🚨 NEW: For the @WSJ, @Hartz_PhD and I expose the ideological takeover of the American Psychological Association. The APA is facing the possible loss of its federal accreditation authority following allegations of widespread antisemitism. But while the APA's antisemitism problem is serious, it's only a symptom of a much deeper ideological rot. The organization has become so captured by radical left-wing political activism that its commitment to scientific objectivity competence is now in serious doubt. We examined the program for this year's major APA Division 39 conference, which drew nearly 800 attendees and held 90 panels over four days. By our count, roughly 70 of the 90 panels were overtly political, and always left-wing. Topics included abolishing the family, queer anarchist psychoanalysis, dismantling gender assessment guidelines, and white supremacy. One session even concluded with a drag show. There was at least some hope that the threat of losing federal accreditation might prompt some institutional soul-searching. It didn't. Instead, APA members just elected Candice Hargons as their next president. Her campaign identifies "systemic intersectional oppression" as the profession's "common enemy" and calls for rejecting the traditional scientific notions of objectivity. Psychologists wield enormous influence over vulnerable patients, and the people seeking treatment deserve the peace of mind knowing that the care they're receiving care is evidence based and not tainted radical politics. We believe most would agree that federal accreditation should actually mean something. If the APA cannot distinguish its scientific mission from its political activism, the Education Department should reconsider whether it deserves the government's endorsement as an authority over psychological training. Read our full essay in the Wall Street Journal below: 🔗wsj.com/opinion/the-inmates-…

🚨New genders just dropped: Sistergirl and Brotherboy A new peer-reviewed paper claims that we must redefine sex, sexuality, and gender in order to "decolonize" health and "unsettl[e] Western biomedical norms" in service of the "LGBTQA+SB" community, From what I can tell, a Sistergirl is just a man who takes on the role and identity of a woman, and a Brotherboy is a woman who takes on the role and identity of a man. Nothing too unique going on here. The paper gives no specifics on how sex, sexuality, or gender should be redefined, but claims that "colonial influence manifests in data collection through adherence to a medical norm of male/female bodies." So "male" and "female" seem to be on the chopping block. The authors describe themselves as "a queer Yamatji person, a Wiradjuri trans fulla, a Wakka Wakka Brotherboy, a trans Ngarrindjeri man, a queer Gunditjmara woman and a trans Murri."

Candace offers another masterclass in manipulation. First, she asks me to give her permission to violate the confidentiality provisions of her separation agreement with Daily Wire, which, of course, I cannot do, since I am no longer with Daily Wire and thus have no authority over how they enforce their sundry agreements with her. Note, too, that she wants my permission to drop only “the document where you listed the reasons for my termination.” Candace, as Candace, has access to all of the agreements she has signed. I, as the former CEO of DW, have access to none of them. So even if I could give such permission — I can't — Candace would be free to selectively release only what suits her and serves her narrative. This is selective disclosure dressed up as a demand for transparency. It's heads I win, tails you lose, as it always is with her manipulations. In the end, I suspect she rather enjoys having an NDA with Daily Wire because it allows her to present herself as being muzzled when, in reality, she violates the terms of every contract she ever signs anyway, but only as far as it benefits her. She disparages Daily Wire and Co. all the time, has openly stated that she is not bound by contracts with people she dislikes, and has openly boasted of providing copies of confidential documents to reporters. Again, it's all just one big manipulation. If it were in Candace's interest to “drop the document,” she would. What stops her? Decency? Fear of lawsuits? Egyptian planes? Certainly nothing in those documents materially changes what is already in the public record. I have not been shy about the reasons I fired Candace. The video of my speech to the DW staff that day leaked long ago. I am not ashamed of having fired her. I'm proud of it. She has spent every day since proving me right. She has devoted herself to slander and lies for fame and money. She relishes trying to ruin the lives of others. She is one of the worst actors in public life, and one of the worst people I have ever known. She is not only a liar, but a serial liar. The mistress of lies. I don't defend myself against most of her lies because to repeat them, even for the purpose of correcting them, only gives them greater reach and credibility with her audience. But back to her tactics in this particular message, which are important to understand. “I grow tired of your psychotic fixation with my life” is hilarious, but effective. Hilarious because, of course, Candace is currently making millions of dollars a month off her psychotic fixation with Erika Kirk, TPUSA, and The Jews™. I know I grow tired of that. I guess we'll both just have to resign ourselves to our disappointment. It's effective, though, because it poisons the well. By characterizing my attention to her statements as a “psychotic fixation,” she establishes a frame through which her audience will interpret anything I say in response. My attempts to defend myself become further evidence of my supposed obsession. She is very good at what she does, and what she does is leading so many people down the road to hell… “I have nothing to hide. Do you?” A great closing couplet because it uses a big lie — Candace certainly has plenty to hide — to give power to a tacit accusation. DO YOU? It's a textbook loaded question, but also something of a Kafka trap: the failure to comply with her demand becomes evidence of the very guilt she is insinuating. Obviously if I don’t do the thing she demanded, which she doesn’t even want and which she knows I have no legal authority to do, that means YES! Truly, she's an artist. This is why I say she is better at lying than most people are at discerning truth.

🚨 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF AMERICA, THE MOMENT YOU’VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR! The @WNBA has officially responded! IS THE #WNBA TRANSPHOBIC? Apparently, the WNBA still can’t define what a WOMAN is, but they’re absolutely certain they know what a MAN is! How convenient! WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert has declared that I am a man. Who gave her the authority to decide who I am? Who gets to define my identity? And how can the WNBA determine who is a man without explaining what qualifies someone as a woman? Is the WNBA denying people the right to define their own gender identity? You can’t have it both ways! America, read this letter for yourselves. THE WNBA HAS SOME EXPLAINING TO DO!

The conference panels at this American Psychological Association division event are so absurd that someone who hasn't been paying attention to the APA might think @SwipeWright and @Hartz_PhD made them up. But those of us who've followed the APA for the last several years are entirely unphased by the fact that all the absolute junk being pushed has nothing to do with good psychological or therapeutic principles. wsj.com/opinion/the-inmates-…

Recently had the opportunity to explain to the Supreme Court of the United States the madness of reframing a mental disorder as healthy and how that created the devastatingly harmful concept of the “transgender child.”

BREAKING: The flagship law review at UC Berkeley is poised to delete all internal application records after we reported on the journal's use of personal statements to promote "diversity," sparking concerns that the journal is attempting to destroy evidence of unlawful discrimination. The law review will vote tomorrow on a document retention policy that would require the journal to delete all "Write-On application materials following the conclusion of each year's Write-On process," as well as any materials related to the election of the journal's Holistic Review Committee. It would also bar the law review from retaining "any recordings of election forums." As a reminder, law review editors have pledged in writing to "uplift Native voices," weigh "diverse life experience" against "technical editing abilities," and "integrate anti-racist sentiment" into the selection process.

For 25 years at FIRE, I've watched universities demand endless evidence of problems they've known about for decades. This summer, I revisited research and reports from Yale, Harvard, Vanderbilt, WashU, and Cornell. I gave this familiar tactic a name: the Academic Filibuster.

I’ve written about the APA’s fringe stance on “gender-affirming care.”This must-read WSJ piece by @SwipeWright and @Hartz_PhD shows how total the capture has become. The APA’s newly elected president identifies “systemic intersectional oppression” as the profession’s common enemy and rejects traditional scientific objectivity. It has become a radical advocacy group, dogged by accusations of antisemitism, and focused instead on topics such as “queer anarchist psychoanalysis” and “white supremacy.” Patients and the public deserve evidence-based psychology, and federal accreditation should require it👇

In a @WSJopinion op-ed, Colin Wright (@SwipeWright) and Andrew Hartz (@Hartz_PhD) argue that the American Psychological Association has shifted from a scientific body to a vehicle for political activism. Read the full piece at WSJ: wsj.com/opinion/the-inmates-…

Read my and @SwipeWright's op-ed on the APA in @WSJopinion

Distilling alcohol at home for personal consumption should absolutely be legal.

BREAKING: Judges dismissed a case challenging Tennessee’s universal school choice program. The teachers union cartel loses again.

Should believing in equality mean denying inherent biological differences? Colin Wright explores what happens when moral judgements are based on scientific falsehoods. Read his full essay here : thinkablereview.substack.com…

Congratulations to @MrAndyNgo on publishing another great book about left-wing radicalism. Highly recommend it. amazon.com/dp/B0H6YBHJ3T?lv=…

Amidst allegations that the trans advocacy brochure sent to Texas households is a false flag designed to boost Paxton’s campaign, one trans advocate writes: “There’s nothing in it that’s actually bad, but it absolutely is designed to fearmonger…”

New: @JKetcham91 @ishapiro and I filed a version of our "Brandeis brief" on pediatric gender medicine in the parental rights case Hudacko v. Regents of the University of California. Plaintiff Ted Hudacko has appealed to SCOTUS after an unfavorable 9th circuit ruling.

Last week, two Columbia students dared to offer a dissenting opinion on the Cornell case—they got death threats and were told they should not be allowed to speak. @Nikos_Mohammadi and Christina Ma argued no more than that students should think before arriving at sweeping conclusions about a complex case, and that it was infantilizing to suggest women could not make decisions they might later regret. None of their detractors have so-far been able to offer a coherent response to their arguments—except making personal attacks and saying they should not be allowed to speak. In that regard, they've already won the argument. My latest in @CityJournal here: city-journal.org/article/cor…

White guilt museum ghosts "White Guilt" documentary. In August, my father, Shelby Steele, and I asked the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture (@NMAAHC) to host a public screening of our new documentary, "White Guilt," followed by a conversation with the two of us. The museum has done this for other films like "13th" and "I Am Not Your Negro." Instead of an answer about a public screening, we were sent an event rental application. Unsure of what to do, we filled it out. Then we were told our dates were unavailable, even though the museum's public calendar showed nothing on those dates. When we asked about other dates for a public screening, we were offered a private rental for $35,000. We clarified that this is not what we had asked for. We wanted a public screening and said we were flexible on dates. The museum then stopped answering us. @FoxNews asked the museum for comment. It didn't answer them either. My father was born into segregation in Chicago and marched for civil rights. He has spent decades writing about how white guilt transformed America and the West after the civil rights movement. That is why we believed our documentary belongs at this museum. Doesn't this museum belong to all Americans? @RobertSchmad of @FoxNews interviewed @jasonrileywsj, @GlennLoury and @carolmswain. Loury watched the film and said that screening it "would certainly be an appropriate use of the platform" of the museum. Our request remains the same: a screening at this museum. We would appreciate an answer. foxnews.com/politics/smithso…