click to watch
In April 2017, Glamour magazine named Pitzer College senior Eli Erlick one of their “College Women of the Year,” the first time a transgender person (born male) was chosen for this honor. A few months later, one of Erlick’s former classmates, a woman who has since undergone “top surgery” (radical mastectomy) to become “transmale” wrote a Tumblr post accusing Erlick of rape — “fisting someone and making them bleed without their consent.” Erlick is co-founder of Trans Student Educational Resources (TSER), “a national youth-led organization dedicated to transforming the educational environment for trans students through advocacy and empowerment,” and a member of the national advisory council for GLSEN, “which works to create LGBTQ-inclusive schools.”
Erlick’s accuser, Danie Yun Diamond, says she “was a Board Member, Program Director, and Grant Writer for TSER during my year and a half+ long emotionally, sexually, and financially abusive relationship with its executive director Eli Erlick.” Diamond says she was “emotionally manipulated into a vulnerable position” and “pursued relentlessly” by Erlick, finally deciding “it was easier to give in to being raped than deal with your pursuit.” She told Erlick she “still has traumatic flashbacks and nightmares about what you’ve done,” and said Erlick exploited TSER, “preying” on other young members of the transgender community.
Somewhere, I’m sure, feminists are trying to blame “patriarchy” for this, but whose idea was it to create pro-LGBT “safe spaces” on college campuses, using claims of societal “homophobia” as an excuse to gather all the sexually confused students together in one group? No, you don’t get to blame “patriarchy” for the predictable consequences of such misguided policies. Celebrating deviance in the name of “progress” and “equality,” creating campus organizations that gave power to “student leaders” like Eli Erlick, and prohibiting criticism of these pro-LGBT policies as “hate” — what did college officials think would happen?
Sexual abuse can occur in every sort of environment, and the #MeToo movement has exposed such abuses in Hollywood, in politics, in media. However, even as these revelations have destroyed careers and shattered illusions of celebrity “glamour,” political correctness has continued to prohibit criticism of systemic problems in the LGBT community. Especially in the context of higher education, we have seen claims of a “rape epidemic” used to demonize male students and deny them due process in campus disciplinary proceedings, and even hoaxes (e.g., the fictional gang-rape at the University of Virginia) perpetrated as part of this feminist propaganda crusade. By promoting the myth that heterosexual males are universally complicit in sexual abuse, to such an extent that heterosexuality and “rape culture” are made to seem synonymous, feminists have helped foster an obverse mythology — the belief that abuse never occurs within the LGBT community.
Go read the accusations against Eli Erlick and ask yourself: Why would college administrators encourage psychologically disturbed young people to create campus groups to celebrate their mental illness? Doesn’t it seem obvious — as a matter of common sense — that allowing the lunatics to run the asylum, so to speak, creates inevitable risks? Such a vortex of insanity will attract dangerously unstable people. Yet this is what seems to have happened at Pitzer College, which is part of the Claremont Colleges network, along with Claremont McKenna College, Harvey Mudd College, Pomona College and Scripps College.
Parents pay more than $65,000 a year to send their children to Claremont. For that price, you might expect administrators to protect students from a campus “leader” accused of “fisting someone and making them bleed without their consent.” However, the academic elite’s devotion to creating an “inclusive” campus means that sadistic perverts are protected from criticism in the name of “diversity.”
Perhaps readers will not be surprised to learn that one of the TSER projects that Erlick and Diamond worked on together was a “Model Admissions Policy on Transgender Students at Women’s Colleges.”
I was 18 and a genderqueer-identifying man who had never pursued any kind of transition raped my best friend, a woman unacquainted with insular trans community politics. I had indirectly introduced her to this guy via mutual friends. After the rape, she told me what he did; I had been in the next room the whole night, awake, talking to someone I didn’t even like. I had no idea it was happening. When she let our mutual friends know, we both assumed they would have her back; after all, they referred to their apartment as a safe space for rape survivors. But instead, her rapist changed his pronouns on Tumblr, claimed to have schizophrenia, and then said that he couldn’t possibly have raped her, because of the power dynamics between a “cis” woman and a transwoman. He moved back to LA a few months later, without ever taking any steps towards transition. When he got there, he told his old friends he wasn’t schizophrenic or trans anymore.
Excuse me for being prejudiced in favor of good old-fashioned heterosexuality, but am I the only one who suspects what’s happening here is that so-called “pro-sex feminism” — which encourages promiscuity as “empowerment” — has yielded a predictable backlash? Girls are identifying as transgender and getting their breasts amputated because they don’t want to be what this kind of feminism tells them a woman must be. Furthermore, many boys become so confused and demoralized, haunted by a sense of sexual inadequacy, that they lose hope of ever having normal relationships with girls. Toxic cultural influences have left many young people, male and female alike, without the kind of healthy self-confidence necessary to social success.