taxpayer dollars.
Enough is enough. Congress must act. Every dollar that funds Planned Parenthood is a dollar spent enabling the deaths of preborn children, the mutilation of young people caught in an identity crisis, and political attack ads on Republican leaders. That money should be invested in real healthcare — providers that support women, protect children, and offer genuine, life-affirming care and psychological help.
The fight to defund Planned Parenthood is not just a policy battle; it is a crossroads for our nation. Lives are at stake for both the preborn children who deserve the right to live and the young people being led down a destructive path from which they may never fully recover. We must demand that our lawmakers stand against this barbarism. It’s time to end taxpayer funding for an organization that kills and mutilates the most vulnerable in our community. Congress must defund Planned Parenthood now.
* * *
Lila Rose is a writer, speaker and activist. She is the founder and president of Live Action, a human rights nonprofit with the largest digital footprint for the global pro-life movement.
Chloe Cole, a poised and articulate 20-year-old woman, passionately advocates against the practice of transitioning minors.Driven by a noble mission to safeguard children from potentially harmful ideologies and medical interventions, Chloe draws from her personal experiences to shed light on the distressing consequences of gender-affirming care for adolescents. Having embarked on her own transition journey at the tender age of 12, only to subsequently detransition at 16, Chloe speaks with firsthand authority on the deeply traumatic effects experienced by minors undergoing such treatments. Follow her: @ChoooCole
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Planned Parenthood door

After Raking In $800M In Taxpayer Dollars, Planned Parenthood Now Offers Trans Services

Abortion

Children

Congress

Opinion

Planned Parenthood

Taxes

The Supreme Court has now ruled in favor of the idea that you don&#8217;t have to be a member of a minority group in order to be discriminated against.
That is obviously true. The fact of the matter is that you can certainly be a white, straight male and be discriminated against, or, in the case reviewed by the Supreme Court, a white, straight female.
According to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/us/politics/supreme-court-straight-woman-workplace-discrimination.html">The New York Times</a>:
<blockquote>The Supreme Court on Thursday <a href="https://archive.is/o/WjYeY/https:/www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1039_c0n2.pdf">unanimously ruled</a> in favor of a straight woman who twice lost positions to gay workers, saying an appeals court had been wrong to require her to meet a heightened burden in seeking to prove workplace discrimination because she was a member of a majority group.
The decision came two years after the Supreme Court <a href="https://archive.is/o/WjYeY/https:/www.nytimes.com/2023/06/29/us/politics/supreme-court-admissions-affirmative-action-harvard-unc.html">struck down race-conscious admissions programs</a> in higher education and amid the Trump administration’s fierce efforts to root out programs that promote diversity. The ruling will place further pressure on employers and others to eliminate affirmative action and other initiatives that seek to provide opportunities to members of historically disadvantaged groups.</blockquote>
Leftist Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the opinion for the court. Again, remember this was a unanimous decision, so the three leftists on the Court, Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor, concurred. Despite the best attempts of The New York Times to turn the decision into a right-wing decision, it was not. It was unanimous.
The Times continued:
<blockquote>The standard for proving workplace discrimination under the law, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court, “does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group.” The case was brought by Marlean A. Ames, who had worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services, which oversees parts of the state’s juvenile corrections system. After a decade there, in 2014 she became the administrator of a program addressing prison rape. Five years later, she applied for a promotion. Her supervisors turned her down, saying she lacked vision and leadership skills. They eventually gave the position to a gay woman who had been at the department for a shorter time and, unlike Ms. Ames, lacked a college degree.
Not long after denying her the new position, her supervisors removed her from her existing job, telling her that they had concerns about her leadership and offering her a demotion that came with a substantial pay cut. She was replaced by a gay man with less seniority.</blockquote>
Ames claimed that she was discriminated against because she was straight.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2212-member-exclusive?elementPosition=2&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Put aside the underlying facts of the case. The question here for the Supreme Court was whether she had to — as the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals suggested —prove that she was a member of a minority or face a heightened standard because she wasn’t a member of a minority group.
<blockquote>The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, said she could have satisfied the “background circumstances” requirement by showing that decisions about her employment were made by “a member of the relevant minority group (here, gay people)” or with statistical evidence. But the appeals court said Ms. Ames had provided neither kind of proof.</blockquote>
The underlying facts of the case are less relevant than the actual ruling, which says that yes, of course, you can be discriminated against if you&#8217;re a white, straight person. If you&#8217;re a member of a majority group, you can indeed be discriminated against.
That should not be a shock in any way, shape, or form.
Good for the Supreme Court for ruling correctly.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a></h3>

Menu