Justin Trudeau can try and distance himself from his ‘peoplekind’ remark during his town hall meeting in Edmonton on Feb. 1, but it confirms to me that his gender-neutrality agenda is Orwellian.
If anyone uses gender references, he will talk down to them as his way of imposing his moral imperative. The ‘peoplekind’ remark arose during his town hall meeting in Edmonton on Feb. 1.
A woman was making a statement to him with reference to ‘humankind’, but he interrupted her and said “we like to use peoplekind because it’s more inclusive.”
Yes, Trudeau’s remark drew some applause from the audience but it wasn’t the roaring applause he hoped for, I’m sure. It was more like tepid, politically correct applause.
But last week, after the media and politicians offered their analyses and comments about the ‘peoplekind’ remark, Trudeau tried to distance himself by calling it a “joke.”
What the woman felt about Trudeau correcting her woman’s feelings were about his correcting her, I don’t know and I can’t speak for her.
Nonetheless, I condemn him for his misconduct. Trudeau talked down to her and he didn’t give her the opportunity to fully deliver her statement.
What he should have done last week is apologize publicly for his misconduct – and made a pronouncement that he is receptive to different viewpoints that don’t conform to his own.
I see his behaviour at that town hall meeting as controlling and terse. If somebody says something that he doesn’t like or disagrees with, then he will pounce and try to humiliate them in order to retain control of the message.
Trudeau is willing to allow participation in the discussions, but only along the lines that he advocates, and that is especially true in relation to his gender-neutral agenda.
Last week, I commented on the flaws of a gender neutral national anthem. Liberals and progressives will argue that gender neutrality is about inclusiveness.
But as I said then, I will say now: You can have patriarchal pronouncements, such as the one found in the national anthem or matriarchal pronouncements and still be respectful of all.
You don’t have to tear down or erase the patriarchal or matriarchal elements, and to repeat another comment from last week… if the political correctness crowd is making the issue about inclusiveness, then my position still stands. Patriarchs and matriarchs can and should be inclusive of each other, while still having their separate positions.
The word ‘peoplekind’ is as flawed as changing the reference in the national anthem to ‘In all of us command’. What is its precise meaning? As with many words in the English language, it can mean different things to different people.
And would it have a place in Webster’s Dictionary if someone came up with an all-encompassing definition? Would Webster’s Dictionary even agree to include ‘peoplekind’ in its word database?
In the end, I will not stoop to Trudeau’s gender-neutrality agenda. His attempts to dismantle common usage like “his,” “hers,” “him” and “her” should be resisted and Trudeau should be put in his place to prevent them becoming thought crimes.