It tickles me to no end when I see students radicalized by woke teachers and professors, getty uppity about the Biden regime. Even in New Hampshire, where we’ve not seen the vitriol and violence from which years of progressive inculcation stems, they came out to shout some slogans and demand things.

Joe is, after all, Pretending to be the President. His staff and the folks running his government and pushing for war funding for places like Israel are all Democrats who came up the same way – radicalized in schools and Universities. It amuses me when their creations turn on them.

Calling for “intifada” and denouncing the American flag as “that dirty rag” and “this Nazi flag,” a small but vocal group gathered on Thompson Hall Lawn at the University of New Hampshire Thursday to join the wave of anti-Israel protests across college campuses.

If you spent a lot of money on the education of these students, you should request a refund—public school, college, all of it. They are demanding a cease-fire and a violent rebellion—the end of hostilities by Israel and the rise of hostility by Arabs in Gaza. But let’s not get mired down by the mangles intentions of pro-peace students. Don’t forget to ask for that refund. We’re here to discuss the timing. NH House Bull 1305 (HB1305) has passed the House and is in the Senate. It would secure Free Speech Rights in public spaces on college campuses by preventing the college or university “from discriminating against any religious, political, or ideological student organizations, even if the organization requires members to adhere to its beliefs, standards of conduct, or mission.”

188-J:3  Freedom of Association and Nondiscrimination Against Students and Student Organizations.  No public institution of higher education shall deny a religious, political, or ideological student organization any benefit or privilege available to any other student organization, or otherwise discriminate against such an organization, based on the expression of the organization, including any requirement that the leaders or members of such organization:

I.  Affirm and adhere to the organization’s sincerely held beliefs;

II.  Comply with the organization’s standards of conduct; or

III.  Further the organization’s mission or purpose, as defined by the student organization.

I’m already on the record defending peaceful pro-Palestinian protests. I’m pro-any-peaceful protest. So the local peaceful protests could not have come at a better time. The Senate is going to move this legislation forward, and under the circumstances, it would be awkward for anyone, regardless of party, to protest. And HB1305 is not a toothless gesture.

188-J:4  Remedies.  Any person or student organization aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may bring an action against the public institution of higher education and its employees acting in their official capacities, responsible for the violation and seek appropriate relief, including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, monetary damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs.  Damages awarded in an action brought under this chapter in 2025 shall not exceed $20,000, provided that the cap shall be annually adjusted thereafter based on the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, Northeast Region as published by the United States Department of Labor.  Any person or student organization aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may assert such violation as a defense or counter claim in any disciplinary action or in any civil or administrative proceedings brought against such student or student organization.  Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to limit any other remedies available to any person or student organization.

Students radicalized by woke teachers and professors, and their woke professors and administrators, may not realize precisely what this means. One of the many tactics used by the Left to silence opposing opinions or debates, even on campuses where speech is “protected” on paper, is to create a security situation—the threat of violence or unrest—administrators who demand exorbitant sums for security that make the “speech” impossible.

Denying the “speech” equal access under HB1305 can or will get them sued. It includes the school, professors who agitate to stop the speech, and even individuals actively preventing it.

HB1305 does not permit the narrow limitations recognized under law by the courts.

IV.  Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as preventing public institutions of higher education from prohibiting, limiting, or restricting behavior, conduct, or expression that:

(a)  Violates any law and could be subject to criminal action.

(b)  Is unprotected by the free speech provisions of the United States and New Hampshire constitutions, including but not limited to true threats and expression directed to provoke imminent lawless actions.

I don’t think peo-Palestinian protested calling for Intifada classifies as provoking violence or lawless action, but again, the likelihood of those radicalized students and professors exercising expression on (say) social media to organize opposition or a counter-protest to speech protected by HB1305 to which they object, could become evidence of a violation of the law if the counter-protest or action succeeded is stopping the expression.

That’s a hint.

So, here’s to peaceful protests, good timing, and HB1305.

The post Did Outraged Pro-Palestine Protesters at UNH Just Guarantee Speech Protections for Opinions They Hate? appeared first on Granite Grok.

This is not a new story, but it is certainly worth writing because these companies need to be called out for their complicity in harboring juvenile sexual predators. The Disney Corporation and Nickelodeon are both guilty of hiring known, convicted individuals or those charged with sexual offenses against children to work with children.

It is unconscionable for any company to condone pedophilia, but it is a new low in moral standards to put children at risk knowingly. What could possibly be the upside in the risk-reward equation to make such a decision? There is so much uncovered with this topic that it is exhausting. Today, we will highlight a few just to peel a couple of layers off this rancid onion. We are not looking at isolated instances but dozens over the last fifteen years. Enough to label this a pandemic of sickness.

The staggering figure was previously unknown but came to light after a recent HBO documentary, titled “Quiet on Set: The Dark Side of Kids’ TV,” included testimonials from child actors who allege they were subjected to abuse on the sets of Nickelodeon shows such as “All That,” “The Amanda Show,” “Drake & Josh” and “Victorious.” CNN reported over a decade ago that 35 employees of Disney had been charged and found guilty of sex offenses with children. This expose did not prevent Disney from hiring a former employee of Nickelodeon who had already been convicted as a sex offender. Does that make Disney progressive for believing in rehabilitation or complicit in the crime?

The Woke Left ate Florida Governor Ron DeSantis alive when he publicly exposed the Disney Company for knowingly employing pedophiles, but are now doing the same to Nickelodeon. These hypocrites won’t dare admit that someone with an “R” after their name was right.

Bill Maher, who, like Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, is starting to sound more Conservative with each issue, went on an eight-minute rant on his HBO show Friday night about the abuse of children by the Woke Liberals that have gone so far to the Left that they have fallen off the world of reality and common sense. It was an incredibly honest monologue you must see on X or YouTube if you do not have HBO.

Isn’t it time we grew up and stopped all the WOKE BS we are subjecting a generation to? As Maher said, these kids are not wannabe adults but submissive morons who will do anything to impress adults, even if those adults want to castrate or physically mutilate them in another fashion. From sexually offensive books in school libraries to drag queen reading hours in first-grade classes to creating sanctuaries for adolescents who want abortions or sex reassignment treatment, when are we going to realize it is adults enticing and entrapping children into a sick and twisted world? It is going to take politicians and a judicial system to grow some cajones to prosecute and convict some of these corporations and parent/sex offenders for what they are: pedophiles, the sickest of the sick.

The post Why Are Corporations Geared Toward Kids Harboring Pedophiles appeared first on Granite Grok.

My name is Lauren Bone, and I am the Legal Director of Women’s Liberation Front (WoLF), a national feminist non-profit organization whose mission is to advance, restore, and defend the rights of women and girls.

I am writing today to express our enthusiastic support for House Bill 396 (HB396), which would clarify that public entities are not prohibited from using biological sex to separate men and women in sports, jails, and prisons, bathrooms, and locker rooms. We particularly note with favor the inclusion of medical and mental health facilities where persons may be involuntarily committed since that is an extremely vulnerable population frequently overlooked by similar bills. We commend that and urge you to consider expanding it to any inpatient or outpatient program.

Men and women have specific innate physiological differences with social implications, including the unique ability of females (but not males) to become pregnant and birth children, including by rape; the increased vulnerability of females to numerous forms of sexual assault and other assault by males; and advantages associated with male physiology in athletics and other physical activities, including musculoskeletal advantages that cannot be equalized via pharmaceuticals or any other medical treatment.

We want to thank Lauren Bone for this Contribution – Please direct yours to Steve@GraniteGrok.com.
You can review our ‘Op-Ed Guidelines‘ on the FAQ Page.

There are other differences between men and women, including a greatly increased rate of violent crime and sexual crime committed against females by males, significantly increased rate of sexual exploitation of females by males, and certain disparities in employment and education. These population-level sex differences are not modified by a person’s self-identity as something other than their actual sex. Women in New Jersey and California prisons have become pregnant from being housed with men, and there have been numerous reports of sexual assault, as well as countless anecdotes of physical violence and intimidation, voyeurism and exhibitionism, and sexual harassment.

Sex-specific facilities and services are often necessary for privacy, modesty, religious observance, safety, and redress of historical discrimination and exclusion. Lack of access to such facilities and services limits the ability of women and girls to participate in public life. As such, outright prohibition on legal recognition of biological sex fails to consider the unique needs of women and girls, which can serve to unduly disadvantage them.

Inconsistency in definitions and in court rulings applying these concepts have led to endangerment and in some cases legal prohibitions against single-sex spaces, which was never the intent of Congress or of the state of New Hampshire in elucidating protections for women and girls in sex discrimination laws. As such, explicit statutory provisions such as those provided in HB 396 are needed to clarify the terms of prohibitions against discrimination based on sex.

This is a good bill, and a step in the right direction for protecting women and girls in the state of New Hampshire. WoLF urges the Committee to give it a favorable vote. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

WoLF works to restore, protect, and advance the rights of women and girls

The post WoLF Testimony in Support of New Hampshire Bill Protecting Single-Sex Spaces (HB396) appeared first on Granite Grok.

Being a modern farmer is not easy at all. The farmer controls all processes from a field with a growing crop to a garage with agricultural machinery. Future profits and the success of the season depend on his actions and decisions. For this reason, the farmer must be mobile and able to find the goods he needs as quickly as possible.

It’s for such purposes that the agricultural marketplace “VAS” was created: https://usa.vas.trade/.

The website covers all states of the country so that every user can buy agricultural products and quickly sell them everywhere. This new bulletin board consists of twelve big categories with the most common products and a various agricultural services.

In the “Agricultural vehicles and equipment” category, each site user can place an advertisement for the sale and purchase of tractors, combines and garden equipment. Not only purchase but also rent is possible; this information must be indicated in the ad.

The “Ready-made products” category is filled with products of plant and animal origin. Here farmers can find seeds for the future harvest and sell their ready-made goods at the right price. The price can be indicated wholesale and retail.You can set a negotiated price by simply clicking on the button when filling out the ad.

Agrochemicals is in the category of the same name for strengthening and protecting your plants.
Where can you find specialists to work in the field or build facilities on the agricultural marketplace? The “Services” category is ideal for finding workers for fieldwork, agricultural lawyers and accountants, marketers and many others.

You can register on the site in five minutes and all site options will immediately become available.
To communicate with each other, users can use chat and leave reviews for a successful purchase. Moreover, if you have any problems using the site, our 24-hour support service is always ready to help you. The agricultural marketplace “VAS” allows you to buy and sell not only new but also previously used goods.

The main thing is to indicate the condition of the product when you publish the ad. This service is not only a bulletin board, but also a place where the agricultural community can exchange experiences and find new contacts for work. The service is growing and developing like a living organism; new categories and groups of products appear every day so that everyone on the site can find exactly what they need.

The post International Agricultural Platform for Farmers appeared first on Granite Grok.

A recent, popular post God Help Us reminded me of an episode in the series Vikings. King Aelle of Northumbria is informed that the Great Heathen Army is at hand and marches his army out to meet them.

The King, with the Bishop by his side, is openly contemptuous of what they believe is the Great Heathen Army. However, the Vikings have only revealed a fraction of their army, the remainder being hidden by the terrain.

As more and more of the Great Heathen Army reveals itself, the King’s and Bishops’ contemptuousness is replaced by shock and terror. The Bishop exclaims “God Help Us!” The King, a devout man but the veteran of many battles, replies, “I don’t think he can.”

“I don’t think he can” is also the appropriate response to God Help Us. The Left has controlled “higher education” for decades. The “protests” are simply one manifestation of the Woke-Communism that “students” are taught.

But it is hardly just “higher education.” The Left controls every major institution, and the GOP is just controlled opposition. Just a few examples … the GOP in DC sends hundreds of billions to protect Ukraine’s borders but does nothing to secure America’s open borders; the GOP in Concord is obsessed with destroying single-family-zoning (massing up New Hampshire) and does nothing to actually stop the DEI (anti-white racism) permeating the public schools.

So, yeah, the appropriate response tot God Help Us is what King Aelle said.

The post God Help Us? … “I Don’t Think He Can” appeared first on Granite Grok.

Once Upon a Time, Howard Dean was the governor of Vermont. He ran for president a few cycles back (2004) and was doing well until the infamous scream in Iowa. The young folks loved him but it flattened his curve, and John Kerry went on to win the party nomination. Dean’s not been idle but hasn’t run for elective office since.

Vermont’s decline was predicted in the Dean era but has accelerated in recent years. What was a commitment to economic malaise has metastasized into committed ruin. Governor Phil Scott, a Republic up north but a Democrat anywhere else, couldn’t stop it if he tried so that might be a good theme for Dean as he ponders another shot at the job.

Might as well be an actual Democrat!

Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean could be considering a run for re-election this year.

Dean told NBC5 that he is currently thinking about another run for the state’s highest office.

Dean, a Democrat, could potentially face off against current Gov. Phil Scott.

Scott has not announced if he is running yet, but has said he is considering a run for a fifth term.

Dean, a physician and former DNC chairman, completed six terms as governor from 1991 to 2002. He made an unsuccessful bid for president in 2004, ultimately losing the Democratic Party nomination to John Kerry.

Were Dean to run and win, the Legislature could stop the pretentious torturing of the citizenry and deliver a killing blow with Dean’s giddy consent. A rejection of Dean, along with a shift in Statehouse power, would send a different message, but I’m not sure voters have it in them, even after the last few years.

I hope they do push back the progressive advance. Vermont is a beautiful state. If Dems keep control long enough, they’ll have de-beautified it with endless acres of wind and solar – which is th eonly way they could possibly hit their Green goals unless the plan is to make Vermont so expensive that it is covered to a gentrified gated progressive community that continues to outsource its “emissions” to third world countries full of people they claim to defend.

The post Night Cap: Howard Dean Might Be Running for Governor of Vermont Again appeared first on Granite Grok.

Over the last year, Vermont’s school board disputes have revealed the same pattern of a unilateral ideology dominating school boards and attacking anyone who dares differ with the cultish frenzy of agitation behind “woke” CRT and transgender activists who have infested government and public schools.

The stakes are indeed high for both political revolutionaries and the children upon whom they are experimenting. The deck is stacked, but the hypocrisy is epic. This is evident in contrasting the outspoken aggressiveness of legislators like state Rep. Elizabeth Burrows, D/P-Windsor.

Rep. Burrows sits on Mount Ascutney School Board concurrently with her House seat, both of which she uses like cudgels against young children not her own. Her current outrage is to sponsor a bill that would allow children to undergo hormone therapy to change their genders without parental consent. As I have explained previously, this is already the practice in Vermont — Burrows et al. seem to think they can cover their bureaucratic butts by passing a law to protect this horrid ideological recklessness toward children.

Mrs. Burrows proudly proclaims her wokeness, though her credentials to decide that young children should be permitted to consent to permanent infertility are absent. It is only a matter of time before these outrageous behaviors by officials lead to lawsuits: will Burrows be personally liable for her gross negligence toward the children entrusted to her care, or do the state and its insurers cover her malfeasance as she presumes to be a psychotherapist and master of legal jurisprudence?

Burrows’ bill, H.659, sets out the following rationale for permitting children at any age to choose to undergo irrevocable, risky hormone therapies:

• Per one survey, LGBTQ youth consider suicide;
• They are less likely to do so if their pronouns are affirmed and they can have birth certificates that match their gender preference.
• 14% of Vermont High Schoolers self-identify as LGBTQ per one survey, though “ one percent… reported being unsure about whether they were transgender.”
• LGBTQ High Schoolers are more likely to be bullied, use drugs and commit crimes.
• One 2019 survey found 63% of LGBTQ High Schoolers reported “feeling sad or hopeless.”
• “Numerous studies” (unnamed) show transgender youth are anxious and depressed.
• An unnamed 2020 study “indicated” that children who delayed puberty had reduced suicidal risks as adults.

Only the last of these relates to hormone blockers, and it does not state what percentage of suicides are averted, or who wrote the study, over what time period, or how it was peer-reviewed. The argument for excluding parents from these decisions is hardly even offered, though the statute gets legally twisted when it recites this folly:

A minor who identifies as transgender may give consent to receive hormone blockers and any other legally authorized nonsurgical, gender-affirming care or treatment from a licensed health care professional working within the health care professional’s authorized scope of practice. Consent under this section shall not be subject to disaffirmance due to minority of the individual providing consent. The consent of the individual’s parent or guardian shall not be necessary to authorize the minor’s access to legally authorized nonsurgical, gender-affirming care or treatment.

Aside from the absence of actual resources for this bold leap, the bill is silent as to the permanent infertility these children face; the risks of cancer, heart disease, and many other health risks associated with experimental hormone therapies; or the constitutional justification to permit children consent to change sexes before they can legally consent to marry or have sex (unless Burrows plans to liberate kids from those oppressive restrictions as well).

This last issue is a legal and jurisprudential one, and we are talking about a legislature passing laws. The core issue here is one of consent: why does Burrows perceive that she can legislate the ability of a child to consent with the sweep of her delusioned pen? Statutory rape is a fundamental protection for children, present in most societies through history:

Statutory rape is the crime of sex with a minor when the sex is agreed to by both parties, not forced.  The reason why it is considered rape is because the minor is considered to be too young to legally consent to have sex or sexual contact.  The age at which a person is too young to consent to have sex or sexual contact varies by state, and often varies by different crimes.  For example, if an adult has “consensual sex” with a person under the age of 12, that might be rape in the first degree, carrying a heavy sentence.  If an adult has “consensual sex” with a person who is 16 years old, then that might be rape in the third degree and carry a lighter sentence.

Vermont recognizes this distinction: sexual activity with a child under 13 is considered an “aggravated” assault – even if “consensual,” like Burrows’ perverse effort and the laughably fake “consents” being signed by kids at UVM without their parents’ involvement. By definition, a child cannot give consent. How does Burrows imagine she has insulated herself, any more than any child predator?

The proposed statute cites high school statistics, but contains no age limit for gender hormone therapy. American children achieve puberty at younger ages than ever, often at age 6 or 7 – clearly Burrows sees no bottom-end age limit, and no problem with informed consent issues like “Well, you are only six: shall we freeze your sperm in case you want to be a parent one day?” – that won’t hold up in court very well, because it is insane to suggest that child is capable of informed consent.

This issue of consent transfers also to the age of marriage – why are polygamy and child marriage wrong for Mormons, but the permanent pre-pubescent elimination of fertility is a decision the pseudo-enlightened Burrows can surreptitiously grant to other people’s kids? Looking at international marriage norms:

The United Nations defines child marriage as marriage before the age of 18 but some American states are violating this norm, allowing children as young as 12 to get married and exposing them to statutory rape. “Our study exposes the inconsistency between laws that permit children to marry and laws that criminalise sex with children across the US. The research shows that some child marriages are indistinguishable from sex crimes,” says senior author Alissa Koski, an Assistant Professor in the Department of in Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health at McGill University. “It’s unclear why they were certified as marriages rather than prosecuted,” she adds. The researchers recommend that throughout the US the minimum age for marriage should be raised to 18, bringing the United States “in line with its commitment to end child marriage by the year 2030 as part of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.”

How are these conflicting stances on consent to be reconciled? The far-out Left wishes to expand “freedom” for children akin to throwing them in a five-lane L.A. highway at rush hour. The statistics in the proposed consent statute reflect a subgroup of identities who seem particularly depressed, anxious, suicidal, and confused – 1% of Vermont high schoolers don’t know whether they might be trans (per the statute!), and Barrows wants to offer sex change hormones to much younger (less psychologically developed) children. It is difficult to choose between aggravated assault and lewd and lascivious as descriptions for this effort, so degenerate is this bill.

But herein lies the almost comic hypocrisy. Surveying just a handful of Burrowsian legislators in Vermont, let us recall that when Sen. Russ Ingalls released the already-public email of a teacher conditioning grade schoolers with gender pronouns, congressional aspirant Becca Balint called for rule changes to have him censored for “doxxing” the teacher! Later, when school board member Liz Cady (a parent, not a paid legislator) issued a very well-reasoned statement that people should not be discriminated against for vaccination status, the progressive chimps howled indignantly from the trees:

“One of our roles and responsibilities as board members is to avoid even an appearance of conflict of interest,” Knox said in an emailed statement. “(Cady’s) unsanctioned rhetoric is harmful, and implies a disregard for this responsibility to our students, staff, teachers, families, and community members.”

State Rep. Lori Houghton, D-Essex, wrote on Facebook that she and the rest of the Essex legislative delegation “are appalled by the latest statement from EWSD School Board Member, Liz Cady and unequivocally reject her twisting of historical facts to fit her narrative.”

“We encourage Essex residents to pay attention to the spoken words of our elected leaders,” Houghton wrote. “We can do better.”

There has been no condemnation by these same voices – or by anyone in Vermont’s school board or education systems – of Carolyn Partridge’s blatant instigation of voter fraud while both a legislator and school board member, or of Elizabeth Burrows’ shameless conflict here. Burrows is both legislator and school board member, and her extremist declarations of her political zealotry make it obvious that there is no effort at objectivity, or respecting the views of parents — she seeks to undermine parents. When the heads roll on this betrayal of our children, they will land in massive baskets under litigation. Burrows is a particularly cruel type of predator — Burrows seeks to open the whole world to experimentation under the pretense of child consent, while proclaiming herself as an enlightened liberator.

Perhaps Vermont parents will have recourse against Burrows and the ultra-progressives in international court, where their child-exploiting extremism will be more closely scrutinized:

The researchers question some states’ marital exemptions to statutory rape laws, explaining that such laws are in place to protect children from “potential physical and mental harms stemming from exploitative relationships.” They say that these laws “acknowledge that children may not have the capacity to give their full and informed consent to sexual activity.” They also refute another argument for marital exemptions, namely the parental consent requirement for children to marry “may be perceived as sufficient protection against potential harms.” The researchers note that “parental consent for child marriage may be difficult to distinguish from parental coercion in some cases, casting doubt on whether this requirement is sufficient protection.”

That last point sums it up: gender hormone therapy for young children is a very dubious venture – most children who are transgender change their minds in adulthood, per the science. There are likely small percentages of children who would benefit from thoroughly-considered hormonal therapies. But with so many experimental unknowns, allowing children to routinely undergo such life-changing treatments on their fleeting whim is child abuse and ideological exploitation – even if their parents do consent.

No wonder progressives object to Liz Cady opposing discrimination, as they seek to impose it through blatant voter fraud in schools, or laws that remove parents from the most important decisions facing their young children.

Originally published on March 16. 2022

The post ICYMI – Is Grooming Children for Gender Change (Behind Parents’ Backs) The Crime of the Century? appeared first on Granite Grok.