The most important parts of communication, written or
verbal is the noun and the verb. These two parts point to the subject and what
the subject is doing. Certainly other parts such as adjectives and adverbs play
an important part but are really secondary in the scope of communication.
Lately though, there appears to be a new star on the
language horizon. This new star isn’t new by any means. It actually can replace
the subject which is usually [but not necessarily always] the noun.
What part of the language is this rising star you
ask? The “pronoun.”
In the 70s and 80s, I was taught in high school
science class, as well as college biology class that gender and sex is determined
only by a person’s chromosomes; this is standard science, not even cutting
edge. Scientists today still preach this, human biology hasn’t changed since my
university days.
I say scientists still preach this, but many high
school and biology professors in colleges and universities are being harassed for
teaching these “outdated” facts.
Like this? Then please subscribe . . . it's FREE! There's no
obligation, here's the link
Biology is now considered “sexist” and “misogynist” and
the University of Wisconsin-Madison is out to "uncover and reverse the
gender bias in biology". American Enterprise Institute's noted feminist Christina Hoff
Sommers is an opponent of radical, 3rd-wave feminists and professors such as Gender Study professors Janet Hyde, director of the Wisconsin-Madison women's studies department. Janet Hyde is a proponent of the deconstruction
of biology.
Christina Hoff Sommers have noted that feminists and SJW's skewed vision of history with
"herstory", history through feminist eyes; have already infiltrated college and university campuses across North America, the UK, and the EU; the Simpson’s
"galgebra" and "femistry" are starting to look legitimate now.
The trannies and SJW's are arguing that sex and gender are more
than chromosomes, it’s part of a spectrum of gender identities which means
there can be hundreds if not thousands of representations of gender on the
spectrum.
The health and science website Medical Daily, which immerses
itself and its readers in post-modern quackery claims that “doctors can no
longer definitively look at the penis or vagina of a new baby and congratulate
the birthing mother with a cheerful ‘it’s a boy’ or ‘it’s a girl.’”
Biology sex expert Arthur Arnold at the University of
California, Los Angeles, told the journal Nature, “sex can be defined a number
of ways.” Yes, California’s premiere University which by the way, the free
speech denying UC Berkeley is part of is a leader in this type of rhetoric.
Gender and sex is based on chromosomes, not feelings.
Just because a person [male] feels like a woman doesn’t mean he is a female and
the same applies for females. Sex and gender is based on men having XY
chromosome pairs and women having XX chromosome pairs.
I’m a proponent of traditional gender-roles and a
self-styled “Biological Realist” and the only exception I will accept is when an individual has Turner
syndrome in which a female is partly or completely missing an X
chromosome and Klinefelter syndrome in which males have two or more X
chromosomes.
One argument that trannies have is not using a
persons requested pronoun is being disrespectful. No, this is not disrespectful.
Pronoun usage is not a form of respect, it’s a form of generalization. Pronouns
are a classification used for people you don’t know until you get to know them.
Using the pronoun “he” or “she” is just a form of pragmatic categorization
separating half the world’s population of men from the other half whom are
women. The only respect a stranger gets until the
relationship moves forward is being called “sir” or “ma’am.” Respect is earned,
not entitled.
Identity isn’t purely subjective, it’s only a small
part of who you are [or think you are.] The impersonally negotiated element of how you present yourself and the agreement by others of who you are
is a bigger part than your subjectively, delusional, self-constructed identity;
this is the objective portion of your identity in which you have little or no
control over what others think of you.
One way to fix this dilemma is to use gender-neutral
pronouns but that’s not much of a fix. The alternatives to "he" and
"she" are myriad and right now there are over 70 gender-neutral
pronouns and the list is sure to grow. And who knows what gender a person who claims to be "gender fluid" is as their gender changes often, if not everyday.
A linguist at the University of Illinois, Dennis
Baron, has catalogued dozens of proposed gender-neutral pronouns, many -
including "ip," "nis," and "hiser" - dating back
to the 19th Century. Some terms come from foreign languages - such as the
German-inspired "sie.” Dennis Baron goes as far as to claim that gender-neutral
pronouns are an "epic fail" and believes pronouns such as
"ze" may not survive.
Like this? Then please subscribe . . . it's FREE! There's no
obligation, here's the link
Never in history has there been legislation used in
order to transform the way people spoke. Canada’s C16 legislates language. Some
people argues that there is legislation which criminalizes racist language: Pronouns
vs. racist remarks? But legislation which criminalizes racist language tells a
person what they can’t say, not what they have to say. I’m pretty certain most people will agree that
using racist language such as the “N-word” has far more effect on a person than
calling someone by the preferred pronoun.
The only legislation I agree with in Canada is Section
133 of the Constitution Act of 1867 which states when and where the English and
French languages may be used.
Also, I agree on sections 16–23 of the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms (which became law in 1982) in which Sections 16–19
guarantee the equal status of both languages in Parliament and Section 20
guarantees the right of the Canadian public to communicate in English and
French with any government office.
Outside of Section 133 of the Constitution Act, there
should be no legislation of language.
Interestingly enough, it was the Treaty of Paris which
was signed in 1763 after the French and Indian War/Seven Years' War between
Great Britain and France, as well as their respective allies ended. France gave
up all its territories in mainland North America, except
for St. Pierre and Miquelon, two tiny islands off the coast of Newfoundland.
So, the land was now British, but, the French vastly
outnumber the Brits by 10:1. So, the British governors allowed the French to
keep their language, religion, and laws. It wasn't because a few French SJW's in berets went running across Canada playing the victim card.
To this day Quebec follows the
Napoleonic Code, while the rest of Canada follows British Case Law.
So, what’s your pronoun preference?
# # # # #
Like this? Then please subscribe . . . it's FREE! There's no
obligation, here's the link
Supporting this page gets you updates on new articles and it
allows you to register for future give aways for such items as iPads, Google
Gear, Kindles, gift cards, and Fitbits. Also, I believe a different and fresh perspective matters and that's something you wont get from the MSM.
You can check out more of my posts at iPatriot Eagle Rising, or my Facebook page
If you enjoyed this post, I’d be very grateful if you’d help
it spread by emailing it to a friend, or sharing it on Twitter or Facebook.
Thank you!