Redefining Reality

Language has always been a tool of power. Now, in 2025, state legislatures are rewriting the dictionary of identity, erasing terms like "mother" and "father" from legal documents and replacing them with clinical, gender-neutral alternatives. Simultaneously, parental rights are under siege, with states like Minnesota asserting their authority to override parents who disagree with their child's gender transition.

The question is no longer if these changes will reshape society—it’s how far they will go. This is not just about inclusivity. This is about control.

From Mother to "Inseminated Person"—How States Are Erasing Parental Identity

Wisconsin and Massachusetts have introduced bills that strip traditional parental terminology from state law. Governor Tony Evers' proposal in Wisconsin replaces 'mother' with 'inseminated person' (Source). Governor Evers’ proposal replaces "mother" with "inseminated person" in Wisconsin statutes. Massachusetts has enacted a similar measure, removing 'mother' and 'father' (Source) in favor of gender-neutral language. Proponents argue this modernizes legal texts to reflect nontraditional families, while critics express concern about its broader implications. Critics warn this is the first step in erasing biological and historical reality in favor of state-imposed definitions.

This shift has real-world consequences. Legal definitions shape cultural and societal norms. When the state controls words, it dictates thought. This aligns disturbingly with Orwellian language manipulation—where definitions morph to serve political objectives rather than objective truth.

The State vs. Parents—Who Decides a Child’s Gender?

Minnesota has taken government intervention even further. The state has enacted legislation making it a 'trans refuge,' preventing enforcement of out-of-state rulings that might remove children from parental custody over gender-affirming medical decisions (Source). In practice, this grants the state more authority than parents in determining a child's medical path. If a minor identifies as transgender and parents advocate for waiting until adulthood before making irreversible changes, the state can legally intervene.

This raises critical ethical and psychological concerns. Developmental psychology shows that adolescent brains are not fully matured until their mid-20s. Studies indicate that many cases of gender dysphoria resolve naturally by adulthood without medical intervention (Source). Countries such as Sweden and Finland have already restricted youth medical transitions after long-term studies revealed more harm than benefit (Source). Yet, in the U.S., government overreach is accelerating.

The Science vs. Ideology Debate

Supporters of these policies claim they protect vulnerable youth. Yet research contradicts this simplistic narrative. Studies show that gender dysphoria often coexists with anxiety, depression, and autism spectrum disorders (Source). Some children diagnosed with gender dysphoria later detransition, expressing regret over medical interventions they were encouraged to pursue as minors.

If science is clear that identity formation is complex and ongoing through adolescence, why is the government overriding parental authority and fast-tracking life-altering treatments?

The answer: control. If a governing body can define language and dictate identity, it holds unprecedented power over the population. Once "mother" and "father" are legally obsolete, what stops the government from redefining "family" itself?

Where Does This End?

The precedent being set is chilling. If a government can legally redefine fundamental human relationships, there is no limit to its reach. Historical parallels exist in Mao’s China, Soviet Russia, and even Orwell’s 1984, where language manipulation led to the erosion of individual identity in favor of state doctrine.

This is no longer about acceptance. This is about compliance. The question is no longer whether language shapes reality—it’s how much influence the state should have in redefining it.

Conclusion

Dr. Laura Schlessinger and other analysts have been warning about this trajectory for decades. The redefinition of core human concepts like gender, family, and identity is not a matter of mere semantics—it’s a calculated effort to reshape society. When the state holds the power to define words, it holds the power to define people.