Susan Burgess "I did not know words can be kidnapped and used for different purposes. It is very effective for those who want to steal your mind." '𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘥,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 — 𝘯𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴.…
What about all the words hijacked by the LGBT community?:
Gay, Queer, Pride, Woman, He, She, Marriage, Husband, Wife, Partner, to name but a few?
Less of your blatant, in your face, evangelism and we might all be able to get on better together. I, and a lot of people I know will never accept mandated speech or pronouns.
Words like "queer" were originally pejoratives lobbed at the LGBT community, that the LGBT then decided to embrace. Its original meaning of "odd" still stands.
The original meanings of "gay, pride, woman, he, she, marriage, husband, wife, partner" etc. are still there. Just because a word's meaning is expanded to include an IDEA doesn't mean it's changed.
Just because you and your compatriots find recognition of groups of people that you don't like offensive and threatening doesn't mean that you should be able to go back to the "good old days" where you could pretend they didn't exist because you all forced everyone to hide who they are.
What's free about that?? Freedom to be the boss of everyone you don't like is only "freedom" for YOU. Are you honestly that selfish??
Same package, different wrapping paper. When you travel around the political spectrum, the far right and far left end up in the same place. How is attacking and belittling Patrick any different than how the far right treat the woke? All I'm saying is that we need to be conscious of our process, not just our perspective on the issues. If we're going to continue to evolve our social consciousness, we need real woke people, not a bunch of woke nazis.
On the relatively recent referendum on Same Sex Marriage Marriage here in Ireland I voted against.
Not because I didn't want gay people to enjoy all the perks and benefits......social ,legal and otherwise.....of the contract of marriage. My objection was on the grounds that they changed..... hijacked, if you like..... the word marriage.
For centuries the word marriage has meant the union of a man and a woman. Surely the Gay community could have thought up a new name for their particular type of union?
Regarding the other words, I won't go through them all but if you maintain that the new found nervousness around the use of the word "Woman" does not present problems, then I think you are being a bit disingenuous.
I’m glad that you do not oppose the rights of individuals to be in a loving, committed, and legal relationship. These elements define a marriage. I don’t understand why another word should be created for the loving, committed, and legal union for same sex couples. We already have the perfect word, and this word is big enough to embrace all who choose to commit themselves to each other, in love. Be well.
"Marriage" in the sense of "husband" and "wife," is based on the concept of bride-price. It is transfer of the female, as property of her father (or other male in the family if the father is deceased), to the "husband," which is a term used equally for the raising of livestock, e.g. "animal husbandry."
The term quietly shifted in (I seem to remember) the mid-1800's, when "marriage" became about "love."
Certainly in the 1800's US, it was not uncommon for a man working land in the territories to purchase a wife outright as a "mail-order bride."
I spend a lot of my time studying American politics and consider myself well versed in the current Woke/non Woke, Republican/Democrat divide. I seem to have made the mistake of assuming that well educated Americans know and understand the social and political tensions that absorb us on this side of the Atlantic.
The Trans movement in the UK, particularly in Scotland, have de-platformed J.K.Rowling for having the temerity to suggest that there are only two sexes; male and female.
Recently, the Scottish prime minister called it a day after failing to push through proposals allowing formerly male rapists, now self identifying as trans women, serve their time in women's prisons.
In Ireland recently, a piece of legislation, primarily concerned with women's health issues, manage to draft the act without once mentioning the word "woman". A remarkable tour-de force in linguistic somersaulting!
North of your border, your Canadian brothers and sisters run the risk of appearing in court if they do not comply with mandated speech rules.
I have no desire to ill treat or traduce any person who genuinely feels to be outside the the normal male/female grouping and I hope they will do the same and not get all hot and bothered if I question their (to my mind) more extreme demands, and........perhaps more relevantly....that of of their spear carriers.
I guess I understand, but I have seen anyone nervous “around the use of the word ‘woman.’” Or the others you listed. Perhaps things are very different in Ireland.
Patrick, I don’t quite understand what you are getting at. I think I get “gay,” but Woman? Man? Pride? He? She? etc. I think I’m missing something here.
Don’t get me started on the subject of pronouns, I taught grammar! I think it is fine to have gender neutral pronouns. We already do. It, its (singular) and they, them, their, theirs (all plural). Certainly I can see why “it” is unacceptable to use for LGBTQ people. There should be a non-insulting singular pronoun to refer to one person who doesn’t chose he or she. They, them, their, theirs, should remain the gender neutral PLURAL pronouns they have been.
But I am willing to see the pronoun issue in the context of groups of people who have been marginalized and are asking for recognition of their equal status as human beings.
Of course, some languages don’t even have gender specific pronouns. The issue is respect and the recently demonized word “inclusion.”
Thank you for this. I too like grammar that is precise. It would be helpful even if we had a singular word for people that didn't include the gender of the person when context wasn't requiring that in addition to it and its. But I don't want to be coerced into using terms that don't fit. Frankly, it doesn't bother me when people mistake my gender (I am a nonconforming female so it happens sometimes) because, I know what I am. It seems only those who are bent on making sure everyone does it "correctly" are the ones who get offended by this mistake. If we put less emphasis on sex and gender in contexts where it's less relevant, we might all be better off. I don't know if this is even possible, but it might make life easier for many of us.
No, not at all. I was replying to Maloney, and I should not have tried to sneak my comment under yours. Grammar matters to me, but not as much as freedom of speech. The English language gonna change, I just hope not so fast that 50 years from now only scholars will be able to get our meanings.
Susan Burgess "I did not know words can be kidnapped and used for different purposes. It is very effective for those who want to steal your mind."
'𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘥,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 — 𝘯𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴.’
’𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴,’ said Alice, ‘𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴.’
’𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 — 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘭.'
What about all the words hijacked by the LGBT community?:
Gay, Queer, Pride, Woman, He, She, Marriage, Husband, Wife, Partner, to name but a few?
Less of your blatant, in your face, evangelism and we might all be able to get on better together. I, and a lot of people I know will never accept mandated speech or pronouns.
Words like "queer" were originally pejoratives lobbed at the LGBT community, that the LGBT then decided to embrace. Its original meaning of "odd" still stands.
The original meanings of "gay, pride, woman, he, she, marriage, husband, wife, partner" etc. are still there. Just because a word's meaning is expanded to include an IDEA doesn't mean it's changed.
Just because you and your compatriots find recognition of groups of people that you don't like offensive and threatening doesn't mean that you should be able to go back to the "good old days" where you could pretend they didn't exist because you all forced everyone to hide who they are.
What's free about that?? Freedom to be the boss of everyone you don't like is only "freedom" for YOU. Are you honestly that selfish??
Same package, different wrapping paper. When you travel around the political spectrum, the far right and far left end up in the same place. How is attacking and belittling Patrick any different than how the far right treat the woke? All I'm saying is that we need to be conscious of our process, not just our perspective on the issues. If we're going to continue to evolve our social consciousness, we need real woke people, not a bunch of woke nazis.
Steven,
good post. thank you.
Hmmm, would I rather be called selfish or a “woke nazi” ??????
Patrick Joseph Maloney "What about all the words hijacked by the LGBT community?:
Gay, Queer, Pride, Woman, He, She, Marriage, Husband, Wife, Partner, to name but a few?"
Just curious. How, exactly, does the definition each of those words by the LGBT community differ from your definition.
On the relatively recent referendum on Same Sex Marriage Marriage here in Ireland I voted against.
Not because I didn't want gay people to enjoy all the perks and benefits......social ,legal and otherwise.....of the contract of marriage. My objection was on the grounds that they changed..... hijacked, if you like..... the word marriage.
For centuries the word marriage has meant the union of a man and a woman. Surely the Gay community could have thought up a new name for their particular type of union?
Regarding the other words, I won't go through them all but if you maintain that the new found nervousness around the use of the word "Woman" does not present problems, then I think you are being a bit disingenuous.
Patrick,
I’m glad that you do not oppose the rights of individuals to be in a loving, committed, and legal relationship. These elements define a marriage. I don’t understand why another word should be created for the loving, committed, and legal union for same sex couples. We already have the perfect word, and this word is big enough to embrace all who choose to commit themselves to each other, in love. Be well.
Patrick Joseph Malone "For centuries the word marriage has meant the union of a man and a woman."
I am unsure what you are using as a source for this definition but what I am finding is:
mar·riage noun
1. the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship
2. a combination or mixture of two or more elements.
"a marriage of jazz, pop, blues, and gospel"
Granted it might "mean" something different to you, but the definition is pretty exact.
"Marriage" in the sense of "husband" and "wife," is based on the concept of bride-price. It is transfer of the female, as property of her father (or other male in the family if the father is deceased), to the "husband," which is a term used equally for the raising of livestock, e.g. "animal husbandry."
The term quietly shifted in (I seem to remember) the mid-1800's, when "marriage" became about "love."
Certainly in the 1800's US, it was not uncommon for a man working land in the territories to purchase a wife outright as a "mail-order bride."
Patrick,
Take it easy and relax back a bit. Nobody is hijacking any words.
People are just using words in the language that they natively speak. What else can they do??
100%
“New found nervousness around the use of the word “woman” ?????
😳😳 Invitation to anyone who feels this and would like to enlighten the rest of us……
I spend a lot of my time studying American politics and consider myself well versed in the current Woke/non Woke, Republican/Democrat divide. I seem to have made the mistake of assuming that well educated Americans know and understand the social and political tensions that absorb us on this side of the Atlantic.
The Trans movement in the UK, particularly in Scotland, have de-platformed J.K.Rowling for having the temerity to suggest that there are only two sexes; male and female.
Recently, the Scottish prime minister called it a day after failing to push through proposals allowing formerly male rapists, now self identifying as trans women, serve their time in women's prisons.
In Ireland recently, a piece of legislation, primarily concerned with women's health issues, manage to draft the act without once mentioning the word "woman". A remarkable tour-de force in linguistic somersaulting!
North of your border, your Canadian brothers and sisters run the risk of appearing in court if they do not comply with mandated speech rules.
I have no desire to ill treat or traduce any person who genuinely feels to be outside the the normal male/female grouping and I hope they will do the same and not get all hot and bothered if I question their (to my mind) more extreme demands, and........perhaps more relevantly....that of of their spear carriers.
I guess I understand, but I have seen anyone nervous “around the use of the word ‘woman.’” Or the others you listed. Perhaps things are very different in Ireland.
Patrick, I don’t quite understand what you are getting at. I think I get “gay,” but Woman? Man? Pride? He? She? etc. I think I’m missing something here.
Sounds like false equivalency. I fail to see any “there” there. And based on other replies I’m not the only one.
You are not forced to use those words, what's your problem?
Don’t get me started on the subject of pronouns, I taught grammar! I think it is fine to have gender neutral pronouns. We already do. It, its (singular) and they, them, their, theirs (all plural). Certainly I can see why “it” is unacceptable to use for LGBTQ people. There should be a non-insulting singular pronoun to refer to one person who doesn’t chose he or she. They, them, their, theirs, should remain the gender neutral PLURAL pronouns they have been.
But I am willing to see the pronoun issue in the context of groups of people who have been marginalized and are asking for recognition of their equal status as human beings.
Of course, some languages don’t even have gender specific pronouns. The issue is respect and the recently demonized word “inclusion.”
Thank you for this. I too like grammar that is precise. It would be helpful even if we had a singular word for people that didn't include the gender of the person when context wasn't requiring that in addition to it and its. But I don't want to be coerced into using terms that don't fit. Frankly, it doesn't bother me when people mistake my gender (I am a nonconforming female so it happens sometimes) because, I know what I am. It seems only those who are bent on making sure everyone does it "correctly" are the ones who get offended by this mistake. If we put less emphasis on sex and gender in contexts where it's less relevant, we might all be better off. I don't know if this is even possible, but it might make life easier for many of us.
J. Nol, I hope to see the day when we recognize the many contexts where gender is in fact irrelevant.
I did not say don't use them, I said he was not forced to use them. Are you saying that Boyd should be forced to use them?
No, not at all. I was replying to Maloney, and I should not have tried to sneak my comment under yours. Grammar matters to me, but not as much as freedom of speech. The English language gonna change, I just hope not so fast that 50 years from now only scholars will be able to get our meanings.
Ah, then I will stop palpitating and renting my garments! Thanks!
Uh....."rending" would be the word you want.
I am sorry, I shouldn’t have. And please, keep your garments. Don’t rent them.
🤣
That's OK. A lot more people are thinking about atheism and agnosticism.