The New York Times shits all over the rights and safety of half of the human race by playing the "tolerance" card.
Since the overwhelming majority of trans are MEN trying to impersonate women, people need to know what it is they are talking about. The editors are typical self-styled liberals who despise women to further the dubious rights of men under the false guise of "tolerance." These guys who call themselves "transgenders" are for the most part sexual fetishists--transvestites--who have a compulsion to act out their fantasies of themselves as "women" and force the rest of us to unwillingly participate in those fantasies and sexual kinks.
These men have no business whatsoever invading women-only spaces, spaces that came about first in the late 19th century when women first started venturing in the world outside the home. Those spaces were in recognition that men tend to be violent towards women, which is a fact. Not all men are or even the majority, but far too many of them are.
These guys can leave the women's clothes at home and use the men-only facilities in public. There is no biological imperative to wear wigs, dresses, lingerie, high heels, and makeup. Other guys aren't going to care what these "transgenders" do in the privacy of their own home. I don't care, either. It is when they force their deviant behavior on me and invade my rights that I object.
Women, however, are not going to sit back and shut up, even when these deranged men threaten them with their lives. They shouldn't have to.
Salon, too, engages in lies under the false banner of "tolerance." Women and girls and their rights to safety and privacy are thrown under the bus in order to further the kinks of sexual deviants, which the vast majority of "transgenders" are.
I wrote following this piece: This legislation has little or nothing to do with LGB "rights." This has to do with WOMEN'S RIGHTS, which has always been the Achille's heel of the so-called "left" ever since the 1960s. Lots and lots of LGBs are against transgenderism. Are they bigots, too, because they believe women have the right to safety and privacy? Does the author even understand what transgenderism IS?
Let's tell the truth. Many people, including idiot politicians, are still under the mistaken belief that the vast majority of trans--trans being MEN trying to impersonate women--are self-loathing gay men who are post op, and these people feel sorry for them. They used to be called transsexuals and were extremely rare. Well, thanks to the term transgenderism being intentionally vague, the vast majority of these guys--some 90 percent of them--not only do NOT have bottom surgery but are what used to be called transvestites. Bruce "Caitlyn" Jenner is a classic case of a man with a sexual compulsion to act out his fantasies as a woman. We are talking about a very real sexual deviance that, thanks to the internet, is being pushed on the public in the public sphere, and women and girls are completely disregarded. Note that very few women who "trans" into "men" are pushing to have access to men's restrooms and locker rooms. Gee, I wonder why that is? Does it have to do with the possibility of sexual assault?
The article, trying to push the false "tolerance" line, is full of lies. Men, especially criminals, all too often assault women and girls in restrooms but they are subject to criminal prosecution. Statutes giving perverts and criminals access to women's spaces basically legalize rape and sexual harassment. It is a LIE that trans are less likely to assault--since they are men they are just as likely to assault women. Even being post-op doesn't alter men's tendency to be violent.
The truth hurts, folks. These guys can leave the women's clothes at home and use the men-only facilities in public. There is no biological imperative to wear wigs, dresses, lingerie, high heels, and makeup. Other guys aren't going to care what these "transgenders" do in the privacy of their own home. I don't care, either. It is when they force their deviant behavior on me and invade my rights that I object.
Women have to have women-only spaces in order to participate in the world outside the home. That is why sex-segregated spaces came about, as safe havens for women from male violence. Think it is trivial? Ask women in India who are pushing to have their own segregated restrooms because they are constantly harassed and assaulted.
Ted Cruz is under fire from the National Enquirer for having a series of girlfriends.
Of course, this doesn't compare to Donald Trump.
More is here.
It gets better, as one of the alleged "girlfriends" was caught blindsided on CNN.
Obituary: Actor Richard Bradford, 78, has died.
The obituary is one hell of a screwed-up one. It says he was "82" while having been born in 1937 when in fact he was born in 1934, (though some sources do have him born in 1937) but would have turned 82 in November.
Furthermore, whoever wrote the obit had to have been stoned, for Bradford was NOT married to Millie Perkins but to one-time dancer Eileen Elliott.
Edit: The obituary has been cleaned up. It clarifies the Perkins bit by saying she was his longtime partner, i.e., shack-up. It also corrected his age to 78.