“Don’t say ‘women,’ say ‘non-males.’”

My godlessness, how demeaning to women is that?! How cancelling/erasing/marginalizing?

Eric, whatever are you talking about, you ask?

Well, according to the U.K. Daily Mail, Canada’s New Democratic Party (NDP) recently sent an email to its members announcing newly elected leaders as ‘non-male’ and ‘male.’”

Journalist Jonathan Kay shared the email via ‘X.’

Moreover, according to lifesitenews.com, the party is now mandating that at least 50 percent of the signatures collected for its leadership races be from NDP members who do not identify as “cisgender male,” but from “equity-seeking groups” such as non-white people, Indigenous members, LGBTQ+ people, and people with disabilities.

So, humans are either males … or non-males?

And there are only “Cisgender males” or “equity-seeking groups?”

But “male” doesn’t mean anything anymore, either. Who among us can define what a male is? Could be fluid, on a continuum, or utterly unknowable, right? Who are we to judge?

But that is precisely what the NDP has done, apparently, with its new binaries. Think of describing a fellow human being as either “male” or “non-male.” That is the opposite of inclusive. We aren’t even supposed to say the word “female?” Dismissing slightly more than half of the world’s population out-of-hand seems marginalizing and misogynistic to me. As well as insane. So, “non-male” is meaningless, too.

Which is what they are aiming for and why they use those terms.

What’s next? Are the destructive progressive whackos going to assert that there are only Jews and non-Jews? Blacks and non-blacks? Wealthy and non-wealthy? Oh, I see it now. There are only oppressors and the oppressed. Males being the oppressors, non-males being the oppressed.

Are there only Buffalo Bills fans and non-Buffalo Bills fans? Capricorns and non-Capricorns?

That is patently absurd. As is Canada’s “New Democratic Party.” Right, non-New Democratic Party members?

Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License