Party of Weird: Biden’s Bizarre Twist on Title IX Takes Effect Today

“‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’” — Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

As humans, who cannot communicate telepathically, we as a rule will use our common language with its widely agreed-upon terms; we also won’t engage in selective alteration of definitions. And if someone did say his dog could join your county fair frog race because “dog” now means “frog” — even though he’s satisfied with “dog” meaning “dog” when entering his pooch in the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show — you’d probably size him up for a straitjacket. Yet such Humpty Dumptys do lurk among us.

Enter the Biden administration and its new Title IX “rule,” based on the claim that “sex” means “gender.”

Education Week introduces the story. “The Biden administration’s new Title IX regulation expanding protections for LGTBQ+ students goes into effect Aug. 1—in a confused and patchwork fashion as injunctions have blocked it in 26 states as well as at some schools in other states,” the site reports. “It also takes effect as the U.S. Supreme Court weighs an emergency request from the Biden administration to partially limit those injunctions and allow most of the rule to take effect across the country.”

Title IX became law in 1972 and simply states, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance….”

While the above clearly states “on the basis of sex,” the Biden administration is now conflating “sex” with “gender” and claims the law means that men purporting to be women (so-called “transgender” status) must be treated as women in every way. Of course, this includes their being allowed to compete in “women’s” sports.

As to this, in the news currently is a female volleyball player who suffered partial paralysis and brain damage after being injured by a 5’ 11” male MUSS (Made-up Sexual Status, aka “transgender”) opponent. That woman, Payton McNabb, is speaking out against the inclusion in Paris Olympics women’s competition of two male MUSS boxers, one of whom compelled his female opponent to quit their bout after 46 seconds and exclaim “This is unjust!”

Yet there’s more to the matter still. As swimmer and activist Riley Gaines writes today at Fox News:

One of the most alarming aspects of these [Biden Title IX] changes is the fact men are taking scholarships meant for women, both academically and athletically. This change is more severe than the obvious unfairness of men competing with women.

… Beginning Aug. 1, men will have full access to women’s once sex-protected bathrooms, locker rooms and changing spaces as long as they declare they feel like a woman. The new policies could mandate boys be housed in women’s dormitories. A college-aged man having unrestricted access to women’s living quarters and intimate areas like locker rooms is like the fox guarding the henhouse.

Under the new Title IX rewrite, any student, faculty member, coach, employee or persons affiliated with a program that receives federal funding would be required to use biologically incorrect pronouns under the guide of preventing “hate speech.”

Of course, the latter means students and staff will be compelled to lie. Speaking of which, the new Title IX dictate is not technically a “rewrite” — it’s a risible fantasy.

The change is, again, based on supposing the term “sex” in the law can now mean “gender.” But putting aside that people don’t actually have “gender,” rightly understood (words do), in what universe does this compute?

Motivated to eliminate “discrimination” against women, Title IX’s framers meant “sex” as in the quality of being male or female. In fact, they couldn’t even have imagined a relevant alternative definition. Why?

Upon the law’s 1972 creation, “gender” was so rarely applied to people that many Americans didn’t even make the association between the two. Just consider that the term’s definition in my old American Heritage School Dictionary reads, “In grammar, one of a number of categories, such as masculine, feminine, and neuter, into which words are divided.” That’s it. It says nothing about people.

Note: That dictionary was published in 1975 — three years after Title IX’s enactment.

What’s more, the term “transgender” was virtually or completely unknown in ’72. The Online Etymology Dictionary informs that it was attested “by 1974.” Individuals thus described were at the time called “transsexuals” (also a misnomer).

But what of common usage? People today do generally use “gender” to describe “sex,” but those Americans don’t usually conflate the two. As one internet commenter put it, expressing a common and logical misconception, “Sex is what you do. Gender is what you are.”

Alright, but what of the “experts,” as they’re the ones the Biden administration listens to, following “the science”? Well, as Psych Central informs, “The terms ‘sex and gender’ are often used interchangeably, but they mean different things.”

“Sex refers to the biological aspects of maleness and femaleness,” the site later points out. “Gender is a personal identity. It refers to the roles, norms, and relationships associated with masculinity and femininity.”

In other words, the Biden administration’s definition of “sex” was not recognized in ’72 and is not status quo today on the street or in academia. It is Party of Weird pipe-dream prevarication.

But if a word can mean “just what I choose it to mean,” well then, let’s loose the dogs of lexical war. “New Title IX rule”? “Rule” can now mean “suggestion.” (So can “court decision” for that matter.) “Discrimination” can mean “trepanning,” “federal” can mean “Martian,” and “financial assistance” can mean “Fig Newtons” (and “president” can mean “imbecile”).

After all, “‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things,’” to continue with my opening Lewis Carroll passage.

“‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’”

The question is, who would be Humpty Dumpty? The Biden administration wants to be master, not just of us but of all — including reality itself. And people opposing this must make sure that Humpty Dummy has a great fall, from grace, so that all the king’s horses and all the king’s men won’t be able to put a winning campaign together again.