12 Comments

Thanks for the article Ken and I hope we can have a picnic some day. Oh shit, I just used a forbidden word. Picnic. Supposed to say Outdoor Eating. Sometimes I want to weep for the passing of common sense and the arrival of such fragility. People are strong. Or at least they can be. We have way too many warriors battling words instead of problems. It seems they won't be satisfied until everything is ground down to a fine powder of bland.

Keep pushing back. We have words for a reason. They mean things. The language is rich (and that's probably a no-no because classism or something) and if you dig hard enough you can probably find some frail excuse to forbid a word, but even if something does evoke an old memory we aren't comfortable with, so be it. It's an opportunity to rise above. To learn. To grow. Avoidance is not the answer.

Expand full comment
author

It occurred to me that there must be some root of bitterness or something that is feeding this penchant for cancelling and banning everything that's not in perfect sync with one's ideals. Especially given that so much of it is done so maliciously (or at least it seems that way). Playing the victim is just another tool to that end.

Expand full comment
Mar 24, 2023Liked by Ken Hiebert

Perhaps not bitterness but an untreatable mass phychosis being continuously self-inflicted on these troubled souls. Their inability and unwillingness to see reality the way others do must be a terrible way to want to live.

Expand full comment

My take on it is that in a world where people feel powerless to do anything about large forces and problems they resort to small battles with ultimately inconsequential things as to have a sense of accomplishment. Sure, some is emotional propaganda from on high, but these emerging trends on Twitter and college campuses to scrub the language of anything that might be considered offensive by someone, anyone, somewhere, anywhere, encourages and celebrates human weakness. No wonder we're floundering. People can handle a lot but seem to prefer the victim role lately.

Here's a piece of mine you might be interested in. Thanks Ken.

https://victordavid.com/writing/the-walking-woken

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for that, Victor. Excellent words. I couldn't figure out how to leave a comment on the article, so I'll leave it here.

Yes, the outrage machine is really running hot these days. I say this as someone who has a fair bit of outrage myself at precisely what you mentioned. I guess I'm of the opinion that my outrage is much more valid than that of the "prevailing winds".

I think history makes a pretty good case that I'm right.

Expand full comment

Thanks for checking that out, Ken. Seems like we're on the same page. Keep on putting it out there. You've got a strong voice.

Expand full comment
Mar 24, 2023Liked by Ken Hiebert

Hello, I found you through the Discord server, and I think that I am here to stay.

This is a very important point to make, and if we do not fight for our gods given rights now, then our children will never know that they existed.

When will you be posting a "memory hole review" or "memory hole rewards" post? I want to hear more about the power of words, which ones we have lost, what they meant, and the implications of their disappearance.

Expand full comment
author

Excellent - welcome aboard, Magan!

I agree on the importance of this issue. I also like the memory hole review idea. There is so much stuff that we really shouldn't allow ourselves to forget.

Expand full comment

Sometimes I try to list them, but I always miss something. That's the terrible beauty of a memory hole.

Expand full comment

I have to say, this is an odd one. On one hand you seem to suggest that the Merrium Webster dictionary has done wrong by making an edit to the definition of ‘female’, and at the same time you’re decrying the policing of language? If anything, hasn’t the dictionary given the word a more liberal meaning? And aren’t you calling for stricter usage? Who is the North Korea style oppressor in this situation?

Are you alluding to Bill C 16? Isn’t that a bit of a stretch?

Expand full comment
author

Their new definition, "having a gender identity that is the opposite of male" is bound to upset a few people because if gender is "fluid" (as we are being told), then how can you even have an opposite to male?

Expand full comment

Well it’s hardly a ‘new definition’, that’s been one of the meanings of ‘female’ for at least a couple hundred years, it just needed some clarification recently because there are some prominent media personalities who’ve made it their full time jobs to pretend to be upset and confused over cultural issues and terminology.

I don’t know what ‘gender is fluid’ means, and nobody’s ever told me that. I’ve heard that gender is a spectrum. On a spectrum there are opposite ends.

Expand full comment