By John Klar
In Vermont’s Randolph Elementary School last year, a third-grade boy was disciplined and made to apologize to a girl classmate who instructed those around her that she desired to be addressed by the pronouns “they” and “them.” The boy was compelled to use the speech elected by the girl, not the other way around. The boy is deprived of the choice of what pronouns of the English language he must employ. These are determined in “gender theory” — not by rules of grammar, but of self-identity. This is profoundly foolish but increasingly the fad at ideologically polluted public schools.
The boy in question had remarked to another boy simply, “That girl ran 15 laps.” This was a verboten use of trans-English, and the girl promptly reported the boy to the language police. Both boys missed recess awaiting the official verdict — they were compelled to apologize to the girl, who self-identifies (for the moment) as “they.”
The problem for the eight-year-old boy is that his brain does not warp like the warped dimensions of gender pronouns; he is rooted in the functional linguistics imprinted by his parents and normative thinking. Vermont third-graders are governed by “teachers” who do not understand what they are teaching — have the adults imposing these rules memorized the dozens of gender identities and gender pronouns that have rapidly proliferated? This foolish thinking proposes an infinite number of gender pronouns, and even neopronouns.
The defining characteristic of these shifting linguistic sands is that they are based on subjective feelings. Grammarly instructs:
Pronouns are an important part of English. Understanding how to use personal pronouns is essential for being able to talk about people accurately and respectfully. … Pronouns have evolved to represent people’s identities beyond the gender binary of masculine (he/him) and feminine (she/her). … But there is one fairly simple rule when it comes to pronoun usage: The right pronoun to use for another person is whichever pronoun (or pronouns) that person wants you to use.
This amorphous standard is then imposed on others willy-nilly:
It can also be a matter of safety — using incorrect pronouns for someone may create problems for them as they try to go about their lives. … Treating someone with respect is never a grammatical mistake. Regardless of what you might have learned about subject-verb agreement, the singular they, or other areas of grammar, the most important consideration should be using the pronoun you have been asked to use.
For the Vermont eight-year-old, misusing this bizarre marker of wokeness “created problems for him as he tried to go about his life.” He felt ashamed but (understandably) didn’t know why. He went home fearing punishment, or disappointment, from his parents, who complained to the school’s deaf ears: “They have eyes to see but do not see, and ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious house.”
Do the deaf and dumb overseers of this faddish foolishness understand the nomenclature they are imposing? Can the school officials pass a basic gender theory quiz, and explain to their students the meaning of the terms “aporagender,” “cishet,” “maverique,” and “novigender”? This is a mere smattering of the new gender terminology, an Orwellian lexicon for the foolhardy. Until they can pass the quiz, how can instructors impose its dictates on elementary school children?
Students in Vermont classrooms are being deprived of an education in basic math and reading — they are being indoctrinated. As George Orwell noted in 1984, “freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
The boy in question was subsequently enrolled in a private school, where he is thriving and learning proper English (and biology, and math). He now possesses the freedom to say that a girl is a girl. All else follows.
Editor’s note: The author, a Brookfield farmer and lawyer, said he received this information directly from a parent of the disciplined child, that the parents complained (to no avail) in a public forum, and that he has seen copies of texts between the parents of both children.
Reprinted with permission from 11/22/2022 The American Thinker.