This video makes me very sad. You seem to be concerned about what children read, yet the first thing you do when you open the book is make fun of how the people in it look. Is that the message you'd rather children absorb? That anyone "different" is bad and should be mocked? Do better.

@xanmiddents6207

8 күн бұрын

Even better, this person uses wonderfully dehumanizing language, referring to the characters as "things" and "it." No need to respect a fellow human beings lived experience if you just pretend they're not human.

It's weird to me how someone can essentially stoop to the level of a middle school bully while also thinking they are in the right. And also fail to understand the most basic point that the other side thinks, but still act like they are smarter than the other side. It's immaturity through and through.

cry about it harder

You act rather like a bully making fun and judging fictional drawings. I would love seeing you react to the other « dangerous » books. Maybe you’ll show what so dangerous about teaching respect, inclusivity and kindness to kids.

This is such a silly video. What a silly billy.

language is defined by the people who use it

@Compass.the.Jackal

6 күн бұрын

not some random guy who got mad about a book in a goddamn NON SCHOOL library

@nunyabizness9842

5 күн бұрын

THANK YOU

"They want you to view everybody who 'critiques' books like this as people who are... excluding of others" Literally spent the entire video just making fun of how people look, then ending by getting mad at a straw man and having a call to action that is directly advocating for banning books that disagree with a specific ideology or even just portray people with different lived experiences. What a wonderfully inclusive individual. Also, great idea: instead of just banning every book you don't like, why don't you just not pick up and read the book to your child. It's for three year-olds. That's part of the reason you got so mad. Tell me what three year old is going to the library and checking a book out all by themselves?

Hello, H3Bomb. Gender and biological sex are not the same thing. If you want to convince someone that gender and biological sex *Are* the same thing, there might be a more logical way to make that argument than by making fun of a book or its fictional characters.

@h3bomb

8 күн бұрын

@@DuskHwy gender and sex have been considered practically interchangeable for a LONG time. Longer than many of us have been alive. It wasn't until people wanted to gender bend that they pretended they were separate. Lately the woke mobs have been using the words interchangeably again, because it's convenient to them.

@noway6133

8 күн бұрын

@@h3bomb Something being around for a long time is not a good reason for things not to change. Otherwise nothing would change ever.

@MarciaDiehl-wy5rw

7 күн бұрын

@@noway6133 Change just for the sake of change is never a good thing. Change to improve society is a good thing and screwing up the English language is NOT a good thing.

@noway6133

6 күн бұрын

@@MarciaDiehl-wy5rw Change for the sake of changing things is inherently neutral. Keeping things the same isn't inherently better than changing them. thats just a dumb argument. Also, it didnt screw up the language lol. Thats such a nonsense point. They is simply a vague term. It is not singular or plural, because its too vague to care. And do you genuinely not know what someone means when they say "they" singular? or are you trying to win based off of a technicality?

@tescomealdeals

6 күн бұрын

@@h3bomb The world was also considered to be flat for a long time, plants weren't considered to be alive for a long time, for a long time we thought there only 4 elements and 5 planets. What's your point exactly?

Singular they, along with its inflected or derivative forms, them, their, theirs, and themselves (also themself and theirself), is a gender-neutral third-person pronoun. It typically occurs with an indeterminate antecedent, in sentences such as: "Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?"[1] "My personal rule is to never trust anyone who says that they had a good time in high school."[2] "The patient should be told at the outset how much they will be required to pay."[3] "But a journalist should not be forced to reveal their sources."[3] You've been using the they pronoun your whole life. it makes sense grammatically.

@austinwoodall5423

7 күн бұрын

The ambiguity of 'they' is why it's acceptable in informal speech. Could be multiple people who left 'their' umbrella. We don't know. It implies that we don't know who 'they' are. 'they' are just some 'other' we do not know. However, if instead we do know who 'they' is and 'they' specifically request ambiguity, the concept of using this informally breaks down. If it is codified, it's not informal. If we use 'they' intentionally instead of in passing to refer to a specific entity, then we have no word dedicated to refer to plural people in an intentional context. By coopting an informal use of a word, you add a ton of friction to conversations where now I have to clarify every time you say 'they' whether there are multiple thems or only one they. Don't get me wrong, there are acceptable ways to do what you're trying to do. Black people sometimes say 'theyself', rednecks sometimes say 'thems' both are fine because they retain the specific use of 'they' to refer to multiple people when speaking intentionally. Or whatever. You can do what you want, just don't get upset when people don't understand you because of your bad language choices

@h3bomb

7 күн бұрын

@@nunyabizness9842 only if you don't know the person's gender/sex already. Nice try though.

@h3bomb

7 күн бұрын

@@austinwoodall5423 🎯

@nunyabizness9842

7 күн бұрын

I've found it very easy to use "they" in a singular context. If you say something like "I met Alex, they're really nice" nobody is thinking you mean multiple people. A casual pronoun like this in reference to one person is only used when the person it relates to has already been established. As you can see in my examples- "somebody" "the patient" "anyONE" "a journalist". These are not used in the way you have described. We are not suggesting it is multiple people, we are using the they pronoun for one person. Similarly when an established identity is referred to as "them", we'll mention their name or a singular noun in reference to them before we use the pronoun "they", or in the same sentence. You can differentiate easily- "they're nice people" or "they're a nice person". My language choices aren't bad, and people understand me perfectly well, because the pronoun is used differently in each context. This pronoun is actually more functional than some we have used for centuries, such as the inclusive vs. exclusive use of "we", which have no differentiation.

@nunyabizness9842

7 күн бұрын

@@h3bomb Nope. That's a decision you made, not a grammatical rule. If a gender is not assigned to the person- aka if you don't know or if they don't use a binary gender- then "they" is the most logical way to refer to them. Oh look, I just used it and you read it and it made perfect sense. Stop hiding your bigotry behind grammar.

Funny that you have a marvel shirt on when punisher hates cops and mutants are an easy allegory for being queer.

Learn empathy.

And unfortunately thats not even the worst part.

Excellent commentary my friend! Keep up the good work!

@h3bomb

8 күн бұрын

@@thegoodpath5008 thank you!

Thank you for bringing this to the attention of parents. Several years ago my children brought home a book called " Jacob's New Dress ". Needless to say we avoid the library now. Very obvious agendas and themes highlighted on display.

@deadPan-c

6 күн бұрын

ah yes, because teaching children that it's okay to express themselves and wear what they want to wear is bad. somehow.

This is out of hand! It's thanks to Jesus that I have detransitioned after 4 years of that deception, I explain more in my 3rd recent v ideo.

@PavelHjaalsen

7 күн бұрын

You lie.

@zoa1-99.......

7 күн бұрын

@@PavelHjaalsen How so?

I don't want that garbage read to any children period with my taxpayer money or anyone else's taxpayer money. If a toddler is read that filth and then grows up to be horribly confused about their sexuality, I won't blame the child. I will blame the radicalized mother or father who force fed that tripe down the poor innocent child's life. Reading this crap to a baby is akin to straight up child abuse.

@h3bomb

8 күн бұрын

@@MarciaDiehl-wy5rw agreed.

@xanmiddents6207

8 күн бұрын

Funny you mention child abuse, considering this channel directly advocates for corporal punishment. But yeah, reading your kid a book is far, far worse than beating them.

@ogpandamonium

7 күн бұрын

Grammar = Child Abuse innit

@MarciaDiehl-wy5rw

7 күн бұрын

@@ogpandamonium More than you know.

@ogpandamonium

7 күн бұрын

@@MarciaDiehl-wy5rw whats that sposed to mean

🙏🙏🙏🙏