I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk

Mother of 3 | American abroad | Failed academic aka Independent Scholar |✍️🗣️ Geographical Political Economy & Critique of Ideology

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

https://t.co/OURjVNlrbE

[Joshua D Phillips @JoshPhillipsPhD]

Bad news teachers

Those “AI detectors” for student papers don’t work (Of course they don’t 😂)

I had students do IN CLASS essays. No AI. I ran one student paper (~800 words) through 5 diff programs & got everything from “100% AI” to “likely 100% human”

Good luck this year 😂😭

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

Women age 55, men to age 60, no cut off for those with certain skills/expertise.

I am sure this will be used to raise similar measures in US, UK etc.

Takes care of un/underemployment and inspires nationalism, building up industrial capacity via increased military/security spending.

#spatialfix #interregnum

[新高地 @5xyxh]

要打仗了，强制征兵和私人财产征用有法可依了。《中华人民共和国国防动员法》已于2026年8月28日修订通过，从2026年10月1日起，这是一部战时国防法。
原则上，18–60周岁男性公民、18–55周岁女性公民应当担负国防勤务（有特殊专长人员不受年龄限制）（第58条）。
民用资源征收、征用任何组织和个人都有接受依法征收、征用民用资源的义务（第64条）。
对公民：拒绝/拖延提供统计资料、不报到或不服从征召/勤务、拒绝拖延征用或阻碍改造、编造传播虚假动员信息干扰秩序等，由县级人民政府责令限期改正，逾期不改的强制履行义务（第78条）。
对企业事业单位、社会组织：上述类似情形，以及未按规定贯彻国防要求建设、未按规定储备战略物资或不服从调用、未按要求储备军品能力、拒绝延误军事采购、拒绝拖延专业保障任务、阻挠公民履行义务等，责令限期改正，逾期不改强制履行，并可以罚款（第79条）。

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@hazelvibess Why? The latter would resolve this interregnum a lot faster because feministas high on their own supply would soon realize that they will always lose a men v. feminists battle where the men don’t hold back, patronise etc.

In the last instance women’s rights are enforced by men.

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

I got questions for the PMC gatekeepers of what is and isn’t race/racist:

1. Was White Men Can’t Jump racist?
2. What about Rachel Dolezal precludes her from claiming a Black identity?

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

Let’s make truthmaxxing in academia, politics and journalism a thing.

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@bernardtjoy No Lovecraft?

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@ghostofchristo1 @bencobley That reminds me, did ChatGPT etc kill Cliff’s Notes? I wonder how the companion book genre is fairing?

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@bernardtjoy How 2026. Before interpretation comes moral, or better, tribe classification.

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@CharlieWalsham_ What’s dignified about the practice of trans? (not rhetorical)

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@Hebro_Steele If heaven’s rockin’ don’t come knockin’

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@dlondonwortel Development as Freedom by Amartya Sen

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@fem_mb Feminism’s foe appears to be The Patriarchy but it is mostly femininity and nature.

https://t.co/32BI7TBgkH

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

“Some men feel like women and that's "true" but we don't what that means or reflects.”

We don’t? Well we know it doesn’t mean they are actually of subset of women (male women is nonsense). Sex is binary: male or female.

Also, much effort outside of academia and msm has looked into why “gender identity” and global LGBTQ+ Inc took off how and when it did. @bjportraits and @wesyang are two good places to start.

Here is another: https://t.co/MP5WsPtpKP

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

“Some men feel like women and that's "true" but we don't what that means or reflects.”

We don’t? Well we know it doesn’t mean they are actually of subset of women (male women is nonsense). Sex is binary: male or female.

Also, much effort outside of academia and msm has looked into why “gender identity” and global LGBTQ+ Inc took off how and when it did. @bjportraits and @wesyang are two good places to start.

Here is another: https://t.co/MP5WsPtpKP

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

“These false claims blend developmental biology, social identity, historical speculation and advocacy terminology until a political position appears to be a scientific conclusion.”

https://t.co/oABWXHH8mD

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@fem_mb Feminism’s foe appears to be The Patriarchy but it is mostly femininity and nature.

https://t.co/32BI7TBgkH

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@RoisinMichaux Mother Nature has a sense of irony.

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@AlexToughTakes Literally everyone is trapped in their body 🤷🏻‍♀️

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

@m_tomorrowland @FistedFoucault Lake Tahoe?

[I Had Potential | Tara van Dijk @taravandijk2]

They went all in on TWAW, “The WNBA now faces a conundrum in court. It must argue that Enes Kanter and Roye White are not women despite their claim to be women. It must therefore argue that some men who claim to be women aren't women. It must therefore say what a woman is and what a trans woman is. It must therefore establish criteria for what it means to be a man who has a female gender identity that could serve as the basis of legal recognition. It cannot do any of these things because all of them cut against the grain of the goals of the transgender movement that the Democratic party has declared to be the "civil rights movement of the 21st century. The party declared forbidding any woman or girl from drawing a boundary between herself and any man who says he is a woman in any public place, in any school, in any changing room, domestic violence shelter, prison, or sporting field, to be the non-negotiable sina qua non of human decency in America and the world.”

[Wesley Yang @wesyang]

There is no "sincerity" requirement or test in NYC Human Rights law for who should be granted access to women's spaces and competitions. "Gender identity" is a non-observable inner essence knowable only through self-report. There is no medical requirement and there is no social requirement for who must be treated as the woman they claim to be under the dogmas of the global transgender movement, or under the strictures of NYC Human Rights Law. NYC Human Rights does not say that "a woman is anyone born female plus any man who cuts off his genitals." It does not say "a woman is anyone born female plus any man who injects himself with synthetic estrogen." It does not say "a woman is anyone born female plus any man who wears a dress, or has a yearlong history of wearing dresses, or who would start crying and heaping invective on you if you referred to him by his sex." It simply says that no one can be discriminated against for their gender identity.

The instant a middle-aged, married father of two teenaged daughters who worked as a federal budget analyst at a conservative think tank in Manhattan declared himself to be the bearer of a "female brain," proven by brains scans (no such brain scans exist), the institute was required by law to refer to him by she/her pronouns and his made-up name. The think tank complied rather than commit itself to years of costly litigation. It may have also been influenced by the campaign of social pressure that the budget analyst stirred up among (overwhelmingly conservative white male) friends employed by Con Inc. who all gloried in their embrace of a Stunning and Brave Woman Becoming Her Authentic Self.

Had the Manhattan Institute refused this request and challenged NYC Human Rights Law in federal court, they likely would have eventually prevailed in the Supreme Court and created durable precedent preserving the free speech rights of all Americans individuals and institutions. It would have been a vital defense of the core liberty that the transgender movement exists to eradicate: the ability of each of us to say what we know to be true and not to be coerced into saying that which we know to be false, a freedom that the transgender movement must eliminate in order to attain its goals, which it has worked feverishly for two decades to eliminate.

They would have succeeded by impeaching the vaporous and undefined concept of "gender identity" in law, demonstrating that a non-observable, unfalsifiable, and unprovable claim by someone to be something they are not can never serve as the basis of a right claimed by an individual or a duty imposed on those that interact with them. They would have demanded that NYC define what a woman is, define what a "trans woman is" and define what "gender identity" is, proving dispositively that the movement has no answers to these foundational questions without which none of the concepts can be instantiated into law in any remotely consistent way. (The ACLU lawyer's declined to define the term "woman" before the Supreme Court.)

The WNBA now faces a conundrum in court. It must argue that Enes Kanter and Roye White are not women despite their claim to be women. It must therefore argue that some men who claim to be women aren't women. It must therefore say what a woman is and what a trans woman is. It must therefore establish criteria for what it means to be a man who has a female gender identity that could serve as the basis of legal recognition. It cannot do any of these things because all of them cut against the grain of the goals of the transgender movement that the Democratic party has declared to be the "civil rights movement of the 21st century. The party declared forbidding any woman or girl from drawing a boundary between herself and any man who says he is a woman in any public place, in any school, in any changing room, domestic violence shelter, prison, or sporting field, to be the non-negotiable sina qua non of human decency in America and the world. Indeed, having to do any of these things will prove fatal to the movement in any world governed by reason and law, which is why the ACLU declined to do so before the Supreme Court of the United States.

The work of making Enes Kanter and Royce White valid trans women based on their claim to be women is the work of decades -- the work of the transgender movement itself, now attained.