In her book Irreversible Damage, Abigail Shrier explores the phenomenon of teenage girls trying to become boys by changing their clothes and names, as well as pursuing surgical and hormonal interventions. Naomi Schaefer Riley writes in her review:

Historically, gender dysphoria—“characterized by a severe and persistent discomfort in one’s own biological sex”—begins in early childhood. It affected a tiny sliver of the population and was almost exclusively found in boys. Around ten years ago, all that changed. Now the number of cases has skyrocketed, the sufferers are overwhelmingly girls, and none of it is happening until adolescence. They’re generally from white families with higher incomes. And there are “clusters of adolescents in a single grade, suddenly discovering transgender identities together.”

Ordinarily, we don’t go to doctors explaining that we think we have pancreatic cancer and just expect them to treat it. We go to doctors with symptoms and expect them to run tests and find the source of our pain. When anorexics tell us they are too fat, we don’t expect medical professionals to agree and help them search for a Weight Watchers meeting. But when it comes to gender dysphoria, therapists are supposed to adhere to the “affirmative-care standard,” which basically means telling a patient his or diagnosis is correct and then figuring out how to “treat” it.

It is not just the demand for self-mutilation that should tip us off to the cultish nature of this movement. . . . Take the way that the transgender activists treat apostates, for instance. If someone decides to “de-transition”—that is, she starts to believe that her biological sex was the right one after all—she is shunned, harassed, and threatened online. And current believers are warned not to have anything to do with her.

How bizarre it is that, after decades of giving girls the message that girls can do whatever they want and be whomever they want, what they have decided is that they don’t want to be girls.

Stephen Daisley writes about the slaying of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim:

Yaron and Sarah were murdered in a climate of lies and vilification and hatred. . . . The more institutions participate in this collective madness, the more madness there will be. The more elected officials and NGOs misrepresent the predictable consequences of asymmetric warfare in densely populated territories, where much of the infrastructure of everyday life has a dual civilian/terrorist purpose, the more the citizenries of North America and Europe will come to regard Israelis and Jews as a people who lust unquenchably after blood.

The most intolerant anti-Zionism is becoming a mainstream view, indulged by liberal societies, more concerned with not conflating irrational hatred of Israel with irrational hatred of Jews—as though the distinction between the two is all that well defined anymore.

For years now, and especially after the October 7 massacre, the call has gone up from the pro-Palestinian movement to put Palestine at the heart of Western politics. To pursue the struggle against Zionism in every country, on every platform, and in every setting. To wage worldwide resistance to Israel, not only in Wadi al-Far’a but in Washington, DC. “Globalize the intifada,” they chanted. This is what it looks like.