This news story is mind boggling in its stupidity.
Basically, it's just telling people about what The Washington Post said while adding their own opinion to the mix, as if there's not enough people that are eager to do that. The author does not say WHY there are against the NYC Subways' decision to address people with gender neutral pronouns. Instead, they use sarcasm to get their point across, and fail to actually *say* ANY thing in the process.
By the logic presented here, until crime fighting is no longer a profession, congress should take a break and do absolutely nothing.
Public urination, sexual assault, etc. etc. are problems that the police should be notified of and should take care of. The last time a serial killer roamed the streets was not the first time a serial killer roamed the streets. The first execution of a serial killer was not the last execution of a serial killer. Ditto with people who rape and steal. Evil is a force that is here to stay. That does not mean blog posts, memorandums, and light hearted news articles must be put on hold.
If the author of this article was not trying to convey that they disagree with what I'm saying here, then I seriously have no idea what it is they thought they were conveying. I highly doubt they disagree with what it is I say here. And if that doubt is to be trusted, then
A) was that sarcasm?
B) if so, how does one re - phrase it in a non sarcastic manner?
C) if it isn't sarcasm, then what was it exactly?
D) whatever the hell it was, what is it intended to communicate?
No comments:
Post a Comment