Given their proclivity to aligning with woke movements, it was probably only a matter of time before Harry and Meghan joined the gender extremists.
But today’s revelation that the Sussexes are throwing their weight behind an organisation who describe the very concept of boyhood as ‘fluid’ and ‘socially constructed’ in an out and out attack on ordinary families is terrifying nonetheless.
As the couple’s true agenda is gradually revealed, it’s becoming obvious that destroying the British Royal Family is only the start of their ambition of a hard left Californian revolution of western society.
A big part of that agenda is erasing so-called toxic masculinity, which is slowly morphing into a general war on men and boys plaguing our society.
Harry and Meghan (pictured with their children) are throwing their weight behind an organisation who describe the very concept of boyhood as ‘fluid’ and ‘socially constructed’ in an out and out attack on ordinary families is terrifying nonetheless
The couple’s Archewell foundation says it is ‘investing in gender equity’ via the so-called Global Boyhood Initiative on a guide for ‘promoting gender equity by fostering positive masculinity in boys and men’. Pictured: Global Boyhood Initiative workshop last July, held at Ravenstone School in Balham
The couple’s Archewell foundation says it is ‘investing in gender equity’ via the so-called Global Boyhood Initiative on a guide for ‘promoting gender equity by fostering positive masculinity in boys and men’.
So far so woke.
However, it is only when you pull the bonnet up on the organisation that you discover just how radical their aims are.
The activist organisation, which is, somewhat worryingly, already working in UK schools via a curriculum pilot, asks primary school kids to question what they describe as ‘gender norms’ which are ‘not tied to sex organs’.
While it is becoming clear that Harry has been emasculated, most likely out of choice, throughout the course of his relationship with Ms Markle, that doesn’t mean hapless schoolboys should do the same.
But that’s just the start of this nonsense.
In a report called The State of UK Boys, published last year, the group goes to war with families and schools for acting as ‘gender and heterosexuality factories’.
It specifically takes aim at ‘white, middle-class, heterosexual masculinity’ as a so-called ‘structuring norm’.
Parents are even attacked for ‘gendering’ their unborn children ‘based on the identification of external genitalia in scans, including through elaborate “gender reveal” parties and a stream of purchases along gender lines’.
So that’s right, according to Harry and Meghan’s new pals, simply expressing your happiness on social media that you’re expecting a little boy or a girl, makes you part of the problem.
I’d love to know at what age they think it’s appropriate for a parent to decide they are indeed raising a young boy or young girl.
After birth, there is criticism of assuming that boys or girls are ‘naturally predisposed to behave in particular ways’, with the phrase ‘boys will be boys’ coming in for particular criticism.
It would be ludicrous to suggest this sort of rhetoric was not infecting our education system.
Because that’s exactly what the Global Boyhood Initiative wants to do, with the aim for school students aged between seven and 11 being educated about ‘the role gender norms play in their lives through activity-based questioning and critical reflection’.
They’ll also be asked to ‘internalise these new gender attitudes and norms by applying them in their relationships and lives’.
What the hell would this do to our kids?
And why on earth are Harry and Meghan associating themselves with an organisation clearly about indoctrination rather than education?
The activist organisation, which is, somewhat worryingly, already working in UK schools via a curriculum pilot , asks primary school kids to question what they describe as ‘gender norms’ which are ‘not tied to sex organs’. Pictured: Global Boyhood Initiative workshop last July
A report called ‘The State of UK Boys’ was written by the Global Boyhood Initiative last year, which claimed that families can be gender ‘factories’ by ‘enacting gender roles and identities’
Tory MP Miriam Cates, who has been bravely campaigning against inappropriate sex education, agrees that the Global Boyhood Initiative is wrong to train young children to become ‘agents of change for gender and social justice’.
As she puts it: ‘Attempting to “re-educate” small children for reasons of political activism is indoctrination and an abuse of the trust that children place in teachers and parents place in schools.
‘It is also concerning that the Global Boyhood Initiative says they have widened their net to include “children of all genders”, which suggests they hold to an extreme position on gender ideology.’
It feels as if those on the left are unable to learn from the catastrophe of gender extremism that has already ruined countless lives thanks to now discredited organisations like the Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service.
Now, before I’m dismissed as an old white man with no interest in talking about such issues, I’d like to briefly bring my own experiences at school into this debate.
Having grown up as a closeted gay child bullied in the playground, I am well aware of just how threatening gender stereotypes can be.
But, trust me, pretending they don’t exist in the classroom is only creating a far bigger problem.
Increasingly, thanks to this sort of dogma, young gay and lesbian children are being convinced into thinking that they must have been born into the wrong body.
Rather than accept that their hormones are running wild as they slowly come to terms with their sexuality, youngsters and teens are assuming that they just must be the opposite gender because they’re a tomboy who loves sport not ballet or a camp young boy who wants to play with barbie dolls.
I fear that if I were at school today, the fact I preferred dressing up as the panto dame doing am-dram with my girlfriends to rugby with the lads, would have seen a woke teacher suggest I might actually be a girl.
The consequence of such a system is young woman like Keira Bell, a victim of the Tavistock Clinic who was prescribed puberty blockers at 16 and underwent a double mastectomy at 20 before detransitioning, realising that she was simply struggling to deal with her sexuality and a host of other relatively normal mental health issues.
Of course, no child should be forced to follow gender stereotypes, and schools and parents should adapt to the unique needs of individual children struggling with their identity.
But suggesting that there should be no celebration or acknowledgement by parents they are having or are indeed raising a boy is counterproductive and unnecessary.
Besides, it’s not how Harry and Meghan personally dealt with the arrival of their two children.
It’s now largely forgotten that the couple used the March 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, where they wrongly accused the Royal Family of racism, to announce to the world that they were expecting their second child.
‘It’s a girl,’ Prince Harry revealed, after the pair had a play argument over who would share the news.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are partnering with the US-based Global Boyhood Initiative
According to the doctrine of the Archewell-backed Global Boyhood Initiative he’d just made a major faux pas by linking the gender of the unborn Lilibet Diana to her sex organs.
Indeed, the social media announcement of the birth of Archie on their now-shuttered Sussex Royal Instagram account was even more explicit, with a disgustingly stereotypically coloured blue graphic reading: ‘It’s a BOY!’
I’d love to know how they made that determination, presumably simply by looking at young Archie’s sex organ, rather than waiting years to discover how they wanted to identify themselves!
Look, Harry and Meghan know that, when it comes to their own children, this ideology was not one they followed.
So they should stop being so damn irresponsible by supporting it so they can keep up with their uber-woke Californian contemporaries.
Read the full article here
Discussion about this post