A Matter Of Phrasing

By TOM TAKASH

Not long ago, sipping my morning coffee and checking the Internet for the latest news, I came across the following: “A recent UC Irvine inclusive language guide directs people to stop using the phrase ‘kill two birds with one stone,” and instead use the less violent ‘feed two birds with one scone’.” I just had to read it a second time. Then, I read it a third time.
This suggestion sounded crazy to me. My first reaction was to completely reject it as apparently some academic’s delusional attempt to help direct one’s thoughts away from aggressive behavior toward our “animal friends.” It implied that this rephrasing could result in a kinder and gentler approach to life. Who could believe this nonsense? But then, the thought occurred to me: Hey, this is coming from one of our major universities. Their pronouncements get press. There are many people who trust and respect the ideas coming from our universities. This bit of rephrasing, and others like it, are changing the views of the vulnerable and not in a good way.
After all, haven’t they made many rethink what were accepted norms in our past? Didn’t the introduction of such phrases as “termination of pregnancy” and “reproductive choice” lead to what many now think is an easier and less demanding approach to everyday life, a life without responsibility? Hasn’t the killing of the unborn become, in the eyes of many, actually an act of “selfless love?”
Many, who, at one time, might have agonized over an abortion as an evil act, now due to clever rephrasing, comfort themselves with such phrases as “preventing an unwanted and unplanned child.” Haven’t we heard that “terminating a pregnancy” can be an act of love? After all, it’s an ugly world and saving a child from being born into it is a brave and courageous act! One would think it takes some serious mental gymnastics to accept that logic, but phrase manipulation can work wonders for anyone looking for an excuse to cover their sins. It’s amazing what flipping a few words can do to blind one’s self from truth.
One very effective phrase today is, “My body, my choice.” This mantra has become the sacred prayer of the radical feminists. Abortion is really a very personal decision made by a woman regarding her body. It’s her right to decide. Just like having a “tummy tuck,” we are told that from recent data that abortion is rarely a dangerous surgery, and in the hands of a professional and competent medically educated person, a safe, and most often, a simple outpatient procedure. A woman with this unwanted invasion of her body, can be in and out, and feeling good and on her way. And with the advent of telemedicine, it can be like getting rid of a headache; just swallow a pill and say hello to good times again!
And, if she’s a minor, no need to tell Mom or Dad. Why upset them, and it’s none of their business anyway?
Besides, abortion is, thanks to rephrasing, “an act of love,” a “removal of an impediment to one’s educational plans,” a “necessary career move,” or even “a sacrament.” Different language can cover a multitude of sins, turning a repulsive deed into a gentle and giving act, so that it appears to be good and necessary. By massaging our words, so-called intellectuals are convincing us that we must throw out outdated sentimentality in favor of new and softer views.
We are being dictated to by a frightening and growing community of pseudo-intellectuals who, we often believe, are smarter than we are. After all, they are the most educated and powerful among us. They mingle with our political leaders and attend the best events. No doubt they’re the ones at the really important charity balls and usually can be seen at The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
They tell us that we must let go of our archaic views! We just have to learn to stop letting our consciences interfere with our decisions. We’ve often been misled by outdated and often prejudicial views, or by doctored history, no doubt promulgated by right-wingers and religious fanatics.
And if we still have any doubts about the upside to the abortion issue, we don’t have to rely on the “pro-choice” positions of Nancy Pelosi and other Catholic politicians any more. We now have the kinder and gentler words of the “pro-choice” Jesuit priest, the former chaplain to Pelosi’s House of Representatives, Fr. Pat Conroy. (It was fortunate, because of her, he was appointed to the prestigious chaplain’s position.) Conroy assures us: “Choice is a highly American value, and it’s a church value.”
Once again, with the magic of the enlightened use of the English language, we are being shown the error of our ways. Father tells us that a “pro-choice” Democrat is not a pro-abortion person. Until he pointed that out, it appeared that there was no real difference. What a revelation. Until Conroy enlightened us, many pro-lifers had wondered how these “pro-choice” Catholic Democrats could continue to claim to be faithful Catholics, but now we know better! They’re just defending the constitutional rights of choice.
Again, with proper phrasing and a little twist, and everything is OK. These politicians are just being good citizens. And according to Fr. Conroy, if a woman decides to choose an abortion “it’s our task as fellow Christians, or Catholics, to make it possible for her to optimize her ability to make the choice.” See how when presented with commonsense wording, we can come to know that evil is not so bad, if we just put the right mask on it. Who said, “You can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear.”
And our “Thought Police” will not stop correcting what they know is misinformation until everyone acknowledges the truth as revealed through their efforts. There are many more seemingly harmless phrases that they will want changed for our own good. No doubt the thought of “stoning innocent birds” caused someone many sleepless nights and eventually an awakening to one of the major causes of violence in the world today. We should be thankful that with that discovery, the Thought Police will work all the harder to make our lives better.
Most certainly, after countless hours and considerable research, they will soon address other causes of ill feelings, aggressive thoughts, and violent behavior, and they will issue more directives to save us from ourselves. After all, who does not want “sugar and spice, and everything nice”? There are certainly scores of other phrases that make use of animals without a thought as to the adverse consequences that could result. It’s important that we make changes now, before it’s too late!

More Phrases To Mull

So, I have a few suggestions for UC Irvine’s inclusive language guide, regarding other violent and offensive phrases using our poor defensive animal brothers and sisters trapped in this world often dominated by cruel and uncaring humans. Is there anything less caring than, “There’s more than one way to skin a cat?” Oh, horrors! How about, we substitute, “There’s more than one way to help an animal undress?” Gee, doesn’t that makes you feel like selling all you own and joining a commune? Maybe I’ll send that suggestion to the Thought Police at UC Irvine.
And while we’re discussing dangerous animal phrases, here’s a few suggestion for them to work over: Why do we speak of a bad guy as “a dirty rat”? Why is a sneaky person, “a snake in the grass”? What about a wolf in “sheep’s clothing”? Is it being fair to assume that “a bull in a china shop” is any clumsier than you or I? I could go on, but I’m sure you’re already beating your chest and with tears in your eyes, shouting “Mea culpa, mea culpa.”
Who knows, maybe this restructuring of our language will lead to an awakening throughout the world to the beauty of Humanism, Free Love, and unlimited worldly goods, and as John Lennon and Yoko Ono wrote in the song Imagine: “Imagine there are no countries. It isn’t hard to do, nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too?” All these things can be ours, if we just let the elites in our society restructure our language and our lives.
Thankfully, it does seem that almost every day we awake to more instructions changing our language and inviting us to conform to the feel-good society that is rapidly surrounding our day-to-day lives. Our trusted media, entertainers, politicians, and modern feminists continually monitor our words and actions and assure us that they have a better way.
And they do. I am embarrassed to admit that just recently my eyes were opened to my “white privilege.” For most of my life, I thought that everyone had the same opportunities in America. That racial prejudice was mostly a thing of the past. That Lincoln freed the slaves. That blacks were “. . . free, free at last.” Then Black Lives Matter, our faithful Democratic Party, and their fellow travelers, said: “No Way.” Our white supremacist majority had completely blinded me regarding our past racial relations and those who had fought to eliminate prejudice.
I now know that rewriting history is absolutely necessary to open our minds. The wool had been pulled over my eyes for too long. It’s difficult to admit this, but until recently I thought that Abraham Lincoln was one of our greatest presidents. I admired him for leading the Union though a brutal civil war that ended slavery in our country. Now words from our elite tell me that I am blinded by my “white privilege.” What a fool I have been.
Lincoln was not the man that I thought he was, and I have no doubt that I will witness the just desecration of his statues in the not-too-distant future. I think there are already calls to remove The Lincoln Monument. And what of the hundreds of thousands of Union soldiers who followed his lead and lost their lives, not to mention the thousands who returned home blind or missing a limb? Shouldn’t we respect their memory?
Well it’s sad to say, but they are, after all, just a footnote in an old and inaccurate history book on a dusty shelf in a library which has long ago been replaced by the Internet. What about another great leader, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his famous “I Have a Dream,” speech made from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial to 250,000 people attending the 1963 March on Washington? I’m sure that the Critical Race Theorists and the Thought Police have dubbed him an anachronism, hardly worthy of a mention.
What Lincoln and King accomplished means little or nothing now that we’ve had a chance to examine them in light of a fresh look at our society. Today we realize that slaves weren’t really made free, but remain victims, second-class citizens still serving the needs of their white masters. The terrible memory of the American slavery experience itself must never be placed on page two. It must be brought up over and over again. After all, if we don’t discuss it every day, won’t it begin again tomorrow?
No matter how often we condemn it, it seems that must still be placed on the highest altar above all other atrocities. The Nazis’ coldly planned Holocaust, the slaughter of millions by Mao, Stalin’s starvation of ethnic Ukrainians, the Turkish genocide of the Armenian people, the Khmer Rouge brutal remake of Cambodia are all just a few of the many shameful tragic incidents of man’s cruelty to man, but none of them must over shadow or minimize our memory of the evil of slavery in America.

Thomas Sowell’s Wise Words

Maybe, I should not admit this, but there are times that I doubt the work of our Thought Police. When I read that white people have even knelt before blacks, begging forgiveness for offenses committed against black slaves who lived over one hundred and fifty years ago, I wonder if the Thought Police have gone too far. These offenses were committed by white people whom today’s “guilt-ridden” white people never knew, against black people whom today’s black population never knew!
How often have we given thought to the possibility that by continually shining light on that past dark time in our history, we are creating generations of people who, until recently, had been demonstrating pride and self-reliance, and may now instead, be considering themselves victims who deserve special privileges? I am reminded of a remark by the brilliant black American economist, Thomas Sowell, who said: “When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.”
And what will this preferential treatment do for blacks? Will it result in a better life for them? Will it bring races closer together? Well, let’s see what it’s doing so far. At the request of some frustrated and angry blacks, we now have special dormitories in some of our colleges and universities that are for blacks only. There are special graduation ceremonies for blacks from some of our colleges and universities, again at their request. We have special award ceremonies for blacks, i.e., Afro-Academics, Cultural, Technological and Scientific Olympics, Black Caucus of the American Library Association Literary Awards, The BET Honors, which celebrate the lives and achievements of African American Luminaries. And there are many other “specials” for blacks. Does anyone think that this is equal treatment? Is it only me that sees this as splitting races apart?
Segregation again, but this time at the demand of the “oppressed.” This is progress? I need clarification from the Thought Police. I had hoped that just a few of their soft and gentle words would lead me to understand that this form of segregation is truly bringing all of us closer together.
But how can the Thought Police comfort me about the doubts I have when I witness a major university waste time and energy rewriting a basically harmless analogy and twisting its meaning into violent thought, and what about the terrible killing of an unborn actually being described as the result of a mother’s love, and even being called a “sacrament,” and the shameful defense of abortion by a priest who offers irrational cover for a political party that promotes and finances millions of abortions?
I guess I’m just a hopeless relic of the past. No matter how much I try, down deep in the depth of my soul, I still know that using the phrase “killing two birds with one stone” has never hurt anyone, that abortion is never an act of love, or a sacrament. It’s always an act of murder. A “pro-choice” Democrat is, in fact, a pro-abortion person.
The charge of white privilege is often used as an excuse to claim victimhood. For the last few years we have often heard the demand, “Defund the Police.” It’s about time that we rephrase that to read “Defund the Thought Police!”