Alexandria Ocasio Cortex, the recently minted millionaire (yes, it’s true) and former bartender, shared some keen-Cortez insight on the rising objections to boys being allowed to participate in girls’ sports. “Exposing,” if you like – not just the problem – but some of the contradictions in her argument.
.@AOC lays out the new Dem talking points on men in women’s spaces: “We are talking about opening up all women and girls to genital examinations when they are under age, potentially just because someone can point to someone and say, I don’t think you are a girl.” pic.twitter.com/zHPuwOyh6p
— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) December 5, 2023
Aren’t genital exams the Dem Party’s bread and Butter regardless of age? Hello, abortion! I’m not sure how familiar you are with those, but to have one, you need your “genitals examined.” Too extreme? Well, there are several situations where a medical professional might examine girls or women in that vicinity. Women’s Health Care – as I understand the Democrat definition, is impossible without it. That vicinity is the center, the apex of health for women from the progressive side of every aisle. A strange development after decades of suffrage and women’s rights marches (even some with cute pink pussy hats) whose point was to have the world view women as something other than that.
You Could say that in preparation for a lifetime of being defined as a vagina by an entire political party, we should “open up all women and girls to genital examinations when they are underage.” Good practice for when the world is run by tyrannical men pretending to be women.
So, is this a privacy issue? That would be ironic.
The one-time “physical” is standard practice in all school sports.
Your concerns would allow boys who are attracted to girls to get their creep on in bathrooms and locker rooms -“examining girls’ genitals” frequently and potentially at length. Obviously, in this context, the words examination and genitals cover a lot of territory, not just in the number of girls or the frequency of observation but in various states of dress and undress.
The infamous Lia Thomas is alleged to have been – on occasion – visibly aroused in the ladies’ swim team locker room, which, adding to the Sandy Cortez narrative, reminds us that the girls in her world are being forced to “examine” genitals against their will. (Related: College Hack: Just Do This Guys, And You Can Parade Naked Through Women’s Locker Rooms …)
And if we understand correctly, the discomfort at being examined once by a medical professional is significant, while objecting to being examined regularly in various states of undress by a boy (who could be naked with an erection) is bigoted. Peeping Tom only needs to change his name to Tammy, and exhibitionism and peeping become a right; its rejection is an act of discrimination.
More unpunishable crimes on the streets of the naked city.
And while the odds of serious injury are less common among pre-pubescent athletes, allowing the comingling of sexes based on how one feels (as in, I feel like staring at girls in their underwear without fear of punishment) not long into puberty, boys pretending to be girls present a significant “women’s health risk.”
Again, defenders will insist that rights trump risks, and generally speaking, as a society, we police after the fact, but is that truly an argument you’d like to make in the wake of years of rape-culture rhetoric? Men pretending to be women who are transferred to women’s prisons have an alarmingly common tendency to rape actual women.
It seems like that’s the culture you’re looking for, in which case women had best think about changing their party of preference before their daughters find themselves examining male genitals in ways that would be inappropriate to explain on these pages.
