Kristi Noem Made Dem Sen. Chris Coons' Line of ICE Questioning Backfire With...
Jasmine Crockett Loses Dem Senate Primary to Hoax-Boosted James Talarico - Blames Republic...
Patch Dispatched: Seth Toth Scores Double-Digit Republican Primary Upset Over Incumbent Da...
National Post: Don’t Deport Truck Driver Who Killed 16 Canadian Teens
Man Who Had Security Clearance Revoked for Leaking Documents to Iran Has Thoughts...
Trump Cuts Off Trade With Spain After It Refuses to Let US Use...
For All of Us Who've Learned It the Hard Way: Grief's Quiet Lesson
'Always Money for War' Whines Senator Who Can’t Read a Budget—or a Bible
ICE Watch Activist Strolls Into Kristi Noem’s Senate Hearing Carrying Massive Backpack
LIVE ELECTION RESULTS: Primary Night in Texas and North Carolina!
CA State Sen. Scott Wiener Says Children Will Die If Teachers Must Out...
The Atlantic Wonders If a Bearded Pete Buttigieg Can Convince America He’s a...
DHS Says It Won't Comply With Denver's New Ban on Law Enforcement Agents...
Kurt Schlichter BODYING Conservative Wannabe Whining About Trump's Iran Strikes Is a BEAUT...
Operation Epic Fury Reminds MS NOW’s Chris Hayes of 9/11

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