Self Driving Cars and the Self Identification Movement

News of a fatal accident involving everyone’s favourite electric car that smashed into a tree with no one at the wheel raises the question: Why do these swanky EVs have a ‘full self-driving’ feature if they don’t fully drive themselves?

There is now a criminal investigation in America over the company’s self-driving car claims following more than a dozen crashes that occurred while the self-driving feature was activated.

If I sold your mother-in-law a car and said it was self-driving, only for your mother-in-law to die after the car hit a tree and exploded into flames while operating in full self-driving mode, wouldn’t you be furious?

Well, okay, imagine it was someone other than your mother-in-law…

Wouldn’t you complain that a full self-driving car in which the driver had to sit in the driver’s seat with hands fully on the wheel, and eyes fully on the road, wasn’t really a full self-driving car at all?

Wouldn’t you say, ‘This car is not self-driving because it doesn’t drive itself? It’s just a normal car being sold at an exorbitant price. How can my friend get one for his mother-in-law?’

If a man puts on a dress and wears make-up, do you call him a woman and insist he should be allowed to play women’s football?

Or do you say, ‘That’s not a woman. It’s a man who wants to be a woman dressed as a woman. And there’s no way I’m letting him tackle my daughter.’

And what if he was driving an EV? Would you say, ‘Look there goes a woman in a self-driving car…’ as it careered straight off the road into a tree?

Of course not.

Wouldn’t he just be an oddly dressed man found in the passenger seat of the burnt-out wreckage of an exorbitantly priced EV, leaving the women’s football team short a player, but not a female player?

Or what if there was a medical procedure that removed the perfectly healthy breasts from a perfectly healthy female so that her chest was flat like a man’s?

Would you say, ‘Look how gender-affirming top surgery has wonderfully enhanced that man…’ Or would you say, ‘That woman’s body has been mutilated, and it’s wrong!’

And if the gender-affirming doctor arrived at his gender clinic in a self-driving EV, would you say, ‘Look! It’s the gender-affirming doctor in his amazing self-driving car.’

Or would you say, ‘Look! It’s the doctor involved in a multimillion-dollar industry that surgically disfigures vulnerable young people arriving in his very expensive EV purchased from the proceeds of highly questionable medical practices…’

And if that doctor protested that men could have periods, become pregnant, and give birth because ‘trans women are women’, would you agree?

Or would you ask him whether he also believes that a self-driving EV that requires him to sit in the driver’s seat holding the steering wheel and watching the road is really driving itself?

Or what about this…

If you discovered our taxpayer-funded broadcaster was failing to report both sides of the argument on trans ideology and had, the entire time, been signed up by a lobby group to promote LGBTQ+ inclusion and diversity, would you call that media network fair and balanced? Would you say it was impartial? Would you call it unbiased?

Or would you say, ‘The ABC is an out-of-control EV that keeps careering off the road!’ And demand to know, ‘Who the hell is driving this thing?’

And what if Australia had a political class who were too afraid to say what a woman was?

And what if the Secretary of the Health Department could not tell you what a woman was without first seeking leave to get advice?

And what if government departments and corporations started referring to women as ‘birthing parents’ and ‘chest feeders’ and ‘people who bleed’?

Would you say, our country was headed in the right direction?

Or would you say, ‘Put me in the passenger seat of a full self-driving EV, because I like my chances better…’