While all of the headline nonsense gets the attention (and the Reflecting Pool, failed Iran war, kleptocracy), the Russell Voughts and Heritage Foundation white Christian nationalists are quietly working to dismantle our country. Thanks for keeping at it, and telling us about it, Jess.
Well said, Jess. It would be good if the parents of every female athlete could read this before they vote in November. What a sad little man Scott Yenor must be. Total Handmaid's Tale crap.
Hmm. Perhaps we print copies of this and hand them out at every girls sports competition in August and September and October. And why not boys as well? I'm willing to bet the majority of all parents of athletes support girls in athletics.
IMHO, the ultimate goal of the Heritage Foundation is the same as the ultimate goal of the KKK, a society controlled by Straight White Guys (preferably White Christian Nationalists). Everybody else is just for their; enjoyment (women), amusement (all nonwhite people), or their profit (basically everybody else).
Yes. That faux “meritocracy” that enables them to be best only by harnessing the power of the state to suppress all others. Innate genetic competitiveness indeed!
From what I've read of the report, it also repolishes the old chestnut that engaging in strenuous athletic activity damages women's reproductive capabilities. A similar argument was used in the late 19th century about allowing women to attend college--too much studying drained energy from the reproductive organs, which led to educated women having fewer children. Weak men fear strong, educated women.
These arguments are so great - tell me you struggle mightily with your impotence, without telling me you struggle mightily with your impotence! And the more they get the public to disregard science (completely the WORST thing that can happen), there is no viable argument to challenge this.
I became enamored of the suffragists and feminists in the early 60's when I was in the fifth grade, in particular Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan Anthony. Cady Stanton's father was a lawyer and it was in his library that she learned about the laws which kept women from the protections of citizenship that were taken as their due by men. I remember asking my mother what was meant by the idea that women's monthly "changes" made us unfit to govern ourselves. She struggled to explain, as we had never discussed menstruation. Finally, she just said, oh, that's a bunch of nonsense.
The Heritage jamokes want to return to the 19th century.
That was the original reasoning for women playing on a smaller basketball court. (Some older friends explained to me that women once played on smaller courts.) Of course, it also kept them off the court on which the men's teams played.
BTW at Texas Tech University in 1995, there was the following bumper sticker after the women's basketball team brought home the championship: "Texas Tech: Where the men are men and the women are National Champions."
If that old chestnut was true, there wouldn't have been so many hush-hush teen pregnancies back in the day when several years of required strenuous activities were the order of the day in girls' PE classes. Back in the day when reliable birth control wasn't available.
If this is what they publish and say in plain sight, imagine what they say and do behind closed doors?
Are they aspiring to ‘Epstein Class’ behaviour regarding girls and women? Or is women as obedient chattel status sufficient? What about ‘their’ women and the women that enable them?
Reading the election results in MO on amendments 4 & 5, I wonder if we’ll be able to flip some seats. Voters reject republican policies for the most part. But get caught up in identity politics. Will they vote for a democrat if they have a choice? I’m so tired of voting against stupid.
4 & 5 were absolutely crushed. In St. Charles County, many signs said “vote yes.” Many Catholics seemed to not pay attention to what their priests wanted. And that was purely because we managed to get abortion back on the ballot. Also very blue-collar, union area. Seemingly they understood Right to Work would be passed asap by a GOP supermajority. Anyway, great news on that front, but terrible news on Jess’s actual post.
As a father of three daughters, one who was Captain of her Cross Country team, I"m disgusted. Sports in any fashion builds character and leadership that we so desperately need. These "men" are the poorest examples of society who probably had a lot of trouble getting dates to the prom.
Long ago, in a university anthropology class, I studied Native American societies. I was struck by the obvious and long-lasting perseverance of the Navajo Nation--a matriarchal society. In spite of all the efforts of the European invaders to eradicate all of the existing peoples they found here, it has persisted and been successful.
I get your point, but embracing a matriarchy just substitutes one ruler for another. Rulers of any gender are antithetical to a free, self governing people.
Oh, dude. Coming at it from a male perspective it seems as though your lens is very, very narrowly focused. Competition vs. Cooperation. Nurturing vs. Discouraging.
You cannot have a "free, self-governing people" in an environment which praises competition (always one "winner") at the expense of working together.
Considering how long the US has been led/ruled by a male perspective and just looking at the results of that - wars, wars and more wars - at my advanced age (88) I think its past time for a female perspective. Actually it has been time for decades.
I'm old enough to remember Geraldine Ferrarro running for president. But oh my the shock and awe routine back then really hasnt changed, has it? The idea of a female president scares the daylights out of both parties.
There is no intrinsic difference,other than gender, between a patriarchy and a matriarchy. By definition, each is governance by a ruler or sovereign. That individual ruler can fall anywhere on a spectrum from benevolence to dictatorial - gender doesn’t matter. In contrast, to be a self-governing people requires cooperation, collaboration and a level of respect for others. It requires democratic participation, not rules handed down from the sovereign. If your preference is to have someone tell you what you must do, then we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Bill is making a point about the quality of people we choose to lead us, and suggesting that such a system should not be based on gender. Would we want a matriarchy with Kristi Noem at its head? Or Laura Inghram? Or Susie Wiles? There are women as well as men who let power go to their heads. The point is to have a system that prevents anyone from being able to abuse power.
No, do some research & I'm pretty sure EVERY WORLD WAR WAS STARTED BY A DECISION FROM A MAN! Kamala Harris was an ECONOMIST & a prosecutor & SHE WOULD HAVE NEVER DONE ANY OF THIS! Tell me you don't understand women by telling me this BS! Don't at me....you have no IDEA what you are talking about .....take a seat .... Men have had 250 years to GOVERN & look at what a shit show you have provided.... & since you're ignorant, bullying the other IS MASSIVELY ILLEGAL IN EVERY CONSTITUTION THIS COUNTRY HAS! GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
Jo, using a very broad brush, I’d generally agree with you on the history. However, it’s still a spectrum - Mary 1 (Bloody Mary) comes to mind. My argument is with “archie’s” in general. Whether they be “mon”, “patri”, “matri”, “olig” or whatever, I don’t want a sovereign ruler. I want participatory democracy where we can choose and remove our own leaders. We can reject those who wish to rule rather than represent.
Broadly speaking, I’d prefer to vote for women, but we also know that they can sometimes be as awful or worse than men. After all, I live in the state that blessed you with Pam Bondi. Given the choice between Lauren Boebert and Ted Cruz or MTG and Tubberville, I’m voting for the guy based on the likelihood that he will die sooner! 😄
I'm not saying one gender is better than the other. But historically you are wrong. Men have been running the world for thousands of years and... here we are. Personally, I've had enough. But I would take a balance, if I could get one - unfortunately I can't!
Also, matriarchy (and patriarchy) are not governmental models that we are voting on. They are cultural systems.
And voting on the person that will die soonest is terrible because they still can do plenty of damage before they die. Again: CURRENT EXAMPLE IN OFFICE!
But I do think that more women need to be put in charge of things. I think that men are not trustworthy as a gender any more.
The question is who is doing the governing on what basis. There will be government of one sort or another in a place where there are people living in a community. There is no reason for that to be a patriarchy or a matriarchy or a kleptocracy.
The issue is whether all in the community are able to participate and on what basis.
The Heritage Foundation clearly intends to try to put women back in the imaginary place they want them to be in: weak, dependent, unquestioning of their masters, ignorant, subservient and up shit’s creek without a paddle when they get dumped for the next trophy wife or master dies or becomes disabled.
This is Robert Buffaloe. I was a family doctor for 39 years. Sometimes parents would ask me about their daughters and sports, worried that sports might damage them. I kept some studies about girls and sports to show the parents. Participation in sports results in higher graduation rates, fewer sexual partners and about a 50% decrease in teen pregnancy. Since project 25 wants more pregnancies and more trad wives, of course they would be against girls in sports.
Not that I think everything is about me, Me, ME, but . . .
There was a lot in this post that pissed me off. I took this quote from the Yenor report quite personally:
“Nor should we forget what happens when we ignore the effects of Title IX on men. Competition is much more central to male identity…both competitive drive and male friendship have suffered under the weaponized application of Title IX.”
What pure, unmitigated bullshit! The stupidity of this is mind-blowing.
Coincidentally, three days ago I posted this in a Substack note: "If supporting equality for women, and wanting men to stop acting like assholes, makes me a feminist, okay, I’m a feminist." I am a man, and I am also a Liberal and a feminist, which makes this idiotic report about me, too. Men need to join the fight against this. This isn't just a women's issue, this is a people issue.
I hope you forgive me for promoting my own stuff, Jess, but here's a link to my latest full essay, titled: "Women Do Not Have to Accept the Unacceptable", which promotes equality for women.
Norm, thank you, this discriminatory nonsense hurts all little boys and little girls, No one should be denied the environment and opportunity to become their full best self, no stereotypes imposed,
You’re welcome, Linda. It’s 2026, you’d think we would be past this stupid stuff by now. But, we are a long way from being past inequality and discrimination, unfortunately.
They will get you all pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen one way or another if the people let them. The Christian nationalists believe they have to oppress women to please god which makes them the most dangerously delusional people in the country.
Thanks for bringing this report to our attention. It’s stunning that in this year of our Lord 2026, “serious” people hold these Neanderthal views and are determined to re-engineer society to fit them. We fought too hard for women’s rights and were never going back!
This clarifies how the racist objectives of Project 2025 connect to the misogyny. Normalizing the "otherization" of black, brown, gay, female people in order to put white men in a superior position over all others isn't just un-American, it is evil. And they have a written, published plan.
While all of the headline nonsense gets the attention (and the Reflecting Pool, failed Iran war, kleptocracy), the Russell Voughts and Heritage Foundation white Christian nationalists are quietly working to dismantle our country. Thanks for keeping at it, and telling us about it, Jess.
Well said, Jess. It would be good if the parents of every female athlete could read this before they vote in November. What a sad little man Scott Yenor must be. Total Handmaid's Tale crap.
Hmm. Perhaps we print copies of this and hand them out at every girls sports competition in August and September and October. And why not boys as well? I'm willing to bet the majority of all parents of athletes support girls in athletics.
Yes, he probably suffers from more than one male deficiency.
IMHO, the ultimate goal of the Heritage Foundation is the same as the ultimate goal of the KKK, a society controlled by Straight White Guys (preferably White Christian Nationalists). Everybody else is just for their; enjoyment (women), amusement (all nonwhite people), or their profit (basically everybody else).
Yes. That faux “meritocracy” that enables them to be best only by harnessing the power of the state to suppress all others. Innate genetic competitiveness indeed!
Best description of our current situation . Well said
Agreed, but I would add the word "ultra-rich."
https://www.nobelprize.org/contact
EX form! trump is not worthy! 🍊🫏belongs in prison!
Sspresd the Nobel link
From what I've read of the report, it also repolishes the old chestnut that engaging in strenuous athletic activity damages women's reproductive capabilities. A similar argument was used in the late 19th century about allowing women to attend college--too much studying drained energy from the reproductive organs, which led to educated women having fewer children. Weak men fear strong, educated women.
These arguments are so great - tell me you struggle mightily with your impotence, without telling me you struggle mightily with your impotence! And the more they get the public to disregard science (completely the WORST thing that can happen), there is no viable argument to challenge this.
I became enamored of the suffragists and feminists in the early 60's when I was in the fifth grade, in particular Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan Anthony. Cady Stanton's father was a lawyer and it was in his library that she learned about the laws which kept women from the protections of citizenship that were taken as their due by men. I remember asking my mother what was meant by the idea that women's monthly "changes" made us unfit to govern ourselves. She struggled to explain, as we had never discussed menstruation. Finally, she just said, oh, that's a bunch of nonsense.
The Heritage jamokes want to return to the 19th century.
Indeed they do.
Won’t be long before turfing women out of Higher Education will get going. Dismal place America/Gilead is going to be.
these guys would love to return to legal coverture, and burning women as witches to steal their livelihoods.
That was the original reasoning for women playing on a smaller basketball court. (Some older friends explained to me that women once played on smaller courts.) Of course, it also kept them off the court on which the men's teams played.
BTW at Texas Tech University in 1995, there was the following bumper sticker after the women's basketball team brought home the championship: "Texas Tech: Where the men are men and the women are National Champions."
If that old chestnut was true, there wouldn't have been so many hush-hush teen pregnancies back in the day when several years of required strenuous activities were the order of the day in girls' PE classes. Back in the day when reliable birth control wasn't available.
If this is what they publish and say in plain sight, imagine what they say and do behind closed doors?
Are they aspiring to ‘Epstein Class’ behaviour regarding girls and women? Or is women as obedient chattel status sufficient? What about ‘their’ women and the women that enable them?
Reading the election results in MO on amendments 4 & 5, I wonder if we’ll be able to flip some seats. Voters reject republican policies for the most part. But get caught up in identity politics. Will they vote for a democrat if they have a choice? I’m so tired of voting against stupid.
I’m pretty positive we are going to flip a few.
Excellent!
4 & 5 were absolutely crushed. In St. Charles County, many signs said “vote yes.” Many Catholics seemed to not pay attention to what their priests wanted. And that was purely because we managed to get abortion back on the ballot. Also very blue-collar, union area. Seemingly they understood Right to Work would be passed asap by a GOP supermajority. Anyway, great news on that front, but terrible news on Jess’s actual post.
Really important article. Thanks, Jess.
As a father of three daughters, one who was Captain of her Cross Country team, I"m disgusted. Sports in any fashion builds character and leadership that we so desperately need. These "men" are the poorest examples of society who probably had a lot of trouble getting dates to the prom.
WE WILL NOT COMPLY! EMBRACE THE MATRIARCHY! KILL THE PATRIARCHY, it has failed miserably!
Long ago, in a university anthropology class, I studied Native American societies. I was struck by the obvious and long-lasting perseverance of the Navajo Nation--a matriarchal society. In spite of all the efforts of the European invaders to eradicate all of the existing peoples they found here, it has persisted and been successful.
I get your point, but embracing a matriarchy just substitutes one ruler for another. Rulers of any gender are antithetical to a free, self governing people.
Oh, dude. Coming at it from a male perspective it seems as though your lens is very, very narrowly focused. Competition vs. Cooperation. Nurturing vs. Discouraging.
You cannot have a "free, self-governing people" in an environment which praises competition (always one "winner") at the expense of working together.
Considering how long the US has been led/ruled by a male perspective and just looking at the results of that - wars, wars and more wars - at my advanced age (88) I think its past time for a female perspective. Actually it has been time for decades.
I'm old enough to remember Geraldine Ferrarro running for president. But oh my the shock and awe routine back then really hasnt changed, has it? The idea of a female president scares the daylights out of both parties.
So, yeah, its time.
There is no intrinsic difference,other than gender, between a patriarchy and a matriarchy. By definition, each is governance by a ruler or sovereign. That individual ruler can fall anywhere on a spectrum from benevolence to dictatorial - gender doesn’t matter. In contrast, to be a self-governing people requires cooperation, collaboration and a level of respect for others. It requires democratic participation, not rules handed down from the sovereign. If your preference is to have someone tell you what you must do, then we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Bill is making a point about the quality of people we choose to lead us, and suggesting that such a system should not be based on gender. Would we want a matriarchy with Kristi Noem at its head? Or Laura Inghram? Or Susie Wiles? There are women as well as men who let power go to their heads. The point is to have a system that prevents anyone from being able to abuse power.
No, do some research & I'm pretty sure EVERY WORLD WAR WAS STARTED BY A DECISION FROM A MAN! Kamala Harris was an ECONOMIST & a prosecutor & SHE WOULD HAVE NEVER DONE ANY OF THIS! Tell me you don't understand women by telling me this BS! Don't at me....you have no IDEA what you are talking about .....take a seat .... Men have had 250 years to GOVERN & look at what a shit show you have provided.... & since you're ignorant, bullying the other IS MASSIVELY ILLEGAL IN EVERY CONSTITUTION THIS COUNTRY HAS! GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
Bill, Jess is not embracing a matriarchy. She’s embracing equity. BIG difference.
Ok. Sorry.
I was replying to the comment about “embracing the matriarchy”. I had a separate comment endorsing Jess’s points.
Matriarchies are historically more egalitarian.
Jo, using a very broad brush, I’d generally agree with you on the history. However, it’s still a spectrum - Mary 1 (Bloody Mary) comes to mind. My argument is with “archie’s” in general. Whether they be “mon”, “patri”, “matri”, “olig” or whatever, I don’t want a sovereign ruler. I want participatory democracy where we can choose and remove our own leaders. We can reject those who wish to rule rather than represent.
Broadly speaking, I’d prefer to vote for women, but we also know that they can sometimes be as awful or worse than men. After all, I live in the state that blessed you with Pam Bondi. Given the choice between Lauren Boebert and Ted Cruz or MTG and Tubberville, I’m voting for the guy based on the likelihood that he will die sooner! 😄
I'm not saying one gender is better than the other. But historically you are wrong. Men have been running the world for thousands of years and... here we are. Personally, I've had enough. But I would take a balance, if I could get one - unfortunately I can't!
Also, matriarchy (and patriarchy) are not governmental models that we are voting on. They are cultural systems.
And voting on the person that will die soonest is terrible because they still can do plenty of damage before they die. Again: CURRENT EXAMPLE IN OFFICE!
But I do think that more women need to be put in charge of things. I think that men are not trustworthy as a gender any more.
Ok. Just to be clear then - you are arguing that we should have a ruler/sovereign rather than being a self-governing people.
The question is who is doing the governing on what basis. There will be government of one sort or another in a place where there are people living in a community. There is no reason for that to be a patriarchy or a matriarchy or a kleptocracy.
The issue is whether all in the community are able to participate and on what basis.
The Heritage Foundation clearly intends to try to put women back in the imaginary place they want them to be in: weak, dependent, unquestioning of their masters, ignorant, subservient and up shit’s creek without a paddle when they get dumped for the next trophy wife or master dies or becomes disabled.
Completely agree.
This is Robert Buffaloe. I was a family doctor for 39 years. Sometimes parents would ask me about their daughters and sports, worried that sports might damage them. I kept some studies about girls and sports to show the parents. Participation in sports results in higher graduation rates, fewer sexual partners and about a 50% decrease in teen pregnancy. Since project 25 wants more pregnancies and more trad wives, of course they would be against girls in sports.
Thanks, Doc.
Not that I think everything is about me, Me, ME, but . . .
There was a lot in this post that pissed me off. I took this quote from the Yenor report quite personally:
“Nor should we forget what happens when we ignore the effects of Title IX on men. Competition is much more central to male identity…both competitive drive and male friendship have suffered under the weaponized application of Title IX.”
What pure, unmitigated bullshit! The stupidity of this is mind-blowing.
Coincidentally, three days ago I posted this in a Substack note: "If supporting equality for women, and wanting men to stop acting like assholes, makes me a feminist, okay, I’m a feminist." I am a man, and I am also a Liberal and a feminist, which makes this idiotic report about me, too. Men need to join the fight against this. This isn't just a women's issue, this is a people issue.
I hope you forgive me for promoting my own stuff, Jess, but here's a link to my latest full essay, titled: "Women Do Not Have to Accept the Unacceptable", which promotes equality for women.
https://thestormbynorm.substack.com/p/a-whole-nother-big-bowl-of-wrong?r=1qaj9v
Norm, thank you, this discriminatory nonsense hurts all little boys and little girls, No one should be denied the environment and opportunity to become their full best self, no stereotypes imposed,
You’re welcome, Linda. It’s 2026, you’d think we would be past this stupid stuff by now. But, we are a long way from being past inequality and discrimination, unfortunately.
They will get you all pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen one way or another if the people let them. The Christian nationalists believe they have to oppress women to please god which makes them the most dangerously delusional people in the country.
May as well label them the "Christian" Taliban... It is accurate...
Thanks for bringing this report to our attention. It’s stunning that in this year of our Lord 2026, “serious” people hold these Neanderthal views and are determined to re-engineer society to fit them. We fought too hard for women’s rights and were never going back!
Stepford wives (1975) at it's finest...
This clarifies how the racist objectives of Project 2025 connect to the misogyny. Normalizing the "otherization" of black, brown, gay, female people in order to put white men in a superior position over all others isn't just un-American, it is evil. And they have a written, published plan.
It is "funny" how flagrant Heritage Foundation/Project 2025 has been. It is curious how few of us read the Project and took it seriously.
Depends on who "us" is. My hair has been on fire since I first heard of it.