| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Thoughts in the New Year
I don’t know about you, but I’m hoping for a lot of change in the “popular culture” over the next few years. Hoping, but not convinced that it will happen–the phonies and hypocrites among us are too fond of their special snowflake identities.
So a few thoughts about recent items in the news, related to popular culture:
First up, a Dear Abby column. A letter to the advice columnist was headlined, “Man Feels Abandoned as Girl Transitions to New Relationship.”
Despite the headline the “girl” (Eve) in the article is actually a male–a person described by the letter writer as a “transgender girl” and the transition is to a new external “gender,” not a new relationship. The person in question desires to make himself outwardly resemble a female. The letter writer describes himself as a “straight man.” Oddly enough, the straight man refers to his lover as a “girl” but not to himself as a “boy.” Hmm. Sounds rather sexist. Nevertheless, Abby didn’t quibble about semantics.
The writer’s dilemma is that his “transgender girl”dumped him for another “trans girl.” (His description.) His former lover, however, wants to remain friends, even though it causes jealous behavior by the other “trans girl” and emotional distress for the “straight male” who can’t get over his loss. Abby’s advice, which you can read in full at the link:
It might help if you consider that there are more than physical changes when making the kind of transition Eve was undergoing, and she may have felt that her trans friend was better able to relate to what she was experiencing than you were. …
What you are feeling is normal. However, it might help you to move forward if you keep in mind that all women are not the same …
Can we please just get over this biological science denial? The man’s lover was not a woman and so spewing forth platitudes about how “all women are not the same” is simply nonsensical. It’s equally nonsensical for a man who initiates a romance with a male person who has not yet “transitioned” into an illusory synthetic female to call himself “straight.”
Now we come to the sad plight of some of the Radio City Rockettes, who are outraged that tradition, courtesy, and contractual obligations require them to dance at President-to-be Donald J. Trump’s Inauguration, whether they like it or not. Suddenly, these special snowflakes, these progressive babies, discover the value of taking a stand for what they believe is their right to their own consciences. It’s amazing.
Christian bakeries must be forced by governments to bake wedding cakes for gay couples, but the Rockettes should be able to refuse to kick their legs at Trump’s Inauguration, without repercussions, simply because they believe the fake news that Trump is a bigot (or sexist, or whatever).
Used to be when people took a stand on conscience, they quietly and willingly accepted the consequences. No more! Instead, these intolerant fools who can’t bring themselves to dance on one of the biggest stages in the history of the world expect to be protected from repercussions and feted as heroes.
Predictably, liberal groups stand ready to help any refusing Rockette who faces repercussions from her employer (as she well should. Imagine if white basketball players, for example, had refused to play any time Obama was in attendance.)
One wonders how many women who auditioned for the Rockettes but didn’t make the cut would love to take their places? This article has a good summary of the hypocrisy of these special snowflakes. Welcome to the real world, young ladies!
Will all who opposed Obama’s administration, who, for example, viewed him as a constitutionally unqualified person or an anti-white bigot, get refunds on taxes that went to support his outrageous policies or his weekly celebrity command performances? Fat chance.
You’re probably wondering what this post has to do with that image up at the top: What’s up with that button that reads, “God?”
Well, I had a brainstorm in response to an excellent (as usual) article over at The Fellowship of the Minds.
Consider: At the University of Kansas libraries, staff, students, visitors (one assumes everybody and anybody) are being offered buttons to wear so that the persons they meet will know, and respond appropriately, to their preferred choice of personal pronouns. “Misgendering,” we’re told, can be hurtful, so everyone is encouraged to take care to refer properly to the person by using the correct pronouns.
What’s the next step? With progressives, it’s always a hop, skip, and a jump until someone gets called up before a tribunal for standing on their own constitutional rights and refusing to be told by some unelected “authority” what to say, how to say it, and to whom to say it or to whom not to say it.
Considering all of the above, I decided that what’s good for the progressive goose should be equally good for the conservative gander.
The button I designed, shown at the top of the post, is for non-Muslims to wear when they want to be protected from hearing anyone with whom they’re conversing use the name Allah instead of the name God, because Allah is to some an offensive, false-equivalent too often wrongly used interchangeably with the word God. Wearing this button will signal to anyone with whom you meet up, especially Muslims, that you prefer them not to use the word Allah. Simple request, huh?
Let’s all be tolerant, considerate, and non-offensive.
It occurs to me that Christians can wear a Merry Christmas button to advise others of their preferred holiday greeting. Problem solved. Jewish people can wear Happy Hannukah buttons, etc., etc., etc. Problem solved, until you get store employees that refuse to comply, of course.
Here’s another button idea. This one hits upon several offensive macro- or micro-aggressions at once:
Wearing this button will instantly signal to those who prefer to be tolerant, considerate, and inoffensive that the wearer is mightily offended by being insultingly stereotyped (pigeon-holed) when someone uses any of those three words to describe him or her.
How easy. How simple. No more shouting matches in university quadrangles, classrooms, cafeterias, or libraries. No more bullying of persons of pale color or the normally gendered. No more assuming that one is “privileged” based upon skin color alone, ignoring family history, ancestry, personal history, income, or any other demographic characteristic that gives lie to the divisive, offensive label. No more anti-white racism. Easily disposed of by using the progressives’ own tactics. No more anti-heterosexualism.
Wear the button. Watch how they respond. Will they be tolerant?
Challenge progressives to follow the same rules for others that they expect to be followed for themselves.
If one group or person is allowed to dictate to everyone else how everyone else is to speak, then that rule should hold true for every group and every person.
I don’t “identify” as white, because I’m not. My skin is dark tan to light olive/brown, and I’m not going to select which of my ancestors I’m going to “identify” with and which I’m going to disavow. Therefore, I never want anyone to assume that I’m “white” and to label me as such against my will.
That’s an offensive macro-aggression, in my opinion.
I don’t “identify” as cisgender, either, although that’s the term that’s being thrust upon anyone who is normally gendered: in other words, heterosexual, in accordance with their DNA. Personally, I don’t see the value in labeling anyone by what they do in their personal lives. It’s a massive misapprehension to think everybody else gives a rat’s patoot. I don’t care. I don’t want to know. And I certainly don’t want the mental images that go along with the various confessional labels.
Making up a word and then thrusting it upon unwillingly labeled persons is offensive and it should stop immediately. There’s nothing wrong with the previous term, the scientific one–heterosexual–and there’s no reason for anyone to decide they’re going to label others as cisgendered, instead.
Would any other group allow another group to decide what they should be called?
Finally, I never, ever, ever want to hear anyone tell me that I’m “privileged” or “white privileged,” especially when that person has no clue about my personal history, no clue about my family history, and no idea what sort of challenges I had to overcome in my lifetime, and all because that person assumes, based solely upon outward appearances, that I’ve been “privileged” and so now presumably owe something to society or to some other group, such that I’m required to make “reparations” or “pay it forward” or “give back” or whatever the catchy phrase of the year now is. Or, worse, that I should sit down and shut up. Move to the back of the bus, in other words.
Anyway, the first rant of 2017 is now officially over.
If anyone has ideas for more or better buttons, let’s hear them!
Can these buttons become “a thing?”
#####
Source: https://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2017/01/04/thoughts-in-the-new-year/
