The point of the movie is that "discrimination on the basis of sex" -- i.e. the concept of "sex-based rights" -- is a BAD THING https://twitter.com/rhetorical_joke/status/1352382378983911424 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
It is not defending the idea of organizing society "on the basis of sex", it is AGAINST that idea Fuck's sake RBG's test case in the movie is even specifically DEFENDING A MAN WHO HAS BEEN DENIED A TAX BENEFIT INTENDED ONLY FOR WOMEN
1 reply 6 retweets 60 likesShow this thread -
She says outright that representing a plaintiff who is a man, in front of male judges, in the rare case of a man being denied an explicit material benefit by the law for being male, is the only way to advance women's rights The concept of "sex-based rights" must be abolished
1 reply 4 retweets 53 likesShow this thread -
S. 214 of the IRS Tax Code at the time specifically gave a tax deduction to women to pay for in-home nursing care, OR to men who had been married but were divorced, widowed or had a wife who was incapacitated
1 reply 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
I.e. it was assumed it was a deduction unmarried men had no need of It was, quite literally, a "women's sex-based right" (and as most "sex-based rights" were, a backhanded condescension to women, saying that caring for elderly relatives was women's responsibility)
2 replies 1 retweet 32 likesShow this thread
RBG was trying to "eliminate a women's sex-based right"! She was trying to take money that the government had specifically set aside for women -- or men who had some connection to a woman in their life -- and just go ahead and give it to men! Men with penises and everything!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.