Staff at Air Canada will no longer use ‘ladies and gentlemen’ to address passengers
In a bid to eliminate gendered terminology, Air Canada has decided to scrap the common address “ladies and gentlemen” or the French “mesdames et messieurs” for all staff.
Rather than saying the favourite take-off announcement “ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking,” flight staff will now be instructed to use “everybody” or “tout le monde”.
No matter how many times women are hounded out of work, social groups, or organizations for saying that women are adult human females, I end up surprised each and every time. This latest shocker comes from the UK, where so much of this madness has fully taken hold. British birth coach Lynsey McCarthy Calvert was pushed out of the charity Doula UK, of which she was spokesperson, because she dared to say that “women birth all the people.”
The issue for McCarthy was that Cancer Research UK changed its advertising encouraging women to get routine pap smears, a basic gynecological exam, to advocating for the test for “everyone aged 25-64 with a cervix.”
In reaction to this, McCarthy took to Facebook, stating “I am not a ‘cervix owner’ I am not a ‘menstruator’ I am not a ‘feeling.’ I am not defined by wearing a dress and lipstick. I am a woman: an adult human female… Women birth all the people, make up half the population, but less than a third of the seats in the House of Commons are occupied by us.”
As we’ve seen so many times before, a few people got onto her feed, and made a lot of noise. They complained to McCarthy “…not only women birth children,” and took their grievance offline and into the real world where they disrupted her professional life. The complaints were that McCarthy was trans exclusive in her statements, that she was offensive.
Activists who are somehow delusional enough to believe that a woman who says she is a man and then conceives a child is a man giving birth as opposed to a woman, who imagines she is a man, having a child, sent letters detailing their offendedness.
The Board of Doula UK determined that the activists were correct and that the woman who has facilitated the birth of children on numerous occasions was incorrect. Doula UK has gone on to say that,despite McCarthy’s contention to the contrary, they had not “acquiesced” to activists or forced McCarthy out. McCarthy resigned, but it was either that or accept lies and defamation.
The only problem with ousting a woman from a pregnancy help charity for saying that “women birth all the people” is that, in fact, women do birth all the people. All the people who have ever been born on this earth since the beginning of time were gestated inside a woman’s body, and birthed from that body. Apparently it’s offensive to say so. Even if it is, it’s still true.
We’ve been at the point where it’s considered offensive to trans activists and trans people to say that only women are capable of having children via their bodies, even though they are. It’s offensive to say that women are the only ones who menstruate, even though they are. And it’s offensive to say that men can’t magically, surgically, and chemically turn into women, that women can’t turn into men, even though they can’t.
The entire thing where a few people’s hurt feelings are more important than actual facts and the right of women to speak the truth about their own bodies and the nature of reproduction continues to be baffling. More baffling is that women who know the truth, that biological sex is immutable, that gender is a lie, are afraid to speak out, afraid to challenge those men who would have us deny our bodies in favour of their made-up truth.
Women who speak out on this are silenced, and like so many other circumstances in which women are forced to believe a man’s interpretation of reality over her own, talking back only gets her hit. Whether personal or professional defamation, there is a big risk for women who refuse to be cowed into proclaiming lies as truth. It seems absurd, and trans activists deny that, but still, it keeps happening. These stories keep popping up.
It should not be shocking to anyone anymore that women who believe that women and men are distinct entities defined by their biological realities are considered bigots, phobic, or prejudiced. The more we are pushed to believe lies, the easier they are to believe, but that doesn’t make them any truer. McCarthy took a vocal stand about the fact that women are the ones who have female reproductive systems, that men do not need cervical cancer screenings because they are not, in fact, people who have a cervix.
Furthering the disconnect women have with their bodies by referring to them only as the summation of their biological parts will not help them overcome the embarrassment of seeking medical care for female only conditions. Ignoring the reality that women’s bodies are the only bodies that are capable of birthing children is cruel because women alone will still be the ones to do it.
Trans activists say that their goal is not to erase women or to deny their existence, yet with their continuing to be offended by the reality of women and their bodies, that’s exactly what they’re doing. If women can’t even maintain a medical definition, how will they access care, have considerate providers who understand the differences between male and female anatomy, or keep their children safe if we are not even able to name their bodies as their own? It doesn’t matter if it’s a kindness to ignore the fact that women birth all the people, it’s still a lie, and a dangerous one.
The drag queen readers from “Fay and Fluffy’s Storytime” have ended their relationship with the Toronto Library. This comes after the Toronto Library permitted feminist Megan Murphy to speak, despite accusations of transphobia.
Kaleb Robertson, who is the “Fluffy” of the duo, stated on Instagram that they could not “continue a relationship with a space that will host someone who is actively fighting to take away my legal rights as a human.”
Fay and Fluffy are apart of a drag queen act that reads books to children. Alongside their acts at the Toronto Public Library, they have also read at the AGO, ROM, and across classrooms in Ontario.
In a statement to the media, the duo stated that “Trans people existing and having rights to employment, housing, and safety is not a discussion.”
Megan Murphy is the founder of the Feminist Current website created controversy when she stated that “Feminists built and funded transition houses for women escaping male violence … and now we’re being told that having spaces for women to protect them from male violence is bigoted.”
Due to this, when Megan Murphy came to speak at the library, a small crowd came to protest her visit, attempting to break police barriers and shouting obscenities in the process. Despite the crowds relatively small numbers, politicians across the city came to denounce the library’s decision.
Fay and Fluffy are only the most recent public figures to cut ties with the Library. More are expected to follow.
Rachel McKinnon, a biological male, won the women’s 200-meter sprint at the Masters Track Cycling World Championships for the second year in a row last weekend. While many LGBT advocates are celebrating this as a triumph, I, a lesbian healthcare professional, find myself deeply worried.
When I watch the course the contemporary transgender movement has taken, I see a movement that can’t possibly endure. And, since that movement has hitched itself aggressively to the cause of homosexuals such as myself, I fear what the backlash will mean for our hard-won liberties.
I’ve only had the right to marry for the last four years in the U.S. I remember that struggle vividly, and I don’t take for granted the freedoms won. Living in the rural American South, I’m reminded regularly of how many people remain wary or disapproving of certain legal rights for gays and lesbians. I’m also aware of how much my friends and I rely on our marriage and parental rights, and on the non-discrimination policies that allow us to be protected from violence and harassment.
Homosexuals won recognition of our civil rights because we were able to exercise our rights without requiring much participation from those outside our communities. The average person’s life changed very little when gays began to marry and live our lives more openly. We asked for inaction in the form of others not seeking to punish us for our personal lives.
These goals contrast sharply with those set by the radical gender movement. Rather than asking for basic protections, the same rights that are common to all people, the movement demands all society make extreme changes to language, personal habits, parenting, medicine, scientific practices, and more. Nothing short of total compliance through words, deeds, and policies is considered adequate. They aren’t asking people for tolerance, but for obedience.
And the consequences for disobedience are severe.
Many outspoken gender-critical women like me have been ostracized from our communities, fired from our jobs, threatened with violence, and even physically attacked. I write under a pseudonym due to my own fear for myself and my family, and my need to stay employed to support them.
I’ve never personally believed in gender ideology, this idea that “man” and “woman” are internal feelings separate from chromosomal and reproductive sex. But I supported trans people anyway because I was able to support them personally and advocate for their respectful inclusion in society without needing to submit to their doctrine. I used their pronouns to be polite, and because I could do so without implying I thought they were literally that biological sex.
But things have changed, and the message sent now is that a transgender woman is literally a biologically female who was mistakenly “assigned” the male sex at birth. As a healthcare professional, I know this to be scientifically false. But for many within the gender movement, saying “she” now equals unreserved agreement with that ubiquitous mantra, “Trans women are women.” By this logic, biological women aren’t entitled to any spaces, opportunities, or protections distinct from males who identify as women. And that is something I do not agree with and cannot affirm.
So I don’t do the pronouns anymore. For me, the demands of the movement became unsustainable, and I had to withdraw my support.
If these demands are driving away people like me, how can the transgender community hope to maintain any sort of broader public acceptance? I’m a hardcore lesbian feminist, and I used to lead teachings for healthcare workers on providing respectful care to transgender and gender-nonconforming patients. If I feel bullied by the demands being made, I can’t imagine how enraged people are who were never comfortable with this population to begin with.
The gender movement in its current form is unstable because it requires brute social and political force to maintain. It’s estimated that approximately half a percent of the U.S. population identifies as transgender. A group that deeply in the minority cannot succeed in securing their rights in the long term if that success is upheld by a public saying and doing things they don’t agree with.
The power this movement holds today is an opportunity, much like that experienced by the suffragettes in 1920 and homosexuals in 2015. It’s a chance to create reform to benefit transgender people, but those reforms will be little more than a historical blip if they can’t be maintained once power shifts. And it always shifts.
By escalating demands to a level that even progressives are finding invasive, leaders of the movement are wasting their opportunity and gambling with the hard-won rights of others. People who care about the future of not only transgender rights but also the rights of homosexuals and women need to stop and reflect on what goals are reasonable and sustainable. The protections we ask for must allow for belief systems other than our own.
Today’s radical gender movement is a movement without perspective or empathy. It disdains compromise and ignores any interests it doesn’t share. While most people, given time, will learn to tolerate policies and belief systems they don’t agree with, no group will work against its own interests indefinitely. And this is why, if nothing changes soon, the gender movement will fail.
The judge involved in the case of a 7-year-old boy whose mother is convinced he is transgender has ruled that the father will have a say over medical decisions, including the transition of his son.
The decision comes on the heels of massive social media outcry from politicians and social commentators alike, as a jury of eleven people had originally ruled against the father, Jeffrey Younger, who was attempting to prevent James from being administered puberty blockers by the boy’s mother and doctor.
”I want you to imagine having electronic communication with your son on FaceTime, and imagine that your ex-wife has dressed him as a drag queen to talk to you,” said Younger in a podcast interview.
“Now imagine how you would feel seeing what I believe is actual sexual abuse—I believe this is not just emotional abuse but is the very, most fundamental form of sexual abuse, tampering with the sexual identity of a vulnerable boy.”
This was all accompanied by a video taken by Jeffrey of his son James, who is seen wearing a towel on his head to simulate longer hair, to make him more like a girl.
The shocking video, titled “Mommy says I’m a girl” is two minutes of James questioning his son about his gender identity.
“You’re a boy, right?” asks the father, who is just discovering for the first time that his son had been convinced he was the opposite gender.
“No, I’m a girl,” says James in the video.
The two-minute video, which has James detail how his mother would make him wear dresses and have his nails painted, went viral, having been viewed millions of times in less than 24-hours.
In all, Judge Kim Cooks of the 255th Family District Court in Texas ruled that James Younger would remain under a “joint managing conservatorship under their parents, Jeff Younger and Anne Georgulas,” according to The Texan.
Judge Cooks also gave the two parents joint decision making over “all medical, dental, and psychiatric care for the boy,” with the judge stating that both the father and mother need to give consent in order to give puberty blockers to a child.
Cooks also issued a gag order on the father so he can’t talk about the case.