"Trans Men" Hopping Mad That Feminists Are Focusing on Abortion Rights for "Women"

You can read the article linked in this tweet, or just scan the comments for the flavor of it.

Specifically, a "trans man" is a woman who now claims to be a man. So I guess maybe that, um, being could become pregnant, if her female reproductive system were still intact.

But becoming pregnant would sort of demonstrate that she was, in fact, a woman, which is something these militant lunatics will not permit to be said in any possible context, even in discussing pregnancy, something that only happens to women.

Thus the argument that the left's fight for abortion rights must extend that battle to fight on behalf of men who need abortions.

The media loves pointing out that the right has become more extreme in ideology.

Do they ever cover things like this? No, of course not, that would embarrass the left and the media's precious Democratic party.

I was discussing this a few weeks ago with someone (forget who), in the context of the media's great interest in Scott Walker's views on evolution.

I pointed out that the media, if it really cares so much about evolution, could ask Keith Ellison about it; I don't know his actual views, but I know Muslims generally do not believe in evolution.

I also pointed out that, if the media really cared about candidates' views on religious doctrine, they could ask supposedly-Christian Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton if they really believed Christ died for our sins. Obviously, a Christian should have no problem answering this in the affirmative.

But a "Yes" answer from Hillary Clinton would be very problematic among her caucus, wouldn't it? (From what I can gather, Clinton really is a Christian, or at least bothers to go to church occasionally; still, the answer would be very embarrassing and difficult for her politically).

So if the media just wants to "find out what candidates" think, why not questions like that?

Anyway, the person I was talking to suggested a similar such question which would be very, very #Problematic for Hillary or Obama to answer:

How many Genders are there?

See, the problem is, most Democrats are not batshit crazy Gender Warriors who believe the answer is three or seven or 3 pi some number greater than 2. Most Democrats, and all independents, think the answer is "2," and would think anyone thinking the answer is anything but 2 is a crazyperson.

But the incredibly militant sexual left is insistent that there are many genders.

So such a question is difficult for a Democrat to answer. It's a politically relevant question, given the changes in the law and the claims (probably right) that the "Trans" sexuality issue is going to be "the next civil rights issue," as many on the left predict, but the media will not ask the question, precisely because no answer is a good answer for a Democrat, and any answer will tend to alienate either the extreme militant sexual-left base, or the moderates needed to win elections.

They love asking exactly that sort of question of Republicans -- the evolution question is designed to force Republicans to choose between their Biblical literalist supporters and their less literalist supporters -- but they absolutely refuse to ask Democrats designed to produce the same sort of cleavage in their fragile coalition.

So, any one out there who likes putting microphones in front of politician's faces: Ask Democrats how many genders their are.

Let's start making these Wedge Issue/Gaffe controversies ourselves for the Democrats, given that the DNC owned-and-operated media will not oblige us.

posted by Ace at 09:17 PM

| Access Comments