Reading Time: 4 minutes

A new law in California is having surprising effects. In September of 2018, the governor of California signed into effect a gender diversity bill, which mandates that any corporate board in the state have at least one female board member. Further, beginning in July 2021, the bill requires a minimum of two women directors on boards with five directors and at least three women on boards with six or more directors.

While the law was met with accolades by many, some are now questioning what they are calling “unintended consequences.” One woman, who requested that she not be named, is on the board of a tech giant in Simi Valley, and discussed her concerns about the bill when we reached out to her.

“I’m sure that the law is good,” the board member commented, “and more government intervention always improves lives for everyone. But I have some nagging concerns. For example, our board currently has six people on it, and I’m the only female. So I’ve been wondering who on the board is going to be replaced, since the law requires that three of us be female by 2021.

Well, and I don’t mean to be, you know, a bigot, obviously, but two of the other members are now transitioning to become females. They say that they’ll be female by the deadline, so no one on this board is changing. I’m just not sure that this is what the bill was meant to do. And to be honest, [name redacted for privacy reasons—ed] hasn’t changed a bit, and isn’t on hormone replacement therapy. I just heard him talking about how much he’s looking forward to No-Shave November this year! I mean, he’s saying he’s becoming a female, but he still plans on, you know, using the God-given parts on his wife!”

With that concern logged, we decided to contact GLAAD, who “rewrite the script for LGBTQ issues.” Sandra Hammermill, a transwoman with the organization, listened carefully to the previous comments, and had a thoughtful reply:

“Well I’m glad you shared this individual’s concern with us. Honestly, we’d like her name, as she is an obvious TERF and it’d be better if she were canceled and deplatformed from her reign of terror immediately. Now you may have missed it, but consider her offensive use of gendered language. She says she’s the ‘only female on the board.’ Well that’s a blatant lie—just look at the facts! And her terminology is so antiquated that she might as well be a plantation owner. She’s the only ‘female?’ Wrong. She’s the only cishet bigot, I’ll grant you, but she’s not the only female. What she should have said is that she is the only AFAB female. [AFAB is the common terminology for ‘assigned female at birth’—ed]

Let’s be honest here: a woman’s beard is a beautiful thing to behold, and even an erogenous thing for some. And no one needs to be checking up skirts to see if coworkers have penises given by some ‘skydaddy.’ What incredible superstition and oppression. Any gender can have their penis. A woman’s penis is as genuine and great as a loving father’s breastmilk, that any little transbaby or cisbaby can suckle from, bringing joy to all around. “

Out of an abundance of curiosity, we contacted a large number of different corporations, and asked them about board makeup; 98% reported that they had board members in various stages of transitioning. While we stipulated that everything would be confidential, one board member, transwoman Jerri Johnson (pictured), who recently completed her transition after starting last night, was very happy to be identified, and asked that we visit her office, which she had tastefully decorated with football memorabilia and pictures of her jacked Jeep Wrangler Rubicon Hard Rock Edition, which she uses during her annual rock-crawling trip in Moab.

Jerri struck a dainty pose for us and commented, “Who supports gender diversity? This girl!”

“It’s true that AFAB women make very poor women compared to AMAB women, but we should really view them with some compassion, as they’re chromosomally disadvantaged—it’s really a birth defect, and it’s very eliteist and ableist of us to expect them to perform up to the same standards as your modern transwoman.

With that said, plenty of my friends on the board are also transitioning. The law is pretty goofy—any board with 6 plus members requires at least three women. Really? My friends over at Solaris Systems just decided to make their board 100 members, so they still only have 3 women. It’s working out really well for them, and if it isn’t legally challenged, I might go back to being a man again, if my company is ok with it.”

As of the time of this writing, the previously unidentified cishet bigot AFAB quoted at the top of the article (slimeball MacKenna Fortuneberry) has been arrested. New California law requires that any such hate speech be reported immediately to the newly formed Bureau of Thought-Crime and Hate Dreams. Her trial will be scheduled as soon as a jury of UC Berkley professors can be assembled.

UPDATE: Quentin Beard, a concerned citizen of the state, reached out to us requesting a deep-dive into the number of people who have transitioned or are transitioning. Since the time of original publishing, we’ve been able to compile more statistics, which are as below:

  • 100% of companies which needed to replace male board members with female board members reported that they have successfully done so due to overwhelming desires by formerly male-board members to transition to the “opposite” gender.
  • Additionally, 78% of companies reported that they are considering replacing current, genetic females/AFABs with newer, transwoman models.

For serious thoughts on transgenderism and how it affects human well being, please see this post.

Share your comments, critiques, or criticisms here. [Please note that I alter most the hate comments to make them funnier for the other readers.]