Discover more from Ignore Previous Directions
Rabbitholed #78: Dana Rivers Is the Story the Media Doesn't Want You to Read
This is a story unparalleled in media censorship about deadly white male violence against a lesbian interracial couple and their black son. When the media goes silent, there is always a reason why.
This is a free post, available for all to read, in order for it to be shared as widely as possible. Please consider doing so. This post is only made possible because of the financial support of my incredibly valued subscribers and patrons. I urge you to become one today by clicking the “subscribe now” button below—and thank you!
Content warning: I could barely write this piece because of the horrific nature of the crimes—so please, take care of yourself while reading it and take care of yourself in general. Don’t ever be afraid to tell a man “no.”
As the hulking, motorcycle-club-tattooed 61-year-old once known to his Sacramento students as “Mountain Man” left the murder scene of the two lesbians whom he had just maniacally and relentlessly butchered to the point of disfigurement—wearing a black leather vest jacket belonging to one of his victims and soaked in their blood—ex-teacher Dana Rivers told the cops who arrived in Oakland shortly after midnight that Veteran’s Day in 2016: “I know I’m in trouble.”
Inside and outside the home on Dunbar Drive that Rivers had just set on fire were the bodies of three innocents, a white woman and a black woman married to one another and their adopted black son, whom Rivers had minutes before sadistically brutalized—with gunfire, stabbing, pummeling and screwdriver—in what could only be described as one of the most chilling acts of narcissistic rage imaginable.
Because Dana Rivers was a man obsessed.
By rage and revenge and a need to obliterate.
Because a woman had angered him in some way. Or told him no. Or drawn a boundary. Or told him he was not a lesbian. Or maybe even looked at him wrong. Or possessed something that he didn’t have? Or maybe it was just her very existence that was too provocative.
Whatever it was, he couldn’t have it. He couldn’t stand it. He would not allow it.
So he would show her.
There was one particular focus to Rivers’ fury.
A 56-year-old woman, hair salon owner, veteran, wife and mother known as Charlotte Reed.
Charlotte Reed’s great crime was making the mistake of befriending Rivers at a local VA years before and then after briefly considering becoming a member of his motorcycle club became the victim of his stalking and threats and then ultimately his insidious refriending once again—all so he could gain Charlotte’s trust long enough to get inside her house and kill her along with every single person she had ever cared about in the world.
It was Charlotte. She had received Rivers’ savage brutality the worst of all.
Lying dead in her bed when police discovered her, Charlotte had not just been shot in the front. She had been viciously stabbed again and again and again a total of 47 times—to the point of disfigurement.
Which was, of course, exactly the point. Because this was personal.
Twenty-eight wounds were delivered to Charlotte’s face, head and neck. He stabbed her 12 times in the chest and torso. She was bludgeoned mercilessly as well, and a bloody screwdriver was found on Rivers when he was arrested.
Dana Rivers “wanted Charlotte Reed to be unrecognizable,” the prosecutor said in her closing arguments recently, and he “succeeded.”
Charlotte’s wife, 57-year-old Patricia Wright—a much-loved computer prep teacher and deaf interpreter for the Berkeley Unified School District and a black woman—was lying dead on the floor near her partner, shot once in the back and once in the left breast and stabbed in the neck and shoulder.
Murdered outside was their beautiful 19-year-old son, Benny Diambu-Wright, adopted from West Africa, who had just graduated from high school, incredibly popular and with dreams of becoming a nurse or a hairdresser and the rest of his life to look forward to. He was executed with a shot through the heart.
That particular slaying—of Charlotte’s most treasured adopted son, Benny—was enacted like savage conquest.
Notably, Dana Rivers took with him as a trophy of sort the teenager’s iPod. He had it on his person when arrested.
“His smile was so big,” Benny’s teacher later said of the slain teen. “To actually hear that a former teacher did this to a young person. Your job, your passion, your life’s work is to protect young people and to support them on their journey. Not end their journey.”
These three victims, prosecutors noted, were “particularly vulnerable.”
These killings took “planning and sophistication.”
And for Rivers to successfully carry out these three executions, Rivers explicitly “took advantage of a position of trust or confidence.”
It should be noted that the vicious spree killer I am writing about—Dana Rivers—a porn-obsessed man who has a documented history of targeting lesbians with his abuser’s rights activism, believes that he is a woman.
He also believes that he is innocent.
I will respect neither of these lies.
Why You Should Care:
As much as the media would like you to believe this story doesn’t matter—even though they certainly couldn’t get enough of Mr. Dana Rivers when they platformed him on Oprah and 20/20 and Good Morning America as a prominent activist who would deliver ratings with his sensational story in the late ‘90s—familiarizing yourself with his story is critical to understanding the current, enormous, war-crimes-level human rights violations underway right now in the modern prison system, all thanks to the ruinous anti-woman, anti-child, anti-biology, anti-safeguarding, pro-corporate-pharma cult of Gender Ideology.
The reason you have heard nothing about Dana Rivers is the exact reason why I am writing about him.
Dana Rivers is the story you need to read as many times as it takes to understand how dangerous it is to give away the word “women” and the sanctity of “women’s rights.”
Because having giving away so much already, in the case of Dana Rivers and in the state of California where he is awaiting sentencing, we have a situation where the nascent Senate bill 132 (signed into law in 2020 by Governor Gavin Newsom) allows this psychopathic lesbian-killer Dana Rivers to be housed inside a women’s prison.
And we all understand what that means.
What that means—precisely—is that more women will be made to suffer and are suffering as they are trapped inside of a caged existence with this male psychopathic hunter of their very personhood.
This current California law, it should be emphasized, is in breach of the Geneva Conventions, the Mandela Laws on Protecting the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty and every other humanitarian edict protecting women on the planet.
The Geneva Conventions, established on August 12, 1949 after World War II, guarantees separate sexed housing for prisoners and fundamentally exists to “provide minimum protections, standards of humane treatment, and fundamental guarantees of respect to individuals who become victims of armed conflicts.”
Put it another way: California female prisoners are currently being treated worse than actual prisoners of war.
The Geneva Conventions provisions state that there should be no acts which are “outrages upon dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” It specifically states, “In any camps in which women prisoners of war, as well as men, are accommodated, separate dormitories shall be provided for them.”
This violation and all the violations Gender Ideology represents are in lawyer Kara Dansky’s words, “the biggest existential threat to humanity generally and to women and girls in particular that I’ve ever seen.”
What will happen with Dana Rivers—putting this murderous, vicious man in a women’s prison even though he has a history of committing punishing male-on-female violence—is happening everywhere around the world right now that has fallen prey to the vicious Art of War-style society-collapsing weapon of Gender Ideology.
The organization WOLF, which Dansky is a former board chair for, is currently suing California, and has endless testimony of women inside of prison who are trapped with these abusive and vicious men. These are women who are begging women who are not locked up and have power on the outside to listen to them—to help. Hear just a few:
“This man violated me, and when the prison tries to tell me it was a woman I feel violated again.” —Krystal Gonzalez
“SB-132 is really just for the benefit of males, not for females no matter how they identify. The writers of SB-132 sure knew what a woman was when they made sure that none of the provisions of the law benefited us in any way.” —Tomiekia Johnson
“Ever since being housed with M.C.H., and later with other men, my mental health has deteriorated. I have continued to experience panic attacks, I can’t sleep, and I sometimes feel like hurting myself.” —Nadia Romero
There is no hyperbole here. There is a verifiable humanitarian crisis.
To paraphrase Spiked Online: How you “identify” as a man matters about as much as whether you feel like your criminality is actually justified and fully righteous because all the women you’ve assaulted “deserved” it.
Imagine if serial killers and child rapists could start identify as being “innocent” and that was respected too?
“Identity” is an insult to the brutality of reality.
Reality is that almost 100 percent of those convicted of sexual violence are male—98 percent to be exact. In UK prisons, almost half of those who identify with synthetic sex identities have been convicted of sexual offenses.
There is not a female prisoner on earth who deserves the punishment of being housed with Dana Rivers, a psychopathic, revenge-obsessed male who has already taken the lives of two women and their family.
I ask you: How many more women does Rivers have to kill before all the requests to be “kind” becomes a little too much for all of us to bear?
The Greatest Trick the Pornsick Man Ever Played Was Demanding That His Public Acting Out of Sexual Kinks Was Actually a “Civil Rights” Issue
“#Pornhelped me understand my gender deviant mindfreak is healthy & sane and delightfully irrational” Dana Rivers wrote on Twitter on February 2, 2010.
A few days after that he wrote, “6-8% of Americans addicted to porn? huh….”
In 2014, four years after this homage to porn as great liberator, three pornographic books appeared on Amazon under the byline of “Dana Rivers.”
Keep in mind: Anyone can publish under any name they want on Amazon, but I contacted both the prosecutor and Amazon itself about these books and neither disputed they were written by the actual Dana Rivers.
Let me tell you about these writings. Because they are about as far from “healthy & sane” as it is possible to get.
These three sick books—two of which are still up on Amazon, available for sale, one of which was removed after I sent a press inquiry two weeks ago—give great insight into a porn-deranged man who utterly despises women and thralls at their brutal degradation.
The following content from them I’m about to summarize is very upsetting, but bringing evil out of cover of darkness is a necessary act at times.
Book 1: CeCe’s Day At The Office.
In this story a woman named Cecilia is the president of a shipping company and is forced into extreme sexual degradation and blackmail—commonly called sextortion—by a man who had previously been her personal assistant named Jeff.
It is the one story of Rivers that has been taken down by Amazon and is the most revealing in its descriptions of male-on-female violence and rape.
It starts with the hero of the story, Jeff, asking Cecilia who had been his boss, “Is little Miss Pwesident ready to go to work?”
“Normally an impeccably polished woman in her forties, Cecilia always wore designer labels that flattered her $200 haircuts and $150 specialty manicures. But today, Cecilia was not polished. Her hair was a mess and her face red with shame-faced anger. But the pink pacifier in her mouth only made her anger into a cute pout. And instead of her designer labels, she was currently tangled in a cheap cotton nightgown that had twisted around her during the night and was now revealing the thick diaper between her legs.”
Jeff had long hoped for a house to “someday fall on his witch boss” and was now forcing her into sexual degradation. Jeff asks if “little CeCe wet herself” and feels “himself stir” as he says that “Daddy can change you.”
Rivers writes that he “had always wanted to diaper someone. All of his previous girlfriends had balked at his requests to baby them.” Now with his hostage CeCe, “Jeff knew he had finally found his little girl, willing or no.”
When he first confronted her she responds “haughtily” but when he reveals what he knows, Jeff enjoys this “game of cat and mouse” and Cecilia is a “shadow of her haughty self.”
He continues sexually torturing her (“he had fed her three full bottles of apple juice and then had locked the bedroom door, confident that CeCe would have no choice but to piss in her diapers that night”) and tells her:
“Don’t you get huffy with Daddy. Remember the rules. Rule 1: always be loving to Daddy. Rule 2: Diapers must always be worn.”
He proceeds to molest her and comments that her vagina is surprisingly “pink and taut for a woman her age.” He continues to molest her and “could feel his cock hardening with each cry.”
He can “see angry tears gathering at her lashes” and continues to “brush her hair back, knowing it made her feel helpless and small.”
As the woman is beaten, Rivers writes, “The sounds of her cries along with the feel of slapping her ass was making Jeff feel a growing tightness in his pants.”
Eventually, he molests her again.
“He refastened the diaper and pulled CeCe up onto his lap, adjusting her so she didn’t sit on top of his erection. Face blotchy and tearstained, Jeff brushed back her hair and soothed her....He could feel the stiffness in her body as he infantilized her, making him smile in pleasure at her discomfort.”
When she is sexually humiliated in front of her peers, Rivers writes:
“Ready to choke on his laughter, Jeff quickly followed his little girl out.”
He grips her arm and watches “her face crumple and fall with her powerlessness.” At this point he recalls when she was an “ice queen” so now deserves to be raped and molested.
“Now,” Jeff said, still holding onto her arm, “apologize to Daddy unless you want to get spanked again.” Seeing the sudden flush of pink rise against her cheeks, Jeff swallowed a laugh. So easily aroused this woman was becoming to his control. He shook her. “What do you say to Daddy?”
Then the receptionist Michelle is welcomed into the office and asked to participate in the molestation and rape of Cecilia, and “Jeff watched the two women, feeling a growing heat stiffen between his legs.”
When she tries to get away, he berates her for “being such an ungrateful little girl.” He pulls out a thin gold metal nameplate for Michelle to use in spanking Cecilia’s vagina. As Cecilia begins crying, “Jeff didn’t think his cock could get any harder” and he declares, “Daddy’s little girl is quite the pain slut, isn’t she?”
Then Jeff rapes Cecilia repeatedly.
Again, this is the one story of Rivers Amazon has so far taken down.
Book 2: Lori’s Big Day.
This story begins with the rapist stepfather committing incest by molesting his 19-year-old daughter. The big twist in the story is that the rapist abuser is also a teacher.
Rivers was also a teacher. (He is also a father, but his poor daughter ought never to be brought into her father’s life nor will I engage in doing so here outside of acknowledging this fact and reiterating to leave her entirely alone as any child deserves.)
In this story—which is still up on Amazon—the daughter is forced to wear a diaper and tells her father that she wet herself. “Daddy’s eyes darkened in knowing pleasure,” Rivers writes.
Then the story describes how Lori was supposed to go to college but instead she is acclimated to the psychological gaslighting and torture of her abusive stepfather. Rivers writes:
“It was only within the last month that Daddy had really pushed to make Lori his complete ‘little girl.’ Before, Daddy was just an overprotective figure in her life who took care of her and her diapers. But within the last few weeks, bibs and bottles and children’s clothes started flooding her life.”
The teenager is forced to wear a small white t-shirt with hearts and a short fluffy pink tutu that reveals her diaper. When she begins crying he responds “quite stern,” with “shadows of anger darkening his expression.” He forces her to sit on her lap, violently physically and sexually assaults her then says, “Now you know Daddy does not like disobedient little girls.” She is humiliated in public, where he delights in mortifying both the sales associate and the daughter he’s raping by saying that he’s shopping for a crib.
“As she and Daddy passed by other shoppers, people would stop and stare at Lori. Many of the women pointed and whispered, looking directly at Lori’s face then at her diaper that was so thick it made her waddle.”
He forces his daughter into the crib in the store. Rivers writes:
“Daddy looked down at her with a deeply satisfied look….Lori looked up into his eyes, dark with pleasure.”
When a friend named Katie recognizes Lori from school, this is when we learn that the father is a professor at school known as “Professor Daniels” and Katie is confused seeing her friend. Rivers writes:
“Lori thought that if it were possible to die from shame she would most certainly drop dead at this moment….Lori knew that within hours, her entire graduating class would know about Lori Daniels wearing diapers and drinking from baby bottles.”
When they return home, the father tells his victim of incest and rape and psychological torture that he is “proud” of her, rapes her again and ends with the rapist father asking who his little girl is, her responding that it is her and “knowing that it was a truth that ran deep into her core.”
Book 3: His Disciplined Ones.
The final story is about another abusive rapist teacher.
Professor Hunter is running a research project lab and is cruel to a man named Alexis but nice to the lab tech Christian who is treated as the “golden child.”
When Alexis tries to get Professor Hunter’s attention, the professor rebukes him and Christian asks, “Do you really want Professor Hunter’s attention?”
Then Christian drives Alexis to a house, where he hears a voice call out. It is the professor’s voice. Christian replies, “Yes, Daddy! It’s me!” The professor asks what he’s brought home, and he says, “I brought home a friend, Daddy. He said he would really like some of your special attention.” Christian says that he had an accident. The professor takes off Christian’s diaper bordered with blue bunnies and molests the student. The professor says that he’s had his eye on Alexis, “But my special attention is given only to very special students. And these special students are the special little boys who know how to make Daddy happy.”
The professor then asks the student if he’d like to “join our family.” The professor says that Chrissy will be a “good brother” and that he just needs to make sure he “really is a good little boy.” First he tells him that he made a big mistake by trying to “show off your report to Daddy.” Then he asks the student to bend over and tells him that “in this house, we spank bare bottom.”
When the victim is pinned, Rivers writes about “the mercy of his power.”
Dana Rivers Was an Abuser Right’s Activist
Throughout his lifetime, Dana Rivers’ abuse and his relentless full-throated activism to re-frame and mainstream his abuse as a “civil rights issue” was unflagging.
“These people did not silence me,” Rivers wrote of his enemies who did not want a predatory male talking about sex in the classroom to vulnerable minors. “They did not make me go away. They did not prevail.”
Back in 2016 when word got out that he had been arrested, a user on Reddit wrote a post titled “I think (the) Dana Rivers was just arrested for murdering a lesbian couple and their adopted son.”
One commenter immediately piped in to defend the celebrated activist.
“It’s hard to call her a bad person,” the user wrote in R/Transgender, “without knowing what, if anything, these people did to her first.”
Dana Rivers was like the original LibsofTikTok teacher, if such a thing had been around in in 1999.
It was then, when he was still David Warfield, that the imposing, super-macho teacher told a classroom full of young students that he had been “sodomized” as a kid, that “he always felt he was a woman trapped in a man’s body” and that “he was going to be changing into a woman in the fall.”
Because of such abusive and predatory behavior—no teacher should ever discuss such details with their students…obviously—he was let go after eight years of service.
Then, after David had multiple surgeries to achieve his desired fetish-affirming synthetic sex identity and rechristened himself as Dana, the Navy vet then leveraged his termination into a $150,000 settlement and fawning media attention.
On his website, when discussing his diagnosis of gender dysphoria, he says that if anyone has a problem with it, “don’t expect a big debate from this girl.”
A press release about Rivers later that year had him practically vibrating with his newfound celebrity.
“To be honest,” he said. “I love it.”
He went on, relishing every name-drop, every appearance, every star-studded anecdote.
“It’s been fun,” he said, “a bit overwhelming and very rewarding to have so much attention paid to my situation. A book and movie are being considered. I actually had Diane Sawyer and a producer from Oprah Winfrey on the phone at the same time a few weeks ago. People magazine named me one of the 25 most intriguing people of 1999, and Jane magazine named me one of the Gutsiest Women of the Year….I’ll take the coffee spills on my carpet and broken bathroom door that happened the day 20/20’s camera crew invaded my house, if the result is more respect.”
In a speech at Capitol Mall in April of 2000, Dana Rivers bellowed to a crowd of half a million people, “My problems are your problems. What happened to me can happen to you.”
My problems are your problems.
Four months later, he took his activism one step farther—publishing an anti-lesbian article protesting the women-only policy at the legendary lesbian music festival known as Michfest, a festival so sacred and unrivaled women are still mourning its passing now even though it hasn’t been around since 2015 when it ended.
Dana Rivers protested the women-only festival unapologetically because women saying no was unacceptable to him. No. This was bigotry to him. It was a civil rights violation.
“Any rule that would exclude me from the community,” he wrote in the 2000 piece, “is intolerable to me.”
Which is why he was a member of Camp Trans, a group so terrifying that the U.S. Forestry Service stopped granting it permits because of violence.
Rivers couldn’t resist adding in his essay, comparing himself to these women around him that “it was obvious to me and to them that I was more female than they were.”
Rivers’ crucial role in Camp Trans is illuminating. He was a celebrity, known as the renowned activist Dana Rivers.”
Rivers and his fellow men would patrol the grounds armed with weapons to scare women into submission and compliance with their demands to invade their space.
They were unrelenting in their anti-women abuse—and their activism to do so.
One particularly revolting flyer left for lesbians featured a a man with a synthetic sex identity on the cover whose erect penis dominated the page, underneath the words “REAL WOMEN HAVE COCKS.”
The letter read:
“Second-Wave ‘Feminists,’ A hot load from my monstrous tranny-cock embodies womanhood more than the pieces of menstrual art your transphobic cunts could ever hope to create. Love, Womyn-born-Monsters.”
Another attendee recounted attending a pre-orgasmic workshop, filled largely filled with women healing from male sexual predation, and a man with a synthetic sex identity described graphically “using a cock ring to beat his meat.” When the attendees were traumatized, he laughed, said he volunteers at a rape crisis center and said he snuck into the fest because “Michfest was made for queer women to celebrate their shared sisterhood and give each other lots of orgasms” and that he wanted to find a lesbian to have sex with.
Another lesbian Michfest-goer added, “Trans women were running through the woods showing festival-goers their junk and screaming at the gate. There were totally nude trans women in the showers, and women at the festival didn’t want to shower or take children in there. There was also some incidents of people masturbating in public and screaming obscenities.”
One intimidated female attendee was harassed by several men who followed her on a path and said, “How does it feel to be the last one out late at night?” and shone flashlights in her eyes.
In a Tumblr post detailing these incidents one woman writes:
“To every transactivist calling me transphobic: yes i fucking am transphobic, i’m scared of y’all.”
Reading Michfest founder Lisa Vogel’s compassionate, measured, almost J.K. Rowling-and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie-esque words from 2000 about the terror Rivers and Camp Trans was spreading is shocking.
Like Rowling and Adichie, Vogel supports trans-identified rights. But nowhere, she sanely makes clear, should those rights ever include the right to destroy single-sex spaces. That is clearly and inherently an abusive demand.
“The Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival remains clear and firm in our commitment to maintain the Festival as womyn-born womyn space. At the same time, we stand as allies with the trans community and refuse to be forced into false dichotomies that equate being pro-womyn-born womyn space with being anti-trans.
“We believe the greater queer community is strong enough to support separate space for all affinity groups. There are times all oppressed communities need separate spaces, even away from their allies. The Festival community learned this in the creation of a separate and honored Womyn of Color space. We call upon the transsexual community to respect and support the community of Michigan, which by its very definition is separate space for womyn-born womyn.”
Womyn-born womyn…like Charlotte Reed and her wife Patricia Wright, both longtime Michfest attendees.
Reading Rivers’ words from 2000 mocking and threatening the women of the festival who dared keep him out—his writing drips with barely contained condescending rage.
“While I truly have compassion for Lisa’s desire to protect her festival from male energy, I knew…her line was marked in an inappropriate place,” he wrote. “She was keeping out [men] who needed and wanted to be inside.”
A few weeks ago now, as the Rivers trial concluded before the jury returned a guilty verdict on all three murders, the prosecutors revealed a meme that Rivers had kept on his phone—right before he murdered Charlotte Reed and her entire family and set fire to their home.
It showed a burning house.
“Mess with a biker chick,” the meme read, “and she’ll burn your house down.”
Six years earlier, when he was first arrested, the police asked Dana Rivers what could have caused him to do this—was it his motorcycle club?
“This has nothing to do with that,” he replied.
“This was personal.”
Top 3 Rabbitholed Takeaways:
#1 Gender Ideology is actively harming women and trying to gaslight, dominate, threaten and terrorize them into submission so they will accept their abuse and like it, too.
Let me quote from the Harvard Law Review-published Kara Dansky’s essential book The Abolition of Sex to put a finer point on it:
The entire English language is being manipulated and twisted in order to obscure the reality of sex. In June 2021, the Biden administration replaced the word “mothers” with the words “birthing people” in a section of a budget proposal regarding infant mortality. In a guide on “Safer Sex for Trans Bodies,” the Human Rights Campaign urges readers to refer to a vagina as a “front hole” and to a penis as a “strapless…”
That our language has changed so dramatically as to make the natural, material reality of sex nearly invisible, with so little public debate, is astounding… If we cannot talk about sex, we cannot talk about sexism. If we cannot talk about sexism, we cannot fight back against it.
Equally insidious is the fact that when you betray material reality and when you participate in your own gaslighting and cognitive dissonance, the demoralization and confusion and despair will set in soon after.
Maybe 2+2 is 5?
No. You know it is not.
Psychopaths exhibit “fearless dominance” and glee at making you repeat fundamental Emperor’s New Clothes-style lies for this exact reason. They relish your submission.
With the first concession, the next is so much easier.
“No” is a complete sentence.
You owe no one anything.
#2 Trans-identified men and trans-identified women’s rights are human rights, 100 percent. But the “rights” Dana Rivers fought for are abuser’s rights. They have nothing to do with fighting discrimination and for equality.
There has been a wholesale terror instilled in the public, media, celebrities, politicians and beyond that any criticism of a trans-identified person is equivalent to bigotry and genocide. It is one of the most widespread mass propaganda campaigns we’ve ever seen in our lifetimes, and it is stunning and educational to watch it unfold.
A more dishonest framing could not be imagined if you hired the most brilliant think-tanks in all the world.
Almost everyone knows the framing not to be true, but it is not the truth that matters anymore. Terror instead reigns supreme. It is what people think that other people might think that matters. It is fear. It is quite simply fear and the terror of the effects of simulated majority sentiment.
“Most Americans across the political spectrum are not going to go along with this,” Kara Dansky told me about the truth finally getting out there. “That’s specifically why the media shuts us out of the discussion.”
No one can change sex. No one. Even that most ideologically captured of all search engines—Google—agrees.
Of course every human being deserves full human rights and civil rights and dignity—always, no exceptions, including and especially those with synthetic sex identities.
But here are some crucial distinctions to make so that you are not actually fighting for the rights of abusers. Consider:
Sexual entitlement is not a civil right.
Sexual abuse is not a civil right.
Sexual exhibitionism and indecent exposure is not a civil right.
Sexual encroachment on women-only spaces and words and realities by men is not a civil right.
Sexual colonization of womanhood, distortion of science, decimation of women’s sports and women’s safety in prisons and rape shelters and hospitals is not a civil right nor is compelled lying requiring people to ignore their instincts and material reality.
No man—regardless of how many surgeries he’s paid for or how many synthetic drugs he has ingested—deserves the ability to destroy the rights and boundaries and realities and safety and survival of millions of women who are screaming, shouting, begging, pleading, fighting: No! No! No!
Even if it was just one woman, she would matter, that woman.
But there are so many women fighting this poisonous cult.
Let me briefly highlight three.
Much of the reporting I’ve relied upon in this piece has come from a writer named Genevieve Gluck who wrote this excellent Reduxx article about Dana Rivers here. Gluck is one of the foremost writers about women’s issues, and her piece features reaction from criminal justice lawyer and the president of the U.S. chapter of Women’s Declaration International, Kara Dansky, the astoundingly brave criminal justice lawyer who has almost single-handedly made sure that this widely censored case—the Dana Rivers story—is not forgotten.
Dansky has written an excellent book, The Abolition of Sex, which in it also mentions the incisive work Gluck has done writing about the near-weaponized, hyper-proliferation of pornography and its links to “synthetic sex identities,” a term that is preferable to “trans” which often seeks to invalidate biological sex.
“Synthetic sex identities” was coined by preeminent researcher Jennifer Bilek.
They, along with the scores of women who are increasingly speaking out—from academics to nurses to comedians to authors to journalists to mothers to artists—despite brutal pushback from men’s rights activists, all deserve your whole-hearted support and even more than that your voice and your courage.
#3 Those advocating for sadistic, racist, lesbian-murdering spree killers are telling exactly what and who they are and just how fully sinister their agenda is.
It’s hard to imagine anyone loudly protesting on behalf of Dana Rivers’ rights to be locked up with vulnerable women following his heartless slaying of a black and white lesbian couple and their adopted black son.
But that’s exactly what happened this week.
As the sentencing phase for Rivers began, on Monday, Kara Dansky and several other women held a protest out in the cold near Alameda County Jail, holding up two purple signs that read: “No men in women’s prisons.”
Don’t treat women worse than prisoners of war. Don’t support the violating of humanitarian law to support hate-crime-committing spree killers.
It seems simple, doesn’t it?
Well, not to Dana Rivers’ supporters, fans, advocates and cheerleaders for his right to be locked up with terrified women who don’t want this madman anywhere near them.
In the middle of Dansky’s protest, acting just like his hero Dana Rivers and in a move that would have made the killer proud, one psychopath violently smashed an egg full-throttle into the side of the former ACLU lawyer’s face.
Violence. Assault. Terrorism. All in honor of a triple murderer.
And those flags that the women were carrying to protest the brutality being enacted upon their fellow women? Violently ripped away and stolen. A robbery that was soon after boasted about and celebrated, with the signs eventually lit on fire and posed with, Abu Ghraib style.
Abusers, all of them.
They would have made Dana Rivers so proud.