I Am. We All Are.

Your human rights are less important than mine.

You’re gay.

 

I had Pankhurst.

I had Mandela.

I had Gandhi

And King.

Every voice

In history

Who cried

For justice.

Equality.

 

Royalty now.

But back then,

Merely

Perceptive,

Provocative,

Proactive.

Reaction

Causing

Change.

 

So take the beatings

And the vitriol

While we watch

And say little.

Do nothing.

View the games

With blackened eyes

And bruises.

 

This your legacy.

This our pride.

To stay silent.

Shh!

While waiting

For a regal voice.

 

I am black.

I am woman.

I am all nations.

I am gay.

We all are.

Battle Of The Sexes? Let’s Get Serious.

I wrote a poem yesterday. A Feeling. What’s new? Well, one of the comments on my poem for starters.

‘Your post is all about him. What about her? Sorry, I am very angry at the ‘so called’ brotherhood of hu-man-ity. Bye.’

I’ll attempt to address this without seeming patronising but I sincerely struggle with anyone’s objection to the use of certain words. There are 152 words in this poem. Five of them may be perceived as referring to gender if wished.

‘His’ references a phoenix. Used as a metaphor.  Three times ‘his’ was used.

‘Humanity’ or’ brotherhood’ to describe the fellowship or unity of homo sapiens as a species.

I have long since passed the need to be politically correct in my use of sex defining pronouns and refuse to write poems that must refer to he/she, him/her etc. And I use other words as I see fit.

My first loyalty is to Spirit that I believe we all are. Next to part of a species – human beings. That is what we are called. Lastly, but no less importantly, to my sex. I am a woman and proud of it but I do not need to prefix every point I make with politically correct lexicon that seeks to subvert common understanding.

‘Hu-person-ity’ would just be ridiculous. ‘People’ did not say what I wanted it to say. ‘Personhood’ would be almost equally ridiculous. I embrace my humanity. And can find no better word to elicit the understanding that is universal in its name.

The etymology and definition of words are there to be researched and understood in their fullest context. Should separatism be seen in words, there is more likelihood that the perception is born of subjective analysis by the reader than overt or subversive intention by the author.

If I saw a man on the street in need of help- and I do mean a man here, one with a penis – would I be less likely to come to that person’s aid than if I saw a woman lying in the same need? Woman as in, ‘I have a vagina’. Of course not. Or is that just me? Are there those whose humanity – compassion, fellowship, charity, mercy – is governed by the sex of a person? Please tell me this is not true. That the perception of humanity is gender defined.

When I say ‘Man’ or ‘man’ in general terms it ought to be obvious to anyone that the reference is to humanity, people, homo sapiens. Give me a better word.

I am aware that in some parts of the world there is an ongoing battle with equality between the sexes in many ways. The struggle continues and I support equality and justice. I fight for equality and justice. For people. All people. Regardless of sex. Colour. Creed. Nationality.

I’ve lived for 53 years now. It does not take even a fraction of that time to come to the conclusion I came to as a very young woman – maybe in my late teens- that those who are enlightened to justice and equality have no need to embark on arguments that belittle common sense.

I accept ‘chairperson’ because it works as a replacement for ‘chairman’. One or two others do too. I can’t even be arsed trying to think of which ones. Seriously, it is beneath me.

When men seek to define women in derogatory ways by using words like slut, whore, bitch, etc. yes I object for there is no real equivalent in speaking of the actions of men unless we start to use, man-slut, man-whore.

There are men and women of goodness just as there are men and women of evil intent. There are men who recognise equality and justice for all just as there are women. To argue otherwise negates half of society and relegates that half to something less than human.

To denegrate the sense of women by entering into nonsensical word changes for the sake of political correctness makes me hang my head in shame. We, as women, are better than that surely. Have more sense than that. Surely?

The same is true for many other forms of politically correct address and simply makes a nonsense of well-reasoned arguments. If the intention is to slur by words then certainly argue your case. But, how often is that the case?

I think I am correct in saying that the USA has become more prone to this type of p.c. nonsense. Correct me if I’m wrong. If you’re bald then you’re bald. ‘Follicly challenged.’ Don’t make me laugh. ‘Vertically challenged?’ You’re short. So what?

There is one human species. There are battles raging among nations. There are people fighting the world over for justice and equality in the name of right and truth.

Let’s stick to the important stuff and stop sweating the trivia. Please. In the name of common sense. And if you want to be taken seriously.

My answer to the commenter was:-

‘I am sorry you feel that any reference to people in words that are universally recognised in meaning should somehow slur womankind. I do not.’