Researchers Say Term "Cyclist" Dehumanizing

                Researchers at Australia’s Queensland University of Technology examined the way Australians characterize their interactions with Bicyclists and determined that those who call themselves “cyclists” are actually dehumanizing and demeaning themselves. The Daily Mail reported that the online survey of 442 people found that one in five drivers “deliberately blocked” cyclists and one in ten admitted to using their car to cut off a cyclist. Still others copped to lesser offenses like shouting and throwing things at cyclists.

                Survey researchers used a “dehumanization trait scale” to measure motorist’s agreement with statements such as “I feel like cyclists are mechanic.” (huh?). A majority of non-cyclists called cyclists “not completely human,” prompting QUT professor Narelle Haworth to say that the language used to describe bicycle-riders needs to change. Haworth prefers the lengthier term, “people who ride bikes,” averring that her term “is more human-like and less like a species,” (huh?) and will change how drivers see those atop a bicycle.

                Brilliant.

                Haworth added, “There is need to grow a culture of mutual respect for people on bikes.” So, apparently, it’s the nomenclature we need to change, not the “cyclists’” or “motorists’” behavior.

                Well then, in that same vein I propose that we replace the dehumanized term “abortionist” with the lengthier term, “people who kill small babies.” Or does that not work as well? Certainly, the dry and ideological term “leftists” could better be replaced by the more organic—and accurate-- “people who hate freedom.”

                “Politician” could be replaced by “people who disdain truth but worship money and power while claiming they are honest and utterly unaffected by money and power.”

                “Republican?” Easy: “People who lack spines.”

                “Journalist?” Even easier: “Ideological-- and easily offended-- people who create fake news while preaching their objectivity and integrity.”

                “Psychiatrist?” No problem. Two alternatives, in fact: 1) “People who are trying to heal themselves while purporting to help others.” 2) “People who feel better about themselves while engaging in an apparent attempt to help those possibly even more screwed up than they are.”

                I think “academic” should be replaced with the less like a species term, “People who are too dumb to get and keep a real job.” “Entertainers” would become “People, typically under the influence of drugs and alcohol, who are even more ignorant than academics but engage in non-stop virtue-signaling.” “Artist” would be supplanted by, “People who take it upon themselves to shock and offend others by ‘pushing the envelope,’ and believe they are doing the world a favor by revealing a heretofore unknown ‘truth,’ such as ‘good is evil’ and ‘there are a limitless number of genders.’”

                Finally, “writer” should go the way of the Dinosaur…to be replaced by the more human-like phrase, ”Tortured soul who feels the need to put words to paper or screen in the usually unfounded belief that he or she  can persuade, amuse, entertain or enlighten.”