… The Transgendered are angry because feminist p*ssy hats imply that one can only be a woman if one has a vajayjay.
Signs at the Women’s March reading “Pussy power” and “Pussy grabs back” deliver “a clear and oppressive message to trans women.” That oppressive message is: “having a vagina is essential to womanhood.”
Solis goes on to quote a transgender woman who was offended by feminists holding “signs that equate womanhood with having a vagina” — and even more offended by a subset of feminists who point out that “trans women are actually men in disguise trying to infiltrate their spaces.”
Maybe they should just take a Midol or something.
Don’t you just love it when the left eats its own?
*gets out the popcorn*
That reminds me of that joke…
@1
True it is: at times, I’d almost pay to see more of it.
Craig Smith, pass some of that popcorn over here.
Lib fighting: the only culturally acceptable form of animal fighting. 🙂
If you are born with a vagina you are female. Born with penis? Male. No matter how hard you try, you cannot have a vagina create sperm or a penis ejaculate eggs. There IS a difference and just because a person “feels” they are a different gender doesn’t change those true biological facts
I admit there are those born with both…they are generally a biological anomaly, and one of their sex organs functions better than the other…one is more dominate, and one usually doesn’t work.
Intersectionality is great until it meets reality. Kind of like Hillary’s personality.
Do those hats really look like vaginas? I’ve never seen one close up.
@7, There are no true human hermaphrodites, to be more succinct.
“Pussy grabs back”
WHere can I find one of these? The concept sounds …. interesting.
I’m with Craig.
Would it be churlish of me to encourage them?
To paraphrase Kissinger: pity all 57 sides (or whatever the number is) can’t lose.
@ Mike M.: Honestly, they just look like shoddily-made knit pink hats. If it weren’t for the femtards calling them “kitty” hats, I would’ve thought they were the breast cancer awareness merchandising empire’s newest addition.
No. They are strictly allegorical (as in a synonym colloquialism for a cat being spelled the same as a vulgarity for a vulva & vagina). What they look like is something a doting old lady would knit for an adopted lion in a zoo to keep their head warm (as in the chickens transplanted from the South now in Rhode Island who are wearing sweaters hand-knit for them).
@ #11 Sorry, rjligier…I will try to curtail my comments from now on…
“Mr. Jones? The doctor will see you now. If you could just step on the scale.”
“Oh, I identify as 150 pounds.”
“…that’s…that’s nice. Could you just…step on the scale?”
“Are you trying to assume my weight?”
#1 Don’t you just love it when the left eats its own?
Yes. It’s that one little vice I allow myself to enjoy. 🙂
Otherwise I’d be a goody-two-shoes.
@8, maybe the accused rapist (and adult male illegal immigrant) in Maryland was enrolled in a co-ed high school freshman class because he identified as a 14-year-old girl?
Yep. There are craft sites on the Web where you can buy knitted or sequined-felt ornaments (for your Solstice tree or rear-view mirror) that definitely look like a “stylized” vulva — i.e., there is some effort to suggest the labia, and there may be a little rhinestone representing the clitoris, etc.
For that matter, some of Georgia O’Keeffe’s floral paintings look a bit like a “stylized vajayjay”, at least to the same extent that the classic paisley design is a “stylized fish.”
But no one seeing one of these hats would be reminded of genitalia.