Gabbard Exposes Dems Hypocritical Change in Gender Language

When Tulsi Gabbard stepped into the political limelight in 2019 to announce her run for the White House, the Hawaii native was vastly unknown throughout the United States. But it wasn’t long before she made it known that she isn’t your average Democrat.

While this might have been partly why she was forced to drop out of the primary race, it has also been what has made her representative for those in her party who choose to actually use their brain and not just blindly follow left-leaning agendas.

Take her complete humiliation of then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris in the primary debates, for example. Gabbard was one of the few willing to take her on and not let her get away with her hypocrisy.

And now, it seems she is continuing to hold her party accountable for the hypocritical decision they are making.

On Monday’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Gabbard spoke of a few recent changes that have been made to the House of Representatives rules, noting that she is not at all pleased with them. In fact, she finds them completely “out of touch with reality,” as well as further proof that her party doesn’t really care about women or science.

The focus of her and Tucker Carlson’s frustrations of the evening pointed to changes in what the House considers to be gender-neutral words.

According to rule changes voted for and passed on Monday, the term “chairman” will no longer be allowed to be used, as will the word “seamen.” Instead, the term seafarer will be used in its place.

But even more appalling is the elimination of nearly all gender-appropriate words in the English language. When referring to a sister, the term “sibling” is to be used. If your father is mentioned, you need to refer to him as a “parent,” just as when your son is talked about, you should say “child.”

Per House rules, denotations like “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild” are the preferred and expected way to discuss or note family relations. “Father, mother, son, daughter,” etc. are to no longer be used.

As you well know, many educational facilities and companies have moved toward using more “neutral” terms when it comes to sex and gender so as not to offend anyone.

However, as Gabbard points out, this virtually eliminates the fact that women, or men for that matter, even exist. And let’s just say that’s not exactly a good look for a party that is supposed to be the champion of women’s rights.

And Carlson was right there to back her up. He asked, “How does it empower women to ban the acknowledgment that women exist?”

Gabbard replied, “It absolutely does the very opposite of that, and it’s the height of hypocrisy for people who claim to be the champions of rights for women to deny the very biological existence of women.”

Furthermore, Gabbard claims that the rule is more evidence that Congress, or at least the left side of it, is far too removed from reality and the needs of those they represent.

She said, “And this recent rule change that the House just actually voted and passed on today… removing references to mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters from congressional rules and administration, it’s mind-blowing because it shows just how out of touch with reality and the struggles of everyday Americans people in Congress are.”

As a former member of Congress herself, Gabbard believes that it is the government’s job to know their citizens, understand their needs and desires, and fight for them in our nation’s capital. But making stupid rules like this isn’t working to do that at all, and it’s a complete waste of time to patriots like Gabbard.

She told Carlson, “Instead of doing something that could actually help save people’s lives, they are choosing instead to say you can’t say ‘mother’ or ‘father’ in any of this congressional language. It’s astounding.”

And by the looks of it, most of America agrees.

I understand “house” rules need to be made and observed to make for a more efficient lawmaking session. But this doesn’t even begin to do any good. Instead, they have effectively proved all they care about is being “politically correct.”