Connect with us


Cambridge Dictionary succumbs to progressives, changes definition of ‘man’ and ‘woman’



Screen Shot 2022 08 29 at 10.16.33 PM

The fetish progressive liberals display for redefining foundational human truths will not end well. The Cambridge Dictionary has succumbed to their fantasy, going so far as to redefining ‘man’ and ‘woman.’

The New York Post writes of the changes:

“Man” now includes the definition “an adult who lives and identifies as a male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.”

In the same vein, the updated definition of “woman” reads “an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.”

In a New York Post op-ed by Mark Goldblatt titled

Dictionary redefining ‘man’ and ‘woman’ is what happens when you reject reality for one group’s fantasy.

The article details the confusion unleashed by the Cambridge Dictionary using Pete Buttigieg, current Secretary of Transportation of the United States government, as an illustrative example. “Consider the statement “Pete Buttigieg is a gay man.” You probably think you know what it means: Pete Buttigieg is an adult male human being who is sexually attracted to other adult male human beings. But,” the article continues, per the Cambridge Dictionary, the assertion may mean at least three other things.

The article goes through the new variations allowed under the revised definitions:

For example, the otherwise benign phrase could mean that Mr. Buttigieg is an adult male human being who is attracted to female human beings who identify as male. The phrase could also mean that Mr. Buttigieg is an adult female human being who identifies as male and is attracted to other adult male human beings. There is at least one other variation of meaning to add to the loss of clarity of meaning. The phrase could mean that Mr. Buttigieg is an adult female human being who identifies as male and is attracted to other female human beings who identify as male.

These conflicting interpretations of “gay man” exist because, as reported, the Cambridge Dictionary’s definition of “man” now includes what the article describes as “the grammatically tortured, trans-sensitive addendum” which is “an adult who lives and identifies as a male though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth.” Its definition of “woman” has been likewise stretched.

This is what happens, the article reports, to language and logic when you reject what’s demonstrably true in favor of what a sympathetic group of people wishes were true. The article advances the questionable proposition “You start out with good intentions” and concludes one may not end up not being able to say clearly what you mean.

Of course, language evolves. For elaboration, not long ago, the sentence “Pete Buttigieg is a gay man” would mean Mayor Pete is a happy, fun-loving fellow. “Gay” acquired a “homosexual” sense relatively recently. But words don’t get blurred with their antonyms to render what’s false true.

The article asserts that “male” and female” have clear definitions: they’re sexual classifications. There are only two sexual classifications, and even in those vanishingly rare instances where observable anatomy isn’t determinative, a person’s genome will reveal his or her sex with 100% accuracy.

Dictionaries have become venues of warfare. “These points get contentious only if you argue that “man,” “woman,” “male” and “female” are fluid terms: arbitrary assignments and subjective realizations — rather than objective, empirical observations — “that can be overridden by untestable gender identities.” That’s why dictionaries are now battlegrounds. Men become women and women become men only by substituting gender identities for sexual classifications. The article concludes that the “demand to substitute freely is the whole of the transgender-recognition case.” When reality is extinguished, things will not end well, because the impulse to eliminate reality can be boundless.

You may like

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar kicked off House Foreign Affairs Committee



ilhan omar d mn

Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar was voted off the House Foreign Affairs Committee Thursday. The action was expected, as Republican members of Congress had criticized Omar’s antisemetic and anti-American rhetoric.

After intense debating on the House floor, the resolution passed with a 218-211 vote. Democrats attempted to pull the race card, accusing Republican House members of racism for removing Omar from the committee.

Omar also accused House Republicans of racism, saying, “I am Muslim, I am an immigrant, and interestingly, from Africa…Is anyone surprised that I am being targeted? Is anyone surprised that I am somehow deemed unworthy to speak about American foreign policy, or that they see me as a powerful voice that needs to be silenced?”

“There is this idea that you are a suspect if you are an immigrant or if you are from certain parts of the world or certain skin tone or a muslim.” Omar said during the heated debate. A fiery Alexandria Ocasia Cortez also chimed in shouting, “This is an attack on women of color!”

Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, from New York, said she had personally witnessed Omar spew anti-American rhetoric. Malliotakis said, “I have been in that committee room where, the representative, equates Israel and the United States to Hamas and the Taliban. Absolutely unacceptable for a member of that committee.”

A four-page resolution was written for the justification of removing Omar from the house Foreign Affairs Committee. The resolution states that in 2019, Omar suggested that Jewish people were buying U.S. political support when she posted on Twitter, “it’s all about the Benjamins, baby.”

Omar also commented on the September 11th attacks saying, “some people did something.” This type of comment is unacceptable for any representative who is sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, lawmakers said.

In the resolution it states that members of this committee should all be held to an “equal standard of conduct due to the international sensitivities and national security concerns under the jurisdiction of this committee.”


You may like

Continue Reading

Trending Now



Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC