This example shows how utterly cynical Kristin Du Mez (@kkdumez) really is:
She starts out snarkily "face palming" a valentines card that says "my husband is sexy and saved," but immediately drops the sarcastic tone when she finds out the card is marketed toward Black people...
When she finds out the card is marketed to black people, she drops the snark and says: "Super interesting to me to consider ways this informs the meaning these words carry."
How does the meaning of "My husband is sexy and saved" change based on the race of who got the card?
The answer is that it doesn't. See, there are two things happening here:
1. Kristin Du Mez likes to attribute bad motives and cringey ideas to people she doesn't like (White conservative evangelicals) and give charitable interpretations to people she does like (everyone else)...
and 2. Kristin Dumez knows she's on the bottom of the woke oppression hierarchy (straight, thin, able-bodied, middle class, blonde, blue-eyed white woman) and doesn't want to run afoul of black women like Beth Allison Barr did in a thread I did here:
1/ For those watching the Kershnar thing unfold and are wondering about why the right, who have taken up the cause of free speech, are apparantly trying to get Dr. Kershnar fired.
I will explain very breifly:
2/ The answer is, in short, children.
The liberal right is, for the most part, willing to tolerate all kinds of speech to varying degrees...unless they think that it harms children.
If they think what someone says will directly harm their kids they absolutely lose their minds.
3/ It isn't that they go literally crazy, it's that if they think you are harming their child, or are advocating for harming their child, they will turn on you like a pack of jackels.
They do not care about whatever highminded reasons you might have for your behaviour.....
1/ 1n 1989, The New York Times ran an article explaining that:
-Marxism was mainstreaming in U.S, colleges. (pic 1)
-Marxism was mixing with feminism, deconstruction and race theory (pics 2+3)
-The Marxists were surprised at how easy it was for them in Universities.(pic 4)
2/ Here is a link to the entire article.
Keep in mind this article was published on October 25th 1989, just 16 days before the fall of the Berlin wall on November 9th, 1989 and a little more than 2 years before the USSR dissolved on December 25, 1991. nytimes.com/1989/10/25/us/…
3/ You see, in the late 80's the academic left in America wasted no time in rehabilitating the political philosophy that created both the Gulag concentration camps and the Holodomor (the intentional starving of at least 3 Million Ukrainians by the Soviet Union)...
2/ Woke activists operate through reputational destruction. Their strategy is to accuse you of being violent and doing harm while tarring you as a "racist," "sexist," "bigot," "homophobe," or "white supremacist."
They have no good arguments, so they attack your character.
3/ Another tactic is to have a double standard in regards to judging a protest.
They insist woke protests be judged by the best intentions of the most articulate protestor, and non-woke protests be judged by the actions of the worst person who happens to show up at the protest.
1/ Woke education activists have decided that during math class *5th graders* should learn to, and I quote: "challenge the hegemonic structure of marriage."
It's not just Critical Race Theory, they're bringing woke gender theory into k-12
Gender theory in k-12:
a thread🧵
2/ This comes from a paper by Christopher Dubbs, education professor at East Stroudsburg University.
Dubbs wants k-12 teachers to use queer pedagogy (teaching methods) and to engage in "Queering Mathematics."
The key words for the paper are, of course, "equity" and "diversity"
3/ I will explain everything going on here so you can understand exactly what's happening.
Most people think the goal of a math teacher in k-12 is to teach math: to teach students how to do addition, subtraction, multiplication and division.
1/ I know most of you aren't Christians but in this argument between @DennyBurk and @bethallisonbarr, beth provides a perfect example of "linguistic sleight of hand."
Beth goes after @DennyBurk for saying she denied "inerrancy" (the idea the Bible contains no errors of any kind)
2/ @bethallisonbarr claimed @DennyBurk was not being honest (pic 1) so Denny came with receipts and explained why he said she denies inerrancy.
This is where the *sleight of hand* comes in.
NOTE THAT THE DISAGREEMENT IS ABOUT **INERRANCY**
That word *INERRANCY* matters here...
3/ Because look what she says next:
-commitment to biblical authority
-the bible is divinely inspired
-it's is God-breathed
-it's useful for teaching, correction, and training in righteousness
- she beleives it
- she affirms the gospel.
2/ "Critical Social Justice" (CSJ) was clearly defined in the book "Is Everyone Really Equal?" by Ozlom Sensoy and Robin Diangelo. That definition, and it's explanation, are in the screenshot below.
saying CSJ a "made-up term" that "doesn't mean much" is simply false.
3/ The authors of that book are not unheard of either. Robin Diangelo is a tremendously influential scholar whose book "White Fragility" spent at least **97WEEKS ON THE NEW YORK TIMES BEST SELLER LIST**, and her work has been cited thousands of times by academics: