Posted on 09/21/2016 5:44:40 AM PDT by madprof98
Martinez was first told by Cypress Creek High School Principal John McHale he couldn’t run for queen because he’s a boy.
“I started crying. Like, it made me really emotional considering how hard I was trying to be queen,” Martinez said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
For awhile gay kids were trending but they’re now passé. Trans kids are the new rage.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett (sister of the founder of NOW)
“When women go wrong men go right after them.” – Mae West
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Winston Churchill wrote this over a century ago.
During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!”
What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me.
Sometime later, I was a young divorcee with a small child. At the urging of my sister, I relocated to NYC after spending years married to an American executive stationed in Southeast Asia. The marriage over, I was making a new life for my daughter and me. Katie said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.”
I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.
And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.”
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?” she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!” they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.
It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.
To me, this sounded silly. I was enduring culture shock after having been cut-off from my homeland, living in Third-World countries for years with not one trip back to the United States. I was one of those people who, upon returning to American soil, fell out of the plane blubbering with ecstasy at being home in the USA. I knelt on the ground covering it with kisses. I had learned just exactly how delicious was the land of my birth and didn’t care what anyone thought because they just hadn’t seen what I had or been where I had been. I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.
How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.
How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?
I dismissed it as academic-lounge air-castle-building. I continued with my new life in New York while my sister became famous publishing her books, featured on the cover of “Time Magazine.” “Time” called her “the Karl Marx of the Women’s Movement.” This was because her book laid out a course in Marxism 101 for women. Her thesis: The family is a den of slavery with the man as the Bourgeoisie and the woman and children as the Proletariat. The only hope for women’s “liberation” (communism’s favorite word for leading minions into inextricable slavery; “liberation,” and much like “collective” – please run from it, run for your life) was this new “Women’s Movement.” Her books captivated the academic classes and soon “Women’s Studies” courses were installed in colleges in a steady wave across the nation with Kate Millett books as required reading.
Imagine this: a girl of seventeen or eighteen at the kitchen table with Mom studying the syllabus for her first year of college and there’s a class called “Women’s Studies.” “Hmmm, this could be interesting,” says Mom. “Maybe you could get something out of this.”...
If the little fag is elected ‘Queen’, does that mean the “King” will be forced to dance with him?
Go, Trump, GO!
Aren’t kids usually nominated for this? The top vote getters are then up for homecoming king/queen. Is he that well liked and seen as a “girl” by that many other kids? Truly frightening if so, for then the future is already lost.
He will probably win.
This cesspool of a country.
His boyfriend is running for king. The kids will get a two-fer.
MAKE AMERICA NORMAL AGAIN
I assume his parents are okay with this.
I was not meant to live in these times. Glad I’m old.
Thank you for posting this. Shortly,I am going to make copies of it and give it to several like minded individuals.
Martinez is on the left. How is that remotely even trying to be a woman? Or these days, is being "Transgendered" mean that you don't even have to try to look like a woman to claim to be one?
“Transvestites are proof to a feminist that men are better than women at everything, including being a woman.”
There is something not quite technically correct about that.
Is insanity contagious? must be, with so many males longing to chop off their schmekels and call themselves female.
The one with the rainbow flag tank top looks like a tanned Beavis.
CC
I am certainly not a rabid feminist, but you do see what is happening, don’t you?
The ridiculous progressives are now eating themselves, and guess who is being left behind? The girls. Little girls and teenage girls are apparently not important. instead boys wanting to be girls are allowed to invade the girls bathrooms, and lockers. They are being allowed to be homecoming queens.
Fairness would be that if a boy runs for homecoming queen, then a girl ought to run for homecoming king.
It is only fair. and, yes, it is ridiculous.
The concept of a homecoming queen was to have an event for the girls to look forward to - becoming the queen or an attendant, or becoming a cheerleader. The boys were the real heroes as they were on the FB team Now everything is upside down and common sense is out the window.
Your observation is sport on. My niece has boy & girl twins who are 4 years old. From the beginning, the boy played with trucks and a tow lawnmower, etc, while the girl dresses up in her frilly princess clothes and loves her dolls.
We had better hope that natural instincts prevail, as it is important to the continuation of the species!
Any father (still around) should keep his family from that school’s events.
And tell the male school board members (if there are any) they better wear a dress every other board meeting or face social justice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.