“Gender ideology is the great global contraceptive,” says Nicolás Ponsiglione

KontraInfo
August 4, 2024

Nicolás Ponsiglione became interested in the topic of Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) when, in 2017, he observed an obsession by some NGOs to reform the Law on Sexual Education, enacted in 2006, so that it would be based on the so-called “gender ideology”. This year, he poured all his observations on the contents of sexual education into the book Deconstruyendo la ESI (Editorial Hormesis, 2024), where he analyses what he considers to be a scam or a fraud, because under the title of CSE something else is being taught. There is an attempt to deny nature and biology and install a new anthropology. CSE, he maintains, is adulterating childhood.

The promoters of CSE with their gender ideology treat children as adults and override the authority of parents.

Ponsiglione's essay will be welcomed above all by parents who sense the danger, the abuse, the overreach of those who design these programs, but do not possess the arguments to stop them. This is the foundations that can turn their intuition into open criticism and rejection. But it will also be very useful for all adults who just want to ensure the psychological and physical integrity of children, who, after all, are not autonomous persons, despite the claims of the gender ideologues.

Interview:

— You wrote a book that is a sort of anti-manual for Comprehensive Sexual Education. You had previously written about this subject, in co-authorship, with a very suggestive title “Adulterated Childhood” and a subtitle that spoke of the “fraud” of CSE. Why is CSE a fraud and in what way does it adulterate childhood?

NP:  The subtitle of the book is not really the fraud of comprehensive sexual education, but the fraud in comprehensive sexual education, because what is wrong, what is harmful for children in CSE as it is being implemented, are elements that have been introduced in a foreign way, specifically what is called gender perspective or gender ideology. Sexual education has some interesting elements and valid proposals but together with the lawyer Mariana Gómez Galanti we say in that book that the fraud in comprehensive sexual education is that gender ideology is introduced in an underhand way. That is the fraud, because it basically has undeclared ulterior motives. In the book we demonstrate something that has already been pointed out by several researchers in the world, such as the German Gabriele Kuby, among many others, that so-called gender ideology is actually a population control strategy— a grand global contraceptive. It is closely linked to a top priority of the United Nations, which is antinatalism.

— This gender ideology basically consists of denying sexual binarism, an arbitrary statement without scientific support, but its promoters deny that it is an ideology, because they want to present it as a revealed truth.

NP:  Exactly. But perspective, vision, worldview or ideology are actually synonyms. What is a perspective? A way of seeing things anchored in certain ideas. And what is an ideology? The same thing. But if you call it gender ideology, its promoters get offended, they don't like it. Now if you say "perspective", they smile at you and become happy, when in reality these are synonyms.

— It's true. In your book on CSE, you dispel misunderstandings. One would be precisely to assimilate sexual education to the gender perspective. So, if one criticises the current contents of CSE it is because one is against sexual education in schools. But the curious thing is that if one looks at the current CSE materials, the manuals, there is no reproductive apparatus, there is no conception, no gestation, no birth; none of that is sexual education.

NP:  That shows to what extent this really is ideology. It is the radical feminist ideology, which for me is not feminism because it in fact denies women, denies the attributes of women, and denies nature. If you deny nature, there is no more woman, so why would we talk about feminism? It is rather a gender ideology that seeks to supplant the concept of sex with that of gender. That is what they seek to teach: a new understanding of sexuality, from which, if you remove all the human rights arguments and all the radical feminist ideology, all that remains is an infertile sexuality. That is something tremendous that caught my attention since I began my observations in the period 2014-2015. Basically, it is teaching children multiple infertile sexual behaviors. No matter what acronym you choose from the LGBTIQA+ spectrum, you will always be practicing an infertile, non-reproductive sexuality. Obviously, it is a radical antinatalist strategy.

— What is being installed in the heads of children, even very young children, is that one is not born male or female, that is an invention, an imposition, a conspiracy to say that males and females are born in the world. Sexual binarism, which is natural, is denied, biology, science is denied.

NP:  It is a new anthropology. But I am not against ideologies. The problem is to do with imposition. That is, adults have the freedom to believe what they want and to preach and support the lifestyle they want. But there is a dividing line between that and going out to impose it as if it were the new great cosmic truth, something that we all have to adopt. This argument is much more subtle than parading around like the extreme right or the religiously orthodox to oppose it at all costs. I am not like that, honestly. I am not a fanatic. Everyone can believe what they want. But going from that to imposing it as a new truth… that must surely make anyone uncomfortable. And that is what is being done today, mainly due to pressure from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum.

— What is told to the child is that sexual binarism does not exist, it is not natural, it is something invented. And the next thing is the self-perception of gender. That is, each person decides whether he or she is a man, whether he or she is a woman, whether he or she is a woman today and a man tomorrow and then a woman again… Do you claim that this gender self-perception is refuted by many disciplines?

NP:  Exactly. Yes. If one wants to find some kind of evidence to support this idea of ​​gender self-perception, it cannot be found anywhere, neither in biology, nor in genetics. Nor in zoology. What about animals that do not have culture? Animals have never seen anything like a patriarchy. But we also see sexual binarism among them and markedly different behaviors between the male and female of the species. Wherever you look at it, from pediatrics, from child development, from psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience; everything speaks to the fact that we are essentially… it is almost embarrassing to even say it, because the binary sexual principle is something absolutely self-evident.

— Another important thing is that this line of thought through CSE is not innocuous, that is, it has consequences that can be serious. It is implemented in a totalitarian manner, let's say it in all its letters, suddenly it appeared as an imposed thing that everyone repeats as revealed truths, referring to the same sources. The UN said it, the IACHR said it, etc. We are already experiencing the negative fruits of this in Argentina.

NP:  Well, pushing a minor into this ideology and having him put it into practice, carry it out in his own body and in his mind, implies from the start, sterility. In other words, there is a destruction of human fertility. Adherence to the opposite sex leads to self-castration, to hormonalization.

— Let's clarify for those who still don't know, that we are talking about minors who, influenced by these CSE contents, feel that they were born in the wrong body; That is to say, the disturbances that one may have in adolescence and that at some point were channeled into food traumas, are now channeled into the sexual issue. The discomfort of a body that changes suddenly and to which they have a hard time adapting, is suggested to them that it is, for example, because they are men trapped in a woman's body. That is happening and in an alarming number of cases.

NP:  Of course, because the formation of identity is something that is achieved over time. It is the most normal thing in the world for boys and girls to have conflicts with their own body, with the awakening of sexuality. It is the most understandable thing. So, in that very weak stage of life, based on an ideology that has no foundation whatsoever and that is extremely harmful to health, in that very delicate moment of life, this ideology that fuels a conflict with one's own body produces enormous damage. For these boys, taking hormones or being castrated implies a reduction in the average life span to 37 years of age.

NP:  They can be summed up as sterility, eternal dependence on the gender industry because they become chronically ill and suicide rates do not go down, they even skyrocket. Castrating oneself, mutilating parts of the body that are healthy, or ingesting hormones of the opposite sex, which are foreign to one's own biology, are things that generate multiple organic problems, increase the risks of diabetes, obesity, thrombosis, stroke... Because, if you go to war against your own body, how can you build a healthy life? It is impossible. You have already lost the battle. It is a public health problem. Something that so closely concerns the psychophysical health of our children, how can it not be the subject of urgent interdisciplinary research?

— There is nothing like that here. Gender transition is accepted and permitted for minors. It means that a boy or girl of 11, 12 or 13 years old is given puberty blockers, that is, their sexual development is blocked with medication, to give them time to think, they say. Then, at 16, 17, they start giving them hormones and then they move on to surgery. That would be the transition they propose. There are no official records, no evaluations. In other words, these therapies are applied in an uncontrolled manner, this is taught in schools without any kind of safeguard, prudence, or care. They are experimenting on children.

NP:  It is because they are taking advantage of a moment of great confusion. Social, cultural, political, and in troubled waters, the fisherman profits. The troubled waters are our civilisation, where everything is very mixed up and the faculties of tolerance, of reasoning, are quite diminished. In these troubled waters, the fishermen who come out winning are the great governing powers of the world. The United Nations, the World Economic Forum, which are literally obsessed with population reduction. A Spanish woman, Sandra Mercado Rodríguez, who wrote the book “The Scam of Transgenderism,” had become trans when she was young and later regretted it. In her book she explains all of the horrors of an industry that is by definition anti-medical and rooted in unethical behavior, because the real consequences of the treatment are hidden from the patient, who is being lied to. So, she denounces this whole thing and identifies the politicians who are trying to rule the world. She accuses them of carrying out a biological erasure.

— In 2018, when the legalisation of abortion was rejected in Congress, the groups that promoted it attacked CSE, they began to say that the law was not being complied with, that there was no sexual education in schools, which was totally false. It was given as it should be: two or three talks a year and in high school. But in 2018, several NGOs that were born with a specific objective suddenly turned to gender ideology, to deconstructing masculinity, and things like that. In the book you say that it was the Fundación Huésped that in 2018 wanted to modify the CSE Law to introduce gender ideology and eliminate the article that authorises each school to teach sexual education within the framework of its own ideals.

NP:  Of course, the Fundación Huésped was behind the legalisation of abortion. Since they did not succeed on their first attempt, they entered through the back door of comprehensive sexual education. That already shows what CSE is. It is training minors in antinatalism, because they are not only taught the doctrine of gender, which is basically sexual infertility, but they are also taught all kinds of anti-antinatalistic behaviors, including abortion. In addition, they have the uncontrolled rise of pornography on networks, which has already reached the level of a public health problem. The Fundación Huésped is the local arm of the United Nations, which signed an alliance with this NGO and finances it. This way, its proposals are passed more easily. In 2018, Argentina signed an agreement with the Fundación Huésped to modify the Comprehensive Sexual Education Law that was from 2006. They don't succeed. In other words, they can't include gender ideology in CSE, but they do it anyway.

— The promoters of this seem to have forgotten what a child is. The impact that being treated as an adult can have on them. It is thought that a child can be talked to about certain things that don't even interest them. It is forgotten that in this matter, sex, you have to answer what the child wants to know, what they ask and not go further. The child processes the data and then comes back with another question. Now the madness is to give them information that the child doesn't ask for and that can disturb them.

NP:  Of course, it is an attack on childhood. Childhood itself, the golden age of childhood, usually ends with puberty, that is, with the awakening of sexuality. But look at how they are trying to awaken this at stages in which any pediatrician, any psychologist, can tell you that they are not prepared either physically or psychologically for this awakening; they are generating a precocious sexualization, a hypersexualization, which I actually call hyposexualization, because in its final consequences it ends up generating a humanity without real eroticism, without power, without vitality, without energy, self-centered people, stuck in a narcissistic and primitive stage of sexuality.

— Furthermore, the male-female bond is being poisoned because girls are told that boys are potential rapists. All of them. They are presented with a negative image of sexuality, of heterosexuality. Radical feminism spreads a corrupt vision of the bond between men and women: the man wants to dominate, he annuls the woman, etc., when in Argentina this has not been the case for years, because this is one of the least sexist countries, if not the least, on the continent.

NP:  It is an anachronistic discourse because they speak of something that perhaps was applicable to my grandparents. But not even to my parents. Today it is already. Today, if I were like the man they portray, believe me I would not have a partner, I would not have two children and I would not have a healthy bond with my wife. Today it is impossible. It is true that our civilization has committed excesses and drags along many conflicts regarding the relationship between the sexes. But we are not going to resolve it by generating and fuelling conflict with the opposite sex.

— No, that is sexual apartheid. They work to generate that: girls on one side, boys on the other.

NP:  Of course. And what does that lead to? What is the final effect? ​​Antinatalism. Birth rate is already a problem in many countries of the world that they no longer know what to do in China, in Norway.

— It is also a problem here, only no one is notified.

NP:  Exactly. It has been a problem for several years. Our democratic Western institutions are all obsolete, they are banners, they have no substance, no function, so these organisations do what they want.

— There is something you say that perhaps allows us to close on a note of optimism. That the paroxysm of an idea can also be the moment when its decline begins, because they have already reached the point where people begin to say enough. Maybe they have exaggerated so much with the gender perspective that they are already beginning to provoke a reaction.

NP:  There is a Chinese proverb that says that ambition makes you fall. He who walks with great strides will not go very far. We are seeing the hyper-exaggeration of a strategy. A display of power. With what I call pandemic health, with climate change, with gender ideology, followed by a long etcetera, there is today a display of a power that no longer knows any borders, that does not respect nation states and that wants to trample on rights that until a few years ago it was unthinkable to trample upon. And they are doing it under completely false pretexts, without any medical, scientific or even ethical foundation. Because everyone can believe what they want, but you have to have a minimal foundation, because if not, we are no longer in a democratic republic. Extreme positions lead to downfall. Because people are not stupid. People are not very given to conflict and activism, especially in Argentina, but rather they want to live in peace. But what is happening? If you touch so much upon areas that should not be touched (because they are part of the legitimate human right to privacy, to teach values ​​to your children and to defend their psychophysical health and integrity) if you start to touch that, you are touching the most important thing for people. I think they are not measuring the consequences of what they are doing.

— People are not stupid but they are absorbed by their daily life, work, family. The defense of a cause requires a lot of time, and sometimes people do not see the whole picture, the whole assault. Now, I think they are putting a wedge in something that can lead people to react. For example, the group MANADA (Mothers of Girls and Adolescents with Accelerated Dysphoria) was formed and they are starting to make themselves heard; many parents are also starting to mobilize, concerned about the content of CSE, who are asking for explanations from schools. I think that this will spread because this ideology directly attacks maternal and paternal authority, because when a child is treated as an adult, when it is said that the child is autonomous, that he has the right to his identity, etc., what is being said is “parents should not intervene here.” The child does what he wants. The family is being delegitimised…

NP:  Of course, but mind you, it’s not that the boy does what he wants, no. The boy does what the United Nations wants. A 15-year-old girl from Miami told me that today being straight is frowned upon. In other words, you are even socially segregated if you are heterosexual in a liberal country. You are a reactionary. But the boy is not being pushed to do what he wants. He is being pushed to do what this perspective of biological erasure wants. In one way, it is common sense. Why can’t a boy buy medicine? Why can’t he buy alcohol, tobacco or drugs? Why can’t a boy get tattoos or put earrings all over his body? Why can’t he go out until two in the morning? Does he not have rights? Right? The thing is that he is a minor. He is not psychologically and physically prepared to make certain decisions and thank God his parents or guardians are there to watch over his integrity. But they reject this. They are attacking childhood. They are treating children as if they were adults, and they are adulterating childhood.


Source: https://noticiasholisticas.com.ar/la-perspectiva-de-genero-es-el-gran-anticonceptivo-mundial-sostiene-nicolas-ponsiglione/

Translation: David Montoute