I've just read that Young Greens no longer refer to female members as 'women', preferring to call them 'non-men'.
see: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/18/green-party-scraps-women-non-men-transgender/
I suspect that is biologically unsound. I gather that the 'basic' human form is female, so there would be a stronger case for referring to men as 'non-women'.
An amusing possibility would be to combine both neologisms to produce an infinite regress.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Posts
No comments :
Post a Comment