In my previous article entitled ‘The Grand Inquisitor’ I described how without waiting for the full facts behind Mario Mallia’s sacking, the institutional progressive left immediately went into overdrive to accuse St Albert’s College and particularly its rector of firing Mallia simply because he was a champion of ‘inclusivity and diversity.’ I described how the online lynch mob flooded social media. What I forgot to say was that among this lynch mob, there was none other than the pro-abortionist group so-called Doctors for Choice.
Note how these biological flat earthers who deny that a human embryo is indeed a human being in its earliest stages of life despite the irrefutable scientific evidence, try to denigrate and target Fr. Aaron Zahra, calling him close-minded and accusing him of disseminating ‘medical’ misinformation. Their post and several of the comments that followed clearly illustrate what they mean by ‘inclusion and diversity.’ This group that is so vociferously for ‘inclusion’ wants to exclude the unborn from life itself if their mothers will it for any reason whatsoever – This post shows how this group that portrays itself as being a champion of diversity really treats those who have a diverse opinion than theirs.
In my article, I wrote that this is nothing but a totalitarian mindset – that will attempt to crush everything and cancel everyone who will not submit to its ideology. I stated that the purpose behind the exaggerated response to Mallia’s dismissal was intentional – that there was not even a pretense of establishing facts or seeking justice, but rather that the whole purpose was to show everyone who is really in power, and how anyone would be treated if they dared questioned its dictates.
In the article, I concluded, however, that all this emphasis on Mr. Mallia being sacked for his championing of ‘inclusivity and diversity had the unintended effect of arousing the curiosity of many who were previously unaware of what exactly what was being promoted under Mallia’s stewardship.
Sure and soon enough, posts started to appear that the school had recently launched what is perhaps Malta’s first attempt at introducing Drag Queen Story Hour in Maltese education.
In an interview given to Lovinmalta last December, Mr. Antoine Cauchi, who teaches Science and Biology at St. Alberts College, stated that through the dark days of COVID-19 lockdowns he ‘slowly started to feel comfortable enough to explore another ‘side of him.’ In his own words, Mr. Cauchi – was inspired to do so– ‘through a TV program’ – and also by a drag ‘artist’ who calls himself Olivia Lilith – who according to Mr. Cauchi is: “a loud and bubbly individual who is not afraid to speak her mind”. According to Cauchi, Lilith (odd choice of surname) is a woman. He refers to him as such.
Apparently, because of COVID in the following scholastic year, the school Panto committee decided to create and film a few episodes for students and their families instead of the actual Panto, due to the restrictions at the time.
What followed was that this committee decided instead to record a series of videos depicting the daily ‘life of Berta (Cauchi’s drag persona), the daily challenges that she faces, and the TV programs she watches.’
Cauchi tries to pass all this off as a form of ‘art’ not much different from the traditional ‘pantomime’ – and he might genuinely believe it – but it is not so, in pantomime, dames are parodies of men, unlike drag queens who look like parodies of women, – In the pantomime tradition the dame is all about creating the logic of nonsense.’ It is the fool, the Harlequin, it is the carnival figure where roles are briefly traditionally reversed and everyone knows it. Children are primed beforehand, not least that the dame is a parody of a man playing a larger-than-life persona.
Having laboured through some of Cauchi’s and the school’s videos, I get no sense of this – It is just guys dressing as women with nothing much else to convey other than this seems to be alright, not simply in a temporarily and culturally accepted inverted phenomenon but as matter of fact. Mr. Cauchi’s self-exposition in the mentioned interview with a public online portal, clearly shows that unlike a normal pantomime actor playing a dame, he sees something of his own personality in a drag queen – furthermore, at every opportunity, in the same interview he refers to other drag queens as her. One might think I am being fastidious or over-interpreting things but I am not – his own words betray the fact that in these personas Cauchi with the aid of the committee sees himself as something other than a pantomime dame.
There’s no doubt that the committee behind these drag performances has taken caution to make this series ‘age-appropriate’ unlike what is currently happening abroad, but critics the world over insist that any drag act (which is at best adult entertainment) is unsuitable for children because of the risk of premature sexualisation.
By their own admission, LGBTIQ and ‘drag queen’ proponents admit that they hope to change future attitudes by exposing children to ‘diversity’, and yet when the same proponents are accused of promoting homosexuality and transgenderism to schoolchildren, they vehemently deny it. If they do not hope to change children’s attitudes with regard to sexuality why are they so vehemently against the laudable desire to protect young children from adult preoccupations? Why do they accuse everyone who opposes their agenda of hatred or of being bigots? why has the EU fallen like a ton of bricks, for example on Hungary, whose democratically elected government banned all sexual propaganda aimed at minors (not just homosexual or transgender)?
You cannot have it both ways.
The diversity brigade claims that there is no danger in allowing children to be exposed to cross-dressing, since clothes are only externals and as such not important. But for most small children, the division of humanity into male and female as signified by their attire is a fact of life they can grasp, and to confuse them by presenting men wearing garish make-up and extravagant wigs and clothing is to destabilise their perceptions of the world. More worryingly, it invites the notion that the only way to know the real sex of a person is for them to remove their clothes.
There is a big difference between children voluntarily trying on garments designed for the opposite sex from some costume box, and seeing a live adult performer dressed in drag to whose care and protection, in their infant or childhood understanding, their parents have entrusted them.
Abroad, Drag Queen Story Hour has desecended into outright grooming – with children being exposed into highly sexualised and inappropriate encounters (see below for just a couple of examples). They did not start that way – They never do.
They started the same way that St. Albert’s College is doing but there is such a thing as a slippery slope, and unless these initiatives are nipped in the bud, they inevitably degenerate into something much worse.
Left unchecked – your kids with the support of the progressive left will one day eventually be getting this as an ‘education’, and not necessarily with your consent:
The slope always works in one direction:
And when that happens you will be likewise slaughtered, accused of being close-minded and bigotted for opposing it.
It will be the drag queens who will be portrayed as the victims and not your children.
As a parent you should see this video (which is alas only one of too many) of where this will inevitably end, and note how you will be inevitably accused of being a ‘hater’ if you dare so much as criticise it:
In our childhood, we have been brought up on fairy stories about not trusting a wolf dressed up as a harmless old lady because of its unusually hairy appearance, big nose, and outsize ears for a good reason – we have likewise been trained to avoid intimacy with strangers. Why oh why do people in drag have such interest in your children?
Childhood is meant to be a preparation for adulthood, not a practice run, but in the current clamour for ‘inclusion and diversity’, it seems children no longer have a right to childhood.
That a Catholic Institution, of all institutions, and one named after the teacher of St. Thomas Aquinas and considered by the Church to be the patron saint of the natural sciences (one wonders what he would have thought of drag performances to children), particularly after the endless series of sex abuse scandals that have plagued the Catholic Church felt that it ought to promote Drag as an ‘educational’ activity for children boggles the mind.
It seems that Fr. Aaron has hopefully recognised a serious problem, and decided to start cleaning the Augean stables in his college, irrespective of the wrath that will befall him from the progressive inquisitors – if not for nothing at least for his students’ sake.
That is a true act of love.