Feminist Nonsense: Banning the Word “Man”

Feminist Nonsense: Banning the Word “Man”

Purdue University wants to ban the word “man”. I suggest they begin with manipulate.

Womanipulate works for me. Because that’s what feminists do…womanipulate.

How do you change the culture? You change the way in which people interact with one another, you change the language.

The left has been on the attack for decades as they have slowly been attempting to modify the language, they have been attempting to change the way we interact with each other. With the rise of the “politically correct” counter-culture that gained momentum in the past decade or two, we see more and more young people who claim to be offended by gender-specific pronouns.

I’d call this bullsh*t, however I’m sure Leftists will claim that I can’t be gender-specific in my bovine reference to their insanity.

According to the Purdue OWL writing guide we are no longer allowed to refer to a congressman as a congressman simply because the word includes the term “man”. Also, we can no longer refer to police and fire personnel as a fireman or policeman.

The Purdue OWL outlines specifically how we are to address possible “biased language”:

Avoid using language that is stereotypical or biased in any way. Biased language frequently occurs with gender, but can also offend groups of people based on sexual orientation, ethnicity, political interest, or race.

Ok Man, I get it. Oops, I mean Dude. No, I mean, PERSON!

What do I do with “Bro”, as that has both familial and racial implications. Thankfully, black people won’t have to deal with either…under the right circumstances. If a black person is called on this, he always has the fallback of calling his accuser racist.

What about using terms like “Mom” or “Dad”? These certainly are gender-specific? I’m guessing in California one can get arrested for referring to one’s parents by their genders. Because what if a child has two mothers, and refers to one of his mothers as “Father”?

But we also have the added twist of people asking to be called on “how they identify”. How will you know how a person identifies, unless you have spoken to them, perhaps even called them by the wrong pronoun?

Will there be “Pronoun Police”?

What about hotlines for when somebody performs the egregious act of call a man, “Sir”, or “him”? 

In the future, you will get arrested for improper use of gender pronouns. But this won’t be as bad as you think!

Inmate 1: I’m in for murder, what about you?

Inmate 2: I’m in for asking a Lesbian, “Sir, what time is it?”

Inmate 1: Damn Boss, you’re bad ass!

The Purdue OWL even provides examples of how we are to refer to various individuals in society,

Original: mankind
Alternatives: humanity, people, human beings

Original: man’s achievements
Alternative: human achievements

Original: man-made
Alternatives: synthetic, manufactured, machine-made

I have a real problem with this one, because what if it was man-made?

The OWL continues:

Original: the common man
Alternatives: the average person, ordinary people

Original: man the stockroom
Alternative: staff the stockroom

Original: nine man-hours
Alternative: nine staff-hours

All valid alternatives, except where men are actually involved.

We all know a woman-hour is worth less than a man-hour. One would think women would love the benefit of being included in man-hours?

This process is fraught with danger. For example, what do we call mannequins?

And what of the Jamaican pronunciation of man, which is “mon”? Do we penalize “monkeys”, for example?

Where does the insanity end?

I’m guessing this ends one of two ways. Either (1) women get rid of men or (2) men man up and disregard this nonsense.

My bet is on #2.

Copy */
Back to top button