WASHINGTON — In the wake of a tense women’s sports showdown before the Supreme Court of the United States, Democratic leaders are reportedly considering emergency legislation to phase out dictionaries entirely, citing “outdated, rigid definitions” that threaten modern political discourse.

The proposal gained traction after attorneys advocating for transgender athletes spent a remarkable amount of time at oral argument carefully explaining that while participation in women’s sports is vitally important, defining the word woman is, regrettably, impossible. Likewise, male and female were described as “problematic legacy terms” that should be approached with caution, footnotes, disclaimers, and preferably a feelings check.

At one point, according to observers, a justice attempted to clarify matters by asking for a basic definition of biological sex. The courtroom reportedly fell silent as counsel stared into the middle distance, searching for guidance from the cosmos, the Department of Education, or at least a progressive think tank white paper.

Merriam-Webster Declared an Extremist Organization

Within hours, progressive activists declared traditional dictionaries “tools of oppression,” arguing that defining words creates harmful expectations that language should mean something specific.

“Words are fluid,” said one Democratic strategist. “They evolve. They shapeshift. They identify differently depending on the speaker, the listener, and the vibes in the room. Locking them into definitions is basically linguistic colonialism.”

A leaked draft memo allegedly recommends replacing dictionaries with a “Living Language Portal,” where definitions update hourly based on social media trends, campus protests, and whoever is yelling loudest on cable news.

Women’s Sports: Now With Fewer Women, But More Inclusivity

The underlying case centers on women’s sports — an area Democrats once described as essential to protecting fairness and opportunity for female athletes. That was before the discovery that protecting women requires never explaining what one is.

Supporters of the new approach insist this is progress.

“Women’s sports are about inclusion,” said one activist, “and nothing is more inclusive than removing the category entirely.”

Critics counter that this leaves female athletes — defined loosely as “people who used to know what female meant” — at a competitive disadvantage. Those concerns were dismissed as “science-adjacent rhetoric” and referred to a task force for further deconstruction.

Emergency Language Reform Measures Proposed

Democratic lawmakers are now floating several policy solutions:

• Replacing the words male and female with Assigned Narrative at Birth (ANAB).
• Allowing athletes to self-certify eligibility using a feelings-based affidavit.
• Introducing trigger warnings before biology textbooks.
• Issuing federal grants to help schools “unlearn definitional thinking.”

One senior aide summarized the party’s position succinctly: “If you can’t define it, you can’t discriminate with it.”

The Future: Silence Is the Only Safe Language

As the Supreme Court deliberates, Democrats remain hopeful the justices will recognize that clarity itself is the real threat. In the meantime, party leaders urge Americans to stop asking basic questions, stop using precise language, and above all, stop expecting words to mean what they’ve meant for centuries.

Because in today’s political climate, the only acceptable definition is no definition at all — and the safest dictionary is one that’s already been thrown out.