On August 27, Teen Vogue published an article titled: “How to Use Gender-Neutral Words, and Why They’re Important.” In the article, author Danielle Corcione (I assume it is a she, but to be politically correct, I’ll refer to Danielle as the “author”) tells us that “Gender-inclusive language isn’t typically something you learn in school, but its use is incredibly important to make life easier for nonbinary peers.”
“Using gendered terms — such as “ladies [and] gentlemen” — is highly presumptuous, especially in today’s society, in which many persons are aware that they don’t identify as male or female and therefore are uncomfortable with this type of language,” Dara Hoffman-Fox, LPC, explains.
Is it really true that “many persons” don’t identify as male or female and are uncomfortable with “he” or “she” or other sex-specific words and pro-nouns? In actuality, this is not the truth. In fact, a 2017 study published in the American Journal of Public Health estimated that only .0039 percent of the United States public identifies as transgender – a number that can hardly be described as “many”. So why is Teen Vogue and other “mainstream” media outlets pushing this “gender nonbinary” narrative?
Ryan T. Anderson, policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation and author of the recent book When Harry Became Sally, correctly identified the source of this narrative in a recent interview he did on Catholic television. “After the 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, LGBT activists promptly pivoted from the ‘LGB’ to the ‘T’ (as in ‘transgender’) for strategic purposes.”
Why, you might ask? Because now that sexual intimacy has been legally removed from the confines of man/woman marriage for life and replaced with “two consenting adults” – there is only one barrier standing in the way of demolishing the Biblical concept of marriage, and that is sex. So, if a generation of naïve, wounded children are successfully indoctrinated that their sex is meaningless, LGBT activists will be one step closer to that goal.
That is why Teen Vogue suggests we stop using words like “mankind” and instead use “humankind”, “kiddo” instead of “boy/girl”, “machine-made” instead of “man-made”, and get this, “nibling” instead of “niece/nephew”. Nibling? Sounds like a way I might consume a snack! Take a little nibling, why don’t you?
The reality is, when we deny the purpose of our sex, we lose sight of who we are as children of God, male and female, made in His image; and if we’re not made in His image, we are free to construct, or deconstruct, ourselves in our own likeness, which tears at the very foundation of the purpose God created male and female in nature.
There is a Purpose in Nature
From the standpoint of General Revelation, or the idea that God’s truth is found in nature itself, we need to start with the fundamental principal that God created everything in nature with a purpose.
We see the tragic results in our family and in our society when we deny that there is purpose in nature: Instead of places of learning, schools become centers for merely warehousing children away from their families and indoctrinating them against God.
Instead of places of worship where God is praised and adored in spirit and in truth, too many churches become places where pastors generate income for themselves, rather than focus on the work of God.
Instead of the joyful discovery of what God has instilled in His creation, science has often become the base manipulation of things to produce wealth, aggrandize the ego of the scientist, and further political agendas of ideologues, both on the right and the left.
Instead of a healing art whereby a physician assists nature to work for the benefit of the sick, medicine has become a playground of the ego wherein the physician manipulates the structure of the body to do whatever the patient wants: sterilization, abortion, body-enhancement and gender reassignment surgeries, lopping off fat to lose weight, inserting (and removing) sexual organs at will; the list could go on and on.
Truly, man has removed himself so far from nature that for many years of the 20th Century, doctors were teaching women that it was far healthier for their babies if they used “formula” instead of the natural and nutritious milk that their own bodies provided. Of course, this myth was later disproven by the same scientific community who once said the latter; but isn’t it troubling that we couldn’t plainly see this truth from what God showed us in our own bodies?
After many years of this mistake, psychology has proposed that a number of neuroses and emotional wounds of men and women in the industrialized world has increased because “the science of nutrition” denied them the basic and fundamental bond that a child should have with his mother from the first moments of life outside of the womb.
While others make proper and compelling arguments that there is, indeed, a purpose in nature, my purpose above is to merely identify the results of several centuries of our world where nature has been inverted.
Click here to read more.
SOURCE: Christian Post, Christopher Doyle