“Mental load.” If you orbit around any kind of female spaces online‚ you’ve probably heard the term. The idea originated with French sociologist Monique Haicault‚ who wrote about the changing nature of work in the 1970s and '80s. The tail end of the industrial era marked the dawn of an age of abstraction‚ when due to automation and outsourcing‚ the work of the average person became less physical and more psychologically demanding. Haicault argued that the role of women within the family mirrored these abstractive trends in the broader society and that the essential function of the familial machine‚ that which fell onto her shoulders‚ became less a traditional productive role and more one of organization and management. Christopher Lasch argued similarly in “Haven in a Heartless World” that around the turn of the 20th century‚ many of the functions once embedded in domestic life were swallowed by the expansion of the bureaucratic‚ “therapeutic” state‚ enervating the family’s authority and reducing its status. Not only did a mother’s role become tediously administrative‚ it became one of minimized importance relative to public-facing careers. Around 2017‚ the concept of “mental load” began recirculating in the mommy blogger world after a French feminist comic familiar with Haicault published an illustration on the topic that went viral. The term essentially refers to the psychological weight of managing the many moving parts of the modern family. The mental load-bearer‚ usually the mother‚ keeps a running list in her mind of the whole family’s daily‚ weekly‚ and yearly schedules‚ taking into account all the competing priorities‚ changing needs‚ developmental milestones‚ and sensitive social and emotional considerations built into the fabric of a family’s shared life. She is the CEO‚ COO‚ and CFO of the entire operation – but her status in public‚ and sometimes in private‚ is closer to that of a slave. Generally‚ those who use the term agree that women feel overburdened by this mental load‚ resentful of the lack of public respect‚ frustrated by the difficulty of explaining their overwhelmed state‚ upset by their husbands' apparent unwillingness to understand‚ empathize‚ or help‚ and ultimately bitter about the arrangement that placed the burden on their shoulders in the first place (marriage). Like so many concepts condensed to meme form online‚ the term is being used as a cudgel in the ongoing gender wars. Citing the mental load‚ embittered influencers conclude that marriage and motherhood are a raw deal for women‚ without exception. Don’t get married‚ they say. Unless you’d like to lose yourself in the haze of being a brain-drained slave. The typical reaction of trad e-people to the emergence of the “mental load” meme is to dismiss the concern (and the term) out of hand‚ minimizing the real work of motherhood and homemaking in order to strike down the whiny wives of TikTok. Shut up. Your job is easy. You have a dishwasher and a vacuum. You’re just lazy and spoiled. In the process‚ they signal a disdain for the very vocation they implore women to take up. But what would conservatives be doing if they weren’t shooting themselves in the foot? Despite all the bluster‚ every corner of the Mexican standoff is missing the point. Something is certainly amiss in the world of women. Rather than confronting that problem with the objective of understanding and overcoming it‚ the left would rather whine‚ but the right would rather bury its collective head in the sand. The way I see it‚ the emergence of the term is an opportunity to build a bridge between the sexes. It’s an opportunity for clear communication. It’s an opportunity for excellence. Monique Haicault’s ideas remind me of Mary Harrington’s – basically: Family life corresponds to the material reality of the greater economy; thus intersexual tensions of the chronic‚ systemic type we’re seeing now can be understood as an expression of something much bigger than mere petty resentments. I wrote in my Claremont review of her book that acknowledging the bigger picture frees us from the temptation to blame one sex or another. Using this as a starting point‚ we can freely acknowledge that the mental load is a real thing. If the concept reflects reality‚ then it’s good that women have named it‚ even if the meme‚ as a flattened version of the truth‚ is being deployed by cynical people for sinister purposes. Now‚ having acknowledged how women’s roles have changed in substance and status‚ what can we do to remedy our mental load? Lane Scott recently named the problem in the American Mind‚ acknowledging the anxiety that arises from unchangeable forces‚ but reframing the answer as a radical personal exercise in self-government. I have another piece forthcoming on the ten commandments of maternal self-government‚ but the gist is this: We must start with ourselves. The economic system is what it is; the substance of our modern lives is what it is. Until dramatic change arrives on the back of a world historical man‚ the challenge is to accept the reality and practice virtue within the confines of our lives. We must become excellent at personal leadership and management‚ now that we see that for better or worse‚ this is what it means to be a modern mother. Leadership begins with oneself. Little forms of rebellion against the antihuman zeitgeist can be virtuous and just as mentally freeing‚ too. Excellence in motherhood is practical‚ and it is spiritual. While we manage and delegate and refine our schedules‚ we can simultaneously prioritize that which makes us human. This may rub some people the wrong way‚ but I schedule time for prayer. We could all build more hospitality into our calendars. We should make more with our hands. This Christmas‚ I’m crafting and cooking rather than outsourcing. The matrix is what it is; the little ways we sneak in our humanity are what sets us free.

Perhaps the dumbest thing I’ve seen Republican congressmen do in my entire long life was their vote to expel former U.S. Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) from their fellowship. One doesn’t have to admire Santos’ character or excuse his con games to recognize he was no less worthy of his former post than many Democrats who remain in Congress. Is Santos really more reprehensible than that black racist demagogue Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.)‚ who‚ about a week before he left for a pro-Hamas demonstration‚ managed to trip the fire alarm in a U.S. Capitol office building? From the video made public of the incident‚ Bowman committed his criminal act quite deliberately and did it apparently to keep the House from agreeing on a temporary budget bill that would avert a shutdown. Bowman was eager to bring about a shutdown to punish “racist” Republicans. He therefore acted in a blatantly criminal fashion‚ endangering the lives of his colleagues. The Democrats are a serious‚ ruthless force who will break any rule or protect any miscreant to hold onto and expand their power. Of course‚ nothing happened to our alarm-tripping black radical except for a slap on the wrist and an inconvenient censure. When Republicans finally voted to censure him‚ they could only pull along three Democrats. This came after the Democrats spent weeks trying to block even a minimal recognition of Bowman’s outrageous behavior. House Democrats also allowed their colleague Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) to remain chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee‚ even after revelations that Swalwell was having an affair with a Chinese spy. The Democrats have also more recently blocked any attempt to discipline Swalwell for his misbehavior. Were Santos’ actions so singularly shameful that they surpassed the sleazy behavior of many of his colleagues‚ such as Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)‚ who is only one of our morally compromised Democratic solons? Charlie Kirk has devoted a recent podcast to the timely theme of “why expelling the clown George Santos is dumber than usual for Republicans.” Self-destructive righteousness Such activities may be driven partly by a need to overcompensate for the way the media depict Republican politicians‚ namely as mean-spirited‚ ultra-partisan right-wingers. This may drive Republicans into engaging periodically in unseemly virtue-signaling and constant jabbering about finding “common ground” with the left. New York Post columnist Miranda Devine has mocked the 105 Republican congressmen who “were suckered by moral vanity” into cutting their own throats. Although I wouldn’t discount Trump’s vanity or verbal intemperance‚ it is to his credit that‚ unlike most congressional Republicans‚ this populist hero doesn’t indulge in self-destructive righteousness. I won’t hold my breath until the Democrats start dumping their own clowns in a spasm of moral righteousness or in order to disarm media critics. The Democrats are a serious‚ ruthless force who will break any rule or protect any miscreant to hold onto and expand their power. I may loathe their politics‚ but I profoundly admire their relentless pursuit of what they want. Democrats could easily dump Bowman‚ Menendez‚ and other lowlifes in their party without risking seats. Such tarnished pols could be easily replaced by their ideological and even gender or ethnic look-alikes. But why make such concessions from their position of power? Let the other side fall on its sword. That’s not how the Democrats act. What was done to Santos was for Republicans the height of folly. The Long Island district that he represented‚ mostly in Nassau County‚ will almost certainly go back to the Democrats. Meanwhile the thin majority that the GOP now holds in the House will become even more sliver-like. Since former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has already announced that he plans to depart at the end of the year‚ this will shrink the Republican voting margin to just three. If Republicans are now having problems trying to assert their will in a predominantly Democratic Congress‚ try doing it with an even narrower majority. What Santos was good for It’s truly astonishing that the 105 morally vain Republicans who voted to oust Santos didn’t reflect more deliberately on the continued value of the person they were dumping. As Devine reminds us‚ Santos “had the most conservative voting record of the entire New York delegation.” Too bad he was thrown to the wolves‚ with the approval of his less conservative New York colleagues. The only silver lining here is that 112 Republican members of Congress voted against Santos’ expulsion. One of the more outspoken “no" votes came from Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.)‚ who believed the expulsion of Santos “goes against the principles of our institutions.” Donalds may have been referring to the embarrassing fact that Congress‚ including his Republican colleagues‚ voted to expel a member who has yet to be convicted in a court of law. This further underscores the rashness of those Republicans who voted to oust Santos. They took selective action against a conservative-voting GOP congressman who has rallied consistently to his party’s tiny majority. Further‚ they opted to expel Santos even before he was tried and formally found guilty of any misdeed. Shame on such moral posturing!

A trio of rabid leftist employees have been fired from an Oakland coffee shop after they were caught on video blocking a Jewish customer from entering a restroom so she could document anti-Semitic graffiti. What's the background? Cellphone video shows the trio of Farley's East employees — two masked females and one unmasked male — blocking the woman from entering the restroom. The male is heard telling the woman she already got her food and that she's "holding up s**t." One of the females tells the customer that "this is private property" and tells her to leave the coffee shop. "I want to go into the restroom‚" the woman says repeatedly. The male employee remarks‚ "I know Israel loves taking private property and saying it's their own …" A female employee accuses the customer of "misgendering" — though the context of the accusation isn't clear. The customer says it's her right to enter the restroom‚ to which the male employee replies‚ "And we have a right to refuse service." The employees blocking the customer also tell the determined woman she can use the coffee shop's other restroom — just not the one they're blocking. The customer digs in her heels and refuses to leave — and then challenges the employees‚ saying that if they "agree" with the graffiti in the restroom‚ they shouldn't be afraid of her documenting it. With that‚ she's allowed to enter the restroom‚ where she records video showing the graffiti. One message read‚ "Zionism = fascism": Image source: X video screenshot via @stillgray The other graffiti read‚ “Your neutrality ... is enabling genocide”: Image source: X video screenshot via @stillgray The male employee is heard telling the woman‚ "History didn't start in 1948‚ lady‚" while another tells her‚ "Free Palestine‚" as she departs. Content warning: Language: — (@) Initial apology draws angry responses Farley's East apologized on its Facebook page last week — a post that has since been taken down. While the apology note indicated the shop has "taken corrective measures with our staff and removed the offensive graffiti" and that "we're not anti-Semitic‚" a deluge of angry comments poured in — as of Friday afternoon‚ the apology post had drawn nearly 6‚000 comments and nearly 3‚000 angry emojis. Conservative commentator Jason Rantz told Farley's East‚ "This is a pathetic apology. No comment about the antisemitic staff?" Fired Farley's East posted a new Facebook statement Saturday saying the three employees caught on video had been fired. "Events like these strike fear in the Jewish community and perpetuate the rise of anti-Semitism in our community and around the world. We do not tolerate any behavior at Farley’s that makes people feel unwelcome or unsafe‚" the statement read‚ in part‚ adding that "though all employees are entitled to hold differing viewpoints‚ they are not entitled to express themselves on the job in ways that are disrespectful and hurtful to anyone." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The FBI has used Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to conduct warrantless “backdoor” searches of the private electronic communications of American citizens. It has done so‚ moreover‚ not just sporadically and by accident but quite deliberately and on hundreds of thousands of occasions. While the technology employed in those searches may be new‚ the issues surrounding it are not. In fact‚ they have been hundreds of years in the making. Just as Wilkes’ story ended badly for King George III‚ our story will end badly for Congress if it reauthorizes FISA 702 — even temporarily — without fixing it. In 1763‚ John Wilkes — a member of the British Parliament — was arrested and his home subjected to an aggressive search because he wrote and published No. 45 of a periodical known as the North Briton. North Briton No. 45 had infuriated King George III and his ministers because it called out their widespread and unlawful use of “general warrants” — official documents authorizing searches and seizures that were backed by neither evidence establishing probable cause nor a specific description of the intended target. In essence‚ general warrants purported to tell the king’s officers‚ “Go search for evidence of a crime in any home or other place you might expect to find it‚ and then seize it.” Unwittingly proving Wilkes’ point‚ the king’s men used general warrants to search his home and the homes of others suspected of participating in the publication of North Briton No. 45. After spending several days locked in the Tower of London‚ Wilkes returned to his home to find it in complete disarray‚ with many items severely damaged and others missing altogether. Incensed by the injustice‚ he challenged the validity of the general warrant at issue and sued the officers who had conducted the search. Long story short: Wilkes won and was awarded a large sum of money as part of the victory. As word of his victorious effort spread‚ Wilkes’ story quickly became famous on both sides of the Atlantic‚ leading ultimately to the adoption of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The number 45 (referring to the publication that had offended the king and sparked the entire episode) became synonymous with both John Wilkes and the cause of liberty in England and the American colonies. Indeed‚ one might say that “45” became the “Roll Tide” of those who wanted to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. As Wilkes became a cult figure in the colonies‚ a motto of sorts based on the Apostles’ Creed was written and published in Boston. It began‚ “I believe in Wilkes‚ the firm patriot‚ maker of number 45‚ who was born for our good‚ suffered under arbitrary power‚ was banished and imprisoned …” Elsewhere in the colonies‚ Wilkes was honored by the naming of Wilkes County‚ Georgia; Wilkesboro‚ North Carolina; and Wilkes-Barre‚ Pennsylvania. Even George III's own young children caught the Wilkes fever. They sometimes opened the door to their father's room and cried‚ “Wilkes and number 45 forever!” just to prank the monarch. A shameful ploy John Wilkes would be shocked by FISA 702‚ which the FBI has used hundreds of thousands of times to spy on Americans without a warrant. There have been essentially no consequences for the agents and agencies who repeatedly violate the Fourth Amendment. As a lawmaker and an advocate of liberty‚ he’d be appalled that the U.S. Congress is preparing to reauthorize FISA 702 — without a single reform. Congress is making this decision not on its own merits but as part of a last-minute addition to the 3‚000-page National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2024. Congress is obscuring its own indefensible actions by hiding this provision in a lengthy “must-pass” bill dealing with other‚ far less controversial matters. Shameful. There are currently two meaningful FISA reform bills before Congress: the bipartisan Government Surveillance Reform Act that I introduced with Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)‚ and the End Warrantless Surveillance Act by U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.)‚ which has already passed the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 35-2. I humbly implore my Senate colleagues — and our counterparts in the House of Representatives — to remember the lessons learned from John Wilkes and North Briton No. 45. Do not rubber-stamp this continued FISA abuse as part of the NDAA. Warrantless “backdoor” searches of Americans’ private electronic communications under FISA 702 are simply modern incarnations of the general warrants used by King George III. Like general warrants‚ backdoor searches under FISA 702 are carried out without any of the safeguards created to protect life‚ liberty‚ and property from the kind of harm that an unrestrained government is uniquely capable of inflicting. Just as Wilkes’ story ended badly for King George III‚ our story will end badly for Congress if it reauthorizes FISA 702 — even temporarily — without fixing it.