According to the Daily Mail Australia, authorities in the Australian state of New South Wales wanted to allow children from the age of three to independently choose their gender.
This is not a toy robot or a new online game. This is gender identity.
NSW Government recommends that 3-year-olds should be given the opportunity to choose the pronoun they prefer to address themselves.
In addition to the traditional “he” and “she”, it is proposed to include the pronoun “they” in the list for those who see themselves outside the binary system of genders.
Do you think this is an insane initiative of the regional authorities?
No, this is already a global trend.
In March of this year, the Danish Ethics Council recommended that government agencies allow ten-year-olds to legally reassign their sex.
July – The Scottish Government encouraged educators to refer to children in schools and kindergarten from the age of four according to the gender and name of their choice (although this can be done without the knowledge of the parents).
For two years now, a campaign has been launched in England to abolish separate toilets in educational institutions, and British parliamentarians are calling for a unified school uniform for boys and girls.
Now officials in Sydney have raised the degree of madness to new heights – have reduced the “age of gender orientation” to three years.
Three years – in their opinion, the very moment when it is time for the child to decide.
Sound voices are still being heard in the West. A researcher at the Institute of Public Relations, Dr. B. d’Abrera, said that young children do not understand the concept of gender, they do not know the meaning of pronouns, so the initiative of the authorities is inappropriate. Madame d’Abrera was very careful in her statements. Apparently because she is a scientist. And science on these issues in the West is dominated by politics.
Let’s be clear. A person is forced to make an unnatural choice, passing him off as a human being.
Teenagers are not just advertised, but persistently imposed a perverse understanding of sex and gender. At the same time, modern media are actively used – products of mass culture. Since 2015, the American television channel TLC has been broadcasting the “Jazz is Me” series about a transgender teenager and pediatric hormone therapy prior to sex reassignment surgery on the American TV channel TLC in the “reality show” format.
The multi-part film persistently and purposefully demonstrates how “normal” and even “cool” it is to be a transgender teenager.
This image is hammered into the heads of the audience with each new episode. I survived five. Broke down on the trip of the boy / girl Jazz to the doctor to select her secondary primary sexual characteristics from the catalog. Yes, to a 13-year-old child, adult uncles and aunts showed pictures of causal places, telling about the variations in their functioning in case of choosing one or another method of surgery. You know, this is not a show for the faint of heart. Because it is not artistic. This is a live broadcast of life – its “new norms”.
If you think that this is a niche film product that is not interesting to anyone, then you are mistaken. It is renewed every year and is firmly in the American TV ratings.
In my opinion, it is built on the principle of the “Stockholm Syndrome”, when the victim begins to love his executioner.
The victims are viewers who are gradually coming to terms with the idea of a mockery of their own common sense and critical thinking.
Our liberal get-together often begins to giggle in a degraded manner when it comes to a serious conversation on a topic. I hear screams: “You are all lying!” and “Stop scaring!” Several of the above examples clearly demonstrate that the situation is rapidly changing towards “new normalities”.
These are not isolated phenomena. The world is changing. They change him. And all this is happening on a global scale. Creeping fetid madness.
And now a riddle. Who said: “I believe that marriage is a union of a man and a woman. For me it is also a consecrated union. The Lord has a hand in its creation”?
Some kind of Christian pastor? Islamic preacher? Perhaps the Taliban? A soil traditionalist? The late Dmitry Smirnov? No. These words were spoken by US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008. That is, 12 years ago it was absolutely normal to hear this from America’s main democrat. Now this statement would look, within the framework of the American domestic political agenda, as retrograde, ultra-conservative, and a democrat with such values would be “chirped” on Twitter and expelled from Instagram in disgrace.
Only a little more than 10 years have passed, and around the world dozens of genders are legalized, and what is there – up to a hundred genders, localized regional laws are adopted that invade the very essence of the human being.
At one time, the English-language “Facebook” offered its users a choice of 58 genders, including “transmasculine”, “denying the system of two sexes” and “intersexual”.
Now experiments are being carried out on children. Purposefully and, I think, in a coordinated manner.
We are dealing with a new type of political concept – ultrabiopolitics.
This is not the first attempt. Adherents of Nazi eugenics tried to conduct such an experiment with humanity.
The Nazis measured skulls and noses, they wanted to bring out a new person. The current liberal Leviathan has gone further.
The task is even more misanthropic – not to bring out a new person, but to force a person to change himself, renouncing his own identity and being enslaved.
So evil has not yet made fun of us.
Before our eyes, social pedophilia has arisen and is being institutionalized.
Behind the “bright prospects of emancipation” is a perverted, ugly worldview.
They sell it to us as a fight against homophobia and a cure for suffering, but this is a real war against the remnants of personal freedom, enslavement of a person from childhood under the barrel of a liberal dictatorship.
We are told that this is progress. It sounds like it’s positive, because we were taught to misinterpret this word. Progress is not movement for the better. Progress is the development of a process. But in which direction and with what result depends on the initially set parameters.
The test phrase is “progressive disease.” This is the case.
We are convinced that this is freedom. But in fact, this is the permissiveness of vice and the release of perversion from responsibility.