评论
打印
That shouldn't be a tough question to answer.
这应该不是一个很难回答的问题。
If someone asked me, hey, Greg, what is a woman?
如果有人问我，嘿，格雷格，什么是女人？
I just show him this picture.
我给他看了这张照片。
Yes. She still makes me tingle and all the wrong places.
是的。她仍然让我感到刺痛和不恰当。
But why was it so hard for a judge to answer this question?
但是，为什么法官回答这个问题会如此困难呢？
Because we've let the woke take the clearest distinctions in life and destroy it.
因为我们让觉醒者在生活中做出最清晰的区分，并摧毁它。
And now people are terrified of facts.
现在，人们对事实感到恐惧。
It's part of the left's trifecta, create victims, create new reasons to call people bigots and give college professors something to waste time on.
这是左翼三要素的一部分，制造受害者，创造新的理由称人们为偏执狂，给大学教授一些可以浪费时间的东西。
USA Today came to Jackson's defense, but totally screwed it up by using nothing but gender studies scholars.
《今日美国》为杰克逊辩护，但他们只用了性别研究学者，完全搞砸了。
Yes, there are scholars in gender studies.
是的，有研究性别问题的学者。
That's like being a tall munchkin. In the health and wellness section.
这就像是一个高大的小矮人。在健康部分。
Ironically, the headline reads, Marsha Blackburn ask Ketanji Brown Jackson to define women.
具有讽刺意味的是，标题是玛莎·布莱克本要求凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊给女性下定义。
Science says there's no simple answer.
科学表明没有简单的答案。
Yes, the same folks who came up with the phrase follow the science, then ignore their own advice when it doesn't benefit their politics.
是的，同样是这些人想出了这个短语，他们遵循科学，但当这对他们的政治没有好处时，他们忽视了自己的建议。
So, I guess we can't call Jackson the first black woman Supreme Court justice, because according to them, she might not be a woman.
所以，我想我们不能称杰克逊为最高法院的第一位黑人女性大法官，因为根据他们的说法，她可能不是女性。
But in reality, what is female has been a simple question for the 300,000 years humans have existed.
但事实上，在人类存在的30万年里，什么是女性一直是一个简单的问题。
It's only in the last decade that idiots have turned it into a trick question on a biology test.
只是在过去的十年里，白痴们才在生物测试中把它变成了一道刁钻的问题。
And why? Because they prefer ideology over biology.
为什么？因为比起生物学，他们更喜欢意识形态。
So, there's no way to clearly define what makes someone a woman.
因此，没有办法明确定义是什么让一个人成为女人。
Well, I got an idea to put this debate to rest, ask 100 men off the street.
我有办法平息这场争论，去街上找100个人。
They'll define a woman as a human being who has a nurturing side.
他们会把女人定义为培育后代的人。
Who can be emotionally strong as a bull, who will always have your back forever and maybe the most beautiful creatures on earth but who can't parallel park.
情感上像公牛一样坚强的人，会永远支持你的人，也许是地球上最美丽的生物，但却不能平行停车。
A sexist would say, but this is where USA Today screwed up.
性别歧视者会说，但这就是《今日美国》搞砸的地方。
They interviewed only gender studies experts on questions of biology.
他们只就生物学问题采访了性别研究专家。
That's like interviewing Dana Perino on death metal.
这就像是在就死亡金属问题采访达娜·佩里诺。
And they all said Jackson was wrong to even cite biology.
他们都说杰克逊引用生物学是错误的。
译文由可可原创，仅供学习交流使用，未经许可请勿转载。
