‘No More Girls in Girls’ School’ (2016)

See the source image

If they ain’t girls, and they ain’t boys, then what are they? (On second thought, don’t answer that.)

This crazy **** is happening right in front of us in real time, and I don’t know anybody who can tell us why. Here, two years ago, the Girls School Assn. in the UK wishes to drop the word “girls” because “girls” is not “inclusive” enough.

https://leeduigon.com/2016/06/21/no-more-girls-in-girls-school/

Who decided everything that to be “inclusive”?

There’s this thing called “language,” see, it’s our primary means of communication, and it consists of these other things called “words.” And if a word does not exclude all the meanings except for the one the speaker actually wishes to convey, then it’s not a freakin’ word anymore! It’s just noise.

If girls are not girls, what are they?

But I don’t think I want to know the Left’s answer to that question.

About leeduigon

I have lived in Metuchen, NJ, all my life. I have been married to my wife Patricia since 1977. I am a former newspaper editor and reporter. I was also the owner-operator of my own small business for several years. I wrote various novels and short stories published during 1980s and 1990s. I am a long-time student of judo and Japanese swordsmanship (kenjutsu). I also play chess, basketball, and military and sports simulations. View all posts by leeduigon

5 responses to “‘No More Girls in Girls’ School’ (2016)

  • Unknowable

    “And if a word does not exclude all the meanings except for the one the speaker actually wishes to convey, then it’s not a freakin’ word anymore! It’s just noise.”

    Excellent point. At some point, it ceases to be symbolic and becomes simple signals, which are how animals “speak”. We are moving in a bad direction.

    Like

  • Phoebe

    I was just thinking about this earlier today — that we’re being “permitted” fewer and fewer words as more and more words are supposedly offensive, harmful, and/or “threatening” to approved victim groups. I thought that pretty soon we’d be reduced to nothing but grunts — but then I realized that even grunts might be seen as somehow offensive to some victim group. Sign language? No, that would be cultural appropriation of the Deaf Culture.

    There really is an approved “Deaf Culture,” by the way. One of my colleagues in the English Dept, who was actually the head of our Disability Studies program, was attacked by other Disabilities Studies people (including many from other academic institutions) because she wouldn’t condemn the use of cochlear implants to heal deafness. You see, allowing the healing of deafness would imply that there’s something wrong with deaf people and would undermine the deaf culture. I’m not making this up. And don’t feel too sorry for my colleague. She was also a vehement victimologist and had strayed only on this one point of doctrine.

    And you thought the scribes and Pharisees were off base for objecting to Our Lord’s healing of the blind, the deaf, and the lame on the Sabbath, right? These Disabilities Studies people would object to His healing them at all.

    Liked by 1 person

  • thewhiterabbit2016

    Whenever I come upon someone who is obviously a lesbian or homosexual, it gives me the creeps. But my reflective response to them is one of pity because as long as they remain in outright rebellion against God’s law, they will never find true happiness (and for sure they are not gay – that is an oxymoron).

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: