THE SERVANT GENERAL
ASSAULTS ON FAITH, FAMILY AND LIFE
SEX VERSUS GENDER
There are only two sexes, as designed by God, and
that is male and female. There are many genders, as
designed by society’s liberals, for diabolical
Today’s radical and ‘inclusive’
language is wrecking children’s thinking and
December 19, 2016 (Every (Everyday For Life Canada)
-- Are you aware of
the fact that unelected representatives at the United
Nations recently established a new position of ombudsman
for LGTB "rights?" The mandate
for the person that assumes the job is to promote
human sexuality expressed by terms such as "sexual
orientation," "gender identity" and
"gender expression." It's the "inclusive"
language of homosexuality. However, this is not a
"right" found in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. In the document, there is no such
thing as LGTB or sexual "rights." This new
"right" is pushed by activists to serve
their own goal to get greater world promotion and
acceptance of homosexuality. We know what the new
ombudsman will not do: be an advocate for heterosexuality,
marriage, procreation, love, chastity, children and
is another objective behind the new UN position. It's
to put pressure on those countries that don't culturally
recognize homosexuality and use the
more persuasive concept of "right" to do
so. In Canada, the United States and most other Western
nations, public education is being used to achieve
the same goal. Many
Western countries have approved radical sex "curriculum"
programs that sexualize children at an early age
and teach them about contraception, abortion ("reproductive
rights"), sexual consent and homosexuality. In
the United States, these programs are known as comprehensive
Embedded in the sex "education" programs
is an inclusive language of sex that aims to change
the thought and behaviour of children and the rest
of society about human sexuality.
The tentacles of sexual revolution of the 1960s continue
to reach out today in Western countries and at the
United Nations. False sexual and reproductive "rights"
in the Americas and Europe have increased abortions,
led to higher rates of sexual infections and diseases,
given us more pornography and too many broken families
that leaves many children growing up without fathers.
We are paying a high price in putting human sexuality
outside of marriage, traditional family and morality.
The pursuit of sex has become its own end.
Defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
comprehensive sex education is “A planned, sequential
K-12 curriculum that is part of a comprehensive school
health education approach which addresses age-appropriate
physical, mental, emotional and social dimensions
of human sexuality."
The programs, however, are too often not age appropriate
because they expose children to the idea that sex
is always "safe and fun."
In short, the programs introduce an explicit language
to students about sex but with nice sounding words
like: age appropriate, comprehensive, safe, education
and fun. As the students learn the words, they learn
how to think in sexual terms and many end up putting
the words into experience. They end up having sexual
relations at a young age. Nobody should be surprised
because human beings use language to think and thinking
leads to action. When thinking is distorted and irresponsible,
it can result in dangerous consequences. The language
of sex works the same way as the language of business,
entertainment or any subject.
Here's one example of how one word has shaped thought
and behaviour about human sexuality. It's the word
gender. Today, gender
is not so much connected to biology.
It refers to other words, feelings and meanings. Gender
is now about "sexual orientation," "gender
identity" and "gender expression."
In Ontario, we now have laws to protect the meaning
of these words. Gender has turned human sex into an
abstract concept away from the binary idea of male
or female, boy or girl. As a result, there
is an expanding and factually unchecked list of gender
possibilities. The LGTBQ (lesbian,
gay, transgendered, bisexual, queer, questioning)
acronym continues to mushroom. It's language and meaning
out of control.
Just consider this. The
city of New York has 31 legally protected genders.
Facebook has gone further by giving account holders
58 genders in the United States and 71 in the United
Kingdom. In Ontario, the new sex curriculum
will teach children at least six genders. There is
no science to back these new words. It's being pushed
by the politics of power, sex and correctness. And
those that control language shape thought and behaviour.
Laws are in place to make that one disagrees, otherwise
the person can be charged with hate speech, fined
or even go to jail.
These newly constructed words, acronyms and expressions
about human sexuality are very confusing to young
people in schools. They confuse adults. Can you define
gender, sexual orientation and the difference between
gender identity and expression? There you go, not
so easy. That's the whole purpose, to confuse. Just
imagine how a teacher can misuse this new language
of gender to shape what children think about themselves
and their sexuality. A teacher could say to a class:
"Boys and girls you may not be a boy or a girl
but any one of these 31 genders." Here's the
New York list of genders and consider just how confusing
these made up words are. We will spare you the longer
list from Facebook:
3. Drag King
4. Drag Queen
5. Femme Queen
8. Gender Bender
16. Trans Person
23. Third Sex
24. Gender Fluid
25. Non-Binary Transgender
27. Gender Gifted
28. Gender Blender
30. Person of Transgender Experience
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the
word gender has this origin and meaning:
(n.)c. 1300, "kind, sort, class," from Old
French gendre, genre "kind, species; character;
gender" (12c., Modern French genre), from stem
of Latin genus (genitive generis) "race, stock,
family; kind, rank, order; species," also "(male
or female) sex," from PIE root gene. Also used
in Latin to translate Aristotle's Greek grammatical
term genos. The grammatical sense is attested in English
from late 14th century.
"male-or-female sex" sense is attested
in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic
qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English
word for "sex of a human being," in which
use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous.
Later often in feminist writing with reference to
social attributes as much as biological qualities;
this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is
from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference
to pop star David Bowie.
The word gender has undergone several meaning changes.
It's a grammar term to classify nouns and pronouns as
feminine, masculine and neuter. Gender has also been
used to define the sexes, as male or female. Currently,
the word gender refers to a person's constructed "social
attributes," what David Bowie called "gender-bender."
It's not limited to a person's biological sex. However,
to learn more about how the meaning of gender has transformed
it will be helpful to briefly outline the work done
by the psychologist John Money at John Hopkins University
in the 1960s. He believed that children's sexual identity
is the product of socialized and the child's genes.
These two factors determine whether a child becomes
a boy or girl. It was Money who constructed a new language
of human sexuality in connection to heredity and the
environment. He was the one who first used the expression
"gender identity" to capture the experienced
feelings of sexuality, and "gender role,"
to describe the societal expectations of being female
Money was one of the people who began looking at ways
to help individuals who were sexually confused. He thought
that sex reassignment surgery could relieve the pain
of those who experience dissonance between their biological
sex and their perceived sexual identity. As we have
said, Money believed that socialization had a great
influence on determining whether a child would eventually
be a boy or girl. Heredity could be altered by the environment.
In fact, he co-edited the book titled, Transsexualism
and Reassignment Surgery to promote the experimental
In one controversial case in 1966, Money advised the
parents of a twin boy, who had a mutilated penis from
a circumcision that had gone wrong, to raise the child
as a girl. The parents decided to listen to Money. In
1973, Money said that the boy had been castrated and
made to play with dolls and dresses. The experiment
to raise the boy as a girl was going well. Socialization,
after all, could change genetics. It was a big news
story at the time. Money made the boys perform sexual
acts, one playing the male role and the other brother
the female. According to Money, the boy now a "girl"
had accepted the new identity. The human experiment
was a success.
However, in 1997 researchers discovered that eventually
the boy had rejected his female identity at the age
of 14. There was even a surgical attempt to reconstruct
his genitals. Money was criticized by many once the
news was made public. The story ended tragically: in
2004, the young man had eventually reclaimed his biological
sexual identity but committed suicide. His brother did
the same. The parents blamed Money for their sons' suffering
The present day meaning
of the word "gender" in comprehensive sex
programs is decoupled from biology.
As a result, the politically acceptable idea is that
gender is changeable at will through the use of hormones,
feelings, surgery and environmental factors. Money's
failed social experiment has had a great influence on
sex "education" even though it's not based
on proven science. It's even against the law in Ontario
to counsel a student (any person) to return to their
biological sexual identity but may express feelings
of being attracted to the same or both sexes. Just think
of the harm this bad law will create in schools.
In 2015, the Ontario government issued a new Physical
and Heath Education course for all schools, Grades 1-8.
A controversial sex curriculum is part of the course.
Here's how gender is defined: "A term that refers
to those characteristics of women and men that are socially
constructed." Money's definition has prevailed.
A person's sex defined as male or female has been replaced
by the more general word gender. It's interesting that
word heterosexuality can't be found in the Glossary
of terms in the course document. It's been replaced
by "sexual orientation," that is defined as
"A person's sense of sexual attraction the same
sex, the opposite sex or both sexes." The curriculum
paves the way to introduce homosexuality into the curriculum
as just another sexual orientation.
term sexual orientation underplays the physical fact
that human beings are biologically male or female.
Much of the focus in the sex curriculum is not on
heterosexuality and traditional marriage but on homosexuality
and new family structures such as two dads or two
moms. These ideas can be easier taught with use of
generic terms such as "sexual orientation,"
"gender identity" and "gender expression."
Here's how these words are defined:
Gender identity. A person’s sense of self, with
respect to being male or female. Gender identity is
different from sexual orientation, and may be different
from birth-assigned sex.
Gender expression. The manner in which individuals
express their gender identity to others. A person’s
gender expression is often based on a social construct
of gender, which is either stereotypically male
or female. However, some individuals who do not
see themselves as being either male or female but
as some combination of the two genders, or as without
gender, choose to express their identity in terms
of a multiple model of gender, mixing both male
and female expressions.
The sex curriculum states that male and female are mere
"stereotypically" social constructs. The schools
are continuing the flawed work of Money. If human sexuality
is socially manufactured, it's much easier for schools
to establish government mandated "gay/straight
alliances." These clubs are not promoting anything
"straight." They are there to normalize homosexuality.
The clubs will help promote the LGTBQ language and thinking
about gender. One Catholic high school calls its gay/straight
alliance a "No Names" club. Neither parents
nor the student body is going to ever suspect what the
club is really doing.
Students will learn at a young and impressionable age
that human sexuality can be unconnected to biology,
family and procreation. Heterosexuality is just like
homosexuality. It's simply another sexual orientation.
There is no need to teach students that biologically
two men or two women cannot naturally have a child,
nor about the higher risks of anal sex because it's
equal to heterosexual sex. It's equity education. Moreover,
the sex curriculum is good for everyone because it's
about tolerating "diversity" and "inclusion"
of every kind: physical, ethnic, spiritual and of course
sexual. That this is not true is irrelevant. This language
of the sex curriculum aims to change student thinking.
The government's argument is that the sex curriculum
is to create safe, anti-bullying and inclusive learning
environments. It's the big push for more progressive
education. Instead, the
radical sex curriculum promotes to young students homosexuality
and alternative family arrangements. It downplays the
traditional family. And it's done under the umbrella
of "inclusive, equity and diversity"
education across the school curriculum. How could anybody
in his right mind be against it. And it's much easier
to get parents to go along when they are told that it's
about "equity education" and anti-bullying
Here's a summary of some of what children will learn
at the elementary level in Ontario:
Grade 1: identity the names of genitalia and the concept
of "sexual consent."
Grade 2: gender is self-constructed
and so it's changeable; homosexuality is just another
Grade 4: romantic dating is introduced
Grade 6: masturbation as sexual pleasure
Grade 7: anal intercourse
and oral sex
Grade 8: carry a condom and "make a sexual plan"
Of course teacher activists can further exploit the
content, knowing that there's little chance that parents
will ever find out what they actually teach. The government
and the teachers' unions have given the green light
to the sex curriculum. It's
the mechanics and plumbing of sex devoid of love, marriage,
family and procreation. No permission
forms need to be sent home to get parental approval
when it comes to teaching the sex curriculum, the "sensitive
issues," co-developed by Benjamin Levin a convicted
child predator. It's the children that will suffer.
It robs them of their souls. The "inclusive"
language will change how students think about human
sexuality and their behaviour. And it's not for the
better. Parents make sure you teach this language life
lesson to your children. It's your parental right to
The explicit sex talk
at an early age is bound to confuse children and corrupt
their innocence. The new language of human sexuality
is politically driven indoctrination and a corruption
of education and thinking.
Reprinted with permission from Everyday for Life