Gender Re-education creates fluency in Gender-Newspeak

…. previous page
Part of the multi-part series: ‘Single-Gender Classes’
Index and preamble for series

Gender re-education — If you don’t get it (the gender Newspeak), then you should go to school and take remedial classes, which may permit you to appreciate the difficulties facing new immigrants who try to learn English and a vocabulary they never heard of, let alone imagined, such as in this:

No doubt, SJWs are correct (they must be, how else could we rationalize the validity of political correctness), and children are resilient.  Children will be better able to cope with the requirements of the Newspeak than non-English-speaking new immigrants are.  Children will be growing up with and into all of it and, with the help of mental giants such as Canada’s relatively new Prime Minister, who insists that people must learn to refrain from using grammatically correct English based on time-honoured traditions, and must instead  be so kind as to use proper, legal pronouns for 69 different genders and learn to employ new concepts such as those of his design ( e. g.: he recently blessed us with one of his creation, “peoplekind” instead of “mankind”).

At least our children, if we are still capable to procreate sufficiently well and often enough to have enough of those, will be able to find their way through the maze of Newspeak.  That attempt did not pan out well for the ancient Roman Empire.  It got up and died, to some extent on account of becoming involved with gender re-education and having to call in the Barbarians to help them out with showing the Romans the proper way to procreate.

The Canadian Prime Minister is a good fellow.  He has nice hair and is a man of experience, frequently moved to tears, which process he elevated to an art.  After all, his experience was gathered as a substitute English teacher, a job that served well to make many members of manpeoplekind weep, which job he had practiced for a few months.  I am fully confident that he knows what he is talking about. Mind you, he frequently changes his mind (even on aspects of Canadian Newspeak of his own making in this case), which I won’t hold against him, as he always speaks the truth (as he sees it), and Newspeak is hard to master, even for a manperson/individual/figure of his capacity.  Still what is there to worry?

Our children will grow into it.  What better way to force them to do that than to make them all use one washroom in the school they must attend.  Bathrooms are good places to have children learn what they need to learn.  I imagine how difficult it would be to give each group of children of a specific gender orientation a washroom of its own!  We could not possibly expect to have enough bathrooms that are as flexible and as numerous as our gender definitions are in every given school.  No, it is definitely much more practical to have the students all use just one single washroom in a given school they must attend.

That brings us to how many classrooms a school must have, which relates to whether there should be single-gender classes or not.  After all, when there is no need to segregate the sexes in the bathrooms in schools, why should there be a need to have gender-segregated classrooms?  That would be counter to all principles of gender re-education.

When there is no perceptible need to segregate students according to probable outcomes in academic achievements, regardless of how likely given students may be able to meet academic qualifications for advancing into Grade II, let alone into any other grade, and if all students are entitled to reach graduation after completing Grade XII, regardless of why, should a simple thing like their genitalia or their sexual preferences be a cause for segregation?  No!  That would be discriminatory, it would hurt their sensitivities, their hard-won self-esteem.

The students may not learn much, but, by Gosh, they are being protected and coddled and indoctrinated to acquire what they need more than their daily bread for the rest of their lives, which are all hard lessons learned in gender re-education.  It is a hard struggle, but they spend twelve long years acquiring self-esteem, and nothing must be done to interfere with that.  If nothing else, they will have self-esteem, and nothing will give it to them but to come out of their closets, declare and celebrate their gender differences and thereby acquire in common bathrooms and co-ed classrooms what formerly was kept private, their stigma of being openly declared deviations from the norm, thereby to build their character in spite of being widely known, all-around deviations from the norm.  They will be appreciated for that, even loved, and with enough effort, the 98-percent (or 94-percent majority, if one includes those who declare themselves to be bisexual or any other gender of their choice) will come to love them, thereby to become (if that is not too much to hope for) like them, deviations from the norm.  When they all deviate, normal is the new deviation.

Gender re-education, Gender-Newspeak Pronouns<br />(when in doubt and in conversation with an individual of unknown gender, show the sheet an let [insert pronoun of (insert pronoun) prefer(s?).]

Gender re-education — Gender-Newspeak Pronouns
(When in doubt and in conversation with an individual of unknown gender and unknown pronoun preference, show the sheet and let (insert pronoun) indicate the pronoun that (insert pronoun) prefer(s?).

Besides, having as many genders as possible will soon cure anyone wishing for gender-segregated classes.  The gender-reality of that quite simply is that there are neither enough qualified teachers nor enough classrooms to give one to each group of students bothered by their genitalia or gender orientation.  It quite simply cannot be done.  There is not enough money in the budget for it.  It is therefore cheaper and more practical to treat everyone the same.  That cannot possibly be done by catering to each individual’s preferences.  Consider that the plan was all along to create, bring out, enhance, and celebrate those gender differences, so that there is a good reason to treat everyone the same and to hammer them all flat.

Aside from that, have you studied the re-engineered set of pronouns that will fit the brave, new gender-reality? (See Table of Gender-Newspeak Pronouns)  You have not yet found the time for that?  What are your priorities?  You better get with the gender re-education program, before proceeding to the conclusion of this article series.

Make sure to memorize that table, but, for your protection against malicious prosecution, I recommend the use of a cheat-sheet.  Print a copy of that table and carry it in your wallet.  I suggest that you replace it now and then, to catch up on any updates that are bound to happen, frequently.  There does not appear to be a reliable, authoritative source of that information; I don’t know of one.  Moreover, the genders we once knew are still under re-construction, wherefore we will need quite some time yet, before our gender re-education is done.

Next to come: The unacceptable solution – Return to simplicity and
Single-sex Classes for Two Sexes


This entry was posted in Education, Social-Destruction Enterprise, The New World Order. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Gender Re-education creates fluency in Gender-Newspeak

  1. Pingback: Seven Genders - Why not more? - dads&thingsdads&things

  2. Pingback: Single-gender classes - dads&thingsdads&things

Leave a Reply