Queer dictatorship 

This is not speculation. Institutions are supporting this queer dictatorship with laws passed behind closed doors and under urgency. In a climate critical of dissent, a regulation was approved that does not require undergoing specific therapies or medical procedures to change the registered sex marker: the so-called "self-determination" law. The legislation, commonly referred to as the "Trans Law" (officially, the "Law for the Real and Effective Equality of Trans People and the Guarantee of LGTBI Rights"), came into effect in March 2023. Its aim is to make life easier for trans individuals who, until then, had to endure a burdensome, often futile and humiliating protocol. It’s clear that biology gives us a reproductive strategy and specific physical traits, while how we wish to present ourselves to the world is a separate matter. That’s the beauty of diversity. But the law doesn’t just allow us to change our treatment in society; it allows changing the mention of sex itself, dismantling whatever “sex” is supposed to mean. In fact, the text states that all rights applicable to the person will follow their new condition, with one exception. In sections 3 and 4 of Article 41, it explains that the rectification of the registry mention of sex will not alter the legal regime applicable to the person prior to the transition, in terms of the Law on Gender Violence Protection. In other words, if you were born male, you will not benefit from the protection you would have as a woman if you fit the cases covered by the Gender Violence law, but you could benefit from it if you are a woman who has transitioned legally to the male sex. The law itself recognizes the contradiction in trying to falsify sex—a reality that cannot be changed—causing legal insecurity and proving that the trans narrative is a fiction; a collective deception to alleviate individual dissatisfaction with stereotypes and gender roles and cope with social pressures. 

The very government that passed the law deliberately uses ambiguous language when referring to self-determination, avoiding mentioning the actual statement that anyone can change their social and legal sex by simply expressing the desire, instead referring to “being who you really want to be” or “expanding rights.” In general terms. 

Feminism has become distorted by everyone’s individual struggles. It has turned into a catch-all for dissent, a container for diverse claims. If historically it fought for the only difference between people to be the body, now we find men and women redefining what it means to belong to one sex or the other based on individual situations and emotions, with laws written according to these desires. Essentially, we’re leaving one rigid framework of what it means to be a “good woman” and moving into others, instead of recognizing that there are millions of ways to be a man or woman. 

The system benefits from stripping “woman” of any meaning, turning women into consumable assets; interchangeable figures they pretend to give a voice to but do not truly listen to. Being a woman is now a revocable “identity.” We cannot allow ourselves to be ridiculed in this way or, at best, to continue being cast as eternal victims, objects oppressed without the ability to defend ourselves. Any viewpoint questioning the idea of women as victims of the system will be flagged and deactivated. The words of playwright and activist Simona Levi ring truer than ever when she says, “Victimizing feminism lowers the dignity of victims. It’s hard to consider it emancipating and transformative if it’s based on something fully accepted by the patriarchy. Being a victim is one of the patriarchal requirements of women. Women have only been seen as passive and victimized. Continuing this role doesn’t bring any substantial change to the condition of women.” For us to be equals, victimhood must be removed from the agenda of any movement. 

Women do not need to wake up each morning believing they have a role to fit into to justify their actions. The vast majority have a broad outlook, one that includes men in their essential roles as sons, husbands, fathers, and grandfathers as well as friends, acquaintances, or coworkers. The reductionist perspective of a radical feminism that thrives on confrontation, marginalizing men and condemning any hint of femininity, offers nothing to those with real problems. If femininity is now punishable because it risks being perceived as the definition of “woman,” who sets the valid standards for it? I find it curious that even many empowering artist speeches are criticized for their choice of clothing. Radical feminists will end up measuring skirt lengths—it’s only a matter of time. I’ve always thought that “abolishing gender,” which is a complex structure beyond clothing and accessories, is a futile fight, similar to wanting to abolish the days of the week. It’s not about eliminating it, as that is impossible, but about not allowing it to define us or contaminate our drive to grow and connect. 

The writer Carmen Posadas said in an interview in November 2022 about this hollow and weeping point of view: “I don’t like the victimist feminism that now dominates: ‘I haven’t achieved anything in life because men are evil and prevent me from expressing myself,’ ‘I’m a genius, but no one recognizes me because I’m a woman,’ and so on. Victimhood is quite poor policy because if someone else is always at fault, you never do anything to progress. I don’t identify with that. I know that there are lots of things that are harder for women, but I’m into the fight. Whoever resists wins, and whoever fights wins too.” 

Paternalism is a frequent source of criticism. It’s understandable not to like being treated like children or half-finished people. So why do we forgive “maternalistic” attitudes that infantilize and prop up a bottom-up classism? Structural differences exist, built over decades of male-dominated history, but 21st-century claims cannot be the same as those from the 19th century or the 1960s. These structural differences are fought from within, rising to the occasion without losing sight that some women are much less fortunate than others.