Monday, June 05, 2006
No more Mum and Dad
This is ludicrous. Sure, a very small minority of children have same-sex parents. What they call them is up to their parents. The idea we should all henceforth be described as "parent" or "carer" for reasons of "sensitivity" is just stupid. In fact it is dishonest. The whole point of language, and the English language is particularly accommodating, is that words should convey as much accuracy, relevancy and information as possible. Having words available that are not to be used is quite a chilling thought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Well, words that aren't to be used is generally because those words are offensive; ergo "mum" and "dad" are offensive words. And offensive to those who cannot conceive children naturally. Adoptive parents were never offended by "mum" and "dad", they just took on the titles. Same sex parents really need to get some perspective, or those that are pandering to them need to.
George Orwell called it 'newspeak'.
Whether here or in Britain, America or Australia, teachers always seem to be in the forefront of this social-engineering lunacy.
What is it about teachers? Do they see themselves as possessors of some great wisdom denied to us mere mortals and therefore they feel entitled to inflict it on us?
Or are they just thick do-gooders?
teachers seem to get on some power trip, boosted up by the assumption that they know more than an eight-year old.
Most are but one lesson ahead...
People are always averse to change, but change comes. And people deal with it. So, the traditional sense of the family is being modified. Big deal! The same was said for inter-racial marriage few decades back..
Joy, People are not always averse to change. Many people seek constructive change. Just what is constructive about not being able to describe a parent as a "mother" or "father"?
Using terms other than mum or dad is silly. Gay couples with children use the same terms themselves. This is a case, if you pardon the pun, of being more royal than than Queen. If two gay men are happy to both be called Dad and two gay women are happy both being called "mum" why should some teachers think better? I have no problem with them letting kids know that some kids come from gay households. But if gay parents are happy with the words (and they are) who should tell them, and the rest of us, any different.
"So, the traditional sense of the family is being modified."
Which is precisely the problem, Joy.
It's *being modified* rather than evolving as institutions tend to do.
Being modified by meddling sanctimonius teachers (among others, but it seems to be mainly schoolteachers) who would do better to concentrate on their core responsibilities--producing children who can actually read, write a coherent sentence or two and with some idea of the history of their country other than the "brown victim/white colonialist" garbage they're being force-fed.
But that'd be work, not nearly as much fun as half-baked social engineering.
It seems KG has it backwards. First, society changed and it changed long before the stilted, slow, dinosaur called government caught on. There were gay families long before anyone suggested changing the law to recognise that reality. There were gay couples with ceremonies in churches long before anyone tried to change the law. Government is a bureaucrat nightmare and what it regulates (like family life and marriage) gets set into stone and only the slow changes of society finally wear it away and the laws change to reflect the facts.
i agree that constructive change is good. why do you define gay marriages and children in those marriages as destructive? It can't be more destructive that children raised by single homes because in that, they either are missing a dad or a mum. It is hilarious that people are questioning the concept of gay marriages when any marriage is not permanent anymore. People utter the vows in weddings, and then break it off. Is that the instituition of marriage that is being defended from being diluted?
People are also fighting a losing battle, because I can bet money, that gay marriages will be legalized, sooner or later. It's inevitable.
Joy, this is a debate about the use of language - not the merits of same sex relationships or marriage.
Hmmm..I don't recall criticising the concept of gay marriage at all.
What I objected to was the language being captured by special interest groups and people being told by members of those groups that the terms "mum" and "dad" were no longer "appropriate". (what a rotten weasel word "appropriate" is--used to convey purse-lipped sanctimonious disapproval when logic fails).
Your are Excellent. And so is your site! Keep up the good work. Bookmarked.
»
Post a Comment