Newspeak

 Newspeak

Undoubtedly, we are witnessing the creation of new words and new expressions that transcend the time-consuming process of acculturation of neologisms derived from popular wisdom that need to be accepted by the collective unconscious to become an incorporated part of written and spoken language.

From concepts such as “politically correct” expressions, which aroused their immediate acceptance with the help of social media influencers.

New interpretations of old expressions such as: "global warming", "toxic machismo", "female empowerment", "feminism", "sexual choice", "my body, my rules", "I don't need a man", "clothes don't makes the character”, soon gained opposite meanings addressing the same phenomenon with opposite connotations and denotations depending on who does the reading and its application.

Words were banned and replaced as the word “poor” was replaced by “excluded, favelas became popular communities; banned words expressions considered pejorative as a homosexual person, it is from then on politically correctly called as behavioral homosexuality; introduced the homoaffective relationship to designate a legally assured homosexual relationship, the aversion to homosexual behavior became a homophobic contravention of gender, since sexual binarity was developed in nuances called diversities of non-binary behavior that represents the choice of sexuality different from the main fundamental sexual characteristic determined by genetics, but determined by social behavior determining a new sexual gender identity.

Including the novelty of neutral language that, contrary to the tendency of the diversity of sexuality opened by sexual option, tends in the opposite way of diverse and plural behavior to the paradoxical unification of verbal treatment through new neutral pronouns, undifferentiating the differences in gender recognition obtained with the hardships as identity and social name different from the genetic sexual binarity rigidly established by genotype and phenotypic appearance.

It is believed that in the pronominal treatment it is identified that there are no differences in treatment, but differently, it seeks to differentiate behaviors so that victimization can be demonstrated in the face of intolerance of the binary society.

Thus was born the idea of ​​homicide of homosexuals being treated separately in the qualification process and criminal procedural classification as criminal homophobia, following this distinction of homicide in general being qualified except for the distinct categories of fratricide, parricide, genocide, added to the new qualifications of femicide, lesbicide for inclusion in the list of socially relevant distinctions and justified by the seriousness of the criminal action.

The legislator decided to listen to society to highlight certain victims of vulgar homicide, assigning specific names to thematize, qualifying the gravity and burden by distinguishing the victim of homicide as cases of fratricide, suicide, parricide, matricide, genocide, feminicide, lesbicide, larceny, magnicide.