Islamists, according to a couple of social media posts we will examine, define a woman as that half of the human race that has a vagina, and further, that it is there to be penetrated at will.
Read more Iran’s mullahs: Time to take the gloves off
Leftists simply can’t define what a woman is. Their perceptions on a whole host of other things are twisted as well, and we will explore them forthwith.
What is clear is that radical leftism and ordinary Islamism are evil and must be defeated. Below, we’ll analyze a few examples of why which recently crossed my social media wake and left me slack-jawed.
What the below posts make obvious is that we really do live in alternate realities from the left and Islamists. Our perceptions of things, our definitions of things, are so different as to be not merely oil and water but oil and… granite. At least oil and water are both liquids. We can’t even get close enough for that. And if we are to survive as a free people, we need to understand one another. We have to agree on certain things being true/not true.
Is there gravity?
Yes.
Do we observe it here on earth?
Yes.
Stuff like that. Basic stuff. We must mutually agree on the basics if not for reasons of mutual detente, then for oppositional defeat. Given that we can’t even seem to agree on what a woman is or is for, defeat — that of us over them — is the most rational goal. Here is but a small sample of the kind of twisted thinking we are dealing with.
Invaders in Ceuta are now openly admitting that if there are girls among them, they will be raped.
— 𝐍𝐢𝐨𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐠 🇮🇷 ✡︎ (@NiohBerg) August 30, 2026
They blame this on the parents, not the rapists.
“It’s her parents fault that we raped her” is the logic they go with.
Meaning, these migrant men don’t see rape as wrong, but… pic.twitter.com/TByXo7dDfm
That kind of thinking came from the Islamist mindset on display in the X post below. The Islamist speaking presents as twisted a definition of “freedom” as you will ever hear.
He actually makes the argument that if a woman chooses not to wear hijab, that that is her “freedom” of choice so it is therefore his “freedom” of choice to rape her.
“If women are free to dress as they please, then men should be free to rape them. How can you be free and we not be free?.”
— Diana Alastair💚🤍💜 ⚢ ❌❌✡️ (@sappholives83) August 28, 2026
This, ladies and gentlemen, is Islam. pic.twitter.com/GhWKMTlWpw
He actually says: “How can [she] be free and he not be free? How can freedom be for [her] and not for us?” The English translation in the video’s captions was clunky and unformatted, so I did the best I could to provide a full transcript (emphasis is mine):
[W]hy is it that the person who wants to harass women, to commit rape, you do not give him freedom? You must give him freedom, right? He himself has chosen to harass everyone to whomever he wishes. This message is the same comment that you see [referring to a post on his phone]. It is the comment that was posted under the hijab post. It says [he reads from his phone] people themselves chose to come out this way. [End of reading.] Well this is saying, sir, it’s freedom then. How do you see your freedom? You don’t see the freedom of someone who likes to rape someone else. Oh how do you say there that the law must stop that but if there is a law for your behavior so that you don’t come out naked and bare either. Don’t come out half-naked with a short manteau and a top and shorts and things like that. This shouldn’t stop this one but stop the one who is, for example, committing rape, creating harassment, go stop him. How can you be free and he not be free? How can freedom be for you and not for us? Actually, I also want to come out with my family, you are taking away our freedom….
I think it’s fair to say we have two comprehensively different definitions of freedom. I think it’s also fair to say we have two radically different minimum thresholds for acceptable behavior from men in civilized society as well. His is, quite frankly, savage. Barely above that of an animal, if that.
Read more Pheromone-Maxxing bros are trying to seduce the reluctant Gen Z chicks
Another bit of unreality I came across this morning was from a purely American leftist point of view. And like our Islamist friend above, this lefty’s assertions were gravity-defying.
You’ll be unsurprised to find it came from The New Republic magazine, as reliably a lefty sewer as there is. I made the unfortunate choice to click on a link to it and boy howdy, was it an experience to read. Someone should have warned me to bring my wings and an oxygen mask as I spent so much time in the outer atmosphere.
Written by a deputy editor Jason Linkins, the title of the piece is “Democrats: Make peace with becoming a little radical”. Some of the assertions from the article are as follows:
- “Democrats are typically averse to any sort of politicking that seems divisive.”
- “[Democrats] prefer to work in comity with their Republican colleagues—even the feral ones we have today.”
- “History teaches us that Democrats don’t really have the yen for accountability….”
- “Democrats need to be less like [milquetoast] Merrick Garland and more like newly minted Minnesota Senate nominee Peggy Flanagan, who has vowed to ‘avenge’ her state.”
- “Democrats would prefer a gentler and more thoughtful brand of politics and that they see uncommon virtue in finding common ground… But America’s Trumpian trajectory will not be gently turned aside.”
- “[Democrats must] shed… themselves of the tendency to seek bipartisanship (looking at you, Hakeem!)….”
- “[Democrats must get] the public… used to hearing talk about abolishing ICE, packing the Supreme Court, hiring the next generation of public servants, and tearing down Trump’s vanity projects.”
Where does one begin?
I’m struggling to come up with a single example, however small, of Hakeem Jeffries leading his conference into “working in comity” with their “feral” Republican colleagues even once. I can’t summon a single one. Quite the opposite in fact!
And “feral”? Oh, how I wish Republicans were feral. If anything, they’ve been as tame as the Democrats have been bold regarding the Trump agenda! Aside from the One Big Beautiful Bill, what has the Senate passed that’s been a marquee item on the Trump agenda? The House has been grinding out bill after bill, but I can’t think of a thing the Senate has taken up that was a featured Trump campaign promise.
And exactly what history “teaches” them that Democrats haven’t a “yen” for “accountability”? Merrick Garland’s D.O.J. was as aggressive as any D.O.J. in history in pursuing a former president. We’d never seen anything like it in our nation’s entire lifetime and this… person, this liberal puke at TNR, thinks Garland wasn’t aggressive enough? Why? Because Trump’s not in prison?
And are they really going to “tear down” the ballroom? Really??
The entire article was astonishing. He even complained about the treatment Democrats get in the media!
How do we even begin to have any kind of peace with these people when our views on simple reality are so divergent?
How do we even begin to fix this?
Again, if we are to survive as a free people, we have to be able to agree on certain things being true/not true. We don’t have to like it — whatever “it” is — but we’ll never be able to coexist in peace if we can’t understand one another past “hello” — if we even get that far.
I wish I had answers for you. I do not. What I can do is make you aware of the depth and breadth of the unreality problem so you are not gobsmacked the next time you try to reason with your college-aged niece or nephew or that 60s burnout relative at a family barbecue. They’re coming from the outer atmosphere, and you’d better bring oxygen.
M. Walter blogs at www.mwalterwriter.com where you can find The Lunatic Left Series, a (near) daily snapshot of Democrat words and deeds so you can see what they’re up to without having to go hip-deep in their toxic brew. You’re welcome 😉
Read more To hell and back: Venezuela’s quarter century journey
Image generated by ChatGPT.