Select Page

The Left Is So Woke, Their Supreme Court Nominee Can’t Even Define What A Woman Is

The Left Is So Woke, Their Supreme Court Nominee Can’t Even Define What A Woman Is

We have all had that child in our family, the one with no issue standing in front of the class, either showing off his privates in the show and telling or telling the class that boys have a penis, girls have a vagina. Mine was a nephew, I love that boy, but he was a rather free spirit when he was younger.

Yet today, this childish wisdom has left the Left; when asked, even a person seeking to sit on the highest court in our nation can’t answer the simple question of what a woman is.

TRENDING: Why Are We Allowing The Travesty Of Trans Athletes Competing In Women’s Sports?

So, let’s make this simple, I can’t believe we have to do this with adults. Still, the Left only cares about science when it benefits them, so they are trying to redefine what a woman is, or as we saw yesterday, they ignore basic science when it doesn’t support their ideology.

So what is a girl or a woman? How about we look to Webster:



1. an adult female human being.”a drawing of a young woman”

Science teaches that all women share some qualifications. They have xx chromosomes, can bear children, breastfeed, have menstruation when they do not have a child.

Are there some women who can’t have children? Yes, but they have XX chromosomes. Can some not breastfeed, do not menstruate? Yes, but they still have xx chromosomes.

We are told to make exceptions for the exceptions to the case, but one has to ask, do we demand glove makers create all gloves with six fingers because a very small percentage of people are born with six fingers, a case called Polydactyly? We don’t, nor if you look in a biology book will they say that we are born with six fingers; people are born with five.

Yet we are being told we have to ignore basic biology. If this was a true biological case, why isn’t this argued with cows, horses, monkeys, or birds? A binary sexual definition defines all mammals as either male or female. Yet, we are now told by people who have no education in basic biology, Big Tech, that we need to ignore the science because it is not convenient to their narrative.

Let’s be blunt here. You can go to a plastic surgeon, get breast implants, or get hormone treatments and cause your breast to grow. You can have your private parts turned inside out, made to look like you have female genitalia, but this is just cosmetic; it is not reality. No mammal can change its biological sex; you are what you are. Even if you have surgery, hormone treatments, change your name, every cell in your body defines what you are; if you have XX chromosomes, you are a female. If you have XY, you are a male.

Yet this basic biology is trying to be redefined by the Left. Big Tech will shut you down for stating basic biology, even in Senate hearings for a supreme court justice, the Democrat nominee, when questioned, refuses to answer what a woman is. The worst part, she is a woman. So what is up here? Why is she, and much of the Left, refusing to answer this question?

The Left is so obsessed with including LGBTQ members into their community, to appease their demands, even if they go against basic biology, they are willing to throw all-female equality out the door, give scholarships to trans over women, edge out women in sports if a man suddenly declares he is a female so he can finally rank in a sport.

This brings us to the question confronting us today. Our highest court, which defines rights, protects different classes: if a candidate can’t even define what a woman is, should she sit on a court that helps define and rule on laws? How can we have any expectation this person will act to protect the rights our women have worked so hard to earn?

This was evident during the Supreme Court hearings yesterday where this exchange took place:

When Senator Blackburn asked Jackson to “define the word ‘woman,'” arguably an incredibly simple question, Jackson responded, “No, I can’t.”

“You can’t?” asked Blackburn, appearing surprised.

“Not in this context,” responded Jackson with a nervous laugh. “I’m not a biologist.”

“The meaning of the word woman is so unclear and controversial that you can’t give me a definition?” Blackburn continued. “The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as ‘what a woman is’ underscores the dangers of progressive education that we are hearing about.”

Is she not a biologist? Who would have thought, well, neither was my nephew when he was five; he sure had no problem answering this question.

This brought about a quick reaction to this avoidance:

Later, Senator Ted Cruz confronted Jackson again on this topic. “You told [Senator Blackburn] that you couldn’t define what a woman is,” said Cruz. “I think you’re the only Supreme Court nominee in history who’s been unable to answer the question ‘What is a woman?'”

Ted Cruz asked the same question, which seemed to set off the emotions and claims of bigotry and racism from the Left.

Following this embarrassment, Cruz appeared on Fox News, where he and Tucker Carlson discussed the hearing events.

“If you can’t answer a question like… ‘What’s the definition of a woman?’, do you think she has what it takes to be a Supreme Court Justice?” Carlson asked.

“Her record, unfortunately, I think is much outside the mainstream,” responded Cruz, referencing her judicial record that has been called into question. “If you look at her record as a federal judge in criminal cases – in particular cases concerning child pornography – repeatedly, she gives incredibly lenient sentences.”

Cruz then proceeded to delve into the details of some of the more serious cases in which Jackson gave a criminal a sentencing period far below the guidelines and what the prosecutors ask for.

“I think the American people are concerned whether they will have a Supreme Court Justice that’s going to follow the law, or [if] we’re gonna have a Supreme Court Justice looking for loopholes to let violent criminals out of jail,” Cruz said. “And I gotta say, her answers and her record in this regard were concerning.”

“She’ll be the first Black woman on the Court, but she doesn’t know what the definition of a woman is,” laughed Carlson. “So, go figure it out.”

We need to ask ourselves, “If a person can’t even define what a woman is, how can we expect her to protect women’s rights if she sits on the highest court?”


I know some will say that I am willing to exclude LGBTQ people from this same question. Still, even though they are demanding that women be discarded to satisfy their political activism, I feel that every American has a right to pursue their path to happiness. Still, no American has a right to do this at another group’s expense.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

About The Author

Timothy Benton

Student of history, a journalist for the last 2 years. Specialize in Middle East History, more specifically modern history with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Also, a political commentator has been a lifetime fan of politics.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.

Visit Our Sponsors

Visit Our Sponsors