What is a woman? After thousands of years of people understanding that basic definition, it says something about where we are right now that liberals refuse to even define women anymore. We heard from Ketanji Brown Jackson during her confirmation hearing to the Supreme Court that she couldn’t answer that question because she wasn’t a “biologist.”

Now, this insanity is permeating everywhere, even into places like Johns Hopkins University which used to be well-regarded for science. But now they appear to have tossed reality and science under the bus to embrace Orwellian double-speak woke language. It was bad enough when the medical journal The Lancet turned women into “bodies with vaginas.”

This is part of the “LGBTQ Glossary” posted on Johns Hopkins University’s “Gender and Sexuality Resources” webpage.

Lesbian [sexual orientation]: A non-man attracted to non-men. While past definitions refer to ‘lesbian’ as a woman who is emotionally, romantically, and/or sexually attracted to other women, this updated definition includes non-binary people who may also identify with the label.

Gay Man: A man who is emotionally, romantically, sexually, affectionately, or relationally attracted to other men, or who identifies as a member of the gay community. At times, ‘gay’ is used to refer to all people, regardless of gender, who have their primary sexual and or romantic attractions to people of the same gender. ‘Gay’ is an adjective (not a noun) as in ‘He is a gay man.’

So a woman isn’t a woman. She’s only a “non-man.” A woman is only defined in the context of men. Talk about erasing women and being misogynistic. Calling all feminists, you’re going to love this.

Meanwhile, there’s no problem with defining a “gay man” as a man. That’s okay.

I’m confused, now. Why does trying to include “non-binary” people only adversely impact calling women, women, but not what you call a man? Can we say how bizarre and head-spinning this all is? Who could keep up with all these bizarre “rules”?

People like “Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling blasted these bizarre definitions. Her tweet has almost five million views.

Man: no definition needed.
Non-man (formerly known as woman):
a being definable only by reference to the male. An absence, a vacuum where there's no man-ness. pic.twitter.com/cpSaSR2Vfg

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) June 13, 2023

Man: no definition needed.
Non-man (formerly known as woman):
a being definable only by reference to the male. An absence, a vacuum where there’s no man-ness.

So anyone (or anything) who is a “non-man” attracted to “non-men” is by this Johns Hopkins definition a lesbian, as people pointed out.

Johns Hopkins: "A lesbian is a non-man attracted to non-men."

Diogenes, holding a chicken: "Behold, a lesbian!" https://t.co/CarY2daPrD pic.twitter.com/uqqSEbkt2N

— Tomas Bogardus (@TomasBogardus) June 13, 2023

This is where progressives are now while claiming to stand for women — who they refuse to even define.

Johns Hopkins got so much backlash for the posting that now they’ve pulled the page. Here’s the archived page they pulled.

They replaced it with this which makes things even more ridiculous.

Johns Hopkins strives to create a campus culture that is inclusive and welcoming for all gender identities, sexual orientations, experiences and viewpoints, and we are committed to ensuring Johns Hopkins is a place where LGBTQ people feel supported.

The LGBTQ Glossary serves as an introduction to the range of identities and terms that are used within LGBTQ communities, and is not intended to serve as the definitive answers as to how all people understand or use these terms.

Upon becoming aware of the language in question, we have begun working to determine the origin and context of the glossary’s definitions. We have removed the page from our website while we gather more information.

So they don’t know how it got there — on their webpage — but they’re working to figure it out. They need to gather “more information” before they can figure out what a woman is.

Oh, Johns Hopkins, how far you’ve fallen.