By now, those of you familiar with my writings know I write on topics I am passionate about, as there is nothing more exhilarating than sharing one’s passions with others. There will always be those who resonate with what I write and those who don’t, and that’s good; after all, we can’t claim freedom of speech and then try to silence those whose opinions may be different than ours.
When I wrote “God is Within,” I got quite a bit of backlash from those who felt I was threatening their faith, yet real faith cannot be threatened; you either have it or you don’t. What I think should not affect you is if your life is better because of your faith, then all the more power to you. My faith is based on believing God is within, yours may be different. When I wrote on “Abortion: The Debate”, I got a similar response, this time from those who felt I was betraying them and becoming dogmatic. They didn’t seem to catch the fact my primary concern is the welfare of the people who go through it. I don’t support it, not because I believe in a mythological hell or because any book says it’s wrong; I don’t support it because of the physical repercussions but more importantly, the psychological damage that does affect the human spirit, and the pain and often guilt I have witnessed in most women who have gone through it. However, just because I don’t support it doesn’t mean I condemn anyone who sadly, after much internal struggle, felt there was no other choice. I am not avoiding a position on the issue; if you have read carefully, you know my position; I am, however, exercising mental maturity, which is the ability to examine two opposite points of view.
I consider myself blessed to be a person who is not easily manipulated. Life’s experiences shook my foundations and taught me things I may not have learned had certain events not occurred. I was also blessed by life to have been provided with a very well-rounded education. I don’t think or agree with things simply because the majority says so. I don’t blind myself to one angle; I like all the facts on the table before making a decision. I do not care to impose my beliefs on anyone, nor will I shy away simply because others may not like my opinion. I have always said that if your beliefs make you a better human being and you can see that based on results, then by all means, keep going. You don’t have to live like me or think like me, neither do I have to believe or think the way you do. So long as we are not seeking to impose our agendas, we will be fine; ultimately that is maturity and respect.
After having expressed all of that, I will expand on the topic of “Gender Ideology”. I have chosen this topic because of the repercussions I see on children and adolescents. I write not only as a mother but as a soul who does not fit within the traditional canons found within society; as such, I understand what it is to be singled out…therefore before you quickly judge, I invite you to read the whole article…
While much of the world is rising up against the Gender Ideology movement, its promoters tend to respond that Gender Ideology does not really exist. Does gender ideology exist or not?…
We can define the current gender ideology movement in a very simple way: it is a set of anti-scientific ideas with political and authoritarian purposes that seeks to uproot the nature of human sexuality and explain it exclusively from a “cultural” point of view; denying the very fact that everything in life itself expresses in two forces, feminine and masculine energy- that is not an idea, or a feeling, but a scientific fact. The core idea of Gender Ideology says we have been sexually constructed by our environment, and consequently, we are called to deconstruct ourselves – it seems there is a basic confusion for some between gender and sexuality, and some use such confusion to promote more dissonance.
Those who argue Gender Ideology does not exist rarely tell us what they mean by ideology. Ideology has two broad meanings:
1) Classical Meaning, which understands ideology as a set of ideas contrary to reason and science; this conception of ideology can be better associated with philosopher Karl Marx. Karl Marx saw ideology as a mirror from which one saw his image inverted.
2) Another meaning of ideology is provided by Political Science, which explains ideology as a set of ideas that regardless of their veracity or error, serve to mobilize specific social and political groups.
So, does Gender Ideology exist or not? Whether we take the first or second meaning of ideology, Gender Ideology is without a doubt an ideology; not only because it opposes biological science, anatomy, spirituality, physiology, microbiology, genetics, embryology, and neuroscience, but also because such peculiar set of mystifying ideas serves to catalyze the political mobilization of two specific groups: Radical Feminists (for True Feminism should not ever be confused with this particular branch) and Radical LGBT groups.
The problem with Gender Ideology is not simply that it is an ideology; it is not simply that it is unscientific; the problem with gender ideology is that it represents a serious threat to individual freedoms masquerading as equality. I don’t have a problem with self-expression; I do have a problem with imposition.
Gender Ideology could not sustain itself were it not for State funding, there is no Gender Ideology without Government funding. Observe any country that is applying gender policies and you will see a State in constant expansion at the expense of the individual freedoms of its citizens. By now, some of you may have made the assumption I am homophobic, yet you could not be furthest from the truth. Personally, I consider myself “Soul Sexual” – in its original Tantric Meaning- and a True Feminist. Soul sexual is a person who falls in love not based on gender or appearances but based on mind and spirit. I do not get excited or attracted to people based on looks. Hence, my attraction is not at all physiological; seeing a man or woman naked does nothing for me; what attracts me is who the person is at his or her core. I do not force any child to think like me or towards any particular agenda.
I don’t consider myself a “tragic woman”; I am proud to be a woman and to be a feminist; I am simply not a radical. My personal history is one that would shake most people’s foundations, and I could easily choose those experiences as the basis for radical behavior; however, I believe in the power of the spirit, resilience, and the innate power women hold. I work on healing myself; although at times I feel terribly afraid; I do not allow the fear to become hatred. I seek for both genders to treat each other with respect and to be given equal opportunities, I do not seek to punish or demean men simply because of what some monsters did. I have close friends who are gays and lesbians, beautiful people for whom I have the utmost respect and with whom open constructive discussions can be held. They are NOT like the radicals. Unlike radicals, they do not seek to impose agendas that make no sense and take the freedom of others; they seek to be treated with genuine acceptance, consideration, and respect. They aren’t delusional, nor do they seek to run away from the unresolved pain and traumas others may have imposed by putting on band-aid solutions, which puts all the responsibility on others and does not foment their own healing as a soul.
I am also a Gnostic/Omnist, which means I don’t “believe” all we are is our physical bodies; our essence is something that transcends physicality, but I do know I have a body, and this body is shaped as a female, hence I am biologically speaking a woman. I am not going to take offense because someone says I am a woman. In parts of the world, there are regulations in place that forbid doctors to call an expecting mother a woman; since when does accepting reality become a cause for feeling humiliated? In other words, Gender Ideology movements are asking us to live in delusion “an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder” yet if one doesn’t agree with the agenda one is labeled as a hater or told one has a phobic disorder.
I love Canada; it is a beautiful country with many beautiful people from all over the world. I love their inclusion; lately, what saddens me is watching this beautiful country erode its foundation because everyone wants something and wants it their way. We all know an eroded foundation is weak and can lead to the collapse of the structure. In Canada, I am watching more and more the school system push the Ideology of Gender. It wasn’t enough that years ago, they decided to teach sexuality to children as if they were mere animals; I am all for teaching sexuality; what I am not for is the demeaning of such a beautiful part of us, minimizing it to the rubbing of genitalia. Nowadays, I see more and more children being taught they have no gender; that, of course, is something I will stand against.
The groups who are pushing for this agenda are right regarding the fact that we are, in many ways, conditioned, including our sexuality. They see that as wrong; well, let me ask them this…how is pushing your belief not forcing more conditioning? So, conditioning is okay when it supports your point of view; otherwise, is it bad?
Children are a blank slate; some children, as they grow, will naturally lean towards loving people of their own gender, and that should be respected, not limited nor encouraged. Why do I say this? Many children will experiment simply because everything is new to them. Others will act out because of abuse that may be going on within their households, yet for others, their soul naturally calls for it. Until that child/adolescent has reached maturity and is capable of expressing his or herself naturally and with full cognition, no one has the right to push that beautiful soul towards one way or the other regarding their sexuality simply because is what makes them comfortable; even worst to force them to live in delusion, denying a biological fact. Respecting the fact that a boy or a girl might grow to love someone of his or her own gender is not the same as telling a child they have no biology.
If you want to foment something, foment real acceptance and openness, not imposed delusion, which is literally compartmentalizing the minds of our children. Within such chaos, the ability to discover their “I” is being eradicated; in a material world, the need for a healthy “I” is necessary. There is no denying we are spirits, but we also live in biological bodies that physiologically express themselves as male and female.
So much ignorance has been promoted when it comes to ego; often claiming we need to destroy the ego to transcend. Without an ego, we would live in chaos and unable to discover connection through individualization. The ego is not the problem, the problem is the false ego; we should not confuse one with the other. I will always show respect and acceptance to an adult regardless of their sexual orientation, what I won’t ever promote is the violation of our children’s minds and the fomenting of an agenda at the expense of their minds and souls.
Yesterday, I read the transcript of Russian President Vladimir Putin regarding the ideology of gender. I cannot believe I agree with some of the things he said regarding Gender Ideology; then again, I don’t close my eyes and turn myself deaf simply because I don’t like something or someone; otherwise, how do we grow? In the past, I have expressed my ire against some of the atrocities committed against people who choose to love their own gender; yesterday, however, he was not fomenting hatred; he was exposing the dangers of Gender Ideology on children. I do have to give some of his examples credit; does that make me his supporter or a communist? Of course not (except to the radical mind), but I support common sense.
During one of his examples, he said, “If you want to believe you are a Panda, then go ahead, but you cannot force me to see you as one”. I appreciate that example so long as it means respecting one another. Let me give you a few examples that may help you see the issue from different angles:
1) A reporter in Argentina, without being disrespectful, expressed his dislike towards the promotion of an agenda (not people), which forces him to live apologizing for being heterosexual. That caused radical minds to say he was promoting hatred; the network forced him every day to take the time to talk about gender ideology in a way that promoted the subject; in other words, they punished him. How is that right? Since when is politely disagreeing on something considered hatred? By that terminology, I would say I feel hated by those who support this agenda because it makes me feel hurt for not being accepted as a woman. Who supports and promotes my point? Who will finance it? We can certainly open a can of worms here, which, in the long term, will not reduce “hate” but fomented. History has proved it: the more you repress vs. deal with issues, the more it is bound to explode. This agenda doesn’t deal with anything, it imposes and hides the real issues.
We are living at an age where we are supposed to be open-minded, yet we are so blinded by passive-aggressive hate, unresolved anger, and trauma that instead of seeking peace, respect, and equality, we delude ourselves. We are doing so when in reality, we are seeking revenge. Examples would be… having to live apologizing for being of a specific color of skin; how is that equality or the fomenting of forgiveness? I hate what has been done to people based on their skin. I have two predominant backgrounds in my line. I lived watching my maternal grandfather being put down for not being good enough for his wife, simply because of his lineage; that is ignorance and is wrong. With that said, I never saw my grandfather seeking retribution or expecting everyone to bow down to him. He stood for equality not for making a whole race pay for what some ignorant minds did. Why? because he knew you cannot ever achieve healing through constant retribution; he also knew within any race, there are those who only seek to hate, and there are those who hate each other and hurt each other even though they share the same color of skin. Another example would be Christmas time; my children’s school sent a letter where we had to teach our children to use the phrase “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”. I do not belong to any religion, but I cannot blind myself to the fact that Christmas time is a time of celebration for many about Christ, just like for others, it is about Hanukah. I don’t take offense when someone says Happy Hanukah or Merry Christmas; why should I? If I did, it would expose how fragile my belief is that I need to impose on others to feel validated. The school had no problem celebrating Chinese New Year and Diwali, among others, but the simple greeting of Merry Christmas had to stop. I should take offense to that, what makes someone else’s beliefs more valid than others? I am not saying the school should not celebrate holidays; if we truly seek equality, we should not be fomenting only one side. I do not like anything that foments the maintaining of wounds remaining open, for I know in doing so healing won’t ever take place, only false acceptance imposed by fear.
Now to go back to the subject of Gender Ideology. If a person feels he is Superman, then by that ideology, we should all accept that he is Superman, and as such, when that person chooses to lounge off a roof because he believes he can fly, we should let him because his belief alone is enough to make it fact?- if we don’t let him simply jump, then technically we are not honoring him as a human…see where this nonsense gets you? After all, who are we to say he is not Superman? Why should we treat that person differently? Why should we say that a person is having a psychotic or delusional episode when gender ideology tells us belief is enough?
More serious examples would be the cases of people undergoing severe depression and who feel suicidal or those who have anorexia. If patients who are severely depressed “believe” life will not get better and feel there is no hope, wishing to die; I guess by the Psychology of Gender Ideology I should tell these people that they are right and to go ahead. After all their beliefs and how they feel should be enough. I should “respect” their feelings and let them take their own life, failing to see the pain and trauma that are overwhelming them. I should not be charged with negligence or anything else having to do with their decision because the fact they believed life wasn’t worth living should be enough for me to step aside and say go ahead.
If a patient who suffers from Anorexia and sees herself as fat, even though she is dangerously skinny, were treated by doctors in the same way as those fomenting Gender Ideology, then that patient would die. Doctors should not be blamed; after all, they had to respect her choice. Letting her die simply because when she looked in the mirror, she saw a fat person instead of the reality, which is bones protruding, a body barely hanging onto life.
A more delusional example would be: Because my name is Sofia, which means wisdom and was the Goddess, creator, etc ; I feel myself like Sofia the Goddess and no one has the right to say otherwise. If they did, they would need to be punished, for the fact I feel I am the Goddess incarnated should take precedence upon my own reality. Because I feel I am the Goddess incarnated, all should bow to me, I should pay no taxes and live life being venerated, but is that reality? I can feel like a Goddess, I have the right to even feel that I am the reincarnation of Sofia; no one can dispute how I feel and what I believe about myself, however, this doesn’t mean my reality, the world I live in, needs to walk on hoops to feed my ideology or delusion. People should not be punished or hated because they see me as a woman and not as the Goddess.
A more serious example and something we could be setting precedence for if we choose to live in denial, would be the child predator who could easily use such distorted rationale to say he is just a child trapped in an adult’s body. Therefore, it is okay for him to be around children, to “fall in love” with children, to desire children; ultimately it would be okay for him to hurt children because he would not be the problem but the children who cannot accept his rationale that he is a child trapped in a kid’s body. How could we possibly stand against this if, in our ignorance of what it means to be understanding, respectful, and accepting of the sensitivities of others, we are dangerously blurring the lines?
I hope by now you can see the danger of feeding delusion; doing so never promotes healing or genuine acceptance. Proper guiding, proper education, and simply promoting humanity is what will take this world to a place of genuine acceptance, equality and care; no band-aid solution will do that for us. No tampering with our children’s minds will do it; instead, doing so will only promote hatred, separatism, and a society that will be in much more need of healing than ever before.
Promoting such agendas is beneficial to governments, not the people; the word Government actually means mind control. It is etymologically originated from the ancient Latin language. It Splits into two words:
1) (guvernare) meaning “to control” and
2) (mens or mentis) meaning “mind”. This is not to get you paranoid, but rather to better help you understand why the government was created; until we have people willing to live for their ideals and do what is best for the people, not for their wallets, governments will fail to provide proper guidance. This in no way is to say we don’t need a Government; we need a compass; we need to accept the fact that our compass every now and then may be wrong, and just because they promote something doesn’t mean they are right. Most governments, corporations, and even the mafia live by the psychology, theology, and philosophy of Niccolo Machiavelli (The Prince), who taught and mastered the techniques for mind control and the retaining of power. One of his techniques was to keep people ignorant, give them enough education to be serviceable, not enough to see the rope around their necks; slaves but thankful to be so. The other technique was to knock your enemy so hard they would never think of messing with you again. Another of his techniques was to give “your enemy” or “opposition” exactly what they ask for (reform/fairness) but do so in such an extreme so they may feel overwhelmed, give up, and blame no one but themselves, therefore demanding to be governed. His most used technique is divide and conquer; dividing our minds makes us easier to manipulate. Someone who is so confused about who he is will live apologizing for everything and will be easier to control than someone who has a solid foundation and who is capable of saying, “Sorry, but you cannot change facts simply because it makes you uncomfortable.”, otherwise how do we grow? How could we ever move forward if we are so busy walking on eggshells? There will always be something to apologize for, there will always be something we do wrong and for which we will need to repay, not learn but repay, even if in our hearts we never meant anything wrong by it.
We speak of a world where there would be no distinctions because of gender, race, sexual orientation, or country one belongs to. I hope my children grow to see a world where we treat each other as human beings, not based on delusions but on humanity.
Eiros 