Posted Feb 07, 2018 by Michael L. Brown

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau,

I’m not sure how this is faring on your side of the border, but here in America (and, apparently, elsewhere, see here and here), your use of the word “peoplekind” has raised some eyebrows.

I’m referring, of course, to your interaction with a woman in your live audience who stated that“maternal love is the love that’s going to change the future of mankind”. You interrupted her to say, “We like to say ‘peoplekind’, not necessarily ‘mankind’, because it’s more inclusive.”

Now, I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I think the word you wanted to use was “humankind,” an acceptable alternative to mankind. To my knowledge, “peoplekind” has not yet gained currency, nor do I expect that it will.

And I do appreciate your desire to be inclusive, not wanting women to feel left out because of the use of the word “mankind,” as if it somehow excluded half of the human race (otherwise known as “womankind”).

But is it possible, sir, that your decision to correct this woman was ill-timed, especially since it was a female speaking about the power of maternal love to change the future of mankind? Surely she understood the already inclusive nature of the word.

And could this be yet another example of PC culture run amuck? It would be similar to what happened in 2016, when it was reported that, “In an increased effort to be politically correct, a new inclusive language policy from administrators at Princeton University is seeking to end the usage of gender-specific words like ‘man’ on campus.”(If you’d like to read my response to this, go here.)

To be sure, I’ve read that you’rein favor of the recent move to remove gendered language from your national anthem, so that “in all thy sons” will now read “in all of us.” In your words, it’s “another positive step towards gender equality.”

And I would imagine that you’d be supportive of the vote by the Episcopal Church of America to stop using male pronouns for God.

Really now, how antiquated it is for Jesus to refer to God as His Father, or to teach us to pray to our Heavenly Father, or even to think of Jesus as the Son of God, for that matter.How much better it is to pray to our Heavenly Parent (or, perhaps, if we had a bad experience with our parents, just to, the Heavenly Person), in the name of Jesus, the Child of God. (Now, if only we could remove all images of Jesus looking male. That would really help!After all, shouldn’t the Savior be gender neutral?)

I do apologize, sir, if my sarcasm seems insulting, but I’m trying to make a simple point: Gender distinctions are not only good, but they serve a useful purpose, recognizing the realities of our biological sex and understanding the differences between the sexes. And those distinctions are crucial. (On this point, may I recommend you heed the words of one of Canada’s favorite sons – sorry, I mean “children” – namely, Prof. Jordan Peterson?)

Unfortunately, in the day in which we live, gender distinctions are considered an enemy, which is why many LGBT activists have declared war on gender. This is a war that will have frightful consequences, since God made us male and female, and we blur those distinctions to our own undoing.

Last December, it was reported that, “27 Percent of California Teens Are Gender Nonconforming.” Yes, “A new study of California youth found that more than one in four teens say their classmates view them as resisting dominant forms of gender expression.”

Did you note those words “resisting dominant forms of gender expression”? This is not primarily an issue of biological abnormalities or deep-seated emotional confusion. This is a matter of resistance. The status quo of gender distinctions must be overthrown.

There’s a reason, sir, that a newly released study claims that teens are identifying as gender non-conforming at a higher rate than was previously believed, and it’s not because, in reality, there are more men trapped in women’s bodies (and vice versa) than we previously knew.

No, it’s because of the ongoing assault on biological realities, the ongoing war on gender distinctions, the ongoing battle againstthe truth that God made us “male and female” – not just “people.”

And while I have no problem using the term “humankind” when appropriate, I fear that your use of “peoplekind” points to a deeper issue, one in which your zeal for inclusion causes you to ignore (and even exclude) the most fundamental categories of life.

That’s why the woman you interrupted spoke of the power of “maternal love” rather than “paternal love,” recognizing a distinction between the two (as sacred and powerful as both of them are). These are distinctions you do well to heed, sir – for the future of mankind.

Tags: 

Sign Up or Login to post comments.

Comments

user profile
gerald a posted a comment · Feb 23, 2018
As a Christian I believe in loving these people like anyone else. In fact I would like to turn them and you to Christ who said "Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works (miracles) themselves". He also said "I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." So called transgenders shouldn't be prevented from holding most jobs. That's not the same as joining with them in their delusion and saying you get to use the other rest room or generally pretending that they really are the other sex. If someone publicly says these transgenders are just very confused people or doesn't call a male who says he's a female "she" or whatever, you want them banished from public life and who knows what else. You want it to effectively be illegal to state a sane and reasonable opinion. You say something or other *really* is going on in people's minds who think they're the other sex than their anatomy. You used as examples that we can observe depression and PTSD via MRI's. Now what are depression and PTSD? They're mental disorders. I already said I think that they really do believe they're the "other" sex. I also said that it's a mental disorder. There possibly *really* is something going on in the brains of people who think they were a famous person in a past life. Maybe it's even possible to detect it in a brain scan. When I say it's not "biological" or "scientific" what I mean is they weren't BORN that way. What is your point about the insanity defense when someone murders someone? First of all the insanity defense doesn't say that their behavior is normal. Just the opposite. It says that the person is impaired. If you're trying to draw a parallel with what people like you say about so called "transgenders", then we would have to say their behavior is to be accepted as completely normal and should be allowed to keep murdering. They are typically sentenced to time in a hospital ward for the criminally insane and required to take medication. You are using the typical argument that is used by LGBT propagandists that it's all about being "nice" and that people who don't agree are these meanies who want to be permitted to keep on being mean. When you succeed in framing the issue that way, it is a very effective propaganda technique.
user profile
Skeptic posted a comment · Feb 19, 2018
Dear Gerald, I enjoy our little exchange. I really don’t want to dig much deeper into the scientific evidence since, as I had mentioned in my last post, I don’t really care. Thus I only want to address a few of your points: Medical science actually deals quite a bit with different states of people’s minds and they can be objectively observed. Conditions such as depression or PTSD can be diagnosed with an MRI scan (to detect symptoms such as reduction of brain tissue or excessive activity in the amygdala), so why would I not consider someone’s feelings to be in the “wrong” body, as biological reality. This is something absolutely real to people who experience this condition, similar to the ones mentioned above. No matter whether you accept this or not. Furthermore, I don’t rely on/accept the bible as evidence to support any truth claims. And by the way, we accommodate in our law a number of mental conditions: We don’t discriminate against people who have an intellectual disability, we accept the insanity defense in court and so on. And to me, it’s just a decent response to folks who are (perceived to be…) different. And what kind of your behavior do you need to modify? How does any of this impacts your personnel life (I always had the same question with regards to gay marriage and how the legalization affects any non-gay people…)? You as a Christian put people in “boxes” which fit or don’t fit in your biblical world view and everyone who objects these discriminating ideas is a hater. You/Christians feel discriminated once you/they lose the right to discriminate.
user profile
gerald a posted a comment · Feb 16, 2018
@skeptic What you are calling "reality" is something that exists in people's minds. Period. Science is about things that can be objectively observed. We cannot observe that anatomical males are *really* females etc. That is not objective reality...and therefore not scientific (or "biological reality"). They may truly believe they are a different sex, so that constitutes SOME KIND of "reality", but not the scientific kind, and therefore not "biological reality". And saying God created them that way is totally not supportable. The Bible, the inerrant word of God, confirms the truth that there are only two sexes: “Haven’t you read that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’" You ask "why should this not be accepted", whatever science says? I accept that they think what they think. However you probably include in the idea of their being "accepted" that everyone modifies their behavior to accommodate what's in their minds, and I assume, that the law also "accepts" this idea that's in their heads. Since when do we, institutions and the laws recognize everything in anyone's mind and modify everything accordingly? The fact is we don't. My opinion is that it's some kind of mental disorder. If someone really believes they are the reincarnation of some famous person who lived in the past, do we require any property that person owned to be turned over to them? Of course not. The idea that this thing in their minds is "scientific" has permeated society's more powerful institutions. However it's not because there's any actual science behind it. It is driven by constant propaganda and undoubtedly some faux academic "research" as well. And let's face it, people who hate Christians automatically think that doing the opposite of what Christians believe is some kind of enlightened "scientific" thinking. The idea that institutions and laws must accommodate the transgenders is a kind of insanity IMO. And the reason it's insane is precisely because it is without any scientific foundation.
user profile
Skeptic posted a comment · Feb 16, 2018
Dear Gerald, I suggest you read up on the subjects you attempt to argue about before you try to lecture other people. The point I was trying to make, which got totally lost on you and the other commentators, was that we all need to be more humble and toss out any of our preconceived notions (“…there are only two genders…things called x and y chromosomes”,”…Men are men and women are women. Done.”), if it turns out they aren’t corroborated by reality. Speaking about reality: What about woman who have one Y and one X chromosome and all the physical characteristics of a female body (Swyer Syndrome)? Following your logic and “biologically speaking”, they are male, correct? …or perhaps not? But even if we wouldn’t have all the scientific evidence about the genetic makeup of the human body and the diversity of (human) life, what difference does it make? If someone identifies as a woman, but has the physical characteristics of a man, why should this not be accepted. I can only imagine the struggles such a person must go through and on top of it, being rejected by certain (religious) groups in society and worst case, put at the same level as pedophiles when it comes to the simple action of choosing a bathroom. I just don’t understand the intrinsic value, which is subscribed to this “black & white” – male-female gender distinction. What harm is being done by educating our children in a way which conforms with reality? I honestly don’t understand. God as the perfect being had no gender, so why does it matter?
Jackie posted a comment · Feb 14, 2018
In Psalm 59:2 David prayed "Deliver me from the workers of iniquity." I too pray this. As a Canadian, I speak for myself but I'm sure there are others who will agree our PM is not "speaking" for all Canadians. I personally feel he is leading our country to ruin. God is being removed from everything and nonsensical phrasing like "peoplekind" and his ever usage of the term "gender-equality" are slowly being infiltrated into everything. He thinks that abortion and pot and people of the LGBT communities are more important than those of us who feel these are sins and are breaking down our society. His blunders really make him look pathetic. As a Christian, I need to pray for our PM to search his heart and change the path he is on. All "mankind" are Gods people. This he cannot change.
user profile
Bethany Millow posted a comment · Feb 14, 2018
Men are men and women are women. Done. There doesnt need to add this language to make things 'gender neutral' and, I believe, that the more attention is drawn to this kind of thing the more of an issue it will become. I completely stand by Dr Brown and what he said that we need distinction, I also agree that people should not be discriminated. Going back to what was mentioned about 1 in 4 teenagers resisting dominant forms of gender, is a massive warning signal, in my eyes, that the more this issue is pressed the bigger the issue is becoming. In other words, the more young people are brought up having things like transgender pushed on them (or more like shoved down their throats in sex education), the more it will pervert their mind and the more they will think about it and come to the conclusion that it is something they should do, therefore if they are not exposed to this the way they have been, then chances are they wont think about it and wont want to 'resist dominant gender', as it has been put. Society making everything 'gender neutral' and LGBT waging a 'war on gender' is just attacking and waging a war on ourselves. It just needs to stop its ridiculous, the whole world has gone into overdrive about whether we should be recognised for what we are born as, and now enforces the idea of having no gender and that recognising gender isn't good. To pick at things like "mankind" I mean really, now that's just silly. I don't have a problem with anyone who is transgender or have had a sex change, but what I do have a problem with, is having it forced upon me and then being forced upon our young people. Everywhere that I turn its all about transgender, homosexuality, and not discriminating these people, and I agree with not discriminating and accepting people as they come and where they're at, but the way and the amount it is shown is unnecessary and it is actually presented more like gay promotion or transgender promotion, its done in a way that almost encourages people to conform to what the LGBT 'thinks' is correct, but how can waging a war on gender, might I remind you we are in fact born with a gender, be healthy or in any way the right thing to do for us as humans? And yet, they have taken the bible out of schools and stop singing hyms in school because they want the students to 'be free in making their own choices', and yet have to sit there and watch to men kissing in a video as a means of education. Nice one.
user profile
gerald a posted a comment · Feb 12, 2018
Skeptic says: "Accepting biological realities is to accept diversity when it comes to gender, sexual orientation and all the other human characteristics. After all, isn’t god “to blame” for the diverseness of the world we live in?" You need to take a course in basic biology. Biologically speaking, there are only two genders, male and female and that's all there ever will be. Just like the Bible says. There are these things called x and y chromosomes you see.
user profile
Skeptic posted a comment · Feb 08, 2018
Dear Dr. Brown, I’m myself not the biggest fan of the movement to make our language gender neutral, since I believe that words like “mankind” are understood to include the females as well. But I do respect people who want to make certain expressions more inclusive (and thus changing the anthem) and I assume, based upon your article, you support this notion (at least in a general sense) as well. Nevertheless I believe your argument becomes a straw man, when you start to equate “equal” with “identical”. Moreover, you fail to acknowledge that there are many shades of grey rather than just black and white, male and female. What harm does it do to you, if someone doesn’t (want to) fit into the categories which you deem acceptable based upon your biblical world view? What is so intrinsically good about gender distinctions, other than “…the bible/God says so”? Accepting biological realities is to accept diversity when it comes to gender, sexual orientation and all the other human characteristics. After all, isn’t god “to blame” for the diverseness of the world we live in? And finally, you always put so much emphasis on proclaiming how companionate you are (and I truly believe you honestly think this about yourself…). So why don’t you start with accepting other people the way they are, instead of trying to change them or even worse, trying to deny them basic rights? I always appreciate the “tone” you use in your articles as well as on your radio show, being respectful especially towards other people with whom you disagree. But your ideas and world view are in stark contrast to the very kind way you present yourself and your arguments.