According to a daily mail article, HERE, Princeton University has mandated that staff stop using the word “man” or any other gendered words in an effort to create an all-inclusive atmosphere. Although, I suppose I can’t say they “man-dated” this. Perhaps they person-dated the change. The ivy-league school has de-man-ded (whoops) de-person-ded,
They are joining other institutions who have made similar moves, such as trading in “he, him and his,” for “ze, zie and hir” or “ey, em, eir and emself” when referring to those who identify as transgender of gender-queer.
No longer can one even say, “man,” when referring to “mankind.” "Manmade," must be exchanged for “personmade,” or “handmade.”
Frankly, I have no problem with some of the items they mention. Mailman should be mail-person. Fireman should be fire-person and so on. Okay, fine. I don’t think it’s that big of a deal either way, but then I am a gender-satisfied man, after all. What concerns me is the denial of reality.
The attempt to remove gender language altogether is dangerous. It should trouble all thinking people, and certainly Christians, that we are living in a culture perpetuating the notion that you might actually be a woman when your biology is that of a man. The problem is the denial of reality.
Below is a video, from the Family Policies Institute of Washington, that has gone viral for obvious reasons. A five-foot eight-inch white man interviews college students asking them how they might respond if he informed them that he was actually a woman. Following the liberal suggestions of their institutions they all celebrate his chosen gender. Great. Next he asks them what they would think if he chose to identify as a seven-year-old girl. They struggle with this one, knowing that if he were truly allowed to adopt a different age and a different gender he might fight for his rights to attend little girls’ slumber parties or play on the playground at school with them. They can see that this just gets weirder with each new false assertion. His next move is brilliant. “What if I told you I was a Chinese woman?” Wow! The students wrestle with the dilemma. Fine, you’re a seven-year-old Chinese woman. Finally, he asks them what they would say to the assertion that he is actually more than six-feet tall. Here is where it gets interesting. “But, you’re not,” one student says.
He ends the video displaying the proper confusion. How can a five-foot eight-inch, white man be a seven-year-old Chinese woman, but not a six-foot four-inch, seven-year-old, Chinese woman?
Perhaps it is because the students recognize that simply producing a yardstick would demonstrate, conclusively, that he is not six-feet and four-inches. Fine, but there are physical tests that are just as obvious which can easily demonstrate that the other facts in his fictitious profile are also false.
If anyone thinks postmodernism is dead, this video should convince him or her otherwise. The problem is that the current move in our society represents a denial of reality. Try that with cancer. We can imagine the parallel. “Deep down, I’m not a person with cancer. Doctors should not treat me as though I have cancer. It’s a violation of my rights for the medical community to continually encourage me to receive treatment for cancer. Who are they to tell me what my medical reality is?” No one talks like that, despite that there are many cancer patients who do not feel as though they have cancer, and when they do experience its horrific manifestation, they wish it were not so. I dare say they long for cancer’s absence as much as transgendered persons long to be the opposite sex. Yet, they don’t deny reality, because such would mean extremely dangerous ramifications.
In the same way, denying the gender God created a man to have, has serious ramifications. If God exists and He designed men to be men and women to be women (Matt. 19:4), then it is a great blasphemy to observe the obvious design and insist that it is otherwise. The same could be said of those who observe the obvious design of the opposite sex, realize what the Maker had in mind, and decide to reject that. (Rom. 1:26,27). For Christians who think that we should go along with Princeton’s brand of inclusivism (which by the way does not include opposing ideas on this), I can’t sugar-coat it. You aren’t taking your faith seriously. If you actually believe in the Christian message and the authority of scripture, you’re actually reacting in an unloving way to encourage or approve of this sort of thing, because it is dangerous for the individual in question (if not physically, then it certainly is spiritually). If you aren’t a Christian, then it’s still bad for society to deny reality. Our culture will only positively progress if we become seekers of truth.
The second problem with Princeton’s new approach has to do with the encroachment on personal rights, which borders on thought-control, but I’ll have to leave that for another day.
In the end, it is my firm conviction that those struggling with gender issues deserve our love as they work through the tough inclinations, desires and traits that have defined their identities. When gay, lesbian or transgendered persons give up those aspects of their lives in repentance, we should applaud them. Then we may echo Paul’s words, “such were some of you (1 Cor. 6:11).” For more on this, click HERE. Moreover, we should celebrate that God mad them “male and female.” This is a part of God’s wondrous design. We cannot be a people who deny reality. How dare we be ashamed of God’s plan!