I take it as given that all of us want to feel welcome wherever we go, be that amongst our friends, work colleagues or in society in general. Hence I understand why Stonewall champions the rights of the LGBT community. How gay people were treated in decades past was terrible and I oppose anyone or any organisation that would seek to cause harm to the property or person of any homosexual or heterosexual. All of us ought to be able to live safely in our homes or go about our business without the threat of harm.
But just because I wish no harm on any homosexual person doesn't mean that I have to agree with everything that Stonewall stands for or seeks to do. For example the issue of gender neutrality. A seemingly innocuous article in my newspaper caught my eye on the 14th July 2017. It was in the i newspaper and was titled 'End of the line: Goodbye Ladies and Gentlemen.'
The above article informed us that transport workers across London have been told to stop using the words 'ladies and gentlemen' in public address announcements in order to comply with a city wide bid to become more gender neutral. Apparently LGBT activists have appealed to the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan to change what they called 'outdated language'. TFL (Transport for London) boss Mark Evers said that TFL wants 'everyone to feel welcome on our transport network' and 'we have revised the language that we use in announcements & elsewhere and will make sure it is fully inclusive, reflecting the great diversity of London.
For some people, just me querying Stonewalls actions would be enough to label me as homophobic which is not true. I do not like the term homophobic as it seems to be used to belittle any who disagree with the party line. If the government were to do this then we would all be up in arms. Democracy means dealing and debating with those you disagree with. Calling them names is childish. All those who did not vote for the Tory party in the recent elections are not toryphobic. Perhaps homophobic could be used for right wing bigots who hate homosexuals. I do not hate homosexuals.
As I said earlier I support Stonewalls right to represent the LGBT community. As a Christian I also call upon the church to reach out and show the love of God to gay, transgender and intersex people, but also to question their lifestyle. This already happens with heterosexuals so why not homosexuals? In this blog I do not intend to bible bash and indeed I hope to be as fair and neutral as I can. My intent is to question the subject of gender neutrality as I see it in society and particularly as I found it in this article.
TFL cite ' a city wide bid to become more gender neutral.' Now I am not a resident of London so I am not aware whether Londoners have been presented with details of the above bid. Neither am I aware whether they have been presented with the arguments for or against this, or whether they have had the opportunity to voice their opinion on this policy. If they have then fine, but if they haven't then why not? A city wide policy effects all Londoners & the mayor needs to heed all views and not just those from one side of the argument.
In the article activists state that 'ladies and gentlemen' is archaic language which is nonsense. I may not be in the first flush of youth, but I still use the term. I admit that thee, thy, thou and forsooth have dropped from my vocabulary and may be confined to history, but 'ladies and gentlemen-COME ON.
I understand that TFL want everyone to feel welcome on their transport network and I should hope so to. What I fail to understand is why 'ladies and gentlemen' should be seen as anything other than a fully inclusive term. There have been times when I have had to stand up in front of others at our chapel, and call everyone to order because something is about to start. I can assure you that on those occasions my words of 'ladies & gentlemen' were meant to include all those present.
Historically 'ladies & gentlemen' is a term of inclusiveness so why does Stonewall want it removed? Gay men are still men, gay women are still women. Your gender does not dictate your sexual orientation in our society. Even transgender people were born as one sex, but then choose to live as another. Of course there is the case of 'intersex' people whose sex can be unclear, but I do not think that they are the issue.
I have been fighting against accepting the following conclusion as I dislike conspiracy theories and don't want to be labelled as a conspiracy theorist. However I cannot deny that there is pressure put on us by society to accept certain views and beliefs. The use of the term homophobic is one example. If you disagree with me then ask yourselves the following. When did you last see the homosexual lifestyle questioned anywhere in the media? When did you last see any debate on gender neutrality? All we get are films, programmes and newspaper articles that promote the homosexual lifestyle as championed by Stonewall. Whilst we should not gloss over the injustices done to gay people in the past, never the less unquestioning support of homosexuality/gender neutrality is not the way forward. Articles such as in the i newspaper give support to gender neutrality, but they fail to give reasons why this is a good thing.
As a Christian I believe that men and women should celebrate their maleness or femaleness rather than accept the pressure to, in some way, hide it. I am not talking about gender stereotypes which are a social construct, but a recognition that both sexes have worth because they are Gods construct.
To be candid I don't really care how TFL make their public announcements. What does bother me is that a relatively small pressure group can get TFL to change a perfectly up to date, and inclusive term for their own reasons.
So Ladies and Gentlemen let us oppose this gender neutrality pressure. There is no reason why anyone should think that this term is anything other than meant to be inclusive and hence no reason for anyone to be offended or feel left out.
My prayer is that going forward we will have meaningful debates in society. I want to hear Stonewalls arguments, and I also want those who disagree to be able to do so. I ask for more democracy, not less.
