Stop using their Newspeak now!

a reply to: dandandat2

Oh my dear god.

a reply to: dandandat2
Think you are confused.
Color and sex are constants, we have no control over.
If you are a man, you may think you are a woman but you will NEVER think like a woman and vice versa.

I'm still bummed that we can't call people "retarded" anymore.

After all, it IS the scientific term is it not?

Also notice how when generalized labels (tranny, retard, queer) are removed in favor of more specific ones, a push to social-acceptance quickly follows?

I guess furries are next...

what you talkin' bout
a reply to: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: ToddB
I've always referred to "trannies" as either standard 3 or 4 speed, or automatic.
Transvestite cross-dressers are sick individuals, period.
We need the insane asylums brought back into being.
There would be a sh*t ton of conversions, I'd bet the farm on that one!

Ironically, dropping one on the head of the other could cure many ills plaguing the world today.

PS: Muncie rock crusher will always be the King of trannies.

My M-22 lost the countershaft and cost $150 to repair, back in '77. A couple years prior to that, I gave away what I thought was a bum tranny, but it was just effed linkage, on the Borg-Warner T-10. The guy I gave it to was a friend, and he helped me on my conversion to Powerglide.

originally posted by: incoserv
a reply to: Nothin

From that post, I'd say it's more accurate that you actually don't believe that there is any meaning in words, because I really can't make much sense of it.

It'd go to follow, though. If you believe that there is no truth in words, then they cannot have meaning because it is impossible for them to convey truth, therefore they cannot convey reality or facts because reality and facts must be inherently truthful.

What a sad world you live in.

Can't decide if my answer should be : nah, but yeah, or ; yeah, but nah ...

Let's try and walk it back, to see where the message got lost.

A - There are those that would usurp, or capture older words and change their definitions, and/or create New-Words™, or is that not what this thread is about ?

B - If so : don't Comply™ ! Simple !
If " They™ " want to control us by changing the meaning of a word : don't give them that power !

A rose by any other name : is still a rose, in it's essence.

What's essential, is invisible to the eye.

They can change the Label™ : but they can't change the essence.

Dying our hair blue, dropping to our knees, and screaming " WHY !!! " is not gonna help.

Reject their control grab anyway you want, but you seemed to be struggling with it all, so just came to try and help.
But everyone sees things differently.

So maybe the methods that work for me, won't work for another, but at least they are out-of-the-box ideas, that may lead other folks to finding their own alternate solutions, to dealing with today's weird world.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: incoserv
Perhaps my ideas may seem silly, but do they not take one away from the effect of Newspeak™ ?

No, not silly, and no, they don't 'take one away' from anything.

They do, however, suggest that we just destroy the entire concept of language, so forgive me if I just laugh my ass off at your drivel and go on my way.

Drivel ?

What do you suggest : that everyone on Earth speaks the exact same dialect of English, with the exact same expressions, accents, everything, everywhere, for evermore ?

Should we also decide the correct temperature, at which the Earth is to remain for ever and ever ?

What is the " correct " language and words ?
And what version shall that be : Victorian English ?

Forsooth !
Thine yonder ruse doth hast lost his bloomers !! LoL !!

Should the COTUS™, Magna-Carta™, and other old Treaties™ be rewritten in our new chosen version of " Proper-English™ " ?

All concepts were invented by us silly apes, and will disappear, when we do.

Concepts, words, languages : they come and go for now.

Be like water ...

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: tanstaafl
Drivel ?

Yes. See below...

What do you suggest : that everyone on Earth speaks the exact same dialect of English, with the exact same expressions, accents, everything, everywhere, for evermore ?

Should we also decide the correct temperature, at which the Earth is to remain for ever and ever ?

What is the " correct " language and words ?
And what version shall that be : Victorian English ?

As I said... DRIVEL.

originally posted by: incoserv
a reply to: Nothin

What's essential, is invisible to the eye.

Hey, don’t bring Monsieur le Petit Prince into this, you can decide if his sheep ate the rose but c’est la seule question qui mérite que vous y réfléchissiez…I just can’t imagine my favorite character as part of the transgender argument.

Speaking of ponderance…

I have said it on here before but I’ll say it once more. Homosexuality seems totally natural to me. Why? Well, because every animal produces a small percentage of offspring which are homosexual come sexual maturity. That rings true from penguins to 24-hour lifespan fruit flies! In fact, flies have taught us a lot regarding the genetics of homosexuality. Homosexuality is also a healthy expression of love between two consenting adults and we all know a two parent home is exponentially more likely to produce a mentally sound child.

When you look at nature again though, you don’t see the animal kingdom producing offspring which attempt to camouflage as the opposite sex and pass as another gender. Peahens don’t pluck a cock’s feathers and stick them into their plumage. Lionesses don’t tear out all their hair in an attempt to leave a mane.

It seems that it is purely a human phenomenon and not only that, but we have all seen in the last two years (which is all it took) that the promotion of the idea of transgender, actually creates transgender people making it, in my opinion, a psychiatric issue born from isolation and remaining inside an echo chamber of ideas which may feel like they would cure the depression which is, in reality, born out of the act of isolating, the never venturing outside into the sunlight, never frolicking, not being socialized as humans have been for aeons with skin to skin touch and eye contact face-to-face among friends. Electronic virtual socialization fails yo create healthy people and this generation proves that as they know nothing, dole out celebrity status to thee most worthless and self-absorbed people they can find, they have no artistic movement, no counterculture…just desperation to be seen as an individual through labels and attention grabbing shenanigans. If they only signed off and had relationships again instead of wallowing with other nutters this would have been thee generation above all others.

And again, in a recent nationwide survey, it was found that 51%, that’s more than half, of Generation Z’s male population, consider themselves to be something OTHER than male/boy.

This wasn’t the case in my generation, I assure you. And it wasn’t that 51% of boys were another gender but simply afraid to come out about it.

The only thing that can be concluded is that seeding the idea of transgenderism is, in and of itself, creating an illness which confuses a person’s gender. We can only hope there is a cure, that it can be undone, that they grow out of it, or I don’t know…

Or it’s Monsanto’s fruits and veggies…but I’m goin’ with option A…

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: tanstaafl
Drivel ?

Yes. See below...

What do you suggest : that everyone on Earth speaks the exact same dialect of English, with the exact same expressions, accents, everything, everywhere, for evermore ?

Should we also decide the correct temperature, at which the Earth is to remain for ever and ever ?

What is the " correct " language and words ?
And what version shall that be : Victorian English ?

As I said... DRIVEL.

Oh yer jest a beggin fer it now , LoL !!

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat

Merci mon ami !

That's part of the point though : Le Petit Prince is above, and beyond the shenanigans.

It is up to us, to rise-above the nonsense, instead of just stomping our feet.
They™ provide the nonsense : we rise above : c'est simple, non ?

But no : they just pump it out, and we all get outraged, make threads on the web, and argue with people we should be getting-along with.

Here's another case-in-point :

That " Poll™ " that you mentioned, that says so-and-so.

How many time do members make threads, and posts, about outrageous Polls™ like that ?
How many times in the past, did ole Nothin reply to those threads and posts, and ask, to resounding crickets :

Where did that Poll™ originate, who Sponsored™ it, who Designed™ it, who Crafted™ the language just so ?
Who, or what energy is behind that Poll™ ?
Have we studied it in depth to spot the Narratives™ and Agendas™ at work ?

Those same questions should be asked about every News-Story™ as well, like so many threads are based-on, yet nobody ever questions the Narratives™ and Agendas™.

Remember seeing you mention recently, that you were a translator.
That puts you in a good position, to have learnt about how languages evolve, the etymology of words, the origins of expressions, and also how they all fade-away in time.

How do you view the Weaponization™ of Words™ and Expressions™ ?

Should we fight tooth and nail, to preserve our own personal temporary meaning of an ephemeral word ?

Personally : am too old to get stuck on other peoples nonsense ; so have developed many tricks to circumnavigate
the crazy.

Another trick is to add the " ™ " after them newfangled fancy Words™, to show that they are Weaponized™, or a Tool™, or Owned-and-Operated™.

Anywho : merci pour la réponse, et bonne soirée.

a reply to: incoserv

British people totally have this problem, it's weird like they speak English but they don't.

too far gone...

a reply to: incoserv

Love this, your so spot on! I find myself laughing at most of this, and most of my friends refuse to call a person nonbinary. They are either male or female, we don't do the 'fantasy' world bullcrap either. If they have a problem with it. I just tell them "I identify as a god so they better bow down and worship me if they want me to respect their 'identification' cause that road goes both ways sweetheart."

Granted, I don't really believe I am a god, i'm a pathetic mortal just like the rest of the world. However, I don't mind the double edged sword cause it's gonna cut both ways. If we going to play that game of "I AM" I will ensure I win.

a reply to: incoserv

Those are great points. It's kind of a double edged sword. I've always believed in being respectful of others and I have no problem addressing a transgender girl as female, especially if she is actually living as a female (as opposed to "IT"S MAAAAAM! lol). However, they are weaponizing the LGBT community against the public to push an agenda on our children so at some point you have to call out the agenda for what it is. And this has gone way too far, especially with that swimmer who was a guy 100% but called himself female. And don't even get me started on the laws they are passing where children as young as 7 can consent to gender therapy. It's all part of depopulation. I feel the most for the kids growing up in this horrible time. It's one thing to help kids feel comfortable in who they are and prevent bullying of kids who are gay or even confused but it's another thing to program them into being confused!

BTW I saw a reply on Hate Speech. I thought I would note that there is no such thing as "Hate Speech". It's a made up term. Legally speaking, "hate speech" is protected by the first amendment even if it's vile and disgusting. So that whole argument about "hate speech" should be tossed out the window because when you impede upon someone elses rights, no matter how disgusting you might find them, you are impeding upon your own.

originally posted by: conspiracytheoristIAM


a reply to: incoserv


Being adopted as a baby, most adoptees wonder about their " biological parents" and distinguish them from the parents who raised them. So, I think there might be some holes in your assertion ?

I think we're talking about biological parents and not biological is it a biological male or is it a biological female

In the medical field, one must ask this question.
What was your assigned gender at birth. This is a new or Newspeak term that was not really used much 10 years ago.

originally posted by: incoserv
As news was just seeping out with initially conflicting information regarding the demented transvestite murderer yesterday, my wife said something that sparked a minor argument between us. She asked if the murderer was a "biological female." I asked her to never use that terminology again. Indeed, I do not use it, never have and never will.

Why?, you ask...

I'll explain.

You see, Orwell's concept of Newspeak is a real thing. It is a tool of the New (really not 'new,' but as ancient as the tower of Babel) Order.

It is the first step in the process of neurolinguistic programming, for as much as our words express our thoughts, they also shape our thoughts. When you allow yourself to be coerced into expressing thoughts in Newspeak, you are allowing yourself to be neurolinguistically programmed (i.e., brainwashed) by slow degrees that are not even perceptible to your own self.

To wit:

When speaking of a tranny, do you sometimes refer to him or her as a "biological" (insert actual sex)?

You likely do, like my dear partially brainwashed wife who asked if the murderer was a "biological female."

Now answer this question: Ten years ago - even five years ago - would it have occurred to you to refer to anyone as a "biological" male or a "biological" female?

More than likely the answer to that question is a resounding NO! Back in the good ol' days, people were either just male or female, men or women (as they actually still are today, XX and XY chromosomes and all that still being a thing). This ridiculous invented need to indicate 'biological' didn't exist. Women are women and men are men; always have been and always will be, Newspeak be damned! You would have just asked, "Was it a man or a woman?" Not a "biological..."

Every time you refer to a tranny or cross-dresser as a "transgendered person," or described someone as a "biological ***," you are using Newspeak and are allowng yourself to be neurolinguistically programmed (i.e., brainwashed) little by little. When you are induced to call a man a she or a woman a he, to speak of "her testicles," it's the same, whether due to fear of social pressure or a misplaced sense of "nice."

This, my friends, is a perfect example of Newspeak.

Just STOP IT!

STOP using their neurolinguistic programmng vernacular for your own sake and that of those around you. Stop brainwashing yourself!

ETA: If, when you see a propaganda article saying something like "her testicles" (I actually saw that a couple of days ago) or "he was pregnant," something inside you doesn't retch, you are already partially brainwashed.

:

originally posted by: olaru12
Question....

Is "newspeak" covered under the 1st. amendment?

usconstitution.net...

Sure, it is.

What is not covered under the first amendment is obligating me to use use it and penalizing me if I don't.

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
And again, in a recent nationwide survey, it was found that 51%, that’s more than half, of Generation Z’s male population, consider themselves to be something OTHER than male/boy.

This wasn’t the case in my generation, I assure you. And it wasn’t that 51% of boys were another gender but simply afraid to come out about it.

The only thing that can be concluded is that seeding the idea of transgenderism is, in and of itself, creating an illness which confuses a person’s gender. We can only hope there is a cure, that it can be undone, that they grow out of it, or I don’t know…

Or it’s Monsanto’s fruits and veggies…but I’m goin’ with option A…

i like your posts but i disagree when it comes to your conclusion. times are changing so people and societies. woman were under control for a long long time, no equality. in germany until the 90s raping your wife wasn't a crime. homosexuality was a crime until the 60s i think. so, maybe because of a more liberal and open times its much easier for people to show the world what they want to be or who they really are. but sometimes it feels like zeitgeist i must admit.

a reply to: malte85

So you're saying the 'new perspective ' marks a new age of freedom from oppression for women?

Are you even certain of what constitutes a 'woman?'


ETA: Not to mention that we're kicking their asses.in every sport imaginable. YAY! for that hard earned equality.

: