STOP UNFPA: Using “Gender-Based Violence” to erase Biological Women — A Violation of the Rights of 4Billion Women
For the first time in history, a UN agency is attempting to erase the biological foundations of human rights. UNFPA — created to protect men and women based on biological sex — is now redefining these categories without mandate, without science, without democratic consent, and without a single treaty backing its actions. By replacing sex with “gender identity” inside the Gender-Based Violence (GBV) framework, UNFPA is stripping 4 billion biological women of sex-specific safeguards built over decades of struggle and sacrifice. Simultaneously, it dissolves the rights of 4 billion biological men, who are now recast as “identity holders” rather than a sex-based class with distinct societal, familial, and reproductive roles.
This is not a policy adjustment.
It is the largest, quietest, and most dangerous re-engineering of human rights standards in UN history.
And it is happening with:
- no approval from member states,
- no amendments to binding treaties,
- no vote in any parliament,
- no scientific basis,
- and no public consultation.
Yet governments remain silent, and the UN system is complicit, allowing UNFPA to rewrite legal sex categories through administrative programming — something even the UN General Assembly never authorized.
The question is unavoidable:
How can the UN allow one agency to dismantle the sex-based rights of humanity’s entire population — 8 billion people — without any legal authority or global consent?
UNFPA’s Original Mandate was entirely Sex-Based
UNFPA was established in 1967 to protect reproductive health for men and women — meaning biological sex categories only.
Even in 1997, the UNFPA Executive Director confirmed that reproductive rights belong to both men and women — again referring only to biological males and biological females.
What GBV originally meant — Sex-Based, Not Identity-Based
1993 – UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women
Introduced the term “gender-based violence.”
At this time “gender” was used as a synonym for biological sex, not identity.
Humanitarian definition (pre-2005):
“An umbrella term for harmful acts based on socially ascribed differences between males and females.”
Not identities. Not self-declared categories.
1995 – Beijing Platform for Action
“Violence against women” = “gender-based violence directed toward women.”
At the same conference, UN delegates explicitly agreed that ‘gender’ does NOT mean gender identity.
This is the most important legal fact.
CEDAW General Recommendation 19
Defined GBV as “violence directed against a woman because she is a woman,”
and framed GBV as sex-based discrimination.
None of these definitions included:
- transgender,
- non-binary,
- gender-diverse,
- or self-identified categories.
When did Men and Boys enter GBV?
The IASC Guidelines (2005) acknowledged that men and boys may also be victims.
This still meant:
• violence against biological men by biological women,
• violence against biological men by other biological men,
NOT:
• men identifying as women,
• women identifying as men.
GBV always referred to sex.
THEN CAME ….
The Great Shift: When Sex-Based became Identity-Based (Without Permission)
Sex-based → Gender-based → Identity-based.
This shift was never approved by any UN treaty body.
From 2005 onward, UNFPA began replacing sex with “gender identity,” using:
• GBV programs
• school curricula
• DEI-style workplace policies
UNFPA’s 2005 “Focusing on Gender” report is the first UNFPA document where “gender” = identity, not sex.
The 2018–2025 Gender Equality Strategies expand “gender” to include:
- transgender
- non-binary
- gender-diverse persons
None of these categories exist in any UN treaty.
THE CORE PROBLEM:
UNFPA HAS NO LEGAL MANDATE TO REDEFINE MAN OR WOMAN
The Yogyakarta Principles (2006) — the only document attempting to define gender identity — are:
• NOT UN law
• NOT binding
• NOT ratified
• NOT adopted by any Member State
They have zero legal standing.
No UN treaty:
• defines gender identity
• equates identity with biological sex
• authorizes agencies to replace sex categories
UNFPA is acting ultra vires — beyond its mandate — and using GBV frameworks to pressure nations into accepting identity categories without parliamentary approval.
Originally, All UN Rights Frameworks were Sex-Based
For decades, UN policy referred only to:
Sexual Discrimination / Sex-Based Discrimination
This always meant discrimination against:
• Women because they are female
• Men because they are male
Foundational assumptions:
• “Sex” = biological male or biological female
• Rights were written for sex, not identity
• GBV = violence against women due to sex-based vulnerability
There was:
• no gender identity
• no SOGI
• no non-binary category
Even gays, lesbians, and bisexuals remained either male or female.
How UNFPA Shifted from Sex → Gender → Identity (Without Mandate)
From 2005–2006, UNFPA executed a 3-step redefinition:
- Replace “sex discrimination” with “gender discrimination.”
This quietly moved protection from biological reality → ideology.
- Expand “gender” to include SOGI and self-identity.
No treaty authorizes this.
- Insert identity categories into GBV.
Transforming GBV — originally protection for biological women — into a catch-all identity category.
Now GBV includes:
• transgender identities
• non-binary
• gender-diverse
• male-bodied people identifying as women
This replaces biological sex with identity.
Why this Is a Distortion — Not a Policy Update
- It Removes Sex-Based Protections for 4 Billion Women
GBV existed because women face:
• pregnancy-related risk
• sexual violence
• trafficking
• FGM
• sex-based biological vulnerability
Once sex is replaced with identity, women lose their dedicated legal protection category.
- It Forces Identity into Women’s Spaces
UNFPA redefines GBV as:
“Harmful acts based on a person’s gender.”
UNFPA redefines gender as self-declared identity.
This means GBV now covers:
• women
• men
• transwomen
• non-binary
• gender-diverse
RESULT:
• male-bodied individuals counted under “violence against women”
• women’s shelters become mixed-sex
• female statistics become contaminated
This is female erasure.
- It Violates International Law
Treaties that govern states:
- CEDAW — protects biological women only (changed only after 2008 through unofficial reinterpretation)
- ICCPR — no gender identity
- CRC — no identity replacing sex
- CAT — no identity-based categories
In 2024, Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court confirmed in the Gender Equality Bill that biological sex remains the legal category.
UNFPA has zero authority to:
• redefine men or women
• create new sex categories
• impose SOGI frameworks
• alter school syllabi
• override constitutions
The LGB vs TQIA++ Distinction
LGB (based on biological attraction):
• does NOT require redefining sex
• does NOT alter legal categories
TQIA++ (based on identity):
• requires rewriting the meaning of male and female
• depends on erasing sex
• uses GBV to enter female protections
This is ideological — not democratic.
UNFPA’s Overreach Is Illegal, Unscientific, and Dangerous
UNFPA bypasses:
• national parliaments
• treaty ratification
• public consultation
• parental rights
• biological science
UNFPA cannot override state constitutions — ECOSOC agencies have advisory power only.
This is the largest violation of women’s rights in UN history.
The Evidence Is Irrefutable
UNFPA has replaced biological sex with ideological identity —
a category:
• no parliament approved,
• no treaty defines,
• no scientific field recognizes as equal to sex.
By inserting identity into GBV, UNFPA is:
• erasing sex-based protections
• rewriting “man” and “woman”
• displacing women from their own rights
• violating CEDAW
• overriding constitutions
• imposing unratified norms on sovereign states
Yet the global system remains silent.
- Why are governments not defending the sex-based rights of their citizens?
- Why is the UN allowing an administrative agency to override 193 Member-State treaties?
- Why are the rights of 4 billion women and 4 billion men being erased without debate or consent?
Supporting Sources
(All from UNFPA or UN system)
https://www.unfpa.org/about-us (origins)
https://aa.unfpa.org/frequently-asked-questions (initial goals)
https://press.un.org/en/1997/19970317.wom967.html (1997 Press release)
https://www.unfpa.org/press/gender-mainstreaming? (2005 statement)
https://unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/focusing_gender.pdf (2005 “focusing on gender)
https://unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/19-132_UNFPA_GenderStrategy-EN.pdf? Gender Equality Strategy 2018-2021
https://www.unfpa.org/genderstrategy (UNFPA Gender Strategy 2022-2025)
If This Continues Unchallenged…
UNFPA will permanently replace biological sex with identity ideology in:
• global law
• education
• health systems
• workplace policy
• GBV protection mechanisms
This is the most profound human rights violation of the 21st century.
The world must act now.
- Stop the erasure of biological women.
- Stop the dismantling of sex-based protections.
- Stop UNFPA’s unlawful, unscientific, and undemocratic redefinition of humanity.
If UNFPA wishes to extend rights to TQIA++ individuals, it must create a separate category — not hijack, erase, or override the sex-based rights of 4 billion females and 4 billion males.
No UN Member State has ever voted to replace sex with identity.
Shenali D. Waduge
