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").
Back to “sodomites” it is.
Yep, why are "they" so angry and unhappy?
Just weeks ago they were complaining they wanted ‘homosexual’ banned! hahaha. What a gang of morons.
Also, Tatchell is a pedophile. Said that not all adult child sexual relationships were harmful.
Also, excellent article Enza. I always enjoy your insights. Good luck getting MEPs elected in the Euro-elections.
I have always refused to use the word “gay” in reference to homosexuality. I have told people that the correct word is homosexual, and if you don’t like that then sodomite would also be appropriate.
Read later
Exactly!
Thank you, Viennacon.
I don’t see why the term “homo” should be offensive when I am by no means offended when someone calls me a “hetero”. Unless of course the homos see something wrong with themselves.
Queer works for me. As in homosexuals egage in queer, odd and not-normal behaviour.
sodomite works for me, and i’ll stick with that.
Maybe gay is an acronym.
G. A. Y.
G=Gooey
A=Anal
Y=Yahoo
Or sum more vile interpretation. Turn the tables back.
I think that’s the real reason Phil Robertson got in so much trouble. He hinted at what they DO.
Yup.
Or homo, if I’m in a hurry.
“ANUS”
LOL
You go, Phil.
I have ceased using gay and ALWAYS use homo to refer to the homosexuals.
Well in ellen’s case I use “ugly dike”. But you get my drift.
I listened to an old version of “My Old Kentucky Home” on Youtube. The part of the song that has been changed was “..and the darkies are gay.” That is what I call a politically incorrect two for one.
To show how illogical these people are, while they consider someone using the term “homo” to describe homosexuals a slur, they describe people who don’t like them as..ta da...HOMOphobic.
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.