The tenets of our liberal culture are getting even more ridiculous
By: Zachary Faria (MSN)
Crazy stupid.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The doctrines of our liberal culture have only become more absurd over the years, even as it's clear that only a fraction of the country actually believes them.
© Provided by Washington Examiner
You can point to any one of a series of examples. Take the case of Twitter suspending the account of Republican Rep. Jim Banks, who correctly stated that health official Rachel Levine "was born and lived as a man for 54 years." Banks criticized the idea of calling Levine the "first female four-star officer to serve in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps'" because Levine's sex is male.
It is absurd enough to embrace the idea that there are no biological differences between men and women, especially when applied to women's sports. But a Democratic Oklahoma state representative took it a step further, criticizing Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt for stating that there is "no such thing as non-binary sex."
But Stitt, like Banks, is correct. There is no such thing as "non-binary sex," just as it is true that Levine is not the first female four-star officer. Biology still exists. Science is real. It is not hateful conduct, as Twitter and that Oklahoma Democrat claim, to acknowledge that.
Not content with just warping biology to fit leftist dogma, liberal institutions have taken to butchering multiple languages. "Latinx" has now replaced "Latino" as a "gender-neutral" alternative. It is used by 5% of Latinos and 99% of liberal politicians and institutions. "Filipino" has likewise been replaced by the atrocity "Filipinx," at least occasionally.
"Filipinx" in the LA Times pic.twitter.com/PIpufwFFbM — Zachary Faria (@ZacharyFaria) October 25, 2021
Meanwhile, former Sacramento Kings broadcaster Grant Napear is suing his former radio station for wrongful termination. Napear was fired last year during the height of the Black Lives Matter movement for responding to former Kings center DeMarcus Cousins by saying that "All lives matter…Every single one." The radio station immediately fired him and claimed that his comments about all lives mattering did not reflect its views or values. Seriously.
Each of these things sounds ridiculous to most people — certainly to all sane people. And yet this is what our dominant liberal culture is now pushing, as corporations obediently bow to made-up biology, edited foreign languages, and the idea that caring about equality is something you should distance yourself from. This cultural march is not going to stop on its own, or with the pushback of invested conservative activists. It will stop only when everyday people make it clear that they reject it.
Tags
Who is online
41 visitors
This has to be reined in.....................
"invested conservative activists"
The real ones are now called RINOs by Donald's culture warriors.
They seem to be trying to outdo each other, getting sillier with each move
Indeed they do. They are doubling down on stupid on every hot button issue.
The slogan "Black Lives Matter" does not negate the statement that "all lives matter". It is an addition that adds emphasis on the marginalized group, it does not remove the larger group.
I hate to say it, but one would have to be pretty stupid to not understand that.
I find it hilarious that these "liberal tenets" seem to be defined only by the conservatives that want to poke holes in them.
It is like having Breast Cancer Awareness month. It is not stating that all forms of cancer are not as important.
Really?
Then why was Grant Napear fired for saying "All lives matter?"
Shouldn't you be asking his former employer, rather than expecting people to read tea leaves for an answer?
EXACTLY! For all we know he stole other people's food out of the fridge.
John said that black lives matter doesn't take away from all lives matter.
The Grant Napear firing contradicts that.
Prove it!! Provide a statement from his former employer, stating that was the only reason for his termination.
In fact, simply provide a statement, from his former employer, that lists that reason specifically as even 1 of the reasons he was fired.
DeMarcus Cousins, a professional basketball player, asked Grant Napear what his take was on Black Lives Matter. He didnt ask him if all lives matter.
If I asked someone what their take was on civil rights for people of color, I would not expect them to say "white people deserve civil rights too".
Napear did not respond to the question as asked. He made a political statement.
I dont think I would have fired him for it, but that is the stations place to explain.
But it is incorrect to say that Napear was not taking a political position, otherwise he would have answerd the question from Cousins as asked.
h
Does a quote from the Mercury News count? (There are others)
The question was a political statement
Not unless they were his current employer (person or corporation that fired him), and it includes that specific quote.
What you provided was a generic statement from an HR person.
Which is all they can do by law.
So you are stating that Vic's statement is a lie because he has no way of knowing that it is true.....by law?
So it proves once and for all that "black lives matter" excludes everyone else.
Thank you.
Nope that's your wish. All I am saying is, last I knew, HR people are only allowed to state date of hire, date of termination/voluntary quit, position, and salary. It isn't a lie if the person being let go knows the reason.
Don't put words in my typing especially to suit your usual semantics game and desire to argue just to argue. Thanks,
Just going by what you said.
Which means, by your statement, that Vic would have no way of knowing that he was fired for making the alleged statement. Therefore, when he made the claim, he made it while knowing that he did not know the truth of why Grant was fired. Isn't that a lie?
Unless you are claiming that Vic is in reality Grant Napear, you have just made my point. Plus, I do not believe that HR is required to tell you every detail about why you are being fired, unless it is brought up in court. Especially not in "right to work" states.
I have put no words in your mouth, I have taken what you have freely said, and quoted you. What you have said indicates that you think Vic is lying.
Let's settle this. Vic said, and I quote, "Then why was Grant Napear fired for saying "All lives matter?"
You said, and I quote, "HR people are only allowed to state date of hire, date of termination/voluntary quit, position, and salary".
With your statement in mind, is Vic in any position to be telling the truth?
ALL LIVES MATTER!
we back the blue. 👮🏾♀️🚔
Black lives matter will only mean something when it means all black lives matter, not just the few tey choose. What about the black children that get killed in their homes by bullet from hand shootings outside their homes? What of the gang members themselves that are killing each other in close to record numbers? What about the other victims of black on black crimes. They don't seem to care about them
Certainly most liberals don't believe black children's lives matter...especially white liberals.
Then I guess there wasn't any reason to fire anybody.
No it will stop when people, especially the people that hire other people, embrace the Declaration of Independence and
Bill of Rights.
The day when no woman is regarded by a hiring manager as a potential conquest or dating candidate.
A day when one is no longer labeled queer or tranny based on their hair color, tats or clothing/ jewelry.
A day when no applicant is excused for skin color or cultural accents.
Some day, hopefully
everyone will be judged equally on what was once the exclusive realm of white men with experience.
Some day
but until then you will have hit pieces by "wonderful" people like Jim Banks.
Declaration of Independence? Wanna explain the "tie-in" with that one?
Enough?
No....not really.
There is a pretty wide gap between "don't call somebody a tranny" and "you must pretend I'm a woman because I feel like one".
There is a similarly wide gap between "a person with an accent" and "a person who talks like the office is a hip hop club", just as there is a huge difference between a spring break tattoo on your ass and three teardrops under your left eye.
My whole rant was don't judge someone by appearances, not calling anyone a tranny, jeez.
And what is Rachel Levine after THAT surgery?
That's a bit beyond pretending to be a woman, that's commitment, if nothing else.
A man
Obviously.
My whole point was that there is a lot more to this "cultural march" than your innocuous statements would have everyone believe, just like there is a lot more nuance to not judging by appearances than your statements acknowledge. (I would also utterly contest your "white men with experience" remark, but that's for another time and place.)
"Not judging someone by appearances" is a noble if unrealistic goal. That's great. But that's not what this culture war is about, and I think you probably know that.
Let's not pretend a US Congressman hasn't been banned from one of the largest communication platforms on the planet over a true statement.
Let's also acknowledge that the vast majority of Dr. Levine's career achievements were in fact accomplished as a man... and that celebrating this appointment as though a female has fought her way to the top is extremely disingenuous.
Let's also remember that gender dysphoria was classified as a mental illness until a very short time ago, and that every other condition where people have such strong feelings of discontent that they want to drastically alter their bodies with drugs and surgery is still considered a mental illness.
So there is quite a lot of resistance to the idea that the rest of us must all affirm this idea that somebody is a man or woman simply because they "identify" as such. It's not just about judging by appearances.
Again.
A living person should not be judged by that shit "in a perfect world".
btw, I guess I missed the celebration.
I don't think it's a mental illness and disagree that it is still considered that.
The APA changed their language in DSV-M in 2012 from disorder to dysphoria.
The APA recognizes that dysphoria not resulting in distress or disablement is not a mental disorder.
It was "rescheduled' in the ICD-11 in 2018 as a "sexual health condition".
Yes there is resistance, there was a resistance to evolution once too.
What about evolution is actually harmful to you rhetorically speaking?
How many transgender people do you know? Are you sure?
I don't hold it against anyone to doesn't know some one who has done it.
They are the same person.
being judged by their appearances
( if you are aware of it , there in lies the deliciousness of the joke )
We're not talking about evolution. We're talking about the suppression of discourse and ideas in a free society. We're talking about viewpoints being compelled. It's simply the 2021 zealots of the Church of Liberal Politics replacing the Southern Baptist zealots of the 1950s.
No idea. Not aware of any, but that doesn't mean anything. Doesn't matter, though. I don't care what they do to themselves. It's a free country and they can do what they want.
I object to being told what I'm required to think about it. I object to people demanding I accept their feelings instead of basic science. (I object when Southern Baptists do the same thing, BTW.) I object to people demanding that any alternative view be silenced.
Anybody that tries to force acceptance of their belief system is going to meet with resistance.
I understand that sentiment completely but
I don't think when a person like Levine gets in the news, that they are forcing their beliefs on anyone.
Oh I agree completely.
I do think it's unfortunate that often the trans person gets inaccurately caught in the shitstorm.
Levine didn't ban anybody from Twitter. To my knowledge, Levine isn't trying to get Dave Chappelle shut down or suppress anyone else's ability to express a contrary opinion.
But those things are happening, and people correctly object.
But if you say it publicly, you are doxxed, you are called a racist, and will probably be threatened and assaulted.
You know...
The liberal way of disagreeing with someone.
I think they all sit together bashing each other in the head with sledge hammers to make up this stupidity.
Good one!