On Friday, the House passed the Equality Act, which ostensibly outlaws "discrimination" based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Every Democrat voted in favor of the radical, anti-science bill. It will certainly now die in the Senate, but its approval in the House is relevant and worth considering. If Democrats ever again control both chambers of Congress and the presidency, this dystopian piece of legislation will be one of the first items on their increasingly weird agenda.
Note that the bill, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically protects gender identity. Discrimination based simply on gender is already illegal. But gender identity is, rather than your actual gender, the gender you imagine yourself to be. In other words, with this law, Democrats hope to protect a person's imaginary gender. If a man says he is a woman, he is entitled to be treated like one. Which is exactly like decreeing that if a man thinks the moon is made of marshmallows, he is entitled to have that belief enthusiastically affirmed by every NASA engineer he comes across.
Under the Equality Act, a biological man would be granted the constitutional right to enter any women's restroom or locker room in any school or business. He would also be given access to all women's sports teams, no questions asked. No need for hormones, "sex change" surgery, or even a wig. A man that says he is a woman, is a woman. Period (or not, in this case).
Three realities immediately emerge. First, the Democratic Party is officially and irretrievably anti-science. As I have argued extensively in the past — because these are the kinds of things that need to be argued about extensively these days — "woman" and "man" are biological categories. They have fixed definitions. A woman is an adult human female. A man is an adult human male. This is how Merriam-Webster, Dictionary.com, the Oxford dictionary, the Collins dictionary, the Columbia encyclopedia, and every other reference I have ever checked, all define those words. Liberals wish to throw out these definitions and rip out pages from every dictionary and encyclopedia on Earth, but they have not proposed a coherent alternative definition. That's because it isn't possible to come up with a definition of "woman" that still allows women to be women while also allowing men to be women, for the same reason that you can't come up with a definition of triangle that still allows triangles to be triangles while also allowing circles to be triangles.
Can a man, by force of will or feeling or conviction, change his biological nature? No, just as I cannot make bourbon rain from the sky or beef jerky sprout out of the ground like beanstalks. The beef and bourbon scenario is attractive, but the laws of nature do not always conform to my ideas of attractiveness or suitability. This is not only a logical conclusion but a scientific fact. If you deny it, you deny science. By definition, you deny science. You don't just deny this particular scientific fact, but you deny science itself.
Second, the Democratic Party is officially and irretrievably anti-woman. This is no surprise coming from the party that tells a woman to express her liberty and autonomy by killing her child. It's hard to get more anti-woman than that, but these cretins will try their best. Ironically, Democrats spent all of this past week shrieking that anti-abortion laws will deprive a woman of her "agency" and "privacy," then they close out that week-long temper tantrum by trying to give men the right to waltz into any female locker room they please. If a man in a woman's restroom is not an invasion of privacy, what is?
Third, the Democratic Party continues to shamelessly exploit the historical plight of black Americans. Black people were property in this country until the middle of the 19th century. Then for another century they were deprived of the basic right to fully participate in society. By trying to cram "gender identity" and sexual orientation into the Civil Rights Act, Democrats are implicitly (and often explicitly) equating the persecution of black Americans to the "persecution" of biological males who are simply asked to use the same restroom as every other biological male.
Black people demanded, and finally won, equal rights. The LGBT camp demands special, unique, custom-made rights. I do not have the right to go into any bathroom I choose. Nor do I wish to obtain such a right. I am regulated to men's bathrooms, and men's locker rooms, and men's sports teams. It is a perfectly fair rule because it applies to everyone equally, which is essentially the definition of a fair rule. But Democrats want some people to be more equal than others, and they are willing to throw women and the laws of science under the bus to achieve it.