Virgin Atlantic is taking wokeness to mile heights this week with new policies eradicating the boundaries of male and female flight staff uniforms as well as making handy pronoun badges available so customers and crew members need not fear being “misgendered.”
That’s what you call “inclusivity,” folks.
On Wednesday, the U.K.-based airline announced the update to its uniform policy, which “removes [the] requirement for its people to wear gendered uniform options.”
Now, crew members can choose between a red version of the uniform, most commonly worn by women, and a burgundy version, most commonly worn by men. The red version can be worn with either a skirt or trousers.
“The policy, effective today, champions the individuality of Virgin Atlantic’s people by enabling them to wear the clothing that expresses how they identify or present themselves,” the airline explained in a news release. “This follows previous changes including optional make up and allowing visible tattoos for crew members and its front line people.”
The update also includes “the introduction of optional pronoun badges” and “mandatory inclusivity training for staff.”
These changes ring rather ironic when you consider that, as Virgin bulldozes any remaining barriers between male and female, any staffers who might oppose this radical approach to sex will be forced to undergo thinly veiled re-education training in the name of “inclusivity.”
To say nothing of the “inclusivity” the airline has extended to new staffers who aren’t so eager to comply with Virgin Atlantic’s vaccine mandate, or unvaccinated passengers who would like to take a flight to visit an ailing grandmother across the pond.
According to the Daily Mail, a number of social media users slammed the uniform policy change, with one speculating that “the majority of Virgin Atlantic staff would rather have a pay rise than this.”
Yet according to the airline’s own glowing publicity projects for its “Be Yourself” campaign, LGBT crew members are grateful for their new ability to, well, “be themselves.”
“The updated gender identity policy is so important to me. As a non-binary person, it allows me to be myself at work and have the choice in what uniform I wear,” crew member Jaime Forsstroem said.
Now, there are conversations to be had about a private company’s right to implement whatever silly policy it wants, or about how this latest example of woke corporate favoritism might turn into the latest example of going woke and thus going broke, as the adage goes.
However, I think we spend way too much time in the weeds of these discussions while shying away from the crux of the matter.
So I’m going to tell you the truth, plain and simple. It’s not popular to the world, which is probably why we often squirm away from it and precisely why it has gone out of vogue to simply be blunt and get right to the most important point at the core of this wild social trend surrounding “gender identity” and sex.
But here it is: Blurring the lines between male and female is the ultimate rebellion against God because it seeks to redefine how he created his image-bearers, which is the height of a dangerously slippery slope morally, culturally and legally.
If you have a Christian worldview, you should never be ashamed to say this. Why? Because the only reliable definition of human rights is based on the biblical worldview, that’s why.
There can be no morality in government if we are not governed according to the fact that we were created in the image of God, and there is certainly no righteousness in culture if it does not operate according to his standards.
Meanwhile, the worldview on which “gender theory” is based stands starkly opposed to the biblical worldview that defines us as worthy of rights and accountable to live and govern morally.
It is predicated on 20th-century postmodern ideas that are ultimately based on personal fulfillment rather than the responsibility of individuals and communities to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly before the greater, more perfect authority of the Creator.
The glaring, devastating problem with this worldview — which is why I myself left it for the Christian worldview as a young woman — is that it relies on the least reliable source in the universe for guidance — that is, the sinful human heart, the thing that should be guided by an external, objective moral compass rather than be used as one.
It’s easy enough to scoff at the absurdity of conflating male and female, or argue that it’s simply too “in your face,” or raise concerns about the long-term ramifications of so-called “gender-affirming care” (which are certainly valid), but at the end of the day, if you want your basic rights preserved, if you want to live in a country governed by a reliable moral compass instead of the wickedly fleeting whims of human self-centeredness, you must firmly oppose these cultural movements.
It’s really that simple.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.