This is a continuation of part of my Lanquage comments yesterday as it relates to the concepts of sex and gender. What a morass we find ourselves in when Biden’s newest appointment to the Supreme Court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, cannot define the term “woman.” Her answer, “I am not a biologist,” should have disqualified her from appointment immediately. She was obviously pandering to the left, offering up a politically correct answer, something that a Supreme Court justice should never do. The left has separated gender from sex and is unable to define either one. Unfortunately, they expect the rest of us to go along with their delusions. SanFrancisco, for example, offers up more than 100 different options for gender on their guaranteed income program application, and Facebook recently added more than 50 gender options, bringing the total choices to 58 for those who don’t identify as male or female. Twenty-five of those descriptors are related to “trans”-something or other. Other terms like Gender Outlaw, Kathoey, and Waria just defy rational explanation. They’ve even gone in search of other culture’s gender-bending references to add to the list. How ridiculous. This madness has to stop. Be yourself, by all means, even if that means calling yourself some preposterous made-up gender that makes you happy in your neurosis, but leave the rest of us out of it. Gender is now being defined as a social construct; thus, you can be whatever you want to be, according to the new age pundits, and sometimes that can change from day to day. But alas, there’s that pesky thing called biology that assigns you a sex at birth. You may not choose to identify as your biological sex, but like it or not, you are what you are. DNA determines that. And regardless of what you choose to cut off or stitch on, your cells know better. Of course, leftist scientists leaped to Jackson’s defense and are now claiming biological sex is difficult to assign based on variables like expression of chromosomes, gonads, genitals, internal reproductive structures, hormone ratios, and secondary sex characteristics. Come on, man. DNA is rarely ambiguous, and although it can occur in mutation, rarely, gonads, genitals, internal reproductive structures, and secondary sexual characteristics differ markedly from the assignment of sex based on chromosomes. Hormones do indeed show variability but fall within a range, and like it or not, anything that deviates from these parameters is abnormal and does not occur with significant frequency. This sudden appearance of 100 genders is nothing more than a psychological construct and perhaps even a fad, as evidenced by all the females in a California grade school suddenly announcing that they identify as male. Statistically impossible. So, let’s put a stop to the practice of confusing our youth with a multiple-choice question on what gender they want to be that day. It’s not an option and certainly not one that should be discussed without parental consent by some community college-educated elementary school teachers. Or Harvard, for that matter. Instructing children that they can miraculously change their sex through pharmacology and irreversible surgical procedures is nothing short of madness, especially when we are allowing children who are too young to drive, purchase alcohol, purchase a firearm, or even sign their own medical consent forms to make these life-altering decisions. And Ohio governor Mike DeWine vetoing measures to prevent “gender-affirming care” in children and banning biological males from competing in women’s sports is an absolute travesty. He claims that after speaking with parents of trans-children, many claimed that if not for the ability to transition, their children would likely be dead. How dramatic. However, European studies are clear that this is simply not the case, and there is no statistical difference in suicide between those who chose to transition and those who did not. Mental illness is hereditary as well, and just like the rest of their chromosomes, these kids likely inherited the same trait for crazy that afflicts their parents. Further, the term “gender-affirming care” is yet another exercise in co-opting language. If we were truly affirming their gender, efforts would be made to ensure that their gender coincided with their biological sex, not some made-up social construct that is suddenly fashionable. So let’s get all the sane adults in the room to agree: Little Johnny can wear a dress and call himself Suzy all he wants. But you have been assigned both testicles and a male gender at birth, and you’re stuck with it until your frontal lobe gets a clue. Boy’s bathrooms and boy’s sports, pal. After the age of 18, although all you educators keep telling us that Johnny’s brain is still mush until his early twenties, you can have at it, cut it off, add them on, and take hormones of your choice. By then, you won’t be a confusing distraction for all the rest of the fourth grade.
Know, I’m not yet through with this ‘23 diatribe, I plan to rant on tomorrow morning, stay tuned
No comments:
Post a Comment