Here’s a nice icon for all the true believers among you, make sure to print it and hang it up somewhere.

Is probably the most idiotic idea since the perpetuum mobile. Let’s look at the history of the thing.

1. The history of the thing.

Couple hundred years ago, people kept slaves. White people, mind you, and black slaves. I may one day explain how this came to be, but never mind all that right now. Fact of the matter is, they did. The colors involved are obviously an historical accident, or chain thereof, and as such should be entirely irrelevant to the entire discussion. Strangely enough, they aren’t.

The white people, however, out of the kindness of their own heart, coupled with the clear observation that slave labour, while cheaper, is a lot less efficient than free labour, and further a lot less skilled, then decided to free their slaves. (The slaves themselves had no part to play in either operation. They became slaves because white men with guns and ships showed up one day in the village, and they became free men because white men sitting around tables and gesturing with quills one day decided so. This completely passive role obviously festered into the mind of your average black person today, but that is another matter, for later.)

The moral observation that keeping slaves is wrong, coupled with the practical observation that keeping slaves is economically unsound formed a very powerful tandem, and stand squarely at the foundation of what is known today as the policy of non discrimination.

Essentially, the idea is that it is morally wrong, and economically wasteful to try and distinguish between people based on criteria outside their control. Pray do not ask what is the difference, in the Puritan mind, between morally wrong and economically wasteful, for nobody knows. At any rate, you aren’t asked when you’re born if you want to be black or purple or yellow or whatever, so you should be treated all the same. Nobody picked to be a girl, so nobody should pick on girls. So forth.

This is all nice and good, but it presents people today with a very interesting problem. Group identity, as we all know, is based on exclusion. The only way for individuals to recognize a group as distinct is for that group to exclude at least somebody. You obviously can’t be a Red Sox fan if everybody else is a Red Sox fan. You can’t be a fan if everybody is just as into whatever sport as you are. So forth.

Obviously, everyone wants to be in all the cool groups. Also, people want all the other people they can’t stand out of their respective groups. These two ideas formed another very powerful tandem, and stand squarely at the foundation of discrimination itself.

Now the two sides are irreconcilable, being in fact formal opposites of each other, and if you make either go away, what you have left can’t reasonably be called humans anymore. So you are stuck in the ridiculous position of telling your son all people are equal and telling your daughter she should mind who she gives head to (unless it’s a very special someone etc)

As it happens, there exists a set of readily recognizable characteristics of humans that are reasonably stable over the generations, such as gender and skin color and so forth. What a better way to differentiate between people could there be ? So we can create the groups of boys and girls, and the groups of niggas, spics, caulkies, belganas and lets not forget Betty Crocker and Aunt Janima.

Since people want to be in the cool group, it goes without saying that the group they are in is cool. Since some people are not allowed in, it is obvious these outcasts can’t be superior to the club itself. Thus, they must be inferior. And thus, a very strong correlation between being out of the group (which really means being different) and being inferior is born. By now it’s obviously wasted time to try and point out that blacks are just as different from whites as whites are from blacks, and thus whites are just as superior to blacks as blacks are to whites. And since we want all the obnoxious people out of our groups, it’s obvious that everybody out of the group is obnoxious (not to mention a liar) and thus we shouldn’t listen to them anyway.

With screeching wheels and smoking through all the hinges, progress finally made it’s way far enough to meet with this entire group discrimination issue. Much unlike tribal people living in a group, progress itself uses a rationalist approach to things. Thus it squarely kicked all this discrimination nonsense in the rear, and that’s that. There won’t be any more talk of it.

At this point we are left with two ways to handle things : we can either sacrifice the mistaken value judgments and keep the actual physical difference identifiers, or we can sacrifice the difference identifiers so as to salvage mistaken value judgments.

The next step would be obvious, except there’s a problem. Not all the people are equally rational. Therefore, not all people are equally willing to follow the dictum of “progress”. After all, this entire progress business is nothing more than a club, isn’t it ? And so, to those who can not or would not follow the imperatives of rational thought, those assessments of value, mistaken as they may be, are important.

They are important in many ways and for many reasons, but it usually happens they are important to the same sort of idiots who believe in god, don’t properly wash their genitals, accidentally shoot themselves while cleaning guns and so forth.

And so we are stuck with a new club, or should we call it tribe, the tribe of people who just won’t let go of their respective preconceived value judgments. This tribe is not exactly unpopulated, and as such spawns plenty of factions. There are the whites who gather together and plan the coming of the Aryan nation. There are the blacks who gather together and try to come up with ways to convince some authority or other to give them money for being black. There are the women who gather so they can hate men together. There is no end to the list.

But by far the most populous is the tribe of Political Correctness. And thus we are through with the history and into the subject matter.

2. The subject matter.

This tribe proposes that we change words, so that any trace of any possible difference be erased. Exactly what is the purpose of having a language that makes no difference is beyond me, but anyway. This amounts to an excellent way of reconciling the cabbage (ie mistaken value judgments) with the goat (ie rationalism), hence the name “political”. Presumably because if there is no way to reference differences, there is no way to discriminate, but in fact because if there is no way to point out prejudices, there is relatively less pressure to get rid of them. Consider these exchanges :

“You shook hands with everyone in the room except the black guy !”
*looks down in shame*

“You shook hands with everyone in the room except one person !”
“So ?”
“But that person had a certain genetically inherited skin color.”
“Like everyone else does.”
There’s just no getting to it, is there. The thing is called “correctness” because it is sadly stuck with the persnickety task of policing word usage, much like your favorite grammar school teachers.

Let us then look into some detail at some of the most holy tenets of this tribe.

“Language is not just powerful. Language is THE root of our society. A word is not just a word, but it is a symbol. Every word you speak, every world you type, and every word you think, has a symbolic meaning. This cognitive-emotive meaning tells us both how to feel about something and also how to respond TO it.”

This would be a typical excerpt. First of all, it means nothing at all. It is a sort of basic notions of the theory of language fried together with vague references to sociology, served in a rich sauce of made up words that in fact denote nothing with a side of creative use of capitalization conventions. How can anyone argue with nonsense ?

Since language allows distinction, and distinction can be then turned into a cultural construct such as discrimination, we should get rid of linguistic distinction.

On a related note, since bread knives can be turned into murder weapons, we should get rid of bread. Just for amusement’s sake, let us present the argument with bread instead of language, and see what happens.

“Bread is not just powerful. Bread is THE root of our society. A slice of bread is not just a slice of bread, but it is a symbol. Every sandwich, burrito or French toast you eat has a symbolic meaning. This cognitive-emotive meaning tells us both how to feel about something and also how to respond TO it.”

Absolutely unsinkable, if anyone manages to get past the initial shrug. Let’s try sex then.

“Sex is not just powerful. Sex is THE root of our society. A fuck is not just a fuck, but it is a symbol. Every cock you suck, every vagina you finger, every load you blow, has a symbolic meaning. This cognitive-emotive meaning tells us both how to feel about something and also how to respond TO it.”

No, really.

Is the capacity to make the sentence “My paperboy is a 40 year old woman.” worthy of being preserved? With the increase of female mail carriers the generic word “mailman” is not more accurate but is in fact misleading in a way it would not have been in years past.

Just for curiosity’s sake, what is an automobile ? Should we re-design the word to describe planes too, because it is otherwise misleading in a way it wouldn’t have been years past ? Will we have a commission looking at all the ways technology has changed the meaning of words and then decide how to change the words ? Do you want new words’ definitions with your morning paper ?

Honey, whats the word for a cat today ?

Dunno dear, wait for the mailperson. That person should be here any minute now.

I think you can’t say minute this week.

But is it *this* week ?

I think so… at least it’s the week that comes after last week.. I think… Maybe we should wait for the mailperson.

In general, the proposition that people can get together and alter their language any way they see fit is no more preposterous than the proposition that people can get to the moon by pulling their own hair. At the very most, they can get enough blood in their eyes that they can’t tell whether they are on the Moon or not yet.

And then there is the ridiculous case of the handicapped. They used to be limp and dumb. But then, somehow, it was decided that won’t do, and they become handicapped. Let alone the fact being limp is not automatically and necessarily a handicap. People can and have done great things in spite of physical shortcomings. The best admiral England ever had was missing an eye, and I bet he didn’t look all that handicapped to all the other admirals he kicked the butts off. Then handicapped wasn’t good anymore, and it became challenged. Then it became disabled. Now word is on the street it’s going to be differently-abled sometime in the near future.

Imagine you’re fifteen. Imagine you are a boy by the name of Sue. Can your life get any worse ? Yes it can. You could be Sue this week, Jenny next week, Mary after that and so on. If those idiots naming you would stop for five minutes, people would get used to the concept that you are a boy, that your name is Sue, and that you aren’t such a bad fellow after all. But no ! They are going to help you, shatter earth and sky, but by all means, help you. After all, they only mean well.

Like hell they do. What they mean is to feel important, grand, they want to save you if you need saving or if you don’t, they want to leave their mark in this world.

And this, my grandson,was your great-great-great aunt Bill.

Pappy, pappy, who was aunt Bill ?

Aunt Bill, my grandson, was the great man who changed the word for uncle to aunt and the word for aunt to uncle.

Oooooh pappy… what a great man she was !

ME : Hi there

PH : Thats hot.

ME : What is ?
PH : Hot ?

ME : Yeah
PH : That.

ME : That what ?
PH : That which it is, is, and necessarily is.

ME : Ehh ? Point !
PH : It’s a metaphysical statement dude. What do you want me to point at ?

ME : You take meth for your physical ?
PH : No, no, meta-physical. You know, the world behind the world and all that.

ME : That is a novel notion. You mean to tell me there’s a world behind the world as we see it ?
PH : Of course.

ME : Like a chair behind this chair and a floor bellow this floor and a wall behind that wall ?
PH : Exactly.

ME : A dog behind your dog ?
PH : No, that’s a cat behind Tinkerbell.

ME : I always thought that dog looked outlandish. More like a bat, with those ears…
PH : Awww, he’s cute.

ME : I guess there’s no accounting for taste. Especially not for yours.
PH : I don’t have a taste, I wash. Check for yourself.

ME : Not right now, thank you very much. Mind pulling that back down ?
PH : What’s the matter, you feel threatened by nudity ?

ME : I feel threatened by that grinning fury animal. Mind letting the boys get a picture when we’re done, and I’m out of the room ?
PH : Sure.

ME : So how’s your friend, Ritchie.
PH : Guy ?

ME : Oh god, don’t tell me you’re encroaching on Madonna territory… She will gouge your eyes out you know ?
PH : That old fart ? She’ll be a century old before I finish college.

ME : Of that, I’m sure. But i meant Nicole.
PH : Whom ?

ME : Bless you, finally a grammatically correct interview. Nicole Ritchie, your best friend.
PH : I don’t know what you are talking about.

ME : Let’s go at this from another angle. What’s your favorite film ?
PH : Zoolander.

ME : And your favorite Hamburger ?
PH : A Whooper.

ME : And your favourite fish out of the water show ?
PH : Simple Life, I guess.

ME : And who is the star of Simple Life ?
PH : Me. Obviously.

ME : And the co-star ?
PH : That would be Tinkerbell.

ME : Anyone else in the cast you might recall ?
PH : There was some fat cow who brought us refreshments. I don’t recall her name.

ME : So you don’t know who Nicole Ritchie is ?
PH : No clue.

ME : You know, she said that’s hot before you.
PH : She might have said something sounding similar. But That’s Hot is a registered trademark.

ME : Really ? For what trade ?
PH : What do you mean ?

ME : You know, for something to be a registered trademark, it has to be used in a trade. What’s your trade ?
PH : You know, stuff…

ME : Soo, its registered for use in the business of stuff ?
PH : I guess so.

ME : Waste of money, don’t you think ?
PH : What’s a waste of money ?

ME : You don’t know, do you… A waste of money is what happens to money right before people get to eat at the soup kitchen.
PH : What’s a soup kitchen ?

ME : Oh never mind. Do you recall Lindsey Logan ?
PH : Oh, yea, she’s hot.

ME : Is she trying to imitate you ?
PH : Probably.

ME : Looky what I found. What do you think ?

PH : I think she doesn’t have any balls.

ME : Yea, I agree. It’s a pale imitation isn’t it ? But you know what they say, sincerest form of flattery.
PH : I personally liked the bit when she was with that fat cow Nicole a couple weeks back, and she ditched her and came over to sit with us. Poor Nicole was simmering.

ME : Aha, so you do know who Nicole Ritchie is.
PH : Of course.

ME : But you just said you didn’t !
PH : I lied.

ME : How horribly horrible of you.
PH : So sue me.

ME : Melissa Caldwell might. She said your hamburger ad was very titillating.
PH : Titty what ? Who’s Melisa Cladwell ?

ME : Not Cladwell, Caldwell. Although… But anyway, she’s with the Parent’s Television Council.
PH : The shit you know about. No, but seriously. Where do you come up with all this crap ? Who even knows what a Parent’s Council is ? That’s like having a commission for warm beer and boring playoffs.

ME : I’m a god, I can’t help it. And things like the PTC are good because they give middle aged useless heiresses something to do.
PH : So die young, leave a beautiful corpse.

ME : Not such a bad idea. Oh, almost forgot. What sort of name is Paris ?
PH : It’s a perfectly good name.

ME : For a boy, yea.
PH : How male chauvinistically piggish of you. You mean to deny women their just share ?

ME : If you have a girl you gonna call her Tom ? Jerry ? And if you have a boy will he be Susan ?
PH : I never plan that far ahead.

ME : But look at the shit it’s getting you in. You’re gonna marry that Kasidokostas fellow. His name is Paris too. What are people gonna say, “Do we invite the Parises ?”.
PH : Whats wrong with that ?

ME : Do you actually like the fellow ? Or is it only cause of his mom’s billions ?
PH : Are you kidding ? He’s going to run for president.

ME : He is ? When ?
PH : Just after Hillary’s two terms.

ME : Oh god. I need a break. Talk to you later sweetie.
PH : Where’s the camera ?