Back to the Office

Strangely enough, the Financial Times of London breaks with tradition and offers some kind words about Gen Z. 

Those who manage this Gen Z cohort in the business world, know that insolent, arrogant behavior has become de rigueur. To the point where, when you read something flattering about Gen Z, you assume that it is untrue or that it is British.

The subject of the recent FT article is the return to the office, the movement against working at home. As you know, this habit took hold during the covid pandemic. And you also know that serious business executives, from Amazon to the JP Morgan Bank have begun insisting that their staff show up in the office.

According to the FT, Gen Z workers are more likely to be at the office than are their 0lder managers:

Con­trary to some ste­reo­types Gen­er­a­tion Z, the cohort born between 1997 and 2012, is lead­ing the charge back to the office, while older gen­er­a­tions are more reluct­ant to return to past pat­terns of present­ee­ism. Work­ers under 24 years old are more likely to be in the office than their older coun­ter­parts, accord­ing to research by prop­erty group JLL: on aver­age com­ing in 3.1 days a week, while other age groups put in between 2.5 and 2.7 days.

Hopefully, we have all learned that being in the office contributes to development:

Man­dated office returns are partly being jus­ti­fied on the grounds of young people need­ing time work­ing in-per­son. Com­ments on remote work­ing from Jamie Dimon, chief exec­ut­ive of JPMor­gan Chase, were leaked this year. “The young gen­er­a­tion is being dam­aged by this,” he said. “They're being left behind socially, ideas, meet­ing people.” Other lead­ers have expressed con­cern that the old appren­tice model, of learn­ing by listen­ing, is deteri­or­at­ing due to home­work­ing.

When you are present in the office, you get to interact with your colleagues and managers, in person, face to face. You develop your social skills and improve your loyalty to your company. None of this is trivial:

Gen­er­a­tional dis­par­it­ies can cre­ate chal­lenges for man­agers, who must bal­ance com­pet­ing demands for flex­ib­il­ity from older work­ers who have exist­ing net­works and caring respons­ib­il­it­ies, with younger peers' desire to learn and meet col­leagues. It high­lights some of the dif­fi­culties for a gen­er­a­tion that spent part of their edu­ca­tion in lock­down.

Again, it’s about building relationships, connecting with other people. You are not seeing through a glass darkly, as the saying goes, but are looking someone in the eye, face to face.

Lucy Blitz, a 22-year-old con­tent pro­du­cer at Two Circles, a sports mar­ket­ing agency, finds rela­tion­ships easier to build in-per­son: “Actu­ally being able to speak to my col­leagues and man­agers face to face if there's an issue, is easier than com­mu­nic­at­ing over Slack, which I can't stand.”

Just in case you were becoming optimistic about Gen Z, the article adds that this group still values work/life balance.

While young people are more enthu­si­astic about the office, sur­vey responses sug­gest they also appre­ci­ate flex­ib­il­ity. The JLL report, which ques­tioned more than 12,000 employ­ees across indus­tries and coun­tries, found the young­est work­ers said their ideal num­ber of days was 2.6 — lower than the days they actu­ally spent in the office but higher than 35- to 44-year-olds, who wanted just 2.1 It also found work­ers under the age of 34 pri­or­it­ised work-life bal­ance and flex­ib­il­ity, while over-55s were more “sens­it­ive to phys­ical con­di­tions like tem­per­at­ure, noise and air qual­ity”.

Flexibility means that they do not feel obliged to spend too much time at work and that they insist on having the proper amount of time off. So, for all the good we see in Gen Z, the group still has a long way to go.

Does Psychoanalysis Make You Human?

Now that psychoanalysis, especially the Freudian version, has passed from the mental health scene, we are now being confronted with post mortems. 

Dare I say that I am being generous. When we read Adam Blum’s attempt to explain psychoanalysis in Psychology Today we are struck by the utter vacuousness of it all. Dare I say that it is an embarrassing exercise, one that is so embarrassing that I hesitated before commenting about it.

Blum explains:

At its best, we imagine a psychoanalyst relieving our anxiety or depression through empathic responses to our thoughts and feelings, or perhaps bringing conscious awareness to whatever we are unconsciously doing. At worst, we picture someone lying on a couch, talking, while someone else sits behind it, not talking. (The unlikeliness that this arrangement should be helpful to anyone is one reason why there are so many actual cartoons about it.)

The arrangement is not just unlikely. It is bizarre, because it precludes face-to-face communication. It makes socialization impossible. Freud understood clearly that the purpose of this arrangement was to provide him unfiltered access to the patient’s mind. Presumably, if the patient is not looking at the analyst he can let his mind wander and can speak whatever obnoxious nonsense passes through it.

Blum is not finished. He offers his theory, namely that psychoanalysis is an education that makes us into human beings.

As I said, the word “vacuous" does it justice. Ask yourself what you were before psychoanalysis made you into a human being. He believes that we all need an education, presumably, in talking to people who refuse to look us in the eye, to become human beings.

Through this mutual formation of theory and practice emerges a picture of psychoanalysis that is as much a kind of education as a kind of cure — the very education that makes us into human beings.

A minimum of reflection will tell you that you are many things in the world-- a son or daughter, a father or mother, a husband or wife, an American or a Russian, and so on. Let’s not forget, executive manager and teammate. We identify ourselves by our membership in different groups. This membership gives us roles and offers rules that we are to follow. If the group succeeds we feel pride. If it fails we feel embarrassed and ashamed. 

In no case do we set out to become human beings. We are human by virtue of our DNA. No more, no less. You do not need to do anything to become human. Nothing can make you subhuman. What were we before we were human beings?

As for the notion of talking to walls, the purpose is to make us into something resembling disembodied minds, which is not the same thing as being human. If anything, it makes us angelic.

Blum continues to suggest that there is something seductive about the process. The analysand, staring at the wall, wants to interact with his analyst, to make some form of connection. Thus, the patient will try his damnedest to find the magic word that will awaken his analyst and help him escape from his Freudian shell.

But even when this goes very well — and especially when it doesn’t — this process has a distinct quality of seduction. Who is this person, a patient may start to wonder, who is so interested in the intimate details of my life? What do they want from me? Why am I bothered or tickled or just curious about that thing they said last time? And why did I have that weird dream?

To analyze means to break down, and when familiar ways of thinking about ourselves and our lives are disrupted by analytic work, we don’t know ahead of time what will come up, or what to make of what does. A desire forms to make sense of these new experiences, which in turn seduces us into becoming more curious about ourselves and our relationships.

As it happens in reality, when an individual is taught the bad habit of talking to the walls, of talking as though he cannot offend  his interlocutor, he becomes something like a disembodied mind. He does not become human. If he graduates from the process he will become more like the literary version of the disembodied mind, the great detective of Anglo-American detective fictions.

That is, he will become like C. Auguste Dupin, Sherlock Holmes, Hercule Poirot, Jane Marple, Endeavour Morse, and so on. The one thing that characterizes these fictional beings is that they are not human. They do not have lives and do not have spouses or children. Saying that they are more or less human or humane is simply a misunderstanding.

There you have it. Psychoanalysis, as it is practiced by people like Blum, will teach you to think incoherently.

Sundaze

With a warm welcome to new subscribers. And, a special thank-you to paid subscribers.

Being as today is Sunday, we take the day off from opining in order to request donations. They are the fuel that keeps this work going. 

Not to be overly obvious, but it takes time and effort to put up a new post daily. Very few others manage to do so. Thus, it’s a job, one that is worthy of compensation. 

If you would like to donate please make use of the Paypal link on this page. If you prefer, you can mail a check to 310 East 46th St. 24H. New York, NY 10017. Please make the check out to my name, Stuart Schneiderman.

I’m counting on you. 

If you have already donated, please pass the word along to your friends, family, neighbors, associates and colleagues.

Please accept this expression of my gratitude for those who will donate and for those who have done so already. Many thanks!

Saturday Miscellany

First, whatever you think about the rest, Barack Obama was right about one thing: some people have too much money.

Data Republican offers this view of the recent work of one Bill Gates.

So, let me get this straight about Bill Gates... 

He bankrolled Common Core, and wrecked public education. Zero accountability. 

He helped script the pandemic playbook at Event 201. Zero accountability. 

He funneled millions into African circumcision programs based on junk science. Zero accountability. 

And now he wants to dim the sun? This guy has done more harm than almost any criminal behind bars.

Second, and then there is the due process question. Apparently, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, currently inhabiting a prison in San Salvador, did not receive sufficient due process. 

To which Yale Law graduate JD Vance replies:

I just disagree with the idea that he hasn't been offered due process. He had a couple of immigration hearings; he had a valid deportation order... ...I think there's actually a deeper issue going on, which is that you see some radical judges at the district court level who are trying to layer so much "process" on top of the immigration system that it makes it impossible to function. We have over 20 million illegal aliens in the United States of America—are we not allowed to deport them? Because if we're not allowed to deport them, then what these district courts are saying is fundamentally, they reject the will of the American people as it was expressed in November 2024.

They used to call it a democracy.

Third, Matt Margolis brings us up to date on Kilmar’s record:

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the now-deported MS-13 thug was driving a car registered to a convicted human smuggler during a traffic stop in Tennessee back in 2022—and he wasn’t alone. He had a group of men with him, raising even more questions about what exactly he was up to. This is the kind of criminal the Left is fighting to protect while pretending Trump is the threat.

During that 2022 traffic stop, Kilmar Abrego Garcia wasn’t just out for a joyride. He was transporting eight other individuals on a shady cross-country trip from Texas to Maryland. His excuse? They were supposedly headed to do “construction work.” No tools, no luggage—just bodies in a car. Sounds legit, right?

And get this: the car Garcia was driving belonged to none other than Jose Ramon Hernandez Reyes, a convicted human smuggler busted for bringing illegals into the U.S. from Mexico, El Salvador, and Honduras. What are the odds? Just a harmless road trip in a smuggler’s vehicle packed with men and no bags. Nothing to see here, folks.

Fourth, another day, another command officer relieved of command. The reason: disrespecting the commander in chief, among others. This, from Rick Moran on PJ Media:

If for no other reason, Col. Sheyla Baez Ramirez, former commander of Fort McCoy in Wisconsin, should have been relieved for demonstrating extraordinary stupidity.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth revealed the reason that Col. Baez Ramirez was suspended. On Sunday, Hegseth reposted an X post claiming, "Commander of Fort McCoy, whose base chain-of-command board was missing photos of Trump, Vance, and Hegseth, has been SUSPENDED."

Fifth, according to Ilya Shapiro, President Trump was right to attack Harvard’s anti-Semitism. He wrote this in his Substack:

As Bill Ackman put it in a revelatory essay the day Harvard president Claudine Gay resigned, antisemitism is the “canary in the coal mine,” a warning about larger issues. It’s a leading indicator of underlying pathologies, which here means everything from cancel culture to ideological indoctrination, intellectual corruption to moral decay. We’ve seen a subversion of the core mission of universities to seek truth and knowledge, and of classical-liberal values like free speech, due process, and equality under the law. It’s been a shift from education to activism.

The root cause of all of this is a noxious postmodern ideology that contends that truth is subjective and must be viewed through lenses of race, gender, and other identity categories, according to some privilege hierarchy. Your rights and freedoms depend on whether you’re part of a class deemed oppressor or oppressed.

Sixth, you might be familiar with an R and B artist named Kehlani. I was not. She had been hired to perform at Cornell, but then someone figured out that she was an anti-Semite.

In time the university administration cancelled the concert. Reported by the New York Post:

Cornell University on Wednesday canned Jew-bashing entertainer Kehlani’s upcoming campus performance after facing overwhelming backlash over the decision to host the anti-Israel musician.

President Michael Kotlikoff said he’d rescinded the Grammy Award-nominated R&B artist’s invitation to perform next month at the university’s “Slope Day” end-of-year celebration — just days after the school initially defended the move.

“Unfortunately, although it was not the intention, the selection of Kehlani as this year’s headliner has injected division and discord into Slope Day,” he wrote in a letter to students and staff.

“In the days since Kehlani was announced, I have heard grave concerns from our community that many are angry, hurt, and confused that Slope Day would feature a performer who has espoused antisemitic, anti-Israel sentiments in performances, videos, and on social media.”

Seventh, by now you are well aware of the damage done by DEI programs. You probably thought that science would be immune from this madness. Apparently not. It has infested medical schools, and that means, medical care.

Conservative Yankee posted this on the Lucianne blog:

Medical schools nationwide are forcing students to promote left-wing ideologies on race, gender, and obesity at the expense of proper patient care, according to a new watchdog report released on Thursday. The comprehensive investigation, produced by non-profit group Speech First, examined 54 public medical schools across the United States, seeking to document how “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) mandates are being enforced throughout medical education. “This ideological conformity is required not only of students but also of faculty, who are often tasked with serving as enforcers of these mandates,” the report explains, noting that ideological requirements begin as early as the admissions process.

Eighth, speaking of DEI, or, more specifically the efforts it is making to stay alive, this, from Mother Harvard, via Aaron Sibarium:

NEW: The Harvard Law Review has made DEI the "first priority" of its admissions process. It routinely kills or advances pieces based on the author's race. It even vets articles for racially diverse citations.

Ninth, always nice to have some numbers to go along with your morning coffee. From the TGIF column at the Free Press, the numbers regarding the political affiliations of young men. As you know, the Democratic Party has seriously lost this group:

(I’m getting this from a fascinating Yale Youth Poll.) Among 18- to 21-year-old men, Donald Trump has a +7 net favorability. Kamala Harris has a −48 net favorability. Let’s sit with that for a moment. That’s really, really unpopular. Telling young men that they are fundamentally toxic and teaching them from age 3 to strongly identify with their race (whether it be inherently good or evil) turned out to be a bad idea for progressives. Now they strongly identify with their race and also don’t care if you call them toxic.

Tenth, the Ivy League never ceases to amaze. For those who think that the anti-Semitic protests are merely an exercise of free speech, consider this from Yale. Also via the Free Press:

Students at Yale University briefly set up a new pro-Hamas encampment, where they chanted a call and response: We will honor all our martyrs / Mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters. And no, they are not talking about their parents and siblings who sacrificed so much to get them to Yale (I’m guessing they screen calls from their actual mothers). They said the quiet part out loud by wearing Hamas headbands, the hottest new campus accessory. So again, to reiterate, they are wearing Hamas headbands and chanting to honor their martyrs. If anyone buys the line that these are just anti-war protesters, or that they’re protesting some specific Israeli policy, you’re deluding yourself. They are Hamas supporters, plain and simple.

Last, I now have several open consulting hours in my life coaching practice. If you are interested, contact me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com.

The Return of the Tradwife

The contempt oozes in every other sentence. A woman by name of Chine McDonald has written a column about tradwives, that is, about women who are happy to function as homemakers. McDonald directs a think tank called Theos. She has written her current screed for the Financial Times. 

By her rather dim lights the phenomenon of the trad wive is something to be analyzed and discredited. Supposedly it signals a flaw or defect. The notion that an intelligent adult female might choose to be a tradwife does not seem to cross her mind. 

The phenomenon either means that there is something wrong with the world or that there is something wrong with these women.

She does not consider the far out possibility that they may be making a decision about what is best for them. Aren’t they free to choose? 

And, dare we mention, at a time when large numbers of American children are brought up in broken homes, homes where their mothers are only occasionally present, some women might have decided to prioritize domesticity and childrearing over fighting to overthrow the patriarchy.

According to McDonald, it’s all just propaganda. There, that solves it, doesn’t it?

The imagery is a 21st-cen­tury iter­a­tion of pro­pa­ganda about fem­in­ine and mater­nal ideals presen­ted in art and cul­ture for cen­tur­ies. Just like Raphael’s “Sis­tine Madonna” or Bot­ti­celli’s “Madonna Litta”, the trad­wife visu­als depict moth­er­hood as young, typ­ic­ally white, beau­ti­ful and serene. But beneath the sac­char­ine icon­o­graphy, we can dis­cern mark­ers of our cur­rent moment.

As though a stable home with two parents present and where defined roles define areas of influence and authority-- is an anomaly.

Obviously, McDonald also takes offense at the notion that these tradwives will be good mothers and will raise healthy children. Again, this is hardly an anomaly in human history. The anomaly is the current American situation where homes are broken and children are left on their own.

Again, McDonald does not want women to believe that they have a choice. The tradwife phenomenon, in her eyes, romanticizes:

… an unat­tain­able domestic per­fec­tion, you can also see it as an under­stand­able reac­tion to fear of con­tem­por­ary uncer­tain­ties. Hyper­loc­al­ism is a response to a scary inter­con­nec­ted world and you can’t get more hyper­local than the trad­wife’s realm. When mil­it­ary con­flicts are raging and eco­nom­ies col­lapsing, why not retreat to the home and make jam?

Again, this is amateur psychology, designed to tell women to get out of the house and into the marketplace. And yet, traditionally, the home has been a woman’s domain, a place where women have power and authority. Apparently, there is something wrong with that.

Worse yet, she is telling young women that no one will ever want to support them and their children. How much confidence does that build?

True enough, as Anne-Marie Slaughter explained when she resigned from her position at the State Department to spend more time at home with her children-- one of whose lives had been seriously deteriorating after she took her job away from home-- there are superhuman women who can pursue career goals and care for their children. The problem is, Slaughter explained, this is very rare, and not very likely. More power to those who can, but telling women to abandon home and hearth in favor of working in the marketplace is very often very bad advice. 

One understands that Slaughter made her decision because it was best for her elder child. And yet, feminist blowhards, who shall not be named, denounced her for betraying women and betraying the revolution. 

That is the feminist position. It is straight-up misogyny. Encouraging women to abandon their children in order to pursue dubious career goals is not a good thing. 

Wherefore Harvard?

Harvard University has taken serious offense at the federal government’s efforts to rid it of anti-Semitism. The university insists that the Trump administration is interfering in hiring and even in the curriculum. 

The Trump administration suggests that the university is infested with anti-Semitism, to the point where Jewish students have been harassed and prevented from going to the library or to classes.

Harvard used to be 25% to 30% Jewish. Now the number is 8%.

As for school life, you might not believe me, so why not believe the New York Times last fall:

In interviews, many Jewish members of the Harvard community described their growing estrangement from campus. Protesters have disrupted lectures, shouting through bullhorns that the war in Gaza was a genocide. Antisemitic messages have been posted on social media. Some students have decided to check their Zionist beliefs in the classroom and in the residence hall. A few have traded in their kippas, or skullcaps, for baseball hats.

The Trump administration has accused Harvard of countenancing anti-Semitism. It has proposed a series of changes that the university has rejected. USA Today offers this description:

Harvard has denied the administration's accusations that it's not doing enough to combat antisemitism and declined to comply with a list of demands, including changing its recruitment, screening, and admissions of international students to prevent admitting "students hostile to the American values," paying an external party to audit the university's student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for "viewpoint diversity" and shutter all DEI programming….

Since Harvard does not seem to want to work with the federal government, the Trump administration has cut off its funding:

The Trump administration has frozen more than $2.2 billion in grants to Harvard University, called for the Internal Revenue Service to remove the university's tax-exempt status and threatened to revoke its ability to accept and host international students. Harvard sued the Trump administration on April 21 to block those measures. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier that day that the administration is planning to slash an additional $1 billion in cuts to federal health research funding at the university….

Not only was Harvard severely offended by the accusation that it was not doing enough to combat anti-Semitism, but its president Alan Garber walked away from a negotiation with Education Secretary Linda McMahon. 

This side to the story has rarely been reported. It bespeaks a colossal arrogance.

The New York Post explains:

Harvard University refused to “come back to the table” after the president of the Ivy League school initially had a positive conversation with the Trump administration about cracking down on antisemitism on campus, Education Secretary Linda McMahon revealed Tuesday.

“I talked to Alan Garber, the president of Harvard … He wanted to make sure there were no antisemitism actions that were taking place on his campus,” McMahon told “Cats & Cosby Show” hosts John Catsimatidis and Rita Cosby on WABC radio.

“We also talked about other aspects of negotiations, relative to doing some vetting for teachers who are coming in and students who are coming into Harvard, because there are a lot of outside agitators that are coming in and causing a lot of the disruptions on campus,” McMahon claimed.

“We thought we were in a good place,” she added. “We were exchanging negotiations back-and-forth, and then Harvard didn’t come back to the table.”

“Their answer was they sued.”

Garber has accused the Trump administration of seeking “unprecedented and improper control” over campus affairs to keep the federal funds flowing.

Harvard opts for complete independence. We understand. And yet, what harm would have come from an effort to negotiate. 

Victor Davis Hanson accuses Harvard of wanting to have it both ways. He recommends that if they wish to assert imperial authority over whatever happens on their campus, they should simply reject federal funding:

Harvard has refused to accept the orders of a Trump administration commission concerning its chronic problems with anti-Semitism, campus violence, and racial tribalism, bias, and segregation.

Yet, unlike some conservative campuses that distrust an overbearing Washington, Harvard and most elite schools like it want it both ways. They do as they please on their own turf and yet still demand that the taxpayers send them multibillion-dollar checks in addition to their multibillion-dollar private incomes….

So, if there are protracted standoffs, our elite campuses will be hard-pressed to defend the indefensible. This effort will be difficult because public confidence in higher education has already plummeted to historic lows in the most recent polls.

You might say that it’s about more than anti-Semitism. It’s about the decline of our greatest academic institutions.

Wednesday Potpourri

First, hedge fund tycoon Bill Ackman is not the only person to note the conceptual deformity, but why not begin with his succinct comment on the current political scene:

A nation in which one administration can allow millions of unvetted illegal migrants into the country, but requires that a court vet each deportation decision in an individually adjudicated case will soon lose the values our democratic system was intended to preserve.

Second, meanwhile down in Argentina, the Javier Milei reforms are bearing fruit. Mario Nawfal reports:

MILEI’S “CRAZY” PLAN WORKED—ARGENTINA’S PAYCHECKS JUST HIT A 6-YEAR HIGH Private sector wages in Argentina just spiked to their best level since 2018—real wages hit 107 in Feb 2025, up from a sad 91 in late 2023. What changed? Oh, just Milei dropping economic reforms like they were hot. People called it “shock therapy.” Turns out, it was more “money therapy.” Critics yelled, “He’ll crash the economy!” Workers are now yelling, “Payday!”

Third, obviously, everyone is talking about the big show that Democrats are putting on in regard to a Salvadoran MS-13 gang member who is currently sitting in a Salvador prison. 

Allow border czar Tom Homan to explain. This, from an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl.

Homan said this, regarding Maryland Senator Van Hollen:

"What bothers me more than that is a U.S. Senator travels on our taxpayer dime to meet with a MS13 gang member." 

"What concerns me is Van Hollen never went to the border last four years, when Joe Biden had a 600% increase in s*x trafficking of women and children." 

"What shocks me is he's remained silent about the travesty that happened our southern border — many people died."

Fourth, from Elon Musk, in conversation with Joe Rogan, from February of this year:

As bad as Twitter was, the federal government is much worse. At least, Twitter passed audits.

“Twitter was at least break-even, and it had to pass an audit. The federal government is literally losing $2 trillion a year, and it fails its own audits.

There's a case where, Senator Collins gave the Navy $12 billion for more submarines, got no extra submarines, and then held a hearing to ask where the $12 billion went.

And they were like, we don't know—that was it. Only the federal government can get away with this level of waste.

The reason I'm putting so much effort into this is that I think it is a very dire situation. America's going bankrupt. That just can't happen.”

Fifth, Larry David-- you remember him-- just wrote a nasty and stupid op-ed for the New York Times entitled: “My Dinner with Adolph.” The subject was comedian Bill Maher’s dinner with President Trump.

The concept was sufficiently stupid to make its way into the Times. And sufficiently embarrassing to be penned by a man who has no shame.

Anyway, over at CNN Scott Jennings explained the game:

“But this isn't about that dinner. It's about the next one. Because this is the modern left. It's an attempt always to intimidate people into not ever doing it again.”

“It's to silence yourselves or we'll do it for you. That's the purpose of this op ed, so that the next comedian or the next person on the American left chooses not to speak to Donald Trump.”

“This is all an effort to get people not to do what you just said, which is to talk to each other and our political leaders.”

This is how the modern left enforces obedience: torch one person in public—so no one else dares step out of line.

Sixth, meanwhile in the movie theatres, Disney’s woke Snow White continues to fail, miserably. By the numbers, via PJ Media:

In its fifth weekend on screens, "Snow White" earned about $7 million in ticket sales domestically and internationally, bringing the total box office take to an estimated $194 million. The film cost an estimated $270 million (after tax credits!) plus another $70-$100 million to market and probably needs $625 million, after theaters take their cut, just to break even.

Seventh, in the therapy world, we now have a distinguished Brooklyn therapist named Natasha Cohen. She was trying to set a good example for her child patients, so she did something stupid. The New York Post has the story:

The Brooklyn woman accused of leaving a brick scrawled with a swastika and the word “Nazi” on a parked Tesla is a super-woke family therapist who was involved in criminal justice diversion programs — and blamed Elon Musk for her heinous actions as she was taken into custody.

Natasha Cohen was released on her own recognizance following her arraignment on hate-crime charges Saturday night, according to prosecutors.

Cohen, 46, has a private practice, working with children, adolescents and their families for more than two decades.

Eighth, in once-Great Britain the Supreme Court has declared that there are only two sexes. Now, even Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer has come around to this view.

Julie Burchill has mostly opposed transmania, as has J.K. Rowling. Now Burchill has a few words about Rowling’s case:

Many brave people – mostly women, but joined by a few exceptional men – have sacrificed much for the victory we finally took receipt of in the Supreme Court last week. They have been robbed of reputations, careers, relationships and – almost – sanity, as much of the world’s establishment and institutions went gender-woo gaga and told us that women could have penises, men could grow cervixes and giraffes are born without sex. …

Until she was hated, I never cared for J.K. Rowling. The idea of anyone over the age of majority who could be reading, say, Lionel Shriver instead wasting their time reading stories about boy wizards irritated me intensely. There were so many of these clowns, apparently, that special ‘adult’ covers of the Potter books were being manufactured, to cover their embarrassment. As with adult babies, I must admit an intolerant part of me felt that such people should probably have their voting rights removed if they were not willing to fully embrace the blessed state of being a grown-up.

Last but not least, I now have some free consulting hours in my life coaching practice. If you are interested email me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com.