I really liked Judge Jackson's answer on the definition of a "woman."

[Seymour Flops]

She said that she was unable to define the term "woman" because she is not a biologist. She is the current flavor of the week for liberal Democrats, so now the official stance of the liberal Democrats is that it is biologists who are the experts to be consulted on who is and is not a woman.

This is much better than what they said last week, which is that we have to listen to the science on that question. More correctly, what they do is to accuse anyone who disagrees with them of "not following the science." When they say "the science" about defining gender, they mean that gender studies professor who was interviewed on NPR the other day.

People such as Lia Thomas and Rachel Levine are not "women," by any biological definition, so it is good that it is biologists who are again recognized as the experts on that. I don't object if Lia and Rachel prefer to be called "transwomen," but I don't see what is wrong with the formerly widely accepted terms, "cross-dressers," and "ladyboys."

That would solve a lot of problems, since the NCAA Women's swimming competition is for "women," not "transwomen." If transwomen, and transmen are truly as ubiquitous as the left clams, they are deserving of their own categories in sports. I doubt that the swim meets for transwomen and transmen would draw much of a fanbase, but then neither does college swimming in general, as far as I know. Most of the audience are parents and friends, and I'm sure Lia's parents and friends would be just as proud, or even more proud, of Lia if he were the true champion of the transwomen swimmers category, and not the best cheater in the Women's category.

 

[Moonglow]

She said that she was unable to define the term "woman" because she is not a biologist. She is the current flavor of the week for liberal Democrats, so now the official stance of the liberal Democrats is that it is biologists who are the experts to be consulted on who is and is not a woman.

This is much better than what they said last week, which is that we have to listen to the science on that question. More correctly, what they do is to accuse anyone who disagrees with them of "not following the science." When they say "the science" about defining gender, they mean that gender studies professor who was interviewed on NPR the other day.

People such as Lia Thomas and Rachel Levine are not "women," by any biological definition, so it is good that it is biologists who are again recognized as the experts on that. I don't object if Lia and Rachel prefer to be called "transwomen," but I don't see what is wrong with the formerly widely accepted terms, "cross-dressers," and "ladyboys."

That would solve a lot of problems, since the NCAA Women's swimming competition is for "women," not "transwomen." If transwomen, and transmen are truly as ubiquitous as the left clams, they are deserving of their own categories in sports. I doubt that the swim meets for transwomen and transmen would draw much of a fanbase, but then neither does college swimming in general, as far as I know. Most of the audience are parents and friends, and I'm sure Lia's parents and friends would be just as proud, or even more proud, of Lia if he were the true champion of the transwomen swimmers category, and not the best cheater in the Women's category.

Laws are written against discrimination based on sex which is why describing a woman is unnecessary since there is no direct definition by the law on discrimination, it is no discrimination period. I know the right wants to discriminate based on sex but unfortunately, the law doesn't signify sex as either a man or a woman.

 

[Curried Goats]

She said that she was unable to define the term "woman" because she is not a biologist. She is the current flavor of the week for liberal Democrats, so now the official stance of the liberal Democrats is that it is biologists who are the experts to be consulted on who is and is not a woman.

This is much better than what they said last week, which is that we have to listen to the science on that question. More correctly, what they do is to accuse anyone who disagrees with them of "not following the science." When they say "the science" about defining gender, they mean that gender studies professor who was interviewed on NPR the other day.

People such as Lia Thomas and Rachel Levine are not "women," by any biological definition, so it is good that it is biologists who are again recognized as the experts on that. I don't object if Lia and Rachel prefer to be called "transwomen," but I don't see what is wrong with the formerly widely accepted terms, "cross-dressers," and "ladyboys."

That would solve a lot of problems, since the NCAA Women's swimming competition is for "women," not "transwomen." If transwomen, and transmen are truly as ubiquitous as the left clams, they are deserving of their own categories in sports. I doubt that the swim meets for transwomen and transmen would draw much of a fanbase, but then neither does college swimming in general, as far as I know. Most of the audience are parents and friends, and I'm sure Lia's parents and friends would be just as proud, or even more proud, of Lia if he were the true champion of the transwomen swimmers category, and not the best cheater in the Women's category.

Don't celebrate just yet morons, college educated professionals are rarely on your side of ignorance. That includes biologists.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Don't celebrate just yet morons, college educated professionals are rarely on your side of ignorance. That includes biologists.

Are you a man or a woman, I mean so far today?

 

[DukeU]

Laws are written against discrimination based on sex which is why describing a woman is unnecessary since there is no direct definition by the law on discrimination, it is no discrimination period. I know the right wants to discriminate based on sex but unfortunately, the law doesn't signify sex as either a man or a woman.

You have to define sex in order to not discriminate. DUH.

 

[Moonglow]

You have to define sex in order to not discriminate. DUH.

Show me in the laws of the 14th and 19th Amendments where it codifies sex.

 

[DukeU]

Show me in the laws of the 14th and 19th Amendments where it codes sex.

"No discrimination based on sex".

What does this word sex mean????

 

[Moonglow]

"No discrimination based on sex".

What does this word sex mean????

If you must be ignorant at least research before inserting foot in mouth.


EEOC enforces two laws that protect you from sex discrimination at work (including when you apply for a job): Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits an employer from treating you differently, or less favorably, because of your sex, which is defined to include pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Sex Discrimination - US Equal Employment Opportunity ...​

 

[Woodznutz]

Jackson perceived that the question was political, so she gave a political answer. Pretty smart actually.

 

[Curried Goats]

Are you a man or a woman, I mean so far today?

Whichever I'm your intellectual superior. Why would you clowns run to cover under biologists? You eschew science, remember, it rarely ever agrees with your limited and bigoted intellects, such as they are.

 

[Woodznutz]

"No discrimination based on sex".

What does this word sex mean????

I used to discriminate based on who I wanted to have sex with.

 

[Polishprince]

Jackson perceived that the question was political, so she gave a political answer. Pretty smart actually.

Not quite, Jackson said the question was scientific and biological. Not political at all, according to Jackson.

And scientifically, there is an answer.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Judge Jackson has shown the world how crazy the Democrat Cultists really are.
They are dangerous fanatics who destroy civilized society.

 

[Moonglow]

Whichever I'm your intellectual superior. Why would you clowns run to cover under biologists? You eschew science, remember, it rarely ever agrees with your limited and bigoted intellects, such as they are.

Only because these people want to destroy those Americans who do not fit their image on what is acceptable of humans living in this nation.

 

[Moonglow]

Judge Jackson has shown the world how crazy the Democrat Cultists really are.
They are dangerous fanatics who destroy civilized society.

The question sought to define what is not your idea of the definition.

 

[BackAgain]

 

[Flash]

Don't celebrate just yet morons, college educated professionals are rarely on your side of ignorance. That includes biologists.

As an Engineer I have many connections with "college educated professional". Most of them in the Engineering and Science fields (including Biologists) are Conservative and would ridicule the dumbshit for the answer she gave.

 

[Woodznutz]

Not quite, Jackson said the question was scientific and biological. Not political at all, according to Jackson.

And scientifically, there is an answer.

She was being questioned about her politics not her scientific knowledge. Recall that she framed her (non) answer within the 'context' of the question, which was clearly political. Criticizing her answer is just grabbing at straws by the Republicans.

 

[Moonglow]

As an Engineer I have many connections with "college educated professional". Most of them in the Engineering and Science fields (including Biologists) are Conservative and would ridicule the dumbshit for the answer she gave.

A person that is so hateful like yourself doesn't have degrees they have an agenda. Are you just a generalized engineer like the ones, they have at hotels?

 

[Curried Goats]

As an Engineer I have many connections with "college educated professional". Most of them in the Engineering and Science fields (including Biologists) are Conservative and would ridicule the dumbshit for the answer she gave.

Really? Then post these thoughts of "biologists" on sex and gender because I don't they find either notions as binary as you stunted clowns present them.