Y-e-s, YES and yes, I know the Washington Times is a connn-serv-ah-tive news source [[thus any word written must be dismissed).
However, I knew there was going to be conflict, cross purposes, and conflation here... saw it coming around the corner. And AS usual women are most impacted:
From article:
“I guess you would call it strange bedfellows, radical feminists and conservatives and religious people who are all just trying to protect women and girls,” said Emilie Kao, director of the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at Heritage. “It’s that simple. It’s not a big mystery.”
Given that “politics is the art of coalition building,” the partnership shouldn’t come as a surprise, said Jennifer Braceras, director of the Independent Women’s Law Center. “But I do think that there is something deeper here, and that is that some feminists and many women on the right share an essentialist view of what it means to be female,” Ms. Braceras said. “We share the view that sex — as opposed to gender — is biological, and we understand that men and women are different in some important ways that impact policy.”
Their priorities include opposing the Equality Act, passed by the House in May, which would amend federal civil-rights law to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Foes warn that it would outlaw sex-specific public accommodations such as restrooms, locker rooms and prisons, as well as women’s sports, which supporters deny.
Transgender agenda fought by unlikely alliance: Radical feminists and conservative women
Trans Athletes Are Posting Victories and Shaking Up Sports
Bookmarks