… USAID has been systematically exporting the sexual revolution to countries that do not want it.
By Jennifer Roback Morse
The recent freeze on U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) expenditures has brought attention to that agency’s unaccountability and waste.
But the problems with USAID run deeper than merely wasting taxpayer dollars or being opaque about its activities.
Despite funding some worthwhile recipients, USAID has been systematically exporting the sexual revolution to countries that do not want it.
Contrary to popular opinion, the sexual revolution is not the result of spontaneous cultural movements or impersonal historical forces.
Much of the sexual revolution has been invented, bought and paid for by governments at the behest of sexual radicals who do not represent anyone but themselves.
It is bad enough when Western radicals manipulate the governments of their own countries.
It is outrageous when they inflict ideological imperialism on poorer countries that actively dislike the toxic sexual culture of the United States.
The American public is rightly outraged about USAID’s waste of their taxpayer dollars.
But let’s stand back and look at this from the perspective of the recipient countries and their self-determination: U.S. foreign policy is interfering with their desire to avoid becoming as morally corrupt as the U.S.
Just take the Trump administration’s opening salvo against USAID. The White House’s Feb. 3 list of “ridiculous” and “malicious” USAID projects included:
$1.5 million to “advance diversity equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and business communities”;
$70,000 for the production of a “DEI musical” in Ireland;
$47,000 for a “transgender opera” in Colombia;
$32,000 for a “transgender comic book” in Peru; and
$2 million for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala.
These projects in majority Christian countries are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.
I have been following this type of information for years now. The subtitle of my book, The Sexual State, points to its main theme, “How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives.” Chapter 5 is called, “The Elites Create the Contraceptive Ideology: Alfred Kinsey, the Rockefellers and Yale.”
At the time that Griswold v. Connecticut was being litigated in 1965, media personality Eric Sevareid referred to it as the “Yale project,” because so many members of the Yale law and medical schools were involved.
The Catholic Church in Connecticut battled this ideology in the legislature year after year, starting in 1935, for the 30 years before the U.S. Supreme Court took the issue out of the hands of legislatures.
The Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution protects the liberty of married couples to use contraceptives without government restriction.
In the process of researching that book, I discovered that the birth-control pill was tested on unsuspecting Puerto Rican women — some of whom were in mental institutions.
Others were students, who were told their participation would be considered in their grades. In previous trials, many Puerto Rican women stopped taking it because they hated the side effects.
No big deal. Legalize and promote the heck out of it. You can read about it in The Birth of The Pill. The author, Jonathan Eig, didn’t seem to realize what he was admitting in his cheerleading for the pill.
In 2020, I interviewed Dr. Wahome Ngare, the former president of the Kenyan Catholic Medical Association.
He revealed the pressure his country has experienced from international NGOs to reduce fertility and allow abortion. YouTube took down that video, but you can watch it here.
Our friends at the Population Research Institute (PRI) have covered human-rights abuses from population control for decades.
Most recently, they published a story called: “Depo-Provera risks and USAID funding for it overseas.” The health risks associated with Depo include not just “menstrual irregularities, abdominal pain, weight gain and decreased libido.”
The drug’s label listing risks goes on for 27 pages. PRI calls it a “novella.” But in all that text, there is no mention of the fact that Pfizer is facing multiple lawsuits over research showing a connection between Depo and brain tumors.
But I want to call attention not to the medical side of the story but the financial and political side:
“Since 1992, when the Food and Drug Administration approved DMPA for contraceptive use within the United States, USAID has funded the push of DMPA (under a variety of names) on women in developing nations around the world.
PRI has been spreading awareness and fighting this since the ’90s, when we reported on the abuses of women in Africa receiving Depo-Provera without informed consent and, in some cases, no consent at all.”
Your tax dollars and mine are promoting a high-risk form of contraception to poor women around the world.
Other stories relating to USAID’s funding for the sexual revolution are also coming to light.
The Federalist recently uncovered USAID funding for a group called the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening, the mission of which includes countering disinformation, including “gender disinformation.” I should say the mission used to include: The website has been scrubbed.
The Federalist found many of its pages, including this one, which lists topics of interest, showing how they plan to counter election disinformation.
Digging more deeply into this consortium, The Federalist found an archived page that deals with “online and technology-facilitated violence against women.”
This is how the consortium defines the problem it intends to solve:
“Women and gender-diverse individuals who hold or seek positions of public leadership often face gendered commentary, harassment, and violence based on their real or perceived character, morality, appearance, and conformity (or lack thereof) to traditional gender roles and norms. …
“Online violence against women … is often considered a risk that women and girls should expect … as ‘the cost’ of doing politics.
“Decisive action is needed to respond to and create accountability for online violence against women.”
I somehow doubt that this “consortium” intended to address online harassment of pro-life Catholic women, or women critical of the trans agenda, sometimes known as TERFs (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists).
We get a clue about who this international organization thinks is worthy of protection from this statement:
“Perpetrators of online violence against women and technology-facilitated gender-based violence (GBV) exacerbate existing harmful gender norms and inequalities, enforce heteronormativity, increase social intolerance, and deepen existing societal cleavages.”
The word heteronormativity means the (supposedly mistaken) belief that heterosexuality is normal. News flash: Heterosexuality is normal, not only in humans but in all mammal species.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines imperialism this way: “the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas.”
By this definition, USAID is engaged in ideological imperialism against poor countries. Many of these countries are appalled by what they consider our loose sexual morals and our disregard for the sanctity of human life.
A few years ago, I spoke at a youth event in Uganda. I apologized to them for my country’s attempt to foist our values on them. They burst into applause. They recognize that babies are a blessing, and the sexual revolution has been destructive.
I am so glad someone is finally waking up to the problems with USAID.
I just wish more people realized that their taxpayer dollars support ideological imperialism in many of the most economically vulnerable countries around the world
. The United States government is attempting to replace a country’s culture with a culture that pleases the palates of Western elites.
This is the Sexual State at work.
