https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/police-investigating-assault-of-trans-student-at-hopkins-high-school-as-possible-hate-crime/
I've commented previously about the inherent conflicts between various factions in the DFL electoral coalition, and how those factions often have interests that directly conflict. Over the last week, we've seen one example starting to unfold at a local high school.
Basically what happened is that a "transgender woman" (biological male) had to take a leak between classes and chose not to use the gender inclusive pissoir, but instead to use the bathroom for biological male students. At some point during his sojourn in the pissoir, another student saw him and made disparaging comments to him. Things escalated from there and the "trans" student escalated from there resulting in significant injury.
Before I go on, I have to say that there is no question that the "trans" student was a victim of a crime, and that the perpetrator should be punished appropriately regardless of the status of the victim. There is no reason why this sort of physical attack should be tolerated.
But, and there's always a but, isn't there?
It appears that, despite the best efforts of the school to confirm, that the attacker is black. Now it gets interesting. We have one victim class person attacked by another victim class person and reports of both racist and anti-ABC comments being made.
https://alphanews.org/black-student-group-says-full-story-not-being-told-about-hopkins-trans-attack/
The other day, the black students association released a statement that muddied the waters even more, especially their line about a "dangerous narrative about our black scholars". I also find it interesting that the BSA wants to give "fearless black LGBTQ+ leaders" a great deal of credit for being responsible for "pride month".
In short, it's going to be fascinating to watch this conflict between dueling victim groups, each vying for a higher spot on the pyramid of victim hood. I'm sure there will be protests, knowing the leftists up here probably violent or at least threatening violence, and vitriol thrown back and forth. To find out whether calling someone a "faxxxt" or a "nxxxxr" is more provoking and if a "trans" kid calling a black kid "nxxxxr" justifies him getting punched.
What's interesting at this point is the MSM trying to keep the race of the aggressor out of the story despite the BSA pushing to make it an issue.
The left has done this to themselves by justifying and encouraging violence when one of the "victim" groups hears offensive words, but in this case, they're both members of the victim class.
2 comments:
Is it wrong to enjoy the spectacle? This seems like a comeuppance of both leftist factions. It's like watching the NBA Finals without having one's own team in the contest. But instead of having a hard time deciding which team one would like to see win, I'm having a hard time deciding which of these two nefarious groups I'd like most to see lose.
Absolutely not. Especially considering that those involved have no clue that this sort of clash was inevitable. The fact that the left set this up with their "punch a NAZI" bullshit a few years ago, makes it better. If, in fact, the N word was used by the "trans" dude, then the black dude was perfectly OK to punch the "trans" dude. At least according to the "punch" the oppressor rule.
I saw one release by the BSA which complained about this incident pushing the narrative that blacks are inherently violent or something like that.
It's going to be a shit show, especially if it goes to court. There will likely be immense pressure on both dudes to keep this out of a courtroom if at all possible.
Post a Comment