I found myself in Helsinki on the official Pride week. A fellow activist texted me notifying me of a Drag Queen story time, aimed at 0-5 year old kids, taking place at the Oodi Central Library in Helsinki. A protest would be taking place outside the library prior to the event, and my first thought as an activist campaigning for gender integrity was to join the demonstration. However, I quickly realised that rather than protesting the event, it would be far more important for me to join the event and see for myself what kind of a performance would the drag artist known by the name Gaylien 2000 conjure up for the children.
The atmosphere in the children’s play area of the library was welcoming and joyful. The story corner was filled with the giggles of the frolicking kids and the warm chatter of their parents. Cheerful rainbow coloured bunting was hung around the hall. I sat down on one of the comfy padded benches and tuned into the space. There probably were families with gay, hetero, single and co-parents, and they all seemed like ordinary parents who care for their children. The children were expressing themselves like any normal kids, running around and playing with each other free from any prejudice. From the outside nobody could have guessed that something controversial was about to take place.
Then a pastor walked into the space wearing his priestly garment along with a few other activists and immediately the atmosphere was charged with a noticeable tension. It was clear that I was about to witness a significant clash of ideologies, perhaps a first of its kind in Finland. Next “Gaylien 2000” entered, a man dressed up as a feminine space clown, and something flared up. The situation advanced rapidly and several guards appeared. Concerned looks were exchanged by library employees and the parents seemed to keep a keener eye on their children.
The Drag artist paced back and fourth in front of the children and tried to claim his role and confidence. In a flash the priest and his entourage had been guided out. Afterwards I heard that the priest had directly addressed the Drag man and questioned whether he comprehends what he is actually doing. Some sort of a conflict had arisen and apparently a trans-identifying individual from the crowd had hit one of the activists. I myself sat on the opposite side across the space, so I could not clearly catch the commotion taking place behind the guards. The children did not seem to notice the conflict but had their eyes on the fluffy, sparkly, funny looking creature that had taken the center stage. A welcoming applause broke the tension in the air, and the story hour could begin.
The Drag artist (he has refused to disclose his name in the media despite numerous requests) started reading to the children how “it’s okay to be missing a tooth” and “it’s okay to be small, medium, large or extra large.”
The bright colours, the fun illustrations and the goofy reading style of Gaylien got both the children and the adults to chuckle. I found myself thinking how much I would have enjoyed, if someone would have read to me, a freckle faced tall kid, how it’s okay to be different. I remember how awkward I felt about my quirks, and how I wish I didn’t have to be taller than most boys my age. I’m sure every child longs to hear how they are accepted just as they are.
Only a few of the sections of the book were clearly rainbow themed, like the part about different moms and dads. The fact of the matter is, however, that modern families are diverse and it’s important to raise children to be open minded and respectful from a young age.
Why such a controversy then? What is wrong about all of this? I got to see the other side of the story. The families, librarians and probably also the anonymous man, who was dressed up as a feminine space clown, all believed they were doing something good. Who wouldn’t want to do everything they can to make the next generation more loving and fair towards everyone. Children can be seriously mean and it’s easy to bully those who appear to be different. Maybe the answer is to campaign for compassion and community at the earliest possible age?
If only the reality was that innocent.
As an activist I am used to examining reality with a broad lens, and keeping many complex equations on the same drawing board. I have always been drawn to discover the creeks, brooks, deep underwater currents and springs rather than the main stream. I value the ethics of the investigative journalist and I consider as many perspectives as possible and look for the silenced voices. These findings form a multi dimensional picture which I mirror back to my internal moral compass. Before all else, I am interested in truth, integrity and human dignity, and I have no need to conform to the ideas of my fellow activists or even my most beloved friends.
The popular culture moulds the modern man to see issues in an inherently polarised way, and the same is true also with the rainbow ideology. If you stand on the side of compassion and equality, you absolutely must be donning the rainbow flag on your social media profile, whether you’re gay or not. However, if you question the Pride movement in any way at all, you are automatically an aggressive homophobe, transphobe and a bigot. Nothing seems to be allowed to exist between these two extremes in the general narrative.
But can we ever introduce any kind of nuance to the public dialogue, if us activists are unable to engage in anything but protesting? Are we able to explain ourselves? Are we able to provide sound evidence and logical conclusions? Are we able to listen? Are we able to approach people in a way that we don’t immediately create fear and opposition?
Are we able to engage in a humane dialogue with those whose actions and values we question?
Based on the public confrontation at Oodi library, it was easy to imagine why in the Pride community people harbour a belief that those who criticise the movement are intimidating and narrow-minded folks. It also became concrete to me, how opposition actually reinforces the victim experience. The more fiercely a minority is opposed, the stronger they will defend their voice. The discriminated minority has a natural longing to be accepted by the majority, and this burning drive has eventually made every social justice movement visible in our history.
This psychological phenomenon is clearly being taken advantage of by including the children’s Pride events into the human rights campaign of the sexual minority. The more hostile the critique, the more the ideology becomes fortified and actually normalised. The entities funding and steering the Pride movement are consciously foisting ever more questionable things under the rainbow coloured umbrella, so that the loud resistance of the sexual minority can be used as a funnel to introduce and install more and more immoral ideologies into the society, such as the sexualisation of children.
Even if some of the Pride community would genuinely be driven by a righteous cause to defend human rights, it is crystal clear to me, that the movement is being manipulated by big money and a dark agenda.
Over the last years, Pride has grown from an annual parade to a week and even a whole month. The events are also being geared towards children more and more. Even the Drag Queen story time has become a fairly common sight in the last couple of years around the world. Also the world has witnessed its first child Drag Queens, although Drag art has previously always been a night life entertainment spectacle, exclusively aimed toward an adult audience, and which has always included sexual undertones and vices. Drag Queens are also notorious for their backstage sex adventures along with heavy alcohol and drug use. Why, then, are Drag Queens being sold as the newest fairy tale character for children?
What are these men who are dressed as a mockery of women doing with little children?
Who does it serve, when boys are dressed in revealing fishnet stockings and provocative makeup – children or child predators?
I insist that the Drag culture and Pride movement does not belong to children. Why? Because at its centre is sex and sexuality, which children should not be subjected to.
Consequently, the story hour of Oodi cannot be examined as an isolated event without a larger context. Even though the Drag artist in question was dressed surprisingly modestly and must have seemed like an actual woman in costume to the children, we must not forget what Drag entertainment generally represents.
Would prostitution be a lovely children’s game, if the pimps were dressed up as gnomes and the prostitutes as fairies?
Next, Gaylien 2000 opened the second book, called Julián Is a Mermaid by Jessica Love. Now the ideology of the story hour started to shine through in a glaring manner. No longer were we speaking of equality and how nobody should be bullied, but we took a deep dive into the world of disassociation and transgenderism.
Julián is a little boy, who begins to dream about underwater life while he’s swimming with his grandmother. In the metro, on the way home, he actually meets some adults dressed up as mermaids, who seem to represent Drag Queens and becomes totally enchanted by them. When he returns home he decides to dress up as a mermaid himself.
Grandma is not upset although Julián has painted his lips with her lipstick without permission, cut branches off her plants and flowers to make a colourful theatrical wig and swirled a mermaid tail out of her white lace curtains. Instead, grandma rewards Julián by giving him a pearl necklace and taking him into a parade of mermaids.
At the parade there are clearly many high heeled men donning dresses and pompous outfits, Drag Queens. Why does the grandma say to the little boy that he is just like them? Why does a little boy join a group of adult men who like to play around with sex and gender roles? What happens to the sense of reality and mental health of a child when he is convinced that a costume play can become his identity?
On the last page of the book there is a picture of Julián with long hair and lipstick. He has turned into a girl. The story plants a belief in children that this is how easy it is. You can become a mythical creature, a girl or a boy, Drag Queen, alien or whatever. A loving parent, which is depicted by the supportive grand mother in this story, will surely encourage pursuing this fantasy.
This is where my boundary is crossed. This is also where many of my gay friends’ boundaries are crossed. Not all members of the rainbow community support this rising trans trend by any means, and some actually feel quite pigeon holed into the trans wagon by the Pride brand.
Convincing children that they can turn from a boy to girl or from a girl to boy is not only deceitful but also incredibly damaging.
The #detrans and #detransition tags are an ever more frequent sight on social media, with heart wrenching video testimonies of sex change regret and the gruesome experience of life after the transition treatments. One of the most disturbing problems is the blunt reality that the operation did not end up matching the expectations the trans-identifying individuals had been sold. They had not been psychologically prepared for the fact that no matter how many surgeries they would have, no man can ever be turned into woman or woman into man. They spoke of how irresponsible it is, that the therapists and surgeons around them encouraged them into an irreversible decision, which ultimately was not even capable of healing their internal experience of dysphoria. Some end up realising that the entire concept of being born into the wrong body is false and extremely damaging, and that there was nothing wrong with their original blueprint.
Some of the detransitioners suffer from scoliosis and osteoporosis caused by the hormone treatments, continuous infections caused by the complications from surgery including numbness of sexual organs, inability to perform sexual acts, problems urinating and constant additional surgeries as well as worsened body shame.
Shape Shifter, a vocal MTFTM detransitioner, describes gender re-assignment treatment as sexual lobotomy, an experimental and unethical medical operation, of which there exists no long term studies.
Do people seriously believe that the Pride brand genuinely has the rights of every member of the sexual minority at heart? Why is there no information on detransition included in the campaign material for trans-identifying people? Why do we not see workshops or presentations held by detransitioners, who now regret their sex change treatments and are adamantly against the entire idea of being born into the wrong body, as part of Pride?
If Pride is a human rights movement, why is not bodily integrity, informed consent and truth about the medical transition not a part of their agenda? Why does the community campaign against compulsory genital surgery for intersex people, but does not recognise that the same surgeries are equally dangerous for people who voluntarily seek them? Why, instead, are younger and younger children being encouraged to have gender re-assignment treatments, when it is actually physically impossible to achieve, since gender is an immutable biological blueprint, and it cannot be re-assigned through manipulation of sex organs or hormones.
Finally, I want to ask some fundamental questions about trans ideology. If gender is not interconnected to the body’s natural and innate reproductive organs and hormonal expression, why does a trans-identifying individual need to modify them? If manhood and womanhood is not a binary biological reality, but an internal identity, what is the significance of the appearance of the physical body? If trans ideology rejects the gender-conservative culture, why do those who identify as trans want to hold on to the stereotypical concepts of female and male? And if, according to trans ideology, the stereotypes of woman and man are inherently uninclusive and discriminatory, then why do trans men imitate the typical male appearance and dress, and trans women imitate the typical female appearance and dress? Is not the trans identification just an elaborate imitation… a lie?
Can we not simply teach our children that there are feminine men and masculine women, and throw away this ideology of transgenderism that is fundamentally contradictory and unnatural?
Why would anyone want to purposely disseminate unscientific gender ideology to children? Three ideological poisons of our time are responsible for this: medicalisation, eugenics and transhumanism. I will be writing more about these topics in my upcoming articles.
If you want to get involved in campaigning for gender integrity, you can print out the double-sided flyer below and distribute it to local youth centres, schools, school psychologists, trans clinics and library notice boards. We need to engage in the dialogue out of compassion, not by rejecting anyone. Kids and teenagers struggling with gender confusion need a huge amount of love and protection, not humiliation, lies or dangerous medical treatments.
If you’d like to dive deeper into the topic of detransition, I recommend exploring the following resources: