Congress Broke The Military, Now It Must Fix It
Only Congress can fully undo the mess it made.Only Congress can fully undo the mess it made.Is The YMCA Using Tax Dollars To Push Trans Agenda? Parents Group Urges Congress To Find Out
'Our letter highlights the urgent need for an investigation into the YMCA’s federal funding since the organization continues to allow for radical gender policies that violate Title IX.''Too Much' whiteness in Lena Dunham's new Netflix show? Just look BEHIND the camera, says 'Girls' star
Actress, writer, and former leftist "It girl" Lena Dunham is back — older, wiser, and ready to confront the biggest mistake she made with the hit HBO show that put her on the map: It simply wasn't woke enough.
Dunham vows this won't happen with her latest venture, the romantic comedy "Too Much." The Netflix series comes more than a decade after the 2012 debut of "Girls," which brought instant acclaim — and near-instant backlash — for star and creator Dunham.
'The funny thing is that she would probably still be under fire if her cast was more diverse.'
"Girls" wrapped up its sixth and final season in April 2017; since then, Dunham has starred in or written one-off television episodes while acting in about a dozen films.
But after all this time, the legacy of "Girls" has returned to haunt her.
White what you know
While conservatives dismissed "Girls" for its self-indulgent depiction of promiscuity as "sexual empowerment," its harshest critics were arguably liberals.
As soon as it aired, "Girls" was heckled from the far corners of leftism for its apparent lack of "diversity." Dunham admitted at the time that the nearly all-white skin tones in the show were simply a reflection of her life, since she is "half-Jew, half-WASP."
This time around, Dunham is determined to affirm her loyalty to progressive ideology before anyone can question it.
In 2012, Dunham did damage control by going on NPR's "Fresh Air" to say she was trying to avoid "tokenism in [her] casting" and opted for her chosen actresses because she assumed the "experience of an African American girl and a white girl" were "drastically different."
You see, it wasn't indifference that made her exclude black characters — but respect.
Pre-emptive apology
While that may have worked almost a decade ago, it's not going to fly in 2025 — and Dunham knows it. That's why she's doing a kind of pre-emptive apology tour before "Too Much" even premieres.
RELATED: 'Superman' director faces backlash for 'racist' India mention; responds with heroic backpedaling
In a recent interview with the Independent, Dunham suggested that the real culprit in the "Girls" diversity imbroglio was the entertainment industry as a whole.
"I think one of the profound issues around ''Girls' ... was that there was so little real estate for women in television that if you had a show called 'Girls,' which is such a monolithic name, it sounds like it's describing all the girls in all the places."
Dunham added that she understands how it would be "really disappointing to people" if they felt the show did not reflect "a multitude of experiences."
The 39-year-old went on to explain that she did "like the conversation" about how woke her show needs to be and said it would not be a problem for the new Netflix series.
I spy ... DEI
To that end, Dunham revealed she has pledged her allegiance to diversity in both the production and casting of "Too Much."
Yes, like "Girls," "Too Much" puts white, affluent characters front and center, with little to no room for people of color. But Dunham urges viewers to think of all the non-whites working behind the scenes to bring this vision to the screen.
"The thing I have really come to believe is that one of the most important things is not just diversity in front of the camera, but it's diversity behind the camera," she told the Independent. "As a producer, one of my goals is to bring a lot of different voices into a position where they can tell their story."
RELATED: All in the family: Hollywood golden boy Pedro Pascal's loony leftist pedigree
Nice try
While impressive, Dunham's deft butt-covering may not be enough to satisfy a baying leftist mob always on the hunt for a new victim, warns culture writer Natasha Biase.
"The funny thing is that she would probably still be under fire if her cast was more diverse," Biase told Blaze News.
If anything, Dunham is trying too hard, continued Biase.
"I understand that we live in a diverse world, and film and television are supposed to be a reflection of that, but we are also often told to write what we know, and that’s exactly what Lena Dunham did."
Dunham bending the knee and "forcing herself" to write characters to which she can't relate would arguably be seen as "more controversial and irresponsible," Biase added, implying that Dunham is in a no-win situation.
"Our girl's about to learn that you can’t please the mob!"
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
'As a woman': Duke Law quietly pushes insane diversity statements for law journal applicants
Duke Law at Duke University distributed an information packet that puts bizarre diversity sentiments front and center for possible applicants.
More than two years after the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions, some major schools are still in the weeds regarding preferential treatment of candidates based on skin color or ethnicity.
This week, Duke Law's very own publication meant to produce "scholarship by premier legal thinkers" was exposed for heavily encouraging students to include diversity statements in their applications to work for the journal.
'To combat the lack of diversity in legal academia, I plan to use my voice ...'
Duke Law Journal has been around since 1951, but likely did not advise students to write about their Asian-American "privilege" or experience as a "Middle Eastern Jewish woman" in order to work for the publication more than 70 years ago.
As reported by the Washington Free Beacon, those types of topics are precisely what Duke Law Journal suggests second-year students write about in their application to become staff editors.
The Free Beacon acquired a 2024 information packet sent to Duke Law's affinity groups, in which the journal gave advice on, and provided examples of, personal statements that could help students land a position. The packet was distributed only to the affinity groups, according to the outlet's sources.
Under possible topics, the first suggestion given in the packet is "your upbringing or personal identity and how it has shaped your perspectives and experiences."
Then, when describing how the personal statements are graded, the first point asks students how a person's perspective could contribute to Duke Law Journal's goals of "promoting diverse perspectives in legal academia."
RELATED: Exposed: Harvard's elite law journal accused of discriminating against white men
— (@)
The notes specifically mention being a member of an "underrepresented or marginalized group" or a "non-traditional student" as being worth mentioning.
The packet then suggests students write about ways in which they have "meaningfully advanced the interests of diverse communities."
These suggestions are immediately followed by personal statement examples, which journalist Aaron Sibarium included in a series of posts on X. The samples included redacted portions, signaling that they were from real applicants.
The first example began, "To combat the lack of diversity in legal academia, I plan to use my voice at Duke Law Journals, through article selection, critiques, and writing my note on pertinent legal issues that affect the Asian-American community."
The statement sample continued, saying that the student wanted to ensure diversity in the legal academic profession, while advocating for "institutional and issue-area diversity."
The second sample personal statement explained how the student's experience could "be useful in promoting diversity," adding that "Asian-Americans" need to have community leaders who "understand and reflect our experiences."
Yet another Asian applicant wrote, "As an Asian-American woman and a daughter of immigrants, I am afforded with different perspectives, experiences, and privileges."
Another applicant broke the trend, though, and instead claimed that her "unique perspective as a Middle Eastern Jewish woman" could "prove useful" as she explores her "intersectional identity in both academic and professional settings."
RELATED: 'Gotta keep it quiet': Dean of students who kept DEI alive at UNC reaps the whirlwind
Duke Law Journal's application process appears to reflect a current, disturbing trend of circumventing bans against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs at once-prestigious institutions.
Harvard's law journal was also exposed recently for allegedly picking articles "on the basis of race," in such a way that the race of the legal scholar is "as, if not more, important than the merit of the submission," the Civil Rights Office wrote.
Duke Law Journal applicants, if they can make it through the process, can look forward to writing on an array of progressive topics. Under "articles you might work on," the journal included sample titles like, "Abortion Disorientation," "Reparations for Project One Hundred Thousand," and "Lutie Lytle Black Women's Scholarship Workshop."
Neither Duke's general counsel nor Duke University's media relations team responded to Blaze News' request for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
L.A. Sheriff’s Dept. Apologizes For Post Saying ‘Hearts Go Out To Victims’ Of U.S. Strike On Iran’s Nuclear Sites
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department on Sunday removed and apologized for its social media post sympathizing with the “victims and families impacted” by the U.S.’s strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, which were bombed Saturday night. The original post stated, “Our hearts go out to the victims and families impacted by the recent bombings in Iran,” […]Trump deep-sixed DEI — but is it undead at major federal contractors like Lockheed Martin?
President Donald Trump has endeavored to ram a stake through the heart of the federal DEI regime.
He kicked off his second term by requiring that the head of every federal agency, department, or commission see to the elimination of all DEI offices, positions, initiatives, programs, contracts, and performance requirements; ordering the government to eliminate DEI discrimination in the federal workforce as well as in federal contracting and spending; tasking his inbound attorney general with preparing a civil rights-focused pressure campaign against DEI practitioners in the private sector; and rescinding numerous race- and identity-centered executive orders issued by Democrat presidents.
While Trump has since enjoyed tremendous success in eliminating various DEI initiatives across the government, it appears that there is still much work to be done.
The 1792 Exchange, a corporate bias watchdog seeking to restore political neutrality in the boardroom and to educate lawmakers about the dangers of woke corporate policies, recently released an analysis of the top 100 federal contractors by dollars obligated in fiscal year 2023.
The report highlights the apparent ideological capture and woke policies of a number of corporate juggernauts on the list, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and the RTX Corporation, formerly Raytheon.
"The American people have the right to know if our hard-earned money is subsidizing any corporation's subversive ideological programs," 1792 Exchange CEO Daniel Cameron said in a statement.
"President Trump has taken bold action to remove DEI programming from federal institutions, including government contractors," continued Cameron. "This report empowers government agencies and legislators to align procurement decisions with that vision of neutrality and excellence."
RELATED: Behind the rainbow curtain: Who is funding the trans agenda targeting kids?
Of the 100 contractors that the 1792 Exchange analyzed, 36 were characterized as "high risk," 16 as "medium risk," and 46 as "lower risk," on the basis of "publicly documented alignment with DEI-driven policies and practices."
The watchdog noted that high-risk companies "have demonstrated a pattern of engaging in DEI practices that prioritize ideological conformity over merit-based considerations."
Examples of such practices include recruitment, hiring, and promotion on the basis of immutable characteristics and sexual preference; requiring employees to suffer through training sessions on gender ideology and critical race theory; and corporate alignment on philanthropy and marketing strategies with "progressive social agendas."
While some big organizations appear to have read the writing on the wall and reversed course on DEI — 1792 indicated that Accenture, AT&T, IBM, Booz Allen Hamilton, and IBM have rolled back at least some of their most divisive DEI policies — others have dug in their feet.
Seven out of the top 10 recipients of federal dollars on the 1792 Exchange's list of U.S. government contractors were labeled "high risk." They were, in order from biggest to smallest recipients of federal dollars obligated: Lockheed Martin, the RTX Corporation (formerly Raytheon), the Boeing Company, Northrop Grumman, Optum360, Leidos, and McKesson.
'Compliance with the CEI naturally leads to ceding nearly all facets of corporate governance to the HRC's influence.'
BAE Systems and Honeywell, though farther down the list, similarly appear to be big offenders in terms of DEI initiatives.
Lockheed Martin, at the top of the list, "yields to political activism in shaping corporate governance, potentially alienating consumers, dividing employees, and harming shareholders"; "implements race and identity-based policies that replace merit, excellence, and integrity with preferential treatment and outcomes"; and "embraces corporate initiatives that redirect its central focus from business goals to partisan policies and divisive issues," according to the 1792 Exchange.
Part of what gave the company away was its perfect score on the 2025 Corporate Equality Index from the non-straight activist organization Human Rights Campaign, as well as its receipt of the "Equality 100 Award: Leader in LGBTQ+ Workplace Equality" distinction from the activist group.
Many of the scoring criteria for both the 2025 CEI and the so-called equality award appear to require corporate violations of federal policy.
While the watchdog outfit did not go out of its way to put CEI scores as a top consideration when assessing risk, Dustin DeVito, the 1792 Exchange's director of corporate research, told Blaze News that "compliance with the CEI naturally leads to ceding nearly all facets of corporate governance to the HRC's influence."
"1792 Exchange's company ratings center around six criteria: ideologically driven cancellation, charitable work, employment policies, reputation, funding, and political action," continued DeVito. "The CEI touches on all of these."
When pressed for comment, Lockheed Martin referred Blaze News to its Jan. 23 statement, which claimed:
Merit-based talent management programs and compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and directives have always been central to this mission. We are taking immediate action to ensure continued compliance and full alignment with President Trump’s recent executive order. We will not have goals or incentives based on demographic representation or affirmative action plans. Additionally, our training offerings are compliant with Executive Order 13950 from President Trump's first administration.
The RTX Corporation was slapped with the same broad critiques as Lockheed Martin. A closer look revealed precisely why.
The company similarly rated high on the 2025 CEI partly because the company apparently "will not donate to non-religious charities unless they embrace controversial sexual identity policies"; requires employees to attend "multiple, controversial trainings on gender identity, sexual orientation, transgender issues, and divisive racial ideology"; covers medical transvestism costs for employees and their children; and publicly advocates for "controversial sex and gender ideology through local, state, or federal legislation or initiatives."
When pressed for comment, RTX directed Blaze News to a Jan. 24 company statement that said, "RTX is taking the necessary actions to comply with the presidential executive orders."
RELATED: Pride Month’s true competition? Faith, family, freedom
Both Boeing — whose executive compensation plan the 1792 Exchange claimed "devalued the weight of product and employee safety in its operational performance metrics, in order to include diversity, equity, and inclusion as a consideration" in recent years — and Northrop Grumman also scored 100% on the 2025 CEI, meaning that it likely jumped through many of the same hoops as other "high-risk" organizations.
Blaze News reached out to Boeing and Northrop Grumman as well as to top "high-risk" companies McKesson, Honeywell, Leidos, Optum360, and BAE Systems for comment.
Northrop Grumman directed Blaze News to another months-old statement indicating that work was under way to ensure the company was in compliance with the president's executive orders.
"We are actively reviewing our policies and processes and taking the necessary steps to ensure compliance with the presidential executive orders for the work entrusted to us," said the Northrop Grumman statement. "Underpinned by our values, we hire, promote, and pay based on merit and performance, resulting in the best team to deliver for our customers."
A company spokesperson for BAE Systems told Blaze News, "As a federal contractor, we continuously evaluate our policies and programs to ensure continued compliance with all applicable legal requirements, including executive orders, and we will continue to hire, promote, and compensate based on merit."
The other companies did not respond by publication time.
The 1792 Exchange has invited any companies on its list to submit corrections to the data if they have taken meaningful steps to comply with Trump's executive orders.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com