YLYL

She has too much actual experience to be a republican supreme court justice.

the point of the question was that it was purposely innoculous to show how adversive the democratic *party* is to anything and everything that might keep them from virtue signalling to the lqbt community, and they fell for it hook line and sinker.
It was a knee-jerk reaction test, and they failed.

Republicans are cultists, not trolls - I think their retardation is honestly come by.

So why can't any Democrat answer it? Hmm? And given the fact that this candidate was chosen SPECIFICALLY for being a 1) black 2) WOMAN, it seems this is one of the most relevant questions asked during the whole hearing. And she bungled it. The White House scrambles and STILL can't cover for her. This is not acceptable to sit on the highest court in the land, it's a fucking disgrace and you know it. You just desperately need her to get on the Court because you know she's a perverted idealogue just like you and will blindly support whatever bullshit and filth the Biden administration throws up.

They won't answer because there is nothing to be gained in dignifying what are obviously culture war gotcha questions. It's not the Supreme Court's role to define the meaning of everyday words. So why would you ask a Supreme Court nominee in their hearing about something that has nothing to do with the court or their own legal career?

>And given the fact that this candidate was chosen SPECIFICALLY for being a 1) black 2) WOMAN
her decades of qualifications are irrelevant, yeah?
>You just desperately need her to get on the Court because you know she's a perverted idealogue just like you and will blindly support whatever bullshit and filth the Biden administration throws up.
mcconnel refursed to put a justice on for almost a year under obama's tenure. he them rammed two in at the end of trumps with barely any review, but wildly unqualified.
fuck you and the bullshit politicians you keep voting in

Good thing that America doesn't have any laws involving sex or gender. According to every leftist yearning to suck on Whoopie Goldberg's anti-semite big black cock.

Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina. It really is that simple.
Now anons, please, git triggered and call me a Nazi because your "girlfriend" has a penis.

>her decades of qualifications are irrelevant, yeah?
It is when there are tons of judges with same qualifications but only black females were selected after stating they would do so.
There are plenty of people with experience playing sports, but if they said they would only send white male athletes to the Olympics, you would have a problem with that. As would anyone else. Same with Hiring, promotions or firing.

I'm almost certain one of them committed manslaughter.

What is a (wo)man?
A miserable little pile of secrets!
But enough talk, have at you!

how would they protect women against violence if they can't define a woman?

Attached: 1307603596.jpg (1200x800, 133.62K)

There certainly are, but as I've said, it's not in the Supreme Court's purview to define the meaning of words. They do not function as a central language authority. They exist to resolve issues of constitutionality. I don't know of any past Supreme Court case where a disagreement over the definition of man/woman, male/female etc. became a constitutional issue. Jackson declined to answer the question because it is irrelevant.

WORLD'S FIRST FAGGOT AND NIGGER NATION!

#BOWDOWNBITCHES

Attached: US.jpg (1080x1920, 209.55K)

I don't know, why don't you read the bill yourself and then get back to us.

Sure. But what do you think the 50% of the country that can produce children think about their biological sex not having a definition?
They're unpersons again! GO DEMOCRATS!

>define woman
>xx chromosomes
>ok, thank you. next question
what's gotcha about this?

Means trannies aren't real women which we all obviously know is true.

It's only a gotcha question because Democrats are literal reality deniers.

YWNBAW

Attached: goblin.jpg (738x468, 289.11K)

Yea it is a useless question, but democrats made it a legit question that they can't answer. Every question is ignorant when you have ignorant people running the country

Whatever it is, Republicans are useless.

youtube.com/watch?v=zMqxveujf0I

>what is a biological female

Tranny nonsense aside, there are people out there with XY chromosomes who appear female and are raised as women (Swyer syndrome). Many are never even aware of it, although they wind up being infertile. You're going to say "well that's just a rare exception." But if you are looking for a hard, LEGAL definition of something, you can't have even rare exceptions.

It's a gotcha question because you are going to offend some group of people no matter how you answer. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. That's not Jackson's fault. Either you give a specific definition like the above and offend the progressive left, or you give an ambiguous definition and get slammed by the right.

From a European perspective she seem a bit retarded.

>Tranny nonsense aside, here's more tranny nonsense
>Humans have two arms and two legs but some people don't so doesn't that mean we don't really know?
This is retarded faggot propaganda and you douchebags try to call it science. Woefully pathetic.

Crazily, on of these xy swyer syhdrome got pregnant. Had functioning ovaries despite by xy and never knew until she had a sterile daughter who was xy

>her decades of qualifications are irrelevant, yeah?
Biden announced his pick would be a black woman before he even decided who to pick

But no functioning eggs, so essentially just another test tube baby.

You will never be a real woman.

Surely you see that the problem is that it shouldn’t be a gotcha question?

Monkey nonsense aside, there are people out there with tails who appear human and are raised as humans. Many are never even aware it's abnormal, although they wind up being incel. You're going to say "well that's just a rare exception." But if you are looking for a hard, LEGAL definition of something, you can't have even rare exceptions.

It's a gotcha question because youa re going to offend 13% of the people no matter how you answer. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. That's not Jackson's fault. Either you give a specific definition like the above and offend the progressive left, or you give an ambiguous definition and get slammed by the jews.

By default, humans have two arms and two legs. But the DEFINITION of homo sapiens is not "has two arms and two legs," not least of which because many things that aren't homo sapiens ALSO have two arms and two legs. Definitions and secondary descriptions are not the same thing. It's a pretty advanced concept, I don't expect you to get it.

Here's a conservative definition, point me to flaw if you see one.

The female of the species is capable of combining her DNA with a man's DNA and bearing the resulting child inside her until it can survive externally.

The male of the species is able to donate its DNA to the female for use in making offspring.

Those incapable of reproduction are "male" or "female" on the basis of which their physiological structure most resembles the average characteristics of male or female members of the species, though gendering them is for convenience's sake.

her qualifications are all based on her being a black female. the scholarship she got to attend law school, her first job, this appointment. She has done nothing of significant merit in the judicial world.

this is essentially like giving someone a Nobel Peace prize because he's the first black US president...

No, not medically assisted, that's what's crazy. Didn't even realize she was xy until her daughter was sterile. Had her own eggs.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/

Uh huh. And you retarded faggots are here arguing that anybody can say they have two arms and two legs even if they don't and the rest of society should just pretend it's true.

BTW, I'mI hate trannies as much as the next trad cons. But I like to be logical and factual.

No, not arguing that. Just saying XY is not dispositive, though a very, very good indicator 99.99% of the time.

Cool to think LGBT is dumb but, dude, source is a source.

The soft bigotry of low expectations says that black people need to be rewarded for their mediocrity, since that's all they're capable of anyway. Dumb niggers.

Her history of short sentences for fucking kids might be a pointed question. They asked Brent about shit he did in college but it's off limits to ask this bitch why she sentence a dude with a shit ton of child porn to 3 years when the guidelines were double to triple that. The dude even said wow that's less then I was expecting. thanks. Yea, she's a keeper.

I'm as hard core conservative(libertarian) as it gets, and this was the weakest straw dog in years.
If you are own our side, please leave.

Attached: 1505956195860.jpg (500x350, 45.03K)

I'm willing to err even more on the side of caution and say if you were born with a dick that makes you a guy. Get over it, faggot.

Attached: 1798455348165.png (1342x1108, 97.39K)

I mean, the laws in that regard are crazy draconian. 3-5 for raping a kid but 20+ for uploading that shit to Kik. Don't get me wrong, glad it's criminal, but either the rape sentence is too low or the distribution sentence is too high.

I think people who actually touch a kid should go away for way longer

Sure, but that XY was born with a vag and ovaries, so she's a chick right? Despite being XY right?

>They asked Brent about shit he did in college
Because there were questions about his drinking and treatment of women
>when the guidelines were double to triple that
this is common. judges aren't fire and brimstone about it like you seem to think

It's no different than asking republicans who won the 2020 presidential election.

Yeah, it was the black guy.

I'd say that's as good a definition of female as any. The "most resembles" can be subjective though for some intersex/hermaphroditic individuals. And our understanding of sexual dimorphism in the brain is still developing.

But this is not really about the definition of female (a biological/medical term), it's about the definition of woman, and to what extent the two are the same. Like I said, damned if you, damned if you don't. For every person insisting that they are identical, there's another person insisting that they refer to two loosely associated things.

People miss the point that language is not a mirror to reality. It's an expression of our imperfect perception of reality.

Yeah faggot, I'm sure the fact that you were born with a dick actually means you could be a woman one day because literally one person in all of human history managed to get pregnant with XY chromosomes.

And if we're being honest here, without additional proof that "science" sounds like politically driven bullshit and not science at all.

>Tranny nonsense aside, there are people out there with XY chromosomes who appear female and are raised as women (Swyer syndrome). Many are never even aware of it, although they wind up being infertile. You're going to say "well that's just a rare exception." But if you are looking for a hard, LEGAL definition of something, you can't have even rare exceptions.
What a fucking trannny mentality.
A woman is a biological female. The end.
>But what about
No, no what about. Small outlier cases can be handled by medical experts, trannies are not women, they're individuals with a psychological disorder and should have their disorder treated.
Since you all think it's such a fucking grey area. How about we define transgenderism as a psychological disorder and cut off the root of even needing to ask that fucking question. Oh wait, transgederism is a psychological disorder and you faggots fooled everyone into thinking it's a lifestyle with this gray area bullshit to begin with.

>People miss the point that language is not a mirror to reality. It's an expression of our imperfect perception of reality.
True. This is why misgendering is bullshit though. People call you what you look like. If you look like a man wearing a dress, you'll be referred to as him. Trannies shouldn't get butthurt about people doing their best to perceive the world. I can't fucking remember people's names, I'll be dammed if I'm going to start worrying about pronouns too.

And democrats provide even more useless answers, as usual.

MAN = MAN
WOMAN = MAN WITH WOMB

DO TRANNIES HAVE WOMBS? NO , NOT A WOMAN

DO I HATE TRANNIES ? NO
DOES IT PISS ME OFF TO PLAY THEIR LARPING GAME? YES
AM I A SELFISH CUNT WHO BULLIES PEOPLE FOR THEIR MENTAL ISSUES? NO
WILL I CONTINUE TO CALL THEM WOMEN IRL? YES
WE
LIVE
IN
A
SOCIETY

NOT
A
FUCKING
BOMB
SHELTER
BUNKER
YOU
INCELS

>In job interview
>Asked question: What is a guy?
>Doesn't know that guy is reference to Guy Fawkes
>Doesn't know that Guy Fawkes' first name comes from the Italian 'Guido'
>Answer: someone born with a dick
>Technically not wrong, yet somehow also very wrong

Well, one that has been recorded. It may have happened more often because the only reason this one was discovered was because the daughter came out sterile.

Why are you so butthurt by science? I'm on your side of the social thing, trannies are nutcases. But I won't let that drive me to being unscientific

Agreed 100%

Should be death in both instances

What is a woman? A miserable little pile of maxipads.

this

having a guardian sex teacher of toddlers and children is fucked up and people should be blinded at minimum. then deafened permanently.

sure, be deaf and blind, you wont touch a child anymore

thats female. The question of womanhood is not the same thing as being female