The city of Houston decided on Tuesday not to engage in the mass delusion that says that men are women and women men.
The 2-1 vote not to allow biological men to use female bathrooms, and not to force employers to continue paying employees who decide to impersonate members of other sexes on the job, is a welcome breath of fresh air. But that has 2016 Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton all hot and bothered. In the aftermath of the electoral defeat, Clinton tweeted:
Everyone deserves full and equal protection under the law. This is a reminder of the work still left to do. https://t.co/r68QAHxxPT
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 4, 2015
This, to put it mildly, is problematic for Clinton. It’s not just problematic because using government to force women to face down men with penises in their bathrooms seems extreme. It’s a problem because transgenderism itself poses a mortal threat to feminism, which is Hillary’s entire claim to fame. Transgenderism is based on the fallacious notion that gender is entirely a social construct: you don’t require any female biology whatsoever to be a female, you just have to subjectively feel female. If Charles Bronson had felt as pretty as Natalie Wood in West Side Story on any given day, he could have left his gunbelt at the ladies’ room door and sashayed on in for a sitsy on the ol’ porcelain throne.
That’s an idiotic idea all on its own.
But it is also completely incompatible with Hillary’s female superiority routine. Hillary’s feminism is based on the notion that gender is not arbitrary and not socially constructed: women have unique capabilities. Just two weeks ago, Hillary said in the first presidential debate, “Being the first woman president would be quite a change from the presidents we’ve had, including President Obama.” But why? Her arbitrary self-definition of gender – the only standard under transgenderism – would foreclose such discrimination based on biology. She then continued, “Finally fathers will be able to say to their daughters, ‘You, too, can grow up to be president.’” But again, so what? Under the pseudoscience of transgenderism, fathers should be able to tell their sons they can grow up to be the first female president as well. Her presence in the Oval Office would in no way forward that goal any more than a biological man in the Oval Office would.
Transgenderism destroys feminism. Modern feminism acknowledges a difference between men and women, and in fact declares the superiority of women. That’s why feminist thinker Germaine Greer declared identifying as a transgender woman “meaningless” and a “delusion”: if gender is as changeable as a suit of clothing, womanhood means nothing. Women have no special struggle – anyone, including lifelong male Bruce Jenner, can achieve it. Women have no particular challenges – ability to bear children does not correlate with female identity. Women are men without the “wo.”
So what, then, would make Hillary Clinton special?
Not her uterus. Not her history. Not her “struggle.” Nothing, in fact, would separate her from Bill save his parochial self-identification as male. Actually, should President Obama decide to embrace his feminine side, he could be the first female president today, without need for surgery or hormone treatment.
Hillary has never been forced to face up to the internal contradiction between her support for transgenderism and her antiquated insistence that America needs a female president. She can’t honestly hold both beliefs simultaneously.
Good thing she’s a two-faced liar.
Ben Shapiro is Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News, Editor-in-Chief of DailyWire.com, and The New York Times bestselling author, most recently, of the book, The People vs. Barack Obama: The Criminal Case Against The Obama Administration (Threshold Editions, June 10, 2014). Follow Ben Shapiro on Twitter @benshapiro.