Ugly provocation
Jolyon Maugham again. Sigh.
James Kirkup tweeted his Spectator piece yesterday:
A ‘transphobic’ crime wave has hit Oxford: stickers so offensive the police refuse to describe them. (The stickers say “Women don’t have penises” and “Woman = adult human female”)
Surely you can see what an ugly and destructive provocation that is?
Ah yes; women saying women are women is so ugly and destructive. How dare we.
Surely you can see that female people have the right to their own ontological, legal and political category and have a right to defend that category from colonization. Oh no of course you can’t. You just expect us to be good compliant little girls and hand our existence away.
Ask yourself what on earth is going on that the dictionary definition of woman can even be considered a ‘provocation.’ Because asserting that a word means what it means could only be provocative if someone else was trying to change that meaning for their own ends couldn’t it?
Maugham of course paid no attention, and simply blocked people who disputed him. Same old same old.
Abiding by dictionary definitions is oppression!
He better steer clear of biology, then. Full of ugly and destructive provocations.
Surely you, Jolyon, can see that it’s not a crime? Surely you can see that the police probably have better things to do?
Since the trans cult may be trying to get the dictionaries to change the definition of woman we will soon have to abandon dictionaries as useless, I think.
If men declare that real women speaking truths men don’t want to hear to be provocative, guess they better get used to going through life being constantly provoked. On the plus side, being in a constant state of rage will probably cause earlier and more serious heart attacks in some of these guys, so , well, whatever.
Apparently some Twitter arseholes are trying to un-word ‘blindspot’ because it is supposedly offensive to blind people. Amazing.
Seth, I’m sure their campaign will largely fall on deaf ears.
AoS – too early in the morning for punning.