LGBT Op-Ed Claims Virginity is Too Exclusive, Does Not Exist
LGBT lefties like to redefine all the things. "Men" can get knocked up. "Women" packing franks and beans under their sundress is perfectly normal. Now, in their latest act of dumbassery, the left is trying to rid the concept of virginity from existence.
Apparently it's not inclusive enough:
Everyone likes to talk about sex, and growing up, virginity always seemed to take the spotlight. As a queer woman, I have a lot of confusion and frustration with the word itself. Over time I’ve come to realize that virginity doesn’t even exist; by definition, it refers to the first time someone has sex, but sex can mean different things to different people.
Uh, within the context of virginity, I'm pretty sure we're talking about the old in-out.
My issues with this only come in when queer women who have had sex with other women are considered virgins simply because they’ve never been penetrated. My girlfriend has been called a virgin by our friends because they don’t readily accept what we do as sex. So if my intimate experiences with my girlfriend are not sex, then neither is your “in and out three times on the fourth floor of the library.” Ultimately, sex is culturally defined by the presence of a penis, or at least some form of penetration, and this is just wrong.
If you still aren't sold on the absurdity of this colossal brainfart, here's a fun exercise. Let's swap out "virginity" with another word and play this
dumbassery logic through. "Walking doesn’t exist because it requires the presence of legs and not everyone has them. That’s just wrong."
Looks like they're ratcheting the leftiness up to a new level. The left having problems with words is nothing new. Now, definitions of innocuous words are too triggering to exist. I guess it's out of the question for LGBTers to come up with their own word for whatever it is they do.
While we're on the subject: