11 Comments
User's avatar
Mary O'Connor, MD's avatar

Thank you, George. It was a good day today.

Yves's avatar
Jun 30Edited

Crazy times, when two plus two supposedly equals unicorn (in the words of the English journalist Hadley Freeman)!

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was its final, most essential commandment. - George Orwell, "1984" (1948)

Orwell updated:

Woke people told you to reject the evidence of your eyes, your stop watches, your measuring tapes. It was their final, most essential commandment.

Next we need the legal destruction of WPATH, the main purveyor of the false and mendacious gospel of "gender-affirming care":

Lisa Selin Davis: The FTC Suit Against WPATH Isn't Just Another Example of Fealty to Trump. June

18, 2026 [FTC = Federal Trade Commission]

It's an example of responding to the sordid history of WPATH, and bad science [the article us

ungated]

https://www.broadview.news/p/why-the-ftc-suit-against-wpath-is

Stosh Wychulus's avatar

Can you imagine The Founding Fathers' disbelief at a country degenerating to where the Supreme Court has to make a decision as to why boys should not be allowed to compete in the girls divisions? Why we can't have nice democracies.

JimBUWDawg's avatar

Excellent piece! πŸ‘πŸ‘

MLisa's avatar

Ultimately, this will force the states to take this seriously. I'm glad that SCOTUS wrote the decision so that it will be the responsibility of the state, but with the backing of Federal Law. All it's going to take is one upset family with a good lawyer and that state will comply. I'll go further and say that school systems....always crying for more money......will put an end the clap-trap rather than risk pricey litigation and an expensive law suit. Anyway 9-0 on one ruling and 6-3 ruling on the other is a pretty good outcome IMHO.

Sarah Barker's avatar

I hope so. I actually was not aware that SCOTUS was also ruling on the definition of sex in Title IX but am gratified by the 9-0 response.

Lisa Simeone's avatar

Yes, but it’s still profoundly depressing that 3 female justices ruled against women and girls. Shameful.

Sarah Barker's avatar

And that Sotomayor in her dissent called BPJ a girl. The heck?! A Supreme Court justice thinks growing out ones hair, injecting oneself with powerful hormones, and fervently calling oneself the opposite sex makes that a reality. That is honestly a two-year-old's understanding of sexβ€”if a boy puts on a dress he becomes a girl. Shocking. And depressing. How grievously uninformed someone whose job it is to be informed can be. Has she never read Colin Wright? Or Emma Hilton? Or Michael Joyner? Virtually any legitimate scientist?

Lisa Simeone's avatar

She doesn't have to have read any of these people. She just has to have a brain and use it. When it comes to this topic, however, she -- and millions of other women, alas -- have lost their minds.

Sarah Barker's avatar

I was wrong. That was Ketanji Brown Jackson, the nonbiologist, who said BPJ was "living as a girl" and then called BPJ a girl. This person should not be allowed to operate a pencil much less warm a seat on the SC

MLisa's avatar

β€œBe Kind”…..Don’tcha know! That’s not how the law is to be applied, but that’s what happens when unserious goofballs are given positions of power. Fortunately, that’s why there are 8 others.