Apparently “Congratulations, it’s a boy!” and “Congratulations, it’s a girl!” are statements that no longer make sense in the secular west. Even worse than being nonsensical, statements like these can result in legal trouble thanks to the cancerous influence of critical theory as it has been applied in the push for the normalization of transgenderism.
Case in point, Robert Hoogland, a father who lives in British Colombia, Canada.
Mr. Hoogland has been held in contempt of court for refusing to refer to his daughter with her perferred prononouns – he / him. (It should be noted that the whole idea of “preferred pronouns” was utterly preposterous until very recently.) The issue is rooted in the fact that Hoodland’s daughter identifies as transgender. Hoogland doesn’t want his daughter, age 14, to undergo “gender affirmative” medical procedures (there’s another Orwellian example of doublespeak). Most parents would agree with Hoogland’s position, as such treatments cause irreversible damage to the bodies of young girls.
In the course of defending himself in court, Hoogland apparently learned that his daughter had been exposed to SOGI 123 (a sex and gender education program in British Columbia). Not only did the courts decide that Hoogland did not have the legal right to stop his 14 year old daughter from beginning the process of transitioning via testosterone treatment, but the court also demanded that Hoogland affirm the entire process or face jail time. How was he expected to affirm the entire process? By using “he / him” to refer to his biologically female daughter. Hoogland refused, and his refusal resulted in criminal charges of “family violence.”
Hoogland’s story can be found here and here, if you want to read more.
The entire episode is utterly absurd, and I’m not quite sure which level of absurdity is most striking – the legal absurdity (charges of “family violence”), the biological absurdity (the entire transgender movement), or the grammatical absurdity (the obsession with nonsensical pronouns).
Secular, western culture is obsessed with a therapeutic sense of well-being, even when that subjective, personal sense of well-being flies in the face of biological sex, chromosomes, and DNA. Our self-obsessed culture also insists that any denial of one’s sense of true inner self is a threat to one’s existence and an act of violence. In this environment, objective truth and free speech take a back seat to any given person’s inner sense of self and sense of emotional well being. This is even true when children are seeking irreversible medical treatments that would have been absolutely unthinkable just years ago. Those who condone and administer these irreversible treatments are applauded while those who try to stop such treatments are literally labelled as violent oppressors.
For those who haven’t lost their sense of sanity and common sense, the challenge of standing for truth and free speech is becoming increasingly difficult. Not only does one have to stand against the social-media mob that has bought into the sovereignty of the self, but now one has to stand against secular governments who insist that we call up down and down up, evil good and good evil. Standing for the truth will prove to be difficult in a culture that denies the objective, unchanging reality of truth itself.