Johns Hopkins University: Where men are men and women are non-men!

Oh, we wish we were making things up with that headline, but it is literally true.

I’m almost certain a woman wrote this too… pray for our sisters 🙏🏼
— Maggie 🕊 (@LibertyAnders) June 12, 2023

The first tweet is quoting a tweet from Arielle Scarcella. That tweet showed a screencap of the definitions of ‘gay man’ and ‘lesbian’ from the Johns Hopkins University website. If you don’t feel like enlarging the picture this is how it defines the term ‘lesbian:’

Lesbian [sexual orientation]: A non-man attracted to non-men. While past definitions refer to ‘lesbian’ as a woman who is emotionally, romantically, and/or sexually attracted to other women, this updated definition includes non-binary people who may also identify with the label.

And this is how it defines the term ‘gay men:’

Gay Man: A man who is emotionally, romantically, sexually, affectionately, or relationally attracted to other men, or who identifies as a member of the gay community. At times, ‘gay’ is used to refer to all people, regardless of gender, who have their primary sexual and or romantic attractions to people of the same gender. ‘Gay’ is an adjective (not a noun) as in ‘He is a gay man.’

In other words, we have independently checked and it is true. We have saved the relevant page as a PDF in case someone tries to memory hole it. But yes, it is real. The picture by Scarcella is only altered by shifting the elements around a bit. But the words are being accurately quoted.

Also: There is no entry for ‘gay woman.’ Nor is there one for ‘gay non-man.’ Because only men are gay, or something. But wouldn't that make the term "gay man" redundant?

You know, the other day, we talked about how a very dry discussion with Jordan Peterson mostly about transgender issues was banned on YouTube, and now is being allowed on Twitter. Somewhere deep in that two-hour discussion they made the point that there is a lot of misogyny in the transgender movement, and it is hard to think of a better example of it. It is simply impossible to defend such unequal treatment.

Three white, able-bodied men come into a room.
The first is wearing blackface makeup and says that he is transracial.
The second is in a wheelchair and says he is transabled.
The third is wearing a dress, make-up, etc. and says he is transgender.
Why should the first two be treated differently than the third?

Why would race be treated as an immutable characteristic, but not sex? There is less biological reality to race than sex. And most rational people would say that when it comes to non-disabled people seeking to become disabled, doctors should not remove a perfectly healthy appendage from a person. For most people, this is true even if he or she is a consenting adult. Unless of course, that appendage is a penis and the patient thinks he is actually a woman, then many people don’t seem to care if the patient is even an adult. If you compare how these different issues are treated, if you really interrogate the idea, you start to see how incoherent transgender ideology really is.

(And now and then, you run into people who are truly nuts, who will argue, for instance, that we should provide amputations to transabled people. The correct response is to let their own ridiculousness rebut itself.)

Indeed, if you want to see how incoherent it all can be, we all know that Johns Hopkins is very likely to fix their definitions after a sufficient amount of outcry so that men will be defined as ‘non-women’ and women will be defined as ‘non-men.’ So, basically, in their eyes, there would not only be no women, but there would be no men, either.

ah yes

the two genders

man and non-man
— shoe (@shoe0nhead) June 12, 2023

how is it that non-man supposed to be better than wo-man 🤣
— 𝙲𝚘𝚞𝚛𝚝𝚗𝚎𝚢 𝙺𝚗𝚒𝚕𝚕 (@courtneyknill) June 12, 2023

A response:

Whoa, man.
— Justin: Immersive AR 🥽 Creator & bird app tourist (@Abandoned_Tower) June 12, 2023

We don’t know if Justin is a fan of ‘So, I Married an Axe Murderer’ but this person responding to him definitely is:

She took my heart and my cat
— Elder Spaceman (@Se7enball) June 12, 2023

Don’t non-mansplain to me
— Chris Worman (@The_Wormanator) June 12, 2023

Haha. And yet the men are still described as men. I never bought the feminist patriarchy pitch, but this movement sure seems misogynistic.
— ryan winfield 🇺🇸 (@WinfieldRyan) June 12, 2023

I'm a woman.

Please don't ever refer to me as a person with a uterus, birthing person, person who menstruates, or non-man.

How do people not realize how degrading this is? https://t.co/gnWtfrXcpy
— Danielle Butcher Franz (@DaniSButcher) June 12, 2023

ATTENTION: We are now back to a binary world. There are men and there are non-men. Please adjust your communications accordingly. https://t.co/ZG6OKuv57H
— The Truth About Guns (@guntruth) June 12, 2023

John Hopkins... Ya'll just upped the game to a new level of ridiculous. https://t.co/Kyus6BwvWn
— Rob Kane (@Dnce_Mthr_Robot) June 12, 2023

Progressivism somehow progressed every social movement back to the thing they were fighting. Women are now "non-men" and activists are fighting FOR segregated dorms and classes at elite colleges and NY prep schools. https://t.co/h93qP2sOnf
— Zack (@ZackAbnet) June 12, 2023

Be relentless in your ridicule. https://t.co/EZ8WzDLVPn
— Laurel Van Driest (@lvandriest) June 12, 2023

Misogyny by any other name. FEMINISTS, WHERE YOU AT, GIRLS? Remember all that bra burning and demanding of equal rights in the 60s and 70s? Did you ever imagine all that work would be undone in just a few short years? Swell work, everyone. Give yourselves a pat on the back. https://t.co/My6FYE48bb
— That Chick From Seattle (@burnedinseattle) June 12, 2023

The same people got rid of the native American and kept the land https://t.co/4YUqkM2AqF pic.twitter.com/2HLCDN4LZO
— 🇺🇲🏴‍☠️⛈️Nick⛈️🏴‍☠️🪶 (@intranick) June 12, 2023

Finally, one of our funnier follows has an observation: