Equally valid
Oh really?
There are women based on biology & women based on gender identity, both equally valid, says Tatchell. Is that right? Is that how these things work? Is it just women who are epistemically up for grabs in this generous way? Are there also men based on biology and men based on gender identity? Does Peter have sex with the based on gender identity kind? If not why not? Are there gay men based on biology and gay men based on gender identity? Does Peter consider the based on gender identity kind gay men like him, gay men in the same way he is a gay man, comrades in the campaign for the rights of gay men?
Who tf does he think he is telling us that men who claim to be women “based on gender identity” are “equally valid”? As the saying goes, “woman” is not a costume. Woman is not an idea in a man’s head. Woman is not something you can just put on like a hat or a sweatshirt or a smirk for the camera. Women are not a stack of library books waiting for Peter Tatchell to stamp us.
Actually, of course, Rishi was mocking Sir Ed Davey, the LibDem leader, for his assertion that some women have penises. But that doesn’t fit the “cruel Tories” narrative so neatly. I thought Rishi’s joke came across rather well – people can judge for themselves here, if they don’t mind clicking on the Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12210007/Rishi-Sunak-mocks-Ed-Davey-Lib-Dem-leader-claims-women-quite-clearly-penis.html
Gotta love that phrasing, “Sunak refuses to accept.”
Like it’s an irrefutable fact and he just can’t accept or acknowledge it. “Sunak refuses to accept that his dog died.” “Sunak refuses to accept that smoking is bad for your health.” “Sunak refuses to accept that the Earth orbits the sun.” “Sunak refuses to accept that some women have penises.”
The “cheap, sleazy joke” IS presenting the lie (that a woman can have a penis) as if it could ever be true in this universe. That joke isn’t funny.