The push for transgenderism is evidence that liberalism is a mental disorder. Conservatives are often accused of being anti-science. If you want to know what’s anti-science, it’s transgenderism. Men and women taking hormones and lopping off body parts because they “identify” as one sex or another.

Transgenderism is damaging to women’s sports. Men who identify as women are competing in track and field and weightlifting. What you don’t see is women identifying as men competing in the same sports. They would be crushed.

It’s sad that women have worked hard to establish themselves in sports only to have their sports invaded by the absurdity of transgenderism.

The always aggrieved Left is now up in arms because Scarlett Johansson was hired to play a transgender man in an upcoming film. The “mental disorder” crowd is insisting that a REAL transgender man should play a transgender man in the film.

If a REAL transgender man plays a transgender character in the film, the film will most likely be a flop. It might even be a flop if Scarlett Johansson plays a transgender man. Scarlett Johansson as a transgender is easier to look at than a man who’s pretending to be a woman. Box office receipts matter for some movie studios.

To say things like this will get you in trouble. Consider the case of Daniella Greenbaum who wrote an article critical of the demand that a REAL transgender man plays the lead role in a film about a transgender.

Business Insider ran a column defending actress Scarlett Johansson from fierce criticism for her decision to play a transgender man in a forthcoming film called “Rub and Tug.” The writer, Daniella Greenbaum, took the apparently outrageous position that actors can pretend to be people they are not. Or, as Greenbaum put it, “Scarlett Johansson is the latest target of the social-justice warrior mob. The actress is being chastised for, well, acting.”

The Social Justice Warriors came out in full force against Business Insider for publishing Greenbaum’s article. Just to have a different opinion is no longer acceptable for some people. But Business Insider committed a Social Justice crime for publishing Greenbaum’s article. Business Insider caved and pulled the article, removing it from their website.

Here’s what it was replaced with:

The brave media at work. How many times have media types lambasted President Trump’s criticism of the media? Have they stopped publishing? No. Have they pulled articles from their websites critical of President Trump? No. And we wouldn’t want them to.

The Weekly Standard republished the article.

Greenbaum quit her job in protest and published a scathing letter against her former employer on her social media account.

“Apparently, that radical view – that actors should be free to act – is beyond the pale of acceptable opinion,” Greenbaum wrote, “as just a few hours after it went up, the piece was erased from the site following a campaign against me.”

“I wish I could say I am surprised,” she continued later in her letter.

“Unfortunately, what happened with my piece – the tarring of a commonsensical view as somehow bigoted or not thought out; the capitulation on the part of those who are supposed to be the adults to the mob – is a pattern happening all over the country within institutions that pride themselves on open-mindedness and liberalism,” Greenbaum concluded. (The Blaze)

Greenbaum’s article was an opinion piece. Jonah Goldberg writes:

There’s nothing remotely beyond the pale about what Greenbaum wrote. Her sin was simply to point out the obvious, which is often considered a great offense without actually being offensive. That is why what she calls the “social-justice warrior mob” turned on her and Business Insider.

Again, no laws were broken. Greenbaum has a right to say what she believes to be true, and Business Insider has every right to publish (or unpublish) what it wants.

If Business Insider had simply opted to reject the piece at first, that would have been fine, and it would have spared itself a lot of embarrassment. Instead, its editors opted to cave to political pressure. Its surrender to the mob tells us a lot about the power of the social-justice warrior mob and the weakness of Business Insider’s editors. (Newsmax)

If you want to see what the “social-justice warrior mob” is all about, watch this scene from the 1962 film The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance starring John Wayne and Jimmy Stewart and a supporting cast that includes Vera Miles, Edmond O’Brien, Andy Devine, John Carradine, Woody Strode, Strother Martin, and Lee Van Cleef. “The newspaper editor prints the truth about Valance, and for his pains has his office trashed and is whipped nearly dead.” (RogerEbert.com)

In this scene, the Shakespeare quoting Dutton Peabody (Edmund O’Brien) is confronted by Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin) and his “Myrmidons”1 over competing political positions. Valance is the opposition. The Press is his enemy.

“Liberty Valance taking liberty with the liberty of the press?” Yes, those screaming for “liberty” are the first people to deny others their liberty to express a contrary opinion.

People expressing an opposing opinion aren’t being beaten with a whip (at least not yet), but they are often savaged and silenced for fear of losing their jobs.

1. “The Myrmidons were figures of ancient Greek mythology, skilled warriors in Homer’s Iliad commanded by Achilles. Because they were known for their fierce loyalty to their leader, the term came to be used in pre-industrial Europe almost as ‘robots’ would be today. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term has since come to mean ‘hired ruffian’ or ‘a loyal follower, especially one who executes orders without question, protest, or pity–unquestioning followers.'” [↩]