I wrote, over on Facebook, responding to a hamhanded nonapology from Anthony Romero, the head of the ACLU:
“We won’t be altering people’s quotes.... It was a mistake among the digital team. Changing quotes is not something we ever did.”
The quote was published in the NYT in "A.C.L.U. Apologizes for Tweet That Altered Quote by Justice Ginsburg."
I added the boldface to "we." The earlier pronoun difficulty — the one for which Romero nonapologized — was a brutalization of a quote by Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She'd written:
“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
The ACLU rewrite was:
“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.”
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
mistakes were made
them, not us
"one can delegate authority, one can never delegate responsibility"
- old Army Proverb
Their apology is more outrageous than the original outrage.
The ACLU are complete fucking weasels.
They have no respect for the language. The ACLU is a purely political organization that really had no respect for the Rule of Law.
Fuck the ACLU.
They seem to feel with "a person" that "they" is still plural, to look at the verb.
"We" means to speak for the organization. I don't know that assurance comes into it. Who cares if they stick to it.
All of Ginsburg's words ought to be changed in any case. A few rounds of Google Translate back and forth might help.
Altering a quote is a new low. Glad they apologized. ACLU is still a huge disappointment these days.
Pronoun confusion linked to gender confusion with a dose of neuter-itis leads to perversion of Notorious RGB's fundamental message.
If "we" did it once but "we" never did it, "they" might do it again, unless "we" are also "they", because "we" and "they" did not want to say "woman" or "she" when "we" and "they" could say "person" and "they" and be more inclusive AND moronic at the same time. Now THAT is diversity, equity, inclusion, and stupidity all rolled into a nice big dogpile.
Woof.
They should have run the original quote, but with a trigger warning.
In weak defense of the ACLU (and they deserve all the scorn they are receiving), "Changing quotes is not something we ever did" could be read as 'We never did it up to now, so it is not our common practice, and therefore you have to excuse us for making a one-time mistake'.
rhhardin: They seem to feel with "a person" that "they" is still plural, to look at the verb.
Using "they" as a third-person gender-neutral singular pronoun goes back (at least) to the time of Shakespeare, and it's always taken plural verbs.
Now that they're on the side of the book banners, can we stop calling them a civil rights group and instead an enforcement arm of the Democratic Party?
Quaestor: "Their apology is more outrageous than the original outrage."
Indeed. On a par with the Lincoln Pedophile Project liars pretending they hadn't been covering for John Weavers sex grooming of young males for years or with The Bulwark/Dispatch liars pretending they simply didn't know "all the facts" when they were busy attacking catholic high school students.
A "mistake among the digital team..." We at least it's original, although not much better than "my dog ate my homework."
Can Of Cheese for Hunter: "Altering a quote is a new low."
Standard practice for leftists and LLR's.....but I repeat myself.
If those digital team people, with names, aren't fired for doing what the ACLU "never" does, then he's lying.
The ACLU has started doing it.
They no longer defend Free Speech.
Defund the ACLU.
And grammatically incorrect to boot.
The use of “People” doesn’t match to the later phrase “a fully adult human”
But all the gender identity, chosen pronouns, hububaloo doesn’t work grammatically unless “they/them” is singular, but grammar be damned! This is science! Well, no, it’s not, but it’s Equity! Yeah, that’s the ticket.
More of the “look at me! look at me! But don’t judge me, bigot!” Generation.
In their little ol heart of hearts, the ACLU knows that it might not have been wrong. After all they are in the group that believes men can get pregnant. Bless their corrupt little hearts.
The ACLU is othering their own digital team.
“We won’t be altering people’s quotes.... It was a mistake among the digital team. Changing quotes is not something we ever did.”
Isn't That EXACTLY what the Wehrmacht said? (well, literally; word for word, they said:)
We won’t be making people into soap.... It was a mistake among the Schutzstaffel.
Making people into soap is not something we ever did.”
"I’m amused to find myself objecting once again to their use of pronouns."
It is amusing, as in laughable. It is also telling, a once-"liberal" organization having to spit out the progressive kool-aid after swallowing it.
The absurdity was a little too blatant in this case, and transgenderism hasn't won in the culture war yet, but the ACLU is a useful canary.
Tom Grey said...
They no longer defend Free Speech.
Quite so. Like their masters in the Democratic party, they see free speech as something the rubes shouldn't be allowed to use, kind of like guns or religion. I sincerely doubt the First Amendment could get majority support in either the Democratic caucus or the ACLU board of directors.
The funny part is that, for multiple definitions of "bear", the ACLU's modified quote is true for men, yet it's fine and dandy for the government to control men's decisions and treat men as less than fully adult humans:
“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.”
In many discussions, it is impossible to deviate from traditional pronouns without inserting total confusion. (For example: "In my discussions, they are impossible to deviate from traditional pronouns without inserting total confusion.") It (they, he, she??) leaves the reader with no option except to re-read the sentence while inserting every possible pronoun combination. "In many discussions, he is impossible..."
"she is impossible..." "it is impossible..." "they are impossible..." Ahh, I see it must be "it is impossible.." It almost seems like a deliberate attempt to avoid clear communication.
He could have said his team held a seance and RBG told them that's what she really meant. Kind of like Hillary and Eleanor Roosevelt.
The ACLU seemed to be othering its mistake - claiming the mistake was caused not by "WE" but looking further we see that the mistake was not caused "by" anyone but rather it occurred "among" the digital team - like a hot potato? or a 4th of July rocket gone wrong? The word "amomg" seemed wrong so I read up on the correct usage." Here is the definitive statement on when to use "among." "Among, ... is the best word to use when referring to things collectively and imprecisely" [for example] "for this reason, among many others; no honor among thieves." So I guess in this case among many others, "among" is the right word for the meaninglessness intended by the ACLU.
hawkeyedjb said...
Like their masters in the Democratic party, they see free speech as something the rubes shouldn't be allowed to use, kind of like guns or religion.
Actually, EXACTLY like guns;
They think the 2nd amendment says The State has the Right to Bear Arms
They think the 1st amendment says The State's Media has the right to free speech and press
They think the 1st amendment says The State Religion (Climate Change) has the right of religion
They must not think it's too big of a mistake since the tweet is still up. If it was just someone on the digital team altering a quotation when they shouldn't have, the tweet would have been deleted as soon as someone noticed.
Leaving it up tells me they are fine with the alteration. They're just a bit annoyed by the criticism.
The "we" (i.e., members of our digital team who prefer plural pronouns) never changed her quote. It was that guy who identifies as the singular male. He did it.
JC, they replaced “woman” and “her”! What fresh hell are we in where women are no longer accorded a name and pronoun? Men are not women. This is outrageous and no apology can suffice. The irony of the changes in this particular quote is not lost.
We have to fight this crap everywhere.
Don't understand all the negativity with the ACLU here. There is no one else to stand up for the Skokie nazis!
Man, I hate Illinois Nazis.
To everyone on both sides of the they them debate: you make a great couple whom enjoy pointless bickering shaming and gotcha games. Thanks to Althouse for providing a notel motel room with a squeekie bed. You can hump all night.
The Left wants to use square brackets to make people say what the Left wants them to say whether it's true or not. However, two can play that game. For example:
1/28/1998, Bill Clinton: "I did not have sexual relations [except for countless episodes of fellatio performed in the Oval Office itself, and numerous instances of vaginal penetration, sometimes with a cigar,] with that woman, Monica Lewinski."
12/04/2015, Hillary Clinton: "I'm running for president, [I'm also guilty of commodities fraud, conspiracy, espionage, treasonous dealings with Russia, and suborning the murder of Vince Foster.] Everyday Americans need a champion. [However, I am totally unfit to lead any project that is not essentially criminal.] I want to be that champion, [but anyone would be certifiably insane to vote for me because I'm the fucking anti-Christ!]"
I cracked the nut. Anthony Romero's first person singular pronoun is "we". Very royal. "It was the digital team's mistake, not ours."
The ACLU’s pooch-screwing begs to be paired with the Lancet’s recent clusterfuck: Lancet editor apologises for calling women “bodies with vaginas” on medical journal's cover.
"Don't understand all the negativity with the ACLU here. There is no one else to stand up for the Skokie nazis!"
That was then. This is now. The ACLU would never do now what they did then.
Serious Question
In the olden days, (or; at least, in movies about the olden days) people would say:
Follow the Money
With regards to the media's new fascination with pronouns (and gentile mutilation) ...
Where is the Money? Where is it coming from? Where is it going?
Is it doctors finding a new billing procedure?
Is it "Jennifer" Pritzker's Billions?
Or, is it (like So many things) George Soros selling America short?
Trannies represented, what a tenth of one percent of the people on earth?
Look at how much bending and stooping society is doing for this micro group
Of course, NOW that ALL freaks and geeks have been labeled "Trans", their numbers are growing exponentially. NOW! if you don't fit in, to a precut hole; you're labeled "Trans"
Are you a Tomboy? You're TRANS!
Do you want to cut your hair weird? You're TRANS!
Are you scared of your upcoming puberty? You're TRANS!
Freaked out, by your 1st period? You're TRANS!
But, like i'm Asking? WHO'S PAYING FOR ALL THIS? WHO'S GETTING RICH OFF IT?
When your goal is the destruction of western civilization, even this counts as a victory.
Welcome to post-modernism, where there is no shared understanding of words, only one’s personal understanding. The pronoun wars are not intended to be more precise but rather to obfuscate in the service of meta understandings of experience. We need to deconstruct language to eliminate the biases and hegemony of the majority.
Ironically, the objections to the ACLU quote change show that the objectors are not on board with post-modernism, at least not with regard to one of the left’s saints. I actually enjoy seeing the left at each others’ throats over such issues. Gives them something to keep them busy so they have less time to deconstruct more of the world.
I stopped sending money to they them those over four decades ago.
I don’t think think it’s ‘gentile’ mutilation, Gilbar. That part comes later.
The digital team (Really? A team?) should be let go.
TwoAndAHalfCents said...
I don’t think think it’s ‘gentile’ mutilation, Gilbar. That part comes later.
oops! i didn't mean that; but it is kinda funny
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा