From Laurie Higgins:
The National Post in Canada is reporting on a recent controversial school board decision in Vancouver to accommodate the desires of gender-confused students and their parents. This accommodation includes allowing students to use the “‘sex-neutral third-person’” pronouns of “xe, xem, and xyr” in place of “‘he/she’ or ‘him/her.’” According to the National Post, “These are…terms used to repair the failure of the English language to allow for 21st Century gender sensitivities….Students will be enabled to choose their preferred washroom, or ‘a reasonable alternative washroom’ if they desire ‘increased privacy.’ In such cases the alternative arrangement ‘will be provided in a way that protects the students’ ability to keep their trans status confidential.’”
A few thoughts on the new rules imposed by sexuality revolutionaries:
1.) Pronouns denote objective biological sex—not subjective feelings or desires. That is a linguistic fact. The school board in Vancouver is adopting completely new terminology. New words—neologisms—enter the lexicon not infrequently. We see this with terms emerging especially in the science and technology fields where new discoveries and inventions require it.
But this is something different. The school board is adopting language created by the radical Left to embody their radical Leftist notions which they seek to compel all of society to accept. Parents, taxpayers, administrators, and teachers should be up in arms about this political move couched in foolish social science and pseudo-compassion.
2.) Other schools, including here in the United States, are compelling teachers to lie, that is to say, to use pronouns that do not correspond to the biological sex of students. In other words, teachers are being compelled by their administrators to refer to gender-confused boys as “she” and “her” and to gender-confused girls as “he” and “him.” This means that the government is compelling teachers (and perhaps soon students) to lie.
There are only two justifications—or rationalizations—for this requirement: Either administrators argue that teachers must lie because it makes gender-confused students “feel better,” in which case we see again the toxic fruit of the elevation of subjective feelings over virtually every other phenomenon, including objective reality.
Or, administrators are arguing that it’s not a lie because pronouns no longer denote objective sex but subjective desires about sex in which case we’re in the beginning stages of a radical linguistic revolution driven by sexual anarchists.
3.) Conventionally, students whose disorders—mental or physical—are so serious that they are incapable of functioning in a normal school setting are sent to special schools designed to accommodate serious disorders. I would guess that gender-confused students are capable of functioning within the school setting but don’t want to. They and their parents believe that everyone else should pretend that their disorder is not a disorder and change their behavior in accordance with Leftist assumptions. If, however, they truly can’t function in a normal school setting, they should attend special schools.
4.) Every school administration should be asked this question: If, as Leftists claim, gender-confused students (or teachers) should not have to use bathrooms and locker rooms with those whose “gender identity” they don’t share, then why should other students (or teachers) be forced to share bathrooms and locker rooms with those whose biological sex they don’t share?
Read more: Illinois Family Institute