How desperate are open-borders secular leftists to conceal evidence of the harms caused by soft-on-crime policies? Well, in Australia, a country ruled by fascists, they are threatening fines of $825,000 (AUD) to anyone who posts the video of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska. They don’t want voters to see the result of coddling criminals and banning self-defense.

Here’s the story from Rebel News:

Australia’s controversial eSafety Commissioner has threatened social media giant X with daily fines of up to $825,000 for refusing to take down or block posts containing CCTV footage of the fatal attack on Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in the U.S.

The footage shows Zarutska being killed by Decarlos Brown, a man with a long record of violent crime who had been released just weeks earlier under North Carolina’s bail laws.

I blogged about the story previously, and noted that the accused killer was a 14-time repeat offender. Leftists like Julie Inman Grant don’t believe in opposing real evil or punishing real evil. They get extremely upset when their “don’t judge” policies are exposed as failed policy to voters. So what to do? Well, they just use political power to suppress anyone who shows the evidence of their failed “don’t judge” policies. After all, if people complain about being murdered, then that spoils the virtue signaling of the leftists.

This isn’t the first time they’ve tried to cover up crimes against law-abiding victims:

Inman Grant’s previous attempt to compel X to censor footage of a church stabbing in Sydney ended in failure after the platform argued Australia had no authority to impose global content restrictions. X later hailed that case as a victory for free speech.

Is Julie Inman Grant an exception, or does she represent the way that most white progressive women see the issues of crime and self-defense? Well, we know from recent surveys that leftism has surged among young women. Not just in America, but worldwide.

Young men are more conservative than young women, and more religious than young women, too.

And women’s groups are opposed to people who point out the results of their “don’t judge” policies.

Here’s a recent article from the UK Daily Mirror:

More than 100 women’s rights groups have warned “racist” attempts to link sexual violence with immigration are putting victims at increased risk.

Rape Crisis England and Wales, the End Violence Against Women Coalition and Refuge are among the organisations warning anti-migrant groups and politicans are “hijacking” survivors’ trauma.

[…]In their statement, co-ordinated by End Violence Against Women Coalition, Women for Refugee Women, Hibiscus and Southall Black Sisters, the groups said linking sex offences with migration is a “racist diversion”.

Lately, I have been seeing many posts from conservative Christian women demanding that men protect and provide for women. However, none of these conservative Christian women have said anything about the voting patterns of young women. How are men supposed to protect women, when women keep voting for more dangerous criminals, and against police and self-defense? We can’t. And we know that if we try, we’ll end up just like Kyle Rittenhouse and Daniel Perry.

Conservative, Christian women  need to think more carefully about how to solve problems. They have an addiction to their knee-jerk reaction of “men, fix it!” and “men, serve us!” But that ship has sailed. Now, the best policy of conservative, Christian women is to turn to young women, and warn them that no one is coming to save them from the consequences of their own choices. Young women need to stop voting on feelings and the desire to virtue signal.

Finally, can you imagine being married to Julie Inman Grant? That’s what parents and pastors are producing for good men these days, but what good man would be stupid enough to marry a leftist fascist like her? Men are coming to their senses, and judging women correctly. The new “10” is the stay-at-home mother who will respect her husband and homeschool the kids. Nobody wants a Karen.