Banning the truth
Walt Heyer wrote, “The ‘Sex Change’ I Had 40 Years Ago Was A Scam, Not Medicine.”
He said, “A person’s sex cannot be changed. I know. I lived and identified as a woman for eight years. Hormones and surgery didn’t change my sex. I was a man before surgery, and I remained a man after surgery, illustrating the truth of God’s perfect design — two separate and distinct sexes, male and female, innate and unchangeable.”
How does the meme go?
Oh yes, God created man and woman. Democrats created the other 57 genders.
Before Elon Musk bought Twitter a few months ago, this tweet mocking the man who claimed a women’s cycling trophy would have been censored and its author banned.
Readers of my blog urged me to move to Substack because of the annoying censorship by Google, which owned the Blogspot platform I used.
But tranny tyranny goes further. This is plastic surgery plus hormone treatments. No one dares to call it plastic surgery, even though men are getting boob jobs to look like women. They do not call it transsexual surgery. Instead, the American media bows to LGBT Inc. and calls it gender-affirming care.
Liberals who once pushed feminism now call women vulva owners. Those in the LGBT crowd are not chauvinist pigs. They are chauvinist trichinella.
Castrating a boy or giving a girl an unnecessary double mastectomy is no more health care than abortion is reproductive health care. But variances from today’s accepted language are unacceptable. The non-conformists will be dealt with severely.
Ironically, liberals cry censorship just like the boy who called wolf.
AP barely re-wrote a press release from the American Library Association, titling it, “Book ban attempts hit record high in 2022, library org says.”
But attempts to ban books are so rare that I doubt that there was a serious attempt last year. Surely a publisher would not hesitate to sue the government and get a restraining order if it attempted such a ban. The ALA included calls to restrict access to these books by children as a banishment.
The AP and ALA oppose attempts by parents to have libraries keep adult books out of the hands of children. AP quoted Deborah Caldwell-Stone, who directs the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, at length but AP failed to talk to one parent or official who wants librarians to do their jobs and protect kids from porn.
Not giving both sides of the story is not journalism. It is propaganda. AP does this so often in political that it indeed is censoring conservatives.
AP’s story also revealed a double standard when it comes to race.
Its story said, “Caldwell-Stone says that some books have been targeted by liberals because of racist language — notably Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — but the vast majority of complaints come from conservatives, directed at works with LGBTIQA+ or racial themes. They include Maia Kobabe’s Gender Queer, Jonathan Evison’s Lawn Boy, Angie Thomas’ The Hate U Give and a book-length edition of the 1619 Project, the Pulitzer Prize-winning report from The New York Times on the legacy of slavery in the U.S.
So it is OK for black people to complain about racism but it is not OK for white people to do so.
Barnes & Noble displayed books it claimed were banned.
If the books are banned, how could B&N display them in public without being arrested?
Lefties are the ones who want to ban books. The National Post said lefties desire banning Dr. Seuss is because “the Cat in the Hat is not a cat, but a racist minstrel show stereotype.” The left also demands rewrites of Roald Dahl’s children’s books including Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (Willie Wonka) because the Oompa Loompa promote racial stereotypes.
Let no one be safe again.
A more threatening censorship is on the rise because Big Tech is in bed with the Deep State. The federal government paid Twitter $3.5 million to censor conservatives.
Labeling words hate speech enables social media censors — called moderators — to censor.
Facebook says, “We believe that people use their voice and connect more freely when they don't feel attacked on the basis of who they are. That is why we don't allow hate speech on Facebook. It creates an environment of intimidation and exclusion, and in some cases may promote offline violence.
We define hate speech as a direct attack against people — rather than concepts or institutions — on the basis of what we call protected characteristics: race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease.”
The First Amendment protects hate speech. In fact, hate speech is why we put that protection into the Constitution.
British censorship is ahead of the Biden administration — for now. BMJ, which is published by the British Medical Association, published on February 17, 2021, entitled, “Should we criminalize those who spread misinformation about vaccines?”
While that may look over the top today will be accepted by the media in a few years. Once we considered it weird to call someone ze. Now requiring people to call you ze or something similarly inane is considered a right — a right that invalidates free speech. Calling someone ze is still weird.
That is an example of the more subtle censorship is re-working the language. We went from homosexual to gay over 50 years. It took just a few years to go from gay marriage to same-sex marriage.
As the last writer to call it Red China, I know the importance of calling things what they are instead of what liberals want you to believe they are.
But the media now calls lefty riots mostly peaceful protests and conservative protests insurrections.
Censoring people in the name of stopping disinformation and misinformation rose in the pandemic panic. Social media protected government medical experts from criticism, even though those experts were wrong about masks, social distancing and vaccines. None of those things stopped the virus because nothing short of a moonsuit will protect you.
Liberals are peculiar about censorship. The Art Newspaper reported that Hope Carrasquilla said she was fired as a school principal in Tallahassee, Florida, because she showed a photo of Michelangelo’s David to sixth graders.
The story said, “One parent felt ‘point-blank upset,’ Carrasquilla told HuffPost, and ‘felt her child should not be viewing’ the iconic 16th-century exemplar of Renaissance sculpture, which depicts a figure from the Old Testament's Book of Samuel.”
What would be the liberal reaction if a principal read the Book of Samuel in a public school? If the statue is OK, why not the book it was based on?
But Barney Bishop III, chairman of the school’s board, told Slate that was not why she was asked to resign.
Bishop said, “As I said in the Tallahassee Democrat, based on counsel from our employment lawyer, I’m not going to get into the reasons.
“But this wasn’t about that one issue. That’s not the entire truth, and she knows it. The fact is, I have been working with her since she became principal, and I have supported her as principal. But as I saw how things were going, how decisions were being made, I made the decision this was the best thing for the school.”
It seems as though she screwed up as principal and came up with this issue to turn herself into a martyr.
Liberals oppose free speech because it promotes free thought. There are many ways to shut people up. The first one is to declare something racist.
Mimi Nartey wrote, “10 Words & Phrases You Might Not Know Are Racist.”
Topping the list is “I don't see color.” The phrase is toxic because without the racist straw man, you cannot divide people.
An example of verboten words is Oriental. They do this because it differentiates Chinese, Korean and Japanese people from the rest of Asia. Different cultures, religions, alphabet styles, languages and skin tone don’t matter.
Up in Canada, the National Post’s list included quoting Beyoncé lyrics — “Appropriating Black culture is not intersectional feminism” — Steve Martin’s King Tut sketch, and shooting Nazis in video games. Nazis are now protected by the left. How fitting.
The truth is under attack. It is a tough battle but it must be fought and won to spare the next generation of Walter Heyers the agony of transsexual surgery.
Today’s TOTALLY SCIENTIFIC POLL.
Once again, Mr. Surber, you have SO many things to comment on that it is difficult to know where to begin. I will keep my view simple. As I re-enter the job market, one thing I have noticed is how many potential employers want to be called by their "Proper" pronouns. I see that and I delete the ad. Do these people really not know if they are a he, she or an 'it?' As far as racist intent goes, I have always found that the people who cry 'racism' first are the biggest racists of them all. I am tempted to engage them in debate, but liberals are too stupid to take about anything and that is my thought for today.
Poll: Both were equally damaging to our structure, imho.
"If the books are banned, how could B&N display them in public without being arrested?"
Is there a better example to showcase liberal hypocrisy? Apply it at every level.