Table of Contents
For all that our mainstream media like to big-note themselves as “speaking truth to power”, the only real truth is that they’re the most abject, bootlicking cowards on the face of the planet.
A lousy few million was all it took for the Ardern government to buy the NZ media, lock, stock and barrel. Not that they needed much enticing. The least you can say about a whore is that she’s only in it for the money: the poxy whores of the mainstream media are in it for love first, then money.
But it’s not just NZ’s cheap tarts: the Biden administration barely had to ask the US media to go on the attack to distract from impeachment investigations as the media were already lubed up and ready to take orders.
And if an ugly dude in a dress bellows, “It’s ma’am!” at them — you better bet they’re already bending over and asking “her” to go easy with them.
On 4 September, Danielle McGahey, who used to play club cricket in Melbourne, became the first transwoman to play in an official international cricket match […] Media reports of the McGahey story used the pronouns ‘she/her’. The top-ranked comment from a Telegraph reader asked: ‘Why do you call it her? He is a man’. On many other similar stories too the most liked comments express exasperation at referring to biological males as she/her. Even when media reports are critical of such stories as convicted rapists being housed in female prison wards, they go along with the pretence that the culprit is a ‘she’.
Why so?
Because they’re told to — and if there’s one thing the lickspittle mainstream media are good at, it’s taking orders from authoritarians.
The UK’s Independent Press Standards Organisation provides vague guidance on how to refer to transpeople. Associated Press guidance, widely adopted, instructs journalists to elevate feelings of gender identity above facts on sex. The Australian Government Style Manual (2023) requires using a person’s preferred pronouns in official content. Are journalists and editors compelled to follow? Whatever happened to media houses using science-based common sense aligned to settled community values, instead of meek compliance with woke guidelines from faceless, unelected and unaccountable language police?
Even if they were compelled to follow, who said they should? Remember when journalists went to jail rather than reveal sources? Journalists who were beaten, tortured, and even murdered, like Daphne Caruana in Malta, for really speaking truth to power?
And yet, the spineless blobs calling themselves “journalists” in the West today are cowed into submission by a bunch of gender-confused freaks?
The root of the pronouns pathology is the terminological sleight of hand in legally reclassifying ‘born male’ as ‘assigned male at birth’. The purpose of a birth certificate is to record the objective sex of the newborn baby, not to assign a subjective gender to it based on the parents’ prejudices and mental health issues. This leads directly to the pathology of preferred pronouns into which the masses have been conned by the insistence that it is but a small act of kindness that costs us nothing but may save vulnerable people from ideationing or committing suicide.
It’s a lie, of course. Not only does it do sod-all to stop these deluded loons from offing themselves, but it damages our whole society. A society of emasculated liars, as Theodore Dalrymple reminds us, is all too easily controlled.
We cannot have a society or constitute a community without shared frames of reference and patterns of action. Pronouns are a social-linguistic device for objectively differentiating males from females according to biological facts, not a matter of subjective individual preference. The claim – that subjective feeling and self-affirming gender identity must be given legal recognition and protection – is an existential threat to society itself. Because it’s limited to Western societies, it is an existential threat to Western society.
Spectator Australia
Which is, of course, the whole point.
