How can transgender ideology be so successful today, when the fact existed in a very marginal way in the public debate?
The progressive march of our societies in favor of the recognition of the right of children to “self-determine” their gender is a global phenomenon. Not only does it occur throughout the Western world, but it also responds to an explicit desire of international organizations. In 2006, a group of human rights experts meeting in Indonesia signed the Twenty-Nine Yogyakarta Principles which relate to soft international legal standards that all states should ideally adhere to regarding sexual orientation and gender. “gender identity” and from which the international institutions (the UN, the Council of Europe) draw inspiration, which, in turn, recommend them to the countries of the world.
Under what authority?
These experts have no mandate, no authority, but their principles serve as a legal reference and a moral compass. In 2017, this group added ten principles and obligations of States, which relate to “gender expression”. It includes the obligation to accept the change of first name and sex in civil status at any age (principle 31), the obligation to protect the right of every child to self-determination (principle 32), or to “ensure that all schools and other institutions provide safe sanitation facilities” (Principle 33). Namely, the very recommendations of the Blanquer circular.…
Do we know who exactly is pulling the strings of this globalized phenomenon?
Intense lobbying would be present within the European institutions. In 2020, the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ), a conservative Christian NGO led by Gregor Puppinck, studied the European Court of Human Rights, and in particular the “pedigree” of its forty-seven judges. This study, revealed by the weekly Current Values in February 2020, shows that this Court is infiltrated by judges who are linked to the Open Society Foundations of the American-Hungarian billionaire George Soros. Of the hundred judges who sat there between 2009 and 2019, the ECLJ counted twenty-two.
What is this Open Society?
The Open Society actively advocates for the right of trans people to legally change their gender. In 2014, she produced a report, “License To Be Yourself”, which presents itself as a resource text for activists around the world working for the rights of trans people and for the evolution of legislation in favor of sex change in civil status, including for children.
It is astonishing, however, that the trans movement has obtained in just a few years such visibility and legislative conquests as it took several decades for the movements for the defense of women and homosexuals to obtain comparable ones.…
Michael Biggs, professor of sociology at Oxford, dug into the question. The reason, according to him, is the massive financial support of a handful of billionaires. Among them, George Soros, whom I have just mentioned, whose OSF is the main donor to trans causes. The OSF awarded grants worth $3.07 million for 2016-2017! Many NGOs, political parties and international institutions receive money from billionaires or pharmaceutical companies.
What are their motivations for giving these huge sums?
Unlike other minority advocacy movements, the trans lobby does not appear to emanate from an oppressed minority, but rather from a small, ultra-capitalist minority who might find a financial interest in promoting transgender ideology and trivializing transformation. bodies by surgery and chemicals. Promotes a figure that she presents under the seductive mask of self-realization and courage.
The trans child, a new marketing product?
Exactly ! The trans child is presented as the new hero, the new conqueror of identity. The one who moves, changes, invents himself, as opposed to the one who remains, the remained who banally coincides with himself. Pixar thus announced in May 2021 that its next animated film would have as its heroine “Jess, a 14-year-old transgender girl. She’s compassionate, funny, and always supportive.” The fashion and cosmetics industry has naturally followed in the footsteps of the cultural industries.
In the United States, the Pantene haircare brand published a commercial for a shampoo in 2021 which presented a transgender little girl, Sawyer, and her two mothers, Ashley and Ellie, explaining very seriously that her hair had played a role. important in its gender transition and creativity.
Isn’t becoming yourself an injunction found in personal development?
We ourselves have become the product we must conquer. Many brands, and of course the fashion industry, highlight this epic of self-conquest by celebrating its courage, for example Nike and its “Unlimited Courage” campaign which celebrates triathlon athlete Chris Mosier . But these fairy tales do not mention the difficulties, the sufferings and the imperfections of the physical transformation of these sportsmen and models.
How to explain such a presence of the trans figure in advertising and its sudden exposure?
This can be seen as a way for companies to combine the pursuit of profit with the defense of minority rights. Combining business with pleasure, defending the good while making business profitable. The trans person, and particularly the trans child, is fashionable: it sells because it fascinates. Another benefit, it allows brands to enhance their image by giving themselves a guarantee of progressivism. But these corporate cultures are part of a larger and orchestrated framework of the promotion of “gender identity”.
Isn’t it simplistic to see, in the promotion of the trans child, only a simple investment which must pay off big?
“Transgenderism” is indeed not just an instrument at the service of the liberal economy. It carries with it an imaginary and instinctual force which powerfully serves a new cultural and intellectual framework, accompanying the emergence of a civilization based on a totally renewed relationship with the body.
And ultimately promote the transhumanist project?
Absolutely: the gender revolution that we are witnessing, and in which children are embarked, is in reality the ultimate expression of the demand for absolute freedom, that of self-determination. In transgenderism thought to its term as in transhumanism, the body is a material that can be modeled at will. The mind imposes its law on the body, through the technique that promises to give it the body it desires. Having become a moldable material, freed from its sexual condition, it is no longer the place of any limit, of any frustration.
Is it another form of puritanism, of contempt for the body?
Transgenderism holds out the illusion of being cured of the first and fundamental humiliation, of the original narcissistic wound: I did not give myself to myself, I can choose everything, but I cannot choose myself. To this extent, the body is both despised as it is given – debt, pure gravity and limit – and exalted as it is created, become projection, image and fantasy. It is this dream body of angels that fascinates both teenagers and adults: it is the promise of harmony, happiness, coincidence with oneself, completeness. At the risk, like Narcissus, of getting lost.
What is the ultimate danger?
Far from gaining in value, this limitless body is even more dependent, this time on machines and industries that sell it the hormones it needs to maintain its appearance. He traded his limit for his autonomy. It is no longer sacred, that is to say inviolable, but potentially delivered to the market. If each of us can choose his sex, mold his body to make it “in his image”, as God created man “in his image”, then nothing will stand in the way of our using it as we see fit. , to enjoy it as well as to market it.