Trans Debates Obfuscated by Linguistic Misdirection

WASHINGTON - July 26, 2026 - PRLog -- Discussions about M2F transgender athletes seeking to compete in events restricted to girls and women have become increasing confused and muddled by linguistic misdirection or obfuscation - sometimes called  semantic manipulation, rebranding, reframing, framing so as to presuppose the conclusion, etc. - charges public interest law professor John Banzhaf . . .

Banzhaf cites, as examples, phrases such as "biological woman," "trans woman" or "transgender woman," and "sex assigned at birth." . . .

Instead, using the phrase "biological woman" misleads people into perceiving such a person as just a different kind of woman . . .

But would someone aged 25 be permitted to compete in the Senior Olympics simply because he says or believes that he is much older; and he behaves and dresses - as well as identifies - as a old man, and his supporters refer to him as a "gramps" . . .

Similarly, using phrases such as "sex assigned at birth" is dangerously misleading and deceptive, or at least obfuscating, because it suggests and implies that the sex reported ("assigned") at birth is somewhat arbitrary, and possibly subject to change later in life. . .

But the phrase "sex assigned at birth," and the suggestion that sex is somehow arbitrary and subject to change, is dangerously misleading.

For example, no one would ever ask a new mother what weight or eye color was "assigned" to her baby at birth.

Well accepted medical science has shown that, aside from a very tiny percentage of all births, human babies are either male or female, and they are not male or female simply because someone made an arbitrary assignment . .

Linguistic misdirection or semantic manipulation - rebranding or reframing words or phrases so as to predispose a desired conclusion - is a well known tactic which can easily slip under the radar and often remain unexposed.

Indeed, well known pollsters such Frank Luntz have explicitly advised about using loaded words to subtly enhance the persuasive power of a claim or argument. . . .
.

An example is the tobacco industry promoting the phrase "environmental tobacco smoke" to suggest that cigarette smoke is just a natural part of the indoor environment which people should therefore naturally put up with and accept. . . .

But when it leads to absurdities - e.g., people can't answer "do you believe that men can become women?" and "what is a woman?" - officials, pundits, and the media should stop using misleading phrases which only confuse and obfuscate basic and undeniable facts about human biology and about sports, argues Banzhaf.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf