James G. Zumwalt / July 27, 2022 

World Net Daily ... Concerning the gender issue, life was so much more simple 40,000 years ago, which was before the Neanderthals died out.

After all, the words in the 1970 song bearing the name "Neanderthal Man" tell us our prehistoric ancestors had no issues concerning gender identity. The song's first stanza keeps it all simple:

I'm a Neanderthal man

You're a Neanderthal girl

Let's make Neanderthal love

In this Neanderthal world

Clearly, although Neanderthals harbored a less developed brain, they saw the world as having only two genders – males and females – with each eventually becoming equipped with a supposedly much more capable brain.

But, tens of thousands of years later, in 2022, gender identity has become a complicated issue. This is evidenced by the stupefying messages of witnesses who testified before congressional committee hearings earlier this year.

The question "what is a woman" never seemed complicated, first coming to light during the March confirmation hearings of President Joe Biden's nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Asked by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., "Can you provide a definition for the word 'woman,'" Brown responded, "No. I can't. … I'm not a biologist."

Of all social issues that have undergone reexamination during man's history, this particular one appeared to have been settled long ago. Forty millennia ago, they never had to seek out another opinion to determine one's gender.

But not only did Judge Jackson's liberal response to Sen. Blackburn's question cloud a concept that has served man and woman well throughout history, it also demonstrated a clear liberal hypocrisy raised after SCOTUS overruled the 49-year-old Roe v. Wade decision giving women the right of abortion.

Liberals argue Roe v. Wade was "settled law" and, as such, was not subject to change. However, by making that argument, they ignore that a much longer precedent has existed for tens of thousands of years that man is man and woman is woman and never the twain shall meet.

In July, University of California, Berkeley School of Law professor Khiara M. Bridges testified on the abortion issue. During her testimony, she consistently avoided using the term "women," instead opting for "people with a capacity for pregnancy." When Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., sought clarification of this, he asked, "Would that be women?"

In responding, Bridges incorporated the term "cis gender" women, meaning women who identify with their biological sex.

Accordingly, she answered Hawley's query with, "Many women, 'cis women,' have the capacity for pregnancy. Many cis women do not have a capacity for pregnancy. There are also trans men who have the capacity for pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy."

Hawley next asked, "So this really isn't a women's right issue …" to which Bridges responds, "We can recognize that this impacts women while also recognizing that it impacts other groups. Those things are not mutually exclusive. …"

This exchange then followed...

Hawley: "So your view is that the core of this, this right then is about what?"

Bridges: "I want to recognize that your line of questioning, um, is transphobic, um, and it opens up trans people to violence by not recognizing that. …"

Hawley: "Wow, you're saying that I'm opening people up to violence by asking whether or not women are the folks who have pregnancy?"

Bridges: "So I want to note that one out of five transgender people have attempted suicide, so I think it's …"

Hawley: "Because of my line of questioning? So we can't talk about it?"

Bridges: "Because denying trans people exist and pretending not to know they exist …"

Hawley: "I'm denying that trans people exist because I am asking you if you are (talking) about women having pregnancies?"

Bridges: "Do you believe that men can get pregnant?"

Hawley: "No, I don't think so."

Bridges: "So you're denying trans people exist."

A critic of Bridges' testimony later wrote the obvious: "Pressure is building to force people to pretend that crackpot ideas are sane."

It is interesting that Bridges chose her testimony before Congress to make such a political show by avoiding the term "woman" or "women" – something she apparently decided to do only after Judge Jackson had raised the gender identification issue at her hearing.

For, in a 2020 law review article Bridges wrote, she saw absolutely no need to do so, unhesitantly relying on the old Neanderthalic terms "woman" and "women" 45 times and 349 times respectively.

Sadly, college campuses are also promoting gender identity, requiring students in class introduce themselves to provide their preferred pronouns. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, recently mocked this requirement at a rally in which he provided the following introduction: "I'm Ted Cruz and my pronoun is kiss my ass."

The senator partially blames academia for instigating this radical gender ideology. In reference to liberals' inability to define something as easy as what a woman is, Cruz issued a "trigger warning" for any snowflakes in the crowd before stating "women exist."

The audience obviously loved it when Cruz, referring to the sanity of gender identity issue promoters, blurted out, "What the hell is wrong with you idiots?" Cruz obviously is one who appreciates the more simple Neanderthal mentality when it comes to gender identity, adding, "This stuff ain't complicated."

One would not realize it is not complicated based on a recent resolution proposed by the largest teachers' union in the country – the National Education Association (NEA). It ridiculously proposed that, in any contracts it issues, the term "mother" be replaced with "birthing parent" to promote inclusivity.

Such a mindset by the NEA should not give any parent with young children in school a warm and fuzzy feeling about what is being taught there.

The introduction of this gender identity complication must be most confusing for Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii. She went on record during Judge Brett Kavanaugh's SCOTUS confirmation hearing to make a very sexist comment about women who testified against him, espousing how females should always be believed.

However, the introduction of this new gender complication raises a question: If testimony given by a biological woman and transgender woman are at odds, whom is the senator to believe?

Even though Neanderthals possessed a far less developed brain, methinks they had a much better understanding of the gender identity issue than we have today. We, ridiculously, have allowed gender identity to devolve into the equivalent of a Heinz 57 variety product line.

Who would have thought thousands of years of progress would leave homo sapiens lacking the simple common sense embraced by Neanderthals?