RSS Feed

The Ongoing Surrender of Terminology to the Secular-Progressive Agenda

Posted on

This past June 1, I posted an article imploring people of good will, common sense, and a respect for natural law (in short, ‘right thinking people’) to cease adopting and using terminology created and/or employed by Progressives in pursuit of their assault on objective morality.

(see https://vlogicusinsight.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/stop-playing-progressive-agenda-word-games-that-attack-objective-morality/).

Reviewing both verbal and print media over the past few months, it has become more painfully obvious that the unthinking and/or unwise use of progressive/leftist terminology by otherwise right thinking people opposed to the assault on objective morality continues with remarkable frequency to the point that almost nobody challenges the use of such terms, and, alas, the meaning behind them.

And sometimes even usually clear-headed scholars and medical people who should know better inadvertently make matters worse.  Case in point is the otherwise fine work of the American College of Pediatricians (ACP) who have declared and published the following on their website:  

 No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender(an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept;not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward.People who identify as ‘feeling like the opposite sex’ or ‘somewhere in between’ do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.  (See https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children)

This referring to gender as merely an awareness of oneself as male or female and not an objective stand-alone category not only plays into the hands of subjectivists and others who wish to promote the irrational claims of “transgenderism,” it’s also etymologically inaccurate and misleading. The roots of the term gender come from the Latin genus, which means kind, or kind of thing. As such, gender is objectively understood as the classification (kind of thing) of organisms based on their biological sex. This being so, everyone is indeed born with a gender, which is either the male gender or the female gender, and it does not matter what they are aware of at birth. For crying out loud, who is aware of much of anything when they are born?  Very sloppy work here on the part of the ACP that plays right into the hands of those who wish to make gender a subjective/fluid thing that can be determined by each individual instead of objective biology.

Similarly, the prefix trans comes from the Latin trans, which means to go beyond or cross over.  So anything that is trans X means something that crosses over or goes beyond X to something else.  Accordingly, to be “transgender” is to go beyond a particular gender, and those who claim that such is possible mean that a person has crossed over from one gender to another gender or to some hybrid or made-up fantasy gender merely by declaring him or herself to have done so.  But in the real world, nobody can cross over from one gender to another just like no human can cross over from the human species into another species and declare him or herself to actually be a “transbird” or “transwhatever,” and so once again it remains imperative for people of good will and right reason to stop misusing terminology and/or redefining terminology that denies objective reality in any way.

Bottom line: nobody is “transgender” or “transgendered,” because such is not possible by virtue of the way God designed the world and human beings (male and female He created them), and gender is not merely an awareness of one’s biological sex.  It is an objective category pertaining to either the female or male sex and nothing else.

What Approach Should We Take?

Repeating what I set forth in the June 1 article,… “right thinking individuals who oppose the attacks on morality and objective reality must cease using the misleading and/or false terminology of the progressives in support of their claims.  Secondly, the use of such terminology by progressives and others must be challenged at all times. The use and/or acceptance of the bogus terminology cannot be justified even as a matter of politeness or academic discourse protocol, and so on. As has been illustrated time and time again, abusing and manipulating terminology is a major weapon employed by progressives in the culture war, and whenever objectively false terminology is directly or indirectly treated as being even marginally legitimate in describing reality, those who use such terminology to aid their opposition to objective morality make progress in their ongoing destructive efforts, especially when the same terminology is also accepted and used by those who otherwise oppose the immoral nonsense.

The term transgender or its equivalent substitutes must never be used without employing quotation marks and/or otherwise indicating the objective falsehood of the term when writing about people who suffer from gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder.  In conversation with a person who employs the transgender’ term or its substitute labels, this must be countered immediately with politeness, but it must be clearly and forcefully explained that such a term is flat out false for the reasons set forth above.  In addition, it should also be pointed out that anyone who uses such terminology and/or accepts the false claims underlying such terminology are actually helping to perpetuate a psychological illness in the name of that other abused term tolerance – the high god of relativism.
Reclaiming a culture based on natural law, reason, and objective science starts with a relentless insistence upon and use of objective terminology that correctly reflects objective reality.

Let us always bear in mind the importance of words in service to the Word of God.”

OVV

Advertisements

3 responses »

  1. The discussion of “trans” and “transgender” reminds me of Thomas Nagel’s paper “What is it like to be a bat?”.

    Reply
  2. The proper response to fabrication and obfuscation is clarity and definition. We do not live in a world where a thing is what authority says it is, with apologies to Lewis Carroll. Long ago the American Psychiatric Association declared homosexuality not aberrant. That did not stop it from being plainly so. Now, even the LBGTQ types and their promoters acknowledge they are a different species. Clarity offends many a miscreant because it shines light on the sin.

    Reply
    • Actually, Donald, the claim of even being a different species is erroneous and should also be rejected out of hand as another denial of reality. Also keep in mind that the Letter T included in “LBGTQ” or “LGBTQ” or whatever order is used actually refers to that which does not exist in the real world, so the entire acronym should also be used with quotation marks or otherwise designated as containing within it a false label of would-be beings that do not and cannot exist in reality.

      Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: