(LifeSiteNews) — “How does someone else’s identity hurt you?” 

That has been one of the primary arguments wielded by transgender activists in a thousand culture wars that have exploded across the Western world, from university campuses to public school classrooms. 

Perhaps the most famous example is the incident that made Dr. Jordan Peterson famous. When the little-known psychologist and professor declared that he would not submit to compelled speech in the form of using “preferred pronouns” for gender-confused pronouns, he drew attention to the fact that when gender ideology is enforced as public policy, the rights of those who do not subscribe to this ideology are inevitably violated. 

The problem, as it turns out, is not about choosing your identity. It is in compelling others to recognize your identity and verbally affirm that identity – even if, by doing so, they violate their own beliefs and consciences. In effect, gender ideology as public policy inflicts “moral injury” on those who do not believe that men can become women or vice versa or that gender is “fluid” and malleable. 

In short, gender ideology as public policy and fundamental rights are on an inevitable collision course.  

The latest example of this was detailed by Jill Foster in The Telegraph. A weekly newsletter sent out by a primary school in the south of England in June caused consternation and confusion among many parents because “among the names of the newcomers was what appeared to be a male teacher’s name with the honorific not of Mr, Mrs, Miss, or even Ms but Mx. Enquiries to the school followed, and the parents discovered that a new teacher who would be teaching children under eight was indeed a man. He was, parents were told, said to have neither a ‘male nor female identity.’” 

Staff at the school, Foster writes, were already referring to the male teacher by the plural pronoun “they”; “some children had mentioned meeting the new teacher and he had been wearing nail polish and had ‘sounded a bit like a girl.’” Legally, the category “non-binary” does not exist in the UK, and there is no third “X” option available on government identification such as passports. But the school decided to affirm this “non-binary identity” nonetheless.  

It is at this point in the story that LGBT activists would demand: “How does this identity hurt you?” 

For parents who do not accept the fictional category of “non-binary,” the harm is obvious, and many are already trying to find new places to send their children to school for the upcoming school year. As one mother told The Telegraph:  

“At first I thought the ‘Mx’ was a spelling mistake. But when we found out he was non-binary and the staff were all calling him ‘they’ and ‘them’ already, I said to the head teacher: ‘That was a bit sneaky. You didn’t mention anything about his identity in the newsletter.’ And she just dismissed it, saying: ‘Not really.’ But I am really concerned. This will be very confusing for the children.”

“My son, who would be in this man’s class next year, has some learning difficulties. I don’t want him being told that the man in front of him isn’t a ‘he’ or a ‘him’. That’s very mixed up. What message is that sending out to children? I’d heard about him wearing nail polish and so I asked the head teacher whether he would be able to dress as a woman. She simply said that he would be expected to follow the school dress code – but I took that as meaning he could wear either male or female [dress].”

“Some of the other parents think we’re just making a fuss over nothing and that it’s only a name and it doesn’t matter what this man wears,” she continued. “But I feel that this is more about what a male teacher wants – acceptance and validation from young children – rather than what’s best for the children themselves. I don’t trust the school any more so I’m taking my little boy out and will home-school if necessary until I find another school. I’m not the only one. I know of around eight or nine families all doing the same.” 

A father concurred with her concerns, telling The Telegraph that the head teacher is unwilling to discuss parental concerns at a collective meeting. “I’m sure this teacher is a nice guy, but if you don’t know what gender you are, what else are you going to be teaching our children? My daughter is already calling this man ‘Miss’ and I don’t know if that’s because she’s always had a female teacher in the past or that she’s been told to call him ‘Miss’ or doesn’t know how to pronounce ‘Mx’.”  

Indeed, even transgender activists disagree on how “Mx.” is pronounced, with some favoring “mux” and others, perhaps more appropriately, “mix.” The head teacher’s reticence to meet – and, according to one parent, even respond with detailed emails – is likely because they are on shaky legal territory.  

“Non-binary is not a status with any definition or meaning in law, as confirmed by the Supreme Court, and anyone claiming to have both (or neither) male and female identities should not be working in any capacity with children,” Tracy Shaw of the Safe Schools Alliance told The Telegraph. “Safeguarding must always come first… Professional adults should never require young children in their care to confirm or validate aspects of their private life or personal identity in a work setting.” 

Who does this man’s “non-binary” identity hurt? Well, the children who are deliberately confused. The parents who do not wish their children to be confused. And ultimately, a society that adapts itself to the fiction that gender is fluid. You can have gender ideology as public policy, or you can have freedom of speech and parental rights. You cannot have both.