Not if they remember the 80s.
5 Likes
Lol exactly.
2 Likes
Wait…the math doesn’t work for me…
1 Like
You must have forgotten that we’re in 1984 and 2+2=5
@twojarslave i think Tim Dillon spoke on this as well; that to stand out in this generation you’d have to cover your genitals and pick up a bible. Well spotted.
2 Likes
Thanks. I don’t really see much of a point in participating if I can’t at least manage that much - bad-faith Internet arguments are insufferable.
Of all the slurs you could possibly have chosen for me, the M-word is perhaps the most hurtful. (/s)
There’s definitely an opportunity for some multitasking there
3 Likes
I hope this weird stuff stays in the USA.
3 Likes
It’s a rough slur to hurl out there for sure, but you can handle it. Imagine how much you can stand out from your peers 10 years from now if you don’t acquire a series of bad tattoos or pursue notoriety as a genderqueer nonbinary social media personality.
Here’s the link to the album I referenced above. It has aged like fine wine, especially the lyrics. My sample size isn’t all that big, but it seems like the 1980’s are coming back into relevance with gen Z.
3 Likes
Disagree on referring to tranny as a slur. The sliding goalposts is one of the problems with leftists and the woke. You have a word for something, it gets used in debate around the topic, the topic is a losing issue for the woke, therefore you slightly change the word to start the cycle again. The other method is using a new word that sounds very similar to get the association of the old word in the minds of regular people and then pushing through unpopular policy or debate points (see equality/equity) by appealing to a common sense that has lost its applicability.
By using your words you want to make me participate in your argument. I deny you that and use the word I want to use and I am not going to let you define it as a slur without me agreeing to that. So if 5% of the population see black person as a slur and want people to use people of color, the answer is no, I am not going to do that. Neither should a sane person be made to feel guilty about not using your new definitions. Same is true for latinx, same for transgender. I am not participating in that. If I say transgender I already concede that there’s gender the way you define it.
1984:
“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. ”
Shooting an elephant:
“In a Society in which there is no law, and in theory no compulsion, the only arbiter of behaviour is public opinion. But public opinion, because of the tremendous urge to conformity in gregarious animals, is less tolerant than any system of law. When human beings are governed by ‘thou shalt not’, the individual can practise a certain amount of eccentricity: when they are supposedly governed by ‘love’ or ‘reason’, he is under continuous pressure to make him behave and think in exactly the same way as everyone else.”
If you change definitions of words and change words and make commonly used words a social crime, you can keep people in check by them never knowing when they say something socially unacceptable. You therefore create a new authority which are people like tlgains who want to be deferred to as the thought police who can tell you which words you are allowed to use. Don’t participate in this. Don’t comply. Don’t let them define your speech. If they want to know what you meant, they can ask you. If they act as if they already know you by defining your words in the way they wish, you know that there is malicious intent behind THEIR arguments.
8 Likes
I’m not sure what’s wrong with using “latinks.” I have no doubt that it’s a word they came up with to refer to themselves, and not a word white progressives decided to use.
2 Likes
Now if only they can change the entire Spanish language to replace the -o’s and -a’s at the end of every word 
FWIW i think it was coined by some latin-o/a/x tranny seeking approval from rich white liberals on Twitter.
I have an interim solution for trans women competing in powerlifting.
Have a best Cis Woman’s trophy.
And for matter, why not drop women’s powerlifting altogether. Have a cis men’s division, a cis women’s division, and an open division for everyone else (since the numbers are on the rise.)
Tell a Spanish speaker who is not American that latinx is the term used to describe him or her. Then tell the person that it was invented by LGBTQ Americans of Latin American descent, who probably can’t speak Spanish properly, if at all, to describe THEMSELVES (gay/lesbian/queer/trans) and see what they find wrong with it.
I would never call someone latinx because it would be the same as calling them gay, not that there is anything wrong with being gay.
Which brings up an interesting contradiction. If you misgender a transexual or assume a gay person is straight, it can be considered a trigger. It’s a potential offense. It’s a potential national emergency. Yet, if you were to make the mistake of thinking a non trans person was trans, and that person got offended, it would be a case of, “what’s so bad about being trans you bigot?”
1 Like
God no. That would be validating the term cis. I find that qualifier offensive.
2 Likes
At least you would know “what” you were competing against.
I disagree wholeheartedly.
You don’t need to put “cis” in front of “woman” to know it’s a woman’s trophy and title.
I’m with @lordgains on this one: NO to Newspeak
2 Likes
Who would care if you or I were offended?
1 Like
In Canada, after C16, it is a literal ‘Offense’ to misgender someone. I do believe it carries a fine with it.
**i looked it up, it used to carry a fine with it, but it was overturned in 2021. At least it was only 5 years of human rights violations
There is no Hispanic language. It’s Spanish, technically castellano. The language of the colonizers and conquerers. So of course they want to destroy it. And it’s not as if many of the woke latinxers can even speak it.
2 Likes
You only need two, hell one, eye for that.
1 Like
And what if the winner(s) were not biological women? Would it still be a woman’s trophy? If so, that would be a sad statement. Title IX would have been no help to who it was written to protect.