[Skybird]

A father and a mother form a couple called parents, right?

Well, you might be surprised to learn that according to a growing influential thinking (or absence of such) in Europe, it is sexist discrimination. In fact children are the product of a neuter entitity called "Elter" (without "n" at the end). Parents (plural) translates into "Eltern" (plural) in German, there is no singular form of the word. This word now gets deleted in official office language, and replaced with a less discriminatory, sexually neutral term.

(German)
http://www.medrum.de/?q=content/mutt...-elter-ersetzt

Originally Posted by Translation

Bern, Switzerland, gets serious in abandoning discrimination

According to a new guideline for the officially binding use of language in Switzerland, the use of the term father and mother falls under description of discriminating terms. According to it, children do not have a father and a mother anymore, but a neuter as cause for their existence, named "das Elter (grammar: neutral form).

Instead of "father" or "mother" it should be written "der Elternteil" (one parent) or "das Elter" (instead of "Eltern/parents"). The guideline is binding for official publications, says Isabel Kamber, deputy chief of the Central Language Service, Section German, of the Federal Office of the Chancellor of Switzerland, reports the Swiss newspaper BLICK.

With this the politically responsible in Bern follow the draft proposal 12267 in the committe for the equality of chances between females and males (of the EU council), which is to fight in nations against terms like the concept of "mother" in order to acchieve gender-equality.

Such a lingustic distortion would also ease the gaining of parenthood by homosexual couples. A child whose social parents would be two lesbian women, then would not have a mother and a stepmother, but two "Elter": Elter 1 and Elter 2. Consequently, grandmother and grandfather should be abandoned as well. It would be grand-elter 1 and grandelter 2, or better: grand-elter 1.1 and grandelter 1.2 and grandelter 2.1 and grandelter 2.2. that also would be a solution friendly towards easier digitisation, which could be easily and flexibly adopted to patchworks.

More on it: "fight against the term "mother" as a sexist stereotype" (no kidding)

(German)
http://www.medrum.de/?q=content/kamp...chem-stereotyp

The european council discusses a draft proposal , that amongst others things recommends to battle against the use of the term "mother", because it would prevent gender-equality.

The gender-ideology aims at the dissolving of social/communal structures and role types. In the media women would be displayed too much as mothers and wifes. with the draft proposal 12267 in the commission for euqlaity between females and males the european council therefore wants to fight against the use of terms like "mother". "Mother", they claim, is a sexist stereotype that would push women into a traditional role. nations now should be called to fight against such sexist stereotypes in general. The media should play an important role here. They should abandon the use of sexist stereotypes. For this, a whole set of programs is planned, like education porgrams for people working in the media world, and the creation of expert offices that shoudl advise the media.

For this goal, especially the European Women's Lobby EWL, an NGO, is fighting.

Reporter for the proposal draft is Doris Stump from Switzerland.

The document is included in the appendix (download as pdf).

What a madness. This is not harmless, because it is about forming and influencing the terms in which people think - or cannot think anymore. No surprise that once again the Eu is behind it. The gender-streamlining in our modern society is a creeping disease of thought that is haunting us since longer now, but especially the educational sector and the issue of the status of homosexual relations is bitterly fought over. and they will not stop it before they have successfully destroyed everything.

Another example: a row in Hamburg over claimed politically incorrect schoolbooks. I had seen it on TV in Spiegel TV, as that article claims, but the source where the above was taken from refers to just that.

(German)
http://www.medrum.de/?q=content/gender-aufruhr-hamburg

Scaring it is how much all this reminds of Newspeak in George Orwell's 1984.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

(...)
The basic idea behind Newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, goodthink and crimethink) which reinforce the total dominance of the State.
(...)
To control thought

“ By 2050—earlier, probably—all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron—they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like "freedom is slavery" when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

The underlying theory of Newspeak is that if something can't be said, then it is much more difficult to think it. (See Sapir–Whorf hypothesis.) There is substantial argument in favour of this notion, in that most humans think by carrying on a dialogue in their heads. They tend to subvocalize their thoughts as they form them and manipulate them; most thought is actually a dialogue with oneself.

What surprises me a bit is that it is the conservative Swiss forming the spearhead here. Or is it no surprise at all - and left-leaning idiots form such idiotic policies in an attempt to enforce the Swiss becoming a bit less "typically Swiss"? And then maybe it is no surprise that the Swiss somtimes strike back, like in that public vote banning the building of more mosques. The same group, btw, in these days is setting up another vote on a proposal that all foreign emigrants who break the law and become criminal and/or social parasites, will be sent back to their countries of origin. The - surprise-surprise - left and the socialists tried to prevent this votum by wanting to simply forbid Swiss people to vote. It seems they see some of their election clients going missing in the next national polls, this is the only argument that could come to my mind against this very reasonable proposal to throw out migrants not playing by the rules. I mean when I run a party and somebody misbehaves or uses the opportunity to steal in my house, I kick him out, too. what is there that could be said against doing so? Nothing!