“He.” “She.” “They.” Have you ever given a moment’s thought to your everyday use of these pronouns? It has probably never occurred to you that those words could be misused. Or that doing so could cost you your business or your job – or even your freedom. Journalist Abigail Shrier explains how this happened and why it’s become a major free speech issue.
I have to post this crap because there are two “like-minded” stories about similar issues. The first story deals with the iconic Mary Poppins. A movie that has delighted generations of Disney fans. THE EVENING STANDARD notes however, that in a New York Times piece, a professor writes that the movie is racist (why the NYTs would publish such nonsense is telling):
The classic family film Mary Poppins has been branded racist by a US academic who accuses Dame Julie Andrews of ‘blacking up’ with soot while dancing with chimney sweeps.
In a piece for the New York Times, Professor Daniel Pollack-Pelzner criticises one of the film’s iconic moments, when Mary Poppins joins Dick Van Dyke’s Bert to dance on a rooftop for the classic song Step in Time.
He writes: “When the magical nanny (played by Julie Andrews) accompanies her young charges, Michael and Jane Banks, up their chimney, her face gets covered in soot, but instead of wiping it off, she gamely powders her nose and cheeks even blacker.”…
The article goes on to show support for the differing side regarding the movie… and the professor complains that the racist alt-right “likes the movie a lot” — I guess supporting his silly position. I assume anyone defending the Disney movie is now “alt-right.” Here is more:
Fans were divided over the professor’s remarks.
One wrote online: “I think this is a reach. She was friends with a chimney sweep. When she went out and danced with him she got soot on her face if I recall this correctly.”
Another wrote: “Mary Poppins wasn’t flirting with black face! It was soot in their faces from being a chimney!!!”
A third said: “This is a candidate for the stupidest New York Times article of all time.”
However others agreed with some of the points raised.
Michael Schulman, ,a writer for the New Yorker said: “This made me think about class, too – how Mary Poppins, a posh domestic, scrambles the class divide and introduces Jane & Michael to the much more fun world of pleb chimney sweeps. Further scrambled in the sequel when the Bankses are also in the poorhouse.”
Author Mr Pollack-Pelzner posted online after his article was published: “The chief reason I wrote this article was the hope that a Disney exec would read it, take another look at the forthcoming Dumbo remake, and ask if there was anything just a little bit racist they might want to rethink before it hits the big screen.
“Here’s one thing I’ve learned about the alt-right, after I wrote this article and received a zillion hate messages in response: they sure like Mary Poppins!”
Wow. His reasoning is “rock solid.” [/sarcasm]
This second story is a couple of weeks old, but worthy considering the above. And yes, this has to be the sign of the Apocalypse. The AZ CENTRAL notes the following:
A few weeks ago, I attended a holiday party at a downtown Phoenix restaurant. I walked around to view the photographs on the wall.
Then a photograph caught my attention.
Friends said, “It’s coal miners at a pub after work.” It was a photograph of coal miners with blackened faces. I asked a Latinx and white woman for their opinion. They said it looked like coal miners at a pub after work. Then they stepped back, frowned and said it’s men in blackface.
I asked the waitress to speak with a manager. Instead, I spoke with a white restaurant owner. I explained to him why the photograph was offensive. Evidently, someone else had made a similar comment about the photograph before.
Yet, the photograph remained on the wall. He said he would talk to the other owners and get back to me. While leaving, I asked him had he spoke with the other owners. He had not spoken with them, but mentioned Google said it’s coal miners after work….
California knows no bounds when it comes to radical LGBT activism. On Thursday, State Senator and Senate Judiciary Committee chair Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) announced that only “gender neutral” pronouns will be permitted during committee hearings. (DAILY WIRE)
At one point California Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson says, “We are using what my grammar teacher would have heart attack over. We are using the phrase they. My grammar teacher’s long gone. And I won’t be hearing from her. If any of you.” She says it almost in the context that with the death of her grammar teacher, so too dies the old way of speaking. As if here grammar was the arbiter of the truth of grammar.
The culture war is first and foremost a war of words – and the left is winning. The consequences can be seen everywhere: in politics, in education, in media. In this video, Michael Knowles, host of the Michael Knowles Show, explains why we should not cede another syllable.
JUST SOME EXAMPLES!
When Seattle police officers write use of force reports they no longer call a suspect a suspect.
“Community member” is the new term. Several officers say the term is offensive, explaining their work with violent suspects.
As noted before, on the right, we worry about actual issues: regulation-fueled economic decline, corruption in Government, the erosion of individual liberty, the unsustainable fiscal path of the national Government.
“When it comes to the bedrock principles, I don’t disagree with him at all,” Cortes defended Trump on Thursday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s All In with Chris Hayes. “Those are twofold. Number one, we have to secure our border. Number two, there can be no citizenship for illegals. You cannot reward criminality.”
Reid stopped him right there.
“Hold on a second,” the MSNBCer said.
“I’m going to stop you right there. You are Hispanic, Steve. Are you comfortable with that term, illegals? That is a pejorative to a lot of people. Why do you use that term?” Reid asked, not believing a Latino would use such a term.
“You know why, because words matter,” Cortes said.
“Yeah, they do,” Reid shot back.
“If you do something that is against the law, it’s illegal,” Cortes reminded Reid. “If you go into a store and you shoplift, you’re not an undocumented holder of a good, you’re a thief. If you come to the United States against the immigration laws of the United States, you’re not undocumented, You’re illegal. …
A guide titled “Words That Hurt” on the website of the University of California, Davis, warns students to avoid using the phrase “you guys” — because, apparently, that’s really harmful or something.
“You guys [e]rases the identities of people who are in the room,” the guide states. It “generaliz[es] a group of people to be masculine.”
The purpose of the guide, which is published on the school’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual Resource Center, is to remind students that “sometimes we say words without realizing the impact they may have on others.”
Marissa Jenae Johnson from Seattle is reportedly a Black Lives Matter co-founder. Marissa likes to rant about her victimhood as a black American and how The Man makes life here intolerable. In this interview with FOX News Marissa says “all lives matter” is a slur.
A business class at Purdue University teaches students the phrase “America is a melting pot” is a microaggression, according to class handouts obtained by The College Fix. That phrase is among at least a dozen examples students were recently instructed on in the Management 301 course.
Additional microaggressions listed on the worksheet include: “Where are you from,” “There is only one race, the human race,” “Everyone can succeed in society if they work hard enough” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job.”
These phrases are problematic because they promote the “myth of meritocracy” or represent “statements which assert that race or gender does not play a role in life successes,” the handout stated. Others are said to be color blind, apparently a bad thing that indicates “that a white person does not want to or need to acknowledge race,” according to the handout.
The Spring 2016 class largely focuses on teaching undergads how to advance their overall professional career development, such as obtaining internships and jobs. But the recent lesson on microaggressions unsettled at least one student in the class….
The New York Times best seller list really isn’t that. What it is is merely an editorial “what you should read, not what actually sells the best.”
The NYT’s even had the audacity (or the lack of self awareness in their egalitarianism aims) to publish a graph of the male and female authors by decade. It showed a clear male dominance over the women. However, as the decades progressed, the sexes got closer to being even, until, the final decade in the graph, they were very similar in books on the New York Times best seller listing.
But this graph, then, is merely an illusion. Since they control the list and who makes it on the list — they can control whichever factors they wish to. Like gender for instance. So they can even out the sexes on the list to give the appearance that male and female authors are writing and selling great books, equally. It does not reflect reality. Nor does this “evening-out process” have anything to say about how well something is written. It merely projects what the few editors think is important to the New York Times.
The majority of authors are — I presume — white. So soon a similar graph will surely show an evening out of minority vs. Caucasian authors.
I posted a link to this article discussing Trump’s foreign policy advancements as compared to Obama’s in regard to “Nobel Peace Prizes.” Here is part of the article:
North and South Korea are discussing plans to make a stunning announcement at their leaders summit next week: a permanent end to the 68-year state of war between the two, according to reports.
North Korean strongman Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in may release a joint statement saying they will seek to end military conflict, an unidentified Seoul official told the Munhwa Ilbo newspaper, Bloomberg reported.
The two men are scheduled to meet April 27 in the border village of Panmunjon — the third-ever summit of leaders from the two Koreas.
Pyongyang and Seoul have technically been at war since the 1950-1953 Korean conflict ended with a truce. Despite occasional flare-ups between the two nations in the years since the armistice, the two Koreas have managed to avoid an all-out war.
A successful summit could pave the way for a historic meeting between Kim and President Trump — the first between a sitting US president and a North Korean leader….
You do realize people like myself do not really want Trump to get the Nobel Prize in Peace, but what is being intimated by the article (OP) is that Obama got his just eight and a half months in the White House.
The prize was nothing more, then, than Leftist panels awarding a Leftist person they idealized with a hopeful fiction.
(In fact, all of Leftism is an idealization of a Utopian dream. A “Super Man” in the “Nietzsch’ian sense”… genderless, able to offend no one, always concerned for the welfare of others in the market place, etc. REALLY THEN, a pipe-dream but one enforced by legislative acts. Dangerous in other words.)
It is similar, then, to the NYTs posting this graphic as if it means something (https://tinyurl.com/y9jck4x3). Since the NYT Best Seller list are really editorial choices and not based on the reality of “which books actually sell the best,” their being proud of an evening-out of male-to-female authors is meaningless. (Unless you live in a bubble: SNL – https://youtu.be/vKOb-kmOgpI)
It is a form of self-gratification, or as David French calls them, the “New Holy Rollers.” That is, “social justice warriors.” The NYT sees themselves as such in creating a fictitious reality in order to fool people with what is really an illusion that says nothing of literary excellence.
You see, when you believe you are morally superior, when you have dehumanized those you disagree with, you can justify almost anything.
Like giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who will hold to an illusory ideal created whole cloth from nothing.
So, if that is the standard…
…the Trump administration has already surpassed it. As we found out with the meeting over the Easter weekend. Ultimately nothing may come of it, but it is more “hope and change” to the real world than what Obama had “accomplished.”
In the grilling of Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo, Corey Booker displays classic “thought control.” Dennis Prager rightly warns his listeners not just of Corey (although he does this), but of the tendency of all Leftism to degenerate into this form of fascism.
Grad student Lindsay Shepherd of Wilfred Laurier U. was dragged before a kangaroo court for showing a Dr. Jordan Peterson video in class. Demand that Laurier dismiss the Orwellian complaint against her, apologize, and reaffirm its commitment to academic freedom.
POWERLINE has an excellent post about making jokes and today’s PC-culture:
Monty Python fans may remember the long sketch about the “lethal joke” that was so funny you would die from laughter, and which was weaponized for battlefield use in World War II… [below/right]…The sketch culminates in the worldwide banning of jokes of mass destruction through the Geneva Convention, but it seems the University of Oregon takes the idea seriously. Get a load of this story:
An acclaimed British conductor has been fired from a prestigious American music festival after a seemingly innocent joke he made to a black friend was labelled racist.
Matthew Halls was removed as artistic director of the Oregon Bach Festival following an incident in which he imitated a southern American accent while talking to his longstanding friend, the African-American classical singer Reginald Mobley.
It is understood a white woman who overheard the joke reported it to officials at the University of Oregon, which runs the festival, claiming it amounted to a racial slur.
Shortly after Halls, who has worked with orchestras and opera houses across Europe and the US, was told by a university official his four year contract, which was to have run until 2020, was being terminated………..
(HOT AIR) Let’s just list this as the next in an ongoing series of reasons why you should be glad that you don’t live in California. (And for those of you who actually do, I don’t have too much pity. You’ve had plenty of warning signals and you should have moved by now.) In the race to lead the nation in identity politics and political correctness taken to the umpteenth degree, California should be surging into the lead. A bill has actually been passed in the State Senate and is now under consideration in the Assembly which would impose criminal penalties – including jail time – if you are found to be addressing a transgender person using pronouns which don’t match the gender they imagine themselves to be.
A bill that passed the California state senate and is now moving through the Assembly could threaten jail time for anyone who refuses to use a transgender person’s preferred pronoun.
The law is currently limited in its effects to nursing homes and intermediate-care facilities, but if passed, those who “willfully and repeatedly” refuse “to use a transgender resident’s preferred name or pronouns” could be slapped with a $1,000 fine and up to one year in prison, according to the California Heath and Safety code. The state senate passed the bill 26-12 at the end of May. Since then, the Assembly Judiciary committee recommended the bill unanimously and the General Assembly held its first hearing on the legislation Wednesday.
For the moment, this would only apply in nursing homes. (These are locations which are not traditionally known for an overwhelming number of transgender residents.) But legal analysts are already speculating that the prohibition would spread well beyond those confines and do so quickly…………
[I]t is “pretty unlikely that, if this law is enacted, such prohibitions would be limited just to this [nursing home] scenario,” UCLA First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh told National Review. (MOONBATTERY)
(Side-note, all seminaries better have a campus in another state ready to go.) In a previous post I spoke to New York having the ability to close and fine businesses (out of business) for not using the pronouns (HERE and HERE). Here, is an example of why government shouldn’t be involved at all with licensing a profession. Here is a reminder of the NY lunacy:
THE DAILY WIRE posts the following on the bill that will surely jail persons in California: “California Proposes JAIL TIME For Using Wrong Gender Pronoun For Senior Citizens”
….“It shall be unlawful for a long-term care facility or facility staff to … willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns,” reads SB 219, called “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Long-Term Care Facility Resident’s Bill of Rights.”
“It imposes fines and jail time on any long-term care employee who refuses to use transgender pronouns. Fines for repeat offenders could be as high as $1,000 and a jail term of up to a year,” reports CBN News.
The bill is sponsored by Equality California and penned by Senator Scott Wiener of San Francisco, notes CBN.
Opponents of the bill (or, people who’ve read the Constitution) are arguing that the compelled speech is an infringement on the First Amendment.
“How can you believe in free speech, but think the government can compel people to use certain pronouns when talking to others?” asks Greg Burt of California Family Council. “Compelled speech is not free speech. Can the government compel a newspaper to use certain pronouns that aren’t even in the dictionary? Of course not, or is that coming next?”
“Those proposing this bill are saying, ‘If you disagree with me about my view of gender, you are discriminating against me,'” he continued. “This is not tolerance. This is not love. This is not mutual respect. True tolerance tolerates people with different views. We need to treat each other with respect, but respect is a two-way street. It is not respectful to threaten people with punishment for having sincerely held beliefs that differ from your own.”
In Canada, such Orwellian measures are already in place. If you refuse to use the pronouns which match a person’s “gender identity,” you could be found guilty of a “hate crime” and face massive fines and possible jail time…… (emphasis added)