Turn on thread page Beta

Should women female and people be banned watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    As we all know the amazing virtue signalling **** Justin Trudeau recently interrupted a speech to say they should say people kind rather then mankind. Apparently anything mentioning men or man is offensive.

    I can understand this we must do everything in our power to obey the Saudi funded propaganda agenda of wiping out white males . This we cannot allow any reference to male or men in western culture.

    But looking at the words female and women I notice something horrifying. "feMALE and woMEN" so you see what I mean I was horrified to.

    Of course there was a huge problem with people kind as well. If we take the word people now take the first letter and go and go back 3 letters o n m so now we have an M. Now we can keep the next letter as an E to get ME but if we take the next letter o and go back just one letter we get N so from the first 3 letters of people we can get MEN. So we should ban the word people as well as its secret code for MEN.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Trudeau is a joke. Political correctness has gone too far (been like this for a long time).
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Luke7456)
    As we all know the amazing virtue signalling **** Justin Trudeau recently interrupted a speech to say they should say people kind rather then mankind. Apparently anything mentioning men or man is offensive.

    I can understand this we must do everything in our power to obey the Saudi funded propaganda agenda of wiping out white males . This we cannot allow any reference to male or men in western culture.

    But looking at the words female and women I notice something horrifying. "feMALE and woMEN" so you see what I mean I was horrified to.

    Of course there was a huge problem with people kind as well. If we take the word people now take the first letter and go and go back 3 letters o n m so now we have an M. Now we can keep the next letter as an E to get ME but if we take the next letter o and go back just one letter we get N so from the first 3 letters of people we can get MEN. So we should ban the word people as well as its secret code for MEN.
    Hi, I've moved the thread to the Society section
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Lmao
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke7456)
    As we all know the amazing virtue signalling **** Justin Trudeau recently interrupted a speech to say they should say people kind rather then mankind. Apparently anything mentioning men or man is offensive.

    I can understand this we must do everything in our power to obey the Saudi funded propaganda agenda of wiping out white males . This we cannot allow any reference to male or men in western culture.

    But looking at the words female and women I notice something horrifying. "feMALE and woMEN" so you see what I mean I was horrified to.

    Of course there was a huge problem with people kind as well. If we take the word people now take the first letter and go and go back 3 letters o n m so now we have an M. Now we can keep the next letter as an E to get ME but if we take the next letter o and go back just one letter we get N so from the first 3 letters of people we can get MEN. So we should ban the word people as well as its secret code for MEN.
    No! Seriously! The words are beautiful! These people are literal philistines! No consideration for the allure of our language! The most beautiful language on Earth!

    Also mankind is commonly understood as meaning the whole human race. I may have just discovered the literal marxist.
    Online

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Got a link to some footage of this? I could do with a laugh.

    Someone just needs to get a book on etymology, and then maybe throw it at him.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Trudeau - the physical manifestation of all those SJW comments you see on websites coming together to form the ultimate machine of man-hating.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Trudeau publicly admitted that it was a joke (albeit a poor attempt at one)

    also yes, the dreaded FEMALE
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Got a link to some footage of this? I could do with a laugh.

    Someone just needs to get a book on etymology, and then maybe throw it at him.


    Listen to what the feminazi asking him the question said too..."Maternal love is the love that is going to change the future of mankind". This is a feminist idea. Feminism preaches that women have superior cultural values to men. They call this "maternal love". They also in their books call it "the female way of knowing" a special way in which women understand the world that is superior to men. They teach that the only way for mankind to survive and prosper is for the total eradication of male values and their replacement by female values. Here's a snippet from feminist icon Germaine Greer's book "The Mad Woman's Underclothes". In it she talks about this feminist concept.


    “Everything I learn reinforces my conviction that the only corrective to social inequality, cruelty and callousness, is to be found in values which, if we cannot call them female, can be called sororal. They are the opposite of competitiveness, acquisitiveness and domination (in her book prior she refers to these as male traits), and may be summed up by the word ‘co-operation’. In the world of the sisterhood, all deserve care and attention, including the very old, the very young, the imbecile and the outsider. The quality of daily life is what matters, the taste of the food on the table, the light in the room, the peace and wholeness of the moment. Perfect love casteth out fear. The only perfect love to be found on earth is not sexual love (another one of those evil traits that ascribes to men in her book), which is riddled with hostility and insecurity, but the wordless commitment of families, which takes as its model mother-love. This is not to say that fathers have no place, for father-love, with its driving for self-improvement and discipline, is also essential to survival, but that uncorrected father-love as it were practised by both parents, is a way to annihilation."

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chaz254)
    Trudeau is a joke. Political correctness has gone too far (been like this for a long time).
    Agreed. Women should get back in their place!

    Why is wrong with saying 'people-kind' or 'everyone'?

    I have never really understood why folks such as yourself get so hot headed about it. It is only a word. Why does it offend you so much? It is not about political correctness. It is just inclusive. A bit like "ladies and gentlemen". I am not a gent and my wife isn't a lady. It is old fashioned clap-trap. Why not just say "everyone" and you have the whole thing covered in one word.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    What is wrong with saying 'people-kind' or 'everyone'?
    Changing words like man-kind is accepting the ideas behind the change and the sexist man-hating ideology driving those ideas. It is accepting a solution for a problem that does not exist.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    I have never really understood why folks such as yourself get so hot headed about it. It is only a word.
    Words are more powerful than bullets. Words have caused the deaths of millions, brought down empires, spread new ideas and changed the way we think about the world....

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Why does it offend you so much? It is not about political correctness.
    It is very much about political correctness. Its all about catering to the ungrounded, irrational sensitivities of certain groups created by certain political ideologies.

    (Original post by ByEeek)
    (Everyone) is just inclusive.
    Is it not inclusive in its current form? man-kind refers to all human beings....

    hmmmm human has the word man in it too...the word women has the word men in it....so do many other words.

    Of course changing such words creates a myriad of problems...problems associated with the practicality of changing millions of words in the English language and problems associated with accepting change that, like I stated before, is driven by fallacies and sexism, in particular the hatred of men....

    Feminism this non-existent, highly institutionalised minority is the driving force behind this demand for change. This hypocritical group full of contradictions despite requesting the removal of the word man from many words in the English language and claiming that gender is a social construct and that men and women do not exist, readily associates this very same word (man) with negative things, "mansplaining"..."manspreading". ..just to name a few examples. It claims that this demand for change is about equality. It isn't. its contradictory, hypocritical, sexist nonsense that has no basis in reality.

    Feminism preaches that we live in a world run by men for men. Because of this unsubstantiated, sexist interpretation of life they see the word man in man-kind as a problem. Of course to any reasonable rational human being it isn't. We do not live in a world run by men for men. If you accept that we don't you cannot accept the changes demanded by feminism because you would understand that words such as man-kind were not born of sexism but rather natural evolution of language and innocent actions that have nothing to do with gender.

    This issue is much bigger than the trivial way that you are looking at it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Agreed. Women should get back in their place!

    Why is wrong with saying 'people-kind' or 'everyone'?

    I have never really understood why folks such as yourself get so hot headed about it. It is only a word. Why does it offend you so much? It is not about political correctness. It is just inclusive. A bit like "ladies and gentlemen". I am not a gent and my wife isn't a lady. It is old fashioned clap-trap. Why not just say "everyone" and you have the whole thing covered in one word.
    It's sad to see things being forced to change, just because a few radical lefties are triggered over words (that aren't even offensive).
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chaz254)
    It's sad to see things being forced to change, just because a few radical lefties are triggered over words (that aren't even offensive).
    Things aren't being forced to change. You are not banned from using man-kind. What is being asked for, and I emphasis ask, is for language to be more inclusive.

    I work in a school with a very diverse community. If I show my students a video that only has white adults in it called Dave and Bob, the video goes completely over their heads. Why? Because they don't see themselves in that video. If I show them a video featuring children that look and sound like them, they engage.

    We take for granted the status-quo of language because we see ourselves in that language. But that doesn't mean everyone does and if you want to address a diverse audience you need to think carefully about the language you use in order to engage everyone.

    So if you are engaging the British aristocracy, by all-means talk about ladies and gentlemen. But if you are talking to my school. Just use everyone. They wouldn't understand what ladies and gentlemen meant as they are words that don't feature in their lexicography.

    And similarly with mankind or the idea that God is male and all the other bits of symbolism that put men over women. There is just no need. It isn't required and it is no big deal. We certainly didn't make a fuss when the law was changed to ensure steps were replaced by ramps for those in wheelchairs and that was a big deal.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,938

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.