Gender Inclusiveness

THE TRANSHUMANIST SCRAPBOOK: GENDER INCLUSIVENESS: BANNING ...

Most readers here know that I view most of modern culture as being driven by a mad ultra-left, ultra-radical progressivist agenda that is waging war on any manifestation of our humanity, be it our masculinity, femininity, the old, the young, the unborn, the disabled, a child's innocence or an elderly person's experience and wisdom, and that this war against the human extends to language itself. The "gender inclusive" fad here is, to my mind anyway, one of the most egregious examples, as the three letters "Man" has to be banned, as if somehow, magically, they imply the exclusion of women. We've all seen how "mankind" disappeared, and 'humankind" entered the vocabularly. Even the garish expression "s/he" is no longer gender neutral enough for some people, and perish the thought that one use "he" or "she" as an old rhetorical pars pro toto pronoun! Sexuality has been reduced to "gender"; we no longer see "sex, male or female" on forms, we see "gender", doubtless with "None of the above" being one of the checkable boxes soon to appear. Now some thought police want to banish "husband" and "wife":

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/05/prof-bans-students-from-saying-husband-or-wife-because-its-not-inclusive/

What is at stake here, I submit, is not only an effort to make free speech and academic freedom a thing of the past - and these students should rigorously insist on their right to use what words and pronouns they want to use, or insist on "balancing courses" that require older forms of diction in the name of "fairness" - the real goal is to cut us off from the traditions of our culture, and hence, from our culture itself. The real goal is the free editting of texts by self-appointed thought police and culture police. It's about the uglification of culture, and hence, about more dehumanization.

Imagine the "updating" process applied to, say, Cardinal Wolsey's soliloquy from Shakespeare's Henry VIII(one of my favorites, incidentally). The original is eloquence and elagance itself:

Farewell, a long farewell to all my greatness! This is the state of man: Today he puts forth the tender leaves of hope; tomorrow blossoms, and bears his blushing honours thick upon him; The third day comes a frost, a killing frost, And - when he thinks, good easy man, full surely His greatness is a-ripening, - nips his root, And then he falls as I do. I have ventured like little wanton boys that swim on bladders This many summers in a sea of glory...(Henry VIII, Act III, Scene II)

And so on.

If we're going to be strictly "fair", we must edit and update all such texts, not just excise "husband and wife" from our speech and writing. I propose an updated, gender neutral Shakespeare, in which the good Cardinal Wolsey's soliloquy(to be played by an acting person who represents as much inclusivity as possible),might read like something along the following lines:

Good riddance to all my perks and bonuses. This is what humankind is: today s/he (or it) plants a garden with young plants meant to symbolize hope, and they flower and bloom sometime in the future under normal conditions, and these cause her/him to become too comfortable in his/her sense of privilege and class. Eventually, the weather becomes bitter cold and kills all those plants, and thus the weather symbolizes changing circumstances and the dead plants symbolize the end of her/his privilieged status, but s/he continued on as before, oblivious to climate change, in a manner similar to young children swimming in a pool that represents their privilieged status, on various kinds of flotation devices, thinking that everything is A-OK, but they return home to their garden and find all their plants are dead. And then they have a life-crisis, like I'm having now...(The 21st Century Shakespeare, Henry/Henryetta VIII, Act III, Scene II)

Of course, it will be some time before we knock some gender-neutral sense into that hideously patriarchal poetry of the bard from Stratford on Avon, or whoever s/he was, but if we get right on it, I'm sure that before the century closes we can all relax with uplifted, non-patriarchal, gender neutral" consciousnesses and with productions of Henry/Henryetta VIII. I nominate the professor from the University of Florida for the job. I'm sure s/he'll do fine, and in the meantime, won't infect any more students with his/her claptrap.

See you on the flip side...

19 thoughts on “ THE TRANSHUMANIST SCRAPBOOK: GENDER INCLUSIVENESS: BANNING ...”

  1. The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.

    Philip K. Dick

  2. thanks doc!!
    hilarious.seeing how there is so much substance/continuity/ definition with the present culture.we now know the clean end of the turd.

  3. I see this ‘movement’ as coming from two source – one uplifting and one powermad.

    On the uplifting side, I grew up in the era where W0p, K1ke, Poll0k, and many other ‘terms’ were used simply to project one’s own inner pain out onto others. This usually produced inner relief at the expense of the Other. By pointing out that the Other was being hurt by this negative use of Chi, a positive service was actually being done. (If taken to its proper conclusion, this meant that each person had to deal-with his/her/it [grin] own pain. A tougher matter, and requires ongoing ‘work’. However, it produces ‘civil’-ization from the inside.)

    On the powermad side, this encompasses everything from little egos trying to get publicity to homogenization of the human condition as a precursor to the dreaded NWO. Many, many ‘subplots’ with varying degrees of hilarity and danger. (On the good side, this inanity means that we are in the middle of a species ‘calm’, not in the middle of a real WWIII, big asteroid hit, or such. Foo-foo tends to go-away under survival conditions…)

    I will say that much of the legitimate gender ‘revolution’ has to do with the female side finally saying ‘I am here, too.’ There have been massive stretches of his/her-story [grin] where females have been valued by males as somewhere below horses and cattle. And treated as such. This needed to change, and it began to do so around the 60s.

    Unfortunately, just like a boiling kettle when you take the lid off, there has been much drama and overreach in the new ‘freedom’. Testing of limits, just to be doing it. I am hoping that the legitimate gender ‘revolution’ will settle-down over time, and that males and females will bond rather than clash – in whatever EVEN form that takes. (And ‘fad’ genres will diminish, because they are no longer relevant.)

    As bad as the ‘weirdness’ now is, I would not willingly go back into the ‘zeitgeist’ of the 50s…

    1. Well, I triggered the ‘Your comment is awaiting moderation’ robot. I’ll let you know when it reappears or is ‘disappeared’. goshawks – February 17, 2016 at 7:23 pm.

  4. Social engineering is way too easy in our movie star worshipping society. B. Jenner receiving the Arthur Ashe courage award and Obama praising him/her for courage. Media is so insidious.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Agreed Sandygirl.
      Media today, is an insidious parasite, that is sucking the life & vitality out of vibrant cultures worldwide.
      I could probably explain the difference between a prostitute and a stylist; but I’m not sure our site modulator would approve.

  5. It seems an inhuman type of understanding is manifesting itself more and more out of these ideologies.
    Conditioning people to be without discernment of what is natural from not. Throwing all sorts of confusion that result in people not having a clear sense of themselves. It’s disturbing to say the least.

  6. These people will grow out of their nutty antihumanist /uber PCness eventually. After all, they are just confused little college students/professors, and one day will have to go out into the real world where men and women exist and men like me will insist on my right to my pronouns.

  7. Little strutting Hitlers. Cultural Marxism at its finest.

    We’re already deep in the Dark Ages 2.0 and Rome on the Potomac hasn’t even fallen yet.

  8. Robert Barricklow

    When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations[engineered?], the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.
    Dresden James

  9. What I see in these tongue twisting sexual politics is a hypocrite pink patriarchy delivered by a phony political left, both trying to pass for egalitarian they will never be. Just two slight of hands in the long historical chain of human devolution.

  10. The problem is in English in Anglo-Saxon-Jute the word for male was wer which was drop surviving only in the word werewolf. The word for female was wif man meant both sexes. Husband is a profession taking care of the livestock. Due to the conquest of 1066 the English language continues to slid into incoherence Eric Blair under the penname George Orwell in his final novel 1984 invented newspeak which took this to it’s logical end. But this is not only a problem of the left but the right has misuse and twisted words to suit their nefarious ends

Comments are closed.