To talk about an absurd idea, a twisted, frankly delusional one, I, like others, happen to qualify it as lunar. It’s a French expression, I know, but I like it.
I’ll get that straight before I add that Liberal MP Jennifer Maccarone lunarly tweeted yesterday.
I give the elements of this story.
gender theory
On April 18, the Quebec official opposition Twitter account published an amazing tweet that told us about a scene from parliamentary life.
I quote it. “Acadie MP André A. Morin is asking Minister Simon Jolin-Barette to replace the term “porter” with “porter” to prevent Bill 12 from excluding anyone. The minister refuses from the outset.
This is when I say “moon”. Jennifer Maccarone retweeted this message and commented: “Once again the CAQ government shows a lack of understanding and inclusion”.
Once again, the CAQ government shows a lack of understanding and inclusion. https://t.co/gwtGit5jNG
— Jennifer Maccarone MP/MNA (@JMaccarone) April 18, 2023
And again I say: “Moon”.
Let’s do the steps again.
Liberal MP Morin believes that the term ‘surrogate wife’ can be mutually exclusive.
what does he mean with that? That men can bear children? If so, the Liberal MP is behind an extraordinary biological discovery.
Or I don’t understand anymore.
As for Liberal MP Maccarone, she believes that refusing to take into account that men can carry babies amounts to a lack of inclusion. So practice exclusion.
Surely.
But we all know what is behind this speech.
That’s the gender theory that’s in the news these days. We know this theory.
For gender theory, it’s enough for a woman to say she feels like a man for us to recognize her as such, even if she hasn’t had sex reassignment surgery – because sex would be independent of biological sex, what would be just a physical residue in the definition of identity. Official recognition is sufficient to justify the change of identity, which is based on the principle of gender self-determination.
Therefore, a biological female who can bear children but has identified as a male can therefore become a “male carrier” – from the idea that we should no longer speak of a female carrier but of a carrier because the term would be more comprehensive.
Perhaps this is the inevitable consequence of a discourse that initially wanted us to replace the words father and mother with parent 1 and parent 2.
Recording?
I would like to point out that this thesis is generally self-evident for the followers of neofeminism, for whom the fact of being a woman no longer comes from nature or biology, but from the feeling of the moment, and that society should be rebuilt from this view of things, for example by allowing biological males who identify as females to take part in athletic competitions for females.
So, is changing the definition of words enough to change the reality they refer to?
But I’ll get back to that. We live in a world that seeks to portray those who cling to the idea that women bear children as exclusive, discriminatory, and adamant reactionaries.
It is not certain that this new vision of the world is suitable for mere mortals.
Who, if familiar with that expression, could mistake it for lunar.
