Posted in In my humble opinion..., Unanswered Questions

Unanswered Question: What’s up with messing with language?

There are many ‘new’ terms in our language. What are these about?
Are we naming ‘new’ things like EVs or AI?
Yes, sometimes we are coming up with labels for ‘new’ things.
Some of our ‘new’ language styles are coming from texting shorthand. BTW takes less time than typing “By the way.”
It is quite a cool event. I don’t believe we’ll be able to spell as well as used to, though. We’ve seen what calculators have done to doing math in our heads.
But there’s a ‘new’ specific term that disturbs me. It’s not about any new object or tool but a ‘new’ concept.
BTW- Even new concepts need new terms. The new term of ‘transgenderism’ isn’t offensive or misleading even though its ubiquitous and gut wrenching. It is a term for something that’s real and everyone knows what it’s defining.

The phrase that troubles me is “My truth.”. Primarily because it’s sometimes interchangeable with “the truth”.
“My truth” is a disingenuous term not unlike calling the Covid-19 shot a ‘vaccine’.
“My truth” has no more to do with “the truth” than the experimental medicinal shot had with any former ‘vaccine’.
IMHO…Our heads are being played with.

So, what’s up with messing with our language?

I think the definition of “my truth” according to the Urban Dictionary gives us a clue.


“MY TRUTH”

Pretentious substitute for “non-negotiable personal opinion.”

Often used by academics, this is a convenient phrase for avoiding arguments because people can contradict your opinion but not your “truth.”

The phrase is often used when seeking to justify a controversial personal stance or action because people are not allowed to argue with “your truth.”


I, for one, make every effort to correct the misuse of modern terms… especially with young people. A silencing and confusion effort is clearly descending upon us.

While we’re at it, can you define the following terms under a broad definition? There’s a lot of confusion these days. Good luck.

“hate speech”
“assault weapon” (the applicant for the head of the ATF couldn’t define one)
“woman” (How can you claim to be a defender of women if you don’t know how to define one?)
“poverty” (the government keeps changing the meaning of the term)
“social justice” (it’s equity now not equality and has nothing to do with ‘justice’.)
“human diversity” (doesn’t pertain to opinion or thought on college campuses but if we used human fingerprints as a guideline, we already have it universally.)
“rights” (Hint: they aren’t wants or even needs.)
“A Democracy as opposed to a Republic”
“criminal”
“Domestic terrorists” as opposed to “opposition to the powerful”
“anti-capitalist” (aka “envying the rich”.)
“Executive order” as opposed to a “law”
“science” as opposed to “expert opinion”
“motherhood”

There are more, of course. Feel free to add your own. ❤





Posted in In my humble opinion..., Unanswered Questions

Unanswered Question: Is the current definition of “kindness” actually “kind”?


When I’m online in social media sites, I’m constantly reminded to just be “kind”.

It’s occurred to me that many people currently have an oversimplified idea of “What is kind?”.

I could be mistaken but there seems to me an idea that not “making waves” is the epitome of “kindness”.
[Other than being the epitome of Marxism, I don’t think so. Marxists don’t like people who ‘think’.]

I consider myself overtly kind. I’m thoughtful, helpful, generous, and reassuring, as often as I am able.
So, I’m wondering why someone might declare my objections to policies and positions as “unkind”. They could argue that they’re flawed but calling someone ‘unkind’ requires a big leap.

I’ve heard that affirming children in their quizzical conclusions on ‘adult’ topics is the ‘kind’ thing to do. Really? Do kids have the knowledge and life experience necessary to make ‘informed’ decisions? Are they born with the ability to navigate the world? If so, why would parents even be necessary? Also, why have parents been held ‘legally’ responsible for what their kids do if kids are independent beings?

IMHO… not offering your kids your values and opinions (aka free-range parenting) is as ‘cruel’ as not offering a ‘blind’ person a ‘helping hand’ to cross the street safely. (Curiously, people who suggest raising kids as ‘free range’ is ‘kind’ often consider anyone not making their cat an ‘indoor animal’ ‘unkind’ because of ‘at large’ dangers.)
Keep in mind, the ‘blind’ person still has the ‘free will’ not to accept the ‘helping hand’. Your kids may not accept your guidance either but it’s likely they may if you are a fair and thoughtful parent. It’s cool how fair and thoughtful parents tend to raise their kids to be fair and thoughtful adults, isn’t it? Can we attribute that only to ‘kinder’ genetics or possibly something else? 😉

Another thing suggested as “unkind” is objecting to people “who want to better themselves” flooding our country ‘illegally’. Really?
First, if we allow that, we are encouraging people- who may have been ‘law abiding’ and generous all of their lives -to break the law and take something that doesn’t belong to them. The ‘unkindness’ of ‘breaking into a country’ also is an affront and ‘cutting of the line’ of other good people who chose not to break the law to become American citizens. Now that we know horrific things are happening to people uprooted by ‘false hope’ of being absolved of their ‘unkind’ methods, might ‘putting our foot down’ (as parents do) save them from themselves?

The ultimate unkind act comes from people who know ‘unkind things’ are happening and think it’s ‘kinder’ not to ‘speak up’.
No, the act of not trying to stop bad things from happening is NEVER kind. It is absolutely unkind, and IMHO is either cowardly or in some way self-serving.

Take heart! People calling others “unkind” are happily not the ultimate arbiters of ‘kindness’ neither are social media memes. Every individual heart determines what is kind. The people telling others to be generically ‘kind’ might want to examine if their own actions fit a “kindness definition” because I don’t think the current ubiquitous definition of “What kindness is?” is universally ‘kind’, at all.


Posted in In my humble opinion..., Unanswered Questions

Unanswered Question: Might we guess why progressives erase ‘standards’?

It just occurred to me while listening to a Progressive member of Congress how often people of that political persuasion use nearly meaningless and generic terminology.
The woman speaking wants (nearly) open borders to “welcome new Americans”.
That tells me that she has no concern for any definition or “standard” for “What is an American?”. Apparently, to her, an American is someone occupying space on our soil. I can conceive of her making a further argument that visa holders are actually, kinda, sorta, Americans too. It’s time to listen to these self-described ‘altruistic’ people far more closely!

Progressives oppose all standards and simply make-up their own definitions to fill that void. And,they do it cleverly. We already know that the Left insists that a woman is anyone who likes the color pink, wears feminine attire, and cries a lot. Any scientific standard that ‘begs to differ’ is simply disregarded. Luckily, our medical professionals haven’t gone totally off that deep end because I’ve been told they still keep actual REAL records attached to the “trendy” ones they are intimidated to compile in order to keep their funding and individual licenses to practice.

Without standards anything goes. Feelings can reign and Marxism can flourish. Equity, itself, is a term promoting a standardless society. Holding anyone to any standard of merit is now racist, unfair, and non-inclusive. Serfdom cannot actually work when diversity of any kind exists. Mediocrity… compliance… and ‘one whole’ are the direct opposites of thriving…independence …and individualism.

And what might we all be being nudged to be included in? A Utopia, Shangri-La, or a gulag? [Only one of those places exist in reality.]

Might we guess why ‘progressives’ erase standards?

Most of we who want to preserve our country might want to consider what’s really going on.