In the latest move to make the female sex simply disappear, the American Civil Liberties Union altered a Ruth Bader Ginsburg quote, on the annive🎃rsary of her death, to remove any mention of women.
The : “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity. When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”
It’s Orwellian, to rewrite history and remove inconvenient but real references. Yet even the statists and authoritarians of “1984” understood that women existed and 💙were unique from men. It’s grotesque to write women out of history as if we don’t m♛atter.
The ACLU engaging in this wokespeak was ironic because Ginsburg was the “co-founder of the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU,” which fights for abortion access for, yes, women. The ACLU dedicates a page to Ginsburg on their website where they refer to her as “a pioneer for gender equality,” mention her “women’s rights work” and generally focus on the fact that she was a woman making her way through the world. And the ACLU page on abortion still notes that Roe v. Wade was “the landmark case tha🐻t secured a woman’s right to abortion.”
Once advocates for free expression, the ACLU now stand🔯s for conformity — imposing the speech codes and cues that enforce access to the in-group. They’re not starting with editing their own website, of course, they’re cutting through the comments of a prominent woman. It’s easier to rewrite a dead woman’s words to fit in with the acceptable mores than have to untwist the pretzel logic that makes abortion important because it🅘 gives women a right to choose while also arguing not only women get abortions.
By changing RBG’s words, the ACLU isn’t𒐪 just disrespecting the justice — they are erasing her.
And it’s happening all over. Male dominated sports haven’t seen an influx of trans men. Male spas don’t have trans men trying to get in. The word “father” remains unchanged even as the Biden administration switches out “mother” for “birthing person” in their 2022 fiscal year budget in a section about, ahem, maternal mortality🍒. We’ll need some extra safe spaces if anyone looks up what “maternal” mไeans.
These aren’t some Birkenstock-wearing hippies spouting off about how “gender is just a social construct, man” while also somehow majoring in Women’s Studies. It’s a replacement of women that we’re supposed to simply accept happening at the upper echelons of o💝ur government and society.
When Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Shalanda Young was asked about the 🍸“birthing person” usage she said𝓀 “We think our language needs to be more inclusive.”
No, it doesn’t. I’m a woman who birthed children and became a mother. Those words mean something and I’m not about to surrender them on some altar of wokeness to be polite. There’s nothing “inclusive” about erasing women. The term t꧒hat is core to our identity is being☂ replaced with something else. Nothing about that is OK and no woman should stand for it. Ruth Bader Ginsburg wouldn’t have.