Great Britain has a great ruling for women

Almost 250 years ago we fought a war against Great Britain, because they were in the wrong.

After another skirmish three decades later (for Gen Z readers, that was the War of 1812), all was forgiven.

We’ve been besties since. We even like the Royal Family, well, mostly the dead ones. 

And many of us like the Brits even more after their 5-member Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a person who was a biological woman at birth, and only that person, could be legally defined as a woman. 

In so doing, they did what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said she could not do during her nomination hearing — define “woman.”

She sidestepped by saying that she was not a biologist.

No biology, but how about biography?

Her biography says she has two daughters.

How would she know if they were daughters if she can’t define “woman”?

Not to pick on her. She was just being politically correct, trying to avoid using biological reality, which might “offend” someone.

After that nomination hearing I called a woman of my acquaintance — no names, because I didn’t tell her I’d be quoting her (because I didn’t know I’d be writing about this). She’s always been Left, but sensible.

Really, I know what Jackson was doing — trying to dance away from a gender trap laid by Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn, coming off a recent court decision. Here’s a clip. 

I marveled that Brown said that she could not answer the question. 

I was stunned when my friend said she couldn't either.

I asked my friend if it were true that she has two sons and one daughter.

She agreed it was true.

Somehow, she knew two were male and one was female, but she couldn’t define “woman”? 

I’m not a biologist, but I told her I could define “woman.” This way: A human person with XX chromosomes, a uterus, and who pees sitting down. (The last part is a little joke.)

—-

We have to stop fooling ourselves in a fruitless effort to create an illusory comfort zone for people whose beliefs defy reality. 

That’s what the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court did. It sided with science and sanity.

This isn’t to dehumanize trans people. It is to apply the correct scientific term to them — a trans woman is a trans woman, not a woman.  There is a difference. Pretending there is no difference actually strips signature essence from biological women. 

This brings us to pronouns. 

If we agree it’s all right for a single person to use the pronoun “we” because they feel it is true, do we agree it’s OK to say Black people are inferior if a racist who believes it, says it? Do we accommodate that personal belief? 

Exaggeration? A little, but not that much.

The Woke, in an effort to be “nice,” are willing to alter reality to soothe the feelings of people who have mental issues.

Trans people are afflicted with live with something called gender dysphoria. (The strikeover represents how it would have been described before PC took over. We no longer have “homeless people.” We have “people experiencing homelessness.” Which makes it more bearable?

To say it is a mental issue is not to say people living with it are bad people. They are not. Headaches are a mental issue. So are multiple sclerosis, and epilepsy. They are mental disorders, worthy of sympathy and treatment.

It says nothing negative about them. It is descriptive, it is not mean.

It is not mean to call an ace, an ace; and a spade, a spade.

And a woman, and only a woman, a woman.