The Yogyakarta Principles

How the West got fisted

In 2007, at a conference in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, a group of “human rights experts” wrote The Yogyakarta Principles to implement gender ideology worldwide. To accompany these 29 principles, they also wrote An Activist’s Guide to the Yogyakarta Principles about what political action to take.

‘Sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ underpin the whole project. The former includes all sexual preferences, and the latter is unrelated to biology. Some of the highlights follow.

Principle 2 says, ‘Everyone is entitled to enjoy all human rights without discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity . . . whether or not the enjoyment of another human right is also affected.’

This means no sexual preference is morally wrong, and they all trump freedom of speech and conscience.

Principle 3 says that states must ‘fully respect and legally recognise each person’s self-defined gender identity.’

Sexual orientation and gender identity are ‘integral to each person’s dignity’ (P9), and any ways in which non-heterosexuals are treated differently is discrimination.

The YP authors especially recommend ‘programs of training and awareness-raising’ for these groups:

• the police (P7)

• judges, judicial staff, prosecutors and attorneys (P8)

• prison staff (P10)

• employers (P12)

• social workers (P15)

• ‘teachers and students at all levels of public education, professional bodies, and potential violators of human rights’ (P28-F)

Principle 12 demands that

‘[States shall] take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to eliminate and prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public and private employment, including in relation to vocational training, recruitment, promotion, dismissal, conditions of employment and remuneration.’ (P12-A)

Remember what this means: nobody can be banned from any training or employment for any sexual preference.

Principle 16 demands that ‘[States shall] ensure that education methods, curricula and resources serve to enhance understanding of and respect for, inter alia, diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, including the particular needs of students, their parents and family members related to these grounds.’ (P16-D)

Principle 18 demands that ‘[States shall] ensure that any medical or psychological treatment or counselling does not, explicitly or implicitly, treat sexual orientation and gender identity as medical conditions to be treated, cured or suppressed.’ (P18)

For example, in September 2012, California passed a legal ban on “reparative” or “conversion” therapy for minors with unwanted homosexual orientation (Senate Bill 1172).

Principle 19 demands ‘the right to freedom of opinion and expression’ for LGBTQ2SIA+ activists, and principle 20 adds that their ‘right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association must not be restricted’ by ‘public order, public morality, public health and public security.’

In ‘A Brief Commentary on the Yogyakarta Principles,’ Dr. Jakob Cornides, an expert on international law, says that this

‘betrays the totalitarian mindset of the YP drafting panel. ... If accepted, this clause will have devastating effects on the freedom of opinion and expression, reaching far beyond the special purposes of the YP. If the particular interests of the LGBT rights movement supersede concerns of public order and morality, any other pressure group may legitimately make the same claims. The notions of public order and public morality would therefore be completely undermined by this clause.’ (my emphasis)

P19 also demands the right ‘to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, including with regard to human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity, through any medium and regardless of frontiers.’

In particular, it says that States must

• Make State-regulated media “pluralistic” and non-discriminatory in respect of issues of sexual orientation and gender identity. (P19-B)

• Ensure that freedom of speech does not violate the rights and freedoms of persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. (P19-E)

In ‘Further Recommendations’ (O), the mass media are requested to

‘avoid the use of stereotypes in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity, and promote tolerance and the acceptance of diversity of human sexual orientation and gender identity, and raise awareness around these issues.’

This is why heterosexual families are increasingly rare in advertising and textbooks.

Principle 24 says that ‘everyone has the right to found a family, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. There are many different types of families. No family should suffer discrimination because of one of its members’ sexual orientation or gender identity.’ Moreover, ‘the sterility of same-sex relationships is to be remedied artificially through access to adoption or assisted procreation (including donor insemination)’ (P24-A).

Principle 27 demands ‘the right to promote human rights,’ specifically encouraging states to

• ‘Ensure a favourable environment’ for these activities. (P27-A)

• Combat any opposition to ‘human rights defenders.’ (P27-B)

• Guarantee ‘access to, participation in, and communication with, national and international human rights organizations and bodies.’ (P27-C)

• ‘Ensure the protection of human rights defenders, working on issues of sexual orientation and gender identity, against any violence, threat, retaliation, de facto or de jure discrimination, pressure, or any other arbitrary action perpetrated by the State, or by non-State actors.’ (P27-D)

Principle 29 requests totalitarian surveillance:

‘There should be no impunity for perpetrators of human rights violations related to sexual orientation or gender identity.’ (P29)

To accomplish this,

• [‘States shall] establish ... monitoring mechanisms.’ (P29-A)

• ‘Ensure that . . . those responsible are prosecuted, tried and duly punished.’ (P29-B)

• ‘Establish independent[!] and effective institutions and procedures to monitor the formulation and enforcement of laws and policies to ensure the elimination of discrimination.’ (P29-C)

• ‘Remove any obstacles preventing persons responsible for human rights violations based on sexual orientation or gender identity from being held accountable.’ (P29-D)

Dissent must be not only suppressed by spied on.

The Activist's Guide to The Yogyakarta Principles (AG) draws attention to some “best practices.”

• The Nepalese Supreme Court’s ruling that transgendered women are a “third gender”

• China removing homosexuality from the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders

• Poland lifting the ban on homosexual parades and ‘homosexual propaganda in schools’

One of the most prominent bodies pushing the YP agenda is The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA). The European Commission provides it with over 6o% of its funds, including donations from George Soros and others.

IGLA has a depraved history. Back in 1985, when it was called the International Gay Association, IGLA lost its NGO status after allowing the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) to become a member. ILGA tried to regain it in April 2002 but was refused because it didn’t prove it had purged paedophile groups. The Washington Times reported that the Pakistani delegate to the UN Economic and Social Council expressed concern:

“For more than a year, the ILGA has refused to provide documentation or allow review of its membership list to demonstrate that pedophilia groups have been expelled.”¹

Ideas have consequences, and the radicals understand the logical consequences of ‘love is love’ with nightmarish clarity.

How should the West respond? Counter-revolutionaries must recognise that law is NOT downstream of culture. The radicals understand that culture is actually downstream of law, and they have won all the crucial ground recently. As a first step, gay marriage needs to be made illegal.

1. George Archibald, “U.N. Group Keeps Ban on Gay Lobby,” Washington Times (May 1, 2002).