Justin Trudeau tells woman to say "peoplekind" instead of "mankind"

Scroll to see replies

.Iqra.

By Justin Trudeau's definition, that means many UK surnames are sexist. For example:

Johnson (son of John)
Robinson (son of Robin)
Richardson (son of Richard)
Dickson (son of Richard)
Thompson (son of Thomas)
Watson (son of Walter)
Jackson (son of Jack)
Wilson (son of William)

Of course a lot of women hold these surnames (in equal numbers to men). But women aren't of course the son of anyone, but are forced to have half of their name constantly with the "son of" someone. So what are we going to do? Rewrite surnames to "people of"?

You can see how silly this gets though, I think Trudeau was personally joking anyway (or at least I hope he was).

Why is Dickson the son of Richard?

Reply 41

Sharpshooter

Original post by .Iqra.

Why is Dickson the son of Richard?

D1ck (apologies for having to avoid the swear filter on this one) is an abbreviation of Richard.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 42

username1339858_

Original post by Bang Outta Order

wo-people...sounds like some childrens fantasy novel species...

it does

Reply 43

Zerforax

Original post by Underscore__

How does this man (probably shouldn’t assume his gender) win elections...

Probably because those pesky women got given the vote.

Reply 44

username3765926

Mankind is the word. We don't need to change it: it has a meaning everyone understands. Non-binarykind doesn't exactly do it.

Reply 45

Unknown-99

Original post by .Iqra.

*hupeople race

Ffs 😂

Reply 46

Life_peer

This ‘man’ is the cuckiest cuck of all cucks.

Reply 47

yungaheartz

Oh mind your peoplers, hes not exactly trying to epeoplecipate anyone here, hes just trying to peopleufacture his own moniker. Its a risky peopleeuver to make but lets be honest here, nowadays its all about shock factor to keep your name in the papers. sure he'll never be able to peoplehandle it down our throats but hes free to try.

Reply 48

username3765926

Original post by yungaheartz

Better not be peoplesplaining there, you straight white cisgender people! You don't want anyone to think your peoplespreading either, right?

Reply 49

yungaheartz

Original post by Unkilled

Better not be peoplesplaining there, you straight white cisgender people! You don't want anyone to think your peoplespreading either, right?

whatever, people!

Reply 50

username3765926

Original post by yungaheartz

whatever, people!

No! We can't call people people! We'll have to call them... I don't know, I feel like I'm peoplesplaining here, but... we could be so peopleey as to call them... non-binary purple penguin attack helicopters, no?

Be arsed typing that in two seconds.

Reply 51

yungaheartz

Original post by Unkilled

so now you're discriminating against helicopters, penguins and the colour purple? people shame on you, you racist, sexist, animalist, colourist, homophobic, fascist!!!

Reply 52

username3765926

Original post by yungaheartz

so now you're discriminating against helicopters and the colour purple? people shame on you, you racist, sexist, homophobic, facist!!!

Yeah, and anywone who disagwees with me (unnecessary voice break) is litewally HITLERR.

Reply 53

yungaheartz

Original post by Unkilled

Yeah, and anywone who disagwees with me (unnecessary voice break) is litewally HITLERR.

discriminating against Hilter :no:

shame on you :fuhrer:

Cringe/10

Wtf is peoplekind? Humankind makes more sense.

Reply 56

rockrunride

Glad Trudeau is finally jumping the shark.

What a virtue signalling fraud that man is.

Reply 57

username3765926

Original post by yungaheartz

discriminating against Hilter :no:

shame on you :fuhrer:

You litewall NAZI FASCIST TRUMP SUPPORTING ALT-RIGHT WHITE PRIVILEGE PIECE OF SH!T!

Also you spelt hitler wrong!

Reply 58

username3079870

Original post by d0p5y

This feminist movement has become dangerous... mankind -> peoplekind, gingerbreadmen -> gingerbreadpeople etc etc... what has the world come to??? Sorry but what is wrong with identifying some item as a “man”??? Someone tell me how that is offensive to women??? Someone explain... Not getting it...

This feminist movement is ridiculous - because if they were true “feminists” they wouldn’t have made walk on girls and grid girls redundant... no job, no income - that’s what feminists have done to women who CHOSE a particular career...

You wonder why male mental health is deteriorating in society - why male suicide rates and depression rates rapidly increasing... why in the 21st century has this become such a big issue... mainly because we live in a society where a certain group of women are trying to demonise and essentially destroy men - and flood this ideology amongst all women that men are dirty, disgusting horrible creatures who are so lower down than women...

I believe in gender equality - equal votes, equal rights... but I also believe that men and women are different - there’s a reason why nature created man and woman - we are supposed to be different and be better at fulfilling separate roles. Distinguishing something as “man” is not offensive, and if you find that offensive then give me a proper straight reason...

I wouldn't say that was feminism per se, but I think I get the point you are trying to make.

What is concerning to me is the rise not of the alt right or the alt left but the rise in the desire for authoritarianism. It seems to be on the increase on both sides frankly.

Does it concern me that Trump is trying to block immigrants just because they come from a certain place or have a certain religion? Yes.

Does it equally concern me that Canada recently passed a law (C-16) that allows the state in effect to try to control what you say? Yes

Despite the fact that both countries have presidents from the opposite ends of the spectrum, they are both doing the same thing.

History shows the truly awful consequences of authoritarianism, be it from the right (e.g. Nazism) or the left (e.g. Maoism). It's the rise in the advocacy for authoritarianism that concerns me, no matter where people sit on the political spectrum. These extreme idealogues on both the left and the right, and their long term consequences are what would should be focussed IMO.

So going back to your post, if you look at what is happening, there is a battle for control between 2 fairly extreme factions of people. They are both employing the same tactics and both attempting to dictate what people do, and both have the same capacity for authoritarianism. We should be focussed on reducing authoritarian policies and discourse, which ever side of the fence they come from.