Mia Cathell from the Washington Examiner highlights the unprecedented inclusion of radical feminist input on this women’s spa case

“Was ‘swinging d***s’ an appropriate opening line in a published legal opinion? “

“VanDyke had acknowledged in his opinion: “Yes, the introduction to this dissent intentionally uses indecorous language. But that is quite literally what this case is about. Male genitalia is precisely (and only) what the Spa, for religious reasons, objects to admitting into its female only space. The fact that so many on our court want to pretend that this case is about anything other than swinging d***s is the very reason the shocking language is necessary.”

“In conversations with the Washington Examiner, women’s rights advocates agreed that VanDyke’s dissent, though coarsely worded, aptly conveys the crude reality that many women and young girls face because of state-mandated “transgender inclusion” policies.

“Those feminist leaders expressed hope that his opinion signals that some judges now have a better understanding of the safety concerns at issue in similar bodily privacy cases. Judges, feminist leaders hope, are increasingly recognizing the plight of vulnerable women forced to share intimate spaces with naked men in the name of transgender affirmation. “

“Elspeth Cypher, the president of the Women’s Liberation Front and a retired Massachusetts Supreme Court judge, said VanDyke opened with the “perfect” first sentence. “In six words he summed up the problem in a vivid manner that crystallizes the problem,” Cypher told the Washington Examiner. “And it shows us what the impact of the opinion will be on women and girls.””