While its existence may vandalize linguistics (as well as common sense), the take-no-prisoners tactics in which it is permeated and imposed is pure terrorism in my book.
The original wave of political correctness some 30+ years ago was no less condescending and largely absurd, however nonconformance brought about at most a finger wagging accompanied by a scornful expression. But no one walked around in fear of their livelihoods or careers for "triggering" its adherents.
Today you can be utterly destroyed instantaneously for even the tiniest and most accidental slight. Or for parents who dare to question their local school boards over the struggle sessions required of their children and risk terrorism charges as a result.
CRT/D.E.I./Woke/Anti-racism are all 100% terroristic strategies. Conform or die.
Now to figure out how to stop them from censoring my charter email… 🔥🔥🔥 i’m just a little guppy in this big fish bowl… I guess they’re afraid of us little guppies making more and more little guppies… 💩
"There are those who dive for cover when they hear "Duck!" and there are those that start arguing about 'What right do you have to order me about?!'".
It is with great anticipation I await the great culling of the second sort, once enough of us of the first sort stops helping, aiding and enabling them.
For my entire life, these groups - collectively known as the woke today - have spewed hatred towards the normal working man or woman, the normal family, the people who never did them anything wrong. Because we never returned their hatred and their vitriol, instead thinking it a tantrum that they would grow out of. Instead, they gleefully raced ever onwards, becoming more and more a real existential threat to our nations, peoples and cultures, all in the name of "progress" or "rights" or "equity".
So no. I won't (and I know I'm not alone in feeling this, though most hold their teeth before their tongue) lift a finger to aid, shelter or even speak up for them.
And any woke-whatsit, know this: /you/ brought these feelings forth. Everyone else in the West has from the early 1970s onwards been content to adopt a live and let live-attitude. Not you.
In english you say reap what you sow. We too say that, but we have one more fitting I believe: "You pissed your bed, now lie in it".
and there are some who, when you yell "duck", look up and take aim. And others who respond "I'll have mine with potatoes". :-) The first kind help feed the second kind.
But seriously. You're right, the core of this is promotion o hate, which divides and weakens,
Hate does not lead to equity, equality, or progress. It suppresses all those things. Hate is the opposite of tolerance. If you must deny someone else to "realized" you've taken a wrong turn.
Respect begets respect and the same for tolerance. If you want others to tolerate you, start by tolerating them. All that is basic "treat others as you would have them treat you" stuff.
Put somewhat more concisely by one of my mentors: if you want respect, don't be an asshole.
Nah, you like your Donald with potatos, that's fine. Me, I much prefer it with roasted carrots and haricouverts, and stir-fried mushrooms (golden chanterelles) with creamed onions.
Duck is one of few dishes I'd order wine to drink, the somewhat discreet taste of the meat needs a gentle yet tart wine to bring out the taste of both.
Absolutely correct Rikard! And your earlier comment as to why these people manufacture all these genders/identities: "Anything which garners you social privileges, power over how others speak, feel and think, and what gets you off from needing to work for a living" nailed it! As to "reaping what you sow," a dear friend of mine used to say "Don't shit where you eat!"
You know how they say "never piss off the people who serve you food?"
Maybe also not piss off the people who grow it/raise it, too. Or the guys who do actually know how to fix the pipes and change the light switch.
There've always been effete morons, ain't nothing new. But the destruction of self-reliancy-producing domestic industries based on hard physical labor--that's the death knell for any society. First time I saw a manhole cover, in NY, stamped "made in India" I knew our doom was well and truly upon us.
True. I have the deepest respect for farmers and ranchers, as well as all the folks who support their efforts, including the truck drivers who get food to market. I like to eat. Farmers need equipment, and fuel, seeds, supplies, all of which is delivered by truck, maintained by mechanics, designed by engineers, produced by production workers...and so on. I've never understood those who show disrespect to the people who's efforts are essential for feeding the rest of us.
at the next level, demonizing capability, hard work, self reliance and responsibility is indeed undermining the ability to move forward or even hold on to what we have. The culture of dependence is self defeating - obviously - when you see the dwindling supply of dependable people. If instead you think you can depend on government, which have the power to compel people to labor in those tasks that are essential to survival, think a little harder. Then review history. On face value you are endorsing forced labor (slavery), and historically, this ultimately fails to provide the desired result.
So go out and thank a farmer or truck driver or the mechanics that keep farms working and trucks rolling. Instead of supporting policies that are driving folks out of those professions, how about we support them (and continue to eat ;-).
Very well put! There has been, for decades, an ongoing campaign to transfer all actual work to a location, any location, where SCA's "effete morons" can't ever be offended by the sight of people with dirty hands sweating as they do meaningful, productive work.
I must have missed the memo that explained where these unfortunates expect to obtain food, clothing or shelter.
""There are those who dive for cover when they hear "Duck!" and there are those that start arguing about 'What right do you have to order me about?!'"."
... There is only one correct response when you hear someone yell, "Duck!"
No doubt wokeism is dangerous and destructive. And I agree that we didn't take them seriously and now are facing the consequences. In the West, we have all been subject to a decades long PsyOp for a larger purpose. These messages have been spewed out in schools, media, entertainment, etc., for decades...and they've been remarkably successful. Gender dysphoria has exploded in the past fifteen years. None of this was an organic, natural process. It was an Op, just like Covid-19. Yes, there are true believers and grifters. But who/what is the power behind the entire message?
If I were a psychopathic billionaire who was convinced there were too many little people vermin on the planet, what might I do? Attempt to normalize abortion on the demand for any reason at any time and call it a "right" and "freedom"? Attempt to normalize euthanasia and convince unhappy people that they're better off dead? Create a virus that isn't particularly deadly and scare the crap out of people so they take the deadly shots? Screw with the supply chains and create food insecurity and hunger?
I don't know how many from the younger generations who have been poisoned by the woke virus can be saved, but I don't think we should give up on them. They've been subjected to a 24/7/365 PsyOp for their entire lives. It may take a generation or two to fix the damage that we let happen while we laughed at their ridiculous notions that have now overtaken the West.
This wasn't a natural progression. Who/What is behind the PsyOp?
You have to think of it more like the opening credits of The Brady Bunch (if you're old enough to remember):
Here's the story of the Leftist Permanent Revolution, which after various disasters and divorces retreated to American academia, where they gradually honed 2 generations of commissars armed with dogma and jargon designed around empowering The Marginalized (basically any poss historical victims), with the goal of undoing European capitalist democracy and replacing it with "socialist liberation", which of course would be overseen by Leftist philosopher kings and their minions;
Here's the story of global capitalism, which is an omnivorous perpetual-motion machine, and in the last generation has decided that nation states and their citizens are an impediment to power and profits, and thus it would be for the best if they owned the entire planet and did away with borders, citizens, rights, democracy etc...
And one day, after a bad Orange Man scared them both to death, they jumped into each other's arms and decided to get married.
Or, more simply, global capitalism and global progressivism have become a Church/State ruling alliance, and one partner wants all our loot and one partner wants all our brains.
Actually, Clever, both parties want our loot, and one of those parties wants, rather than our brains, for us to simply stop using said brains. We appear to be well on the way to satisfying both!
I'm just wishing I had some reason to fill out a form with these questions on them: Race: I'll put Black (I'm not), Sex: If you can't tell by looking at me, I'll seek service somewhere else, Age: take a good guess - whatever you say will be closer than my chronological age. Pronouns: Ridiculous question. Shut up. ha ha, I'll probably be escorted out by men in white coats (yes, I used that terminology intentionally)
I get that some people have a different gender on the inside than the outside. Human mind and soul are complicated things, so why not. I won't debate if it is a choice or an imperative, and do the best I can. It makes no difference. Be a good person, treat others with respect and tolerance, and we're good.
I get that some people of one gender are attracted to the opposite gender, others attracted to persons of the same gender. Again, makes no difference to me. Consenting adults and all that - if you don't make it my business I won't.
I don't now if a person chooses their gender or sexual preference or if it's hard wired or whatever. Whatever.
But here's what I don't get - non binary? There is a third, forth, fifth....nth gender? Really? What are the others? Maybe you're not sure some days, but really, what are the 2+n genders?
If one things that they have to compel others to respect them, well, here's something those people need to know: it doesn't work. Ever. What you get is not respect.
In the immortal words of Rocket J. Squirrel "ah Bullwinkle, that trick never works!"
Since they don't get respect no-how, and can rationalise contempt as [insert buzzword here], they happily settle for compliance.
The inability to feel shame before others is integral in this. To avoid feeling shame, they use the mythos of Rights.
After all, if you're denied something or unable to achieve something and that something is called a Right, then it's not on you to improve or change; hence no reason for you to feel shame, only anger and entitlement.
What gets me is that none of the woke discuss the WHY - what is *causing* this non-binary experience for so many now, when historically it was almost nonexistent? The main cause: TOXINS. There are 100,000 synthetic chemicals in our food, air, water, medications, etc. that were not in existence 50 -70 years ago. They are screwing up the human endocrine (hormone) system in many complicated ways, most of which medical system has yet to unravel. (And yes, too many *vaccines* are heavily implicated!) I have a master’s degree in holistic nutrition and have read many scientific books dealing with this heavily interdependent and complicated medical problem. In my lifetime, I have watched the medical *profession* be completely taken over by the pharmaceutical *industry* - they are damaging the human hormonal system!
Social Contagion? - Conspiracy-theorist-me has assumed PsyOp explanations - the roll out announced/confirmed by the National Geographic's "Gender Revolution" issue - Jan 2017 - NG, long the voice of the deep state. (I see they now call it a "historic special issue")
But your approach certainly cannot be discounted - perhaps a peculiar twist on the old nature/nurture debate - here: poisons enabling PsyOp. Still, the question remains (for the poison approach) - why the sudden emergence in the late teens and not e.g. the early 'oughts
To Your question - probably no one knows yet why the late teens and not the early teens. It’s unbelievably complicated - how do you mathematically model the interaction of 100,000 synthetic chemicals with trillions of human cells?
But here’s an eye-opening experience. Check out from your local library any documentary on Woodstock, and really look at the bodies of these 400,000+ young people in attendance. These are not Hollywood extras, folks, just a cross-section of American youth. You’ll see that there’s hardly a single fat person in the crowd! None of this puffy, swollen fat that plagues people today...
“Whatever” is the best response. There is nothing consistent about the non binary gender designations. It is mostly younger people trying out new forms of self expression in order to create an identity. In my day, people got tattoos and piercings and dressed up based on how a certain genre of music was marketed.
I’ve found the easiest way to not get trapped in trying to remember self identified genders is to just use the person’s name and/or “that person” when talking about them. Trying to keep the gender pronouns straight in your head is extremely difficult and what makes it so annoying. Otherwise, whatever.
In my day having any part of our bodies pierced was clear indication something had gone badly wrong. But I get your point. Thanks. And really, who am I to judge someone else form of rebellion and self expression? I'm the guy who dropped out of school at 16 to tour with a rock band, then went to college, and earned multiple advanced degrees. Not my parents choice for sure ;-). But I'm still confused regarding "non binary". No value judgement just wondering beyond male and female, what are the choices? If we add "not sure" I guess that's three options. that's all I got...what am I missing?
As for pronouns, that's two different things. Firstly, If you choose he/she different than what may be obvious and someone gets it wrong, get over it. You want people to tolerate your identity, tolerate them too. Humans are imperfect. If being addressed by the wrong pronoun is the worst thing that has ever happened to you, you are one lucky human.
Are you a plural pronoun. No. Just no. If you choose a plural pronoun as an individual, you're just wrong. If you choose "they" to avoid gender identification, again, you are just wrong. That is not what the words mean. Ignorance and illiteracy are not cool. Ignorance and illiteracy are not liberating. Ignorance and illiteracy are is a tool of oppression. Do not promote ignorance and illiteracy in the name of self expression. Do I really need to explain why that doesn't work?
The "non-binary" thing confuses me too. For a transsexual who is trying to live as a member of their target sex/gender, getting called by the pronoun appropriate to that gender is certainly important, and I would aim to do so out of respect for them so long as they behave themselves appropriately to that gender. For a person in that state, getting "outed" with the birth-sex pronoun might be social death.
But for someone who isn't trying to transition, what does it matter? If I'm transgendered, but not transitioning, I don't care what pronoun you call me by, so long as it's either 'he' or 'she' or whatever is appropriate in the language you're speaking. Similarly, if you're such a mix of masculine and feminine that you can't make up your own mind which you are, then why not just leave it to the folks having the conversation to decide which one is most fitting?
I've noticed a recent shift toward replacing the 'T' words with "non-binary," as if both to extend and erase the transgender issue. It extends it by bringing in a miscellaneous set of people who may be a little whacked in their kinks, but have no real craving to be of the opposite sex. It erases it by defining it as "non-binary," i.e., having no concern with the male-female binary gender polarity. For transgendered people, whose whole issue is the desperate longing to be on the other side of that polarity, this is preposterous.
LGBT people, including T people, won most of their real issues during Obama's second term, and I generally applaud that. Since then though, the transgender issue in particular seems to have been taken over by wokist political predators who are redefining it in ways that do no good for the transgendered or for anyone else, but weaponize it in order to anger normal people and bully them. Rather than constructively support a small number of people with a serious brain-body mismatch to peacefully transition, they instead want to use that as an excuse to blow up the polar gender system, upon which our community rests, altogether. The displayed pronouns are a chip on the shoulder that give them license to attack and destroy anyone who uses other than the asserted pronoun, however ungrammatical or nonsensical it may be. The woke bullies can pretend as usual to be defenders of the wronged, and the transgender people they exploit will ultimately take the blame for their cruelties.
And that is why I use the person’s name and “that person” when dealing with people who ask for non-obvious pronouns. It both doesn’t force you to use language with which you don’t approve and you don’t have to deal with the problem when you inevitably misgender the person.
I just started calling everyone Bubba. or bubba, which is a gender independent pronoun. As in "y'all are being a bunch of bubbas" or "hey Bubba, get over yourself and pass the ketchup!"
Related topic: I went to see my VA doctor yesterday. The VA is now asking what veterans' sexual/gender preferences are--with the purported concern of "to better assess health risks" as the fig leaf for an otherwise naked assault on privacy.
I suggested that they look at me and try to figure it out. Unfortunately "go to hell" wasn't one of the response options.
To his credit the doc wasn't comfortable asking, any more than he would be in asking about one's religion.
But God knows, we're in a flaming nose dive as a civilization.
Personal pronouns should be seen as an oxymoron. If the person at issue is in a position to be offended, simply use their name or something similar, such as initials; otherwise, why would they know or care?
Now, to my larger point, insisting on personal pronouns is the height of rudeness. Just as it would be wrong for me to insist that you recite the Shahada every time we meet, it's wrong for me to impose my religious beliefs on you via pronouns. If you don't think I'm a woman or a zirconia's or whatever, you shouldn't have to profess your allegiance to my religious ideas by using my pronouns.
To put it another way, no one even attempts to argue that your sir-ness or whatever is a matter of objective reality; to the contrary, the whole theory is that you & you alone know what you are & thus that you must reveal your truth to me. Thus, I'm free to reject your truth; I shouldn't have to pretend that I believe Bruce Jenner is a woman if I don't believe that Bruce Jenner is a woman.
It's time for us to realize that I am not injured by your religion, nor am I injured by your professions of your faith; consequently, I have no right to demand that you adhere - or pretend to adhere - to my religious creed. If I think Bruce Jenner is a woman, I'm free to profess that faith - just as you are free to reject it & to profess your opposition to it.
If the transgender intend to kill themselves unless everyone professes their religion, they are simply religious terrorists, and they should be condemned as such.
If your religion teaches you that there are 73 genders, you have no more right to insist the world agree than you would to insist that everyone say Mary was a virgin.
We cannot have civilization if we insist upon religious uniformity. Eventually, those whom you seek to oppress will resist and, at that point, violence is inevitable. Religion never caused violence; the attempt to impose one's religion on others always does.
Terrorism: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." Oddly enough, the only way this doesn't fit with the "you must use my arbitrarily decided pronouns" movement is that it's not "unlawful." But it is intimidation in the pursuit of political aims, and it's definitely used against "civilians," or "peasants." And while it's not physically violent, there is a sort of mental violence inherent in it, in that they won't take "no" for an answer and they're constantly playing mind games, as in an abusive relationship.
I've always considered it more a form of linguistic vandalism.
While its existence may vandalize linguistics (as well as common sense), the take-no-prisoners tactics in which it is permeated and imposed is pure terrorism in my book.
The original wave of political correctness some 30+ years ago was no less condescending and largely absurd, however nonconformance brought about at most a finger wagging accompanied by a scornful expression. But no one walked around in fear of their livelihoods or careers for "triggering" its adherents.
Today you can be utterly destroyed instantaneously for even the tiniest and most accidental slight. Or for parents who dare to question their local school boards over the struggle sessions required of their children and risk terrorism charges as a result.
CRT/D.E.I./Woke/Anti-racism are all 100% terroristic strategies. Conform or die.
Do not expect me to conform .
Homeschool! There are so many choices out there now! 💖🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
Yes! We homeschooled all of our kids.
Great job! I’ve graduated four now and I’ve got two more to go… 😁🥰👍🏼🙏
Outstanding GBA!!!
Yay! You’re gettin’ there!
Indeed it is!
...a fair target for malign creativity of shape-rotators on revenge 🤸
He whose jokes go over the zombies' heads laughs best.
I wonder what Al-Qaeda's bathroom policy is like. I imagine it involves lots of screaming and swordplay.
You can go into whatever bathroom you like, but there's a guy with a scimitar waiting if you choose the wrong one.
I heard about him. He's their Gender Affirming Care specialist.
Something probably got lost in translation to Pashtun, but it's for the best really.
Affirmed once, with the scimitar.
Why the glaring omission of goats? Them's sure must have burly presence.
How did you get a moving avatar daiva? It’s SO COOL 😎
It's a common or garden variety animated gif: locate a dear-to-your-heart specimen from gazillions on interwebz, and upload in Edit Profile mode 🙂
Absolutely love it! 😁😁😁
Now to figure out how to stop them from censoring my charter email… 🔥🔥🔥 i’m just a little guppy in this big fish bowl… I guess they’re afraid of us little guppies making more and more little guppies… 💩
Why won't you treat your good self to Proton account? 😉 --> https://proton.me/
--
Why #2. How come your avatar isn't frolickin' already?
Love it.
To repeat what I was taught once, as a young man:
"There are those who dive for cover when they hear "Duck!" and there are those that start arguing about 'What right do you have to order me about?!'".
It is with great anticipation I await the great culling of the second sort, once enough of us of the first sort stops helping, aiding and enabling them.
For my entire life, these groups - collectively known as the woke today - have spewed hatred towards the normal working man or woman, the normal family, the people who never did them anything wrong. Because we never returned their hatred and their vitriol, instead thinking it a tantrum that they would grow out of. Instead, they gleefully raced ever onwards, becoming more and more a real existential threat to our nations, peoples and cultures, all in the name of "progress" or "rights" or "equity".
So no. I won't (and I know I'm not alone in feeling this, though most hold their teeth before their tongue) lift a finger to aid, shelter or even speak up for them.
And any woke-whatsit, know this: /you/ brought these feelings forth. Everyone else in the West has from the early 1970s onwards been content to adopt a live and let live-attitude. Not you.
In english you say reap what you sow. We too say that, but we have one more fitting I believe: "You pissed your bed, now lie in it".
and there are some who, when you yell "duck", look up and take aim. And others who respond "I'll have mine with potatoes". :-) The first kind help feed the second kind.
But seriously. You're right, the core of this is promotion o hate, which divides and weakens,
Hate does not lead to equity, equality, or progress. It suppresses all those things. Hate is the opposite of tolerance. If you must deny someone else to "realized" you've taken a wrong turn.
Respect begets respect and the same for tolerance. If you want others to tolerate you, start by tolerating them. All that is basic "treat others as you would have them treat you" stuff.
Put somewhat more concisely by one of my mentors: if you want respect, don't be an asshole.
Duck with potatos? Heresy!
Nah, you like your Donald with potatos, that's fine. Me, I much prefer it with roasted carrots and haricouverts, and stir-fried mushrooms (golden chanterelles) with creamed onions.
Duck is one of few dishes I'd order wine to drink, the somewhat discreet taste of the meat needs a gentle yet tart wine to bring out the taste of both.
I will concede to your superior proposal. What time is dinner ?
;-)
Must have misplaced my dinner invitation. Please re-send.
Absolutely correct Rikard! And your earlier comment as to why these people manufacture all these genders/identities: "Anything which garners you social privileges, power over how others speak, feel and think, and what gets you off from needing to work for a living" nailed it! As to "reaping what you sow," a dear friend of mine used to say "Don't shit where you eat!"
You know how they say "never piss off the people who serve you food?"
Maybe also not piss off the people who grow it/raise it, too. Or the guys who do actually know how to fix the pipes and change the light switch.
There've always been effete morons, ain't nothing new. But the destruction of self-reliancy-producing domestic industries based on hard physical labor--that's the death knell for any society. First time I saw a manhole cover, in NY, stamped "made in India" I knew our doom was well and truly upon us.
True. I have the deepest respect for farmers and ranchers, as well as all the folks who support their efforts, including the truck drivers who get food to market. I like to eat. Farmers need equipment, and fuel, seeds, supplies, all of which is delivered by truck, maintained by mechanics, designed by engineers, produced by production workers...and so on. I've never understood those who show disrespect to the people who's efforts are essential for feeding the rest of us.
at the next level, demonizing capability, hard work, self reliance and responsibility is indeed undermining the ability to move forward or even hold on to what we have. The culture of dependence is self defeating - obviously - when you see the dwindling supply of dependable people. If instead you think you can depend on government, which have the power to compel people to labor in those tasks that are essential to survival, think a little harder. Then review history. On face value you are endorsing forced labor (slavery), and historically, this ultimately fails to provide the desired result.
So go out and thank a farmer or truck driver or the mechanics that keep farms working and trucks rolling. Instead of supporting policies that are driving folks out of those professions, how about we support them (and continue to eat ;-).
Very well put! There has been, for decades, an ongoing campaign to transfer all actual work to a location, any location, where SCA's "effete morons" can't ever be offended by the sight of people with dirty hands sweating as they do meaningful, productive work.
I must have missed the memo that explained where these unfortunates expect to obtain food, clothing or shelter.
""There are those who dive for cover when they hear "Duck!" and there are those that start arguing about 'What right do you have to order me about?!'"."
... There is only one correct response when you hear someone yell, "Duck!"
"WHERE?"
In swedish, duck the verb is ducka (duh-kah!, approx.). Duck the fowl is anka (ahng-kah!, roughly).
Thoug I'd accept "A la orange?" too as a third category of people.
or "Mallard? Fulvous Whistling? Gadwall? Wigeon?"
No doubt wokeism is dangerous and destructive. And I agree that we didn't take them seriously and now are facing the consequences. In the West, we have all been subject to a decades long PsyOp for a larger purpose. These messages have been spewed out in schools, media, entertainment, etc., for decades...and they've been remarkably successful. Gender dysphoria has exploded in the past fifteen years. None of this was an organic, natural process. It was an Op, just like Covid-19. Yes, there are true believers and grifters. But who/what is the power behind the entire message?
If I were a psychopathic billionaire who was convinced there were too many little people vermin on the planet, what might I do? Attempt to normalize abortion on the demand for any reason at any time and call it a "right" and "freedom"? Attempt to normalize euthanasia and convince unhappy people that they're better off dead? Create a virus that isn't particularly deadly and scare the crap out of people so they take the deadly shots? Screw with the supply chains and create food insecurity and hunger?
I don't know how many from the younger generations who have been poisoned by the woke virus can be saved, but I don't think we should give up on them. They've been subjected to a 24/7/365 PsyOp for their entire lives. It may take a generation or two to fix the damage that we let happen while we laughed at their ridiculous notions that have now overtaken the West.
This wasn't a natural progression. Who/What is behind the PsyOp?
You have to think of it more like the opening credits of The Brady Bunch (if you're old enough to remember):
Here's the story of the Leftist Permanent Revolution, which after various disasters and divorces retreated to American academia, where they gradually honed 2 generations of commissars armed with dogma and jargon designed around empowering The Marginalized (basically any poss historical victims), with the goal of undoing European capitalist democracy and replacing it with "socialist liberation", which of course would be overseen by Leftist philosopher kings and their minions;
Here's the story of global capitalism, which is an omnivorous perpetual-motion machine, and in the last generation has decided that nation states and their citizens are an impediment to power and profits, and thus it would be for the best if they owned the entire planet and did away with borders, citizens, rights, democracy etc...
And one day, after a bad Orange Man scared them both to death, they jumped into each other's arms and decided to get married.
Or, more simply, global capitalism and global progressivism have become a Church/State ruling alliance, and one partner wants all our loot and one partner wants all our brains.
Actually, Clever, both parties want our loot, and one of those parties wants, rather than our brains, for us to simply stop using said brains. We appear to be well on the way to satisfying both!
Don’t even need to create a virus. Just hype up random test results and cold symptoms.
Assuming, of course, that we CAN "fix the damage"?
"There are those who dive for cover when they hear "Duck!" and there are those that start arguing about 'What right do you have to order me about?!'"
And then there are those who immediately scan the skies looking for a mallard.
Don’t forget the third group, who upon hearing someone yell “Duck!”, turn their attentions to dinner.
And the fourth group, wondering how it got out of the fridge.
This is the second such story I've read. First one was decades ago (duck was in the freezer) and I was never 100% convinced it wasn't apocryphal.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna16725051
In the unlikely case I'm ever asked to fill out a form asking for my pronouns, I'm going to state them as:
pro/nouns
purrrfect. I an 100% in favor of nouns!
I'm just wishing I had some reason to fill out a form with these questions on them: Race: I'll put Black (I'm not), Sex: If you can't tell by looking at me, I'll seek service somewhere else, Age: take a good guess - whatever you say will be closer than my chronological age. Pronouns: Ridiculous question. Shut up. ha ha, I'll probably be escorted out by men in white coats (yes, I used that terminology intentionally)
Ok kids help out the old guy.
I get that some people have a different gender on the inside than the outside. Human mind and soul are complicated things, so why not. I won't debate if it is a choice or an imperative, and do the best I can. It makes no difference. Be a good person, treat others with respect and tolerance, and we're good.
I get that some people of one gender are attracted to the opposite gender, others attracted to persons of the same gender. Again, makes no difference to me. Consenting adults and all that - if you don't make it my business I won't.
I don't now if a person chooses their gender or sexual preference or if it's hard wired or whatever. Whatever.
But here's what I don't get - non binary? There is a third, forth, fifth....nth gender? Really? What are the others? Maybe you're not sure some days, but really, what are the 2+n genders?
"...what are the 2+n genders?"
Anything which garners you social privileges, power over how others speak, feel and think, and what gets you off from needing to work for a living.
If one things that they have to compel others to respect them, well, here's something those people need to know: it doesn't work. Ever. What you get is not respect.
In the immortal words of Rocket J. Squirrel "ah Bullwinkle, that trick never works!"
Since they don't get respect no-how, and can rationalise contempt as [insert buzzword here], they happily settle for compliance.
The inability to feel shame before others is integral in this. To avoid feeling shame, they use the mythos of Rights.
After all, if you're denied something or unable to achieve something and that something is called a Right, then it's not on you to improve or change; hence no reason for you to feel shame, only anger and entitlement.
The whole point of PC, cancel culture and now pronouns is the imposition itself.
Yup.
"The object of power is power" as O'Brien puts it.
I'd add that the judgement on whether the power is justly applied or not, is in what methods and costs it utilises or creates.
It's no good giving the One Ring away if it will create a dark and terrible Queen instead of Sauron, so to speak.
Precisely. It's about control.
Exactly. It’s part of a humiliation ritual.
What gets me is that none of the woke discuss the WHY - what is *causing* this non-binary experience for so many now, when historically it was almost nonexistent? The main cause: TOXINS. There are 100,000 synthetic chemicals in our food, air, water, medications, etc. that were not in existence 50 -70 years ago. They are screwing up the human endocrine (hormone) system in many complicated ways, most of which medical system has yet to unravel. (And yes, too many *vaccines* are heavily implicated!) I have a master’s degree in holistic nutrition and have read many scientific books dealing with this heavily interdependent and complicated medical problem. In my lifetime, I have watched the medical *profession* be completely taken over by the pharmaceutical *industry* - they are damaging the human hormonal system!
"what is *causing* this non-binary experience for so many now"
The ability to get attention on TikTok.
Oh yeah, there’s that, too.
Social Contagion? - Conspiracy-theorist-me has assumed PsyOp explanations - the roll out announced/confirmed by the National Geographic's "Gender Revolution" issue - Jan 2017 - NG, long the voice of the deep state. (I see they now call it a "historic special issue")
But your approach certainly cannot be discounted - perhaps a peculiar twist on the old nature/nurture debate - here: poisons enabling PsyOp. Still, the question remains (for the poison approach) - why the sudden emergence in the late teens and not e.g. the early 'oughts
To Your question - probably no one knows yet why the late teens and not the early teens. It’s unbelievably complicated - how do you mathematically model the interaction of 100,000 synthetic chemicals with trillions of human cells?
But here’s an eye-opening experience. Check out from your local library any documentary on Woodstock, and really look at the bodies of these 400,000+ young people in attendance. These are not Hollywood extras, folks, just a cross-section of American youth. You’ll see that there’s hardly a single fat person in the crowd! None of this puffy, swollen fat that plagues people today...
“Whatever” is the best response. There is nothing consistent about the non binary gender designations. It is mostly younger people trying out new forms of self expression in order to create an identity. In my day, people got tattoos and piercings and dressed up based on how a certain genre of music was marketed.
I’ve found the easiest way to not get trapped in trying to remember self identified genders is to just use the person’s name and/or “that person” when talking about them. Trying to keep the gender pronouns straight in your head is extremely difficult and what makes it so annoying. Otherwise, whatever.
In my day having any part of our bodies pierced was clear indication something had gone badly wrong. But I get your point. Thanks. And really, who am I to judge someone else form of rebellion and self expression? I'm the guy who dropped out of school at 16 to tour with a rock band, then went to college, and earned multiple advanced degrees. Not my parents choice for sure ;-). But I'm still confused regarding "non binary". No value judgement just wondering beyond male and female, what are the choices? If we add "not sure" I guess that's three options. that's all I got...what am I missing?
As for pronouns, that's two different things. Firstly, If you choose he/she different than what may be obvious and someone gets it wrong, get over it. You want people to tolerate your identity, tolerate them too. Humans are imperfect. If being addressed by the wrong pronoun is the worst thing that has ever happened to you, you are one lucky human.
Are you a plural pronoun. No. Just no. If you choose a plural pronoun as an individual, you're just wrong. If you choose "they" to avoid gender identification, again, you are just wrong. That is not what the words mean. Ignorance and illiteracy are not cool. Ignorance and illiteracy are not liberating. Ignorance and illiteracy are is a tool of oppression. Do not promote ignorance and illiteracy in the name of self expression. Do I really need to explain why that doesn't work?
The "non-binary" thing confuses me too. For a transsexual who is trying to live as a member of their target sex/gender, getting called by the pronoun appropriate to that gender is certainly important, and I would aim to do so out of respect for them so long as they behave themselves appropriately to that gender. For a person in that state, getting "outed" with the birth-sex pronoun might be social death.
But for someone who isn't trying to transition, what does it matter? If I'm transgendered, but not transitioning, I don't care what pronoun you call me by, so long as it's either 'he' or 'she' or whatever is appropriate in the language you're speaking. Similarly, if you're such a mix of masculine and feminine that you can't make up your own mind which you are, then why not just leave it to the folks having the conversation to decide which one is most fitting?
I've noticed a recent shift toward replacing the 'T' words with "non-binary," as if both to extend and erase the transgender issue. It extends it by bringing in a miscellaneous set of people who may be a little whacked in their kinks, but have no real craving to be of the opposite sex. It erases it by defining it as "non-binary," i.e., having no concern with the male-female binary gender polarity. For transgendered people, whose whole issue is the desperate longing to be on the other side of that polarity, this is preposterous.
LGBT people, including T people, won most of their real issues during Obama's second term, and I generally applaud that. Since then though, the transgender issue in particular seems to have been taken over by wokist political predators who are redefining it in ways that do no good for the transgendered or for anyone else, but weaponize it in order to anger normal people and bully them. Rather than constructively support a small number of people with a serious brain-body mismatch to peacefully transition, they instead want to use that as an excuse to blow up the polar gender system, upon which our community rests, altogether. The displayed pronouns are a chip on the shoulder that give them license to attack and destroy anyone who uses other than the asserted pronoun, however ungrammatical or nonsensical it may be. The woke bullies can pretend as usual to be defenders of the wronged, and the transgender people they exploit will ultimately take the blame for their cruelties.
And that is why I use the person’s name and “that person” when dealing with people who ask for non-obvious pronouns. It both doesn’t force you to use language with which you don’t approve and you don’t have to deal with the problem when you inevitably misgender the person.
I just started calling everyone Bubba. or bubba, which is a gender independent pronoun. As in "y'all are being a bunch of bubbas" or "hey Bubba, get over yourself and pass the ketchup!"
:-)
Personality disorders, masquerading as “genders” solely to obscure the reality of the illness (but failing quite badly.)
Nah, calling them terrorists is appropriate. Have you seen their reactions when somebody "misgenders" them?
It's getting difficult to keep up with pronouns. Is there an app available that gives the new pronouns of the day???
Of course not. The whole point is to keep you off balance when the language changes again.
Your discomfort with "keeping up" is the whole point of this exercise.
I was trying to be funny.
You succeeded.
I was also trying to be funny. I was apparently less so.
Perhaps we both need to add smiley punctuation to our comments :)
:)
Bingo! The imposition itself.
A variation on The Process is The Punishment.
No but ChatGPT can rattle off hundreds for you if you can’t find the right one.
the UK, my home where stupidity reigns
Try moving to California. It'd be a close call on stupidity.
I can confirm this. There is a reality distortion field around the entire state.
they wouldnt let me in the country let alone crazyfornia
you're better for it. I'm not a real big fan of my country right now.
florida looks ok!
I was only referring to the USA.
At this point, Florida is a country unto itself!
the federal gov still wont let me in there
waiting for florida to secede from the union....
Related topic: I went to see my VA doctor yesterday. The VA is now asking what veterans' sexual/gender preferences are--with the purported concern of "to better assess health risks" as the fig leaf for an otherwise naked assault on privacy.
I suggested that they look at me and try to figure it out. Unfortunately "go to hell" wasn't one of the response options.
To his credit the doc wasn't comfortable asking, any more than he would be in asking about one's religion.
But God knows, we're in a flaming nose dive as a civilization.
Personal pronouns should be seen as an oxymoron. If the person at issue is in a position to be offended, simply use their name or something similar, such as initials; otherwise, why would they know or care?
Now, to my larger point, insisting on personal pronouns is the height of rudeness. Just as it would be wrong for me to insist that you recite the Shahada every time we meet, it's wrong for me to impose my religious beliefs on you via pronouns. If you don't think I'm a woman or a zirconia's or whatever, you shouldn't have to profess your allegiance to my religious ideas by using my pronouns.
To put it another way, no one even attempts to argue that your sir-ness or whatever is a matter of objective reality; to the contrary, the whole theory is that you & you alone know what you are & thus that you must reveal your truth to me. Thus, I'm free to reject your truth; I shouldn't have to pretend that I believe Bruce Jenner is a woman if I don't believe that Bruce Jenner is a woman.
It's time for us to realize that I am not injured by your religion, nor am I injured by your professions of your faith; consequently, I have no right to demand that you adhere - or pretend to adhere - to my religious creed. If I think Bruce Jenner is a woman, I'm free to profess that faith - just as you are free to reject it & to profess your opposition to it.
If the transgender intend to kill themselves unless everyone professes their religion, they are simply religious terrorists, and they should be condemned as such.
If your religion teaches you that there are 73 genders, you have no more right to insist the world agree than you would to insist that everyone say Mary was a virgin.
We cannot have civilization if we insist upon religious uniformity. Eventually, those whom you seek to oppress will resist and, at that point, violence is inevitable. Religion never caused violence; the attempt to impose one's religion on others always does.
"Religion never caused violence..."
Go read the parts of all three Abrahamic religions where their god orders violence done.
You cannot separate the theory from the practice.
"Religion never caused violence"
*squints, rereads* Torquemada would like to have a word.
Why? Wasn't Torquemada attempting to IMPOSE his religion? You need to read the rest of the quote to which you have replied.
Fair enough
Jihadist pronouns: He, she, dead.
Which reminds me....all the transgender people should go live in Iran for awhile and see how it goes. It won't be pretty.
Is that like Pig Latin or something?
eLay eeGaye eBay eTay euQay
Terrorism: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims." Oddly enough, the only way this doesn't fit with the "you must use my arbitrarily decided pronouns" movement is that it's not "unlawful." But it is intimidation in the pursuit of political aims, and it's definitely used against "civilians," or "peasants." And while it's not physically violent, there is a sort of mental violence inherent in it, in that they won't take "no" for an answer and they're constantly playing mind games, as in an abusive relationship.
Take it away, Theoden, King of Rohan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RywJSc3I6dU
I am tired of people wasting our time and mental sanity on this nonsense. Stop it now!
How about Moron and Morona?