This has not been a good week for women, as the Left continues its war on the fairer sex in the name of 'transgender rights' and 'trans inclusivity.
We've told you quite a bit about Stephanie Turner, the college fencer who was expelled from competition after she refused to compete against a man, including the ridiculous statement from USA Fencing and CBS News/AP's incredibly sexist headline.
Now a judge in Montana has temporarily blocked HB 121, a bill that protected women's bathrooms.
Here's a thread breaking down the ruling, and the logic pretzels this judge used to arrive at his conclusion.
BREAKING. THREAD.
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
A very activist Montana judge has temporarily blocked a bill (HB 121) that was signed into law protecting women’s privacy in bathrooms.
The reasoning is spectacular. Just wait for this:
1/ pic.twitter.com/4qUfaYxrq2
We'll note the judge is a man.
The judge found there is no evidence that it protects women’s privacy to keep men out of women’s bathrooms!
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
Um….excuse me. What does this judge think women want privacy from? 2/ pic.twitter.com/7HIBYOPF3O
Yes, it actually does protect women's privacy.
Women have been harassed and recorded in bathrooms. By men who 'identify' as women.
This is a bit technical legally but the court finds that TG status is a suspect class which gets special protection. Why? Bc equal treatment on the basis of s*x is a fundamental right.
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
But genderism isn’t ON the basis of s*x at all!!!!! Talk about mixing up concepts. 3/ pic.twitter.com/1P1YEabs9G
Transgenderism is the assertion that sex and gender are fluid and changeable. That's not an immutable characteristic, which means it's not protected on the basis of sex.
But the Left's own definition and application of transgender ideology.
Then the court finds that it violates the MEN’S right to privacy to have people know that they are men walking into a ladies room and the men have a constitutional right to privacy!
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
(Did your head just burst too? 🤯)
4/ pic.twitter.com/bMzriAoQ9c
But the judge also said this doesn't protect women's right to privacy.
He's talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Next the judge says that asking men to stay out of the ladies room burdens the men’s right to a basic necessity.
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
Yes. This judge called it a “basic necessity” for some men to use whatever bathroom they want.
A BASIC NECESSITY. 5/ pic.twitter.com/nSGPLIbmWi
It does not.
They can use the men's room.
Further, the judge claims that “intersex” people, do not fit the act’s definition of male or female and therefore don’t know whether they are permitted to use either bathroom!
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
I have included the definition for you here. 6/ pic.twitter.com/JOmjiPeKan
This writer asked Grok and here's what it said about the prevalence of genuinely intersex people:
The number of genetically intersex people—those born with variations in sex characteristics (such as chromosomes, gonads, or genitals) that don’t fit typical definitions of male or female—depends on how 'intersex' s defined, and experts disagree on this. A narrow clinical definition focuses on cases where chromosomal sex (e.g., XX or XY) doesn’t align with physical appearance or where genitalia are ambiguous at birth. A broader definition includes conditions like Klinefelter syndrome (XXY), Turner syndrome (XO), or congenital adrenal hyperplasia, even if external traits appear typical.
Using the strictest clinical definition, the prevalence is estimated at about 0.018% of the population. This figure comes from studies focusing on clear discrepancies between chromosomal and phenotypic sex or ambiguous genitalia requiring specialist evaluation. For a global population of roughly 8 billion (as of recent estimates), this translates to approximately 1.44 million people.
As of July 2024, the population of Montana is 1,137,223. That means the number of intersex people in Montana is about 205.
So the judge put the safety and privacy of roughly half a million women living in Montana for 205 people.
Make it make sense.
This is a temporary injunction on this bill while the parties fight it out to determine whether the bill can legally stand.
— Jennifer 🟥🔴🧙♀️🦉🐈⬛ 🦖 (@babybeginner) April 4, 2025
For now, there is no privacy for women in bathrooms.
The whole order can be found here: https://t.co/QXYaYte30V
This is absolutely insulting to women, and this is happening in a red state.
The Left has made it very clear they will ignore the will of the duly elected legislature, the will of the voters, and the safety of women to shove their radical trans agenda down our throats.
Party of women? Nope.
Editor's Note: Radical leftist judges are doing everything they can to hamstring President Trump's agenda to make America great again.
Help us hold these corrupt judges accountable for their unconstitutional rulings. Join Twitchy VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member