Gender Ideology Has Become Law
The Cautionary Tale of Canada's Subversive, Incremental Lawfare
In Canada, the general acceptance of gender ideology as the supreme law has been achieved by confusing support for LGBTQ rights with approval of this ideology.
The Canadians were duped by it. They haven't been able to distinguish between standing behind the historical advancement of homosexual and lesbian rights—during which incidents like police raids on gay bathhouses in Toronto were duly denounced and a legitimate and essential struggle for freedom was waged—and adopting this ideology as fact.
Gay Pride has become a massive industry, working with governments and some of the biggest institutions in the world to the tune of billions. It has accumulated unfathomable cultural influence.
The narrative has evolved from "Gay Pride" to "2SLGBTQ+ Pride" as a result of the progressive fusion of gender ideology and gay rights. Many gay and lesbian organizations disagree with this strange and outrageous set of changes.
It is important to monitor this divergence from the LGBT rights movement. The extent of the accumulated cultural power surpasses legal frameworks protecting the rights of same-sex couples and prohibiting discrimination. Despite the fact that, today, more and more women are speaking out against biological men encroaching on women's places and titles, this movement started in Canada in February 2007 when transgender person Kimberly Nixon asked to be allowed to work as a peer-rape counsellor at the Vancouver Rape Relief & Women's Shelter Society. The shelter was accused by Nixon of discrimination.
The verdict was rendered moot even though the VRRS was ultimately found not guilty of discrimination on the grounds of the group's freedom of association, which allowed the group to operate as a women-only venue regardless of gender identification. In retaliation for the shelter's refusal to permit a biological man to counsel women on rape trauma, the City of Vancouver withdrew municipal funds because the shelter did not satisfy its requirements for trans equity and inclusion. Subsequently, the shelter was closed.
They Are Not the Same
Gender theory and same-sex rights are not the same.
Gender theory necessitates acknowledging that biology cannot define males and females. The whole purpose of being gay, lesbian, or bisexual is eliminated by this.
In addition to saying that someone's sexual orientation does not define them as a man or a woman, how can we support same-sex relationships?
It is absurd to conflate the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and even transgender individuals with the notion that the sex binary must be destroyed, yet it did work.
It is wild to consider how inherently homophobic gender ideology is, while also noting that the gay rights movement was used to normalize it in Canadian society. It’s strong evidence that cognitive dissonance was a requirement for the Canadian public to legitimize these changes.
Human Rights Laws
Following decades of legal changes across Canada to safeguard same-sex couples' rights, the Northwest Territories became the first Canadian jurisdiction to specifically include "gender identity" as a forbidden basis of discrimination in its human rights legislation in 2002. This was the first instance in which Canadian culture moved away from the sensible position of shielding same-sex couples from prejudice, and instead cemented the notion that sexual orientation is unimportant to the fabric of our society.
After a lot of well-crafted propaganda, 14 years later, in 2016 Justin Trudeau amended the human rights legislation to make gender ideology a national legal framework for the entire country of Canada. This was a significant shift in Canadian society brought about by the government of Ontario, which even included using the wrong pronouns as a crime.
However, the psyop intended to conflate gender ideology with gay rights obscured the implications of this for Canadians. The desire to help and do the right thing was weaponized by the Canadian government.
Why were the people, who now believe defining a woman is offensive, being lumped in with lesbians who have been fighting for the right of biological women to love other biological women?
“each person’s internal and individual experience of gender. It is their sense of being a woman, a man, both, neither, or anywhere along the gender spectrum. A person’s gender identity may be the same as or different from their birth-assigned sex. Gender identity is fundamentally different from a person’s sexual orientation.”
Laws that require us to identify with the gender identity of others or face being accused of hate crimes? These are extreme concepts that most people don't adhere to.
The reason left-wing feminists are screaming against gender ideology is that laws that define gender as a spectrum diminish both the history of women's liberation and their entire identity.
But when women were officially declared extinct in Canada, where were the left wing protests?
This was part of human rights law in Canada all the way back in 2016. The truth is that as this was being incrementally implemented into our society, the progressive mindset was not able to think through the consequences of these changes.
The effort to confuse gender ideology with gay rights was successful, thus, it was also relatively easy to modify Canadian culture in general to conform to gender ideology.
For this reason, Trudeau now has the authority to declare that Canadian taxpayers will pay the $75K/person in sex change benefits for federal employees.
Decades of social engineering and lawfare went into making this a reality.
This is not to argue that Canadians made a mistake by endorsing Same Sex Rights; rather, it is to argue that a Marxist tactic known as Hegelian Dialectic Social Engineering was employed to further an objective unrelated to Same Sex rights.
All the government and media had to do was to keep adding to the Pride acronym as a means of expanding and mutating the original same sex rights issue into an ever growing quagmire. With the narrative having gone from LGB rights into 2SLGBTQIA+ rights, even greater societal change was then proposed. Using propaganda to reframe dissent against the proposed changes as a rise in hate against “this community,” the changes are then pushed through. This is how major cultural and legislative changes in Canada were continuously justified.
Gender Ideology Vs Peaceful Assembly
On Tuesday, April 4, 2023, the NDP party in Ontario introduced a law, which would make demonstrations during drag queen story hour illegal. Their announcement's language carefully dehumanized every protester while neglecting the main worry of parents who are beginning to see the threat posed by gender dogma. Of course, their main worry is exposing kids to acts and content that isn't appropriate for their developmental stage.
Some parents prefer not to instill gender ideology in their kids. Telling their kids that they might be "trapped in the wrong body," or that perhaps, "if you watch this man in a dress, you can sort it out" is not something that some parents think is healthy to do. And yet, the lawfare to criminalize this position as hate continues.
This is not hatred. Being against the alleged "2SLGBTQ+" community is unrelated to bigotry. But a lot of Canadians will buy it because of decades of social engineering.
Some parents are aware that drag queens have a history steeped in adult sexual entertainment, and that many drag queens have taught kids that being sexual in front of adults may get them attention and occasionally even money.
Some parents don't think their kids should be raised with this set of values.
All of this is disregarded, and we are informed that the demonstrators are "anti-2SLGBTQ+" and bigoted.
What's worse is that this measure is being floated as political theatre, giving the impression that the NDP is "pushing back" against the conservatives. It is utterly absurd to think that the three main political parties are engaged in a real political conflict over issues such as gender ideology, parental rights, and gender affirmative care.
Anything that tries to paint this as an NDP vs. Conservative or Conservative vs. Liberal issue should be categorically rejected because all three have contributed to the creation of laws pertaining to gender ideology. In Canada, this is a Uniparty problem.
Let's begin by discussing Canada's introduction of "Gender Affirmative Health Care" in order to comprehend this.
WPATH on a Warpath
Medical personnel participate in the sterilization and mutilation of minors in many countries across the world because of the gender affirmative model.
Primarily, this concept is being promoted by WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), an extreme activist group masquerading as a scientific institution.
Despite WPATH’s influence, the gender affirmative model has elicited growing dissent from countries worldwide. Finland, Norway, the UK, and Sweden have all resisted this paradigm, and yet, there hasn't been much mention of their opposition in the mainstream media in North America.
One key component of WPATH's propaganda serves as a benchmark for determining whether or not radical "Gender Affirmative Care" is gaining traction in a given country.
This is the main problem.
WPATH released the following statement in 2010:
“The WPATH Board of Directors strongly urges the de-psychopathologisation of gender variance worldwide. The expression of gender characteristics, including identities, that are not stereotypically associated with one’s assigned sex at birth is a common and culturally-diverse human phenomenon which should not be judged as inherently pathological or negative.
The psychopathologlisation of gender characteristics and identities reinforces or can prompt stigma, making prejudice and discrimination more likely, rendering transgender and transsexual people more vulnerable to social and legal marginalisation and exclusion, and increasing risks to mental and physical well-being.
WPATH urges governmental and medical professional organizations to review their policies and practices to eliminate stigma toward gender-variant people.”
First of all, the purposeful confounding of individuals with the mental health condition known as gender dysphoria with the purposefully-ambiguous term “gender-variant people” has led to complete mayhem in the medical systems that adopt WPATH's interpretation of the problem.
This is the reason that a large number of doctors are reluctant to provide gender affirmative care.
In radical gender affirmative care, this is the tip of the spear: affirming children without first evaluating their mental health for fear of being socially outcast as a bigot.
This Christina Button article is crucial because it refutes the misinformation spread by WPATH, which holds that transgender individuals are born with the brain of the other sex, and that gender identity is determined by the brain. In fact, WPATH is persuading medical professionals all around the world that denying access to cutting-edge medical therapies to anyone who "feels trans"—regardless of age—is transphobic since it implies that the individual is neurologically distinct and was born this way.
And the main thing that the UK, Sweden, Norway, and Finland have done is fight back against this deception. All of them are actively resisting the radical demands of WPATH and erecting appropriate medical gatekeeping that prioritizes mental health.
In the meantime, it has been fully adopted in Canada by legislators, politicians, and medical professionals who have accepted it at face value.
Let’s look more closely at one particular claim being made by WPATH—that the psychopathologlisation of someone who believes they are trapped in the wrong body increases "risks to mental and physical well-being."
Stated differently, providing a first line of treatment based solely on mental health concerns to children who feel they are stuck in the wrong body endangers their mental health.
Mental health is endangered by mental health safeguards.
Given that gender dysphoria has been studied as a mental disorder for decades, this is a genuine case of Orwellian doublespeak.
To have a deeper comprehension of the actual global dynamics surrounding this pivotal conflict, let's examine the distinctions between Canada and the United Kingdom.
Canada Vs the UK
An October 14, 2022 article by Reuters reports that:
"England's National Health Service has drafted new guidelines for treating transgender youth that would call for local authorities to be alerted in some cases where young people have obtained puberty blockers and hormone therapies on the private market."
The Interim service specification released by the NHS in October 2022 states that:
"Providers delivering The Service must be an established specialist tertiary paediatric unit with a strong partnership with mental health services; be an established academic centre with a strong track record of research in children and young people; and have robust safeguarding frameworks in place."
This represents a radical departure from the basic ideas of the gender affirmative approach that WPATH is advocating globally.
Radical trans activists and WPATH call this NHS action "transphobic," and believe it would "kill trans kids," merely because they are limiting access to medications like puberty blockers and because they are seeking an evidence base for these therapies.
Given that puberty blockers have only been authorized for the treatment of "precocious puberty," which has its own complicated web (as detailed in this four-part series on the exploitation of transgender people), the NHS's decision is very appropriate.
Even without delving into the dark past of how children were given puberty blockers based on dubious theories about premature puberty, we can still identify one very important component:
When prescribed to youngsters experiencing early puberty, the effect is transient, and the kids are soon free to resume growing into adults.
When prescribed for gender dysphoria, these drugs are meant to halt puberty permanently, which pushes most of the children who take them toward hormone therapy in an attempt to permanently change the gender of their bodies.
Due to its off-label use, this medication has not been well investigated as a treatment for gender dysphoria.
Now put this information in the context of WPATH's basic principle: access to puberty blockers shouldn't even require clinical gender dysphoria! Give them the medicine if they feel transgender; else, you're transphobic!
There should be no "pathologization" of mental health. A youngster has the right to delay puberty if they "feel incongruent."
Radical gender affirmative care opens a floodgate here—the blurring of boundaries to allow decades of research on true clinical gender dysphoria to be disregarded in the middle of WPATH's cacophonous cries of "FREE MY PEOPLE!"
Though the media will continue to claim that gender affirmative care is practiced in the UK, we need to assess the extent to which this break from WPATH's core concept represents an abrupt end to the radical gender affirmative model.
On the modern battlefield to protect children from systemic abuse, dissension is much required.
The NHS rules state that the approach being used in Canada would be prohibited due to the drastic modifications made in the UK.
This is where the global context really matters. Gender ideology and gender affirmative care are being used by countries like America and Canada, who adhere to WPATH's desire to "de-psychopathologize" gender diversity, to put children in danger and take away parental rights.
Unity Across Borders
It has become obvious that lawfare, and gradual cultural conditioning play a huge role in the war on parental rights and children's minds and bodies, no matter where you live. And yet, where you live matters.
WPATH’s influence is perhaps best illustrated in America by Planned Parenthood, which permits young girls who self-diagnose as having gender dysphoria access to testosterone on the same day, without a prescription or permission from their parents.
And while it seems like Canada is by far the most radical country, the recent 1 Million March for Children across the entire nation reveals that parents have awakened to this decades-long psyop. The use of Neo-Marxist ideology in the legal system, the healthcare system, and the education system is not as subversive as it once was.
If we examine the fact that the mainstream media in Canada and America have done their best to obscure dissent emerging from nations around the world, and have targeted successful events like the 1 Million March for Children with aggressive propaganda, one thing becomes clear: they do not want dialogue between parents across borders.
Propaganda is a localized phenomenon and needs to be tailored to each population accordingly. This is a chink in their armor. Global coherence among parents is a major threat to information warfare that falls apart as soon as one examines the victories and losses of neighboring countries. The fact that we are dealing with an international globalist coup, and their uniparty minions in each of ur own countries, gives us a distinct strategic advantage:
Know your enemy as they are manifest elsewhere in the world, and you just may find their weakness here at home.
Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.
If you enjoyed this contribution to Badlands Media, please consider checking out more of Justin’s work for free on Substack.
Simon Esler assisted Justin with this piece.
Badlands Media will always put out our content for free, but you can support us by becoming a paid subscriber to this newsletter. Help our collective of citizen journalists take back the narrative from the MSM. We are the news now.