Nancy Pelosi Bans ‘Gender’ Terms Like Mother, Daughter, Father, Son in House Rules

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-MA) unveiled the rules for the 117th Congress on Friday, which contain “future-focused” proposals, including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter.”

“This package, which will be introduced and voted on once the new Congress convenes, includes sweeping ethics reforms, increases accountability for the American people, and makes this House of Representatives the most inclusive in history,” said the House Committee on Rules in a statement.

House Speaker Pelosi went on to say she is “pleased to join Chairman Jim McGovern in introducing this visionary rules package, which reflects the views and values of the full range of our historically diverse House Democratic Majority.”

“Thanks to the leadership of Chairman McGovern and our Members, Democrats have crafted a package of unprecedented, bold reforms, which will make the House more accountable, transparent, and effective in our work to meet the needs of the American people,” said Pelosi.

“These future-focused proposals reflect our priorities as a Caucus and as a Country,” the House Speaker added.

Within the proposals are the creation of the “Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth,” which would require Congress to “honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral.”

In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter” will be removed.

In their place, terms such as “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild” will be used, instead.

Source: Breitbart

Merriam-Webster Dictionary Adds to Definition of Female: ‘Having a Gender Identity That Is the Opposite of Male’

The dictionary appeared to add to its primary definition of female, which is defined as, “of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs.”

However, while the primary definition overtly acknowledges the biological reality of the female sex, which makes it distinct from the male sex, the U.S. dictionary effectively negated its own definition by adding additional explanations to seemingly submit to the radical transgender movement.

Merriam-Webster’s sub-definitions, which seemingly erase the reality of biological sex, include:

  • having a gender identity that is the opposite of male
  • made up of usually adult members of the female sex
  • designed for or typically used by girls or women
  • having a quality (such as small size or delicacy of sound) sometimes associated with the female sex

This would not be the first time Merriam-Webster has moved to satisfy the mounting demands of transgender activists. As Breitbart News reported in July, Merriam-Webster updated its definition of “trans woman” to “woman who was identified as male at birth,” once again taking another step in erasing the biological reality of women.

As reported at the time:

Notably, the new definition conflicts with the dictionary’s official description of “woman,” which is defined as “an adult female person.” Merriam-Webster defines “female” as “of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs” — a function a trans woman is, biologically, incapable of.

 Similarly, “trans man” is currently defined by Merriam-Webster as “a man who was identified as female at birth,” and the same logical sequence prevails. A “man” is defined as “an adult male human,” and “male” is defined as “an individual of the sex that is typically capable of producing small, usually motile gametes (such as sperm or spermatozoa) which fertilize the eggs of a female” — another function biological females, or those who would identify as a “trans man” —  are not able to do biologically.

Some feminists have remained at odds with transgender activists, who they contend are gradually erasing women to bend to the “woke” mob.

Continue Reading at Breitbart News…

Cambridge Trandgender Study: Psychiatrists Pressured to Accept Transgender Narrative or Remain Silent

Psychiatry sits on this knife-edge: running the risk of being accused of transphobia or, alternatively, remaining silent throughout this uncontrolled experiment

Abstract

Summary

In the past decade there has been a rapid increase in gender diversity, particularly in children and young people, with referrals to specialist gender clinics rising. In this article, the evolving terminology around transgender health is considered and the role of psychiatry is explored now that this condition is no longer classified as a mental illness. The concept of conversion therapy with reference to alternative gender identities is examined critically and with reference to psychiatry’s historical relationship with conversion therapy for homosexuality. The authors consider the uncertainties that clinicians face when dealing with something that is no longer a disorder nor a mental condition and yet for which medical interventions are frequently sought and in which mental health comorbidities are common.

In 2018 the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) issued a position statement to promote good care when dealing with transgender and gender-diverse people that relates to ‘conversion therapy’.1 In this article we reappraise the phenomenology of gender identity, contrast ‘treatments’ for homosexuality with those for gender non-conformity, analyse the relationship between gender dysphoria and mental disorders with particular reference to the younger cohort of transgender patients, and ask how psychiatrists can address distress related to gender while upholding the central tenet of ‘first do no harm’.

Homosexuality and conversion therapy

Male homosexuality was outlawed in the UK in 1865 until the Sexual Offences Act 1967 decriminalised sexual acts between men. During that time, homosexuality was shameful, stigmatised and conceptualised as a mental disorder. Psychiatry was instrumental in its treatment, which continued even after the legal change.2

Attempts to ‘cure’ same-sex desire included psychotherapy, hormone treatment and various behavioural interventions. These interventions are now considered ‘conversion’ or ‘reparative’ therapy.3 One high-profile failure for such ‘treatments’ was Alan Turing. After being found guilty of gross indecency in 1951, he was prescribed oestrogen, which rendered him impotent and caused gynaecomastia. He died by suicide in 1954.4

Conversion therapies lost popularity as evidence emerged of their ineffectiveness,5 coupled with more tolerant social attitudes. Homosexuality was removed from the World Health Organization (WHO) ICD-10 classification in 1992. In 2014, the RCPsych published a position statement explicitly rejecting conversion therapy and supporting a ban.6 Same-sex orientation is regarded as a normal, acceptable variation of human sexuality.

Enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, lesbians and gay men in the UK now enjoy the same civil rights as heterosexuals in terms of healthcare, marriage and raising of children, and equal employment. Although they enjoy equal status and increased visibility in most Western societies, there remain countries and cultures where same-sex practice is taboo or criminal, and where people still seek treatment.

Beyond sexual orientation

In recent years, increasing links have been forged between lesbian and gay communities and those representing other gender identities. Stonewall describes ‘any person whose gender expression does not conform to conventional ideas of male or female’ as falling under the umbrella term ‘trans’.7

Definitions have evolved beyond those included in the 1992 ICD-10 under ‘gender identity disorders’, with which psychiatrists might be familiar.8 Transsexualism was widely understood to mean ‘a desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, and an accompanied discomfort of one’s anatomic sex’.8 Underlying mechanisms are poorly understood, although there are similarities and overlaps with both body dysmorphia and body integrity identity disorder.9,10 Sufferers might embark on social and medical intervention to help them ‘pass’ as the opposite sex. Historically, a diagnosis of gender dysphoria would have been required for doctors to intervene in this group.11

Transgender, however, has become a much broader category (Fig. 1). New terminology reflects a conceptual shift from clinical disorder to personal identity.12 Crucially, gender dysphoria is no longer integral to the condition. The World Health Organization has renamed ‘gender identity disorder’ as ‘gender incongruence’ and reclassified it as a ‘condition related to sexual health’ rather than retaining it in the chapter pertaining to ‘mental and behavioural disorders’,13 a somewhat discrepant placement, reflecting a political rather than scientific decision-making process.

Read more…

University Professor Loses Admin Job For Stating That “Men Cannot Get Pregnant”

Kathleen Lowrey is an associate professor of anthropology at the Faculty of Arts of the University of Alberta, in Canada. She is also serving as the chair of the undergraduate program – an administrative role which includes duties such as chairing a committee about courses, approving transfer credits, and running a special seminar for honors students in the department.

She’s also a feminist. However, according to some anonymous students and the higher-ups of her University, she is not the right kind of feminist. Because she believes that women are … women. Even worse, she believes that men cannot be women because they don’t have a vagina.

These extreme and radical views caused her to become “problematic” as she was pressured to leave her administrative role. When she refused to do so, she was fired.

Lowrey says she was told in meetings that complaints, made to the dean of students and the university’s Office of Safe Disclosure and Human Rights, were that her views on feminism were making students feel unsafe and there were concerns this was driving students away from choosing anthropology as a major. She doesn’t know exactly the nature of the complaints — or who made them — because they were made informally and anonymously, she said.

“My chair was hoping that for the good of the department I would resign from my position.”

She said she was also told she had been discouraging students from organizing Pride events, which she denies. It was this claim which led her to conclude the complaints centred around her views on gender.

Following a subsequent meeting with the dean of the faculty, she received a letter saying she couldn’t effectively continue in the role and her leaving would be in the best interests of the department. Lowrey said the letter didn’t expound upon the reasons for her dismissal, and she maintains she has never been given proper reasons for her dismissal in writing.
– National Post, University of Alberta prof loses admin role over views on gender that made students feel ‘unsafe’

Lowrey is not a conservative that is looking to “own the libs”. She actually ascribes her intellectual formation to Marxism and radical feminism. While this kind of background should receive an enthusiastic thumbs-up from the social justice crowd, it is not enough anymore.

That’s because Lowrey describes herself as a “gender-critical feminist” which considers biological sex of primordial importance in fighting for women’s rights. While, only a few years ago, this precept was the norm in feminist circles, it is now deemed bad and “transphobic”.

Until what seems like a few minutes ago, there was nothing controversial about this opinion. But now there is. The only “correct” opinion to hold is that gender expression trumps biology in any rights-based claims. And in academic circles, Lowrey’s views, which she is at no pains to hide on campus and off, are a form of apostasy that cries out for punishment.
– National Post, Barbara Kay: U of A professor holds the line on free expression

Lowrey boils her views on feminism down to a few key ideas: Men cannot get pregnant, lesbians don’t have penises, and biological sex is real. These views apparently made students feel “unsafe” and  “caused them harm”.

We are talking about a University (a place of the highest learning possible) being “harmed” by the pre-school teaching that “boys have weewees”.

Continue Reading at Vigilant Citizen…

Heartbroken Dad Of Trans Teen Breaks Gag To Beg For End Of ‘State-Sponsored Child Abuse’

For the past 11 months, Robert Hoogland, a father in Surrey, British Columbia, has been forced to watch as his 14 year-old daughter was “destroyed and sterilized” by court-ordered testosterone injections. After losing his legal appeal to stop the process in January, Rob (previously anonymized as “Clark” or “CD”) is making a desperate attempt to bring his case into the courts of public opinion, even though it breaks a court order demanding his silence about the case.

“I had a perfectly healthy child a year ago, and that perfectly healthy child has been altered and destroyed for absolutely no good reason,” Rob said in an exclusive interview. “She can never go back to being a girl in the healthy body that she should have had. She’s going to forever have a lower voice. She’ll forever have to shave because of facial hair. She won’t be able to have children…”

Rob felt that at the age of 14—when the courts judged his daughter competent to take testosterone without parental consent—she simply did not have the foresight necessary to understand such consequences. Over the course of the past year, Rob has heard his daughter’s voice deepen and crack and watched her begin to grow facial hair.

“Sometimes I just want to scream so that other parents and people will… jump in, understand what’s going on,” Rob said. “There’s a child—and not only mine, but in my case, my child out there having her life ruined,” and yet, Rob felt, “people don’t [even] know.”

Rob’s efforts to raise awareness of his daughter’s plight have come at a high cost. The last time he granted an interview to The Federalist, he was convicted of “family violence” by the BC Supreme Court for his “expressions of rejection of [his daughter’s] gender identity.” He was also placed under threat of immediate arrest if he was caught referring to his daughter as a girl again.

While a January ruling in the BC Court of Appeal vacated that threat, Rob remains under a strict gag order forbidding him from speaking about his daughter’s case in public and requiring that he “acknowledge and refer to [his daughter] as male” in private.

But Rob says he feels a moral responsibility to try to fight the laws and the court rulings which have “destroyed” his daughter. “People need to stand up and realize that [the courts are] sterilizing children, essentially, and mutilating them,” Rob said. “It’s… state-sponsored child abuse.”

Feeling that if he lacked the courage to speak out, he could scarcely expect others to stand up and help him, Rob granted two video interviews to Canadian YouTube commentators about his case. While the interviews garnered a sharp initial interest, the commentators who granted them quickly found themselves under threats of litigation. Rob’s first interview was immediately taken down. Rob’s second interviewer, Laura-Lynn Thompson, faced similar threats, but initially refused to take her video (not currently available in Canada) down.

Last Thursday, Justice Michael Tammen of the British Columbia Supreme Court ordered that Thompson’s interview and various social media posts be taken down. When Thompson stalled, trying to keep a rapidly sharing copy of her interview available to Canadians on Bitchute, the police were sent to her house to demand she take the video down.

Tammen also harshly reprimanded Rob for speaking about his case to the media, warning him that if he broke his silence again, he would likely be cited for contempt of court.

Nevertheless, Rob says he is unwilling to back down. “Whatever happens to me pales in comparison to what’s already happened to my daughter.” Rob feels there is no way for him to fight “this child abuse” of his daughter except to force his story out into the open.

The path forward is not likely to be easy, but Rob said he feels a responsibility to tell his story that goes much deeper than anything court costs or even jail time could deflect. “Let’s say in 5, 10 years my daughter is detransitioning, and she turns to me and says, you know, ‘Dad or Mom, why did none of you do anything to stop this?’…. When my daughter asks me that question, I’ll say, ‘I did everything that I possibly could. There was nothing more I could do, and then when there was nothing more I could do, I continued on because I didn’t want other parents to go through what I went through.”

(Rob has set up a crowdfunding page for those who may wish to help.)

Laura Lynn Thompson of http://lauralynn.tv joined The Alex Jones Show with guest host Matt Bracken to break down the heartbreaking story of government sponsored child mutilation and the government regulations that lock parents out of protecting their children or speaking out.

Source: The Federalist