Stop using their Newspeak now!

As news was just seeping out with initially conflicting information regarding the demented transvestite murderer yesterday, my wife said something that sparked a minor argument between us. She asked if the murderer was a "biological female." I asked her to never use that terminology again. Indeed, I do not use it, never have and never will.

Why?, you ask...

I'll explain.

You see, Orwell's concept of Newspeak is a real thing. It is a tool of the New (really not 'new,' but as ancient as the tower of Babel) Order.

It is the first step in the process of neurolinguistic programming, for as much as our words express our thoughts, they also shape our thoughts. When you allow yourself to be coerced into expressing thoughts in Newspeak, you are allowing yourself to be neurolinguistically programmed (i.e., brainwashed) by slow degrees that are not even perceptible to your own self.

To wit:

When speaking of a tranny, do you sometimes refer to him or her as a "biological" (insert actual sex)?

You likely do, like my dear partially brainwashed wife who asked if the murderer was a "biological female."

Now answer this question: Ten years ago - even five years ago - would it have occurred to you to refer to anyone as a "biological" male or a "biological" female?

More than likely the answer to that question is a resounding NO! Back in the good ol' days, people were either just male or female, men or women (as they actually still are today, XX and XY chromosomes and all that still being a thing). This ridiculous invented need to indicate 'biological' didn't exist. Women are women and men are men; always have been and always will be, Newspeak be damned! You would have just asked, "Was it a man or a woman?" Not a "biological..."

Every time you refer to a tranny or cross-dresser as a "transgendered person," or described someone as a "biological ***," you are using Newspeak and are allowng yourself to be neurolinguistically programmed (i.e., brainwashed) little by little. When you are induced to call a man a she or a woman a he, to speak of "her testicles," it's the same, whether due to fear of social pressure or a misplaced sense of "nice."

This, my friends, is a perfect example of Newspeak.

Just STOP IT!

STOP using their neurolinguistic programmng vernacular for your own sake and that of those around you. Stop brainwashing yourself!



ETA: If, when you see a propaganda article saying something like "her testicles" (I actually saw that a couple of days ago) or "he was pregnant," something inside you doesn't retch, you are already partially brainwashed.

:

a reply to: incoserv

*Note: This is not "hate speech;" this is truth.

If you consider it "hate speech," it is because you hate truth.
:

a reply to: incoserv

Any problems with me calling her an attention seeking, murderous, crazy bitch in drag?

How's that for hate speech.

a reply to: incoserv

The fact that fealt the need to put a disclaimer is funny.
And using the word tranny is considered to be offensive.
So it would seem that you support offensive slurs meant to degrade groups of people.
Tisk tisk

a reply to: Allaroundyou

What is an example of a defensive slur, counter to say an offensive one?

a reply to: incoserv

Straight up.
Saint Matthew, chapter 5, verse 37...
St John 16:29
(Fine, the whole Bible, because context, context, context)
Word up.

#ThereAreFourLights

a reply to: JinMI

Biological Male/female comes to mind.
Good question though.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Male and female is enough, you don't need a caveat to make a distinction when the choice is binary.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: JinMI

Biological Male/female comes to mind.
Good question though.

So if I refer to a transwoman as a biological male it's defensive and not offensive?

Just trying to establish rules here.

If our DNA says whether we are MALE or FEMALE,

I like, "Was she a DNA Female?"

a reply to: JinMI

It's intentionally confusing, which i suspect is the point.

a reply to: JinMI


I believe when speaking to someone maybe not say that.
But when we discuss an event with someone involved and that subject is part of that story I believe it to appropriate.

a reply to: incoserv


Being adopted as a baby, most adoptees wonder about their " biological parents" and distinguish them from the parents who raised them. So, I think there might be some holes in your assertion ?

a reply to: incoserv
I'm with you inconserv. I don't use the newspeak and I won't use it. If you were born a man, your a freaking man.
I don't call people with piercings all over their face a pin cushion , all thought I'd like to.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: incoserv

The fact that fealt the need to put a disclaimer is funny.
And using the word tranny is considered to be offensive.
So it would seem that you support offensive slurs meant to degrade groups of people.
Tisk tisk

Not sure what disclaimer you refer to. I do not disclaim anything I said.

"Tranny" is a contraction of the word "transvestite," which means a cross-dresser, or someone who disguises him- or herself as the opposite sex.

I fine lying about scientific biological fact to be offensive.

a reply to: Grenade

It's meant to put folks in a no-win argument and cut straight into strife.

Another false dichotomy amongst the very many running currently.

Logic, reason and discussion squashes it out pretty quickly which is why none of those tools are utilized.

originally posted by: carewemust
If our DNA says whether we are MALE or FEMALE,

I like, "Was she a DNA Female?"

In that case, she is just a female. No need for qualification.

You don't ask if someone is a "DNA Italian."

a reply to: conspiracytheoristIAM

When there's a need to differentiate, it's a suitable distinction.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

I believe when speaking to someone maybe not say that.

Why? Why when speaking to someone should we avoid facts? Again, you said that the language used in the OP were akin to offensive slurs. So I would like to know what a defensive slur is.

But when we discuss an event with someone involved and that subject is part of that story I believe it to appropriate.

Ok well this kind of counters your first sentence there.

You can't defeat the communist by playing his games by his rules.

You have to reject his game.