A new dawn for American women

In this piece Meghan Murphy describes how the new administration in America has brought for the American women.

by /Feminist Current


Across the internet, women have been expressing relief at the end of the Trump era.

Even Canadians are posting moving images of Kamala Harris and Jill Biden in outfits representing progress. No true feminist would wear a black suit and red tie, after all. What America needs now is jewel tones.

I’m hard pressed to understand what trauma Canadians have endured watching an egomaniac tweet himself into internet jail… If anything, it provided dedicated progressive posters with four years of conversation starters. Now what will you meme about?

Either way, I’m just glad all this division and polarization will finally come to an end.

Canadians and Americans alike will have to band together to find something new to distract themselves with. Maybe this time it will be mass surveillance and the end of free speech? OR. Or. Wait no I have a good one. An end to women’s sport and sex-based protections?

The first thing U.S. President Joe Biden did, the day after his inauguration, was to sign 15 executive orders, including rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement and reversing a policy that blocks U.S. funding for programs overseas linked to abortion. Not bad. He also implemented a mask mandate on federal property, as well as on buses, planes, and trains.

But Biden’s courageous “100 Days Masking Challenge” (ooooh fun! It’s like a game!) wasn’t the only decision allowing us to collectively breathe a hot sigh of relief. He also signed an executive order to implement certain aspects of the Equality Act, which sounds like a great thing, unless you are a woman who, in 2021, hoped for equality under the law. Sorry, Karen. Equality is not for you. Put your mask back on.

The order ensures “that federal anti-discrimination statutes that cover sex discrimination prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity” and bypasses the tedious legislative process normally required to pass legislation.

But hey, we’re talking about equality, you guys.

And who would vote against that! As far as I’m aware, democracy just means other people get to decide what’s good for you. People who vote against ungood things are fascists.

Lest you had been fooled into believing an “Equality Act” was, at least in part, about combatting sex-based discrimination, seeing as women are the half of the population who spent the last 100 years fighting for equal rights under the law, we are reminded that our status as “woman” only matters if you are the kind of woman who is a man.

The original Equality Act introduced in 1974 by Bella Abzug did in fact seek to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex (as well as sexual orientation and marriage status) but as we all now know, thanks to Twitter’s fact checkers, humans have surpassed sex. We are now a mass of amorphous theys whose rights are determined by the kind of porn we prefer. The Equality Act of 1974 did not go on to become legislation, and has been reintroduced in various forms over the years, bringing us to modern times, where equality is still needed, just not for chicks.

Today, the important thing, in terms of ensuring equality, is that mediocre male athletes be permitted to compete against girls and women, lest they have to live with their male-based mediocrity. As such, this “Equality Act” ensures that individuals cannot be discriminated on the basis of their “gender identity,” which sounds nice because no one should be discriminated against, but in this case we’re using the term “discrimination” to defend the rights of men to claim they are female and be treated as such.

You might ask why men would wish to be treated as “female.”

Well, for starters, to ensure they are not denied access to abortion should they become pregnant with delusion. But there are a few other good reasons, too. One of which being that, should these men find themselves charged with sexual assault, they can avoid being stuck in prison with a bunch of violent dudes. Fair enough. No one wants that. Problem is that, as “women,” these men now have the right to be imprisoned in women’s facilities, meaning female inmates are now subject to the male violence no one wants anything to do with. Seems unfair, right? Too bad, Karen! That’s equality!

The really important thing this Equality Act does, though, is to level the playing field for males who aren’t good enough athletes to compete against other male athletes. It is more fair for them to compete against women who are, due to their biology, not as strong or as fast as male athletes. Indeed, women’s bodies are different than male bodies, but we’re no longer allowed to talk about why that is, because material reality is not very polite, and impoliteness kills.

Men can now not only legally access women’s facilities — including washrooms, locker rooms, and dressing rooms — but as “women,” they can also win sport competitions, races, scholarships, and accolades previously reserved for girls and women, which they fully deserve, because the hardest thing about being a woman is being male.

In October, Biden promised us he would enact the Equality Act during his first 100 days as President.

He is a Good Guy (which is why you voted for him, right?) and Good Guys keep their promises. So, he is following through. None of this was a surprise, and now we can all celebrate this brave new world, free from the burden of independent thought.

Personally, I’m just relieved Americans no longer have a crazy guy as president! Imagine if the leader of your country believed that males could become female through pronouncement, then enacted legislation on that basis! LOL.


This article was originally published on Feminist Current:  is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including The Spectator, Unherd, The CBC, New Stateman, ViceAl Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the Department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Editors note: The sketch by Monty Python really nails it:

14 thoughts on “A new dawn for American women”

  1. Well, someone sure has it in for trans people. “You might ask why men would wish to be treated as “female.”” Well, no, not really. If someone feels that they are deeply uncomfortable with their given gender, a compassionate society allows and helps them to be comfortable in their chosen gender. I can’t see that’s such a terrible way to treat people.

    “women’s bodies are different than male bodies” except when it comes to anything that means women (usually white, privileged women in wealthy societies) might lose out. Then they’re the same, even if they’re not. Do please make up your mind.

    The basic unstated assumption of the writer is that All Men Are Bad, Scheming and Untrustworthy and All Women Are Good Victims of Men. That should have been made clear and supported with evidence – perhaps by comparing the lives of, say, Martin Luther King, Jr and Margaret Thatcher and their effects on the lives of women.

  2. @James Or we give people that are unconformable with there body therapy the same we do for people with anorexia we don’t encourage them to keep destroying there body.
    And if people just think they are trans because they want to wear a skirt or make up then there is nothing wrong with them doing that without claiming they are something that they are not.

  3. @Steve: Therapy is for people with a medical or psychiatric condition. It is not to persuade people who are gender-nonconforming that they must accept their societally-imposed gender. Your suggestion is disturbingly similar to that forced on gay and lesbian people in countries such as Uganda that are dominated by Western evangelical Christian churches.

    “A lot of media coverage is obsessed with details of body parts and surgical procedures. For some trans people, having gender reassignment surgery is an important part of their transition. Getting access to that surgery is extremely difficult at the moment, and more investment is desperately needed so that trans people can get the procedures they need.

    But for other trans people surgery isn’t something they want. Being trans isn’t about having (or not having) particular body parts. It’s something that’s absolutely core to a trans person’s identity and doesn’t alter – whatever outward appearances might be.

    And frankly, it’s no one else’s business: you wouldn’t dream of asking someone else what they’ve got going on under their clothes, so why would anyone think it’s appropriate to ask a trans person?”
    https://www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans#trans-people-uk

  4. @I: I don’t know. There are many conflicting opinions but I suspect you are completely sure that you know the answers to those two questions.

  5. Lol, so you don’t know what a woman is, yet you know that “trans women are women”? How does that work exactly?

  6. @I: Well, at least I brightened your day with some humour, although I’m aware that for people on the libertarian Right, the use of ‘LOL’ is not an expression of genuine joy and warmth. I have not written that “trans women are women”. I wrote only that I don’t know what defines male or female in the UK in 2021 or in any other time and place.

    Trans people should be treated with compassion and dignity, not with suggestions that they need therapy or that they are potentially any more dangerous than any other human, both of which are, as I wrote, reminiscent of the fear, hatred and contempt still being meted out to gay people in many parts of the world.

    Perhaps you ought to meet a few trans people instead of categorising them in the box marked Dangerous: Not Like Normal People.

  7. @I: I can only suggest that you do some research into the reality of trans people and gender identity, as you and the author of the article above seem less informed on the topic than even I am. My brief internet search this morning left me considerably better educated than I was when I got out of bed. I can point you to:

    – an academic meta-study debunking the author’s statement that trans athletes are claiming prizes unfairly: “Sport and Transgender People: A Systematic Review of the Literature Relating to Sport Participation and Competitive Sport Policies” at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-016-0621-y
    – Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Organizations Debunk ‘Bathroom Predator Myth’ at https://abcnews.go.com/US/sexual-assault-domestic-violence-organizations-debunk-bathroom-predator/story?id=38604019

    – an in-depth piece in Men’s Health: https://www.menshealth.com/uk/fitness/a26798247/trans-athletes-sporting-performance/

    – a moving and informative video from trans people: https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/07/intro-to-transgender-identities/

    1. Dear James,
      we are happy to engage in serious and respectful political discussion with our readers. It is fine if you argue against us and in favour of transgender people, and we know that the mainstream media is full of this postmodern “truths”.
      As radicals we will always stick to the physical and biological reality that sex is binary.
      In case you deliberatly agitate and attack us and/or falsely accuse us we will block your comments in the future.

  8. @James You mentioned earlier to not categorize all transgender people as “Dangerous.” Ironically, that’s what you are doing with a lot of people here.

    Not all people who speak out against the queer ideology, or the trans movement are against trans people. The trans people are not the same as the trans movement. In fact, the trans movement only represents only trans people. It has systematically silenced the trans people who have detransitioned and spoken out against HRT. (https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/23/why-detransitioners-frighten-trans-activists/) For a movement that claims to be “inclusive”, they sure seem to be pretty exclusive to (ironically) certain “groups” of trans people.

    I feel deep compassion for trans people. They, like any one else, should have the rights to dress in a non-gendered manner, or to engage in activities typically considered to be for the “other” sex. They, like any one else, should not be forced to label themselves for breaking gender stereotypes. They, like any one else, should have access to a good life and dignity, free of fears. These are basic civil rights that everyone should have.

    But that does not mean men who claim to identify as women should have access to women’s safe spaces. And it works both ways. A woman in a men’s bathroom is as much a violation of privacy, as is a man in women’s bathroom. The way the situation is in a lot of places, anyone can claim to be trans gender and get access to spaces they should not have. A convicted rapist was sent to women’s prison because he decided to come out as “trans” after conviction. (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/rapist-identifies-as-trans-woman-gets-sent-to-womens-prison-guess-what-happens-next)

    This is not an isolated event. This is a system designed to help sexual predators. The fact that the trans movement is quick to come out against detransitioners, but not against such sexual predators says a lot about the movement.

    On a final note, you said that feminists claim “women’s bodies are different than men’s” or the opposite however the situation suits them. The women or men who claim these two views are usually not the same people. I doubt you’d ever find the author of this piece claiming that women’s bodies are the same as men’s.

  9. I see. You had to reference a story in a far-right, notoriously bigoted website in order to dig up anything to support your anti-trans people ideology.

    “In 1981 it changed its name to the Revolutionary Communist party. In 1988, the party launched a magazine called Living Marxism (later LM). By then, it had abandoned many of its former convictions. Among the few discernible traces of its revolutionary past was an enthusiasm for former communists in the Balkans, such as Slobodan Milošević.

    In 2000, it closed after losing a libel case: it falsely claimed that ITN had fabricated evidence of Serb atrocities against Bosnian Muslims. But as soon as the magazine folded, a network of new groups, with the same cast of characters – Furedi, Claire Fox, Mick Hume, Brendan O’Neill, James Heartfield, Michael Fitzpatrick, James Woudhuysen – sprang up to replace it. Among these organisations were the Institute of Ideas, the Academy of Ideas, the Manifesto Club and a new magazine, Spiked. It had the same editor as LM (Hume) and most of the same contributors.”
    (George Monbiot, “How US billionaires are fuelling the hard-right cause in Britain”, The Guardian, 7 Dec 2018)

    This is what you follow? This is what you reference to support your bigotry against non-binary people? And yes, you are writing against trans people. If you deny trans and other non-binary people full rights, you deny them their full humanity. Nothing you have written so far would be out of place in the Daily Mail, the Sun or rags even further to the right. As the pieces I linked to show, the fear, hatred and contempt being generated by the anti-trans movement are based on no evidence whatsoever. Nothing – apart from a loathing of what they see as repugnant in being non-heteronormative.

  10. @BorisWu: You are taking it upon yourself to decide what it is to “agitate and attack us” but you haven’t taken the time to examine the abundant evidence I’ve provided which supports full human rights for trans and all non-binary people. Another respondent who opposes those human rights cites as evidence a far-right, libertarian magazine, founded and run by people who lost a libel case in Britain for falsely claiming that ITN had fabricated evidence of Serb atrocities against Bosnian Muslims. Perhaps you ought to be looking elsewhere for evidence of agitation and attacks.

    Just what is going on here? On the one hand, I see interesting and worthwhile, well-evidenced pieces about the role of civilisation and agriculture in climate change; on the other, I see conservative, right-wing propaganda fulminating without evidence against non-binary people and against sex positivity. I can’t decide just what the goals of this website are. Maybe you’ll explain.

  11. James if you’re so well-informed then enlighten us: what is a “gender identity”? What are people who “identify as a woman” identifying with?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *