Friday, 20 October 2017


The latest cult to emerge from the nihilistic Left is that of 'gender pronouns', which also seem to change every so often. Ten years ago, it was not even on the radar; then suddenly, every American university campus was flooded with things like 'ze' and 'xe' and 'per' and 'thon' and various others. Now, the latest pronoun fashion seems to be to use 'they' and 'them' for usually obese middle-class Leftists who wish to reject Natural Order and the way they were born, as though changing language somehow changes the reality of who they are.

The chart above is a typical list of third-person singular gender pronouns from just three years ago. You will notice immediately what is missing: the pronouns relating to pure maleness, and this reveals what the people behind this nonsense are really up to. Equally, below is a chart of all the new symbols that were being used at around the same time. The male figure is back, but this is probably so it can be compared with the likes of 'demiboy', whatever that is.

As said though, these charts are from just a few years ago, but now the tack has changed to simplifying everything to just 'they' and 'them'. There is a good reason for this (from these people's perspective), which I will now go into. The initial explosion of 'alternative genders' demonstrates what the whole LGBTJQ+ racket actually is: hobbyism. Think about it: what do 'members of the LGBTJQ+ community' constantly talk about? Their sexuality is their hobby. And not just any hobby; it is taken to obsession. A former friend of mine's wife was a bit of a fag hag and their parties were inevitably populated by quite a few 'people of alternative sexualities' (to keep it within TC parlance). Their first topic for conversation was always when they 'came out' to their parents, followed by tales from the 'gay scene'. They ask us not to stereotype them, and yet they have made themselves into complete stereotypes.

Therefore it follows that all this invention of pronouns and symbols gives them a grammar through which they can talk about their hobby and pseudo-intellectualise it, just like trainspotters have their own terminology. As such, it would remain an irrelevance to most people - except in their obession they wish to impose this grammar on everyone. And this is why the grammar had to be simplified for mass consumption, because the whole range was just not marketable to the masses, but remains for 'aficionados'. The video below is just one of many going round that propagandise the alleged importance of gender pronouns:

Yet if the new gender pronouns were so important, why have they been simplified? The simple answer is the original pronouns are not important at all; it is the imposition that is important. Because unlike most hobbies, this one has an underlying will to power. The simplified pronouns, one notes, are also the ones we use for the plural form of the third person. The implication here is those identifying as 'they' have more worth than those identifying as 'he' or 'she'. This is a deliberate attack on normal people through congnitive linguistics, whereby thought is manipulated through the political abuse of language.

Ultimately, this hobby promotes passive aggression; romantic yet nonsensical talk of 'planets and stars and sky' and overwrought appeals to our caring side by describing being 'misgendered' as 'a knife in my heart' is juxtaposed with imperative language like '...and that's a non-negotiable' or 'you need to...' And again we have masculinity described as 'toxic', which shows these people do have figures of hate they love to attack. In the case of the Asian male in the video, as he reveals, he hates masculinity (and therefore wishes to destroy it) because he himself could not live up to the White masculine ideal (again demonstrating the problems of multi-racialism). Indeed, when one of these hobbyists talks about 'psychological violence', she does not even think of the psychological violence these people themselves cause, especially as they have infiltrated the education system and inflicted their nonsense on vulnerable children.

You will also notice all the buzzwords and stock phrases like 'challenging but also rewarding', 'validating', 'presenting', 'options'. These have come from the glossary of big business. Look at most international corporations and they not only subscribe to the LGBTJQ+ agenda, but actively promote it. The same George Soros the insider trader and billionaire internationalist tycoon is the same George Soros that funds these pressure groups and transfers the language of business to the language of the New Left: from Whiggism to post-Marxism.

1 comment:

  1. The whole "changing the birth certificate" instinctively outrages me as it is a lie. The birth is a historical event recorded down, no matter what that person claims to be now. It is a lie akin to 1984's memory holes and Ministry of Truth.

    I see they had three versions of "agender", whatever that is meant to mean. It's like a cult formed by mad people who are encouraged to indulge. Once they beat people down to accept "they" they'll beat them down to accept the next stage and so on. The slippery slope goes all they way down to oblivion and they are dragging everyone else a short distance behind them as they go. Remember when the excuse for "acceptance" was that it didn't matter what people did behind closed doors? Whatever happened to the "behind closed doors" part?