Inclusive in what sense?

Imagine being an academic and seeing your union shout this:

We know that by “trans rights” they mean not the human rights that everyone has but special invented luxury rights that cancel the rights of other people, especially women. If men who call themselves women have the “right” to go everywhere women can go, then women don’t have some rights we’ve depended on for a long time. If men who call themselves women have the “right” to compete against women in sports then women lose the right to compete against women. If men who call themselves women have the “right” to win prizes for women, then women won’t win prizes any more. And so on. Men can’t idennify themselves into the female category without taking things away from women. Men with a shred of decency wouldn’t want to do that, but trans “activism” attracts men who lack that tiny shred.

Also, academics are supposed to be reasonably clever and thoughtful. Trans ideology is childish nonsense. Make it make sense.

2 Responses to “Inclusive in what sense?”

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting