Gender ideology

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Gender demagoguery
So young people nowadays have choices to make that they didn't face before. And it's not a once-for-all choice; they can question and redefine themselves at any time. ... it'your choice to be called lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning, intersex, asexual – or something else. ... We have reached the point that regardless of anatomy, you can choose your gender identity. And you can choose to change your gender identity as often as you change your clothes.
— Allan Metcalf[1]
The radical feminist demagoguery
"Until all women are lesbians, there will be no true political revolution."
— Radical feminist author and journalist Jill Johnston[2]

Gender ideology is the view that innate biological sex of an individual is irrelevant, and that everyone should have a choice to select whom he or she feels to be or wants to become (man, woman, otherwise sexually or gender-differentiated, respectfully).[1] According to this demagoguery, biological division of sexes into males and females places unnecessary restriction on humans, because it allegedly creates so called 'gender stereotypes' of thinking and behavioral patterns in the society that later, according to proponents of this 'theory', may lead into various forms of 'discrimination'. Gender ideology therefore claims to be entitled to redefine the common understanding of the sexuality of humans from the biological and medical perspective onto the socio-culturally created artificial construct of 'gender,' i.e. onto the subject of purely subjective perception and feeling of oneself so that everyone can "freely choose" who he or she is or whom wants to be wrt. this so-called 'gender identity'.[3] The fundamental work of gender ideology is Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity by Judith Butler.[4]


Gender ideology is the belief that biological sex and "gender" i.e. social identification as male or female, are two different things. This is a false binary division. It assumes the two things are unrelated and therefore separable. In actuality, biological sex and gender are intrinsically related and male/female identity is so written into each of our body-cells that even removing our reproductive organs does not change our sex or our gender. "Gender" is nothing more than an indication of sex. The indication maybe be one of language, or of costume, or something else, but gender is only gender if it indicates biological sex. If it does not, it is a hollow signifier and not true gender.


An early and disastrous example of gender ideology was the work of the sexologist Dr. John Money, who performed "transsexual" operations in Baltimore, Maryland. He carried out a bizarre experiment from 1966 onwards, on a pair of twin boys named Brian and Bruce Reimer. The twins were born in Winnipeg in August 1965. When they were seven months old, an accident at a hospital destroyed Bruce's penis. Dr. Money advised the distraught family was that he could turn Bruce into a girl. When Bruce was 18 months old, he was castrated and brought up as a girl with the name Brenda. The experiment ended in failure, and in disaster as first of all Bruce on growing up decided to regain his male identity, then later both twins, victims of this disturbing experiment, committed suicide. [See article on Dr John Money.]

Since the time of Dr. Money, understanding of the human genome has advanced and we now know that a child's sex is fixed from the point of conception, and is inscribed in every cell of his or her body, including those of the brain. Each cell contains either two "X" chromosomes (indicating a female), or one "X" and one "Y" chromosome (indicating a male); this genetic marker of gender cannot be changed. Hormones present in the womb may influence secondary sexual characteristics, but nothing can change the sex of a child, or of an adult. There is a growing body of evidence that attempting to do so is harmful and cases of ex-transsexuals who regret and try to reverse their decision.[5]

While some feminists such as Judith Butler advocate gender ideology, not all feminists agree with it. There is a disagreement and vigorous war of words between transsexuals and radical feminists who do not accept biological men as "women".[6] Transgenders have even created an acronym TERF meaning "trans-exclusionary radical feminist" which they use as a term of denunciation, hostility and abuse.[7]

Despite scientific advance, and this vocal opposition from some radical feminist groups, LGBT activists have continued to persuade politicians worldwide to adopt gender theory as "progress" and legislate accordingly.

Political lobbying instead of science

Instead of applying scientific research and peer-reviewing by independent scientific community, the partisans of gender ideology are imposing their views on the rest of the society by means of political lobbying in national and international political structures. At the same time, they uncritically and manipulatively promulgate interests and goals of activists from certain pressure groups who falsely label themselves as legitimate 'minorities' (cf. LGBTI bundling).[3]

Gender ideology in Istanbul Convention

On 5 Jul 2017, Ambassador of Norway to the Council of Europe deposited its instrument of ratification the so-called Istanbul convention. Thus, Norway became the 24th state to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.210).[8] In Slovakia, however, the call for ratification was met with strong public resentment.[9][10][11] In 2013, organizations Forum for Life and Forum for public questions worked out an analysis where they showed and pointed out that under the pretext of combating violence against women and domestic violence, the convention is misused i.a. to introduce the gender terminology that is foreign to domestic legislature.[12] The Convention also encroaches upon parental rights in realms of education and gives special privileges to self-appointed interest groups. Consequently, there have been more than 100 domestic organizations that signed a call for withdrawing the Slovakia's signature and for refusal of the Istanbul convention. One political party that as of 2017 participates in government, SNS, publicly denounced the Istanbul convention.[13][14][15][16] In 2015, two NGOs, Áno pre život ("Yes for life") and Spišská katolícka charita (Regional Catholic charity) have been denied grants from EU and Norway Grants for their projects after they were found as signatories for recalling Slovakia's signature under the Istanbul Convention. As the projects of these two organizations were targeting the needs of women suffering i.a. from domestic violence, the case was interpreted by general public as proof that background for Istanbul convention is ideological indoctrination and does not honestly seek or represent the real help to women who are in need of it. When the leaders of these NGOs which do not perceive domestic violence through distorted optics of feminist terminology on "gender-based violence" visited the Norwegian Ambassador to Slovakia asking for explanation, they were simply told that they have to accept Istanbul convention.[17] In the meantime, the representative of liberal NGOs such as Adriana Mesochoritisová from Možnosť voľby ("Option of choice") made attempt to portray conservative NGOs, by using logical fallacy of bifurcation, as "leading towards violence".[18] Liberal lobby also strives to bring EU as a whole to join Istanbul convention in order to avoid sovereign decisions of particular countries and thus impose this convention even upon "disobedient" ones. Speaker of European socialists S&D, Iratxe García Pérez, claimed that one of the latest resolutions, hijacked into programme of Council of the EU on 11 May 2017 under the camouflaging Agriculture and Fisheries agenda, „increases the pressure onto 14 member states, which so far have not ratified the Istanbul convention.“[19][20][21] Bulgaria also backed away from the treaty due to public resentment. The Bulgarian Orthodox Church argued that ratification would lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Bulgaria or increase the likelihood of young people identifying as transgender.[22][23]

Opposition to the Gender ideology

No More Gender Ideology Sign. Used mainly in Chile.
March Against the Gender ideology in Santiago de Chile, October 2018.
Con Mis Hijos No Te Metas March, Lima, Peru.

The term "Gender ideology" is mainly used by Latin American Conservatives. One of the most important writers about the topic is Agustín Laje along with Nicolás Márquez who wrote "The Black Book of the New Left" (El libro negro de la Nueva Izquierda), a book that denounces the Gender ideology, the Third Wave of Feminism, Moral relativism, Abortion, Indigenism and many other forms of Cultural Marxism that were introduced by the Sao Paulo Forum in the 90s to the Latin American Politics.

In Peru there is a Movement called Con Mis Hijos No Te Metas (Don't mess with my children in English) which has strongly opposed the Gender ideology.

In Chile and Argentina there have been marches against the ideology alongside Pro-Life Marches.

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro in his inauguration speech mentioned his opposition to the ideology.

Paragguay President Mario Abdo Benítez and his predecessor Horacio Cartes have also started policies against the implementation of the ideology in the Paraguayan State.

There has also been initiatives like the Bus of Liberty (Bus de la Libertad), a bus that says "Nicolás has the right to a mom and a dad, less state, more family."[24] and "The boys have a penis and the girls have a vulva, do not be fooled."[25] This bus has been in Santiago and Madrid. The initiative was started by the Spanish Catholic Organization named HazteOir, and in Chile by Marcela Aranda[26] there were attempts to censor the bus by categorizing it as hate speech.

Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin said at the 2022 Valdai Club Conference: "Respecting the peculiarities of people and civilizations is in everyone's interest. Actually, it is in the interest of the West too, as it loses superiority. The West is quickly becoming a minority, culture-wise. That said, Western culture should be respected, just like any other. If Western elites believe that they can incorporate into the minds of their people, their societies, things that I personally find somewhat weird, and which are apparently in fashion, like dozens of genders and gay pride parades, so be it. Let them do whatever they want. But the West has no right to impose their cultural preferences on other nations and societies. Russia does not lecture others on how they should live, and does not want to be lectured."

See also


  1. 1.0 1.1 R. Albert Mohler, Jr. (2015). "5.Transgender revolution", We Cannot Be Silent: Speaking Truth to a Culture Redefining Sex, Marriage, and the Very Meaning of Right and Wrong. Harper Collins, 77–8. ISBN 978-07180-32487. 
  2. Jill Johnston (1973). Lesbian nation: the feminist solution. Simon and Schuster, 166, 271. “...theory and practice come together we'll have the revolution. Until all women are lesbians...” 
  3. 3.0 3.1 K príležitosti medzinárodného dňa detí: Vyjadrenie a výzva lekárov, psychológov a iných odborníkov ku vplyvu rodovej ideológie na duševné zdravie detí (On the occassion of International Children's Day: Statement and declaration by medical doctors, physicians, psychologists and other professionals to the impact of gender ideology on the mental health of children) (Slovak). “Rodová ideológia okrem iného tvrdí, že nezáleží na vrodenom biologickom pohlaví jednotlivca, resp. že je nepodstatné: každý má mať možnosť vybrať si, kým sa cíti alebo kým si želá sa stať (mužom?, ženou?, inak sexuálne/rodovo odlišným?). Biologické delenie pohlaví na mužov a ženy vraj človeka obmedzuje, lebo údajne vytvára v spoločnosti rodové stereotypy zmýšľania a správania, ktoré neskôr vedú k rôznym formám diskriminácie. Rodová ideológia si preto nárokuje predefinovať obvyklé chápanie sexuality človeka z biologického a medicínskeho hľadiska na sociálno-kultúrne vytvorený konštrukt rodu (gender), teda na predmet rýdzo subjektívneho vnímania a cítenia seba samého tak, aby si každý mohol „slobodne určiť“, kým je alebo kým chce (rodovo) byť.”
  4. Judith Butler (2011). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge. ISBN 9781136783234. 
  8. Norway ratifies the Istanbul Convention (05 Jul 2017). “Today, in Strasbourg, Ms Astrid Emilie Helle, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative of Norway to the Council of Europe, deposited its instrument of ratification in respect of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (CETS No.210). The Convention will enter into force, as regards Norway, on 1 November 2017. Norway becomes the 24th States to ratify the Convention.”
  9. Jurinová a Verešová: Ako je možné, že ešte stále nespustili roky sľubovanú diskusiu o Istanbulskom dohovore? (Slovak) (6 Sep 2016).
  10. Prečo by Slovensko nemalo ratifikovať Istanbulský dohovor (Why Slovakia should not ratify the Istanbul convention) (21 Jun 2017). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  11. Renáta Ocilková. Istanbulský dohovor ako trójsky kôň? (Istanbul convention as a Trojan hourse?) (Slovak). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017. “V ID sa približne 70-krát nachádza odporúčanie „prijať potrebné legislatívne a iné opatrenia“, pričom implementáciu zákona bude kontrolovať orgán (GREVIO), zložený z expertov z Turecka, Srbska, Francúzska, Portugalska, Španielska, Talianska, Rakúska, Albánska, Malty a Čiernej Hory, ktorí sú nezávislí a konajú vo svojom mene. Nie je to na zvrchovanú Slovenskú republiku trošku odvážne? (Česi napríklad Istanbulský dohovor vôbec neriešia, ani ho nepodpísali, ani sa ho nechystajú ratifikovať.) GREVIO má výrazný vplyv na národnú legislatívu a môže sa stať inštitúciou, ktorá bude v budúcnosti v našej krajine presadzovať akúkoľvek politickú (či ideologickú?) agendu. Najväčšie riziko dokumentu je však jeho vágnosť a všeobecnosť a to, že týmito všeobecnými formuláciami a monitorovacím mechanizmom sa bude môcť Istanbulský dohovor každý rok vykladať ináč. Od ratifikácie budú musieť národné parlamenty monitorovať prijaté opatrenia a nemajú právo na výhrady (okrem pár nepodstatných vecí).”
  12. Zastavenie procesu ratifikácie Dohovoru Rady Európy o predchádzaní násiliu voči ženám a domácemu násiliu a o boji proti nemu (Stopping the process of ratification wrt. The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence) (Slovak). Fórum pre verejné otázky (Forum for public questions) (26 Nov 2013). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  13. Kontroverzný Istanbulský dohovor dostal nateraz stopku. Anna Verešová ozrejmila, prečo úsilie kritikov nekončí (Slovak) (7 Jul 2017). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017. “Dohovor chce podľa vašich slov presadiť kontroverzné témy. Aké sú reakcie jednotlivých organizácií na tento dokument? Už v roku 2013 vypracovali experti z Fóra pre verejné otázky a z Fóra života právnu analýzu, na základe ktorej sme žiadali zastaviť prijatie dohovoru. Pod túto výzvu sa podpísalo viac ako sto organizácií. Uvádzali sme štyri hlavné výhrady a to – zavádzanie gender terminológie, zasahovanie do rodičovských práv v otázke vzdelávania, snaha o odstránenie zvykov, tradícií a stereotypov a vytvorenie nejednoznačného monitorovacieho mechanizmu. Najvážnejšie z toho je tzv. rodové vzdelávanie detí a mládeže na všetkých úrovniach škôl. Nad rodovým scitlivovaním detí od útleho veku ešte v roku 2015 vyjadrilo znepokojenie viac ako 340 psychiatrov, psychológov, pediatrov a pedagógov.”
  14. Poslankyňa Verešová reagovala na obvinenia o diletanstve a snahám proti odstráňovaniu násilia na ženách (Slovak). (20 Jul 2017). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  15. Zuzana Čahojová (30 Nov 2015). Istanbulský dohovor: Vlk v ovčom rúchu (The Istanbul convention: Wolf in sheep's clothing) (Slovak). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017. “Okrem iného, znenie samotného Dohovoru v zásade operuje len s pojmom „žena“ a pojem „rod“ sa v texte Dohovoru vyskytuje už len jedenkrát v článku 4 „Základné práva, rovnoprávnosť a nediskriminácia“ odseku 3. Pohlavie aj rod Ustanovenia Istanbulského dohovoru teda predpokladajú súbežnú existenciu dvoch navzájom nezávislých „premenných“ rodu a pohlavia. Táto dichotómia sa tiahne celým textom Dohovoru a v súvislosti s ňou sa vynárajú viaceré podstatné otázky, ktoré sa týkajú samotného výkladu, a to dokonca takých zásadných pojmov, ako je výraz „žena“. ... V prípade Istanbulského dohovoru sa v zásade ponúkajú dve alternatívy výkladu. Prvou by bolo, že „žena“ je determinovaná biologickými ukazovateľmi. Druhá alternatíva je tá, že rod je sociálny konštrukt a ženou je každá osoba, ktorá sa za ňu považuje. Zdá sa, že aj členské štáty Rady Európy si boli dobre vedomé nejednoznačnosti a iných problémov, ktoré so sebou Istanbulský dohovor prináša. Preto sa pokúsili „napáchané škody“ napraviť v dôvodovej správe, ktorú prijali k Dohovoru.”
  16. SNS nepodporí Istanbulský dohovor a vyzýva, aby Slovensko stiahlo podpis pod ním (Slovak) (13 Jul 2017). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  17. Pavol Rábara (30 Nov 2015). Ženský boj o rod (Women's fight for gender) (Slovak). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  18. Dá sa to konferencia - Adriana Mesochoritisová, Možnosť voľby. NOS OSF (26 May 2016). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017. “"konzervatívne kruhy idú smerom k násiliu" Prednáška Adriany Mesochoritisovej z Možnosť voľby o kampani na podporu Istanbulskeho dohovoru. Záznam z konferencie "Dá sa to", ktorá sa konala 21. apríla 2016 a bola záverečným podujatím Fondu pre MVO.”
  19. Pavol Rábara (17 May 2017). Ako obísť štáty, ktoré nechcú Istanbulský dohovor (How to bypass states that do not want Istanbul convention) (Slovak).
  20. EU to join international convention combating violence against women (11 May 2017). Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017.
  21. Agriculture and Fisheries Council, 11/05/2017. European Council Council of the European Union. Retrieved on 25 Jul 2017. “Press releases: EU to join international convention combating violence against women 11/05/2017, 10:20”
  22. POLITICO SPRL (15 Feb 2018). Bulgaria backs away from treaty opposing violence against women. Retrieved on 9 Jul 2018. “Borisov’s government submitted the Council of Europe convention — known as the Istanbul Convention — to the national parliament last month. A vote on the treaty was supposed to take place in January but was postponed to allow more time for debate. Volen Siderov, one of the leaders of the United Patriots, warned that if Borisov’s GERB party continued to seek approval for the treaty, the government coalition could fall apart, prompting an early parliamentary election. A number of Bulgarian religious groups, including the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, also opposed the treaty, claiming its ratification would lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Bulgaria or increase the likelihood of young people identifying as transgender. Bulgarian President Rumen Radev also spoke out against the treaty, Reuters reported, and claimed it did not in fact prevent violence, because the problem still exists in countries that have ratified it.”
  23. Georgi Gotev (23 Feb 2018). After Bulgaria, Slovakia too fails to ratify the Istanbul Convention. EURACTIV Network. Retrieved on 9 Jul 2018. “ast week Bulgarian PM Boyko Borissov withdrew from parliament a motion to ratify the Istanbul Convention, faced with ever-growing opposition, first from its coalition partner, the United Patriots, the opposition socialists, and more broadly, with the population. ... Detractors claim that this opens the door to legalising gay marriage and promoting homosexuality in school by so-called promoters of “gender ideology”. “Unless there is full compliance with the provisions of the convention with the definition of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman, I will never agree to ratify.” Slovakia’s parliament amended its Constitution in 2014 to define marriage as a union between man and woman, which stirred protest among rights groups at the time.”
  24. Manifestaciones marcan inicio del recorrido del "Bus de la libertad" por Santiago (es). T13 (July 10, 2017).
  25. Madrid prohíbe circulación de bus con mensaje anti transexual e investiga posible delito de odio (es). (March 1, 2017).
  26. Organizadores del "Bus de la Libertad" citan la Constitución chilena como fundamento de su protesta (spanish). c80 (July 7, 2017).