Madness: Awakened Scientists Ask to Replace ‘Male’ or ‘Female’ with ‘Sperm-Producing’

by

Not a week goes by in America if some industry or over-credentialed institution has new language restrictions or recommendations.

The term police is used to patrol the liberal arts beat and human resources departments. Now, no industry including science and medicine is safe. If you were to go back to the dawn of the feminist movement when women would burn their bras and proudly proclaim ‘I am a woman!’ And told them that in future, using the word ‘woman’ would be considered controversial, I believe they would scream.

Yet, here we are, kneeling to the crowd of gendered gender ideologies and erasing not just women, but men in an attempt to appease the delicate sensibilities of a statistically small percentage of our population. Unfortunately, this type of placation has some potential real-world negative repercussions.

RELATED: NY Middle School Apologizes For ‘Culturally Insensitive’ Chicken And Waffles Meal

Sex is actually binary

The latest push to erase the two-sex dynamic comes from the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (EEB) Language Project, the brainchild of American and Canadian scientists. One major change that caught the attention of journalists this week was their recommendation to classify individuals as ‘male’ and ‘female’.

They argue that these terms should be phased out because they reinforce the idea that sexuality is binary. So to make sure you relate to me, they want to stop classifying people by their gender because science is no longer science.

So how should scientists classify individuals? According to this crackpot group of experts, scientists should use the terms ‘sperm producer’ or ‘egg producer’ instead.

But my favorite option they suggest is to refer to individuals as ‘XY/XX individuals’, so… male and female? So how is it any different? Oh, that’s right, it doesn’t.

The rationale behind these changes is that these new terms avoid “emphasis on hetero-ideological perspectives”. Ah, this is not an attempt to be more specific with our science but to please sexual orientations other than heterosexuality.

Naturally, this nonsense does not stop with the words ‘male’ and ‘female’.

Related: Non-Binary God? The Church of England considers language in scriptures to be gender-neutral

Is there anything you can say?

In addition to male/female terms, the list of recommended phased words includes:

  • male/female
  • parents
  • Primitive/advanced
  • stranger
  • offensive
  • outsider
  • non-native
  • race

The reasoning behind phasing out ‘invasive’ and ‘non-native species’ is that, according to these scientists, these terms are “xenophobic, anti-immigrant, and militaristic.” Now, I am not the end of all military terms and vocabulary. Still, I can tell you that ‘invasive’ and ‘non-native species’ are not military terms, whatever that means.

Instead of saying ‘invasive’ or ‘non-native’, they suggest saying ‘newcomer’ or ‘nuisance species’, which might be my favorite suggestion yet. How cool is it to call a group a ‘nuisance species’?!

But perhaps the craziest argument in this mess is the proposed alternation of two fundamental scientific terms; Double-blind and survival of the fittest. Obviously, using the term double-blind can be offensive to people with disabilities.

I think it’s even more offensive to assume that blind people aren’t intelligent enough to understand the difference between their disability and the definition of double-blind. ‘Survival of the fittest’ is perhaps considered harmful because it also discriminates against disabled people and is associated with eugenics.

See, my husband and I are members of the disabled community. We are both more fit to survive, especially in light of this type of activity.

Related: It’s ‘Adios!’ ‘Aloha!’ As the leftist word police strike again

The death of science

Why our country is so far behind China in terms of education and innovation is quite enlightening. Instead of doing real science, we are preoccupied with how much we can signal without considering how it degrades real science.

“I think that when you label male/female, mother/father as harmful, you’re abandoning science for ideological support,” explains Frank Furedi, a professor at the University of Kent. The flip side of this argument is that while most people don’t intentionally use their language to cause pain, these terms have the power to “unwittingly damage,” as the project explains, “the inherent complexity and historical legacies of language.”

Dr. Caitlin Gaynor, who helped start the EEB project, says that “the project started as a Twitter conversation between a few people discussing potentially harmful terminology.”

This should have been a red flag; Nothing good comes from Twitter conversations.

“Regardless of the intention, the project of language re-engineering will cause confusion for many and the last thing scientists need is a lack of clarity about the meaning of the words they use,” said Professor Furedi.

The professor has a point – what kind of catastrophic problems can scientists use impure language or focus on ideals instead of scientific principles?

RELATED: “Satanic Gender Affirmation Ceremony” held at State Capitol to protest child gender reassignment bill

Loss of focus

It’s a crazy world where we focus on policing our words instead of moving forward with real innovation and discovery. Last month UK museums made waves when they said they would phase out the term ‘mummy’ and use ‘mummified person’ instead.

“The term ‘mummy’ is not wrong, but it is inhumane,” said a spokesman for the National Museums of Scotland. Inhuman to whom? Dead mummy?!

Trust me; I’m reasonably sure that word doesn’t scar Mummy mentally. Dr. University of British Columbia. “The EEB Language Project will be a living document, as particular words that are harmful and their substitutes may change over time,” said Daniel Ignace on behalf of the EEB Project.

You know, how comforting it is that we can spin our proverbial wheels around completely innocuous words instead of doing science.

“The hope is that this grassroots effort will bring people together,” Ignace said.

This is reasonable, because there have been many times in history when what people can and cannot say has ultimately brought people together.

Now is the time to support and share your sources of faith.
Ranked #3 on FeedSpot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites” by The Political Insider.