The RCMP as a Guardian of Gender Dogma
In a widely circulated CBC interview, RCMP Staff Sergeant Camille Habel, a spokesperson trained in communications, warned Canadians that if someone who previously supported “equal gender rights” begins leaning toward “traditional values,” this might be a sign of radicalization.
This wasn’t an offhand remark from a beat cop. This was a spokesperson delivering the institutional view. Communications officers don’t freelance opinion; they embody the message of the organization they represent.
What makes Habel’s statement more troubling than its surface absurdity is what lies beneath. She doesn’t define “gender rights,” and she doesn’t define “traditional values.” But context fills in the blanks. It’s unlikely she meant the right of women to vote or equal pay—those rights are firmly embedded in Canadian life and broadly accepted, even by traditionalists.
More likely, she refers to the newer ideological fringe: the belief that biological sex is fluid, and that gender is self-declared. Under this regime, a man becomes a woman by mere utterance—by incantation. This idea is no passing Trudeau-endorsed fad. Sgt. Habel, speaking on behalf of the RCMP, affirms it.
With that affirmation, the belief becomes institutional orthodoxy, and questioning it becomes political heresy.
In doing so, Habel, likely without realizing it, mimics the logic of religious apostasy. In radical Islam, the term “apostate” refers to a former believer who rejects the faith. Apostasy is considered far more dangerous than mere unbelief. Infidels could be potential converts, but apostates are traitors. For that, they are marked for elimination.
This is the very architecture of the progressive worldview Habel spoke for. If you’ve never accepted “gender rights,” your opposition is regrettable but understandable. You’re an unenlightened hick. But if you once affirmed these dogmas and begin to question them—if you defect—you are now a danger. Your defection is a sign of ideological instability and a potential indicator of radicalization.
This is not policing. This is creed enforcement to protect the intellectual shallowness of woke.
Just as radical Islam punishes apostasy because it believes truth travels only in one direction, toward prophetic revelation, progressive ideology behaves similarly. The “arc of history” always bends forward, they believe, toward greater “inclusion” and more “fluidity.” That’s why Sgt. Habel cannot imagine the reverse scenario.
You will never hear her or any RCMP spokesperson say:
“If someone who previously believed that Aristotle and Jordan Peterson are right and suddenly starts to lean toward there being 72 genders, they may be on the path to extremism.”
That such a reversal, flying in the face of thousands of years of human experience, would not be branded radical is an indication of how the RCMP has gone woke. In the progressive faith, beliefs are not debated; they are recited. The incantation matters more than the evidence. One must affirm that “trans women are women,” that children can consent to irreversibly harmful medical changes, that gender is a spectrum known only to the self and instantly valid to others.
And if you falter, even quietly, you are not merely mistaken. You are dangerous.
When backlash followed, the RCMP attempted damage control. Habel didn’t mean that traditional values were illegal, they said. People can hold extremist views; it’s acting on them that crosses the legal line.
But this defense misses the key point entirely.
The real concern isn’t what’s illegal. It’s what’s being coded as deviant, as suspect, as potential threat. Once a belief is culturally positioned as “pre-radical,” it becomes easier to surveil, easier to isolate, and easier to punish under the broad discretion of state institutions and law enforcement.
This reveals the core contradiction: actions taken in accordance with progressive incantation are never coded as extremist, no matter how invasive, deluded, coercive, or medically harmful they are.
Children are placed on puberty blockers. Minors undergo irreversible surgeries. Parents who object are sometimes investigated. Medical professionals who dissent risk professional ruin. These are not idle expressions of belief; they are concrete, life-altering actions.
Yet none of this is deemed radical. It is affirmed, subsidized, and protected. The federal police endorse it.
Meanwhile, a citizen who moves from affirmation to doubt—questioning the incantation and (re)turning toward biological reality—is flagged by the national police as possibly becoming a danger.
This signals the real offence: opposing woke progressivism itself, not its substance or consequences.
The RCMP doesn’t speak for the public. It serves the state. And the state, under Trudeau’s post-national, identity-first governance, has made progressive ideology not just law but liturgy. Institutions have followed suit. What Habel’s statement confirms is what many suspected: the RCMP is as captured an institution under Prime Minister Carney as it was under Justin Trudeau. It treats ideological defection from radical gender theory as a threat vector.
This is not neutral. It is not balanced.
It’s a warning. Because when a federal law enforcement agency treats reversals in progressive thought as precursors to crime, it ceases to be a guardian of peace and becomes a sentinel of dogma.
Still, we must take Sgt. Habel seriously, not because she speaks truth, but because she speaks for power. Her words reveal how deeply progressive ideology has colonized public institutions. Where once dissent was tolerated, now doubt itself is a diagnostic tool. If you question the dogma, you’re flagged.
In such a world, freedom of belief isn’t suppressed overnight. It’s rebranded as extremism, softened into suspicion, and then quietly sidelined, leaving only one orthodoxy to remain.
We’ve seen this story before. In faith systems. In totalitarian regimes. It has now arrived in the RCMP.
Share Your Thoughts