The Scrapbook swears it is doing its best not to turn this venerable magazine into Identity Politics Weekly. However, the gender-related absurdities have quickly escalated from man-bites-dog to dog-bites-man to man-identifies-as-dog—and we find it impossible to avert our gaze.
A new documentary aired on Britain’s Channel 4 last week entitled Secret Life of the Human Pups. According to the Guardian, it “is a sympathetic look at the world of pup play, a movement that grew out of the BDSM community.” Human pups “enjoy tactile interactions like stomach rubbing or ear tickling, play with toys, [and] eat out of bowls.” According to one pup, “It feels like you can be gay, straight, bisexual, trans and be accepted. . . . All I want is for the pup community to be accepted in the same way.” We can’t wait until Hillary Clinton’s Justice Department instructs North Carolina that the Civil Rights Act covers men in dog suits who dig up their neighbor’s flowerbeds and urinate on fire hydrants.
We wish that were clearly a joke as opposed to a plausible scenario, but it appears the left wants to keep greasing the slippery slope. To get an idea of how such lunacy is catching hold, look to—of course!—Congress. On May 26, the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives held a hearing on the Obama administration’s recent threat to cut off funding to schools that don’t allow transgender students to choose their own facilities. To testify against letting boys in girls’ locker rooms, Republicans called Gail Heriot, a member of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.
“If I believe that I am a Russian princess, that doesn’t make me a Russian princess, even if my friends and acquaintances are willing to indulge my fantasy. Nor am I a Great Horned Owl just because—as I have been told—I happen to share some personality traits with those feathered creatures,” testified Heriot.
California representative Zoe Lofgren was so angered by these remarks that she called Heriot “highly offensive” and “an ignorant bigot.” Naturally, the left and transgender activists made Lofgren into their hero du jour for responding to Heriot’s testimony with grandstanding outrage. But anyone who actually watched the hearing saw that Lofgren had embarrassed herself.
Rep. Steve King told Lofgren she was out of order, but she insisted on talking. “Mr. Chairman, it is my time, and I would just like to say that we allow witnesses to say offensive things, but I cannot allow that kind of bigotry to go into the record unchallenged.” Heriot interjected at that point, asking, “Does that mean you think I am a Russian princess?” Lofgren responded, “I have no idea.”
Now Heriot is explicitly making a rhetorical point, and yet Lofgren regards statements about personal identity so sacrosanct she can’t bring herself to say that, no, Heriot is not, in fact, a Russian princess? But if Heriot’s a princess, and wearing a collar makes one a dog, we suppose it’s not too much to ask that Lofgren try to identify as a member of a more elusive species—a politician with logical faculties.
