Well, that didn’t take long.
After U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade hit the headlines, Democrats suddenly discovered the reproductive organs of female homo sapiens.
For the past 10 days or so, the liberal media have been filled with claims of a “war on women” and the need to protect “women’s rights,” especially the “right” to choose and to privacy.
Conservatives were told to keep their hands and court rulings off women’s bodies and out of their uteruses.
But on Wednesday, The Washington Times discovered a subtle shift in language that was more recognizable prior to that leak – to wit, when Democrats were comfortable with terms like “pregnant people,” “pregnant individuals,” and “birthing people.”
That day, Senate Republicans and moderate Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia voted down the Women’s Health Protection Act, which every other Democrat supported.
The bill would have made Roe v. Wade the formal law of the land, not just a landmark legal precedent, and even expanded that to make abortion legal up to the moment of birth.
But the bill’s text was not so much about “women.”
As the Times noted, “Congressional Democrats who hoped to advance a bill that would legalize abortion up to the moment of birth have erased any mention of women in the legislation in deference to transgender men who might become pregnant.”
“The measure has been introduced in the past, facing defeat by Republicans every time, but the language in the bill has evolved in deference to the demands of the LGBTQ community.”
Whereas past versions included terms like “women’s health” and “women seeking abortion services,” the bill rejected on Wednesday, according to the Times, left the word “woman” entirely out, except in the title.
The actual meat of the legislation instead referred to “patient,” “person” or “individual.”
Much like the Associated Press did when it coined the term “pregnant people” for its renowned style guide, Democrats in Congress had two definitions in their bill for those who they believe can get pregnant.
As the Times pointed out, the measure’s text said, “The terms ‘woman” and ‘women’ are used in this bill to reflect the identity of the majority of people targeted and affected by restrictions on abortion services, and to address squarely the targeted restrictions on abortion, which are rooted in misogyny.”
On the other hand, “access to abortion services is critical to the health of every person capable of becoming pregnant. This Act is intended to protect all people with the capacity for pregnancy — cisgender women, transgender men, non-binary individuals, those who identify with a different gender, and others — who are unjustly harmed by restrictions on abortion services.”
So, under this language, “men” have now also found a way to muscle into another area once reserved for women besides sports and restrooms: pregnancy.
Visit Tampafp.com for Politics, Tampa Area Local News, Sports, and National Headlines. Support journalism by clicking here to our GoFundMe or sign up for our free newsletter by clicking here.
Android Users, Click Here To Download The Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. Follow Us On Facebook Here Or Twitter Here.