Roles undermined by unreasonability

Its Father's day today and most people will seek to honor their father today whether the family are still together or not. Celebrating roles is a really positive thing that reinforces mum's and dad's unique but sex/nature determined role seperately on different days of the year. Sure the boundaries between different roles are often blurred as both ideally ( which is the focus of the day)work together to balance the needs of the child. A child doesn't usually play fight with mum like he play fights with dad ;we celebrate their differences - the strength of one , the softness of the other.We celebrate their different contributions to balance and growth in a child's life - its a big story based on two often similiar but often different components. Even a gay couple or guardian can honor the role (however small) of these two people ,either alive or present , as substitute or real .
There is no getting away from the fact that some guardians feel threatened because they are not exactly one or other or together both : their own position seems to worry them . Single mums don't wish to relinquish there role as carers,( no name change) they just want "a dad" for their kids ( a job that may be taken on by gran etc ) .Why do some people  try to bully us into changing definitions so that there is less implied inferiority, when most people learn to accept what they have been given.  Why is bullying a growing problem is our woosy age and why do we put up with it? 
Changing the meaning of words to suit the noisy ones , does not seem to improve the situation, creating confusion and frustration amongst those who once knew exactly who they were before. The minority have got what they want, but has it worked?
No, the whole idea of changing what we are to be what we are not, is another anti-intellectual child like piece of nonsense that is based on the stupid idea of taking our/others  feelings of inferiority about who we are too seriously. A shared sense of inferiority ? afraid of offending ?
Was so pleased to see a well adjusted vertically impaired person on the panel of Australia's paralympics commentary team TODAY  use some clear definitions . She called herself a "crip"( short for cripple) and non disabled a "normy ". Sometimes the audience is more pathetic that the poor person who is the subject of some pity. How can we help someone who doesn't really accept who they are, accept themselves ( esp if we give in to something that just addresses feelings and not rationality )
People who think they will feel better about themselves or others by redefining a composite or more individual  definition may have a problem bigger than any redefinition of their identity will solve.