The English language is under threat, and with it our reality. This linguistic devastation began with men who imagine themselves to be women, and want everyone else to think of them that way too.
Identity politics provided the vocabulary of oppression and victimhood trans advocates use to dupe English speakers into believing gendered feelings are more important than biological facts.
It’s not enough for trans advocates to demand the new language be used. Scholars, intellectuals, celebs, writers, and basic, everyday people are taken down, canceled, shunned, for not getting on board with the passive group think.
The word ‘mother’ is up for debate. It is now being reinterpreted as offensive to women who would rather be thought of as male, even if they have birthed a child via vagina.
Courts of law are being drawn into this absurd, mental gymnastics required to uphold the new language interpretations.
A court will rule on whether a transgender man who has given birth to a child should be described as father, rather than mother, on the birth certificate.
Do you think the court should allow him to be listed as the father of the child he gave birth to?
📞03030 80 55 55
— BBC Talkback (@BBCTalkback) July 18, 2019
This summer, Refinery29 teamed up with GLAAD to give us a new, 54-word, dictionary of terminology. If we use these new definitions for pre-existing words, we will gaslight ourselves into believing fiction over reality.
The glossary redefines ‘sex’ as something that is not innate, but assigned, and ought not be.
Saying the term ‘gender identity’ describes ‘a person’s internal, deeply held sense of their gender’ could lead us to believe that gender is akin to a soul. Since we’re all atheists now and don’t believe in souls, gender will have to do.
‘Gender expression’, not to be confused with gender identity, is what a person’s gender identity looks like on the outside. These are the stereotypical manifestations of traditional gender appearance, ‘cues’ that ‘society identifies… as masculine and feminine.’
If your gender identity doesn’t match your sex you can give society clues as to how you would like to be perceived by donning garb and or accessories that are stereotypically associated with men or women, respectively. GLAAD doesn’t seem to care that this reinforces gender stereotypes.
‘Cisgender’ is the term for anyone who is not trans. However, it only exists in relation to trans. It creates the binary that the trans movement would say they are trying to deconstruct. Instead of a male/female binary, we now have a cis/trans binary. This term claims a Latin root, giving it the seeming smack of authority.
Then we hit the land of the even more absurd. The new terminology requires us to understand that there are stereotypical gender expressions that are valid, but that not everyone adheres to them, and non-adherence is some special designation. It’s like the entire trans movement forgot that women used to not be allowed to wear pants.
We’re meant to believe that before the emergence of the concept of gender non-conforming, women went around exuding femininity all the time, and males masculinity. This is simply not true. The work of quantifying and categorizing men and women into tidy little boxes is being done by the trans movement just as they claim to be dismantling it.
If gender non-conforming is used to ‘describe some people whose gender expression is different from conventional expectations of masculinity and femininity,’ non-binary is ‘used by some people who experience their gender identity and/or gender expression as falling outside the categories of man and woman.’ At least in this regard, this glossary sticks to English standards of redundancy.
Apparently, ‘genderqueer’ is different. The term encompasses those ‘who experience their gender identity and/or gender expression as falling outside the categories of “man” and “woman”.’ I think it’s probably for someone who feels gendery but wants to be a little aggro about it. ‘Agender’ people are opposed to gendered expectations, but somehow the word does not describe feminists circa 1975. ‘Androgynes’ want to be David Bowie.
‘Bigender’ folx dig being perceived either way, but you’d better be careful of their pronouns. Maybe they can provide a schedule of when and where and under what moon sign they are to be referred to as what. If you are ‘gender-fluid’, that means you spend so much time thinking about your innate gender that you are a high priest of trans religiosity.
Gender variant, neutrosis, pangender, third gender, aliagender, genderfuck, intergender, polygender, trigender, are all labels with which one may label one’s self if they don’t want to be labeled as cis. It’s basically a ‘get out of the normie box’ free card, and all you have to do is claim it. It helps to be vocal about it, and make sure you’re always telling people about it, that way everyone knows how different and special you are.
There have been people throughout history who have chosen to present themselves as the opposite sex. Many have faced hardships, but the fix isn’t to go so crazy that no one has any idea what you’re talking about.
Changing language, effectively destroying our ability to speak about men and women, biological sex, motherhood, and gender equality, does not help trans advocacy. Instead, it disseminates the idea of drastic differences between the sexes and the genders. It holds up gender as some innate object of identity that has innate characteristics. It puts dresses on women and pants on men and claims that if the costumes are reversed, so too are the sexes reversed.
This is not progressive language, but a dissemination of ideology. Gender is not the Holy Grail of who we are, it is merely a component, something to check off on a box to make sure we get the right medical care.
This bastardization of English helps no one, not trans individuals, their advocates, women, or anyone who appreciates accuracy in communication.