Part 4: The Synthesis — This Is An Attack on Feminism
- Ash A Milton
- Jan 21
- 29 min read
Introduction: What We're Really Watching
The previous three parts documented ICE's transformation, historical patterns of authoritarian violence against women, and the contemporary categorization system separating "acceptable" from "dangerous" women. This final part synthesizes those observations into a stark conclusion: we are witnessing a coordinated, multi-system attack on feminism—on women's ability to participate in public life, resist authoritarian power, and exercise political agency without facing violence, vilification, or consequences designed to force compliance.
This isn't about immigration policy. It's about whether women can step outside designated roles without state reprisal.
I. Language About Women: The Systematic Devaluation
The Escalation (July 2024 - January 2026)
Language shapes reality. Authoritarian movements targeting women begin by changing how women are described, categorized, and valued. Track the evolution of right-wing rhetoric about women across 18 months and you see deliberate escalation designed to make violence against politically active women seem reasonable, necessary, even heroic.
July 2024 - JD Vance: "Childless Cat Ladies"
Future Vice President describes Democratic women leaders as "childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too."
The message isn't subtle: Women without children are defective, bitter, dangerous. They haven't fulfilled biological purpose, therefore deserve no political voice. The phrase went viral precisely because it crystallized a worldview: women's worth derives from reproduction, not intellect, profession, or citizenship. A woman who hasn't had children—regardless of her education, accomplishments, or contributions—is reduced to a "cat lady," a figure of ridicule and pity.
This matters because it establishes the framework for what follows. If women's primary value is reproductive, then women who organize politically instead of focusing on motherhood are betraying their nature. If they're "miserable" about their own choices, their political engagement is driven by psychological deficiency, not legitimate concerns. The groundwork is laid: these women can't be trusted, shouldn't be listened to, aren't operating from reason but from some feminine pathology.
August 2024 - Tucker Carlson: "I Hate You"
On his podcast, Carlson states without qualification: "The archetype of the person that I don't like is a 38-year-old female white lawyer. I hate you."
This goes beyond disagreement. "I hate you" is eliminationist language. Not "I disagree with lawyers' approach to policy" or "I think the legal profession skews liberal." Just visceral hatred of a specific category of woman: educated, professional, with legal authority.
The specificity matters. Why 38? Because it's the age where professional women have achieved expertise and authority but haven't yet aged out of being threatening. Why lawyer? Because lawyers have power—they understand systems, wield influence, can challenge authority. The hatred targets precisely the women most capable of effective resistance: educated, professionally powerful, at the peak of their competence.
And Carlson doesn't whisper this to friends. He broadcasts it to millions. He models for his male audience that hating professional women isn't shameful—it's something you can say out loud, proudly, with moral certainty. He gives permission.
January 11, 2026 - Fox News: "Wine Mom Gangs"
Four days after ICE agent Jonathan Ross shoots and kills Renee Nicole Good, Fox News columnist David Marcus publishes his piece. The timing is critical—before investigation, before facts are established, before the community can process the loss of a mother of three. Marcus moves immediately to establish narrative:
"What we are seeing across the country as organized gangs of wine moms use Antifa tactics to harass and impede Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents is not civil disobedience. It isn't even protest. It's just crime."
Notice the construction: "organized gangs" (not groups, not coalitions—gangs, which connotes criminality and violence), "wine moms" (trivializing their identity while gender-marking them), "Antifa tactics" (linking them to domestic terrorism), "not civil disobedience... not protest... just crime" (stripping any political legitimacy from their actions).
He then claims Good was "a trained member" of these phantom terrorist organizations. He provides no evidence because there is none. Renee Good was a poet. A substitute teacher. A mother of three whose glove compartment held stuffed animals. Her Instagram bio described her as "a poet and writer and wife and mom." But Marcus needs her to be something else—needs her transformed from victim to villain—because if she's just a mother who was killed, the whole narrative collapses.
The "wine mom" framing does double work: it both trivializes (just suburban women with too much time and too much pinot grigio, how ridiculous) and terrorizes (they're organized gangs using Antifa tactics, a serious threat). This contradiction is intentional. It allows the media ecosystem to mock women's organizing as silly suburban theater while simultaneously justifying federal violence against them as necessary counter-terrorism.
January 2026 - PJ Media: "Greatest Threat"
The escalation continues. Right-wing outlet PJ Media publishes a column declaring that "Affluent White Liberal Women" are not just a problem, not just a concern, but "the greatest threat to our nation"—greater than Russia, greater than China, greater than terrorism, greater than any foreign adversary or domestic danger.
Think about what this claim does: it reframes women's political participation as the primary danger facing America. Not economic inequality. Not climate change. Not actual terrorism. Women with education, resources, and political agency are the existential threat.
This creates permission structure for anything. If these women truly are the greatest threat to the nation, then stopping them becomes a patriotic duty. Limiting their political participation becomes national security. Violence against them becomes defense of the homeland. The rhetorical foundation is laid for treating American women exercising First Amendment rights as enemy combatants.
January 2026 - Lauren Chen: "Decline of Civilization"
Lauren Chen—Canadian influencer who the DOJ accused of working for Russian propaganda operations, who had to leave the United States in 2024, whom the Trump administration allowed back in—writes that the ideology of women like Renee Good is "almost wholly responsible for the decline of Western civilization."
Not partially responsible. Not a contributing factor. "Almost wholly responsible."
The ideology of women who organize mutual aid, who track ICE operations, who show up to support neighbors, who blow whistles to warn the vulnerable—this is what's destroying Western civilization.
Again, notice what this does: it makes opposing these women a civilizational imperative. You're not just disagreeing with their politics. You're defending civilization itself from destruction. Any measure, no matter how extreme, can be justified if the alternative is civilizational collapse.
The Pattern: Devaluation to Dehumanization
The escalation follows textbook authoritarian progression:
"Childless cat ladies" → Women without children are failures (devaluation based on reproductive status)
"I hate you" → Professional women deserve hatred (stripping humanity, modeling hostility)
"Wine mom gangs" → Organizing mothers are terrorists (criminalizing collective action)
"Greatest threat to nation" → Women with agency are enemies (elevating to national security threat)
"Decline of civilization" → Women's resistance destroys everything (making opposition existential)
This isn't random. This is systematic preparation.
Tucker Carlson saying he hates 38-year-old female lawyers isn't venting frustration—he's giving millions of men permission to view educated professional women as legitimate targets of hatred. When that hatred is normalized, action based on that hatred becomes thinkable.
Fox News calling mothers "wine mom gangs" establishes framework where treating them as criminals is appropriate. If they're gangs using terrorist tactics, then federal law enforcement response isn't overreach—it's proper counter-terrorism.
PJ Media declaring women the "greatest threat to our nation" creates ideological foundation for eliminating that threat. If women's political participation genuinely threatens America's survival, then stopping that participation by any means becomes justified, even heroic.
Lauren Chen blaming women for civilizational decline makes opposing women's resistance a moral imperative. You're not suppressing dissent—you're saving civilization.
The Destination: When Language Becomes License
By mid-January 2026, this systematic rhetorical preparation has achieved its purpose: it has made violence against politically active women seem not just acceptable but necessary.
Consider the official response after Renee Good's killing:
Vice President JD Vance: Called her death "a tragedy of her own making" and added that the ICE agent is "protected by absolute immunity" because "he was just doing his job." Not "this is tragic and we'll investigate." Not "we grieve this loss." Her death is her fault, the agent is protected, case closed.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt: Described Good as part of a "sinister left-wing movement" using "domestic terror techniques." The woman shot while sitting in her Honda Pilot with stuffed animals in the glove box is now a domestic terrorist.
President Trump: (he has since walked this back after finding out her Father was a big supporter of his) Claimed Good "viciously ran over" the ICE officer, that she was "very disorderly, obstructing and resisting," despite video evidence showing her vehicle moving away from the agent when he shot her. He found it "hard to believe [the agent] is alive" and described the agent as "now recovering in the hospital" from injuries that DHS later claimed were "internal bleeding to the torso"—though the agent drove away from the scene and was treated and released the same day.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem: Stated Good was "stalking and impeding" officers throughout the day and tried to "weaponize her vehicle" to run over the agent.
Within 24 hours of a federal agent killing a mother of three, the highest levels of American government were describing her as a domestic terrorist who viciously attacked a federal officer and deserved what happened to her. The video evidence showing otherwise doesn't matter. The witnesses saying otherwise don't matter. The narrative is set: dangerous woman resisted, agent acted in self-defense, case closed.
This is the precise function of the "wine mom gang" rhetoric, the "childless cat ladies" framing, the "greatest threat to civilization" narrative. They create a permission structure where federal agents can kill mothers, tear-gas children, claim absolute immunity, face no investigation, no accountability, no consequences—because the victims have already been framed as enemies who brought violence on themselves.
The language doesn't just describe reality. It creates the reality where state violence against women becomes not only permissible but celebrated.
The Jackson Family: Manufacturing a Narrative
January 14, 2026: Destiny and Shawn Jackson are driving their six children—ranging from six months to eleven years old—home from a basketball game in north Minneapolis. It's a Wednesday evening. They're a family of eight in a minivan, coming home from watching their son play. It's the most ordinary possible scenario.
They pull over because protesters and parked cars are blocking their route. Destiny's mother is among the protesters—she's been out since the shooting of Renee Good seven days earlier. Destiny stops to check on her, to make sure she's safe. This is what daughters do. This is care, not activism.
What Happened Next:
ICE agents surround their vehicle. Shawn Jackson sees agents on all sides and realizes they're trapped. He tries to back the minivan up—maybe there's a way out—but federal agents have boxed them in completely. Front, back, both sides. There's nowhere to go.
An ICE agent approaches Destiny's window and screams at her: "Get the F out of here."
Shawn tells the agent they're trying. They want to leave. They're not protesters—they're a family trying to get home. They have six kids in the car. But there's no path out. The agents have them surrounded.
Destiny makes a decision that may have saved her family's lives: she tells her husband not to move the vehicle until the federal agents clear. She's seen what happened to Renee Good. She knows that when ICE agents surround your car and you try to drive, they shoot you and then claim you tried to run them over. "We've seen what happened to Renee," she later tells CNN.
So they sit. Trapped. Six children in the car, ranging from a six-month-old infant to an eleven-year-old. Waiting for federal agents to let them leave.
Then the federal agents begin firing.
Tear gas. Flash bangs. Not fired into the air or toward protesters. Fired at the vehicle. A tear gas canister rolls directly under the Jackson family minivan.
Within three seconds, the vehicle is rocked by explosions.
The car lifts off the ground from the force of the blast underneath. It slams back down. Every single airbag in the vehicle deploys simultaneously—front, sides, curtain airbags. The doors automatically lock, a safety feature that becomes a death trap. The vehicle begins filling with tear gas.
Inside are six children. The windows are up. The doors are locked. Tear gas is pouring in.
Bystanders run to help. They fight to get the doors open—electronic locks won't respond, they have to manually force them. One by one, they evacuate the children. The older kids first—easier to move, can help themselves. The younger ones need to be carried. Finally, the six-month-old baby, D'iris. The car seat is difficult to maneuver, especially with airbags deployed and tear gas filling the space.
When someone brings Destiny her baby, he's not breathing. His eyes are closed. A six-month-old infant has stopped breathing from tear gas exposure.
Destiny Jackson performs CPR on her own baby. Mouth-to-mouth. On the street. In the cold. While her other five children are crying, coughing, struggling to breathe.
"In the midst of like doing mouth-to-mouth, I stopped and I looked at my baby and I was just like 'wake up, you have to,'" she tells CNN later. "I just felt like I'm gonna give you every breath I have."
The baby survives. But three of the six Jackson children are hospitalized: the six-month-old infant and two children with severe asthma, both of whom could have died from the exposure.
Here's What the Department of Homeland Security Posted on X:
Not an apology. Not an acknowledgment of error. Not a commitment to investigate.
"It is horrific to see radical agitators bring children to their violent riots. PLEASE STOP ENDANGERING YOUR CHILDREN."
Read that again. A family driving home from a basketball game is surrounded by federal agents, has their vehicle tear-gassed and exploded by flash bang, watches their baby stop breathing, performs CPR on the street—and the Department of Homeland Security posts that the parents are "radical agitators" who "brought children to their violent riots" and need to "stop endangering your children."
No context provided. No explanation that this family was driving home. No acknowledgment that federal agents surrounded the vehicle. No mention that agents fired the tear gas and flash bang that caused the explosion. No recognition that the parents tried to leave and were prevented from leaving by federal agents. No indication that a mother gave CPR to her infant on the street.
Just a simple, damning narrative: irresponsible radical parents endangered their own children by bringing them to a riot.
The post stays up for hours. Long enough to circulate widely on social media. Long enough for thousands of people to internalize the message: protesters are using children as shields, mothers are endangering babies for political points, the real threat isn't federal agents firing explosives at vehicles full of kids—it's the parents who dared to be in the vicinity.
Only when CNN challenges DHS directly does the agency delete the post. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin explains why: "because the people were victims of the rioters but didn't bring their kids to the riot."
Notice what she's doing: even in the deletion explanation, she maintains that there was a riot, that people brought kids to it, that blame lies with civilians not agents. She's just conceding that maybe this specific family didn't technically bring kids to a riot—but the framing remains. The narrative holds.
But by then the damage is done. The post has been screenshot, shared, commented on thousands of times. For all those hours it was live, it served its function perfectly: it preempted sympathy, justified violence, established consequences, and fragmented solidarity.
The Preemption of Sympathy:
Before anyone can feel outraged that federal agents tear-gassed six children, before anyone can demand accountability for an infant stopping breathing, before the natural human horror at what happened can develop—the narrative is already established. The parents brought this on themselves. Irresponsible decision-making. Bad judgment. Their fault.
This is critical because sympathy is dangerous to authoritarian projects. If Americans feel sympathy for Destiny Jackson giving CPR to her baby, they might demand accountability. They might ask why federal agents were firing explosives at a vehicle with children. They might question whether this is appropriate use of force.
Fox News host Jesse Watters ridiculed the situation, questioning, "Where's daddy to tell these women to wise up," under the assumption that the mother had taken her children to a protest. This was despite reports indicating they were actually trying to drive home from a basketball game. He did not even watch the segment, which aired immediately after his comment, featuring the father, Shawn Jackson, who was in the car during the incident and later spoke to reporters about the traumatic experience.
But if Americans think Destiny Jackson is a "radical agitator" who brought her kids to a "violent riot"—well, then she endangered her own children. Federal agents were just responding to the riot. It's terrible that the baby stopped breathing, but really, what did she expect?
Sympathy preempted. Outrage defused. Accountability avoided.
The Justification of Violence:
If mothers are bringing babies to "violent riots," then of course federal agents are using tear gas and flash bangs. What else should they do? The agents are responding to dangerous situations. The situations are dangerous because protesters made them dangerous. The presence of children makes it worse, but that's the protesters' fault for bringing children.
This narrative flips the causality. In reality: federal agents surrounded a vehicle containing six children, trapped it, and fired explosives at it, causing an infant to stop breathing. But in the narrative DHS establishes: protesters created a violent situation, irresponsibly brought children to it, and federal agents responded appropriately to the dangerous conditions protesters created.
The violence is justified because the victims are already framed as perpetrators. The people harmed brought harm on themselves. The state bears no responsibility.
The Establishment of Consequences:
The message to women is unmistakable: if you participate in protests—if you're anywhere near protests, even if you're just driving home and stop to check on family—your children may be harmed, and you will be blamed.
The safest choice becomes clear: stay away. Don't attend protests. Don't observe. Don't even drive through areas where ICE might be operating. Stay home, stay quiet, stay compliant.
This is the chilling effect in action. This is how you suppress dissent without formally banning it: you make the consequences so severe, and the attribution of blame so twisted, that participation becomes unbearable.
You are a F*cking B!tch - in the words of John Ross when he shot Renee Nicole Good.
The Fragmentation of Solidarity:
Some mothers will see Destiny Jackson's story and think: "I would never put my children in that situation. I would never endanger them that way."
They won't recognize—or will be prevented from recognizing—that Destiny was driving home from a basketball game. That she stopped to check on her mother, an act of daughterly care. That federal agents surrounded her vehicle and trapped her family. That the decision to stay put rather than drive was the decision that saved her family from being shot like Renee Good.
These mothers will internalize the DHS narrative: there are good mothers who keep their children safe by staying away from politics, and there are bad mothers who endanger their children by participating. Good mothers stay home. Bad mothers bring babies to riots. And when bad mothers' children suffer, it's tragic, but it's the mothers' fault.
This fragmenting of maternal solidarity is essential to the authoritarian project. If mothers stand together—if they recognize that what happened to Destiny could happen to any of them, that the line between "good mother driving home" and "bad mother endangering children" is determined entirely by federal agents' decisions about where to fire tear gas—then they become dangerous. They might organize. They might demand accountability. They might refuse to accept that mothers must choose between civic participation and protecting children.
But if mothers are separated into categories—responsible mothers versus irresponsible mothers, protective mothers versus endangering mothers, mothers who stay home versus mothers who bring babies to riots—then solidarity becomes impossible. The mothers staying home will judge the mothers participating. The mothers participating will doubt themselves. The cohesive threat dissolves into individual anxieties.
The Outcome and the Twist:
Three children hospitalized. A baby who needed CPR to survive. A family whose minivan was destroyed. No accountability for the agents who fired explosives at a vehicle full of children. No investigation into whether surrounding a family vehicle and tear-gassing it constitutes appropriate use of force. No consequences of any kind.
But here's what authoritarians didn't anticipate:
Destiny Jackson tells Fox9: "My kids were innocent, I was innocent, my husband was innocent, this shouldn't have happened. We were just trying to go home."
Then she says: "Although the Jacksons have never attended a protest, Destiny said she was now inspired to join the demonstrations."
This is the part the machine doesn't account for: that terrorizing mothers doesn't always produce compliance. Sometimes it produces fury.
Destiny Jackson saw her baby stop breathing. She gave him CPR on the street. She was blamed for endangering her own children when federal agents tear-gassed them. And her response wasn't fear. It was recognition.
She recognizes now that the danger isn't protests. The danger is federal agents with no accountability. The danger is a system that can surround your car, fire explosives at your children, watch you give your baby CPR, and then blame you for what happened. The danger is a government that treats "we were just trying to go home" as insufficient defense against state violence.
So now she'll protest. Now she'll resist. Because staying home didn't keep her family safe. Compliance didn't protect her children. Trying to go home wasn't enough.
The machine that ran over her family revealed itself completely. And Destiny Jackson, who never protested before, now sees exactly what needs to be resisted.
II. ICE Agents: Where the Language Comes From
Gaming Culture to Federal Agent Pipeline
Part 2 documented ICE's transformation: 26 weeks training pre-2025 → 6 weeks by mid-2025. Recruitment pivot to gaming communities. This matters because anti-woman language doesn't just exist in Fox News—it's the native language of the culture producing these agents.
Gaming Culture Framework:
Women players = "e-girls" or "thots" seeking male attention
Women in games = NPCs (non-player characters) or objectives, not agents
Women must accept constant sexual harassment or leave
"SJW" (social justice warrior) and "feminist" = common insults
Women who complain are "ruining gaming," deserve coordinated attacks
ICE recruiting from tactical shooter forums, promising "real-world" operations, pulls young men from environments where devaluing women is normalized, sexual harassment is entertainment, women who resist deserve punishment.
Translation to Federal Operations:
Gaming mindset brings this framework to streets:
Gaming: "E-girls ruining server" → Street: "Wine moms impeding operations"
Gaming: Sexual harassment as bonding → Street: 308 sexual violence complaints in 6 years (ICE agents abusing other ICE agents)
Gaming: Women who resist deserve punishment → Street: Renee Good "brought it on herself"
Gaming: Women as NPCs → Street: Women as targets, not citizens with rights
Sexual Violence Culture
Part 2: 308 sexual abuse complaints inside ICE from 2015-2021. 13% substantiation rate, minimal consequences.
This culture doesn't stay internal. When organization tolerates sexual violence against own employees, establishes norms for treating all women:
Internal: 308 complaints, women reporting face retaliation, substantiated cases = minor discipline, culture protects harassers
External: Women observing ICE operations harassed, women near operations treated as targets, complaints about agents go nowhere
Language connects: Tucker Carlson hates female lawyers + Fox News calls mothers "gangs" + gaming culture teaches women who speak up deserve punishment = ideology finds ready home in organization already tolerating sexual violence and punishing women who report.
Six-Week Training Gap
Pre-2025: 26 weeks training including constitutional law, de-escalation, use-of-force standards.
By mid-2025: 6 weeks, curriculum designed to instill "warrior mindset," not judgment.
Former trainers describe new agents who:
See every situation as potentially hostile
Default to force over de-escalation
View civilians as threats, not people to protect
Lack understanding of constitutional limits on authority
The Combination:
6-week "warrior mindset" training + gaming culture recruitment (women as targets) + sexual violence culture (harassment normalized) + media environment (politically active women = terrorists) = predictable results.
Agents view women protesters not as citizens exercising First Amendment rights but as NPCs impeding mission, "wine mom gangs" using "Antifa tactics," legitimate targets for force.
The language about women isn't separate from ICE's transformation—it's the ideological fuel.
III. Historical Highlights: This Has Happened Before
Nazi Germany: Language Preceded Violence
Part 3 documented Nazi transformation in months, not years. But transformation began with language:
1933: "Women's proper place is in the home" (Kinder, Küche, Kirche) 1933: "Professional women are displacing men" (removal justified as restoring order) 1933-1934: "Women's true value is motherhood" (Mother's Cross, marriage loans) 1935-1936: "Women who resist are traitors" (Sophie Scholl labeled enemy of Fatherland)
American Parallel (2024-2026):
Nazi: "Proper place is home" → American: "Childless cat ladies" are failures
Nazi: "Professional women displacing men" → American: "I hate female lawyers"
Nazi: "True value is motherhood" → American: Trump National Medal of Motherhood (6+ children)
Nazi: "Resisters are traitors" → American: "Wine moms" = "greatest threat to civilization"
Language creates framework where violence becomes acceptable, necessary.
American Suffragettes: Trivialize-Then-Terrorize
Same pattern, early 20th century America:
Trivialization: "Hysterical women," "irrational feminine emotion," "shrill harpies," "bored housewives seeking attention"
Simultaneous Terrorization: Force-fed 49 times (Emily Davison), arrested repeatedly, sexually assaulted in custody, violent suppression justified
Both trivializing (silly women) and terrorizing (dangerous threats) at once.
Fox News does same: "wine moms" (trivializing—suburban women with time) while "organized gangs using Antifa tactics" (terrorizing—domestic terrorists requiring federal response).
Contradiction intentional: allows dismissing women's organizing as frivolous while justifying violent suppression as necessary.
Speed of Transformation
Nazi Germany (1933-1934):
19,000 women lost professional positions
100,000 female teachers dismissed
3,000 female doctors removed
University quotas dropped women to 10%
Months, not years.
America (January 2026—first 21 days):
2,000+ federal agents deployed single metro area
Oversight offices eliminated (CRCL, OIDO, Ombudsman)
Renee Good shot, labeled domestic terrorist within 24 hours
Absolute immunity claimed for agents
Six children hospitalized from tear gas, parents blamed
Military deployment threatened (Insurrection Act)
DOJ investigating mayor and governor
In three weeks: from immigration enforcement to agents killing mothers, tear-gassing children, claiming immunity, labeling resistance terrorism, threatening military deployment.
If you think this can't escalate further, you don't understand authoritarian patterns. If you think it will stabilize, you don't understand the machine. If you think there's a bottom, you haven't studied history.
IV. The Synthesis: How the Machine Works
The Seven-Step Process
The targeting of women operates through perfectly synchronized systems. Understanding how they connect is essential to disrupting them:
1. Media Ecosystem Devalues Women
Fox News, right-wing outlets, and aligned media establish ideological framework over months:
Professional women are enemies ("I hate 38-year-old female lawyers")
Organizing mothers are terrorists ("wine mom gangs using Antifa tactics")
Women's resistance destroys civilization ("almost wholly responsible for decline")
Women without children are defective ("childless cat ladies")
This creates permission structure. When Tucker Carlson broadcasts to millions that he hates professional women, he models that hatred as acceptable. When Fox News calls mothers "gangs," it normalizes treating them as criminals. When outlets declare women the "greatest threat to our nation," violence against them becomes patriotic defense.
The media ecosystem doesn't reflect reality—it manufactures the reality where violence against women becomes thinkable, then acceptable, then celebrated.
2. ICE Recruits from Devaluation Culture
The agency deliberately targets communities already steeped in anti-woman ideology:
Gaming communities where harassing women is entertainment
Online spaces where "SJW" and "feminist" are slurs
Environments where women are NPCs, not equals
Forums where coordinated attacks on women who complain are normalized
Six weeks of "warrior mindset" training (down from 26 weeks emphasizing constitutional law and de-escalation) produces agents who see civilians as threats. Combined with sexual violence culture inside ICE (308 complaints 2015-2021, minimal consequences), the ideology translates directly to operations.
An agent who spent thousands of hours in gaming culture learning that women who speak up are "ruining" spaces and deserve retaliation arrives at ICE to find an organization that already tolerates sexual violence against its own female employees. The cultural reinforcement is total.
3. Violence Occurs—Predictably
This isn't random. This isn't "bad apples." This is a system functioning as designed:
Renee Good: Observing ICE operations, shot three times by agent Jonathan Ross
Jackson family: Driving home from basketball, surrounded and tear-gassed, infant stops breathing
Women across Minneapolis: Detained, sexually harassed, threatened by masked agents
Pattern repeating in every city where heavily-deployed ICE operates
When you combine:
Media calling women terrorists
Agents from culture viewing women as NPCs
Six-week training emphasizing force over de-escalation
Sexual violence normalized inside agency
No accountability structure (oversight offices eliminated March 2025)
Legal immunity claimed for all actions
...you get predictable, systematic targeting of women. The violence isn't anomaly—it's function.
4. Media Immediately Justifies Violence
Within hours—sometimes minutes—of violence against women, justification narrative deploys:
Renee Good killed January 7 → Fox News labels her "trained terrorist member" January 11
Jackson family tear-gassed January 14 → DHS posts "radical agitators bringing children to riots" same day
Any woman harmed → narrative established before facts examined
The speed is critical. Before investigations, before witnesses speak, before video analysis—narrative is set. Trump claims Good "viciously ran over" agent despite video showing opposite. DHS claims Jackson family brought kids to riot despite family driving home from basketball.
Truth becomes irrelevant. Narrative is everything. And narrative always follows same pattern: woman brought it on herself, agent acted appropriately, no accountability needed.
5. System Protects Agents—Absolutely
No matter how egregious the violence, protection is total:
"Absolute immunity" claimed by Vance for agent who killed Good
No investigation despite infant requiring CPR after federal agents tear-gas vehicle
No consequences for agents despite three children hospitalized
Federal government threatens military deployment against those demanding accountability
The protection extends beyond individual incidents:
Oversight offices eliminated (CRCL, OIDO, Ombudsman closed March 2025)
DOJ investigating local officials who criticize ICE (Mayor Frey, Governor Walz)
Congresswomen attempting oversight turned away from facilities
Judges who restrict agent tactics face federal appeals
The message is clear: agents can do anything. Local officials who object will be investigated. Federal officials who might provide oversight have been eliminated. Citizens who demand accountability face federal criminal charges.
The immunity isn't just legal—it's operational, political, institutional.
6. Chilling Effect on Women—Calculated
Other women watching these patterns learn specific lessons:
Observation is dangerous: Renee Good was observing when killed
Presence is dangerous: Jackson family just driving through
Motherhood provides no protection: Six kids in car didn't prevent tear-gassing
You will be blamed: Whatever violence happens, media frames it as your fault
Men are protected: Agents get immunity and called heroes
Your networks will be targeted: Mutual aid organizations labeled terrorist gangs
This chilling effect is intended outcome, not side effect. The goal isn't just punishing individual women—it's changing behavior of all women. Make resistance so dangerous, consequences so severe, blame so automatic, that participation becomes unbearable.
Some women will choose compliance. They'll stay home, stay quiet, conclude that protecting children requires avoiding politics. The fragmentation of solidarity means those who do participate will be isolated, easier to target, dismissed as the "bad mothers" who endangered their own kids.
7. Process Repeats—Systematically
This isn't one-time event. It's ongoing process:
Next woman steps up to observe, organize, resist
Next incident of violence occurs (shooting, tear-gassing, detention, harassment)
Media immediately justifies (terrorist, gang member, dangerous radical)
System protects agents (immunity claimed, no investigation, no consequences)
Chilling effect intensifies
Machine keeps running
Each iteration teaches the lesson more powerfully. Each woman harmed becomes evidence used against the next woman. The machine feeds on its own violence, using each incident to justify the next, each victim to blame the next victim.
What Disrupts the Pattern: Historical Lessons Applied
History shows both failures and successes in resisting authoritarian targeting of women:
What Failed (and Why):
Individual moral courage without collective action: Sophie Scholl's resistance was extraordinarily brave. She distributed anti-Nazi leaflets, refused to recant, maintained moral clarity. She was also arrested February 18, 1943 and executed by guillotine February 22, 1943—four days later. Individual acts of conscience are noble. They're also insufficient against state machinery. One person resisting can be disappeared. A thousand people resisting creates crisis the state can't easily resolve.
Faith in institutions that protect power: American suffragettes believed in legal processes, petitioned properly, worked through channels. They also got arrested repeatedly and force-fed 49 times. Emily Davison attended protests for years following proper procedures. She died after being trampled by the King's horse. Institutions don't protect people challenging power—they protect power. Counting on courts, oversight bodies, internal investigations to constrain authoritarian violence is counting on systems designed to maintain the status quo to disrupt it. History shows: they won't.
Hoping men in power would recognize reason: Women waited decades for the vote, presenting logical arguments for why denying half the population political voice was unjust. Men in power heard those arguments, understood them perfectly, and continued denying women the vote until sustained disruption made continuation untenable. The problem was never that men didn't understand. The problem was that understanding didn't motivate change. Power concedes nothing without demand.
Accepting incremental rollbacks as reasonable: Each Nazi restriction on women seemed reasonable in isolation: university quotas were just returning to traditional values, marriage loans were just supporting families, removing women from civil service was just prioritizing veterans. But each "reasonable" restriction enabled the next. By the time the machine was fully operational, stopping it required war. The lesson: there is no such thing as acceptable incremental oppression. Each restriction accepted makes the next restriction easier.
What Worked (and How):
Sustained, visible, disruptive resistance: Suffragettes didn't write polite letters. They chained themselves to railings. They hunger-struck in prison. Emily Davison threw herself in front of the King's horse during the Derby—impossible to ignore, impossible to dismiss. The disruption made clear that denying women the vote had costs. Male comfort would be disturbed. Public events would be interrupted. The machinery of society would not run smoothly while half the population was denied voice. Sustained disruption works because it imposes costs on those in power.
Women's networks and mutual aid operating outside formal institutions: Underground networks helped people escape Nazi Germany when official channels failed. Mutual aid societies supported striking workers when unions were crushed. Women organized child care, food distribution, safe houses—infrastructure that didn't depend on state permission or institutional cooperation. These networks couldn't be shut down by closing one office or arresting one leader because they were distributed, resilient, and operated outside official channels. This is why authoritarian regimes work so hard to infiltrate and destroy these networks: they represent power that exists independent of state control.
Refusing to internalize blame and shame: When authorities force-fed Emily Davison, she didn't accept that she deserved it for being too aggressive, too unwomanly, too disruptive. When they arrested Emma Goldman for distributing birth control information, she didn't apologize for corrupting morality. They refused the narrative that their resistance was female hysteria, irrationality, or moral deficiency. This refusal is critical because authoritarian control depends on victims internalizing that they brought violence on themselves. When women reject that internalization—when they insist the violence is the state's fault, not theirs—the shame weapon fails.
Documenting everything for historical record: Suffragettes wrote detailed accounts of their arrests, their force-feedings, their treatment in prison. Holocaust survivors testified about what they witnessed. Documentation creates historical record that can't be erased, can't be rewritten, can't be dismissed as exaggeration or false memory. When authoritarians claim "it wasn't that bad" or "they brought it on themselves," documentation proves otherwise. This is why surveillance states work to prevent documentation: they know memory can be manipulated but photographs, videos, written accounts create evidence that resists manipulation.
Making costs of violence visible to those who might look away: Every time authorities brutalized suffragettes, coverage created new converts. People who might have ignored the movement couldn't ignore women being trampled by horses, force-fed, beaten in custody. Each act of violence made clear what opposing women's rights actually meant: state violence against women. Making the costs visible forces those who benefit from oppression to confront what they're accepting. Some will look away anyway. But enough won't.
This is the historical blueprint for resistance that works. And these same principles apply to 2026.
What This Means for 2026
Americans—particularly women—must:
1. Stop accepting incremental escalation. Each "isolated incident" is part of pattern. Renee Good's killing isn't isolated. Jackson kids tear-gassed isn't isolated. Components of system.
2. Document relentlessly. Film everything. Write everything. Post everything. Administration will lie—Trump claimed Good tried to run over agent when video shows opposite. Documentation creates evidence they can't erase.
3. Build and protect women's networks. Mutual aid. Childcare collectives. Legal defense funds. Communication networks. Administration will try isolating resisters. Networks prevent isolation.
4. Refuse to internalize blame. When media says mothers irresponsible for protesting, reject it. When authorities say women brought violence on themselves, reject it. Authoritarian gaslighting.
5. Make costs visible. Every time agents harm someone, make it impossible to ignore. Renee Good's glove compartment full of stuffed animals made her humanity visible. D'iris Jackson's six-month-old face made tear-gassing personal. Don't let administration abstract victims into statistics.
6. Recognize there's no bottom. Machine doesn't stop on its own. Only stops when people force it to stop. Hoping it won't get worse guarantees it will.
V. The Path Forward: Practical Resistance
Documentation and Evidence
Film everything: Every ICE interaction, protest, arrest. Multiple angles. Upload immediately.
Preserve evidence: Authoritarian regimes delete records. Offline backups, physical copies, distributed storage.
Create detailed accounts: Names, dates, locations, witnesses. Minnesota AG's 80-page complaint documenting ICE abuses = model.
Share widely: Every incident must be impossible to ignore.
Network Building
Mutual aid: Childcare, food, transportation, housing. Support systems not relying on institutions.
Legal support: Defense funds, lawyer networks, know-your-rights training.
Communication: Signal groups, encrypted apps, phone trees. Assume surveillance.
Care networks: Trauma support, medical assistance, emotional resilience. Long-term resistance requires sustained care.
Strategic Action
Show up: Protests matter. Physical presence matters. Numbers matter.
Track and observe: ICE watch groups labeled "gangs" precisely because they're effective. Keep doing it.
Protect the vulnerable: Schools, daycares, hospitals. Community protection of those targeted.
Noise campaigns: Whistles, pots, pans. Make ICE operations impossible to conduct quietly.
Economic pressure: Target companies supporting ICE operations. Target politicians enabling escalation.
What Men Must Do
What Doesn't Help:
Telling women to stay safe by staying home (what authoritarians want)
Explaining "not all men" or "not all agents" (irrelevant to systemic analysis)
Waiting for institutions to protect women (institutions failing)
Assuming this doesn't affect men (when women can't participate, democracy fails)
What Does Help:
Amplify women's voices: When Destiny Jackson says agents tear-gassed her kids, believe her. When Renee Good's wife says "we had whistles, they had guns," listen. Don't require women to prove what they're experiencing.
Provide material support: Childcare for protesting mothers. Legal defense funds. Transportation. Housing for those targeted. Resources for women organizing.
Use male privilege strategically: Men less likely to be sexually harassed by agents, dismissed as hysterical, face reproductive threats. Not fair—reality. Use that reality to provide cover for women doing dangerous work.
Don't center yourself: This isn't about men's feelings. It's about recognizing pattern and disrupting it.
Recognize it's your fight too: When state can kill Renee Good with impunity, claim absolute immunity, face no consequences—everyone's freedom is threatened. Not "women's issues." Whether state can murder citizens and call it justified.
Hold other men accountable: When men celebrate Good's killing, challenge them. When men trivialize "wine moms," explain pattern. When men blame Jackson family, provide facts. Male solidarity enables authoritarian escalation. Break it.
Psychological Resilience
Expect escalation: It will get worse before better. Prepare mentally.
Reject despair: Authoritarian regimes want hopelessness. Resist that.
Find community: Isolation is dangerous. Connect with others resisting.
Celebrate small wins: Every person protected, operation disrupted, agent held accountable.
Remember history: Authoritarianism defeated before. Can be defeated again.
VI. The Choice
By January 21, 2026, Americans face a choice. Not between political parties or policy preferences. Between recognizing authoritarian pattern and looking away.
History will ask: When federal agents killed Renee Good and claimed absolute immunity, what did you do? When they tear-gassed six children and blamed parents, how did you respond? When they labeled mothers "terrorist gangs" for organizing mutual aid, did you see the pattern?
The components are visible:
Militarized force deployed against civilians
Sexual violence culture embedded in force
Media apparatus labeling resistance terrorism
Legal immunity claimed for agents
Children harmed with no accountability
Women specifically targeted
Historical parallels to previous authoritarian escalation
Speed of transformation accelerating
You can see it or look away.
If you see it: Document, resist, disrupt, refuse. Build networks, protect vulnerable, make costs visible, hold the line.
If you look away: History will record that too.
Conclusion: Hope Is a Mother
Let me be clear that "mother" is not just a biological term—a mother is a woman who nurtures, protects, loves, cares, and is willing to do what needs to be done. Women are natural nurturers and family goes well beyond biology. Humans would never have survived to form civilizations under the flawed nuclear family model. People were not meant to live in isolation. The mothers resisting in Minneapolis include biological mothers, chosen mothers, community mothers, women who care for neighbors' children, women who organize mutual aid, women who protect the vulnerable regardless of blood relation. Motherhood is action, not biology. It is care made visible through commitment.
After Destiny Jackson gave her infant CPR, after baby started breathing, after three of six children were hospitalized, she told Fox9: "My kids were innocent, I was innocent, my husband was innocent, this shouldn't have happened. We were just trying to go home."
Then something remarkable: "Although the Jacksons have never attended a protest,
Destiny said she was now inspired to join the demonstrations."
This is what authoritarians don't understand about mothers: you can terrorize them, tear-gas their children, blame them for violence you inflicted, call them gangs and terrorists and irresponsible radicals. Some will be frightened into submission.
But others—like Destiny Jackson, Renee Good, Adriana Goblirsch, mothers across Minnesota organizing mutual aid and tracking ICE and protecting schools—will see exactly what you're doing. And resist harder.
As one Philadelphia Inquirer columnist wrote watching mothers face impossible choices between civic action and protecting children: "Where the regime has sought to instill fear, they have instead inspired righteous fury. After all, hope is a mother."
The machine is powerful. The machine is real. The machine is visible.
But the machine can be stopped.
Women throughout history stopped it: suffragettes who hunger struck until men couldn't ignore them, resistance fighters who distributed leaflets until Nazis executed them, mothers who protected neighbors until agents arrested them.
They didn't win because they were stronger than the state. They won because they refused to stop. They won because they built networks the state couldn't infiltrate. They won because they documented what the state wanted hidden. They won because they made costs of authoritarian violence so visible that enough people finally said: no more.
We are in that moment now. Pattern visible. Escalation rapid. Window for effective resistance open but closing.
History will record what happened in Minneapolis, January 2026. It will record Renee Good's death, the "wine mom" panic, absolute immunity claims, military threats.
It will also record what came next.
That part—what comes next—is being written now. By mothers organizing childcare so other mothers can protest. By neighbors tracking ICE to warn vulnerable. By people documenting every incident. By citizens showing up despite danger.
By every person who sees the pattern and refuses to look away.
The machine is visible. The resistance is building. The outcome is not yet determined.
Choose wisely. History is watching.
Sources
Fox News and Right-Wing Media Rhetoric:
Fox News, David Marcus, "Renee Good killed in ICE protest sparks civil disobedience debate" (January 11, 2026)
Raw Story, "Fox News alarm over 'organized gangs of wine moms' skewered in the New York Times" (January 17, 2026)
The New Republic, "After Renee Good's Murder, Wine-Mom Gangs Are Now the New Antifa" (January 19, 2026)
HuffPost Life, "Minneapolis Moms On TikTok Document Escalating ICE Presence" (January 13, 2026)
Salt Lake Tribune, "Opinion: The right wants ICE to crush the wine mom insurgency" (January 18, 2026)
Philadelphia Inquirer, "Trump's message to politically active mothers: Stay home, or your children will suffer the consequences" (January 18, 2026)
PJ Media, various columns on "Affluent White Liberal Women"
Lauren Chen social media posts and columns
Tucker Carlson statements (2024)
JD Vance "childless cat ladies" comments (July 2024)
Jackson Family Incident:
CNN, "Minneapolis family, six children tear gassed after they were caught in clash between ICE and protesters" (January 17, 2026)
Bring Me The News, "DHS deletes post blaming Minneapolis family tear-gassed by federal agents" (January 17, 2026)
Fox 9 Minneapolis, "North Minneapolis ICE shooting: Children hospitalized after flash bang, tear gas hits van" (January 15, 2026)
ABC17NEWS, "Minneapolis family, six children tear gassed" (January 17, 2026)
The New Republic, "ICE Attacks Car Full of Kids, Leaving 6-Month-Old Baby Unconscious" (January 16, 2026)
DHS deleted X post
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin statements to CNN
Laura Ingraham Deceptive Edit:
The New Republic, "Fox Airs Shockingly Deceptive Edit on Minneapolis Amid ICE Takeover" (January 16, 2026)
Renee Good Killing:
All sources from Part 3, including The Intercept, ClickOnDetroit, Wikipedia, CNN, Al Jazeera, NPR, Star Tribune, CBS News
VP JD Vance statements
President Trump statements
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt statements
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem statements
Administration Response:
Trump administration Insurrection Act threats
DOJ investigation of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz
Various official statements from DHS, White House
Minneapolis Context:
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey statements and press conferences
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz statements
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison 80-page complaint
Representatives Ilhan Omar, Angie Craig, Kelly Morrison, Betty McCollum statements
Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara statements
Historical Sources:
All sources from Part 3 on Nazi Germany and American suffragettes
Additional analysis from New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg
Historical pattern analysis from multiple sources
Parts 1, 2, and 3:
All previously documented sources on ICE transformation, demographics, training, culture, sexual violence statistics, gaming culture recruitment, January 6 connections, historical parallels
Note: This synthesis prioritizes showing how language devaluing women creates permission structure for violence, how that language translates from gaming/media culture into federal agent mindset, how historical patterns repeat, and what practical resistance looks like based on what has worked (and failed) historically.
I am one woman with a blog - I make mistakes - I make typos. I use AI to assist with verifying facts and editing.
I have a biased POV - I am a childless cat lady.
I am a Book Wh0r3. No Man Required!
Check out our Wine Mom, Childless Cat Lady, and Book Wh0r3 Merch today.
Comments