EU Parliament to debate ‘Istanbul Convention’ – Trojan horse for Gender Ideology

15188776262_4395cb9d1c_bThe European Parliament will on Wednesday 23 November debate the EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention, ostensibly on “preventing and combating violence against women” but in practice a ruse to enshrine in EU law its first ever legally-binding definition of “gender”.

On 4 March 2016, the European Commission proposed that the EU accede to the legally-binding Istanbul Convention. While all 28 EU Member States have signed the document, only 14 of them have actually ratified it, in some case because they have been alerted to its dangers after signing it unawares and under pressure for an “EU consensus”.

Seeking to exert further pressure on Member States, MEPs have tabled a series of questions to the European Commission who will appear before the Parliament, a willing accomplice in this ruse, to “explain” how important this Convention is “in preventing violence against women”.

For their part, the MEPs claim that “EU accession will provide greater efficiency and coherence in its internal and external policies in combating and preventing violence against women and gender-based violence across Europe, and ensure better implementation of EU laws, programmes and funds adopted to that end.” They go on:  “It will contribute to wider EU objectives on gender equality, anti-discrimination, public health and economic growth.

The gender ideologists who put this item on the EP agenda do not even seek to hide their subversive and undemocratic behaviour, claiming in their written questions that “the accession by the EU to the Istanbul Convention will exert renewed political pressure on the Member States to ratify this instrument.” In other words, these totalitarians do not want sovereign EU Member States to have freedom in exercising their rights to ratify (or not) international legally-binding agreements. They want the unelected European Commission to press gang the recalcitrant 14 sovereign governments into ratification.

The totalitarian tendencies of the European Parliament’s gender ideologists are laid brutally bare in their debate-setting question to the Commission: “What other concrete steps is the Commission taking to ensure that the Member States sign and ratify the Istanbul Convention? And in the case of the Member States that have already ratified it, what actions are envisaged for adequate enforcement of this instrument?”

Let there be no mistake that the Istanbul Convention is a very dangerous document, posing as an instrument for stopping violence against women, something which is already very adequately combatted by existing EU and national laws. The Convention seeks to codify a controversial and non-consensual definition of ‘gender’ as a social construct that is independent of biological reality. This contradicts the existing definition in international law (the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court). Denying the existence of the natural differences between the two sexes has profound legal implications regarding the exact meaning and scope of ‘gender’ policies, freedom of religion, and the duty of professional secrecy for counsellors, therapists, pastors or ministers.

The Convention also seeks to fight against and eradicate any “tradition based on stereotyped gender roles.” The binary view of mankind and of marriage, held by all major religions, may be stigmatised as a ‘tradition based on stereotyped gender roles’ and thus something that should be opposed in teaching materials or school curricula under the Convention.

Additionally, the document infringes the right of parents to be the primary educators of their own children (Article 2 Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights). Once a country ratifies the Istanbul Convention, the definition of gender as a social construct is legally-binding. This will further limit the right of parents to oppose controversial school classes and curricula that teach gender as ‘social sex’ to children.

In an attempt to expose the myth being pushed by the Commission and its extremist gender theory MEP partners, one political group has tabled an alternative series of questions to the Commission which it is hoped that Vera Jourova, European Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, will address when she appears before the Parliament.

  • What concrete steps have the Member States taken in their national legislation to protect women from violence?
  • How does the Commission support Member States in raising awareness of the devastating consequences of violence against women?
  • Can the Commission explain how the EU’s accession to the Convention will offer women protection from violence?