Who will fight for women’s rights now?

This is a reprint of an article that has been prevented from being posted on Face Book Because they said it violates their community Standards

All the more reason to read it I suppose.


The article is Authored by Robert Bridge: (we are helping get his words out)

Robert Bridge


Oh Brother (PDF)

Oh Brother! Who Will Fight for Women’s Rights Now That the Democrats Have Scrapped Gendered Terms?


The social justice monster has come full circle and is now devouring its ‘Dr. Frankenstein’ creator, Robert Bridge writes.

One might be forgiven for thinking, at a time when panic over a pandemic is sweeping the land, and a political battle over control of the White House is raging, the Democrats would take a break from stoking partisan fires. Forgiven or not, you would be thinking wrong.

The social justice monster has come full circle and is now devouring its ‘Dr. Frankenstein’ creator. That much was clear this week as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in the name of “inclusivity” and “diversity,” tossed raw meat to the radical progressives inside of the Democratic Party by banning gender-specific terms.

The revamped House code of conduct now forbids use of those words that once made a Hallmark card worth sending. Intimate words that evoke familiarity, like ‘father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, and granddaughter… gone with the wind.

Because any allusion to the binary world of male and female is offensive to about 0.01 percent of the nation’s population, lawmakers will be forced to substitute those sex-stained terms with surgically sterile and neutered ones like ‘‘parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, step child, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild.”

At the same time, the new rules call for the creation of an Office of Diversity and Inclusion, which will be empowered to do, among other things, “direct and guide House employing offices to recruit, hire, train, develop, advance, promote, and retain a diverse workforce…” No chance of anything going wrong there.

So what is really going on here, aside from just more taxpayer-funded absurdity from brain-dead politicians? First, the new House rules represent just the latest broadside against the traditional nuclear family, which requires for its very survival a commitment to biological certainties, like the existence of just two reproductive sexes, known throughout millennia as ‘male’ and ‘female’ and denoted by the XY and XX chromosomes, respectively.

These days, however, a newborn baby can no longer expect to be delivered into a sane world where a doctor may freely congratulate its mother and father – excuse me, the parents – on the birth of a beautiful baby girl or boy – excuse me, offspring. That’s because “assigning sex” at birth is no longer acceptable to the cancel culture inquisition. That would be oppressing the little bambino with something called ‘science’ at a time when some politically motivated members of the medical community are insisting that gender is nothing more than a ‘social construct,’ a fluid concept that can change at any time.

In fact, for those who have not been keeping tabs on the escalating madness, there are now dozens of gender types, including male, female, transgender, gender neutral, non-binary, agender, pangender and genderqueer. Can anyone imagine what it must be like for a pimply pubescent to sit through a sex-education class in the midst of such infernal confusion and uncertainty? Moreover, it’s the height of irony and arrogance how Democrats are lecturing Republicans about “following the science” on Covid-19, yet they refuse to follow the simplest of all science, that is, the existence of exactly two human genders, male and female. The real ‘social constructs’ are the other dozens of categories that now wish to claim status as ‘genders.’

The presumptuousness and stupidity on the part of the Democrats does not end there. At a time when the Cultural Marxists cannot bear to hear familial terms dripping with sexual innuendo, they are gleefully introducing elementary school children to discussions on alternative sexual lifestyles, like transgender. Most adults have no problem with an individual identifying with whichever sex he or she desires. But would it be asking too much to let the children stick to learning the Three Rs before jumping headlong into an orgy of lifestyles choices? The danger of subjecting young and impressionable children to this pseudo-science is apparent in the increasing number of youth who are now regretting their irreversible sex-change operations.

Finally, in what is perhaps the greatest irony of all is that these ridiculous word games only serve to cancel out legitimate movements. Concealed below the shroud of Orwellian doublespeak is a tyrannical word salad that does just the opposite of what it purports to do: increase “inclusion” and “diversity” in society.

For example, how can one have any sort of conversation on ‘women’s rights,’ for example, when any mention of the fair sex has been outright banned? The question is not a rhetorical one.

“It’s the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for women to deny the very biological existence of women,” former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, who just might be the last Democrat in DC with a functioning brain, told Tucker Carlson. “Instead of doing something that could actually help save people’s lives, they are choosing instead to say ‘You can’t say mother or father.’”

I would ask for an ‘Amen!’ at this point, but, thanks to the clown work of lawmaker Emanuel Cleaver, who ended his congressional prayer opening of the very unsexy 117th Congress with the words “amen and awoman,” even that simple gender-free term (which simply means ‘so be it’) is now tainted with foul political intrigue.

With these sort of unforgivable stunts under the belt, the Democrats should be very grateful they have perfected the art of ‘winning’ elections, otherwise they would probably vanish from the political landscape simply out of lack of doing anything positive for the nation. Indeed, the term ‘Democrat’ may be on the way out faster than that of ‘male’ and ‘female.’

All Credits go to where credit is due.

One thought on “Who will fight for women’s rights now?

  1. Dennis Martin January 25, 2021 / 8:34 am

    The irony! The Left has courted Feminism as a cherished Cultural Offensive fir decades and now this troublesome betrayal. Not surprised. Feminism has served its purpose and true to firm, the Left uses the dupes and then discards them when no longer useful.

    The current occupant of the Oval Office is merely a cloak, a figure head, for the extreme voices now ensconced in Congress, Academia, theMefia, and yes, Corporate America.

    Why dont we just cut to the chase and call each other “Comrade” and be done with it! No visible gender, no rank or implied privilege and as neutral as the Left desires. Hey, let’s do like Trotsky and the Russian Red Army in 1918: remove all signs of rank from Police and Military?
    No chevrons, epaulets, whatever! Everyone equal!

    Welcome to Socialist America.

    Like

Let your voice be heard - join the conversation

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s