Here's what transpired between them in a Senate hearing a few days ago according to NBC News:
Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, asked Bridges, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, why she used the phrase “people with a capacity for pregnancy” when she described the impacts of abortion restrictions and bans.There's more that you can watch on the video: A few thoughts on their dialogue:
“You’ve referred to people with a capacity for pregnancy — would that be women?” Hawley asked.
Bridges responded that many cisgender women, who identify with their assigned sex at birth, have the capacity for pregnancy and that many do not.
“There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy as well as nonbinary people who are capable of pregnancy,” she said, referring to people who identify as neither male nor female.
Hawley shot back, “So this isn’t really a women’s rights issue?”
“We can recognize that this impacts women while also recognizing that it impacts other groups,” Bridges said. “Those things are not mutually exclusive.”
Hawley continued to press Bridges and asked her what the core of the right to abortion is about.
“So I want to recognize that your line of questioning is transphobic,” Bridges responded.
She continued, “And it opens up trans people to violence,” but then Hawley cut her off and the two began a tense exchange.
“I’m opening up people to violence by asking whether or not women are the folks who can have pregnancies?” he said.
Bridges responded with a statistic, noting that 1 in 5 transgender people have attempted suicide, and then Hawley interrupted her again: “Because of my line of questioning? So we can’t talk about it?”
Bridges continued, “Because denying that trans people exist and pretending not to know that they exist is dangerous.”
Hawley interrupted again: “I’m denying that trans people exist by asking you if you’re talking about women having pregnancies?"
As he asked his question, Bridges repeatedly asked him, “Are you?”
Bridges then asked Hawley if he believes men can get pregnant, and he said no. To which Bridges responded, “Then you’re denying that trans people exist. Thank you."
Ms. Bridges is a law professor so she presumably understands that her tactic of accusing anyone who disagrees with her on the transgender issue of opening up trans people to violence is disingenuous. It's simply a way of attempting to discredit an opponent without having to make a case for why the opponent is wrong.
It's astonishing that she thinks that asserting a simple biological fact that men can't get pregnant makes one "transphobic" or is an act of "denying that trans people exist." How is it?
It's too bad that Senator Hawley didn't ask professor Bridges if she was aware of any actual instances of a biological male getting pregnant. If she is her answer would've been helpful; if she isn't how does she know it's biologically possible?
It's also unfortunate that the senator didn't think to ask the professor to explain the biomechanics of male conception. How exactly does it happen and what transpires in the transgender person's body that creates a child and allows the person to carry the child in the womb? Progressives often insist that they're science-based so it would've been helpful if she had been asked to elucidate the relevant biology.
If Professor Bridges and others wish people to go along with the notion that men can get pregnant they're going to have to explain the science behind how this happens and give examples of trans individuals who have accomplished it. Until then, they shouldn't be surprised when they encounter skepticism and astonishment when they claim it's possible.
After all, without evidence their belief is just a superstition, an instance of blind faith in their ideology. They certainly have the right to believe it if they wish, but they shouldn't expect everyone else to do so as well.
It'd be a worthwhile exercise for every candidate for political office during this election cycle to be asked the question Ms. Bridges asked the senator - "Do you believe men can get pregnant?" I wonder how many of them, especially among the Democrats, would welcome that question.