"Gender ideology" hoax

First some short info from an article:
Now some info from someone who supports this hoax:
Its a short book consisting of 31 pages.
1995 - 4th UN World Women Conference in Beijing
Official representative of Honduras - Mrs DeCasco, and Mrs Dale O’Leary object the document for containing too many times word “Gender”. Those two ladies, and representative of the Holy See ask the conference for clarification of the term on basis its “unclear” and it may refer to “women”, “sex” or even “homosexuality” or “bestiality”.
some 60 delegates then meet and declare that term “gender does not need any further clarification”.
Holy See (the Vatican) Stated:
“In accepting that the word “gender” in this document is to be
understood according to ordinary usage in the United Nations
context, the Holy See associates itself with the common meaning of
that word, in languages where it exists. The term “gender" is
understood by the Holy See as grounded in biological sexual
identity, male or female."
Basically saying “this is our definition”.
1996 - Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines in a legally binding form “gender” as “: both sexes, male and female,
within the context of society”
This definition was made after Holy See and certain musim countries demanded more clarification of the term.
1997 - Mrs Dale O’Leary writes a book called The Gender Agenda
In it accuses UN od supporting radical feminism.
2002 Vatican releases “Lexicon of the Family”. A thesaurus like dictionary containing 78 “ambiguous terms” such as “gender” or “homosexuality”
Whole name of the book is “Ambiguous and debatable terms regarding family life and ethical questions”.

  • Book contains statements such as “homosexuality has no social function, therefore it has no rights” or “there is no proof that condoms prevent AIDS”.
    There is preface in English:
    Its worth to note that Vatican accused U.N. of intentional use of misleading terms:
    (at the bottom of the text)
    Also on Amazon, the book is endorsed by Cardinal George Pell from Sydney. Yes… THAT one.
    2012 - mrs Jane Adolhe in here “Gender wars at the United Nations” makes nice trick.
    At page 28 she wrote about feminist Oosterfeld and her activity. At page 29 she inexplicably jumped without any reason to “Yogjakarta principles” attempting to make a connection between feminism and LGBTQ rights groups.
    2014- Slovakia
    Mr. Anton Chromík claims that EU is pushing agenda which aims to destroy “traditional family”. He succeds to find 300 000 voters and call for a public referendum. As they cannot ask for banning homosexuality (such act would get him 12 years of prison) instead they call to not expand LGBT rights.
    A dubious intent, which failed as only 21% registered voters showed up.
    No relations between UN or EU, feminism and or LGBT has been confirmed, as those are UN and EU are independent bodies.
    2018 - Slovakia
    Slovak Conference of Bishops (KBS) recommends to NOT ratify “Istanbul agreement” claiming it contains dubious “gender” agenda. In general its an agreement to prevent domestic violence.
    “Istanbul Agreement” article 3, point C) - Definitions
    ““gender” shall mean the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men;"
    A definition which is mostly same as legally binding definition of Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Its mainly because the agreement deals with home violence.
    Also the Istanbul Agreement was created by “Council of Europe” which is completely independent on U.N. or E. U. But yet again “gender ideologists” are everywhere.
    So basically after 23 years representatives of the Roman Catholic church dont get legal language, pushing official and blessed conspiracy theory to the world.
  1. Have you met such material before?
    Today i learned that because original Lexicon (or its important parts) was written mostly in Spanish, and thanks to mrs De Casco, the hoax has quite strong roots in South America.
  2. Your opinion?
  3. I stand before an important choice.
    a) I can keep current state where general public in Slovakia is unaware of the Lexicon and the hidden homophobic language it propagates, while KBS will look like a group of lunatics, who cant understand clearly defined terms.
    b) I may bring this to general public in Slovakia (small blog up to 2000 readers)
  • KBS will look like a fools in the eyes of progressive young generation. Old religious generation might accept the conspiracy theory.
  • Local LGBTQ groups and progressives get whole image
  • Roman-catholic church will be exposed for what it is.
  • this time i would go "too far"and i might expect a serious backlash.