Why the Redefinition of the Word ‘Woman’ Matters
By David Harsanti
December 16, 2022
I saw this Opinion piece in the Epoch Times and had to share.
I have been trying to find a good, informative way to make
this point on a level that even a rabid liberal could grasp.
First, the basics. No matter how many times a parent or a very
confused responsible person looks at their DNA or look at them-
selves in a mirror or in their pants, they cannot deny that God only
created two sexes.
No matter how misguided they are or disillusioned with adopted
identity descriptives, a tree is a tree, a dog is a dog.
All of the ridiculous identifiers they create will not change
how God made them, so accept it, get over it, and cease to make
yourselves look increasingly foolish.
Samuel Johnson’s “Dictionary of the English Language,” first
published in 1755, defines the word “woman” as “the female of the
human race.” And until October 2022, the word “woman” was still
defined as “an adult female human being” in the Cambridge Dic-
tionary. What transpired on the topic during the intervening 267
years? Not much. Science confirmed what men and women have known
since Adam and Eve began talking past each other — not only do the
sexes have immutable physiological differences, down to their gene-
tic matter, but they observe, act and think differently as well.
Yet, Cambridge now says the definition of a woman is “an adult
who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said
to have a different sex at birth” (and the definition of a man is
someone who “identifies as male though they may have been said to
have a different sex at birth.”) How does one use “woman” in a
sentence? One of Cambridge’s examples is, “Mary is a woman who was
assigned male at birth.” Who assigned Mary’s sex? Her parents? God?
Evolution? The SRY gene? And what other human characteristics does
Cambridge believe can be altered according to one’s feelings? Lexi-
cographers have a responsibility to offer clarity and accuracy —
which is, of course, impossible in this case.
When asked about the change, Sophie White, a spokeswoman from
Cambridge University Press, told The Washington Post that the
editors had “carefully studied usage patterns of the word woman and
concluded that this definition is one that learners of English
should be aware of to support their understanding of how the lan-
guage is used.” This is tautological gibberish. Though, in fairness
to White, “Wokeish” is a relatively new language.
The Post, for instance, claims Cambridge updated its defini-
tions for “woman” and “man” “to include transgender people.”
(Incredulous italics mine.) This also makes zero sense. If Cambridge
changed the definition of “black” or “Caucasian” to incorporate
“Asian people,” it would not be including a new group; it would be
altering the fundamental facts of what makes someone black or white
or Asian. “Woman” is not a neologism. Our understanding of “woman”
hasn’t been altered by new scientific discoveries. Nothing has
changed.
At first, these liturgic declarations of one’s “pronouns”
seemed relatively harmless to me. And, not that it matters much,
but I’ve been perfectly willing to refer to adults in whatever man-
ner they desire. It’s a free country. Pursue your happiness. It’s
not like gender-bending is some new idea. In my real-world exper-
ience, I find that most people try to be courteous.
It’s one thing to be considerate and another to be bullied
into an alternative reality. But that’s where we are right now.
Placating the mob has led to the rise in dangerous euphemisms like
“gender-affirming care,” a phrase that means the exact opposite of
what it claims. In today’s world, “gender-affirming therapy” means
telling a girl she can be transformed into a boy, but “conversion
therapy” means telling a girl she’s a girl. The corruption of real-
ity has led to the rise of a pseudoscientific cult that performs
irreparable mutilation on kids, with puberty blockers and cross-sex
hormones and life-altering surgeries.
And in their never-ending campaign to smear political oppon-
ents, Democrats have latched onto this idea as if it were a univer-
sal truth. If a person contends that gender is an unalterable
feature of human life these days — a belief shared by all of civil-
ization until about five minutes ago — they might as well be Bull
Connor holding a firehose. Only this week, after signing the same
sex marriage bill, our octogenarian president claimed that Repub-
licans had passed “hundreds of callous and cynical laws introduced
in the states targeting transgender children, terrifying families
and criminalizing doctors who give children the care they need.”
Speaking of cynical. Does the president really believe these
troubled teenagers “need” mastectomies, facial surgery and genital
removal to feel loved? Or would it be more prudent to let them wait
for adulthood to make life-altering surgical decisions? Has anyone
ever asked him? Joe Biden is, of course, right that Americans
should be free from threats of violence. That includes kids who are
now subjected to abuse at the hands of people who have adopted this
trendy quackery.
I simply refuse to accept that most Americans, or even more
than a small percentage, believe children should be empowered to
choose their sex. Rather, in their well-intentioned effort to em-
brace inclusivity — and avoid being called bigots — they’ve allowed
extremists to, among many other things, circumvent debate by cor-
roding fundamental truths about the world. And that’s what these
dictionaries — once a place we collectively went for definitions
and etymologies — have shamefully helped them do.
COPYRIGHT 2022 CREATORS.COM
I have an opinion where, if a doctor is going to remove some
sexual or private parts of another person, they should have to
have endured the same operation themselves first.
If a parent wants to force their teen to have the sex change
surgery, they too should have first had it.
If a male wants to participate in female sports, they should
also have had the actual change surgery, not just shots and meds.
My guess is that these barbaric surgeries will come to a quick
and much needed stop.
God did NOT create males and females for irresponsible and
misguided mentally confused so-called adults could destroy any of
His creations.
I pray that He will intervene for the sake of His children.
Conservatively,
John
Conservativelyjohn.com 