By Peter Burrows 1/25/21 – elburropete@gmail.com - silvercityuburro.com

One of Biden's first acts as president, if not the first, was to implement a transgender speech code at the White House. In case you haven't heard, the White House contact form now asks for the "preferred pronoun" by which you wish to be addressed: she/her, he/him, or they/them. Those are in addition to the conventional Mr., Mrs., and Ms. Additional options are: Mx., other (please specify), and none.

(I had to Google "Mx." for a definition. Summarized from Wikipedia: "Mx (usually pronounced miks) is an English language neologistic honorific that does not indicate gender. It was developed as an alternative to common gendered honorifics, such as Mr. and Ms, in the late 1970s." Late 70s? Unwoke me is just learning about it. Sigh.)

The inclusion of "other (please specify)" may need a little explanation for all you unwokes out there who may be unaware of the recent proliferation of pronouns needed in our Brave New Progressive World. Why, you say, are more pronounces needed? Because, silly, there are now more than two genders.

Male or female used to be one of the easiest things in the world to determine, but not anymore. I found a site on Google, hopefully satirical, that identified 112 different genders. However, there's nothing satirical about a $250,000 fine, is there?

"In New York City, it is now illegal to discriminate anyone whose gender is male, female, 'or something else entirely.' Mayor Bill de Blasio's office last week released a list of 31 genders approved by the New York City Commission on Human Rights --- . The list is a guide for businesses, which can now be fined as much as $250,000 if establishments refuse to address someone by their preferred pronoun."

That's from a June 1, 2016 news article. "Only" 31 genders back then, so perhaps 112 today is a serious number. (Facebook was up to 58 by 2018.) And if you think nothing so ridiculous can be serious, you haven't been paying attention, mis amigos. Newly re-elected Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, proving that advanced senility is all the rage in D.C. these days, has proposed that only "gender-inclusive language" be allowed on the House floor. Members are to:

--- eliminate gendered terms such as "'father, mother, son, daughter," and more. --- the rules package would "honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral." -- Terms to be disallowed include "father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin (Huh??), nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half-brother, half-sister, grandson, [and] granddaughter," to be replaced with "parent, child, sibling, parent's sibling, first cousin (Huh?? again.), sibling's child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, [and] grandchild." --- " (Summarized from The Epoch Times 1/21/21, 'Huh?s' added.)

If Pelosi gets her way, and she will, this will become the law in both the House and eventually the entire country, to be enforced, and not just in New York City, with jail time and fines. This is already true In Norway, where hate speech against transgenders, if said in public, can get a transphobe a fine and up to three years in jail. The law was recently stiffened to include a year in jail for something said in private. Turn off Alexa, you transphobic SOBS!

In studying this issue, though, I'm afraid enforcement could be extremely difficult. The problem is how to "honor all gender identities by changing pronouns" when the pronouns to use are proliferating almost as fast as the genders they're supposed to represent. The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer Plus (LGBTQ+) Resource Center at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (thank you, Wisconsin taxpayers), explains the need for all these new pronouns, and adds a very helpful table.

"A gender neutral or gender inclusive pronoun is a pronoun which does not associate a gender with the individual who is being discussed. Some languages, such as English, do not have a gender neutral or third gender pronoun available, and this has been criticized, since in many instances, writers, speakers, etc. use "he/his" when referring to a generic individual in the third person. Also, the dichotomy of "he and she" in English does not leave room for other gender identities, which is a source of frustration to the transgender and gender queer communities. People who are limited by languages which do not include gender neutral pronouns have attempted to create them, in the interest of greater equality."

https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/ (This one is linked, the one in the graph is not!)

Obviously, the above is too complex to be incorporated into any legal code written to protect our transgender brothers and sisters --- pfffft! -- siblings from hate speech. Plus, using those terms is asking too much of a transphile who wishes to avoid offending zir/hir trans friends.

Years ago, the nongender pronoun "it" was used as a flattering term for movie starlets to describe those ladies who really had "it," the "it" being something us male pigs do not need defined. The first to enjoy this pronoun was silent star Clara Bow. (No, I'm not QUITE that old.)

I suggest we revive that trusty old pronoun and use it to both simplify and ensure political correctness in our everyday speech. For example, a transgender male, a female who identifies as a male, could be called and referred to as "he-it."

Most of us would find that relatively simple to use, e.g., "good morning, Mx. He-it," or, "let's ask for he-its opinion," and so on. For transgender women, men who identify as women, the corresponding pronoun would be "she-it," as in "good morning Mx. She-it."

Simplicity itself, don't you agree? (Please, don't thank me. Just my humble attempt to promote peace and understanding.)