In fresh years we have increasingly seen the tension between conventional knowing of human rights and fresh interpretations related to the utmost left-wing sex ideology and the politics of global institutions. Examples of actions undertaken by Britain and the European Union show that redefining concepts and constantly expanding the catalogue of ideological postulates are an crucial component of the neo-communist revolution.
The EU and the UK are becoming increasingly bold in genderism. 1 of the most controversial areas is the issue of sex definition. In the UN peculiar Rapporteur Reem Alsal study on the situation of women in the UK, indicated to the problem of public authorities ignoring the judgments of the British ultimate Court, which ordered the knowing of the word "sex" in the biological context.
According to the report, the deficiency of defining clarity makes it difficult, among another things, to collect data on force against women and weakens the consistency of the legal protection system. It was besides pointed out that mixing of sex categories and sex identity could lead to real consequences in areas specified as shelters or prison systems.
Critics of this policy stress that moving distant from unchangeable legal categories not only introduces legislative chaos but besides undermines citizens' assurance in the regulation of law. If definitions of basic concepts change according to current ideological trends, the law ceases to service as a unchangeable mention point. In this context, Britain is becoming a symbol of a wider phenomenon – attempts to redefine legal language under force from fresh social concepts.
Similar trends you can see in the activities of the European Union in global fora. The EU Council paper on human rights priorities provides for the stepping up of actions for "gender equality" and "reproductive and sexual rights", as well as the promotion of sex integration in different policy areas. From a critic's perspective, this means shifting accents from classical human rights to ideological demands that do not always have a clear legitimacy in global law. ()
It is peculiarly controversial that the concept of "reproductive rights" can be interpreted as covering access to abortion, although it is not explicitly defined in global treaties. Critics point out that this explanation can lead to political force on associate States and marginalise different cultural or spiritual sensitivity. ()
At the same time, EU papers item the request to combat misinformation and to strengthen "information integrity". Although these objectives are presented as actions for democracy, concerns arise that in practice they may lead to a simplification in the pluralism of public debate, especially on world-view issues. ()
A summary of the policies of the United Kingdom and the European Union shows that the sex dispute does not only concern moral issues, but has a deep legal and organization dimension. Critics of the current direction of change indicate that the redefining of concepts and the expansion of fresh ideological standards can lead to a conflict between universalism of human rights and the sovereignty of states and conventional systems of values. In their view, the future of the European debate depends on uncovering a balance between protecting individual rights and maintaining the stableness of the language of law and cultural pluralism.
We besides recommend: Regermanization done with Polish hands
