Merriam-Webster Dictionary decided to take the side of Democrat senators after Judge Amy Coney Barrett used the term “sexual preference” in her confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, suggesting that the very word “preference” could be “offensive,” according to the Daily Wire.
Pink News added that the dictionary updated its definition with an addendum that said “the term preference as used to refer to sexual orientation is widely considered offensive in its implied suggestion that a person can choose who they are sexually or romantically attracted to.”
Steve Krakauer—the executive producer of Megyn Kelly’s podcast—noted: “As recently as last month, Webster’s Dictionary included a definition of ‘preference’ as ‘orientation’ or ‘sexual preference.’ TODAY they changed it and added the word “offensive.”
Krakauer continued: “I mean this is all just complete insanity. Here’s Leon Panetta, Obama’s Defense Sec, writing in 2018 for CNN about how ‘Trump is not who we are’ since ‘we are all created equal under God, regardless of our race, creed, religion, color, sexual preference.’”
The recent change by Merriam-Webster has presented a contradiction in what progressives purport to want out of social change. Bo Winegard took to Twitter late Tuesday to present the contradiction: “Progressives: ‘Sex is a social construct that is created by culture and expectations of gendered behavior.’ Also Progressives: ‘Sexual orientation is 100% biological and the suggestion that it can be influenced at all by social forces is offensive and outrageous!’
Winegard posted again shortly after: “For what it’s worth, I don’t think it’s much affected by social forces, and I don’t think it’s a choice. But it also doesn’t matter. If it were a choice, it doesn’t change the morality one way or another.”
“This new definition was made in real time, after Senator Mazie Hirono claimed the long standing, inoffensive term, was offensive, on the Senate floor. This claim was made to discredit Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination, and for no other reason,” The Post Millennial reported.
This is not the first time the Merriam-Webster Dictionary has responded to pressure to change a listing in its text. The Daily Wire reported back in June that after a 22-year-old black woman made a complaint about the definition of the word “racism,” the dictionary company said that it would change its text, including a more broad and “systemic” understanding of the term.
The young woman—a recent college graduate from Missouri—stated that the Merriam-Webster definition of “racism” was too simple. She said: “So, a couple weeks ago, I said this is the last argument I’m going to have about this. I know what racism is; I’ve experienced it time and time and time again in a lot of different ways, so enough is enough. So, I emailed about how I felt about it. Saying this needs to change. I basically told them they need to include that there is systematic oppression on people. It’s not just ‘I don’t like someone,’ it’s a system of oppression for a certain group of people.”
The editor of Merriam-Webster, Alex Chambers, responded: “While our focus will always be on faithfully reflecting the real-world usage of a word, not on promoting any particular viewpoint, we have concluded that omitting any mention of the systemic aspects of racism promotes a certain viewpoint in itself.” She continued, “This revision would not have been made without your persistence in contacting us about this problem. We sincerely thank you for repeatedly writing in and apologize for the harm and offense we have caused in failing to address the issue sooner. I will see to it that the entry for racism is given the attention it sorely needs.”