Those who can get you
to believe absurdities
can get you to
Let’s be clear: Transgender equality is the civil rights issue of our time. There is no room for compromise when it comes to basic human rights.— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) January 25, 2020
Stump The Justice
Stump the Justice! pic.twitter.com/61f8w3nJHF— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 27, 2022
Can science answer the question, "what is a woman?"
Last week, a candidate, standing for appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, who was under consideration specifically because she is a woman, refused to provide a definition for the word, "woman," when asked for one.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson refused to define the word, "woman," saying she isn't qualified to answer the question because she isn't a biologist.
Jackson's non-answer has blown up in the national conversation and has now reached such a pinnacle of stupidity that it may never be answered, as the glib outglib one another on social media.
What Jackson really means is she won't answer the question and if someone won't say, in public, what he or she thinks a woman is, then you really can't trust them. She should have answered in some way.
"A woman is like a man, but not a man," is better than, "I'm not a biologist."
Perhaps, the answer might be found if we flip the question and ask, "what is not a woman?"
Well, right away, Joe Biden's "admiral" comes to mind. Rachel (nee: Richard) Levine worked "her" balls off to become one of USA Today's "Women Of The Year." Rachel went to work as "Richard" for 40 years, and is most definitely not a woman, no matter how may people Twitter censors for saying so.
Admiral Rachel is now responsible for the nation's health.
Another Biden home run is Samuel Brinton. Biden placed Sam in charge of our nuclear waste a couple of months ago. Sam is not what most folks think of when they hear the words, "nuclear engineer." Brinton is married (not to a woman) and he and his spouse are big animal roleplay enthusiasts.
Sam thinks he's a woman -- but Sam also thinks he is a pony -- and he's in charge of our nuclear waste. Good call, Joe!
When the discussion of "what is not woman" comes up, Bill "Lia" Thomas's name is sure to pop up. Lia, as Bill, was an also ran when "she" was swimming with the boys, but thanks to the Ivy League and NCAA, "Lia" is a national champion and is being considered for the women's Olympic swimming team.
None of these guys are women, no matter how much the lunatics on the Left pretend -- which brings us back to the question, "what is a woman?"
Naturally, the world turns to science for the answer, but now we have competing sciences -- real science and "gender" science -- and, oddly enough, they don't agree.
Scientific American says the traditional medical concept of two sexes is overly simplistic, and Nature.com agrees, arguing that the Health and Human Services proposal to classify people on the basis of anatomy or genetics should be abandoned because it "is a terrible idea that should be killed off. It has no foundation in science and would undo decades of progress on understanding sex."
Gender science is the science of a tiny minority, the 1% or 2% of people in the country, that have anomalies -- are physically abnormal -- not normal. That doesn't make them bad people. It makes them different.
Diversity is our strength, remember, so let's not turn everything inside-out and upside-down for 1% or 2% of the population. Most people have issues, but they press on, and that's what makes them noble. Accommodations could be made, but genderism's goal is to make the normal, abnormal and the abnormal, normal and there is nothing noble about that. It is simply a lie.
The media is a reliable handmaiden to the Left and is comfortable with promoting their lies. USA Today has always been an early promoter of the Left's latest bullsh!t.
If anybody has the temerity to contradict, or worse, ridicule the Left's fantasies, the social media barons censor them. Guys, like Twitter boss, Parag Agrawal, contend free speech has no place on his "private" platform -- and screw you anyway.
Two years ago, the Australian Academy of Science defined a woman as, "anyone who identifies as a woman, including cisgender (personal gender identity corresponds with sex assigned at birth), transgender (personal gender identity does not correspond with sex assigned at birth), non-binary and intersex persons who identify as a woman (or girl).
I realize these guys are scientists and have degrees up the ying-yang, but they could have stopped after the word, "anyone." The remaining words are just gibberish and that gibberish is what passes for "science" in the 21st century.
The Australian Academy of Science says so.
The real point of this insanity is, if men can be women, why can't anybody be anything. For example, a scholar who's lived in China for more than two decades says "anybody can be Chinese."
Then there's Ja Du, part of a small but growing number of people who call themselves transracial. Ja Du used to be a white guy named Adam. Ja Du now considers himself Filipino, and even drives a Tuk Tuk, an Asian-derived vehicle used for public transit in the Philippines.
The actor, Laurence Fox, claimed that he is now a “trans-racial actress of colour” and that he is looking to finally win an Oscar for portraying the widow of Nelson Mandela.
And that is why Jackson refused to answer what appeared as a simple question. When the Left wants anybody to be able to be anything, the last thing they need is a definition of a woman, or anything else, floating about -- especially from a future justice. So, instead of laughing and saying, "I'm a woman," she was deceitful and evaded the question.
Jackson was dishonest. That's not a good characteristic for a judge.
I gotta go, but remember, it's OK to say someone or something is "not normal." It won't make you a bad person. It will make you a realist. Pink guy has every right in the world to be whatever it is "she" is, but I'm quite comfortable saying this ain't normal . . .
. . . and I know what a woman is.