This isn't a surprise - Glenn Reynolds' other waste of time with feminism, The Frisky (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) doesn't understand the difference between "confusing" and "disturbing":
Welcome to the world’s most confusing divorce case. A judge in Arizona today declined to grant a divorce to Thomas Beatie, who attained minor celebrity status as the “pregnant man” a few years back and gave birth to three children. Beatie, who was born a woman but identifies as a man, married wife Nancy in Hawaii in 2003. But was he a man or a woman at the time? Beatie had undergone a double-mastectomy by then and was starting hormone therapy, but he still had a woman’s reproductive organs, reports AP. The judge today decreed that there wasn’t enough evidence proving Beatie was a man at the time of the wedding. That makes it a same-sex marriage, which means that the state of Arizona doesn’t recognize it. And if the state doesn’t recognize the marriage, it can’t grant a divorce, either.
Ahh, but Oprah and the gays had "enough evidence" (facial hair) to declare a man was having a baby, right? (And people wonder why I have a "cultural subversion" tag,...) Didn't I just write - today - the courts were the only place you can nail NewAge bullshit down?
I swear, this entire existence is just one big lie,...
No comments:
Post a Comment
COMMENTS ARE BACK ON