Posted on 04/16/2014 2:51:46 PM PDT by Enza Ferreri
I've written about the hijacking of language by the Left and some of its manifestations.
There are many other aspects of it, like the wounds inflicted on grammar by the use of "they", "them", "theirs" in reference to a singular subject. For example: "Everyone knows what they are doing" or "The user must log in with their password". This is done only because it's politically incorrect to use "he", "him", "his", to cover both men and women, as it allegedly gives men a status of superiority (the same as in saying "man" to mean "the human species").
Politically correct writers - like the Australian-born philosopher Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University - instead use "she" to refer to both men and women, at least remaining grammatically correct. If we want children to be properly educated, PC should not override grammar. Writing logically helps thinking logically.
The practice of employing "they" referring to a singular has spread so much that it is now in use even when it's got nothing to do with PC, like in cases where the sex of the subject is known, so either "he" or "she" would be fine. I suppose people say "they" just to be on the safe side as they don't know the rationale behind its use, or they do it even in a totally automatic, thoughtless manner.
There is a particularly interesting case of PC language: the word "gay". The homosexual movement has hijacked what was once a common English adjective meaning something completely different - in fact in many ways opposite - from the sense that has become predominant today thanks to that movement's highly successful efforts, and now we cannot use this word in the original sense any more. That is tantamount to a small group's theft of the language that belongs to everybody.
In the video that you can see by clicking on the "Enza Ferreri Blog" link above, George Galloway interviews Peter Tatchell, the UK's number one homosexual activist, about what terms to describe homosexuals would be accepted by the thought police of his movement. In it Tatchell, among other things, explains the origin of the word "gay" in the modern sense of a man sexually attracted by other men.
According to Tatchell, homosexual men's intention in adopting this term for themselves was to distract people's attention from the sexual nature of their condition. I can understand why they wanted to do so: they knew that being associated with anal sex, which is repugnant to most normal people and is medically unhealthy, as medical authorities keep saying - although this is not much reported in the media -, would not be good for their PR and image.
It is a case of dissimulation, if not outright deception. And it is a rare gem that someone involved in introducing one of the most glaring examples of this kind of politically-motivated changes in our language talks about it frankly and openly.
It is not just one of us saying that the Left intentionally changed the meaning of words for political reasons, but Peter Tatchell admitting it in a video interview with George Galloway. We can document a claim with evidence directly from the horse's mouth.
We should not accept this dissembling any more than we accept taqiyya from Muslims. I never use the word "gay" except in inverted commas (unless I want to describe someone who is merry). To do so would be to give in, to help homosexualists in their disguising attempt.
"Homosexual" is an honest word. It is not offensive - in fact, homosexuals who believe this are implicitly admitting to thinking that there's something wrong with their condition. At the same time, it tells things as they are: it describes people who are sexually attracted to the same sex (from the Greek "homos", meaning "same").
So Turd Burglar is not proper?
Oh well, back to Flaming Faggot I guess.
Shame on you!! Be Polite. Ask them “Which term do you find most offensive so that I may use it to excess?”
LOL!
Yeah, cuz lord knows I’m all about etiquette.
;D
It is essential to always be polite when offending ;)
Women just get “lezzy” because that what we used in the 70s.
I’m too lazy to keep up with the newer, cooler misnomers.
:)
In spite of Ellen’s perversities, I was using the Halo dog food she pimps until I found out that since she snatched up the company, the quality has dropped dramatically.
I thought my dogs had just become ‘sensitive’ to it but people at PetCo told me they got lots of complaints and returns of the Halo stuff they still carry, having already dropped many of the items.
She couldn’t even get dog food right.
You are absolutely correct. Otherwise the debate is always about ‘who you are’….which is a totally unprovable and nebulous concept, as opposed to ‘what you do’ which is a very concrete and provable concept. For this reason, I will never use the word homosexual… by using the word in common speech in a way that steps into line with what would be regarded as the ‘accepted’ use of the word, you are essentially agreeing with all those who propagate the idea that homosexuality is something in your mind that you can’t change, you were born that way, it’s natural and so on. There is no such thing as ‘homosexual’ using that meaning of the word… there are only those who engage in perverted sexual relations with members of the same sex i.e. sodomites.
Peter Tatchell also wants to lower the age of consent and decriminalize adult/child sex....the guy is a despicable pervert.
http://www.christian.org.uk/news/tatchell-reiterates-call-for-lower-age-of-consent/
I’m sticking with “homosexual.” I want people who engage me on the subject to understand that sex is involved.
I think that the plotters that hijacked “gay” came out of the show-biz and/or advertising rackets. It was a commonly used word in ads up into the late 50s-—early 60s.
Am also fairly sure that “ homosexual” was invented by homosexuals in Europe over a century ago to create a “scientific” term to justify themselves.
Well said, my charientist friend.
Oh, blush.
;]
When ABC ‘s good morning america proudly hails a basketball players coming out gay as heroic, courages and an inspiration to us all and the vision of the real homosexual act that hides behind the nice word gay, we are being bombarded by a sick agenda and sick people.
How about pillow-biting assrape-aspirants?
Somewhere there is a thread with many replies from you with many variants, adjectives and alternative descriptions of the homosexualist.
That thread may actually be several years old, but I’ll never forget it.
It’s classic Lamataz at its best.
Thursday, March 22, 2012. A day that will live forerever in FR infamy.
This thread. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2862581/posts
This was the one I was thinking of last night and so I went to find it. Not only was it a great poke at the poo-poking David Brock; it also began the Lamataz ping list.
Thanks Mr. Mataz for all you do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.