The Incredible Biological Female Penis! By Mrs Vera West

     Readers need to be brought up to speed on new developments in transgender, non-binary biology:
  https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/21/transgenderism-a-mans-penis-can-be-a-female-penis/

“A man’s penis becomes a female penis once a man declares himself to be transgender, says Indya Moore, one of the players in a transgender-themed TV show on FX network.

@IndyaMoore

If a woman has a penis, her penis is a biologically female penis.

9:31 AM - Feb 18, 2019

… actually women. But once the men are women, their bodies are women’s bodies. So men’s penises become female penises.
Moore extended the “female penis” claim by declaring the existence of ‘male vaginas,’ which are presumably carried by women who are living as men.

IAM
@IndyaMoore

Yes.

Adrian Hilton
@Adrian_Hilton
If a man has vagina, is it a biologically male vagina?#AskingForAFriend https://twitter.com/IndyaMoore/status/1097269840165904384 …

5:24 AM - Feb 20, 2019

      The “female penis” claim went viral because it spotlights the logic of the transgender ideology, which insists the Department of Justice must blur and forbid any legal or civic recognition of the biological distinctions between the two different and complementary male and female sexes. This policy must be imposed to ensure that children and adults can easily discard their female or male sex by simply declaring they have an opposite-sex “gender,” or have a “gender identity” which is between male and female, say transgender activists. A person’s “gender,” say activists, is their personal feeling about being female or male, or something in between. For example, Moore’s feelings are described as “binary,” or neither male nor female.

IAM
@IndyaMoore

I am a biological non binary.

7:02 AM - Feb 21, 2019

     Moore’s feelings-are-more-important-than-biology logic was explained by another transgender writer:

     Moore took the often-heard rallying cry “trans women are women” one step further: She argued that if trans women are biological women, by definition, a trans woman’s penis is “a biologically female penis.” That’s a radical point missing in mainstream discussions on trans bodies, as trans women are often made to feel as if they should be ashamed of their genitals if they don’t have a vagina. “Don’t use science to justify your bigotry,” Moore tweeted at critics of the “female penis” claim. “The world is way too weird for that s**t.” The transgender effort to suppress any recognition that men and women are different and complementary would not matter except for the movement’s political alliance with wealthy progressives and radical feminists who wish to destroy the political power of the male-and-female family. For example, editors at the New York Times invited a February 7 op-ed which smeared women who reject the political claim that gender is more important than biology. Author Sophie Lewis described the vast majority of women as “terfs”:

     … the most vocal trans-exclusionary voices are, ostensibly, “feminist” ones, and anti-trans lobbying is a mainstream activity. Case in point: Ms. Parker told the podcast “Feminist Current” that she’d changed her thinking on trans women after spending time on Mumsnet, a site where parents exchange tips on toilet training and how to get their children to eat vegetables. If such a place sounds benign, consider the words of British writer Edie Miller: “Mumsnet is to British transphobia,” she wrote “what 4Chan is to American fascism.” The term coined to identify women like Ms. Parker and Dr. Long is TERF, which stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. In Britain, TERFs are a powerful force. If, in the United States, the mainstream media has been alarmingly ready to hear “both sides” on the question of trans people’s right to exist, in Britain, TERFs have effectively succeeded in framing the question of trans rights entirely around their own concerns: that is, how these rights for others could contribute to “female erasure.” Many prominent figures in British journalism and politics have been TERFs; British TV has made a sport of endlessly hosting their lurid rudeness and styling it as courage; British newspapers seemingly never tire of broadsides against the menace of “gender ideology.” (With time, the term TERF has become a catchall for all anti-trans feminists, radical or not.)

     Lewis’ radical support for the transgender ideology is logical because she wants to minimize the role of male-and-female families. A review of her book, Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family, says:

     Rather than making [birth] surrogacy illegal or allowing it to continue as is, Sophie Lewis argues we should be looking to radically transform it. Surrogates should be put front and center, and their rights to the babies they gestate should be expanded to acknowledge that they are more than mere vessels. In doing so we can break down our assumptions that children necessarily belong to those whose genetics they share. This might sound like a radical proposal but expanding our idea of who children belong to would be a good thing. Taking collective responsibility for children, rather than only caring for the ones we share DNA with, would radically transform notions of kinship. Adopting this expanded concept of surrogacy helps us to see that it always, as the saying goes, takes a village to raise a child. But Lewis’ ‘Terf’ smear is also aimed at lesbians who wish to maintain a clear distinction between women and men. For example, former tennis star Martina Navratilova is being slammed by political activists for her growing opposition to transgenderism in sports. The Guardian reported February:

     The former Wimbledon champion Martina Navratilova has been criticised for “disturbing, upsetting, and deeply transphobic” comments after she argued that allowing transgender women [men] to compete in women’s sporting tournaments was “insane and cheating”. The tennis player and gay rights campaigner first drew criticism from equalities activists and trans athletes when she tweeted in December: “You can’t just proclaim yourself a female and be able to compete against women. There must be some standards, and having a penis and competing as a woman would not fit that standard.”

     “To put the argument at its most basic: a man can decide to be female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organisation is concerned, win everything in sight and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to [fathering] babies if he so desires. “It’s insane and it’s cheating. I am happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her. It would not be fair.” The Guardian also saw fit to quote a man who is living as a woman describing Navratilova as beset by “transphobia,” as if the former tennis star is mentally ill.

Neil Munro
@NeilMunroDC

Democrats argue that It is “cruel and unscientific” to define each person’s legal sex by biology. But if sex is not defined by biology/human nature, it will be redefined by politicians & the transgender lobby - regardless of damage to women, men & children http://bit.ly/2DxntFb

2:22 AM - Nov 13, 2018

     All of this makes perfect sense if one accepts the premise that gender, like race, is a social contract. And, one had better accept it, because the social norms have now been put into place by the power elite to smash you to smithereens, if you think otherwise.