Well Well Well, This Certainly Doesn't Help the Fraud-Happy Somalis
Aaron Rupar’s Snotty Question About What Trump Could do to Make the Country...
X BODIES Nobel Foundation for ELITIST Post Insisting Machado Giving Her Prize to...
Dem Ilhan Omar’s ‘Peaceful Protestors’ Rhetoric Doesn’t Reflect the Violent Reality on the...
FAFO in Real Time: Leftist Gets Secret Service Visit Over 'What She Deserves'...
Tech Workers Mistaken for ICE Agents and Accosted by Flash Mob
Tiffany Cross Accuses Pete Seat of Lying About CNN's MN Report — Then...
Hot Take: The Killing of Renee Good Was 'Rooted in Misogyny'
Kitchen Crusader: Utensil Armored Wannabe Superhero Seeks Social Justice Gets Ruthlessly M...
Two Women Plead Guilty to Running $68 Million Medicaid Fraud Scheme
While Media Looks Away, Iran Hires Terrorist Militias to Slaughter Protesters in the...
Axios: Private GOP Polls Show Declining Support for Immigration Enforcement
Jacksonville Mayor Says Video of Woman Punching Florida Trooper ‘Came From a Place...
At Least 11 Alleged ICE Vehicles Vandalized at Minneapolis Hotel Overnight
Mayor Pete's Latest Brainwave: Amend the Constitution to Strip Corporations of Free Speech...
Premium

Merriam-Webster has also tweaked their definition of 'girl' (and 'boy') in order to be a safe space for all the little trans kids out there

Yesterday, we told you about Merriam-Webster’s sneaky little amendment to their definition of “female.” Here it is again:

A number of people pointed out that if “female” means “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male,” Merriam-Webster’s definition of “male” would have to be a lot clearer than their definition of “female.” Well, guess what: it isn’t. It’s this:

So, a female is the opposite of a male, which is the opposite of a female, which is the opposite of a male, which is the opposite of a female … and by this point, you’re probably dizzy from going around in circles. We know we are.

But join us if you will on one more little trip. Let’s take a look at how Merriam-Webster defines “girl,” shall we?

What was wrong with “a young woman”? Why did they need to change it to “a person whose gender identity is female”?

And in case you’re wondering, yes, they did, in fact, do something similar for boy:

This is getting ridiculous. And stupid. And anti-scientific. And anti-language. And anti-sane.

When did words stop meaning things? Because we’d like to go back to the time before that. This timeline is just too much.

We wish. Boy (pun intended), do we wish this were all just a silly joke, instead of a sickening one.

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos