In the UK the government’s desire to appease all manner of social demands has the government in court.

If you had any supposition that our spiraling social activist reimagining of the realities of our world and science was starting to ease let me dump some frigid dihydrogen monoxide on those hopes. Feelings and personal desires are now declaring basic fundamental scientific precepts to be hateful constructs.

In Great Britain courts there is a fight in the works where a transgender man wants to be identified as the “Father” of a newborn. The difference here is the individual bringing forth the suit gave birth to the baby, and they are declaring that being listed on the birth certificate as the mother leads to all manner of offense. This takes us down to a realm of social desires eclipsing basic biology.

The parent in question (listed as T.T. for legal requirements) has declared that being forced to be listed as a biological “mother” on the legal document violates personal choice matters. According to TT’s lawyers, “Being forced to register as a mother to his son is contrary to his right to private and family life within Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and that such interference, in the light of the changes which have evolved in society are no longer proportionate.”

It is with no sense of awareness they invoke the term “evolved” in order to fight against a biological standard. If you think this cannot become even more confounding, and scientifically obtuse, just wait.

TT has been legally declared a man for years. TT has been granted a gender recognition certificate, under the 2004 Gender Recognition Act. This was delivered by the British Gender Recognition Panel, which was created under that same act. So you have a sense of how swimmingly things are going across the pond.

A couple of years ago, TT elected to undergo intrauterine insemination treatment in order to become pregnant. That is, TT was born a female, sought the legal means and some procedures to transition to become a male, then elected to become pregnant but to be recognized as a male following childbirth.

While battling against the word “mother,” TT’s lawyers have suggested that he might be willing to settle on the term “gestational parent.” That the term “gestational” biologically is used to designate the female is something we are not permitted to point out. That a male can be said to be accurately described this way is something I am incapable of wrapping my testosterone-polluted mind around in an approved fashion.

Making things even more migraine-inducing, British medical boards will only grant the insemination treatment to females, for reasons obvious. So TT had to have been asserted as female to qualify. But as TT’s lawyers have stated, “It is an accepted fact that a female who transitions to male may in law maintain the ability to conceive and give birth to a child.”

And now the courts are even coming up with their own “solution.” The government’s lawyers are suggesting that TT can be listed on the forms as the “Male mother,” making things even more ludicrous. One expert spoke to the High Court Family Division saying, “the status of a mother is no longer gender-specific.” Rendering all definitions as completely valueless they say, “Being a mother is no longer necessarily a gendered term. A man can be and, in this case of TT, is a mother.”

We have now entered the phase where all words are completely meaningless. A person who delivers a baby is a male, referring to them as a “mother” for delivering a child is offensive, but the term mother can be used to describe a man, and a man can be described as a woman in order to become inseminated by another man, but in truth they are actually a man even though they were pregnant and brought a child to term.

Since everyone involved here operates with the belief that none of these terms carry any type of firm definition, and ALL can be interpreted by anyone to mean anything they choose, then why on earth is anyone fighting and in court?!?! All parties essentially agree that all terms can mean all things. There – done!

This is the kind of result we get from the crowds who have declared so much of nature offensive. They tell us that our sexuality is something that is set in place from birth, but that there are over 50 genders from which people can label themselves. That is, who we choose to have sex with is determined at birth, but the gender we were born with is something we can choose. Now “males” can give birth and a baby can be born without any female involvement.

They also tell us that conservatives are anti-science. This is enough to drive me to drink — leading to the mother of all hangovers.