The UN Didn't Just Reject Gender Propaganda, They Annihilated It

Does this mean now we can trust the global giant?

Since its 1945 inception the United Nations has promoted equality for all and emphasized the protection of children. Yet the body remained silent as millions of school age children were prompted into believing sex was malleable and like a humanized Hasbro toy minors could chemically and surgically transform into whatever sex they chose.

The transgender movement was already losing traction.

• In 2019, the Swedish government, which strongly supported youth hormones, reversed their stance after a 7 month investigation revealed researchers could not find a single high quality study on the long-term effects of gender affirming treatment in children and adolescents.

• Finland, based on existing literature, revised their recommendations for treating gender dysphoria to focus on therapy interventions over medical treatments.

• In June the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on hormones and blockers for minors and in July the Olympic committee banned transwomen from competing in women’s sports. Meanwhile eight states moved to restrict public funds from being used for transgender adults.

UN Special Report

In a Special Report to the Human Rights Council the UN noted there has been a “concerted international push” to “erase the legal category of women”.

The report defined the delinking of their biological sex from women as “a form of “coercive inclusion” that relies on the expectation that women will be kind enough to sacrifice their own recognition and protection for the sake of others.

The report decries the danger to women from sex-neutering terms like “birthing persons”, “menstruaters/bleeders” or “vagina havers.”

The UN shreds the transgender woman narrative:

In an effort to provide recognition for males who identify as women or girls, many States have denied females their own right to be recognized in law as a distinct, particularly vulnerable group in need of targeted protection as envisaged by international law, including lesbian and bisexual women.

The report concludes that “policies that seek to erase women as a group “constitute[s] unlawful discrimination” and “also violence against women and girls.”

Refreshing, but does this mean the UN is trustworthy?

The UN is a political body whose primary ambition has been the expansion of its own power. Its 17 Sustainable Development Goals can only be realized through the Orwellian centralized control of property rights, education, food production, health care, and the means of production.

In 2019 the United Nations formed a Strategic Partnership Framework with the World Economic Forum. The purpose of the partnership is to provide additional financing to expedite the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals while broadening the platform for the WEF to advance its own global schemes.

The WEF’s goal is to replace shareholder capitalism, the bedrock of a free market economy with stakeholder capitalism, a socialist/fascist economic model where a select committee defines the stakeholders who will benefit from corporate profits. Under the model, workers are eventually priced out of staples like home and property ownership and forced into a reduced lifestyle in which “you will own nothing and be happy.”

According to Google’s Ai, “"You will own nothing and be happy" is a phrase associated with a vision of the future proposed by the World Economic Forum, suggesting a society where individuals rely on shared services instead of personal ownership.”

Why the UN’s about face?

Some policymakers believe the transgender movement was a political distraction the UN no longer needed. Others that public opinion was already turning against the transgender conversions. Either way, the move offers the UN a valued veneer of objectivity.

The organization is being criticized for the mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the recent attempt to force nations to accept amendments to its International Health Regulations. The IHRs are overseen by the UN’s WHO. The amendment would have handed the agency authority to impose narrative management, propaganda, and censorship during health emergencies. The regulations were vague and broad handing the WHO expanded powers to define both the health emergency and mandate responses including global lockdowns.

It’s unlikely the UN has given up its control aspirations. But the exposure of the harmful deconstructing of biological reality is welcome.