Feminists In Civil War Over Trans Rights Law, Gender Inclusivity Could BACKFIRE On Feminists. A new law called the Equality act would amend the 1964 civil rights act to expand protections to trans individuals. But Republicans and even some Feminists oppose the bill saying that gender identity is too vaguely defined and one Feminist going as far to claim the bill is a human rights violation.Within Feminism there are different factions such as intersectional and gender critical. Both groups are at odds with each other and simply by using their preferred titles I can be accused of supporting one group or the other.In some circumstances social justice activists and far left activists have actually contradicted their own protests by simultaneously demanding women only spaces but also demanding they be open to all identities.Even more odd is Matt Gaetz argument that this new law could allow Trump to be the "first female president"
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
A new bill would allow President Donald Trump to declare himself the first female president in: U S, history and
Yes, I know it sounds crazy, but as an argument brought up by representative Matt Gates when discussing the Equality ACT, this is a bill that seeks to amend the nineteen. Sixty four civil rights ACT to include gender identity as a protective class gates argues that gender identity is
two vaguely defined, and it will allow anyone to claim that they were male or female. Thus, in an extreme case trump could claim. He is the first female president now on the left, their arguing that the right is just trying to use transphobia to stop them
far from being passed, however, it seems that, as we try to expand civil rights, there is some contradiction that will ultimately be fought against by the left themselves in
circumstance as people sought, gender inclusive, eighty in a lounge enter
actual feminists actually resisted this, because they wanted a woman only space. It's true that this
new bill as well as the existing law might make it impossible for women's
We programmes tonight. Let's take a look
What's going on exactly with the equality ACT and how people are trying to counteract or how their defending it
But before we get started, make sure you subscribed to our new you to channel Youtube COM, Slash sub, verse, videos, the gold
Channel is produced straightforward news on the ground, reporting and expert interviews to cut their despair.
And the biased to the best of our abilities. Now tonight, we're going before me
bring a special preview of a new mysteries podcast, we're gonna, be doing that will be at seven p m. If you want to support this video just
on social media. Tops. Revenues are first story from the Washington Post, RAP Gate says:
and gender rights bill would let Trump declare himself the first female president. The story says gates one of trumps, most vocal defenders,
Capitol Hill is known for making incendiary statements. He was speaking at a hearing on H, our five. The equality act, which would prohibit discrimination against gay and transgender individuals in housing, is a public spaces, employment and other areas. Gate set at the hearing that, while we support
the rights of transgender people and will not denigrate order, neither existence or their struggles. He believes the bill as written
only nominally protect certain individuals while causing tremendous harm to others. What happens when sex is defined as gender identity and gender identity is terribly vague, gates asked? Will all sex based distinctions be erased? Would grants for female led businesses or programmes roman instead fields suddenly be open to all persons, whether they believe or not, that they, then, if I, as a woman, can
consider this possibility. If President Trump or to say I am now the first female president who would celebrate that? Would those who support the legislation think that's a good thing, or would they be dismayed? Bad actors have already weapon eyes sum up: sensible equality laws for their own benefit, but it's not just republicans- is actually a huge debate in the feminist community. This story from Pga media, lesbian, feminist, slams, the Equality ACT H. Our five is a human rights violation on Tuesday lesbian, feminist, Julia Back, who was kicked off of the Baltimore Algae Bt Commission because she opposes transgender identity, testified against the Federal Equality ACT. Her testimony caused quite a stir, with many Democrats expressly asking other witnesses to deal legitimize it. If the act.
Passes in its current form as age. Our five then every right that women have fought for will cease to exist backward age. Our five is a human rights violation. Every single person in this country will lose their right to single sex sports, shelters, grants and loans. The law will forbid ever distinguishing between women and men. They add back warned male rapists will go to women's pay.
Unlikely assault, female inmates, as has already happened in the UK, female survivors of rape will be unable to contest male presence in women's shelters. Men will dominate women. Sports girls, who would have taken first place, will be denied,
I'd scholastic opportunity, women who use male pronouns to talk about men, maybe arrested, find and banned from social media platforms.
Girls will stay home from school when they have their periods to avoid harassment by boys in mixed space, toilets,
girls and women will no longer have a right to ask for female medical staff or intimate care providers, including elderly, or
tabled women who are at serious risk of sexual abuse females.
Here the officers will no longer have the right to refuse to perform pat downs or intimate searches of males who say their female and women undergoing security checks will noble.
You have the right to refuse having those security checks being performed by men, claiming a feminine identity, everything I just list that is already happening, and it's only going to get worse if gender identity is recognised in federal law. I urge my fellow Democrats to wake up. Please acknowledge biological reality back concluded.
After her testimony representative, Jerry Nobbler, chairman of the House Committee on the judiciary, asked some new candy legal, direct
the national Women's law centre and a pro transgender witness to contradict backs testimony. Listening to that testimony, it seems like that particular witness does not believe that transgender people exist. Shandy responded. I find this response to be entire.
The disingenuous, and there is a legitimate argument to counter back statements just because there are people who exploit the system and just because the media covers stories doesn't mean there actually as big of a problem
as we think they are now it's true. They may be a problem and its also true. This might be over height. It requires an actual deep look at statistics and what is actually going on now. I'm not saying this to discredit back, I'm just offering up a legitimate criticism of the things you springing up simply coming out in saying it's
sounds like back. Doesn't think transgender people exist in no way actually argues what she sang. There's one of the biggest battles happening on the left right
and there is no middle ground. I have been called a sexist by both sides: trans inclusion, airy entrance, exclusionary I've been called a transfer job or a woman. Hater there's just no way to appropriately respond to this. If you think that trans women should not be competing, gets biological females, you're Trans Phobic, if you think people have a right to use whatever language they want on social me without being banned. You're transphobia. However, when I actually say that I think TAT,
People are deserving of civil rights protections, then I'm called sexist by other feminists. There's quite literally no way to be correct in this matter, because both sides don't like what you have to say about it, even if you're just trying to explain it. But there are some interesting problems that will arise with me loose
and vague definition of gender identity. So now
this is going to land me on the turf side of the argument. I suppose, but it's important to point out so, let's pointed out anyway, first important to note that many of these women's only school programmes actually already are illegal. It's just that no one's challenged them for their not being shut down, but there are some people who are actively challenging them now. Here's where gets kind of confusing if anyone can identify as any gender they want. Personally, I dont think you're gonna, see Ya
a massive wave of people just deciding to join women sports, but cheaters do exist and we
You tell someone a college scholarship is on the line. You may find that some people decide cheating is worth getting a hundred thousand dollars worth of school education or whatever the scholarship is worth yeah. They might actually
cheap. The definition doesn't require anyone to undergo hormone therapy or to be formally diagnosed. You can just say you are trans or a woman, and then you have immediate access to spaces, typically designed to protect females,
or you have programmes designed to encourage women in certain areas actually get shot down like this story from the grand Forks, Harold
rules for women. Only grants changed after man's disco
patient charge at University of Minnesota. This is from last November as it is,
already illegal to discriminate based on someone's gender identity is less relevant to what we are already seeing right now, but this story shows us the strange contradiction held by international feminists. This story from the car
facts to protect illegal women. Only lounge hundreds of women and some men promised to squat
again, State University had a study lounge that was off limits to men for ninety one years until a professor from a rival school filed a regulatory.
Light, the media noticed and poof. The lounge was suddenly open to all genders because of this five hundred students, including a smattering of men, have promised to squat in the lounge with another four hundred interested as of Monday night. The event take back the winds. Lounge said we must join together to take back out.
We're safe space. Adding this will be an intersection event, and it has come to my attention that women of different identities have previously felt uncomfortable in the women's lounge. So I wanted to make an additional effort to make the space open and inclusive two women of all identities. Now this may be the best example of why the Equality ACT will
fail in many regards so long as gender identity is so vaguely defined at this school. They wanted a space for women only. However, there are also transom, and thus they needed to make the space Inter Sectional, meaning it would include transmit as well. But how do you define what makes a woman a woman? That's been something of great debate, even among the international feminists, because you might actually have someone who identified as a woman. A
biological female who wears a tailored suit like a three p soup. Well, that's a traditionally masculine role and their embracing it, but doesn't mean they're, not a woman. So what happens then, when some?
on, whereas I'm just clothes like I'm wearing walks in, and they say we fought for the right to have
Women's only space you can't come in. Could I then just say I'm a woman and they have let me and more importantly, do they have the right
to challenge me or any one else to ask us whether or not we are actually women while it
It would be exceedingly rare that someone
lie and pretend to be Trans just to get access to a lounge. It's also important to point out that anybody in the lounge has no right to even challenge you because think about the ramifications of that someone could shop, was legitimately trends and then be forced to show their papers or prove their trans? Well, that's not
Thus, the only thing they can do is make the space open to literally everyone. You can't go on asking for papers and you can't make assumptions about what makes someone a woman that's their own logic. Thus they can't actually
for a safe space for women at the same time, fight for it to be open to all identities, it literally does not make sense, and this is what we will likely end up seeing across the board. The contradiction doesn't and there, the ACL you a noted intersection
left wing identity. Carrion organization opposes sex aggregation. It seems like they don't actually agree on exactly. What's going to happen here, some intersection of feminist saying there should be a woman's
safe space while the ACL use has sex obligation is wrong and this bill would basically do away with that anyway,
one of the most important arguments which are brought up earlier is that I think cheaters will be rare. They will exist, but just because this creates an opportunity for some cheaters doesn't mean we shouldn't offer up protections to gender non.
Forming people for Trans people, honestly, don't what the answer is, but I can say, is true: there will be people who exploit the system. This will result
Biological females losing special protections and there isn't a sum
An underlying much of this argument that there is
biological differences between men and women, which is absolutely wrong. Why should say males and females? It's a very hard at topic to navigate whether or not tromp declares himself the first female president upon this acting pets.
Entirely different story and is extremely unlikely.
You can. Let me know to think in the commerce below will give the conversation going. You can follow.
Mine's acting gasped stay tuned, new videos, everyday at four p m eastern and olive morbid zombies,
in general. You tube outcomes, less TIM cast new starting at six p m eastern thanks bring it up
I'll see you next time.
Transcript generated on 2020-05-04.