It’s not what you define, but who defines it…
Recently, President Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, was asked to define the word “woman” during questions regarding an opinion Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that included the word “woman.”
Below is the account taken from the Washington Post:
“I’d love to get your opinion on that, and you can submit that,” Blackburn continued. “Do you interpret Justice Ginsburg’s meaning of ‘men’ and ‘women’ as male and female?”
“Again, because I don’t know the case, I don’t know how I’d interpret it,” Jackson said. “I’d need to read the whole thing.”
“Okay,” Blackburn said. “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”
“Can I provide a definition?” Jackson replied, clearly bemused. “No. I can’t.”
“You can’t?” Blackburn replied.
“Not in this context,” Jackson said. “I’m not a biologist.”
So, according to Judge Jackson, only biologists can deign to answer this most basic of biology questions.
With this answer, Judge Jackson personifies the current state of communication in the Western world, that is, it is not what you define, it is who defines it. Or to put this another way, who has the “right” to define it. Even a biological female like Judge Jackson cannot define the word “woman,” because she is not qualified to do so. Let me restate again, a biological female CANNOT define the word “woman.”
What is a Woman? Redux
I recently wrote on this subject on International Women’s Day. I posited that this sort of ambiguity regarding a basic biological truth is part of a war on women. Furthermore, this intentional ambiguity puts girls and women at risk in what should be their traditionally safe spaces. Not to mention the assault on women’s sport that culminated in a biological male, including all his male parts, winning a NCAA championship over biological females.
Can Biologist Define “Woman?”
Furthermore, biologist also appear not qualified to define the word “woman.” Harvard Human Evolutionary Biology lecturer Carole K. Hooven came under fire in 2021 for stating the following:
The facts are that there are in fact two sexes. There are male and female, and those sexes are designated by the kinds of gametes we produce.
Another biologist, Laura S. Lewis, took to Twitter to condemn Hooven’s as “transphobic and harmful.”
Inclusive language like “pregnant people” demonstrates respect for EVERYONE who has the ability to get pregnant, not just cis women. It is vital to teach med students gender inclusive language, as they will certainly interact with people that identify outside the gender binary.
Moreover, according to Laura S. Lewis, biologist cannot accurately define the word “woman,” therefore, Judge Jackson must look elsewhere for such a definition—if one exists at all…
Who Really Gets to Define the Word “Woman”?
Who really gets to define the word “woman?” The answer to this question is simple. Per our intellectual betters, the only group allowed to set definitions regarding sex are LGBTQ+ activists. They are the new holders of the keys of gender orthodoxy. Furthermore, any who dare step out of line will be silenced by Big Tech (see the Babylon Bee).
Furthermore, as someone firmly on the Left, if Judge Jackson were truly transparent, she would provide the orthodox definition provided by NPR with the help of GLAAD.
That conversation would go something like this:
Senator: “Please define the word “woman?”
Nominee: “Do you mean a “cis-woman? Gender is a cultural construct and those who align with their sex as birth we call cisgender, so a cis-woman is person who aligns with their sex assigned at birth.”
Senator: “Are there other women than “cis-women?”
Nominee: “Yes, trans women.” Nominee reads excerpt from GLAAD website.
“Transgender woman: A woman who was assigned male at birth may use this term to describe herself. She may shorten it to trans woman. (Note: trans woman, not “transwoman.”) Some may prefer to simply be called women, without any modifier. Use the term the person uses to describe their gender.”
Senator: “So, according to you, both biological males and biological female are women?”
Nominee: “Senator, I am not allowed to use the word “biological.” Allow me to again quote from the approved orthodoxy, if I may…
Senator: “Please do.”
Nominee: “TERM TO AVOID:
“born a man,” “born a woman,” “biologically male,” “biologically female,” “biological boy,” “biological girl,” “genetically male,” “genetically female”
Phrases like those above oversimplify a complex subject and are often used by anti-transgender activists to inaccurately imply that a trans person is not who they say they are. “Biological boy” is a term anti-trans activists often use to disregard and discredit transgender girls and deny them access to society as their authentic gender identity. As mentioned above, a person’s sex is determined by a number of factors – and a person’s biology does not determine a person’s gender identity.”
Senator: “So, for the record, a woman is anyone who says they are a woman, is that right?”
Nominee: “Yes, that is correct, Senator. A “woman” is defined as anyone who says there are a woman.”
Senator: “Oh, dear lord…”
Therefore, if Jackson were honest, this would have been the true exchange between her and Senator Blackburn. Judge Jackson, a biological female, does not have the authority to define the word “woman,” nor do the biologists she punts to.
It’s Not What You Define, but Who Defines It…
To conclude, in our modern reality, the only group qualified to define the word “women” are LGBTQ+ activists, and they in turn define all meaning out of the word to the point where a “woman” is whoever says they are. This reminds me of a quote I read once…
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final most essential command.
1984, by George Orwell.
Those who deny the evidence of their eyes and ears now define words for the rest of us.
Like what you read? Please check out my other writing here.
Please like and follow me on Facebook.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In