In Attempt to Defend Chelsea Clinton, Far-Left Trans Writer Accidentally Admits 'Gender Queer' Book is 'Creepy' for Kids

Nick Kangadis | May 2, 2023
Text Audio
00:00 00:00
Font Size

Much like other people’s money, eventually the left will run out of excuses in order to feed their narratives. It doesn’t matter the topic, it almost always happens — either that or the left will use their expertise to make their ideological opponent’s case for them. This story is more of the latter.

Privileged former First Daughter Chelsea Clinton attempted to make a case against banning books, but decided to use a losing argument by conveying that over half of the books being banned “involved books with LGBTQ+ characters & themes.”

Here’s a pro-tip for completely inept lefties: people on the right aren’t opposed to the LGBTQ community. They just have a problem when you try to pervert their children with highly sexualized visuals and descriptions of sex acts, which have no place in a minor’s education.

Anywho, that brought out Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon to call out Clinton for her defense of perverted material for kids.

“Chelsea Clinton has come out in favor of porn for kids,” Dillon tweeted.

And then, of course, because what would this kind of exchange be without a whiny, clueless leftist giving their two cents — which they’re perfectly entitled to giving.

Ari Drennen, the LGBTQ director of the George Soros-funded Media Matters for America, chimed in to try and defend perversion of children before making detractors cases for them.

Related: WATCH: Dems Vote Against Felony For Indecent Exposure To Minors– Because It Could ‘Ban Drag Shows’

“Weird way to tell us you’re yanking it to children’s books, Seth,” Drennen said in a strange instance of projection.

This forced Dillon to play his ace in the hole, sending graphic pages of the “Gender Queer” book in response. Drennen was confused and thought Dillon should’ve saved the response for a private conversation because of how graphic the images are for public consumption, let alone for kids.

“Hey Seth I think you meant this for my DMs, you just sent me an unsolicited drawing of a blowjob,” Drennen tweeted.

This is where Drennen, who is supposedly a “trans woman,” proves Dillon’s point for him.

“What do we call a man who sends this photo to a woman unsolicited?” Drennen tweeted. “I don’t think “satirist” is what I’d go with, personally.”

During the exchange, Drennen tried to make “himself/herself” the victim in the scenario.

“Nobody says that’s a book intended for children and at no time am I ok with this man sending me sexual images,” Drennen added.


Dillon pointed out Drennen’s initial response in which “he/she” disgustingly claimed — because “he/she” didn’t have much of an argument — that Dillon was “yanking it to children’s books.”

So there’s admission number one, that the book was intended for children.

“You called it a children's book,” Dillon tweeted in response. “The imagery—and your response to it—proves it isn't. And I didn't send it to a woman.”

“So your position is that you’re sexually harassing another man and you think *that* will go over better with your audience?” Drennen asked in response. “Stop sending me this stuff Seth, it’s creepy.”


Yes! We know! We agree that the content in question is, in fact, “creepy.” That’s the whole point. This book shouldn’t be available to children.

The left will run in circles to defend whatever perversion is the flavor of the month, but aren’t they also the ones who push for minorities to be removed from iconic branding and other entities? Aunt Jemima? Uncle Ben? The Land-O-Lakes Indian woman? Hattie McDaniel? Frank L. White?

No? Nothing? Silence from the left? But isn’t “silence violence?” Or are words violence? I guess it depends on the day for a leftist.

Any way you slice it, at least we got an admission from someone on the far-left that the books parents — not just conservatives — but parents believe is too much for kids.


Follow Us On Twitter