WATCH: The New Naked Gun Trailer Drops With the PERFECT O.J. Simpson Joke
Flashback: Here's Nancy Pelosi Singing a (D)ifferent Tune on China, Trade Deficits, and...
‘Hmmm’: Adam Kinzinger Suspicious There Are No Tariffs on Russia
What a Peach! Watch Unhinged Leftist Crow About 'No FEMA' for Tornado-Impacted Red...
Tim Walz's Magical Media Tour Continues! He Tells MSNBC Voters Regret Electing Trump...
Not Even CLOSE, Bud! The Hill Wants Us to Believe the Pendulum Is...
Only 19% of Baltimore Kids Are Proficient in Math, So the District Spends...
Jamie Raskin Calls Fed. Employees Patriots, Claims They Pass Up MANY Rich Jobs...
U.S. Bans Romantic Relationships Between Gov Workers and Chinese Citizens, Eric Swalwell H...
EPIC Post from GenZ'r Explaining Why He's NOT Worried About His 401K DECIMATES...
Now That the Border Is Secure It's Safe for Dems to Go (Tom...
NBC News Scrapes the Bottom of the Barrel to Get a Nurse's Opinion...
CNN's Abby Phillip Gets Fact Checked to Her Face!
HORSES**T! Stephanie Ruhle Tries Lecturing MAGA About What THEY Voted for but Dean...
Chuck Schumer Triggered By Elon Musk's Spot-On 1-Word Post About Dems Suing to...

USA Today: Science says there's no simple answer to the definition of 'woman'

Wow, it’s not that we didn’t expect it, but the mainstream media is going above and beyond to do some repair work on some of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s stumbles during her confirmation hearing. Jackson’s claim that she couldn’t define what a woman is because she’s “not a biologist” was just embarrassing, but it’s touched off two days of hot takes on why that question wasn’t fair and it’s not so simple to answer.

Advertisement

It took USA Today a couple of days to put together, but they finally published a piece Thursday explaining that “science” says there’s no simple answer to the question, “What is a woman?” We’ve already seen once-reputable science journals trash their credibility over the reality of biological sex, so what does USA Today have to offer?

Alia E. Dastagir looked to “gender scholars,” trans activists, and more to put together a really, really lengthy piece to tackle this seemingly impossible to answer question. She writes:

Scientists, gender law scholars and philosophers of biology said Jackson’s response was commendable, though perhaps misleading. It’s useful, they say, that Jackson suggested science could help answer Blackburn’s question, but they note that a competent biologist would not be able to offer a definitive answer either. Scientists agree there is no sufficient way to clearly define what makes someone a woman, and with billions of women on the planet, there is much variation.

Advertisement

So the headline said according to science there was no simple answer, and yet Dastagir is interviewing “philosophers of biology” and “gender law scholars.”

Just as an aside, this editor is a man, but if he were a woman, he’d be pretty pissed right now.

Advertisement

This article has to be a couple of thousand words and it still doesn’t give us a definition, only this woke crap from a gender studies scholar:

“When Blackburn and the rest of her caucus support women’s full reproductive justice, when they aggressively try to solve the inequality of investment in girls’ and women’s sports – still true 50 years after Title IX made it illegal – when they take meaningful action on the persistent wage discrimination against women, especially women of color, then maybe it will make sense to engage their questions about who can count as a woman.”

Advertisement

Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement