Monday, December 7, 2009

Political Correctness Gone Mad in the UK and a Look at Relativism



Labour MP: ban shops from selling ‘sexist’ pink toys to little girls

Not even the color pink can withstand the unrelenting onslaught of political correctness.

The Pinkstinks pressure group claims that young girls are being led up “pink alleys” by stores which target them with presents such as pink fairy wings and princess dresses.

It is organising a boycott of shops including the Early Learning Centre, which the group claims are leading the “pinkification” of girls' toys which end up crushing their ambitions later in life.

Bridget Prentice, the Justice Minister, said that she was supporting the campaign because she was concerned that shops were creating Christmas gifts which were aimed particularly at either girls or boys.

She went on: “It’s about not funnelling girls into pretty, pretty jobs, but giving them aspirations and challenging them to fulfil their potential.
“We want to say to organisations like the Early Learning Centre that we rely on them to be progressive about encouraging girls to think of themselves as equal, and not to reinforce the old stereotypes.”

Emma Moore, a mother of two girls who founded the Pinkstinks group with her twin sister Abi, who has two boys, lives in Mrs Prentice’s Lewisham constituency.
She told the News Shopper local newspaper: “Ask yourself what we want girls and boys to learn from an early age.

“Is it that pink, passive and pretty is for girls and that blue, bold and challenging is for boys?

“Since the early 1990s manufacturers and retailers of children’s products have fabricated restrictive boundaries of what it is to be a girl in today's society.
“As a result body image obsession begins younger and younger and beauty is valued over brains.”

Pinkstinks has 2,000 supporters on the social networking website Facebook.


This just takes the cake for me. It hurts my brain just to think about this. I've been thinking about this a lot and I can narrow this down to one word: Relativism. These people have a delusion in that they think everything is relative, nothing is true, everything is gray, and there is no black and white.

Moral relativism: there is no right and wrong, just a set of binding rules religion and humanity places on us. Do what you want, when you want. If you feel it is right, then it is right. These are the types that over analyze serial killers and crime. These are the types that view the death penalty as being equivalent to the murder of an innocent person. These are the same types that forged the liberal movement of the 60's (If it feels good, do it!).

We have spiritual relativism. If you feel this is the right way to earn salvation, then it is! Oprah Winfrey is a perfect example. Her views that there are infinite paths to heaven relative to the individual is enough for me. Her new world order cult of unitarian sheep is driven my spiritual relativism. No rules. Do what you feel is right, because YOU are God. Think I'm making this up? Watch and learn.

Let's see, there is also relativism when it comes to marriage. People that want to include homosexuality in the definition of marriage are doing nothing but diluting the very institution. They are breaking the very boundaries and principles that the idea is made of, and that is a man and a woman coming together for procreation. Alan Keyes makes a tremendous case for this in this dynamite video.

There is what I like to call American relativism. This is the secular progressive idea that America is no longer defined by its original principles the Founding Fathers abided by. They believe America is an evolving society enduring constant change, no longer subject to the religious, racial, and cultural characteristics it once was known for. These are the types that favor the eventual abolishment of the Constitution. They are the types that will thrust America and the world into a global society where sovereignty and national, cultural, and ethnic traits no longer apply.

And then here, we have gender relativism. Male and female are simply defined by anatomical features. I don't need to elaborate. Females are just as qualified to do any job as males, and vice versa. If you are a female, and you want to be like a male, then you are right! If you are a male, and you want to be a female, then you are right! Don't conform to the constraints of society. Blue can be female. Pink can be male. These are the types that think a woman could carry a 30 pound M240B machine gun through a combat zone just as good as a man. Feminism is a big factor in this. Pink has always been a girl thing. It is a trait of femininity. And femininity is what defines the female gender. There is no grand conspiracy to subject little girls' brains to "crush their ambitions" by using the color pink! If you think the only thing needed to prevent a female from succeeding is the color pink, then you are more delusional that I thought!

It reminds me of the classic movie, It's Pat. In fact, I think this movie sums up this post perfectly.



The fact of the matter is this. There are definitions of things. There are characteristics SPECIFIC to things. There are boundaries. There are traits. Humanity recognizes things in terms of concepts, definitions and PRINCIPLES, as Alan Keyes said. And we behave, reason, make laws, establish institutions, and build civilizations in accordance with such principles.

I am a firm believer that the new world order, and the antichrist, will harness this politically correct falsehood, and use it as a base to establish a one world government and humanist society for the sake of "world peace". People will eat it up. It will make the cult of Obama we saw in 2008 look like child's play.

4 comments:

foutsc said...

One more symptom of an overweening government. This is in Britain, but I can see it happening here. Government is way too far up our business. I don't know how we unwind it...

Donald Borsch Jr. said...

foutsc,

I had an old-school wind-up alarm clock that I carried with me for years and used when I traveled.

One day it stopped working. It wouldn't do what it was supposed to.

I smashed it on the floor, as it was useless to me at that moment.

Just an observation.

TRESTIN MEACHAM said...

Why am I not surprised by this? Why not ban a color? They have already banned books and words. Now they are going after carbon. This is moving beyond ludicrous.

bob wierdsma said...

Relativists say that morals are relative but in practice they are quite narrow in trying to enforce their own liberal viewpoints on the unsuspecting.