As it has been shown before, abnormality is legitimized by stealing names and words, which simultaneously strips natural and normal things of existence in people’s conscious minds. That this conflicts with reality and will not long stand is beside the point that destruction will nonetheless be wrought.
The term “gender”, for example, was declared to be separate and distinct from “sex”, and terms like “man” or pronouns like “her” were appropriated. And now a judge has declared, in court, that in a case involving discrimination on the basis of sex, one must refer to biological males as “transgender females”. Quoth the judge:
“What I’m saying is you must refer to them as ‘transgender females’ rather than as ‘males.’ Again, that’s the more accurate terminology, and I think that it fully protects your client’s legitimate interests. Referring to these individuals as ‘transgender females’ is consistent with science, common practice and perhaps human decency. To refer to them as ‘males,’ period, is not accurate, certainly not as accurate, and I think it’s needlessly provocative. I don’t think that you surrender any legitimate interest or position if you refer to them as transgender females. That is what the case is about. This isn’t a case involving males who have decided that they want to run in girls’ events. This is a case about girls who say that transgender girls should not be allowed to run in girls’ events. So going forward, we will not refer to the proposed intervenors as ‘males’; understood?”
The targeted attorney made clear how nonsensical this was:
“The entire focus of the case is the fact that the CIAC policy allows individuals who are physiologically, genetically male to compete in girls’ athletics. But if I use the term ‘females’ to describe those individuals — and we’ve said in our opening brief, we’re happy to use their preferred names, because names are not the point to the case. Gender identity is not the point of this case. The point of this case is physiology of bodies driven by chromosomes and the documented athletic advantage that comes from a male body, male hormones, and male puberty in particular. So, Your Honor, I do have a concern that I am not adequately representing my client and I’m not accurately representing their position in this case as it has to be argued before Your Honor and all the way up if I refer to these individuals as ‘female,’ because that’s simply, when we’re talking about physiology, that’s not accurate, at least in the belief of my clients.”
But this madness does not end at mere “gender”, but to denying normalcy to any monogamous relationship, with one person declaring that to be part of the “spectrum of asexuallity”!
“My partner is the most compassionate, loving, and respectful partner I could ask for. He has supported me through difficult times, weight fluctuations, questioning my gender, changing my name, and sobriety, among other things. I am incredibly attracted to women. He knows this, and we have talked about opening our relationship. However, he is on the spectrum of asexuallity and is only interested in having sex with me. The thought of me having sex with other people makes him deeply uncomfortable, as we both relate to sex in very different ways.”
While people roll their eyes of now-ex-Congresswoman Katie Hill and her “thruple” (complete with nude bong hits and naturism with a goat), that wasn’t what caused her to resign—that reason involving a Congressional staff member becoming part of said thruple for a while. In many, if not most, Congressional districts, a simple “thurple” would not only not cause a voter revolt, but would actually insulate such participants from criticism.
Normalcy is becoming the new abnormal as the abnormal is normalized via the dishonest of not-so-mere words.
