An ‘Egg-Producing Female’ Is a Hen, Not a Woman

The insanity worsens! They've fallen down Alice's rabbit hole:
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said ..., ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

From The European Conservative

By Steven Tucker

When a false ideology seeks to conquer reality, it has to pretend words are more real than the actual things they (supposedly) refer to.

We are always told by today’s woke Stasi that “language matters.” They’re quite correct: that’s why their own attempts to police our words have to be so assiduously resisted by conservatives. When the language being policed is scientific in nature, the need for resistance is even greater. To redefine the discourse of science along political lines is to redefine the very parameters of reality itself.

The latest attempt to do so comes in the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Language Project (EEBLP), launched in February 2023 by a network of clearly left-leaning scientists from universities across the U.S. and Canada. Predictably, the EEBLP commissars seek to decolonize their subject, whose very origins are supposedly steeped in the Western civilizational filth of white supremacy and cis-heteronormative oppression alike.

In their online “Team Statement of Positionality” (‘positionality’ here being a fancy euphemism for ‘sexual, racial, and political bias,’ but in a good way), EEBLP proselytizers are encouraged to “critically assess their subfield’s terminology,” asking whether it helps “celebrate dominant narratives or oppressive norms”—norms such as the sole existence of the two traditional binary human sexes of ‘male’ and ‘female,’ and not any recently invented new made-up ones like those of the popular entertainer Sam Smith, who self-identifies both as ‘non-binary’ and as a professional singer.
Too Stupid For Words

As usual, such attempts are couched in the misleading and emotive lexicon of mental protection and moral blackmail. The EEBLP claims that they are only trying to make allegedly ‘vulnerable’ minority groups feel ‘safe’ within the laboratory, but the specific terms they seek to erase are unlikely to make anyone sane feel terribly unsafe at all.

On their website, they link to an outside article in which a vastly over-sensitive black American herpetologist named Earyn McGee complains that the traditional term for capturing lizard specimens in the wild is “noosing,” as biologists characteristically try and cast a loop around the reptiles’ necks to immobilise them. However, according to McGee, “Being the only Black person out in the middle of nowhere with a bunch of white people talking about noosing things is unsettling,” and so the term should be dropped in favour of something less ‘offensive’ and related to the historical fate of lynched black people like Emmett Till instead, such as ‘lassoing.’

Accordingly, the word “noose” is now specifically listed as a “harmful term” on the EEBLP’s online “repository” of such things, a verbal Room 101: otherwise, maybe Ms. McGee’s white colleagues in equally white lab-coats may one day be minded to forget their precious lizards for a brief moment and murder her in the convenient solitude of the remote American desert instead?

Other racially “harmful” biology-related terms identified for erasure include “non-native” and “invasive,” which when used to describe flora and fauna from abroad are now deemed “anti-immigrant” and “militaristic.” Likewise, the phrase “citizen science” becomes “harmful to non-citizens,” such as those currently crossing the Mexico border into the United States illegally by the busload.

“Slave-making ants,” which force other species to do their hard-labour for them like POWs, meanwhile, must also be rechristened “pirate-ants,” as the very name “normalizes slavery and colonialism as a natural phenomenon in the wild,” supposedly making the transatlantic slave-trade seem merely an extension of the natural order of things, and thus due an imminent comeback.
Mother Hens

When the EEBLP begins remaking the language of sexual reproduction, things become even more absurd. The word “harem,” used to describe the multiple female sexual partners of a dominant male animal like a gorilla or Hugh Hefner, “Perpetuates offensive stereotypes of human cultures, particularly those of the Middle East, and evokes a sexualized human power structure in which women are assumed to be subjugated to men.” So, it makes female creatures seem generally physically less powerful and aggressive than males are—which could never be admitted, as it implies the different sexes may enjoy some innate biological basis to them, which would never do for today’s obsessively identitarian, trans-friendly Left.

The EEBLP specifically seek to purge the scientific lexicon of such archaic, reactionary old labels as “male” and “female,” which are only “used to reinforce societally-imposed ideas of a sex binary, emphasizing cis-normative and hetero-normative views.” Instead, the distinctly bloodless terms “sperm-producing individual” or “egg-producing individual” should be used, the latter of which makes a woman sound more like a chicken than an actual human being.

Likewise, the obviously obscene labels “mother” and “father” merely “perpetuate a non-universal, heteronormative and cisnormative view of the parenting and birthing process.” From now on, parents of whatever species (human or otherwise) should be referred to as the “sperm-donor” and “egg-donor” respectively, thereby making it sound as if artificial conception is actually the natural way to go about siring children, rather than the unnatural one—even though, pretty obviously, animals themselves cannot engage in highly technological lab-based practises like IVF out there in the jungle or the tundra.
The Human Zoo

The EEBLP also links prominently to the website of a similar, more school-centred organization, Gender-Inclusive Biology (GIB), which aims to “grow a gender-inclusive curriculum,” largely by convincing toddlers that various animals are trans.

As “[a]ll people, cis & trans, experience different bodies”—“experiencing” now being much more real than actually “having”—GIB provides its own table of forbidden terms to help teachers warp reality. Instead of “males,” why not refer to schoolboys as “people with testes”? A schoolgirl, meanwhile, may be delighted to be considered “an estrogen-dominant body” instead.

These are two genuine exemplar sentences of the kind to be used in tomorrow’s GIB-approved science lessons: “Women Ovaries produce eggs” and “The mother gestational parent carries the foetus for 9 months.” That is literal erasure of women, right there: and all in the name of Cultural Marxism unbiased science.

GIB-promoted classroom resources focus upon introducing students to the fascinating world of homosexual animals, providing heartwarmingly tolerant essays like “Remember Thomas the Blind Bisexual Goose” (who could ever forget him?). They also provide slides of various cute animals who, quite genuinely, do not reproduce in the same way human beings do … largely because they are not human beings! Male sea-horses, for example, really do get pregnant: “Boy sea-horses have a pouch where the girl sea-horse places the fertilized sea-horse eggs. This allows the boy to be pregnant and care for the growing babies. This daddy carries the babies until they are ready to be born.”

I knew this interesting factoid myself as a child too; but, back then, it was presented to kids as a mind-boggling illustration of just how different various members of the animal-kingdom were from human beings. Now, it has been flipped upside-down as an illustration of how human beings are really all just no different from sea-horses.

Notice, by the way, how even the post-sexual classroom indoctrinators themselves prove singularly unable to talk about sea-horses here without recourse to such surely ‘problematic’ terms as “boy,” “girl,” and “daddy.”

The GIB and EEBLP people are all fully qualified scientists and educators. They must know that males and females exist, and that there is at least some inescapable physical and biological basis to them—but that’s the whole point. When a false ideology seeks to conquer reality in this way, it has to pretend words are more real than the actual things they (supposedly) refer to. It’s the only way such ideologues can maintain their wholly blinkered worldview.

Even poor old Thomas the Disabled Bisexual Goose is less wilfully blind than they are.