Youth Blog

Youth Opinion Piece

On day one at the UN CSW67, I quickly encountered the mechanism in which the UN pushes their pro-abortion agenda. Attending the side events, I began questioning the involvement of UNFPA, the United Nations sexual and reproductive health agency, in what seemed like unrelated matters. Let me walk you through the two incidents that revealed the transparency of their manipulative method.

When attending a side event run by Egypt, focused on implementing programs to empower young girls to have the self-confidence and self-esteem to pursue education and careers, allowing them access to the job market, I took note of the partnership between UNICEF and UNFPA. When attending a different side event run by Kenya, focused on male engagement to end gender-based violence, the UNFPA representative raised the point of ensuring girls’ access to contraception.

Upon learning that UNFPA is the agency focused on improving global reproductive and maternal health, I was confused about the partnership of UNFPA with Egypt’s initiative to empower young girls to get jobs. I questioned how access to contraception and ending genderbased violence in Kenya could possibly be related. A quick google search revealed that combating gender-based violence, an issue that affects 1 in 3 women, is an objective of the UNFPA. Another objective on this list is ending child marriages. These objectives are embedded into a long list of other objectives that focus on access to contraception, teen pregnancies, reproductive health care, childbirth, etc.

It became very obvious to me that gender-based violence and child marriages are gateway issues that the UN fear mongers vulnerable countries in the Global South to focus on, so that UNFPA can build partnerships with these countries by supporting them, to push their proabortion agenda. These issues are obviously very agreeable concerns. But what underlies the initiatives to combat them, are a slew of feminist sexual and reproductive health goals. First comes combating gender-based violence and ending the exploitation of children in forced marriages, then comes a push for abortion and population control.

Furthermore, these initiatives, which are encouraged by UNFPA, are adopted by countries in the Global South, and then solidified and supported by Liberal democracies. For example: Ireland supports Sierra Leone and Tanzania in the end to gender-based violence, while Finland does the same to Kenya. These more powerful liberal governments implement legislation to combat these issues, setting an example and supporting these countries in the global south to follow their lead.

This ideological colonization poisons the values of countries whose ability to uphold them are now jeopardized because their legislation is under the control of the UN’s radicalized agenda. I identified at least one moment in each event when this idea became clear: Egypt, as a primarily conservative country with a majority Muslim population and minority Coptic Orthodox Christian, holds family values. Their partnership with UNFPA puts these family values at risk. This was explicitly demonstrated when the UNFPA representative on the panel at this side event proudly revealed results of their work in the metric that less girls are choosing motherhood/marriage and are choosing to pursue careers. UNFPA’s model is presented as an “either/or” paradigm as opposed to what could be a “yes/and” framework i.e “YES women can be mothers AND have careers”. These self-confidence educational programs begin with encouraging girls to chase after a career, but might proceed to empower them about their right to abortion.

Kenya’s panelists revealed a framework that strives to uphold the role of the man as head of the family with programs to educate young boys about respecting girls to end sexual and domestic abuse against women. The representative from Finland on this panel, contributed remarks regarding broadening the “socially acceptable ways of being a man”. The Kenyan panelists made it clear that their goal is to help men be better protectors and providers to their families, not teaching men to stop being men as proposed by Finland. Remarks from the UNFPA representative on this panel focused on access to contraception and sexual and reproductive health. Again, I have no idea how those issues support Kenya’s goal to support men to be better heads of their families so that women suffer less violence.

Unfortunately, Kenya and Egypt’s vulnerability as developing countries puts them in a position to lean on powerful governments and UN agencies to achieve positive change in their countries. This agreement has unfortunately come with the threat of wokeism.

I urge you, do not be swayed with the sweetness of the candy before it is too late to be overcome by the poison that lies within it. The works of the UN may present itself as good, but the core of their works are aimed at breaking down the family unit.