You probably know by now that Google fired one of their engineers, for writing a memo accusing the company of being closed minded to different viewpoints.

James Damore suggested it might be possible that computer science is a field dominated by men because women, by virtue of being women, actually prefer other jobs.

This was Google’s idea of a capital offense.

One brave female scientist had the courage to write an article discussing the science that explains why he is correct and we collectively wonder whether she will be forced to walk the plank as well.  

While there’s plenty to be said about the witch hunting element of this story, let’s talk about the gender angle for a moment.

After all, it is 2017, and we  have spent the last two years arguing about whether gender is something you chose for yourself or something chosen for you.

Specifically, we have been told there is a fundamental human right to determine your own gender.

In support of this position, we are told that you can, in part, identify whether a five-year old was “born into the wrong body” based on their toy and clothing preferences and how they feel about themselves.

In this context, there is an acknowledgement that boys and girls behave differently and transgenderism is what happens when a male brain is put into a female body or vice versa.

Ultimately, we are told that unless each of us takes up the cause of those whose brain doesn’t match their body by celebrating their desire to modify their body we will be sentencing them to a life of psychological torment.

This perspective is now progressive orthodoxy.

Enter James Damore’s memo.

While he doesn’t use the precise term, he suggests that he and the other men who make up the majority of the technology workforce have been born with a “male brain” that inclines them toward that sector.

He further suggests that those born with a “female brain” might be inclined in a different direction because their brains are wired differently.

And Google loses its mind.

Strange, isn’t it?

If a woman claims to be born with a “male brain” that compels her to undergo plastic surgery and hormone therapy, she is a transgender hero.

If a man claims to have a male brain that predisposes him to like computer science, he is to be drawn and quartered.

And you’re supposed to think this is progress.

If this seems just a little bit insane, you’re not wrong.

But there is a kind of logic behind it.

A logic that long ago rejected the idea that some things are true and some things are false regardless of how we feel about them.

This logic sees the world entirely through the framework of the oppressed and the oppressor.

They will agree with you if you are transgender because you are part of “the oppressed”.

But, when a “cisgender”, straight, white, male makes the exact same argument, they’ll mock him.

Just because they don’t like him.

The cognitive dissonance they should experience eludes them because somewhere along the line they forgot that “speaking truth to power” requires some concern about what is true.

The Democratic party has long been the party associated with abortion.  But Washington State Democrats have taken the next step.

Many Democrats nationally were irked recently  when the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in Washington DC said that it will help elect pro-life Democrats in their effort to take back the House of Representatives in Washington DC.

That won’t be happening here in Washington State.

In an interview with The Stranger, State Democratic party Chairman Tina Podlodowski  has stated that they will not support any candidate who does not support abortion.

While the state Democratic party has operated this way functionally for years, this may be the first time that position was stated publicly.

Since Washington State allows candidates to declare their party preference without the support or endorsement of a political party, this does not prohibit someone who opposes abortion from running as a Democrat.

It just ensures that the state party will not support that candidate.

The Republican Party has supported a handful of legislators who support abortion that have frustrated the pro-life majority of the Republican party.

Many voters have an issue or two that are most important to them.  Some even consider themselves to be single issue voters.

Here in Washington State, we officially have  a single issue political party.

A race that will likely decide the balance of power in the Washington State Senate next year is virtually tied based on early primary results released Tuesday evening.

With the Republicans currently holding a 25-24 majority in the state Senate, this seat, now held by the Republicans, is an opportunity for the Democrats to take back Senate leadership that has been controlled by the Republicans since 2012.

Democrat Manka Dhingra was leading the primary with 11,928 votes (50.54%).  Republican Jingyoung Lee Englund is second with 10,052 votes (42.59%).  Parker Harris, generally believed to be right of center independent, was third with 1,620 votes (6.86%).

Only Dhingra and Englund will advance to the general election.

Since Harris’s support is believed to be from Republicans, it is expected that much of his support would go to Englund in a two-way general election.

Assuming those who voted for Parker are likely to vote Republican in the general election, the Republican/Democrat vote difference is only 300 votes.

Late arriving ballots, which tend to favor Republican candidates, could push Dhingra below the 50% mark when all votes have been counted.

Regardless, all indications are that this race will be very close.  It is also expected to break all-time spending records in a state legislative race.

Republican control of the Senate for the last five years has allowed them to negotiate as equals with the Democrats.

A Democrat victory in this race would give them control over every branch of Washington State’s government and likely re-energize Governor Inslee’s far left priorities.

Several taxes – capital gains tax, real estate excise tax, and an energy tax –  proposed by Governor Inslee but rejected by the Senate in the last budget negotiations could get new life in a Democrat controlled Senate.

Also, many far-left social policies including regulation of pro-life pregnancy centers, efforts to force businesses to pay for abortions, and attempts to regulate speech for licensed therapists have failed to become law only because of the current Senate leadership.

While much of Washington State believes 2017 is an “off-year” for elections, in reality, this special-election in Redmond, Woodinville, Kirkland, Duvall, and Sammamish will decide the direction of our state for the foreseeable future.

A lot of you have probably had this experience.

Someone is yelling at you. They want answers. They are demanding to know why you hate them.

You’re confused. You’re sure you don’t hate this person because, for starters, you’ve never met them before.

You’re willing to grant that they don’t make an awesome first impression, but what you feel isn’t close to hate.

But the accusation is frustrating, nonetheless.

You go out of your way to be kind, but still, anytime you express your opinions, people accuse you of being hateful.

Well, before you wring your hands too much more, it can be helpful to remember that some people want you to hate them.

Here are three reasons why.

1. They get Oppression Points

First, they want you to hate them because they get oppression points. In many places today, being a victim is an accomplishment. Just google “fake hate crimes.” You don’t harm yourself and accuse someone else of doing it unless you think it will help you somehow. In social justice warrior circles, being a victim is valued more highly than being disciplined, industrious, or smart. People want to believe you to hate them because it gives their life significance.

They can’t go back to their snowflake convention with, “They disagree with me, but they’re enjoyable people, and our kids get along great.” They need you to hate them because believing they are hated is a fundamental part of their identity.

     2. They Don’t Want to Have to Consider Your Arguments

Second, they want you to hate them because if you don’t, they would feel obligated to consider what you have to say. The respectful thing to do with people you disagree with is to engage with them through an exchange of ideas that involves mutual respect and a sincere attempt to understand the other’s perspective.

But they don’t want to have to explain why kids don’t need a mom and dad or why a white woman can identify as a man but not as an African American. They just want to be able to do whatever they want to do and never feel judged for doing it. By telling themselves that you are hateful, they relieve themselves of the need to defend their ideas from critique or otherwise engage you on a human level.

Which leads to the third reason they want to believe you hate them.

     3. They Hate You

They want to believe you hate them because they hate you. That is the great irony in this scenario. They hate you because you think there are ways to show love other than through approval. In their mind, if you hate them, that somehow validates their hatred of you. That’s the nature of bitterness.

The sad fact is, once you choose to hate someone, everything they do is offensive. That means even your kindnesses will be interpreted in a way that allows them to think you’re hateful. And there’s nothing you can do about it.

Of course, not everyone wants to believe you hate them. There are plenty of people of every political persuasion who can acknowledge the goodwill of people they disagree with.

But the next time you encounter someone who refuses to give your motives the benefit of the doubt, in the words of the great American philosopher Taylor Swift, “Shake it off.”

It could be that they accuse you of hating them because they want you to.

Your job is just to make sure it’s not true.

Why should you be cool with men undressing in front of girls?

Because money.

That’s the argument being made by opponents of privacy rights in Washington State. They claim that if Washington State adopts rules that require schools to separate facilities based on a students sex then Washington’s economy will collapse.

Their evidence? North Carolina.

You may be recall that North Carolina passed a bill called HB 2 which, though very different than than I-1552 currently being considered in Washington, also dealt with policies surrounding access to private facilities.

The progressive mob worked very hard to keep HB 2 from becoming law, but it passed anyway. At which point they channeled their passion into doing whatever they could to harm the economy of North Carolina.

They convinced pop stars to cancel concerts and tried to get companies to stop doing business in the state.

They convinced the NCAA to move some basketball games out of North Carolina and the NBA to move the All-Star out of Charlotte and into New Orleans.

They neglected to mention that Louisiana has the same laws that they were so upset about in North Carolina.

Whatever.

Politicians got in on the act too. Governors in Washington, New York, and California banned travel state travel to North Carolina. Seattle’s Mayor did the same.

What was the fallout of the year-long effort to drive the economy of North Carolina into the ground?

Maybe not as bad as you think.

At the end of 2016, Forbes magazine still named North Carolina #2 on its annual “Best States for Business” list.

In 2016, Site Selection magazine ranked North Carolina as the #2 best business climate.

In 2017, North Carolina rose to #1.

Chief Executive magazine ranked North Carolina as the #3 state for business.

Washington State ranks worse than North Carolina in every case.

Before, during, and after the outrage of 2016, North Carolina has had one of the fastest growing economies in the country.

Unemployment is down and employment is up.

In 2016, North Carolina outpaced national averages in such categories as gross domestic product, labor force expansion, payroll jobs and inflation-adjusted wages.

This is not the story of an economy on the verge of collapse because of their belief in biology and privacy.

The highly publicized efforts to stop people from traveling to the state didn’t seem to work either.

Tourism in North Carolina’s increased 4.3% in 2016 and broke all-time records.

Was there an impact at all? Maybe

Supporters of HB 2 acknowledged that the worst-case scenario is an economic impact in North Carolina of one-tenth of one percent of the state’s economy. It could be less than that, which gets your perilously close to zero.

In general, however, Washington is looking up to North Carolina when it comes to its business climate.

But there’s something else to keep in mind as well.

The concern about potential economic impact isn’t a concern at all.

It’s a threat.

They aren’t concerned that passing Initiative 1552 would naturally create economic consequences, they’re promising to do their best to hurt people if it does as a way of deterring others from following suit.

But there’s a problem with this argument here in Washington, in addition to the fact that it didn’t work in North Carolina.

Are they going to convince Microsoft, Boeing, Amazon, Starbucks and the Jonas Brothers to take their business someplace more progressive?

I don’t think so either.

But even if their threats could work, even if they were able to harm the state’s economy out of spite, what kind of people trade the privacy and security of their wives and daughters for money anyway?

Hopefully not you.