You know, I was sitting thinking about the 87 “gender” thing, and the “I F*cking Love Science™” crowd.
It hit me that once again, a word is being co-opted by the sophists. A word that means one thing, and they pretend it means another — simultaneously coasting on the actual meaning … social reputation … of the word and denying that very meaning.
You know, I could grant them the word “sexuality”. Maybe there are eleventy jillion “sexualities”. The vast majority of them a result of nurture (or lack thereof) rather than nature.
But there are only two genders, scientifically, in nature. Oh, sure, sometimes nature screws up and produces a person here or there who has some physical attributes of both genders. And that’s certainly no reflection on those people any more than being born deaf or blind or with three arms is. It is not “normal”. It is what it is. A good term would be “neither, but we’ll try to fit you in as best we can.”
But hijacking the word “gender” (which is, in fact, a scientific term) to essentially mean “sexual preference(s)” or “self-identification” is intentionally dishonest. Pretending you’re still talking about science while using this word is a special kind of stupid dishonesty.
The progressives did the same thing with “liberal”, and myriad other words.
We shouldn’t let them get away with it. Causes all sorts of problems.Loading Likes...