How big is the universe?
Why do I exist?
What is truth?
In the past, these are the types of questions that were considered to be among the most difficult to answer.
It seems that is no longer the case.
We are now being told the following is one of the most difficult questions in the world.
"Define what a woman is."
We had a nominee to the Supreme Court testify last week when asked that question that she could not do so because she was not a biologist.
Never mind that you could ask a 3-year old to correctly identify a man and a woman with absolutely no difficulty.
However, USA Today reporter Alia Dastagir reports that science says there's no simple answer.
Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2022/03/24/marsha-blackburn-asked-ketanji-jackson-define-woman-science/7152439001/ |
"A competent biologist would not be able to offer a definitive answer" ???
"Scientists agree that there is no sufficient way to clearly define what makes a woman" ????
"With billions of women on the planet, there is much variation". ???
Reading this "journalism" I wonder how do we even know there are billions of women on the planet if we can't define what makes a woman to begin with?
You also have to wonder how a Supreme Court justice is going to rule on a case that comes before her that might involve infringement of a woman's rights?
For example, women are specifically mentioned as a protected class under the EEO laws.
Source: https://www.archives.gov/eeo/terminology.html |
It would seem that biology can very clearly define a woman.
Hasn't it started from the moment of birth for thousands of years when someone at the delivery states "It's a girl" or "It's a boy"?
These days we don't even wait for the delivery. The gender can be determined before birth.
How is that possible without biology and science?
Are we now saying that all those gender reveal parties are just a poor excuse to have a party?
Yes, there are extremely rare instances where a chromosomal abnormality may make determination of the genetic sex of a baby complex.
It is also true that nobody can determine how someone "feels" or how they "identify".
However, that is a state of mind.
We have seen Elizabeth Warren state in the past that she identified as a Native American.
A DNA test later showed that you would have to go back at least six to ten generations to find any Native American ancestry in her genetic makeup. That would make her at best 1/64, and at worse, 1/1024 Native American.
Many, many Americans of European descent have more Native American blood in them than Warren.
You also may remember the case of Rachel Dolezal, the white woman who identified and saw herself as Black. The problem was that she was a Caucasian from birth. She just "felt" like she was Black.
The human mind is very powerful. It can make us believe many things that are not true.
When it comes to transgender issues the thing I find interesting is that all of the work done today is to deny the biology and accept how the person "feels" or "identifies".
Medical interventions are focused on attempting to alter the biology. (Testosterone levels, gender reassignment surgery, etc)
That was not always the case. The prevailing medical opinion for centuries was represented by the views of Dr. Paul McHugh who was the psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins University who believed that transgenderism was a "mental disorder" and sex change was "biologically impossible."
It used to be established medical practice in transgender issues to work on treating the mind rather than attempting to change the biology of the body.
No comments:
Post a Comment