War Berkeley Law Professor Expertly Sautées Senator Josh Hawley In Terse Exchange On Trans People - Nigga I want the crack this journo is smoking



Senator Josh Hawley thought he had a gotcha question for Berkeley law professor Khiara Bridges, but he ended up getting got, as her rhetorical savvy left him speechless and embarrassed.

Smug, mansplaining insurrectionist Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) just made a progressive celebrity out of Berkeley law professor Dr. Khiara M. Bridges, though he certainly did not mean to do so. In a Tuesday Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the legal ramifications of the Supreme Court’s recent overturning of Roe v. Wade, Bridges was testifying on the topics of family law and reproductive rights. Hawley figured he’d troll Bridges by exploiting the splinter issue of abortion rights and trans-inclusive language, and thought maybe he'd get himself a winning soundbite.

But Dr. Bridges splintered Hawley all the way to the woodshed, as KRON4 reports. The glorious, 90-second exchange can be seen in full below.

1657676679170.png


Hawley initially thinks he’s going to nail Bridges. “You’ve used a phrase, I want to make sure I understand what you mean by it. You’ve referred to ‘people with a capacity for pregnancy.’ Would that be women?”

Bridges is unflapped. “Many cis women have the capacity for pregnancy, many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy,” she responds. “There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy.”

She adds, practically laughing at him, “We can recognize that this impacts women while also recognizing that it impacts other groups. Those things are not mutually exclusive, Senator Hawley.”

Then she turns the tables. “I want to recognize that your line of questioning is transphobic, and it opens up trans people to violence by not recognizing them,” she flatly tells him.

Hawley gets defensive. “Wow, Are you saying that I’m opening up people to violence by asking whether or not women can have pregnancies?”

“I want to note that out of five transgender persons has attempted suicide,” she points out.

“Because of my line of questioning?” he fumes. “So we can’t talk about it?”

“Because denying trans people exist, and pretending not to know they exist – ,” she tries to explain, but of course Hawley interrupts her.

“I’m denying that trans people exist by asking you if you’re talking about if women have pregnancies?”

She then games Hawley at his own game. “Do you believe that men can get pregnant?” she asks.

“No, I don’t think men can get pregnant,” he responds.

“So you’re denying that trans people exist,” Bridges concludes.

“And that leads to violence?” Hawley asks, grasping, and now himself flustered. “Is this how you run your classroom? Are students allowed to question you or are they also treated like this?”

“We have a good time in my class, you should join,” she calmly responds. “You would learn a lot.”

Dr, Bridges is now an instant folk hero, so let’s get to know her. According to her UC Berkeley bio, Dr. Bridges was a college valedictorian who speaks three languages, is a classically trained ballet dancer, and has been published in the Harvard Law Review, Stanford Law Review, and Columbia Law Review. She’s the author of the books Reproducing Race: An Ethnography of Pregnancy as a Site of Racialization (2011), The Poverty of Privacy Rights (2017).

And don’t tell Senator Josh Hawley, but her latest book is entitled Critical Race Theory: A Primer (2019).

https://sfist.com/2022/07/12/berkel...osh-hawley-in-terse-exchange-on-trans-people/ (A)
 
10/10 subtitle.

Too bad he didn't answer "“I want to note that out of five transgender persons has attempted suicide,”"

WIth : "Why is that my problem? That isn't the focus of today's meeting".

Edit: I just read the transcript but the video is something else. How is this dysgenic nigger bitch appearing before congress with a nose ring in, and spitting this nonsense? We really are a joke country.
 
How exactly did Hawley "get got" here? It sounds like he was entirely reasonable.

“So you’re denying that trans people exist,” Bridges concludes.

The proper response would have been, "No, I'm denying that anyone can change sex. A woman isn't a man just because of a feeling in her head. She is a woman, and always will be a woman, Why do you hate women so much that you can't admit that basic biology exists?"
 
???

I read the transcript and watched the video. The professor comes off looking stupid and doesn't actually answer the questions. The only people that can honestly watch this and feel like the professor "won" are troons and handmaidens. Regular people, especially people who are genuinely trying to get more informed about this topic, are going to walk away from this feeling more confused or shaking their heads.
 
???

I read the transcript and watched the video. The professor comes off looking stupid and doesn't actually answer the questions. The only people that can honestly watch this and feel like the professor "won" are troons and handmaidens. Regular people, especially people who are genuinely trying to get more informed about this topic, are going to walk away from this feeling more confused or shaking their heads.
You were not supposed to have done either of those things. You were supposed to read the headline, assume that conservative bigot was put in his place, and shout a triumphant "SLAY KWEEN!" to the heavens.
 
Bridges is unflapped. “Many cis women have the capacity for pregnancy, many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy,” she responds. “There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy.”
She adds, practically laughing at him, “We can recognize that this impacts women while also recognizing that it impacts other groups. Those things are not mutually exclusive, Senator Hawley.”
Hawley gets defensive. “Wow, Are you saying that I’m opening up people to violence by asking whether or not women can have pregnancies?”
Why is the article written like this, with the journo adding their personal slant onto everything that was said? Anyone can watch the clip for themselves and make their mind up on who came out of it looking better. Is this running commentary for people who literally need to be told what to think?
 
That conversation exchange is so painful to read. That "doctor" takes gaslighting and manipulation to another level. I couldn't imagine having a conversation with that lady. She obviously thinks she's your intellectual better, but then can't seem to grasp what sex biological sex is, and she then resorts to emotional manipulation by insinuating that looking at things critically causes trannies to have suicide ideation and become the targets of violence. What an exhausting specimen, and this is who is edumacating today's youth. Sad.

Yeah, her exchange in this conversation is not something I'd be bragging about. She doesn't come off as logical or reasonable at all. I guess leftists really are that out of touch with reality though, that they think she somehow owned him here and told him what's what.
 
You were not supposed to have done either of those things. You were supposed to read the headline, assume that conservative bigot was put in his place, and shout a triumphant "SLAY KWEEN!" to the heavens.
Compared to us regulars here on AnN that know the correct response is to look at the title and say 'lol niggers' and 'lol 41%'.
 
“Many cis women have the capacity for pregnancy, many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy,” she responds. “There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy.”
So...even mentally ill women can still get knocked up, in spite of Buck v. Bell.
“Because denying trans people exist, and pretending not to know they exist – ,” she tries to explain
Fairies stop existing if you refuse to believe in them.
If only.
 
Why is the article written like this, with the journo adding their personal slant onto everything that was said? Anyone can watch the clip for themselves and make their mind up on who came out of it looking better. Is this running commentary for people who literally need to be told what to think?

Personally, I blame Hunter S. Thompson. Every faggot journo these days think they are "gonzo"
 
Back