Politically Incorrect


Back in the day I observed the slow erosion of the English language by radical feminism. Mrs was replaced by Ms and man by person, even though man in most contexts eg mankind is generic. Chairman was now chairperson and more recently simply “chair”. So now the chair of the dept of chemistry is not this….


But this…


There was concern that the province of Manitoba would be now Personitoba, freedom was going to be epersoncipation and the monthly curse now referred to as personstruation. Fortunately, none of this came to fruition. Our Prime Minister recently replaced mankind by personkind though humankind might have made more sense. In any event he said he was joking. Of course he wasn’t, but back pedaled under protest like most politicians tend to do. The Canadian anthem has now been changed to “in all of us command from all thy sons command”. Most Canadians don’t know the words anyway, rarely sing it and the French version which I liked better remains unchanged. Personally I prefer the Soviet-Russian National Anthem and had it all memorized at one time.

I do not suggest a return to a mythical time when men were men and women were women (and mended his socks), but I do take issue with the impact of feminism on written English.

How can a teacher get students to take language seriously when virtually the whole educational establishment teaches the opposites? When students have been ordered since first grade to put “he or she” in spots where “he” would mean exactly the same thing, and “firefighter” where “fireman” would mean exactly the same thing? Well I always thought a fireman was a black-faced guy (not African American) who loaded coal into a train locomotive).

Now lately I was watching a tape of psychologist Jordan Peterson on the subject of the Canadian law bill 16 which mandates us to use correct pronouns in relation to transexuals or the “gender conflicted”. Failure to use a person’s pronoun of choice — “ze,” “zir,” “they” or any one of a multitude of other potential bizarre non-words — will land you in hot water with the commission. That, in turn, can lead to orders for correction, apology, Soviet-like “re-education,” and fines in cases of continued non-compliance.

Peterson sees this as an infringement on freedom of speech. Well I see it as mierda de toro. Forced speech is the most extreme infringement of free speech. It puts words in the mouths of citizens and threatens to punish them if they do not comply.

Now before I am accused of being a right-wing nut job anyone who knows me is aware I am socio-politically marginally to the right of Leon Trotsky.

Peterson is right in that he disagrees with the view of transgender activists that gender is a social construct and has no grounding in biology. The activists view that because the grounding for biology unlike homosexuality is weak and so transsexualism might indeed be choice. Possibly one that is out of synch with reality. Sorry but chromosomes is destiny.

My problem is that we are catering to a tiny but very vocal and media hungry minority of the population. This brings me to the clinical. In 1978 I had my first transsexual experience. It was 2am and what seemed like a very attractive apparent transvestite entered the ER claiming he was a woman trapped in a man’s body and was depressed because he was recently denied surgery to remove his johnson. That is until he lived for at least two years as a woman complete with hormones. He had already had breast augmentation. Alrighty then.

Well this is what he/she got me up for? I could not take this condition seriously at all at the time and certainly not at that time of day and I still have trouble with it not being a psychotic or body dysmorphic manifestation. You have XY chromosomes dude. Not XX or XYY or even intersex( hermaphrodism). I did admit him for observation. He took great pains as I recall to conceal his genitals with very tight knickers.

Homosexuality has been demonstrated to not be a condition of choice but one of bio-genetic predisposition. So we have at least hard data . To accommodate the social needs of at least 10% of the population seems reasonable but transsexuals are 0.6%. Well simply on statistical grounds let alone dubious clinical ones altering the English language for such a small group is unrealistic.

For those who ignore the use of gender specific pronouns and refuse to pay fines there is a possibility of jail due to contempt. Imagine sharing a cell with an armed robber or drug dealer because you were arrested by the language police for a grammatical indictment…..

I fear political correctness will ultimately lead to this scenario in paleontology class: “You’re not allowed to call them dinosaurs any more,” . “It’s speciesist. You have to call them pre-petroleum persons.”

What do you think of this post?
  • Meh 
  • Boring 
  • Useful 
  • Interesting 
  • Awesome 

2 Responses to “Politically Incorrect”

  1. Carole Kocian says:

    Even Trudeau is having trouble with sexist pronouns.

  2. Claude Francis says:

    Don’t know what to add to this expect to say that if you’re not a “she” or a “he”, then perhaps a third category needs to be created to accommodate these folks by perhaps referring to them as an “it”, you know just to keep things simple. Political correctness gone to the extreme if you ask me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: