A transwoman in search of a glamour modeling career agreed to have consensual sex with the photographer (filmed for money) until the photographer discovered “she” had a penis. The transwoman is outraged and calling it discrimination.
“No one should be treated like this – this is discriminating and appalling behavior.
“This man messaged me saying he wanted to take my picture, have sex with me and film it to make money and then once he found out I was trans he stopped all contact with me.
Glen Reynolds at Instapundit asks if anyone, “Remember(s) when it was all about consent, which could be revoked or withdrawn at any time for any reason? But the rules have to change constantly because reasons.”
Does that count? Is it exclusionary? In the world of the equity and equality narrative, are men prohibited from exercising the consent decree?
Sorry, I’d like to stop, or no means no? No?
Okay.
Gender is fluid, correct? That’s what we’ve been told. Ria Cooper, the model, is preparing to change her sex for at least the third time. Will this one also have a penis? Just curious because all this photographer should have to do is declare at any point in time that he is a woman, and the transwoman wanna-be glamour model with a penis becomes some sort of sexual predator.
If two men pretend to be a woman, and one of them revokes consent, do Liberals even care?
What if it’s man who had his package removed and “she” ignores a revocation of consent from a woman who still has her penis? What then?
Have we created a progressive social justice outrage paradox? Will the whole business spin in on itself and create a liberal narrative black hole that no left-wing dogma can possibly escape?
We could only be so lucky.
Do we just blame white men even if no one in our gender theory experiment is caucasian? How about rich people, this has to be their fault.
Gosh, this is fun. I hope the photographer’s solicitor is this creative. He could counter sue for defamation and sexual harassment.
Then what?
Image: The Sun.co.uk
