Pride Month: Hot Dog!
Two questions for you:
Question 1: Sperm from your (male) father and an egg from your (female) mother are the reason for your being. Do you believe in the miracle of biology?
Question 2: If your biological parents shared a wardrobe – including dresses, ties and pants – and both parents displayed the whole range of masculine and feminine traits, including physical activity, moods, voice modulation and stance, would their biology or sex change? Of course not!
It’s Pride Month.
This year Pride Month is of particular importance. It’s the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots. In 1969, in Greenwich Village New York, in The Stonewall Inn – a small mafia-owned establishment – there was a riot involving police and gay activists. It catapulted gay rights groups and gay publications into public notice around the world.
The significance of that event 50 years ago, when gays fought against discrimination and for recognition, has all but been lost today. Now, various groups demand acceptance for more than a dozen ways individuals might identify themselves. Here are some examples:
transgender, gender fluid, non-binary, demi-boy, bi-gender, trigender, pangender, agender, non-gendered, genderless, gender free, neutrois, third gendered, other gendered and gender queer.
Understanding these terms requires a distinction between sex and gender. The sex of an individual is based on biology – our reproductive functions and associated DNA. Your parents are fine examples. The term gender, popularised during the 70s by the feminist movement, is based on social and cultural differences.
Activists today see biological difference as all but meaningless. An example is the term ‘genderless’, where an individual allegedly lacks the qualities typically associated with either sex. Or ‘androgynous’, which means being partly male and partly female in appearance.
What about females who are unable to conceive or bear offspring, and live without ovaries after a lived experience with cancer. They might wear a tie, trousers, or other traditionally ‘masculine’ clothing, as well as ‘feminine’ attire. They might be both sensitive and assertive. They are every bit as female as women with ovaries and breasts and just as much a mother as are those who have conceived naturally. Should they be considered anything other than female? Absolutely not.
With the help of leading children’s book publisher, Scholastic Australia, schools around Australia will be urging students to refute the significance of biology, identify with gender, and embrace gender culture. Boys will be encouraged to think they are not boys, and girls will be encouraged to think they are not girls.
Imagine a social order based on gender alone.
Deep down, however, the real issue isn’t gender. The problem is the ‘followers’, who are unable to think critically, too frightened to speak out, or too lazy to care.
Most mothers and fathers of school age children aren’t like that. They’re determined to ensure boys and girls are proud of their biological selves. They boycott companies like Scholastic Australia, and boycott sexuality education taught by generalist teachers with no qualification to manage such sensitive subject matter. These determined parents demand that sexuality education be taught after hours, possibly at the school, and definitely by experts. And let’s not forget those teachers who are also parents. They speak out loudly and proudly, calling schools to account for mocking biological facts. They speak out as parents and as teachers.
Other parents and teachers – those who believe in social engineering via gender concepts – are failing to see one important reality. Claiming you are something other than male or female will eventually lead to your own irrelevance.
Remember that great line by Robin Williams in the film Mrs. Doubtfire? ‘This is me being a hotdog’. With no limits to how we can ‘identify’ ourselves, perhaps that’s the next social order we can look forward to.
We are all entitled to look, feel and be ourselves, but not at the expense of our children.