THE SERVANT GENERAL
ASSAULTS ON FAITH, FAMILY AND LIFE
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT FORCING GENDER IDEOLOGY
ON GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
February 10, 2017
The totalitarian nature of liberals is coming to the fore.
They preach tolerance but are the most intolerant.
They force their diabolical ideology on people under pain
of punishment for non-compliance.
Canadian government employees must pass pro-LGBT
‘gender equality’ test, or else
OTTAWA, February 9, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) Canada’s
federal public servants have three chances to pass a mandatory
feminist “gender equality” course or face unspecified
has learned of a number of federal employees who fear that
if they refuse to take the test, or outright fail it by not
selecting the feminist-approved answers, they might be overlooked
for promotion. Some fear they might even lose their jobs.
The gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) course was developed
under Jean Chretien’s Liberal government in 1995. Its
purpose was to “advance gender equality in Canada”
by helping government employees craft and implement “gender
equality” policies, programs, and legislation.
GBA+ tool was erratically applied over the past 20 years.
One woman complained in a 2005 article that appeared in Canadian
Women's Studies that under the Harper government "further
development of policies using this tool is almost nonexistent."
this changed when Liberal leader Justin Trudeau came to power
Under Trudeau’s Liberal Government GBA+ has not only
been injected with new life but has received a makeover by
sexual elites who want to impose their vision of “diversity
and inclusion” across the Federal government. The “plus
(+)” in the name indicates that Gender-based Analysis
“goes beyond gender,” according to Status of Women,
and includes factors such as “sexual orientation.”
Online searches reveal that before Trudeau's election the
program was simply referred to as "GBA" and after
his election the "plus (+)" was added.
the introductory training video to GBA+, a homosexual couple
is given as an example of persons whose needs can be “better
address[ed]” by public servants trained in the course.
the video’s narrator: “Joseph and Marco are young
professionals who have recently ‘married’ and
adopted their first child. … Have you considered how
the issues you address in your work might impact these individuals
or how gender, culture, disability, and other diverse factors
might have a bearing on the outcomes of federal government
Gwen Landolt, national vice president of Real Women of Canada,
told LifeSiteNews the course with its corresponding test is
“indoctrination” that is meant to “purge
the politically incorrect” from the Federal government.
“This is outrageously totalitarian,” she said.
“It shows a complete lack of democratic and so-called
“What this program reveals is an intolerant government
that wants to purge anybody who doesn't adopt their ideology,”
‘Not simply an add-on’
A 2015 Auditor General’s report released in February
2016 that looked into the implementation of GBA+ at the federal
level found that many departments were not using the tool
The report recommended that the GBA+’s watchdog, primarily
the Status of Women, should “take concrete actions to
identify and address barriers that prevent the systematic
conduct of rigorous gender-based analysis.” The Privy
Council Office (PCO) and Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
(TBCS) were also to be actively involved in implementing the
Status of Women Canada, a department that critics say is largely
controlled by adherents to radical feminism, was then given
the power to develop the GBA+ course and see that it was implemented
across federal departments.
example of gender norms in Canada': Screenshot of material
covered in GBA+ course.
An action plan was developed last year in which Status of
Women along with PCO and TBCS were to see to the “full
implementation of Gender-based analysis (GBA) across federal
departments and agencies” by 2020.
action plan was extensive. It included:
GBA+ training outcomes in “employee performance”
and implement a more robust framework to monitor progress
on GBA capacity and implementation across government.”
Part of this implementation included “collecting information
from departments and agencies on GBA implementation via
a detailed GBA+ Survey to all Deputies on an annual basis.”
After completing the course, Federal public servants will
be able to “recognize how sex, gender, and diversity
can influence the outcomes of policies, programs, and legislation.”
They learn that GBA+ is a “key consideration”
at all stages of the policy, program, and legislative process,
“not simply an ‘add-on.’”
They will have learned a number of unproven claims of radical
is biology. Gender is social context.”
refers to the characteristics associated with ‘feminine’
and ‘masculine,’ as defined by society, culture
and history. It changes over time and between cultures.
Gender is not necessarily determined by sex.”
roles are the learned and expected behaviours that define
and influence the responsibilities, activities, constraints
and opportunities that exist for women and men, girls and
boys, in a given society.”
“Gender exists on a continuum, meaning femininity
and masculinity exist in differing degrees; all influenced
by these many other variables.”
They learn to “challenge assumptions” by means
of examples like the following:
“While driving on a highway, a father and son are
involved in a terrible accident. The fire department is
the first respondent at the scene. As the boy is carefully
removed from the wreckage, one of the firefighters exclaims,
“That’s my son!”
Question: “Who is this firefighter?”
Answer: “The firefighter could be the boy’s
mother or a second father (stepfather, same-sex relationship,
States the course: “Challenging assumptions is a fundamental
element throughout the GBA+ process. We must become aware
of any assumptions, either our own or those of the institution
we work for, that could affect the development or outcome
of an initiative.”
Landolt said one obvious assumption that needs to be challenged
in the GBA+ course is that “only radical feminism matters.”
She pointed out the hypocrisy of having a radical feminist
group implementing a program on “equality” that
is supposed to represent everybody.
The Status of Women is supposed to promote women’s issues,
but it is made up of all-party feminist MPs who largely promote
all that is wrong within the radical feminist movement, she
Landolt said Status of Women does not represent numerous Canadian
women who have a different vision of what it means to be a
“Status of Women are only feminists for feminists, funding
only feminists, dealing only with feminists. And feminism
is only one thread in the multicolored fabric of women's views,”
At the end of the course, public servants must take a “Final
Quiz.” They must achieve 80 percent to pass. If they
pass, they receive a certificate of completion.
one asks what “Gender is.” One must answer either
A or B.
A. “The characteristics associated with ‘feminine’
and ‘masculine,’ as defined by society, culture
B. “The biological differences between men and women.”
If B is selected, the answer is marked wrong.
LifeSiteNews has learned that a number of Federal employees
are disturbed by the unscientific and unproven theories that
are woven as fact throughout the course. They are worried
about what consequences might ensue if they refuse to take
the test, or if they fail it by not selecting the feminist-approved
On top of this, LifeSiteNews has learned that a climate of
fear exists across Federal departments. Public servants are
not voicing their concerns about the course to fellow workers
out from fear of being ratted on and facing potential retribution
LifeSiteNews asked Status of Women what consequences a Federal
employee faces if he or she fails the test three times. Léonie
Roux, Status of Women’s public affairs officer, responded
that while Status of Women provides departments with the “training,
tools and guidance they need to implement GBA,” the
ministry is “not [in] a position to comment on other
department’s implementation of GBA.”
Landolt called the forced implementation of the course “unacceptable.”
“These public servants are paid by the taxpayer to represent
them. They are not employed to be indoctrinated with an ideological
position that most people disagree with,” she said.