Below is the start of a very good article by Excelpope. Follow the hyperlink to continue reading.
In the past couple of weeks the ever-growing sphere of trans-rights activism has intersected with the public consciousness in three particular battles; one new, one old and one on-going.
The old battle has been the final conclusion of the British Columbia tribunal hearings, brought by Jessica Yaniv against beauticians unwilling to provide waxing of her genitals. The case hasn’t exactly been a towering success for Yaniv, with paragraph 109 of the judgement openly saying that the motivation for bringing the cases was personal financial gain and racism.
The battle that’s been rumbling on for a while surrounds abrasive and abusive cycling champion, Rachel McKinnon. Several sources were ratio’d to hell when they reported her winning a world record spring time in women’s cycling.
The new entry came from across the Atlantic, from the New York Democrats. A rule that required districts, electing two members of the state committee each, to elect one man and one woman, was changed to a requirement for two people of different genders. This rule was proposed by 20-year-old Emilia Decaudin, who came out as non-binary 3 months ago and was, as many people noticed, very happy to be there.
In each case public opinion wasn’t so much against trans ideology as genuinely flabbergasted that any of this was being taken seriously. And yet, still, trans-rights activists leapt to the defence in all cases. Even racist scammer, Jessica Yaniv, was defended by prominent trans-rights activist, Morgane Oger, who blamed lawyers in the case for digging up dirt on Yaniv.
Why defend these cases? Nobody hearing about these issues for the first time this week is likely to think that Yaniv is a nice person or that McKinnon, who is well off the pace for a man of her age, setting world best times in women’s cycling is fair, or that a political party electing two white men, one of whom dresses unconventionally for their sex, is increasing inclusivity. Why not accept some battles as lost, move on, and try to win the war over public opinion?
The answer is “Trans women are women” – the “Four legs good, two legs bad” of trans-activism.
Trans women are women – TWAW – isn’t just the slogan of the trans-right movement, it’s its most fundamental and axiomatic core. Should trans-women be allowed into women-only spaces? Yes, because trans women are women. Should trans-women be allowed on women-only shortlists? Yes, because trans women are women. Should trans-women be allowed to define feminism? Yes, because, etc.
As bedrock goes, it is feeble. The assertion doesn’t stand up to the. . . continue reading here