According to RedState, that basic truth was put to the test on Capitol Hill this week, when senior leaders from some of the nation’s top medical schools appeared before the House Education and Workforce Committee to discuss how diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies are reshaping medical education. What unfolded was not a technical debate over curriculum, but a revealing clash between biological fact and ideological fashion, with the people responsible for training America’s future doctors struggling to answer the most elementary questions about human reproduction.
The scientific facts are not controversial: human beings are mammals, and like other mammals, we are sexually dimorphic, or as some biologists put it, sexually bipolar. Humans belong to the clade Eutheria, in which sex is genetically determined at conception; in our species, an XY chromosome pairing produces a male and an XX pairing produces a female, with only rare and well-documented genetic abnormalities as exceptions.
July 16, 2026
In everyday life, if a grown man chooses to wear a dress and declare himself a woman, most people may shrug and move on, even if they privately disagree. But when the chancellors and deans of elite medical schools—the very people charged with teaching future physicians how to diagnose and treat patients—cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that men cannot bear children, the issue ceases to be cultural theater and becomes a direct threat to medical integrity and patient safety.
That danger was on full display Tuesday, when Representative Mary Miller, R-Ill., pressed several medical school leaders on whether they would affirm the basic reality that only women can become pregnant.
These academic elites, steeped in DEI orthodoxy, repeatedly dodged, deflected, or redefined terms rather than state plainly that men do not have wombs and cannot give birth.
Rep. Miller focused her questioning on Dr. Sam Hawgood, chancellor of the University of California, San Francisco, highlighting UCSF’s own instructional materials. "Doctor (Sam) Hawgood, you see UCSFs Classroom Guide, titled ‘Framework for Gender and Sex Concepts in Teaching,’ advises against using the term pregnant women," she said during the hearing on DEI’s impact in medical schools.
"Instead, it says to use pregnant people. Who are pregnant people compared to pregnant women? Just curious." The question was simple, but the implications were profound: if medical educators cannot define who can become pregnant, how can they responsibly train doctors to treat pregnancy-related conditions?
Miller then pushed the issue further, asking a question that should have required only a one-word answer. "Has a non-biological woman ever had a baby?" she asked, to which Hawgood replied that a "transgender person can."
"That's not a biological woman. Has a non-biological woman ever had a baby?" Miller shot back, refusing to let the semantic sleight of hand stand. Hawgood responded, "I would reiterate" before Miller cut him off, saying bluntly, "It’s ridiculous."
The congresswoman then turned to Dr. Steve Dubinett, dean of the UCLA School of Medicine, citing another troubling example from medical training materials. "Lastly, Dr. Dubinett, a required course at UCLA medical school advises ob-gyn students not to, and, I quote, assume gender identity," Miller said, underscoring how ideology is being embedded into core clinical instruction.
"OK, from another class in May of 2026. It included a disclaimer that while it uses the term she and women, it does not intend to exclude, and I quote, ‘those who have a uterus but do not identify with these terms.’ What does that even mean?" Her question captured the absurdity: if medical schools are now teaching that people with uteruses may not be “women,” then language itself is being contorted in ways that can only confuse clinical judgment.
In medicine, facts must be paramount, and ideological “woke” constructs must yield to observable reality. The delivery of medical care is precisely the arena where clarity about sex, anatomy, and biology is not optional but essential, because misclassification can be fatal.
One experienced emergency physician—described as an emergency medicine doctor with more than 15 years in practice—has reportedly encountered this problem repeatedly with self-identified transgender patients. She has seen individuals present with abdominal pain while insisting on being addressed according to their chosen gender identity, prompting her to respond, "I don't care how you identify, I have to know what parts you have, because if you're actually a man, you might have gas, but if you're actually a woman you could have an ectopic pregnancy that could kill you."
Too many such patients, she has observed, still resist examination and evaluation when confronted with the need to disclose their actual anatomy. Those are individual choices, and adults are ultimately responsible for their own decisions, however reckless or confused they may be.
Medical schools, however, do not have the luxury of indulging such confusion. The training of physicians and the practice of medicine must be grounded in science and fact, and the fact is straightforward: no man, no adult male human, has a uterus, and no man, no adult male human, can have a baby.
Only women—regardless of how any particular woman may choose to “identify”—possess the biological capacity for pregnancy. Only women can conceive, carry, and deliver children, and this has been understood across cultures and centuries; as the article notes, "This isn't exactly news."
Yet this ideological virus has now spread far beyond fringe activists and into the heart of the medical establishment. Even in the hearing, Rep. Miller herself used the phrase "biological woman," a term that is, strictly speaking, redundant, because sex is inherently biological, not psychological or political.
Sex is a matter of biology, biology is a matter of science, and science is the disciplined study of facts. The facts are that humans are sexually bipolar—male and female—and in the context of healthcare delivery, that binary reality is the only relevant determination when diagnosing and treating sex-specific conditions.
What is unfolding in these institutions is a shameful distortion of the very educational system tasked with producing the nation’s primary healthcare providers. When medical schools prioritize ideological conformity over biological truth, they are not merely engaging in academic fashion; they are endangering patients and undermining public trust.
America’s educational systems have been badly compromised for some time, and higher education is no exception.
But there is a critical difference between a student wasting time and money on a Gender Studies degree and a student training to become a physician, whose decisions will directly affect whether patients live or die.
The Gender Studies major may only be harming himself, or herself, or "xeself, of flippity-floppity-floofself, or whatever they may choose to identify as." Medical students, by contrast, are supposed to be learning how to save lives, and there is no room in that mission for the "shameful woke horse squeeze that these deans of American medical schools are shoveling out."
If the nation’s top medical schools cannot say plainly that men cannot get pregnant and women are the only sex capable of bearing children, then the problem is not merely academic—it is systemic.
Restoring sanity will require medical educators, lawmakers, and the public to insist that science, not ideology, governs the training of those entrusted with our health and our lives.
