The Gender Ideology Religion

Wall Street Journal Guest Column

Losing My Nonreligion, (Archive) by Jerry A. Coyne

30 March 2025

Coyne opines about the reason he left the Freedom from Religion Foundation.  

And here is my comment which the good editors of the Wall Street Journal rejected.  

The truth is, most Americans, certainly almost everyone on the left, and if the WSJ is anything to go by, a good number purportedly on the right, have lost all common sense.  Sure, Trump won.  But these people are not going anywhere.  Here I mean not only the gender confused, but all of those who support and enable their genuine insanity.  And of course, as Coyne infers, they will not be swayed because this is their religion.

It's ironic that Coyne left the Freedom from Religion Foundation because of the FFRF's in-house religion.  But these are the times in which we live.  He was a heretic, so he had to be excommunicated.  No, there can be no dissension from the dogma at the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

And what's more, I do not even believe that most of these guys are gender confused.  Rather, I think this is an advanced form of narcissism and a narcissistic power play supported by their large cohort of flying monkeys.  I have written more about this here.

𓐵

Astronaut Question

Here's a question:  If we are going to send women into space, can we not find women smart enough to use a hair tie?



And no, this question is not meant to be rhetorical, ironic, mean, or even sarcastic or funny.  It is just a simple, straightforward query.

For anyone who would argue that, intentionally or not, this is mean, I would say that it only seems mean because it is true.  She looks like Medusa, and either she is too dumb to realize it, or I suppose it could be a conscious decision.  Either way, question stands.

Here is one other question:  Is Butch, next to her, too unkind to tell her?  Hey Suni, maybe you should tie your hair back before we go on camera.  Maybe he is just living up to his name; laughing at her.

𓐵

Marketing is Not Dead

The forgotten art of an effective television commercial

Today, most British commercials are wholly uninspiring.  Like this, this, this, this, this, and this.  All currently running television campaigns and all dreadful.  I mean for the love of God:  Domin-oh-hoo-hoo.  What is that?  And notice the extremely light product focus in all of these commercials.

There is one Domino's commercial featuring a live hedgehog supposedly coming out of hibernation.  The unappetizing critter makes no sound, but the helpfully provided closed captioning offers his thoughts:  Dominos?  That's it, that's the whole commercial.  It is so bad that no one has added it to Youtube.

Then comes something else entirely.  Created by BBH (Bartle Bogle Hegarty), led by Creative Director, Felipe Serradourada Guimaraes.  Sure, it is an emotional appeal ad, but at the same time, it is entirely product focused.

Grok offers some background on the campaign.  Find the music here.

𓐵

Peterson's Message to Musk (and the rest of us)

On Tommy Robinson and Schools of Education

Peterson first discusses the abysmal treatment of Robinson by the government of Great Britain.  Britain has become a theocracy with dhimmi-servants running the government, the judiciary, and the police (my description not his).  Then Peterson moves on to our own nightmare, the university schools of education, which supposedly train teachers.  I have written about this existential threat before.

𓐵

Grok on Covid

Fifteen questions for Grok

Grok currently allows users, with non-paid accounts, to ask fifteen questions every two hours.  So I thought, why not?  This is a follow up to my post last month, On the Faith of Atheists, which was my first discussion with Grok, and kind of interesting.

This time, I decided to edit it a bit more for clarity.  For instance, Grok now asks the user questions at the end of each response.  Probably trained to do so in order to maintain and encourage user engagement.  So I deleted any question that Grok asked me which I chose to ignore.  But again, there is a link to the original conversation at the end.

Anyway, here are my fifteen questions:

After Covid, I heard Zuby make the point that:  Most people would rather be in the majority than be correct.  Is this sentiment correct?

Zuby’s observation, Most people would rather be in the majority than be correct, taps into a well-documented aspect of human psychology:  The tendency toward conformity.  This idea is not new; it echoes what researchers like Solomon Asch found in the 1950s with his conformity experiments.  Asch showed that people often align their opinions with the majority, even when they know it is wrong, due to social pressure.  About 75% of participants conformed at least once when faced with a clearly incorrect majority opinion on something as simple as line lengths.

This sentiment holds up in broader contexts too.  Social media, like X, amplifies it, people pile into trending narratives, often prioritizing likes and retweets over accuracy.  Post-Covid, you saw this with debates over masks, vaccines, or lockdowns:  Many clung to dominant views, whatever they were locally, rather than digging into data or questioning inconsistencies.  Studies on groupthink, like those from Irving Janis, back this up, people avoid rocking the boat to stay comfortable in the crowd.

But is it most people?  That’s trickier.  It is not universal, some thrive on being contrarian, and others dig for truth regardless of popularity.  Zuby’s likely exaggerating for effect, as a precise headcount is impossible without massive surveys.  Still, the core idea tracks:  Humans are wired to seek safety in numbers, and being correct often takes a backseat to fitting in.  Covid, with its uncertainty and tribalism, just made that more glaring.  What do you think, did you see this play out around you?

Well certainly most people followed the experts advice in the response to Covid, even if it hurt their own health or even the health of their children.