So what would follow from that is that if they ever actually manage to convince a majority of people to start using a term like "uterus-havers" to refer to women, they would then invent something even more ridiculous to keep the virtue signaling and punishing of those who aren't virtue signaling going. Nigger went to negro to colored people to african american to people of color, so what's the next step for uterus-havers? People of uterus? Uterus-gifted individuals?
He's describing the euphemism treadmill, but I don't think it applies in this case. They're not trying to ban the word woman for being offensive, they're trying to redefine it to include a small group of men with a degenerate fetish and exclude a small group of women retarded enough to buy into the male privilege lie. In other words these replacement terms technically aren't euphemisms. They're not trying outrun any negative connotation that the word "woman" has, so if they ever did get their way I don't see why they would feel the need to change the terminology down the road. This language is dehumanizing but it's not really euphemistic.
They're not trying to ban the word woman for being offensive,
the whole point is that the word "woman" is offensive to trannies, because (male) trannies don't have a uterus, can't get pregnant, so it disqualifies them as women at first place.
This language is dehumanizing but it's not really euphemistic.
No, the language is very much euphemistic, by the very definition of the word.
So what would follow from that is that if they ever actually manage to convince a majority of people to start using a term like "uterus-havers" to refer to women, they would then invent something even more ridiculous to keep the virtue signaling and punishing of those who aren't virtue signaling going. Nigger went to negro to colored people to african american to people of color, so what's the next step for uterus-havers? People of uterus? Uterus-gifted individuals?
He's describing the euphemism treadmill, but I don't think it applies in this case. They're not trying to ban the word woman for being offensive, they're trying to redefine it to include a small group of men with a degenerate fetish and exclude a small group of women retarded enough to buy into the male privilege lie. In other words these replacement terms technically aren't euphemisms. They're not trying outrun any negative connotation that the word "woman" has, so if they ever did get their way I don't see why they would feel the need to change the terminology down the road. This language is dehumanizing but it's not really euphemistic.
the whole point is that the word "woman" is offensive to trannies, because (male) trannies don't have a uterus, can't get pregnant, so it disqualifies them as women at first place.
No, the language is very much euphemistic, by the very definition of the word.