Three dudes try to stifle debate:
Mr. Burns is right: there's no difference between calling him a biological male (which he is) and a man (which he...technically, whether or not he or I wish he wasn't...is). That's about where his understanding ends.I am *SO* fucking tired of being a debate subject.
— Joanna the Fearless (@JoannaFearless) March 17, 2021
It all started, you note, when Tony Sosin tried claiming that "the media", already in trouble for endlessly lying about trannies, should go even further down the rabbit hole of lies by eschewing the term "biological male". The reason? It's a "slur", and the media never ever ever is allowed to "slur" somebody. Unless you're Ezra Levant, or a kid in a MAGA hat, or a slightly conservative Supreme Court candidate, or a different slightly conservative Supreme Court candidate, or Canadian gun advocates, or principled bloggers. He also claimed that's "it's okay to have debate and disagree" and then immediately decided that the terms of debate can only be fought on faggot terms. Rush warned us about this years ago.
Now, back to this gay marriage and language business. I don’t mind having to re-explain this. I have learned over 25 years that it takes oftentimes ten different ways to explain something in order for some people to understand it. Now, yesterday I said that gay marriage is inevitable. There are two elements to this. One of them: The Republican Party signaled there isn’t gonna be pushback against it. But, secondly, we lost the language, and that’s just as important.The institution of marriage has been targeted for destruction, essentially, and the road to destroying it is being paved, and the way that this has been started is to change the definition. I’ll tell you what’s coming next. After this “civil right,” they’ll move on to “liberating” illegal aliens, and then taking away our civil right to bear arms. They will also continue to push a carbon tax on the basis of climate change and whatever else. They’ll continue to corrupt the public school system, however they manage to do that.
So can we return the favour? "Fetus" is a serious anti-ageist slur...the only acceptable term is living human baby. "COVID19" is unacceptable...debate and disagreement is fine and all but anybody in the media who calls it anything other than the Chinese Communist Party's Wuhan Flu bioweapon needs to be censored. Not that we're against disagreement and debate of course, heaven forbid! Debate is great as long as people only use the words I permit and the opinions I allow.
On the bright side, having debated this with myself, I was wrong earlier. When I implied Kevin Burns only said one sentence fragment of truth, I wasn't paying close enough attention. He was also right when he said:
It’s an appeal to nature which is inherently biased against our lived experience
Indeed, that's what we say to all the weirdos who believe themselves to be Napoleon: what you believe you are is unrelated to reality. And until you stop being so aggressive about your mental illness, you will continue to be a subject of debate.
And much deserved ridicule.
