Culture warrior
Dirt dirt and more dirt. Ginni Thomas is in it up to her neck.
Ginni Thomas, the self-styled “culture warrior” and extreme rightwing activist, has links to more than half of the anti-abortion groups and individuals who lobbied her husband Clarence Thomas and his fellow US supreme court justices ahead of their historic decision to eradicate a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.
A new analysis of the written legal arguments, or “amicus briefs”, used to lobby the justices as they deliberated over abortion underlines the extent to which Clarence Thomas’s wife was intertwined with this vast pressure campaign.
On the one hand, we’ve got the left zealously campaigning to destroy women’s rights via “trans rights,” and on the other hand we’ve got the right doing it via “rights of the unborn.”
“The Thomases are normalizing the prospect of too close an association between the supreme court and those who litigate before it,” said Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University and co-host of the Strict Scrutiny podcast. “This isn’t the first time that Mrs Thomas has had dealings with those who come before the court and seek her husband’s vote.”
Dirty pool.
What proportion of the American or International Left would support the right of men who wish they had been born female to use women’s public washrooms and other facilities.? That’s where it counts. The right of people to be trans and to cross-dress etc would not be an issue for either the Left or the Centre these days IMHO.
What do you mean “would” support? They already are.
And of course I’m not talking about the right to cross-dress. “The right of people to be trans” doesn’t mean anything.
OB @#2: OK. ‘Would’ and ‘do’ mean much the same in this context. The right of people to be trans and to cross-dress etc is not, and would not be an issue for either the majorities of the Left or the Centre these days IMHO. It is only the trans community themselves that beat it up into a big issue as far as I can see. Marlene Dietrich was perhaps the most famous female cross-dresser. It was an essential part of her act, in an otherwise standard-issue heterosexual life and mariiage (m. 1923–1976 to Rudolf Steiner.) Nobody objected, to my knowledge. But there are no doubt parts of the Anglophone (never mind the Islamic) world where being biologically male but found in public dressed up as a woman could get the bloke concerned into all sorts of bother with the cops, and run in for something or other. ‘Loitering with intent’ maybe.
It isn’t only the trans community themselves that beat it up into a big issue. It would be nice if it were but it isn’t. I’ve only written about 10 million posts on the subject.