(Part I)

The difference between the two sexes is a wonder. It is perhaps the most beautiful difference in nature. Can one imagine a world with only men or only women? Truly, what would such a world look like? Is there any way for life to continue without the two sexes?

The natural sciences, above all biology, prove this wonder. They prove the obvious, namely the difference between the two sexes. The hormones bear witness to this. Yet some in the social sciences tell us that sex is a "social construction." But "this denial of reality is a form of madness" (Michel Onfray).

After the social construction of sex came the deconstruction of sex. There are no biological or social sexes. Everything is a matter of will, a matter of individual choice. On Facebook alone, one can already select more than 56 sexual identities to define oneself.

In other words, sex is detached from nature and the body and becomes identified with erotic desire. This is a new fluid identity, one that you can choose and change whenever you want. So there are not two sexes, or twenty-two, or one hundred and two. Each person, according to personal preference, can shape the sex they wish to claim.

It should be noted that Judith Butler, the high priestess of the abolition of the two sexes, obtained a "certificate of indeterminate sex status in California." These extreme minority views are imposed by a left-liberal conglomerate encouraged and funded by major multinational corporations.

Those who argue that sex is a social construction confuse cause and effect. For example, boys and girls do not play with different toys because they are subject to "gender stereotypes," meaning because society imposes it. Rather, precisely because they are different sexes, they gravitate toward different toys. Of course, there are boys who play with toys usually associated with girls and girls who play with toys usually associated with boys. But boys remain boys and girls remain girls.

What does the deconstruction movement seek? It seeks to move from minority to majority status and to dictate developments. What was an exception to the rule, such as homosexuality, is to become the new rule. And not merely an accepted particularity and form of difference, as it truly is. In other words, from tolerance toward various sexual minorities, we move to the imposition of these minorities' dominance over the majority of two-sex society.

As for same-sex couples, after civil partnerships we moved on to marriage and adoption. Then, since we cannot abolish nature, we can pay for a womb in order to have our own children. In other words, there is not only deconstruction of the two sexes, but also deconstruction of the mother and the father in raising children. Deconstruction of the family, which is the foundation of society. So there is no father and mother, but parent 1 and parent 2. This is an absurdity of left-liberal nihilism, a rejection of eternal and timeless values and institutions that remain fundamental to the functioning of society.

The comic and at the same time tragic truth is that some countries of Western civilization have adopted this absurdity. We are the first civilization that wants to abolish the two sexes. That is why the rest of the world speaks of a crisis of Western civilization. And this downward slide is what the government also wants to follow.

So let us erase the nature of the two sexes, let us erase civilization, the man-father, the woman-mother, and the family. And then what remains? An empty, externally directed individual. This is what a marginal minority seeks to impose. But do we, the overwhelming majority, want that?

Faced with this absurdity, let us heed Michel Onfray's advice: there is no other way out than the noble and honest struggle against the idiocies that threaten to become law!

Pavlos Marantos

marantosp@gmail.com