YOU MOUNTEBANK.
Shatner Slams E.U. Censors Proposal to Ban Star Trek’s “To Boldly Go Where No MAN Has Gone Before "
- Thread starter Cpt. MAGA Man
- Start date
You never know!
The thing is that neither version is satisfactory. The first is sexist (sexism is a thing that was recognized even in 1966). The latter is ridiculous. There are very few times when the ship (either of them) went somewhere and there were NO people who got there first! If you're going to say "where no one has gone before", you shouldn't expect to find any people there (wherever "there" is).
Now if they'd changed it to "where WE have not gone before" that would have resolved both criticiisms.
It looks like a foreign version of an online right-wing waste of bandwidth called the Western Standard that spouts copious amounts of far-right political garbage and has practically declared the premier of my province a saint, even though she recently hosted both Tucker Carlson and Jordan Peterson for an "interview" and her most recent thing was to announce a law that will require transgender children to have their parents' permission in writing if they want to specify a preference in name and pronouns at school. Without this permission, teachers will have to keep addressing them by their legal names and pronouns. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The Alberta version of this is paywalled, but what little I've read of it indicates that the conspiracy notions and idiotic fearmongering are full steam ahead. My province is being governed by sociopaths who absolutely would lap this up and claim that Justin Trudeau wanted to eliminate all references to men and put women first even in situations where it would be nonsensical to put them first.
Snowflakes don't deserve to be maligned in this way (real ones, not the people for whom this word is basically playground-level namecalling).
No doubt you can find evidence for this completely unsubstantiated claim, right?
But even that isn't accurate because their has been alien races who developed space travel before humans and are members of the Federation or make up the crew. With these kind of expressions you don't got to be accurate so much as sound romantic and adventurous. To Go Where No Man Has Gone Before sounds like both of those things and also like a nod to Neil Armstrong's first words on the moon. Replace Man with One kind erases the Armstrong nod but does feel more inclusive plus more expansive as well. Something even beyond the humans experience with space travel up to this point. No One could be anyone from humans to aliens.
Treating hypothesis like fact, are we?
Colonel Worf, we're interested in facts not theories.
Sorry it took awhile, had a lot going on yesterday. And since I deliberately avoided sites like Fox News, PragerU, and National Review for obvious reasons, a lot of what I found was unusable.
Institutional:
https://www.newsweek.com/my-new-study-proves-it-cancel-culture-much-worse-left-opinion-1598727
https://www.thefire.org/news/10-worst-colleges-free-speech-2023
Legal. While this wasn't in the US, a punishment of a year in the slammer for remarks said in private exceeded even my expectations.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2852DI/
From the article:
(People found guilty of hate speech face a fine or up to a year in jail for private remarks, and a maximum of three years in jail for public comments, according to the penal code.)
That is utterly disgusting!
As a professional historian with books on my shelf that date back to the early 19th century and every decade in between then and today, I can assure you they’re not going to be erased anytime soon.
More seriously, any attempt to pin deliberate historical distortion on a particular subset of the ideological spectrum is a clear sign of…uninformed speculations, rather than the evidence-based thinking expected from our profession.
Both the far Right (Nazism, fascism and militarism) and the far Left (Communism, Marxism-Leninism) burn and ban books and whitewash history. The idea it's only progressives is absolute balderdash.*
*Named for Albert Balderdash, a 19th century English author who had his book on genitalia banned after he ran into a girls' school in Kent and started yelling about the glories of "the lady bits."
*Named for Albert Balderdash, a 19th century English author who had his book on genitalia banned after he ran into a girls' school in Kent and started yelling about the glories of "the lady bits."
So, with respect to what's happening in the United States, what you've posted is a list of purported examples of that includes outraged "mobs" targeting professors for behavior that has nothing to do with the use of gender in language. Mobs petitioning for institutional consequences is not itself institutional consequence. Racism, and possible religious discrimination, while concerning, is outside the boundaries of this discussion, which is about the censorship of language relating to (sex and) gender.
So, that we don't have to wade through a lot of superfluous material, and there are a lot of examples there, with a lot of details, could you please indicate which of the examples in the info-dumps you've provided actually constitute examples of what's under discussion here in this thread? Thanks.
One example I will accept as a valid example is the one in the second article about Loyola University New Orleans (New Orleans, Louisiana), which was about the religious institution allegedly silencing the promotion of abortion rights by a student. While I suspect that some people might have had in mind employer/employee-type relations when thinking of institutional issues, students obviously have a critical place in the universities and they are subject to institutional policies. So, yes, it's quite plausible that religious institutions institutionally censor speech pertaining to (sex and) gender-related issues.
(This doesn't mean I necessarily reject all other examples, it just means that I'd like a list of examples that are all on-point to consider, not a broad list that includes many examples to consider, many of which aren't even on-point.)
As for the last link about something going on in Norway, well, as you say, it's not the US. So that obviously doesn't count, just for that reason.
Once again, got any example of this erasure of history?
Accepting one of your examples, while agreeing with you that one of them doesn't count, and asking you to indicate which of the many other examples you posted are actually on point, that's evasive?
Irony?
My response wasn't evasive. And it's completely accurate so there's nothing to contest with "evidence."
I think he meant me.
