NY Times Is Rather Upset That Girls Are Used To Fight The Gender Confused Push

This is one of the lead opinion pieces in the NY Times today, and is proof that those highlighting that girls and women are being negatively affected by the transgender push, especially in schools. Writer Alexandra Brodsky seems a bit upset

Don’t Use Girls as Props to Fight Trans Rights

Last month, a Minnesota federal court received a complaint about rampant gender discrimination in one of the state’s school districts. The lawsuit claimed that girls were subject to harassment, barred from participating in athletics, and forced to transfer schools rather than tolerate a hostile environment.

It seems like the sort of case that feminist warriors, like my colleagues at the National Women’s Law Center, might bring. But the plaintiffs’ lawyers come from the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative nonprofit organization that is elsewhere suing the federal government to stop it from protecting transgender students’ rights. The discrimination noted in the lawsuit stemmed from the presence of a transgender girl in the girls’ locker room.

See, the problem here (one of them) for Social Justice Warrior Alexandra is who is protecting these female children, not that they were exposed to a deviant, nor that they were having their privacy violated on multiple occasions. One would think that female groups would rush to the aid of these girls. Unfortunately, the Progressives have decided that the so-called rights of the gender confused are More Important than those of females, much as they’d deemed that radical Islam must be protected over the rights of women.

In the Minnesota lawsuit, Privacy Matters v. U.S. Department of Education, the A.D.F. attempts to tell a tale of gender-bending terror. Instead, the complaint reads, heartbreakingly, as the story of a transgender girl acting like any other girl — dancing in the locker room, expressing insecurities about her body — in the face of rejection by her peers.

And Ms. Brodsky will lie to make her case. It was a whole lot different than she describes, and her peers? Yeah, they were real girls, who didn’t appreciate all that this boy pretending to be a girl was doing.

The lawsuit celebrates the “fundamental right of bodily privacy,” which, the complaint argues, “is deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition and has long been recognized in the United States Constitution.”

Can you not read the sneering in that, especially in light of the preceding paragraphs? Suddenly, privacy rights for all people, especially women, must be dismissed in favor of letting the gender confused, and those pretending, do whatever they want

The focus on privacy marks a shift in anti-trans strategy. Earlier efforts, like North Carolina’s House Bill 2, which limited bathroom access, relied on a dangerous myth that prohibiting discrimination against transgender people would allow predatory men to enter women’s restrooms. That approach is giving way to a new focus on privacy — narrowly defined to include only non-transgender women and girls.

See? Privacy for real females is silly! And, damnitall, how dare those big meanies on the Right mention privacy! Only liberals are allowed to do this, and only when it comes to abortion on demand!

The claim depends on the belief that transgender girls are actually boys.

They are boys. It’s great how liberals tell us that they are the party of Science, yet fail basic biology.

The organization bringing the suit sees no problem in the girls’ locker room if there are no transgender girls present. But the fake-feminist privacy argument is apparently more tolerable to liberal minds — and perhaps more dangerous for that reason.

Privacy rights are now fake? How about that.

When schools fail to value female athletes, or punish girls for “unladylike” outfits, they reinforce narrow visions of what makes a good woman. The same thing happens when they tell a girl she has to change in a different locker room solely because she is transgender.

Not a girl. Boy. And real girls? Meet the liberals big bus.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “NY Times Is Rather Upset That Girls Are Used To Fight The Gender Confused Push”

  1. john says:

    Say Teach how is that HB2 bathroom doing in NC? Think your Gov or Senator will survive?

  2. Good news! John read the Constitution which says that US Senators vote for state laws….oh, wait.

  3. Jeffery says:

    The claim depends on the belief that transgender girls are actually boys.

    They are boys. It’s great how liberals tell us that they are the party of Science, yet fail basic biology.

    That’s part of the debate isn’t in. And it’s you that fail basic biology. At birth, some babies with indeterminate genitalia are assigned as male or female by a doctor. Certainly the doctors do not perform genetic testing or even evaluate if the baby has testes AND ovaries. Some babies are XY yet with female genitalia. Some are XX with male genitalia. XXY individuals are not rare (1 in 500 births or 300,000 US alone), and many identify as female.

    What is your definition of male and female? And why is there no room in-between? And for gawdsakes why the intense hatred for those that are different? It’s almost the definition of American conservatism: we hate those that are different.

  4. That’s part of the debate isn’t in.

    Yeah, it is. See, there are these wacky things called “chromosomes.” They determine all sorts of things, such as if someone is born with a penis or a vagina.

    Tell me more about your “science”, Jeff.

  5. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    The claim depends on the belief that transgender girls are actually boys.

    They are boys. It’s great how liberals tell us that they are the party of Science, yet fail basic biology.

    That’s part of the debate isn’t in.

    No, that part is certainly in: if you have a penis and testicles, and XY chromosomes, you are male, period, absent a real birth defect.

    If some anthropologist digs up Bradley Manning 5,000 years from now, and examines his remains, he will determine that the ‘subject’ was male, from his skeletal structure and, if any remains, his DNA. Said anthropologist will be using objective criteria.

    Y’all are using subjective ‘information,’ Mr Manning’s beliefs to assert that he is female, contrary to objective criteria.

    And it’s you that fail basic biology. At birth, some babies with indeterminate genitalia are assigned as male or female by a doctor. Certainly the doctors do not perform genetic testing or even evaluate if the baby has testes AND ovaries. Some babies are XY yet with female genitalia. Some are XX with male genitalia. XXY individuals are not rare (1 in 500 births or 300,000 US alone), and many identify as female.

    While this might be true enough, you are attempting to use individuals with actual physical birth defects to argue that people who did not have such — Bruce Jenner, Bradley Manning — might somehow really be female, when they are clearly male by every objective standard. Messrs Manning and Jenner might believe that they are really female, but they are no more female than I would be Vulcan if I could find some way to dye my blood green and find a quack plastic surgeon to give me pointed ears.

    If I did something like that, you wouldn’t just agree with me that I was Vulcan; you’d say that I was nuts, looney tunes, cookoo for coco puffs; you’d never buy into my delusion. Why, then, would you buy into the delusions of Mr Manning?

  6. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host characterized it perfectly:

    Yeah, they were real girls, who didn’t appreciate all that this boy pretending to be a girl was doing.

    How amazing it is that teenagers can tell boys and girls apart, but (supposedly) educated adults cannot?

    Green alligators and long-necked geese, humpy-backed camels and the chimpanzees can all tell males and females of their own species apart. Cats and dogs seem to be able to tell not only males and females of their own species apart, but can differentiate between males and females among humans. It’s only Western liberals who have become so stupid that they’ve lost that ability.

  7. Jeffery says:

    I have no idea nor even an opinion on Manning’s or Jenner’s genitalia or chromosomes.

    if you have a penis and testicles, and XY chromosomes, you are male

    While we respect your credentials as physician/sociologist/biologist, and even if some green alligators and long-necked geese are on your side, most experts disagree with your conclusions.

    Do the old confederate states plan to start conducting chromosome tests outside every public restroom?

    Your analogy breaks down just a bit since men and women DO exist and vulcans do not.

  8. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    Your analogy breaks down just a bit since men and women DO exist and vulcans do not.

    How do you know? How do you know that there is not a green-blooded, pointed eared humanoid species on another planet?

    The answer is, of course, that you don’t know that: there may or may not be, but we don’t know the answer. You attempted to respond to my point by making what you saw as an objective point — and kind of failed in that — but that only solidifies my argument, that sex is an objective, not subjective, thing.

    And, of course, men and women do exist here on earth, and we have always defined them by their very obvious sex, right up until now, when leftists have managed to stupid themselves up so much that they can no longer tell.

  9. Jeffery says:

    You can believe in Vulcans if you wish.

    As for me, I prefer to get my info from scientists, and they say this whole transgender thing isn’t as simple as conservatives, geese and alligators suggest.

    I bet even Mr. Spock would listen to what science had to tell him.

    Live long and prosper.

  10. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    I fail to understand where people get their information. All, that’s 100% of experts agree humans come it two sexes, male and female and other than birth defects and mutants that’s all there has ever been. Any expert suggesting otherwise is what is commonly called a quack and should be shunned. What Jenner and Manning have in common is a psychological problem. In their mind they are the other sex (there being only the two) but in reality they can cut off or add on anything they want but it changes nothing other than create a grotesque testament to the foolishness and damage caused by modern liberalism. These people need to be helped not butchered.

    The very idea that leftists believe there are more than two human sexes proves they should not be listened to for any scientific opinions including abortion and climate change. If they haven’t the common sense to know males and females anything else is way out of their sphere of comprehension.

    These people will buy anything, no wonder they’re leftists. It makes sense since they’re mostly atheists. Like the old saying goes if you don’t believe in something you’ll fall for anything. They prove the old adage correct.

Pirate's Cove