“The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth.”
Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell
In a Twitter chat on October 10, a representative of the Associated Press Stylebook caused a furor by stating some of the AP’s new stylistic rules concerning transgender people adopted in its 2017 edition, which is available in print and online (for a fee).
“Style” in this sense means the AP has determined what terms journalists should use and how they should use them so that they are used consistently.
For terms about gender and transgender people, the Stylebook has adopted the words and dogmas preferred by transgender activists and rejected the objections of women to transgender terminology that “erases” women, assuming natal women expert in the consequences of transgender terminology for women were even consulted.
One tweet by @APStylebook sums up the transgender activist assault on reality: “Call people transgender only if relevant; give the name they use publicly; avoid references to being born a boy or girl. #APStyleChat (2/3)”
Call people transgender only if relevant; give the name they use publicly; avoid references to being born a boy or girl. #APStyleChat (2/3)
— AP Stylebook (@APStylebook) October 10, 2017
(Note: the link for all three tweets in the sequence is https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/917820391191609346. I also Storified the key @APStylebook tweets on the topic.)
Translated from transgenderese, that means, “Hide a person’s transgender status as much as possible to enable his or her deception about his or her natal sex; instead of using a transgender person’s birth name, use the one he or she adopted to present as the opposite sex; avoid letting readers know the true sex of a transgender person.” In other words: deceive, deceive, deceive.
As I explain in more detail in my forthcoming book, War in the Women’s Room: How to Get Men in Dresses Out of Women’s Spaces and Save Your Children from Confusion about Their Sex, published by Dangerous Books, there are two reasons transgender activists persuade or force everyone they can to lie about the true sex of transgender people.
Why do they do this? Making people lie is a tool totalitarians use to get power over them because telling the lie changes them. In persuasion science, it’s called “commitment and consistency.” When you get people to commit a lie, either by force, such as getting lies mandated in a style book, or by convincing them that it’s the polite thing to do, which are both common ploys of transgender activists, they change their beliefs about themselves to make them consistent with the lie to avoid the pain of cognitive dissonance.
Let us examine the crazy, reality-rejecting reasoning employed by these people.
Lying about the birth sex of transgender people legitimizes the counter-factual insistence of male genitalia-intact, heterosexual, transgender-identified men (TIMs) that they were born as women. It legitimizes their false claim that they are in fact women, and that their penises, therefore, are women’s penises because they are women. Underlying this is the idea that women can have penises, and that such “women” must be allowed in women’s restrooms and everything else.
There is a lot of circular reasoning in transgender activist dogmas. Also, it is common for transgender activist dogmas to be mutually exclusive while transgender activists insist they aren’t. Cynics, also known as lovers of logic and reality, cruelly interpret these inconsistencies as signs of a con job.
Transgender activists claim that their demand for control of the language used to describe them is a civil right, like the women’s movement insisting that grown women should not be described as girls. This is nonsense. The manipulative language transgender activists propose is deceitful, aimed at depriving other people of the once-universal right of knowing the actual sex of practically everyone. And the primary purpose of the deception is to get men into women’s spaces—because that sexually arouses most TIMs—while removing every defense women have against these violations by getting these men labeled in language and in law as women in defiance of reality.
Transgender activists also have succeeded in getting laws enacted to give them governmental powers to compel people to lie in accordance with transgender dogmas, with insanely cruel punishments for telling the truth. For example, in New York City, employers, landlords, and all businesses and professionals—and their employees, tenants, clients, and customers—must lie about a transgender person’s name, pronoun, and title (Mr./Ms.) or face a $250,000 fine, which is levied by a commission rather than a court of law.
On October 4, California Governor Jerry Brown (D) signed Senate Bill 219 into law, which requires nursing home employees lie about a transgender person’s sex or face a $1,000 fine or a year in jail. Nursing homes residents also now must share rooms and restrooms with transgender residents of the opposite sex. Nursing home operators must force them to do this or face a $1,000 fine or a year in jail.
The purpose of enacting coerced speech laws in New York City and California is to control the language used in the entertainment, publishing, and news industries, as well as in the companies headquartered there. Controlling speech in New York City and California has a global influence. This is magnified by the new rules of the AP Stylebook influencing speech in the entire news industry.
Conservatives realized in the abortion debate they could not let the Left dictate the language they used to describe their beliefs and goals. They became pro-life instead of anti-abortion. Now conservatives must reject transgender activist terminology along with their dogmas.
The need for conservative news media to adopt reality-based terminology is urgent because transgender activists are on a totalitarian path. Already, on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and in real life, TIMs, who used to call themselves “transwomen,” now are referring to themselves as women from birth, while they scornfully deride real women as “ciswomen, uterus bearers, vagina havers, and non-men.”
That is why I propose reality-based style rules on how to refer to transgender people and dogmas in my book, along with other solutions for going forward in our new post-transgender world in a win-win way. Transgender activist dogmas harm women and children the most, but they also are destructive to transgender people. There’s a better path. If transgender activists don’t want to take it, they will reveal their goal is totalitarian power, not civil rights.