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

Andrew Klavan

Gen Z

Humor

New York Times

Relationships

Satire

Women

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;

Pete Hegseth

‘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

Military

Politics

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

Gender

Opinion

Planned Parenthood

Pregnancy

Taxes

Transgender

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>

US Supreme Court Slated To Issue Opinions As Term Nears End

Supreme Court Affirms: Discrimination Can Affect Majority Groups Too

Ben Shapiro

Discrimination

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Sonia Sotomayor

Supreme Court

Whites

Former first lady Michelle Obama said that a woman’s unique ability to grow a human life inside her body is “the least of” what the reproductive system is for.
Obama, a prominent Democrat and supporter of abortion, discussed her thoughts during an <a href="https://open.spotify.com/episode/0SvVgcSCgmhJysFFOPU5hR">episode</a> of her “IMO with Michelle Obama &amp; Craig Robinson” podcast on Wednesday.
The “Becoming” author said that the &#8220;frustrating thing&#8221; is that the issue &#8220;has been reduced to a question of choice, as if that&#8217;s all of what women&#8217;s health is.&#8221;
&#8220;I attempted to make the argument on the campaign trail this past election that there&#8217;s just so much more at stake because so many men have no idea what women go through,&#8221; Obama said. &#8220;We haven&#8217;t been researched, we haven&#8217;t been considered, and it still affects the way a lot of men lawmakers, a lot of male politicians, a lot of male religious leaders think about the issue of choice, as if it&#8217;s just about the fetus, the baby.&#8221;
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday&amp;_gl=1*1qdq03s*_gcl_au*MTYyNDg0MTE0OS4xNzQxODk4NTMz*_ga*MTEzOTk1NjkxNi4xNzI2MzI1MDQz*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*czE3NDgzNzg2NDgkbzEwMDMkZzEkdDE3NDgzODEwMTckajU4JGwwJGgw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
&#8220;Women&#8217;s reproductive health is about our life,” Obama added. “It&#8217;s about this whole complicated reproductive system that the least of what it does is produce life.”
She continued, “It&#8217;s a very important thing that it does, but you only produce life if the machine that&#8217;s producing it—if you want to whittle us down to a machine—if the machine is functioning in a healthy, streamlined kind of way. But there is no discussion or apparent connection between the two.&#8221;
The former first lady’s friend, OB/GYN Dr. Sharon Malone, was a guest on the episode. She agreed with Obama’s thoughts, saying, &#8220;one of the things that is disturbing&#8221; is that the &#8220;government has gotten involved in decisions that are personal and healthcare decisions.”
“It&#8217;s not just about whether someone chooses to have a pregnancy or not, but this is a situation where a woman should have control over her body—when and if to have a baby, and to decide how that pregnancy should continue,&#8221; she said.
At another point in the episode, Dr. Malone also mentioned a link between “older sperm” and “more autism.”
“They&#8217;ll never let that secret out. That may be the key behind all the defunding everything,&#8221; Michelle Obama replied. &#8220;Then old men can keep marrying 20-year-olds. It&#8217;s like, &#8216;I&#8217;ll give you the baby you want.'&#8221;

Michelle Obama

Michelle Obama Says Creating Life Is ‘The Least’ Of What A Woman’s Reproductive System Does

Michelle Obama Says Creating Life Is 'The Least' Of What A Woman's Reproductive System Does

Podcast

Social Issues

U.S.

Women's Rights

Truly wise people have known for a long time that college doesn’t make you smarter – in fact, it usually has the opposite effect. But despite this reality, it’s always a little jarring when an institution of higher learning makes a mistake that any 3-year-old child could identify as wrong.
In today’s episode of You Can’t Make This Up, Smith College, an all-women’s school founded in 1871, just handed an honorary degree to Rachel Levine, a four-star admiral and former Assistant Secretary for Health who also happens to be a man formerly named Richard.
It&#8217;s a big slap in the face to feminists who have been fighting for “women’s rights” since the school’s founding. It’s also an affront to all the normies out there who can plainly view the difference between girls and boys. In the case of Smith College, the school’s entire existence hinges on celebrating women. So, you know, maybe they should be able to identify one. 
But these activists running our elite institutions have long since traded common sense for total fealty to radical Left-wing gender theory proponents. No wonder people have a negative view of college these days.
Women’s rights advocate Riley Gaines, who gained notoriety after speaking out against a male competing as a woman in college swimming, <a href="https://x.com/Riley_Gaines_/status/1924202136625172482" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> about the controversy on X.
“Smith college, a private *women’s* college in Massachusetts, awarded Rachel (Richard) Levine an honorary degree today,” she said. “He then delivered the commencement address. Ladies, congratulations — your graduation was led by the very thing feminism was allegedly fighting.”
Smith College was actually one of the universities to roll out and develop a formal program for Gender studies! While Smith graduates are drowning in student debt and gender studies degrees, the administration is busy handing out honorary degrees to someone who declares himself to be a woman, regardless of biological reality. 
Jeremy’s Razors believes the truth still matters, and we know exactly what a woman is. We make razors for men who accept their manhood as the solemn duty that it is, and for women who are actually women. 
And while Smith College is handing out honorary degrees like a participation trophy to a man in a dress, <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jeremy’s Razors</a> is handing women the one thing the Left refuses to: reality. Our <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/collections/womens/products/womens-2nd-gen-1-1-starter-set?selling_plan=4057563349" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Women&#8217;s Razor</a> doesn’t care about “preferred” pronouns — it cares about giving you the closest, smoothest shave this side of sanity. Five blades. Aloe and Argan oil. A curvaceous handle that grips like truth in a world that keeps slipping into delusion. No lectures. No rainbow-washed pandering. Just the unapologetic femininity of a woman who knows who she is — and isn’t asking permission to be her. <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/collections/womens/products/womens-2nd-gen-1-1-starter-set?selling_plan=4057563349" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Get the razor that still knows what a woman is.</a> Because biology isn’t bigotry, and we’re not playing pretend.
There’s no virtue signaling, no rainbow razors during pride month, and precisely zero charades involving gender swapping based on feelings. We don’t give out fake awards based on gender identity. Here you’ll find sharp blades, bold values, and the kind of sanity you won’t find on most college campuses.
Smith College is confused. The media, as always, is complicit. But <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jeremy’s Razors</a>? We’re standing on principle and declaring the truth. 
Stop giving your money to woke companies. <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Shave with Jeremy’s Razors instead</a>.
Jeremy&#8217;s Razors shares common ownership with The Daily Wire.

Rachel Levine

An All-Women’s School Doesn’t Know What A Woman Is

College

Jeremy's Razors

LGBT

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton&#8217;s latest dig at Republican women made it clear that she has learned absolutely nothing from the massive wave of backlash that hit her after her 2016 comment referring to President Donald Trump&#8217;s supporters as a &#8220;basket of deplorables.&#8221;
Clinton sat down with Margaret Hoover for an interview in early May, and Hoover used the opportunity to ask the twice-failed Democratic presidential candidate what advice she might have for the first female President of the United States.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨NEW: Hillary Clinton appears to have learned nothing from her 2016 “basket of deplorables” remark — she just smeared nearly *all* Republican women as “HANDMAIDEN[S] TO THE PATRIARCHY”🚨<a href="https://twitter.com/DailyCaller?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DailyCaller</a> <a href="https://t.co/9rrFjDdO12">pic.twitter.com/9rrFjDdO12</a>
— Jason Cohen 🇺🇸 (@JasonJournoDC) <a href="https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1924121589555007755?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 18, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Well,&#8221; Clinton began, and then there was a long pause before she added, &#8220;First of all, don’t be a handmaiden to the patriarchy, which kind of eliminates every woman on the other side of the aisle, except for very few.&#8221;
She named Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) as one example of a Republican woman who did not fit that particular description. Hoover suggested that former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) would be another.
&#8220;Yep, there&#8217;s a few,&#8221; Clinton continued. &#8220;Look, first we have to get there, and it is, you know, obviously so much harder than it should be. So, you know, if a woman runs who I think would be a good president, as I thought Kamala Harris would be and as I knew I would be, I will support that woman.&#8221;
Lily Tang Williams, Republican candidate for New Hampshire&#8217;s 2nd House District, fired back via X: &#8220;Hillary Clinton called Republican women &#8216;Handmaidens for the patriarchy.&#8217; What does she call her own party which supports men competing with women in women’s sports, hurting women &amp; invading their private spaces? Hypocrites!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Hillary Clinton called Republican women &#8220;Handmaidens for the patriarchy.&#8221;
What does she call her own party which supports men competing with women in women’s sports, hurting women &amp; invading their private spaces? Hypocrites! 
<a href="https://t.co/RZJTanBHuO">pic.twitter.com/RZJTanBHuO</a>
— Lily Tang Williams (@Lily4Liberty) <a href="https://twitter.com/Lily4Liberty/status/1924525967529136412?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 19, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Says GOP Women Are ‘Handmaidens To The Patriarchy’ — Except Two

Hillary Clinton Says GOP Women Are 'Handmaidens To The Patriarchy' — Except Two

Handmaid's Tale

Media

Patriarchy

Republicans

Dove is at it again. The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/wokest-wash-around-heres-how-dove-has-pushed-woke-nonsense" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“woke” personal care company</a> was blasted on social media this week for appearing to use a male model to advertise women’s hair products.
In a six-second ad posted by Dove on Facebook in February, the model promotes the company’s “intensive repair” hair products, but social media users noticed that something was off.
“This is a real commercial by @Dove. Another woke company trying to erase women,” wrote Libs of TikTok.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is a real commercial by <a href="https://twitter.com/Dove?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Dove</a>
Another woke company trying to erase women.<a href="https://t.co/I0Dc21sTzO">pic.twitter.com/I0Dc21sTzO</a>
&mdash; Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1922018165598441837?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 12, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On Facebook, Dove limited users’ ability to comment on the video. Most of the reactions to the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DoveUS/videos/1560468317995780/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> were the laughing emoji, and another big chunk of the reactions were the angry emoji.
<div id="attachment_919879" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-919879" class="wp-image-919879 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-13-at-4.48.40%E2%80%AFPM-1024x516.png" alt="Dove advertisment" width="1024" height="516" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-13-at-4.48.40%E2%80%AFPM-1024x516.png 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-13-at-4.48.40%E2%80%AFPM-300x151.png 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-13-at-4.48.40%E2%80%AFPM-768x387.png 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-13-at-4.48.40%E2%80%AFPM.png 1206w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />Screenshot: Dove/Facebook</div>
Dove did not respond to a request to comment. 
Dove, which falls under the umbrella of uber-woke mega corporation <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ben-jerrys-sues-woke-unilever-over-alleged-censorship-of-its-leftist-views?author=Daily+Wire+Shop&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=42&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Ben+%26+Jerry%E2%80%99s+Sues+Woke+Unilever+Over+Alleged+Censorship+Of+Its+Leftist+Views" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Unilever</a>, has a history of using trans-identifying men to portray women in advertisements. For example, in 2017, Dove featured a man who claimed to be a woman in a <a href="https://www.allure.com/story/dove-realmoms-transgender-mom" target="_blank" rel="noopener">commercial</a> about mothers. Dove’s #RealMoms commercial showed Shea, a man, alongside his spouse and baby. 
“You get people who are like, ‘What do you mean you’re the mom?’” Shea says in the commercial. “We’re like, ‘Yep, we’re both gonna be moms.’”
After Dove’s latest stunt, many people on social media said this was the last straw for them. 
“I don’t buy their products, but my wife does. I guarantee you she won’t be buying any more  @Dove products after I show her this commercial. Didn’t Bud Light teach anybody anything?” <a href="https://x.com/HaveBlue77/status/1922024678790414341" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> X user HaveBlue77. 
“I always buy Dove soap, shampoo, and conditioner. Time for a change,” <a href="https://x.com/darkangelradfem/status/1922301299271315631" target="_blank" rel="noopener">added</a> @darkangelradfem. 
Another social media user, @King_ape6 <a href="https://x.com/king_ape6/status/1922018718151745909" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>, “Good thing I use @JeremysRazors products.” 
That is a good thing. Because Jeremy’s Razors will never go along with the lie that men can be women. It’s offensive and just plain wrong. 
And Jeremy’s Razors offers a bevy of alternatives to all the woke products in your bathroom, including <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/collections/fathers-day" target="_blank" rel="noopener">razors, shave cream, shampoo, body wash, and deodorant.</a> <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/collections/fathers-day" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Right now, you can save up to 47% off on Jeremy’s Razors as we celebrate Father’s Day.</a> Men and <a href="https://www.jeremysrazors.com/collections/womens" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Women</a> deserve a personal care company that respects them for who they are and doesn’t pretend that any hairy dude can just choose to identify as the finer sex.
Jeremy&#8217;s Razors shares common ownership with The Daily Wire.

Soap

Dove Slammed For Using Masculine Model To Advertise Women’s Products … Again

Dove

Wokeness

I have spent a lot of time covering psychiatric drugs like SSRIs. The problem with these drugs is that they&#8217;re incredibly potent, potentially dangerous, and they effect the mind in ways that the doctors prescribing them don&#8217;t fully understand. And all of these problems are compounded by the fact that they are increasingly easy to obtain. In fact, as the problems with psychiatric medications become more evident, the barriers to access them only become lower. It seems that things should be working the opposite way. But that&#8217;s how it goes now. If you want to get a highly potent, dangerous, mind altering drug, you can. In fact, you probably don&#8217;t even have to leave your house.
This trend is becoming more and more common with an ever increasing array of drugs. They are very easy to get, there is very little oversight, and you don&#8217;t have to leave your house to obtain them. This is a major problem that will require all kinds of legislation to fix. But there are some steps we can, and must, take immediately to address the problem of fraudulent, life-altering drugs being handed out in large quantities to young people, basically on demand. One of those steps is to defund some of the largest distributors of these life-altering drugs, which is something that should&#8217;ve happened a long time ago.
If we can’t ban these people from operating outright, then at the very least, we should stop giving them money and tax breaks. What&#8217;s happening is a genuine crisis — and it&#8217;s not limited to SSRIs. It extends to a whole host of other drugs as well. And a new investigation by Live Action, the pro-life nonprofit, has just brought renewed urgency to this crisis, and how completely out-of-control the problem really is.
Here is part of an undercover investigation by Live Action, where they contacted various Planned Parenthood locations posing as a 16-year-old girl. And in these conversations, Live Action&#8217;s 16-year-old girl requests &#8220;gender-affirming care,&#8221; including cross-sex hormones. And Planned Parenthood responds by saying this is completely fine. They say they&#8217;ll do it virtually, over Zoom or something like that. And then they suggest that, if the girl goes to a clinic in-person, she doesn&#8217;t need to be accompanied by her mother in the examination room. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
BREAKING: New investigation from <a href="https://twitter.com/LiveAction?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@LiveAction</a> exposes Planned Parenthood for prescribing cross-sex hormones to MINORS using virtual appointments
Planned Parenthood needs to be investigated and defunded NOW.<a href="https://t.co/QsLTPIsQgj">pic.twitter.com/QsLTPIsQgj</a>
&mdash; Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1920217291511288102?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This footage is part of an extensive <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/news/new-report-case-defunding-planned-parenthood/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.liveaction.org/news/new-report-case-defunding-planned-parenthood/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1746900283197000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1UnEno3qo6_DScSrBrIbmc">investigation</a> by Live Action into Planned Parenthood. The full <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/case-for-defunding-planned-parenthood/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.liveaction.org/case-for-defunding-planned-parenthood/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1746900283197000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0BHIgVXNdhMvnIkjrauySg">report</a> was just released this week. To put things in context, Planned Parenthood is the leading abortion mill in the country. They commit roughly 40% of the abortion in this country, all by themselves. And they receive something like $700 million from taxpayers every year.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1593-member-exclusive?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+Show+Episodes+Carousel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
So what exactly is that money buying, aside from abortions and irreversible drugs for children? According to Live Action, citing various investigations, it&#8217;s allowing Planned Parenthood to traffic in human body parts, commit all kinds of health code and privacy violations, and engage in anti-white racism at all levels of its operation. The entire report is available online if you want to view it, and you should. I will simply highlight this one section in particular:
<blockquote>At least 40,000 patients went to Planned Parenthood for &#8216;gender affirming care&#8217; in 2023 alone, a number that has risen tenfold since 2017. The largest proportion, about 40 percent, were 18-to-22-year-olds.</blockquote>
According to Live Action, 45 out of Planned Parenthood&#8217;s 49 affiliated facilities provide this so-called &#8220;care,&#8221; and Planned Parenthood is now the second-largest provider of so-called &#8220;gender-affirming hormones&#8221; in the United States.
The report continues:
<blockquote>Planned Parenthood targets minors for gender-affirming care by disseminating pro-transgender ideology online and in schools. It has also stated that it would like to expand its gender-affirming care to a greater number of minors.</blockquote>
The report cites a video from Planned Parenthood, in which the organization claims that puberty blockers are, &#8220;like a stop sign&#8221; that pauses puberty without any potential side-effects. Planned Parenthood also provides sex education materials to elementary schools, according to this report, including, &#8220;information about puberty blockers and graphics of pubic hair art.&#8221;
In some cases, Live Action notes that Planned Parenthood was caught referring a 14-year-old undercover actor for &#8220;gender-affirming&#8221; treatments at another organization, so that he could hide his so-called &#8220;transition&#8221; from his parents. It goes on and on. Every page of this report is extremely difficult to read, and it&#8217;s all very damning. Even if you put all of the baby murder to the side — which you can&#8217;t, because that&#8217;s still obviously the most evil thing this organization does — but even if you did somehow forget about that, Planned Parenthood still remains one of the most evil organizations in the country. Their explicit goal is to permanently alter the lives of young people with surgeries and hormones, long before they&#8217;re able to consent to anything like this. And as the report outlines, half the time, they don&#8217;t even follow their own protocols, as limited as they are.
What&#8217;s left unanswered, in all of this, is why Planned Parenthood still receives hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. Republicans control Congress and the White House. So why the hell are we still sending so much money to these butchers? To be clear, as Live Action&#8217;s report outlines, you probably don&#8217;t even need legislation to stop this funding. There are dozens of violations listed in this report, which documents Planned Parenthood&#8217;s issues with patient privacy, fraud, trafficking of fetal remains, and so on. All of these problems, by themselves, are grounds for an executive order shutting down the funding immediately. But that hasn&#8217;t happened yet. And Congress hasn&#8217;t done anything either. Nor have they done anything about the mass prescription of SSRIs.
To be clear, Planned Parenthood should be forcible shut down, by law. The whole organization should be banned and all of its executives and employees at every level of the company should be put on trial for crimes against humanity. There should be a Nuremberg for Planned Parenthood executives. But that is not likely to happen any time soon. There are a lot of things that should happen but won&#8217;t, and this is number one on that list. So defunding them is the bare minimum. It’s not even close to the full extent of what should be done to shut down these butchers and child abusers and bring them to justice. It&#8217;s just the most meager first step. It&#8217;s the step where we at least stop forcing Americans to fund these psychopaths. And yet we haven’t even done that. Republicans control the federal government and yet somehow we are still sending hundreds of millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood.
Why? What is the reason? What is the negative consequence of defunding them? The Left will be mad? The media will complain? The activists will shriek and sing protests songs in the street? That last thing is pretty painful, I admit. But is in any of that enough to override the great moral necessity of defunding an organization that kills and castrates children? Obviously not. Especially because the protesters will be shrieking anyway. The media will complain regardless. The Left will stay mad no matter what. They’re going to cry. We might as well give them something real to cry about.
That&#8217;s not to say the Republicans in Congress haven&#8217;t done anything at all. They&#8217;re technically showing up to work even though it&#8217;s not exactly ground-breaking stuff. But it&#8217;s well past time for elected Republican representatives, along with the White House, to take decisive action on the ghouls and butchers who call themselves healthcare providers. If we can defund NPR — and the White House says we can — then we can defund these abortionists too. And we can stop corporations from distributing psychoactive drugs like they&#8217;re candy, while we&#8217;re at it. This is what we voted for.

US-POLITICS-JUSTICE-RIGHTS-ABORTION

Disturbing Investigation Into Planned Parenthood Reveals Shocking New Details

gender-affirming care

Libs of Tik Tok

Live Action

Matt Walsh

Teenagers

Normally when some influencer posts a video that I find annoying and I feel the need to respond to it, I save it for my Daily Cancellation segment. Today, however, I am going to break that rule. I am going to begin with a video from an allegedly conservative influencer named Emily Wilson.
What makes this video relevant, aside from the fact that it just simply annoys me, is that it echoes a message we’ve been hearing with increasing frequency from women on the Right with, in some cases, very large platforms. Emily’s platform isn’t very large, but it is sizable enough. She has half a million followers on Instagram. I’m sure she’s a nice person. I don’t know her and have no issue with her personally. But she represents a growing, or at least increasingly evident, problem on the Right. The problem, in a word, is feminism.
Feminism is not compatible with any meaningful definition of conservatism. Whatever conservatism is trying to conserve — like marriage, the family, western civilization itself — feminism militates against. And yet many feminists have become mouthpieces in the movement, and are accepted as such, as long as they wear a MAGA hat and say that they don’t like illegal immigration or whatever.
So with that in mind, let’s listen to just the latest submission to the ever expanding conservative feminist genre:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Not to pick on <a href="https://twitter.com/emilysavesusa?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@emilysavesusa</a> because I’ve been seeing a lot of girls on the right counter signaling the ‘trad’ stay at home mom lifestyle lately also, but I think this message is ridiculous.
Being a SAHM is not being ‘trapped’ by a man. That’s feminist BS. It’s also not… <a href="https://t.co/2iiwnYCb0T">pic.twitter.com/2iiwnYCb0T</a>
&mdash; Sarah Stock ✟ (@sarahcstock) <a href="https://twitter.com/sarahcstock/status/1917844165893018047?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Well, I am cringing. But not because of the trad wives. I’m cringing at this lame, half-baked attack on stay-at-home moms. And I’m cringing even more at the fact that women with these kinds of views are still embraced as “conservative.”
Try to imagine the opposite of this. Imagine a Left-wing influencer who advocates for every Left-wing policy under the sun but then comes out one day and says, “You know what? I think a woman’s proper place is in the home, raising her children.” It’s impossible to conceive of any Left-wing woman ever saying such a thing. And if she did, she would be immediately excised from the movement. That’s because leftists understand that supporting so-called traditional gender roles is fundamentally antithetical to their worldview. You literally cannot be a leftist and hold that view.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1588-member-exclusive?elementPosition=1&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
The same is logically true in the reverse. Attacking gender roles is fundamentally leftist. Which means you cannot be conservative if you hold fundamentally leftist views. You have every right to express those views. But you should not be embraced as a conservative, much less listened to as a spokeswoman for the movement. 
Now let’s go through some of the specifics here. Emily says that a woman should have a job and her own income so that she isn’t “trapped” by a man. She envisions the relationship between husband and wife as inherently competitive. Marriage is a zero sum game where both husband and wife are competing for control. Again, this is a fundamentally leftist conception. It is a recipe for divorce. There is nothing in and of itself wrong with a wife earning money. As I’ve conceded many times, a family may feel that they need two incomes in order to survive. Or they may want a second income. Or the wife might have a job that doesn’t require leaving the house and going to an office every day. But if she’s earning money as an escape hatch because she doesn’t want to be “trapped,” that is a very bad sign.
If you want to understand why it’s a bad sign just imagine how it would sound if a man adopted this philosophy. A woman on X commented yesterday that a wife needs a “backup in case their man can’t fulfill his providing roles.”
Well what if a man decided to have a back up in case his woman didn’t fulfill her wifely duties? Most people would find that objectionable, for good reason. The whole point of marriage is that you are devoting yourself entirely to your spouse. Two become one flesh. It is not possible to make that level of commitment while at the same time actively building yourself a nest egg just in case you want to leave. Saying the vows and pledging yourself to your betrothed means not having an exit plan. It means you burn the boats like Cortés and turn towards that wilderness and journey into it together, come what may.
She also says that men want to be mentally stimulated. The implication is that stay-at-home moms are too stupid to provide that sort of stimulation because all they think about is their “sourdough bread.”
This is absurdly dismissive and insulting to millions of good, godly, intelligent women who, while staying home with the children, are also capable of having intelligent conversations with their husbands. It also assumes that a woman who sits in a cubicle all day will somehow have more interesting things to say to her husband at the end of the day. Having a job as a woman does not make you smart or interesting. I hate to break it to the working women of the world, but your husband is almost certainly not intellectually stimulated by your job or your stories about your job. If he was able to choose between listening to a story about your office drama or listening to a story about what you did with the kids that day, he would prefer to hear about the latter. This is the sort of thing you would know about men if you listened to them when they try to tell you what they want, instead of declaring what you think they should want.
But the biggest problem — and the objection you hear most often from these feminist types — is the claim that somehow the stay-at-home mom arrangement is implausible, or even impossible. Emily declares that your chances of finding a man who can provide for you while you stay home and raise the children are, “Slim to none. Actually none,” she says. There&#8217;s no chance that it works out for you. There’s no chance that it works out for you or anyone you know. And yet it has worked out for countless people. It’s worked out for my wife. It’s worked out for many families that I know personally. It’s worked out for billions of human beings across the globe and through history since the dawn of civilization. Emily has written off the most normal and historically common practice as not just difficult but, according to her, literally impossible. And not just impossible, but also absurd and grotesque.
There’s a lot of this kind of thing going around. During my conversation with Tucker Carlson this week, we talked about the absurdity of gay adoption and gay parenthood.
Here&#8217;s a clip of that exchange that Tucker&#8217;s team posted:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Should gay couples be able to adopt? Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson discuss. <a href="https://t.co/q3I5vRRzVF">pic.twitter.com/q3I5vRRzVF</a>
&mdash; Tucker Carlson Network (@TCNetwork) <a href="https://twitter.com/TCNetwork/status/1918058750692180235?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Plenty of people on the Right, or Right-adjacent, took great exception to this. Glenn Greenwald is one of them. He tweeted in response: 
<blockquote>One has to be morally deranged — or totally ignorant of the grim realities of kids lingering without parents in orphanages, shelters and foster care, only to be expelled at 18 with no support — to believe that that dark hell is better for kids than being adopted by gay couples.</blockquote>
Morally deranged, he says. The view that two men should not be allowed to adopt children was held by nearly everyone in this country, and everyone across the world, until very recently. Barack Obama was against gay adoption when he first ran for president. So was every other elected Democrat. Any elected Democrat over the age of 50 was probably, at one point, opposed to both gay marriage and gay adoption. In fact, gay adoption was so obviously wrong to so many people for so long that it wasn&#8217;t even discussed. It wasn&#8217;t debated. It was just intuitively understood that children need a mother and a father. We won’t let two men adopt children for the same reason that we wouldn’t let a polyamorous polycule adopt a child. Children need a mother and a father. We are not going to deliberately put a child into a disordered environment where he is not only deprived of a mother or a father, but the role of mother or father has been replaced in an unnatural and confusing way.
This was always understood. Now, in the blink of an eye, what was always understood is &#8220;morally deranged.” The thing that everyone believed forever until approximately last Tuesday is not just wrong but shocking and upsetting and baffling. This is the game that&#8217;s played. And I, for one, am entirely sick of it.
Not everything that is old or traditional is automatically good, of course. Slavery is old and traditional — and still practiced in non-western countries. It&#8217;s also very bad. But there are basic truths about how human society is fundamentally structured. Truths that have withstood the test of time. Truths that have, while civilization held fast to them, it flourished and advanced in remarkable and seemingly miraculous ways. Truths that, minutes after our society abandoned, immediately led to decline and chaos and confusion. One of those truths is that a child needs a mother and a father. Only a man and a woman can have a baby, or should. Another one of those truths is that men and women are different, and so have different roles in the home and in society. This was an idea so basic that there wasn&#8217;t even a term for it. We only started labeling it &#8220;gender roles&#8221; at the moment that we decided to abandon it. And I would say that the results of that decision have not been good. Divorce, broken homes, declining birth rates, 60 million dead babies. And those are just the early returns.
That’s why we cannot be embarrassed to hold to a system that is ancient and timeless, and proven, tested, and vindicated by the testimony of our ancestors and by thousands of years of human experience beyond that. As conservatives, if that is not worth conserving, then nothing is.

Three businesswomen walking together in an office

Why ‘Conservative Feminism’ Is A Total Lie

Why 'Conservative Feminism' Is A Total Lie

Chemotherapy

Conservatives

Family Values

Fathers

Feminism

Husband

Marriage

Parenting

Social Media

Poorly equipped, unsanitary, and understaffed facilities. A sewage leak caused patients to vomit. Positive sexually transmitted infection results went unreported. 
The New York Times gave a shocking <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/15/us/planned-parenthood-clinics.html">glimpse</a> behind the curtain of Planned Parenthood. Although the legacy media usually defends and promotes the largest U.S. provider of abortion (nearly <a href="https://cdn.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/ec/f4/ecf43d92-fcd2-4d11-b299-e67b5c3ac394/2024-ppfa-annualreport-c3-digital.pdf">39%</a> of <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states">all</a> abortions in our country), some things are too egregious to ignore. 
This is what Planned Parenthood dispenses under the guise of providing “necessary women’s health care.” 
These grotesque lapses aren’t due to a lack of funding, but a lack of desire to provide quality care. According to its 2022-2023 annual <a href="https://cdn.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/ec/f4/ecf43d92-fcd2-4d11-b299-e67b5c3ac394/2024-ppfa-annualreport-c3-digital.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a>, the collective organization received over $2 billion in income, including $699.3 million in taxpayer funding and $997.5 million in private donations. Yet, they don’t prioritize “care, no matter what,” as their advertising claims. Instead, they funnel money into lawsuits and to loyal politicians, spending nearly <a href="https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/tipsheets/the-quickie-planned-parenthood-votes-launches-2024-electoral-program" target="_blank" rel="noopener">$40 million</a> in the 2024 election cycle.
Their goal is to overturn any limitations on abortion, even <a href="https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/abortion/types-attacks/trap-laws" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arguing against</a> basic safety standards that would improve care for the women Planned Parenthood claims to be concerned about.
I have seen the disintegration of Planned Parenthood’s mission firsthand, as I worked part-time for a local Planned Parenthood while I was an OB-GYN resident 30 years ago. At the time, I wasn’t concerned with my ideological differences on the abortion issue, especially since they never asked me to perform abortions. I enjoyed my time there, caring for underserved women, performing necessary gynecologic services such as pap tests, well-woman exams, STI testing, and contraceptive management. Like many Americans, I assumed that abortion was only a small part of the services they provided, and that other services were addressing women’s needs. 
When I compare Planned Parenthood’s 1996-1997 annual report, which coincides with my employment there, to today, their mission is clearly more focused on abortion to the neglect of other services. Whereas they provided 1.5 million pap tests in 1996, that has plummeted by 87% to 197,617 in 2022. Adoption referrals dropped 72%, from 6,274 to 1,721. 14,292 prenatal clients have decreased to 6,316 prenatal services.
Meanwhile, the number of abortions they sell rises every year, from 153,367 in 1996 (11.3% of the 1,366,000 abortions performed that year, <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/1998/11/abortion-incidence-and-services-united-states-1995-1996" target="_blank" rel="noopener">per</a> Guttmacher Institute) to 392,715 of the estimated one million abortions sold in the U.S. in 2022 (39%). Planned Parenthood only has a few options to resolve a woman&#8217;s pregnancy: prenatal services, adoption, miscarriage care, and abortion. <a href="https://lozierinstitute.org/fact-sheet-planned-parenthoods-2022-23-annual-report/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">97%</a> of the time, she&#8217;s sold an abortion. As an organization, then, Planned Parenthood appears to care far less about helping women through their pregnancies or plans for adoption than they do about selling women abortions. 
My recent experiences with Planned Parenthood are far different from my impression three decades ago. As an obstetric hospitalist, I have provided care for several women who suffered complications from the abortions Planned Parenthood sold them. In each case, Planned Parenthood failed to offer them an appointment or offered nonsensical advice like “rub your tummy” when they reported heavy bleeding.
But don’t just take my word for it. The media have been recently sharing horror stories highlighting their poor-quality care.
We’ve seen the stories of incomplete abortions, an IUD placed in a pregnant woman resulting in a stillbirth, and an improperly placed contraceptive which resulted in nerve damage, reported in an exposé by The New York Times.
18-year-old Alexis Arguello <a href="https://catholicvote.org/investigation-teen-dies-from-planned-parenthood-abortion-complication/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recently died</a> after a late-term abortion at a Fort Collins, CO, Planned Parenthood. According to a physician who testified about her death, the facility waited too long to notify emergency responders when she experienced a complication during her abortion at 22 weeks’ gestation. EMS was allegedly advised not to use sirens to facilitate her rapid transport to the hospital.
Instances of Planned Parenthood employees <a href="https://lawecommons.luc.edu/annals/vol23/iss1/5/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">failing</a> to ask questions to identify and assist trafficked women and facilitating transport of minors out of state for abortions without parental notification have been documented many times.
Since Planned Parenthood facilities are preferentially providing abortion drugs, frequently by mail, women can’t go to them if they experience complications. Instead, these women will go to the ER, where hospitalists like me will care for them. And even if a Planned Parenthood facility were nearby, they would be incapable of providing proper treatment.
Planned Parenthood marketing has successfully gaslit Americans, convincing them that desperate women would have no health care options without Planned Parenthood. This is untrue. There are thousands of federally qualified health center service sites (FQHCs) in the U.S., providing many health services for women in need. Medicaid health insurance is accepted by most private health care providers, expanding the options for women, and also providing the prenatal services that Planned Parenthood rarely provides.
We must look beyond Planned Parenthood’s slick marketing and gaze into the soul of this heartless organization. Better care is available for women from other organizations, and women deserve better than what Planned Parenthood offers.
* * *
By Dr. Ingrid Skop, M.D., FACOG, Vice President and Director of Medical Affairs for Charlotte Lozier Institute.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Daily Wire.

US-VOTE-POLITICS-DEMOCRATIC-CONVENTION

Gaslighting Women: It’s Time To Look Past Planned Parenthood’s Slick Marketing

Doctors

Federal Government

The New York Times

Right now, there is a bill headed to President Trump’s desk that will protect Americans from deepfake and revenge pornography. This is an incredible win for Americans, and something I have been fighting for my entire career. 
Over decades in the cybersecurity field, I’ve helped solve a lot of crises for government agencies, major corporations and more. But there’s a certain kind of call that I still dread getting. It starts with a trembling voice on the other end of the line: “Can you help me?” As they tell their tale, my heart sinks. A lump forms in my throat. This is another life shattered by explicit images strewn across the digital public square, each notification on their phone another dagger into their sense of safety as the image spreads.
For years, my team and I have made a point to fight for these survivors. We make calls, write letters, beg social media giants to remove the content – real photos stolen from private moments or deepfakes conjured by AI’s dark alchemy. This crime is indiscriminate. It targets the socialites, the professionals, rising stars, the rich and the poor. One professional athlete, a courageous woman I helped, saw her stolen images resurface dozens of times over several years. She told me it made her want to stop leaving her house. Even Scarlett Johansson — a global icon with every possible resource at her fingertips — can’t banish her deepfakes for good. If she’s powerless, what chance do everyday victims have? They have to watch their trauma go viral, reliving it with every view. Some, in desperation, have taken their own lives.
There are different ways to refer to this phenomenon. Terms like “revenge porn” and “deepfake” are often used interchangeably. “Deepfake” describes a specific kind of AI-produced image that usually uses a reproduction of a real person’s face. I reject “revenge porn” because while it may sound edgy in headlines, it re-victimizes the victim. People take intimate images of themselves for all kinds of reasons, from self-confidence to sharing with someone they trust. That may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but it doesn’t make it okay to share those peoples’ images without their consent in ways for which they weren’t intended. That’s why I refer to these pictures or videos as non-consensual intimate images, or NCII.
It wasn’t that long ago that pornography hid behind brown wrappers and clerks who checked IDs before you bought it. Now, anyone can steal an image, fabricate a lie, and blast it worldwide at lightning speed. The Cyber Civil Rights Initiative estimates over 15 million Americans – that’s 1 out of every 23 of us – have faced NCII sharing, a number that continues to balloon as AI fuels the carnage. Deepfakes — 98% pornographic, 99% targeting women — number in the hundreds of thousands, with just 16 sites known for hosting them racking up 200 million visits in a six-month period last year.
Social media companies can do better. It’s the right thing to do, and they have the technology to do it. If their algorithm can figure out my favorite shoe color and relentlessly sell them to me, they should be able to address this plague across their platforms. They are making some efforts. Meta removed 1.2 million NCII items in 2024’s first half, but gaps persist. And it’s not entirely the fault of the platforms themselves. 

A tangle of laws and regulations used to combat NCII sharing makes the process slower and more difficult. A 2024 study found that X (formerly Twitter) left 25 reported deepfakes up for weeks, while removing copyright violations in hours – a stark sign that today’s laws prioritize property over people. YouTube and TikTok axe millions of videos over copyright claims, yet billions of views on deepfake sites reveal a glaring chasm. Victims currently have to navigate a maze of rules, pleading to faceless systems with no human to hear their pain and no guarantees the images will come down.
That’s why their haunting words echo in my mind: “Can you help me?” Yes, I can. But my team can’t chase resurgent ghosts across the internet forever.
Thankfully, Washington has woken up to the crisis. The &#8216;Take It Down Act&#8221; makes publishing non-consensual intimate imagery — real or AI-crafted — a federal crime and requires platforms to remove it within 48 hours of a victim’s plea. The bill’s sponsors are Sen. Ted Cruz and Sen. Amy Klobuchar – both outspoken, prominent members of their parties who have run for president in recent years. They have very little in common politically – although they are both parents of daughters. But they worked together to secure an astounding unanimous vote to pass the bill in the Senate. And this week, thankfully, it received an overwhelming victory in the House and is now headed to President Trump’s desk.
Critics, many from the libertarian tech crowd, claim the &#8220;Take It Down Act&#8221; stifles free speech, but protecting victims from abuse isn’t censorship — it’s justice. It helps the rule of law catch up with the pace of technology. It’s not about politics, it’s about people. By one estimate, over 4 million American children have been scarred by AI porn fakes of themselves or peers. The NCII porn pirates don’t care who you vote for – they will strike your family, your friends, your coworkers. The sensible updates to our laws included in the &#8220;Take It Down Act&#8221; will help us protect ourselves and each other. This is a victory worth celebrating.
* * *
Theresa Payton is the CEO of Fortalice Solutions. She was the first female White House chief information officer, serving under President George W. Bush.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Daily Wire.

Menu