Discourses against sex education in Spain: media stories and opinion leaders on Twitter (X)

Discursos contrarios a la educación sexual en España: argumentario mediático y agentes de referencia en Twitter (X)

Discursos contra a educação sexual em Espanha: argumentação mediática e agentes de referência no Twitter (X)

Soraya Calvo González^1*
Gracia Trujillo Barbadillo^2**

¹ Universidad de Oviedo, Spain.
² Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
^* PhD in Equity and Innovation in Education. Professor at Universidad de Oviedo, Spain. Member of the Social and Educational Analysis, Intervention & Evaluation (AIES) research group. calvosoraya@uniovi.es
^** PhD in Sociology. Professor at Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain. Member of the Juan March Institute of Social Sciences. gtrujillo@ucm.es

Received: 15/09/2023; Revised: 16/10/2023; Accepted: 14/04/2024; Published: 19/08/2024

Translation to English: Fundación General de la UCM. Centro Superior de Idiomas Modernos - Gabinete Lingüístico

To cite this article: Calvo González, Soraya & Trujillo Barbadillo, Gracia (2024). Discourses against sex education in Spain: media stories and opinion leaders on Twitter (X). ICONO 14. Scientific Journal of Communication and Emerging Technologies, 2(2): e2086. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v22i2.2086

Abstract

This article analyses the discourse against sex education on Twitter (X) with the aim of identifying the key elements of the narrative used and the main issues mentioned in the discourse, looking at trends in their dissemination. For this, we focus on the posts made by two key organisations to defend the parental veto (known as the “pin parental”) in Spain: Profesionales por la Ética and Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento. The information is collected through data mining and participant observation techniques. The analysis presents a quantitative approach to frequencies and references, and a qualitative one in the form of sentiment analysis. The figures show that the discourse focuses on defending the freedom of families to decide how their children should be education and on opposition to sex education as part of the curricular. This discourse also attacks the LGTBI+ community, certain left wing political representatives and the public system, especially the education system, including schools and teachers. The analysis also shows how this narrative conflicts with the right to education and the freedom of education, becoming a weapon of political and partisan pressure. In the conclusions, we discuss our findings in the context of other studies on hate speech and the political strategies of the far right and ultra-Catholicism with which our data coincide. Finally, we discuss its limitations and future proposals.

Keywords:
Sex education; twitter; hate speech; parental pin; educational policy; LGTBI+

Resumen

Este artículo analiza el discurso contrario a la educación sexual en Twitter (X) con el objetivo de detectar las claves de la narrativa utilizada y las categorías centrales del discurso, ahondando en las tendencias en su diseminación. Para ello nos centramos en las publicaciones de dos entidades clave en la defensa del pin parental en España: Profesionales por la Ética y Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento. La información se recoge a partir de las técnicas de minería de datos y observación participante. El análisis presenta un acercamiento cuantitativo a frecuencias y referencias, y uno cualitativo en forma de análisis de sentimiento. Los datos muestran que el discurso se centra en la defensa de la libertad de las familias para decidir sobre la educación de sus hijos/as, y en la oposición a la educación sexual como elemento curricular. En este discurso se ataca asimismo al colectivo LGTBI+, a determinados representantes políticos vinculados a la izquierda y al sistema público, especialmente al sistema educativo, incluyendo centros y profesorado. El análisis también muestra cómo estas narrativas entran en conflicto con el derecho a la educación y la libertad de enseñanza, convirtiéndose en un arma de presión política y partidista. En las conclusiones discutimos nuestros hallazgos con otros estudios en relación con el discurso de odio y las estrategias políticas de la extrema derecha y el ultra catolicismo con las que nuestros datos muestran acuerdos. Finalmente se señalan limitaciones y propuestas futuras.

Palabras clave:
Educación sexual; twitter; discurso de odio; pin parental; política educativa; LGTBI+

Resumo

Este artigo analisa o discurso contra a e educação sexual no Twitter (X) a fim de detetar as chaves da narrativa utilizada e as categorias centrais do discurso; aprofundando as tendências na sua disseminação. Para tal, centramo-nos nas publicações de duas entidades-chave na defesa do "pin parental" em Espanha: Profesionales por la Ética e Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento. A informação é recolhida a partir de técnicas de extração de dados e de observação participante. A análise apresenta tanto uma abordagem quantitativa das frequências e referências, como um tratamento qualitativo sob a forma de análise de sentimentos. Os dados mostram que o discurso se centra na defesa da liberdade das famílias para decidir sobre a educação dos seus filhos e na oposição à educação sexual como elemento curricular. Para isso, é realizado um ataque direto que gera narrativas negativizadas sobre o coletivo LGTBI+, certos representantes políticos ligados à esquerda e o sistema público, com destaque para a rede educativa, incluindo escolas e professores. A análise também mostra como essas narrativas entram em conflito com o direito à educação e à liberdade de ensino; e se tornam uma arma de pressão política e partidária. Apresentam-se as conclusões e discutem-se esses resultados com outros estudos em relação ao discurso de ódio e às estratégias políticas da extrema-direita e do ultra-catolicismo, com os quais os nossos dados mostram concordância. Por fim, são apontadas limitações e propostas futuras.

Palavras-chave:
Educação sexual; twitter; discurso de ódio; pin parental; política educativa; LGTBI+

1. Introduction

The right to education, recognised in article 27.1 of the Spanish Constitution, is a key element of public debate within a democratic society. Ideologies and policies work together to create the outline of the role of the State as the manager of education. The power of families to make decisions about the moral education of their children within the formal educational system is one of the main elements of this role. The so-called freedom of education, also recognised in article 27.1, sometimes comes into conflict with the right to education.

There are two key historical moments in the analysis of the social and media stances in this area: the addition of the Educación para la Ciudadanía subject (Education for Citizenship, or EPC for its Spanish initials) in the Spanish Organic Law on Education (LOE for its Spanish initials) in 2006 (Trujillo, 2011); and the appearance of the parental veto (pin parental) in the Autonomous Community of Murcia in 2019 after Vox gained positions of power in some institutions. In the case of EPC, “the opponents of the LOE, aligned with conservatism, introduced into the debate a different concept of the right to education, understood more as a right to freedom – of the parents, schools or individuals – and less as a right to equality” (Fernández, 2008, p. 247).

The organisations supporting the conscientious objection movement launched media campaigns and published informative documents. The subject was also taken to the courts of the different autonomous communities with varying rulings. On 28 January 2009, the Supreme Court unified case law by ruling against the objection to the subject by a large majority, of 22 votes in favour and 7 against¹. The pro-objection organisations then took it to the Constitutional Court, but that ruling is still pending due, among other reasons, to the withdrawal of the subject. In 2013, the PP government proposed a new law on education (LOMCE for its Spanish initials) that replaced EPC with Educación Cívica y Constitucional (Civic and Constitutional Education).

Over the following years, the pro-conscientious objection movement was less active, this being the time of the full implementation of the LOMCE. In the 2019/2020 academic year, due to a coalition agreement between the PP and Vox to allow them to govern, the instructions at the start of the academic year in the Autonomous Community of Murcia begin to propose measures that could be classified as an "implicit parental veto". This was one of the measures Vox included in its election manifesto and it was key to the two political parties reaching agreement (Gómez, 2022; Souto, 2021).

The parental veto takes the form of an administrative request, the aim of which is to require management teams to provide a preliminary report on any talk or activity that deals with socially controversial issues. The idea is that families and guardians can see and analyse such content in advance and then decide whether or not to allow their children to attend the educational event. In 2020, we saw the emergence of the Pin Parental² Platform, a website supported by various organisations and that presents itself as offering advice to families on how to use the parental veto, performing activities to ensure that it is implemented in all Spanish schools. EPC pro-conscientious objection organisations such as HazteOír and Profesionales por la ética play a key role on this platform. At the same time, Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento was launched. The aim of this very active association is to channel complaints about indoctrination in schools in order to take legal³ action. Among the issues they consider controversial and linked to the parental veto are LGTBI+ issues, transsexuality and the so-called "gender ideology". This term, which does not exist as an analytical category within the social sciences, is used globally to attack feminist and LGTBI+ arguments (Mattheis, 2021). It is related to the emergence of the far right and ultra-Catholicism in formal political settings (Evolvi, 2023; Pepin-Neff & Cohen, 2021). The use of the word “ideology” is intended to underline the dogmatic nature such concepts, debates and demands are claimed to have (Carratalá, 2023), as well as their falsehood (Cornejo-Valle and Pichardo, 2017). They are perceived as a threat to the traditional family model of a cishet couple, and those who defend this model deny the existence of misogynist violence (Cabezas, 2022), supporting the use of the term "domestic violence" (García-Mingo et al., 2022). In recent years, it has also been detected that the feminist movement, when objecting to the so-called Trans Law, is using this type of expressions, adopting the approaches taken by the ultra-conservative groups (Trujillo, 2022).

The way in which the “gender ideology” concept is disseminated obeys the logic of the growing trend towards polarisation in traditional information sources (Mollaabbasi & Jafari Kafiabadi, 2022) and in those emerging with a more social purpose (Osmundsen et al., 2021). The dynamics of polarisation, especially those deployed in the most popular social networks, are being studied to understand how they impact society and their implications for the construction of new imaginaries that establish specific social orders (Yarchi et al., 2021). The topics to which the messages and concepts relate vary, but in the literature we detect a move towards centrality for recurring issues such as racism and xenophobia (Lantz & Wenger, 2023; Vidgen & Yasseri, 2020), migration (Galindo -Dominguez et al., 2023; Arcila-Calderón, et al., 2022), the denial of climate change (Falkenberg et al., 2022), the questioning of sex-gender diversity (Carratalá, 2023; Edenborg, 2023; Tolomeotti & Cabral 2019) and feminism (Peña-Fernández et al., 2023; Blanco-Alfonso et al., 2022).

The relationship between political polarisation and the normalisation of digital hate speech is an important factor in understanding contemporary socio-cultural movements. Research has looked at the technological elements that foster certain violent narratives contributing to the generation of analogical discrimination or aggression (Bueno de Mata, 2023; Kocoń et al., 2021). Of interest are the approaches to the personifiable agents that function as political pressure groups and support certain elements of digital hate speech (Díez-Gutiérrez, et al., 2022). Regarding the effects of these messages, there is evidence that links daily exposure to violent media with a deterioration in community ties between equals and the delegitimisation of social agreements against discrimination (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020).

In these contexts, spaces such as Twitter (X) appear with their symbolic elements, such as memes (Paz et al., 2021), which play a key role in disseminating discriminatory ideas and create an obstacle to the construction of fair, equitable societies linked to the defence of human rights (Herrero et al., 2022; Román-San-Miguel et al., 2022).

2. Methodology

Our main objective is to detect defining lines of argument in defence of the parental veto in Spain, focusing on attacks on the inclusion of sex education in the formal educational system. We use a descriptive methodology designed ad hoc to quantitatively detect frequencies and references in text and image posts on Twitter (X). Subsequently, we analyse the posts, identifying emotional and significant trends in the messages.

The priority elements for analysis are:

• Detection of key dissemination agents: accounts of leading organisations.

• Central concepts in own-production messages (tweets) and messages reposted from third parties (retweets): references and frequencies.

• Level of polarisation and agreement/disagreement of posts.

• Recorded interactions: viralisation of messages.

• Qualitative description of viralised messages.

The indicated elements include all potentially analysable aspects of each account and/or tweet, taking into account the technical structure and information offered in the interface (followers, content of the messages, number of retweets/likes/impressions).

The collection and analysis techniques used are as follows

• Participant observation. A Twitter (X) account was created to identify key influencers and viral messages. The works on virtual/digital ethnography by Hine (2008, 2017), and the methodological contributions in this regard by Pink et al. (2022), were useful for the creation of this model; as were various updated empirical developments that use Twitter (X) as the subject of the analysis (Díez-Gutiérrez et al., 2022; Avdeeff, 2021; Özbaş-Anbarlı, 2021).

• Quantitative treatment of tweets and retweets. Python with the playwright library was used to read and download the raw data. The analysis of the tweets was possible thanks to the dump of tweets and retweets for the accounts analysed. There was also a dump of information on the social impact of the tweets: retweets, likes and responses. Atlas.ti was applied to the raw data to obtain references (words) and frequencies (number of times each word is repeated). For this process, text mining in digital social environments was used (Guilleumas and Gil, 2023; Blanco-Alfonso et al., 2022).

• Sentiment analysis used Excel and the MeaningCloud extension for AI sentiment analysis. MeaningCloud allowed us to identify the morphological, syntactic and semantic features of a text thanks to the use of natural language processing techniques. This tool has been academically tested and shows validity and reliability (Ermakova et al., 2023; Lozano-Blasco et al., 2023; Godinho et al., 2022).

The time frame analysed was from September 2022 to July 2023.

3. Results

The results obtained are set out below.

3.1. Detection of key dissemination agents

Two profiles of professional organisations were detected: Profesionales por la Ética and Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento. The accounts of these organisations were chosen for the following reasons:

Profesionales por la Ética played a key role in the fight to introduce a conscientious objection to EPC and is one of the organisations promoting the Pin Parental platform. Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento is a new association linked to the Pin Parental Platform and focused on taking informal and legal action against “indoctrination in the classrooms” and the defence of the right of families to decide about education. Both profiles have a limited sphere of influence (Spain) and provide information, without being openly linked to political parties. Their main theme is education.

The Profesionales por la Ética profile began in 2009, has 11,400 posts and more than 8,000 followers (see Figure 1). The Educadores contra el Adoctrinamiento profile dates back to July 2022, has 1,330 posts and more than 1,600 followers⁴ (see Figure 2). @profesionales refers to a leading website (professionalsetica.org) and @ECA_Espana no.

All the tweets and retweets on the feed (no replies) for the indicated time period were downloaded in.csv format. The inclusion of retweets allows us to profile messages from other external organisations (political, educational, media, etc.) being disseminated, allowing us to detect nuclei of media pressure. These tweets and retweets had to have text content and could also have images. Specifically, 479 posts from @ECA_España were analysed and 555 from @profesionales (N=1034 posts).

**3.2. Central concepts in tweets and retweets: references and frequencies**

We use the Altas.ti breakdown by word lists (see Figure 3), ignoring words appearing in the exclusion list of the Spanish language, inferring base forms and discarding non-conceptual words (e.g., “de”, “que”, “del”, etc.). We took into account the references (words) with more than 10 frequencies (repetitions), prioritising the analysis and focussing on those with more than 20 frequencies (more than 0.15% of the sample).

The following emerging conceptual categories were detected, arising from an open and axial coding procedure based on grounded theory applied to the social networks (Jaccoud et al, 2023): Human reproduction, life and family; Minors; Sexuality and gender; Education and indoctrination; Justice and legislation; Politics, state and government.

3.2.1. Category “Human reproduction, life and family”

This category has a strong presence. We can highlight the following references, with the English translation in brackets for clarity purposes: “parir” (give birth), with 250 frequencies, conceptually related to others with a strong presence such as “hijo” (son), “padre” (father), “abortar” (abortion), “familia” (family), “eutanasia” (euthanasia), “vida” (life) and “casar” (marry). An aspect to highlight is the masculine genderisation of the concepts referring to the family (“hijo” (son), “padre” (father)) rather than the concept “mujer” (woman), with a weaker presence. Below 20 frequencies we find references such as “suicidio” (suicide) and “vientre de alquiler· (surrogacy). The breakdown can be found in Table 1.

Table 1. Human reproduction, life and family

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
parir (give birth)	250
hijo (son)	127
padre (father)	84
abortar (abort)	82
familia (family)	79
eutanasia (euthanasia)	66
vida (life)	60
casar (marry)	36
mujer (woman)	34
madre (mother)	18
hombre (man)	16
aborto (abortion)	15
suicidio (suicide)	14
bioética (bioethics)	12
vientre+alquiler (surrogacy)	12

Source: own research.

3.2.2. Category “Minors”

Childhood is one of the central categories, beyond its representation as children. “Niño” (boy) has 91 frequencies and “menor” (minor) 87 frequencies. Linked references such as “año” (year) and “edad” (age) also appear. Male genderisation can be seen again. Below the threshold of 20 frequencies we find synonyms of these references. The breakdown can be found in Table 2.

Table 2. Minors

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
niño (boy)	91
menor (minor)	87
año (year)	58
edad (age)	23
infancia (childhood)	15
adolescente (adolescent)	11

Source: own research.

3.2.3. Category “Sexuality and gender”

We can highlight the centrality of references such as “trans”, “género” (gender), “sexual”, “pornografía” (pornography) and “sexo” (sex). “Pederastia” (pederasty) and “pedofilia” (paedophilia) appear less strongly and below 20 frequencies, as does “disforia” (dysphoria). The breakdown can be found in Table 3.

Table 3. Sexuality and gender

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
trans	74
género (gender)	70
sexual	50
pornografía (pornography)	41
sexo (sex)	26
igualdad (equality)	19
pederastia (pederasty)	13
pedofilia (paedophilia)	11
disforia (dysphoria)	10

Source: own research.

3.2.4 Category “Education and indoctrination”

The defence of a specific type of education appears as the common theme in the posts analysed. “Educación” (Education), with 57 frequencies, is positioned significantly below “adoctrinamiento” (indoctrination), with 82 frequencies. “Educativo” (Educational) is repeated 29 times and “adoctrinar” (indoctrinate) 27. In this same line, the hashtag “#contraeladoctrinamiento” (#againstindoctrination) is used 48 times and “#enseñarsinadoctrinar” (#teachingwithoutindoctrination) 37 times. Schools are also part of the message: “instituto” (secondary school) and “colegio” (school) are the most repeated concepts. The breakdown can be found in Table 4.

Table 4. Education and indoctrination

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
adoctrinamiento (indoctrination)	82
educación (education)	57
educativo (educational)	29
adoctrinar (indoctrinate)	27
#contraeladoctrinamiento (#againstindoctrination)	48
#enseñarsinadoctrinar (#teachingwithoutindoctrination)	37
instituto (secondary school)	34
colegio (school)	33
ies (high school)	19
profesor (teacher)	19
estudiar (study)	19
alumno (pupil)	18
escuela (school)	17
centro (centre)	16
educar (educate)	15
enseñanza (teaching)	15
libro (book)	13

Source: own research.

3.2.5 Category “Justice and legislation”

The references to the judicial system and current legislation are clear: “Ley” (law) is the most repeated, with 160 frequencies, followed by “derecho” (right), “denunciar” (report), “tribunal” (court) and “constitucional” (constitutional). We find other concepts that could be related such as “deber” (duty), “sentenciar” (sentence), “aprobar” (approve) and “defender” (defend). Below 20 frequencies, we detect general concepts such as “libertad” (freedom), “protección” (protection), and “legalización” (legalisation), with special mention for the reference to the Constitutional Court - “tc” with 11 frequencies. The breakdown can be found in Table 5.

Table 5. Justice and legislation

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
ley (law)	160
derecho (right)	79
denunciar (report)	46
deber (duty)	31
tribunal (court)	30
sentenciar (sentence)	26
aprobar (approve)	25
defender (defend)	25
constitucional (constitutional)	24
protección (protection)	16
libertad (freedom)	14
legalización (legalisation)	11
tc (constitutional court)	11

Source: own research.

3.2.6 Category “Politics, state and government”

“España” (Spain) appears 51 times, followed by “ideología” (ideology), “gobierno” (government), “asociación” (association), “político” (politician) and “gobernar” (govern). Also noteworthy is the use of specific regions, such as “Galicia” and “Madrid”, and explicit references to people such as @nunezfeijoocon, @aliciavrubio and @irenemontero, which accounts for 37 frequencies taking into account the reference “montero” and the hashtag #irenemontero. The breakdown can be found in Table 6.

Table 6. Politics, state and government

REFERENCE	FREQUENCY
España (Spain)	51
ideología (ideology)	45
gobierno (government)	37
asociación (association)	36
político (politician)	35
Galicia	30
Madrid	24
@nunezfeijoo	24
govern	20
@aliciavrubio	19
público (public)	18
ideológico (ideological)	15
sistema (system)	13
#irenemontero	13
montero	12
@irenemontero	12
votar (vote)	11
ministerio (ministry)	10

Source: own research.

3.3. Level of polarisation and agreement/disagreement of the posts

After reviewing the overall narrative of the 1,034 tweets analysed, we applied the MeaningCloud tool. The data obtained regarding the level of polarisation based on sentiment can be found in Table 7.

Table 7. Polarisation based on sentiment

	NOT APPLICABLE		NEUTRAL		POSITIVE		POSITIVE+		NEGATIVE		NEGATIVE+
@profesionales	64	6.19%	49	4.74%	144	13.93%	19	1.84%	230	22.24%	49	4.74%
@eca_espana	96	9.28%	52	5.03%	174	16.83%	20	1.93%	109	10.54%	28	2.71%
TOTAL	160	15.47%	101	9.77%	318	30.76%	39	3.77%	339	32.78%	77	7.45%

Source: own research.

Posts classified as neutral are in the minority compared to those that evoke positive or negative sentiments. This evidence seems to show that the messages in the posts show some polarisation, raising the possibility of influencing the media discourse. We found a slightly higher tendency to present discourse with negative or very negative sentiment, which is related to expression of emotions such as fear, anger, rage or sadness. Below are examples of tweets indicating the classification given based on sentiment (see figures 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8).

The data obtained regarding the level of polarisation based on agreement and disagreement can be found in Table 8.

Table 8. Polarisation based on agreement/disagreement

	NOT APPLICABLE		AGREEMENT		DISAGREEMENT
@professionals	2	0.19%	411	39.75%	143	13.83%
@eca_espana	-	0%	353	34.14%	125	12.09%
TOTAL	2	0.19%	764	73.89%	268	25.92%

Source: own research.

The messages analysed mostly show support or reinforcement of opinions, that is, they are positive reinforcing messages. In contrast, we have more than 260 tweets that can be classified as in disagreement or conflict; these are messages that show evident rejection or that invite questioning and/or criticism. Below are examples of tweets indicating the classification given based on agreement or disagreement (see figures 9 and 10):

3.4. Recorded interactions: viralisation of messages

To gain a deeper understanding of the set of elements comprising each tweet, tweets were filtered based on their interaction records. Tweets were selected if they met the following inclusion criteria:

• Have a number of representative interactions (+ 1,000 likes or RT) following previous research in the same context (Campos-Domínguez & Calvo, 2017).

• Have interactions in all categories (likes, retweets and replies) in order to work with all the elements of analysis proposed.

• Have textual content, not just images or emojis, to quantify references and frequencies.

• Be directly or indirectly related to the subject of education.

The total is N=14 tweets, of which one is a tweet published explicitly by the accounts analysed (primary source), the rest being retweets from other accounts (secondary source).

All the core concepts are addressed in the selected tweets. Six tweets have negative polarity, including two rated as very negative. Five tweets are rated with positive polarity, including one very positive. The other tweets are divided between those that are rated with neutral polarity (one) and those that cannot be rated (two). Nine posts show “for” positioning, and six show “against”.

3.4.1 Qualitative description of viralised posts

The contextual description of the viralised tweets is provided in order to understand their origin, the narrative characteristics of the discourse and the operationalisation of the conceptual categories. To this end, we present a description of four posts (see Table 9).

Table 9. Overview of viralised tweets

COD	SOURCE	CATEGORY	VIRALITY	SENTIMENT	POSITION
T1	SECONDARY (RT)	SEXUALITY AND GENDER JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	29 REPLIES 466 RT 1022 LIKES	NOT APPLICABLE	AGREEMENT
T2	PRIMARY	MINORS EDUCATION AND INDOCTRINATION	113 REPLIES 676 RT 1202 LIKES	NEGATIVE	AGREEMENT
T3	SECONDARY (RT)	HUMAN REPRODUCTION, LIFE AND FAMILY MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER EDUCATION AND INDOCRINATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	207 REPLIES 774 RT 1235 LIKES	POSITIVE	DISAGREEMENT
T4	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS EDUCATION AND INDOCRINATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	172 REPLIES 894 RT 1279 LIKES	NEUTRAL	DISAGREEMENT
T5	SECONDARY (RT)	HUMAN REPRODUCTION, LIFE AND FAMILY SEXUALITY AND GENDER	256 REPLIES 334 RT 1449 LIKES	NOT APPLICABLE	AGREEMENT
T6	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	1552 REPLIES 5464 RT 16800 LIKES	POSITIVE+	AGREEMENT
T7	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS EDUCATION AND INDOCTRINATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	226 REPLIES 1562 RT 2647 LIKES	POSITIVE	AGREEMENT
T8	SECONDARY (RT)	SEXUALITY AND GENDER JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	86 REPLIES 824 RT 1847 LIKES	NEGATIVE	DISAGREEMENT
T9	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION	1276 REPLIES 14700 RT 24400 LIKES	NEGATIVE	AGREEMENT
T10	SECONDARY (RT)	HUMAN REPRODUCTION, LIFE AND FAMILY MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER	577 REPLIES 1118 RT 3002 LIKES	POSITIVE	DISAGREEMENT
T11	SECONDARY (RT)	HUMAN REPRODUCTION, LIFE AND FAMILY MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER EDUCATION AND INDOCTRINATION JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION	130 REPLIES 1173 RT 4221 LIKES	NEGATIVE	AGREEMENT
T12	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	777 REPLIES 3700 RT 4475 LIKES	NEGATIVE+	AGREEMENT
T13	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS POLITICS, STATE AND GOVERNMENT	95 REPLIES 1653 RT 4753 LIKES	POSITIVE	DISAGREEMENT
T14	SECONDARY (RT)	MINORS SEXUALITY AND GENDER JUSTICE AND LEGISLATION	32 REPLIES 856 RT 2495 LIKES	NEGATIVE+	AGREEMENT

Source: own research.

The tweet shows an alleged image of a public secondary school in Mérida (see Figure 11). The image shows a door covered with a sheet of purple cardboard on which we can see a drawing of a woman raising her fist, a reference to the Republican flag and the Venus symbol, used by the feminist movement, as well as the colour purple. Above the cardboard it reads “LA PASIONARIA”. Around the door are signs that are not legible due to the size of the image. The post argues that what we can see in the image frightens families because it represents the invasion of ideological indoctrination in education.

The post is from the analysed account @ECA_espana.

The post links to the website https://www.monteroveteya.es, aimed at stopping the Spanish Solo Sí es Sí (only yes means yes) law and questioning the existence of the Ministry of Equality. It argues that Minister Irene Montero has imposed gender ideology and promoted pederasty and the corruption of minors, among other criticisms (see Figure 12). These impositions and/or proposals are related to the application of different laws: The Solo Sí es Sí law, the so-called “Trans Law”, Family Law, etc. Readers are encouraged to sign the petition.

The post is a retweet from Carla Toscano, deputy of the VOX Party.

The tweet shows images of children posing with adults in what appear to be LGTBI+ Pride demonstrations (see Figure 13). Flags and costumes are seen, and adult erotica appears to be shown in some of the images. No context or location information is given. The text is intended to be a wake-up call for parents, ironically stating that in order to be considered inclusive, modern or diverse it is necessary for children, “the younger the better”, to participate in activities associated with what the author calls the “LGTB lobby”. These activities, in which minors are claimed to be allowed and invited, include sadomasochism and other fetishes, touching and nudity, openly linking the LGTBI+ collective with pederasty.

The post is a retweet from Luis Pazos, a verified account with a significant presence (more than 64,000 followers) linked to anti-government activism in Mexico (Catholic left).

The tweet shows an image in which a minor appears to insert an object into the anus of a person who appears to be stained with blood and whose head is covered by a cloth (see Image 14). The context of the image is unknown. The text links the image to the political left, described as “satanic”, and suggests that political progressivism is doing such actions with “children”. The author points out that these actions “have no forgiveness from God”; in contrast to the concept of “satanic” previously used.

The post is a retweet from a verified account that uses a pseudonym and has a significant presence (over 54,000 followers). The description in the bio is “Catholic Christian - Anti-globalist. The GURU of TRUTH”.

4. Conclusions and discussion

The data presented show some key discursive elements used for the opposition in the media to education on sex-gender diversity in formal education. We have detected that the discourse presented in these content dissemination spaces tries to create polarisation, prioritising an emotional message over an informative one. Our results coincide with those detected by other studies that link this effective polarisation to the dissemination of fake news and biased and intentional discourse (Osmundsen et al., 2021), as well as with the proliferation of hate speech (Herrero et al., 2022), especially linked to issues related to sexual diversity (Carratalá, 2023) and feminism (Blanco-Alfonso et al., 2022). The use of retweets from viral accounts is a key strategy for sending messages with violent and explicit narratives in line with the ideology of a priori “professional” accounts: these retweets reach the end user more or less indirectly due to Twitter’s (now X) algorithm and its policy of sending suggestions to personal feeds that are linked to the central themes of those accounts followed, consulted, or with which interaction has taken place. Reading and interacting with these types of messages is important to understanding the construction of the rumour (Sunstein, 2010), its potential dissemination (Eady et al., 2019) and its materialisation in the form of a collective ideology. We highlight the direct relationship between the anti-sex and gender education discourse and profiles adopting an ultra-conservative and ultra-right ideology, clearly showing the instrumentalisation of the discourse of political leaders and/or activists to define a pseudo-educational argument without scientific evidence (Cabezas, 2022; Borba, 2021) based on “moral panic” (Pepin-Neff & Cohen, 2021; Rubin, 1989) and fear (González-Castro, 2023).

There are a series of forceful concepts that structure the discourse and that coincide with the emerging categories detected. Firstly, the idea of the traditional family and human reproduction specifically (the discursive importance of the concept of “giving birth” is noteworthy) is presented as the core of society. We found similarities between this operationalisation of the concept of “family” and anti-gender discourses based on biological criteria, this tendency being key in the defence of the traditional family linked to conservatism. Our evidence shows how moral fundamentalism plays a fundamental role in the reproduction of hate speech against sex-gender diversity and those who represent it, supporting other studies with similar findings (Mattheis, 2021; Tolomeotti & Cabral, 2019).

The importance of the family revolves around the parents (gendered as masculine) as guarantors and decision-makers in the education of minors. This line of argument is central to the defence of the parental pin, promoting its implementation as a way of protecting freedom of education and parental authority. In this way, the central core of the movements against EPC resumed, in the moment when families having the right to choose the moral education of their children was defended, understanding conscientious objection as a human right. However, in civic education there is no right to object (López, 2019) and this has been ratified by the Constitutional Court, as we stated at the beginning of the article, on the basis that such a proclamation is a misinterpretation of art. 16.1 CE (Barrero, 2022) and that there are ethical values in line with human rights that must be respected within the framework of a plural and civic society. In this way, it is recognised that the State can include content related to religion or ideology in its educational proposals, understanding the influence that these have had on the development of societies as we know them today, so that “parents who wish to have their convictions strictly accepted will have to opt for private education with its own ideology” (Barrero, 2022, p.116). Another finding is the questioning of public education and teachers. In the messages analysed, educational centres, generally public, are singled out, denouncing an alleged politicisation and indoctrination that endangers both the right to education and the minors themselves, alluding to the use of public resources for this purpose.

We can also see discursive focuses on the defence of children, a vulnerable group requiring protection, against two clearly identified enemies: pederasty and indoctrination. The aim is to personalise the agents likely to be defenders of these enemies, placing the LGTBI+ community and the political left in the spotlight. The discourses detected relate these two agents to the abuse of minors, the legalisation of pederasty and the use of regulated, formal education as a tool for indoctrination and manipulation. Also visible is the inclusion of the concept of “gender ideology” as an imposition that represents danger, sexual perversion, the destruction of the family and that is contrary to science (Bárcenas, 2021), as well as its relationship with sex education as a space in which topics unsuitable for minors are dealt with, which irremediably leads to them being corrupted. In this struggle, key figures are singled out as representing the enemy, as in the case of Irene Montero, the former Spanish Minister of Equality. This intentional effort to link feminism and the defence of sexual diversity with crimes about which there is a clear social consensus and latent sensitivity fits with the strategies of disparagement and criminalisation that right-wing political movements have used to attack all kinds of social movements (Ferreira, 2019); in our research we show similar evidence to that in other studies that analyse the construction of the anti-feminist discourse on social networks (Evolvi, 2023; Bonet-Martí, 2020).

We also detected a tendency to question the separation of state powers in an effort to present the current government as an agent of corruption with hidden interests, a discourse linked to conspiracy theories and anti-globalism (Raposa and Estre, 2023). They explicitly talk about “ideological laws of the left” and refer to two approved pieces of legislation, the LGTBI⁵ Law and the Family Law, as examples of the breakdown of the previous order and of new dangers to be eradicated.

5. Limitations and future proposals

This article has some limitations. Firstly, the focus on Twitter (X) accounts does not include the global websphere and other influential agents in collective ideology and public policy. We encountered a number of difficulties in accessing raw data from Twitter (X) due to its purchase by Elon Musk and subsequent modifications to its API, which complicate the connection to its databases and the monitoring of content. Our aim for future research is to extend the analysis both to the parental pin dialogue on the social networks and to other types of media spaces (mass media, educational or informative materials, etc.).

Digital/virtual ethnography has served as a methodological inspiration for this research, but a more in-depth application of this remains for future work. We believe it is appropriate to point out the importance of this model and we consider it a priority to conduct empirical analyses along these lines due to its potential in the field that concerns us. In conclusion, we would like to stress the importance of analysing social networks from the perspective of social sciences, as they are a key sphere of representation and dissemination of discourse (hate, among others) today. Analysing the content and dissemination of anti-sex education discourses in our context is essential if we are to contribute to tackling them.

Contribution from the authors

Soraya Calvo González: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, and Writing – review and editing.

Gracia Trujillo Barbadillo: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, and Writing – review and editing. All authors have read and agree with the published version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Support and funding

This research has received funding from the grants for the retraining of university teaching staff MU-21-UP2021-030 - Ministry of Universities - Government of Spain.

Data availability

The entire dataset supporting the results of this study was published in the Repository of the University of Oviedo (RUO) and can be accessed at https://hdl.handle.net/10651/72588

References

Arcila-Calderón, Carlos, Sánchez-Holgado, Patricia, Quintana-Moreno, Cristina, Amores, Javier J., & Blanco-Herrero, David. (2022). Hate speech and social acceptance of migrants in Europe: Analysis of tweets with geolocation. Comunicar, 30(71), 21-35. https://doi.org/10.3916/C71-2022-02

Avdeeff, Melissa K. (2021). TikTok, twitter, and platform-specific technocultural discourse in response to taylor swift’s LGBTQ+ allyship in ‘you need to calm down’. Contemporary music review, 40(1), 78-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/07494467.2021.1945225

Bárcenas, Karina (2021). La violencia simbólica en el discurso sobre la ‘ideología de género’: una perspectiva desde la dominación simbólica a través del pánico moral y la posverdad. Intersticios sociales, 21, 125-150.

Barrero, Abraham (2022). Educación cívico-democrática y adoctrinamiento ideológico. Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional, 125, 109-126. https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/redc.125.04

Blanco-Alfonso, Ignacio, Rodríguez-Fernández, Leticia, & Arce-García, Sergio (2022). Polarización y discurso de odio con sesgo de género asociado a la política: análisis de las interacciones en Twitter. Revista de comunicación, 21(2), 33-50. https://doi.org/10.26441/RC21.2-2022-A2

Bilewicz, Michal, & Soral, Wiktor (2020). Hate speech epidemic. The dynamic effects of derogatory language on intergroup relations and political radicalization. Political Psychology, 41, 3-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12670

Bonet-Martí, Jordi (2020). Análisis de las estrategias discursivas empleadas en la construcción de discurso antifeminista en redes sociales. Psicoperspectivas, 19(3), 52-63. https://dx.doi.org/10.5027/psicoperspectivas-Vol19-Issue3-fulltext-2040

Borba, Rodrigo (2021). Disgusting politics: circuits of affects and the making of Bolsonaro. Social Semiotics, 31(5), 677-694. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2020.1810554

Bueno de Mata, Federico (2023). Particularidades probatorias del discurso de odio en Internet: identificación de factores de polarización radical mediante sistemas algorítmicos. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, 39, 1-12, https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i39.416359.

Cabezas, Marts (2022). Patriarchal authoritarianism reloaded: Gender violence, policy conflict, and the resurgence of the far right in Spain. PoLAR, 45(1), 56-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12484

Campos-Domínguez, Eva & Calvo, Dafne (2017). La campaña electoral en internet: planificación, repercusión y viralización en Twitter durante las elecciones españolas de 2015. Comunicación y Sociedad, 29, 93-116.

Carratalá, Adolfo (2023). Disinformation and Sexual and Gender Diversity in Spain: Twitter Users’ Response, and the Perception of LGBTQI+ Organisations. Social Sciences, 12(4), 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12040206

Cornejo-Valle, Mónica, y Pichardo, Jose Ignacio (2017). La “ideología de género” frente a los derechos sexuales y reproductivos. El escenario español, Cadernos Pagu, 50. https://doi.org/10.1590/18094449201700500009

Díez-Gutiérrez, Enrique Javier; Verdeja, María; Sarrión-Andaluz, José; Buendía, Luis, & Macías-Tovar, Julián (2022). Discurso político de odio de la ultraderecha desde Twitter en Iberoamérica. Comunicar, 30(72), 101-113. https://doi.org/10.3916/C72-2022-08

Eady, Gredory; Nagler, Jonathan; Guess, Andy; Zilinsky, Jan & Tucker, Joshua A. (2019). How many people live in political bubbles on social media? Evidence from linked survey and Twitter data. Sage Open, 9(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/215824401983270

Edenborg, Emil (2023). ‘Traditional values’ and the narrative of gay rights as modernity: Sexual politics beyond polarization. Sexualities, 26(1-2), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/13634607211008067

Ermakova, Tatiana; Fabian, Benjamin; Golimblevskaia, Elena, & Henke, Max (2023). A Comparison of Commercial Sentiment Analysis Services. SN Computer Science, 4, 477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-023-01886-y

Evolvi, Giulia (2023). Global Populism: Its Roots in Media and Religion. The World Congress of Families: Anti-Gender Christianity and Digital Far-Right Populism. International Journal of Communication, 17, 18.

Falkenberg, Max; Galeazzi, Alexandro & Torricelli, Maddalena (2022). Growing polarization around climate change on social media. Nature Climate Change, 12(12), 1114-1121. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01527-x

Fernández, Juan Manuel (2008). Derecho a la educación y libertad de enseñanza en la reforma educativa (LOE). Revista de Educación, 344, 245-265.

Ferreira, Carles. (2019). Vox como representante de la derecha radical en España: un estudio sobre su ideología. Revista Española De Ciencia Política, 51, 73–98. https://doi.org/10.21308/recp.51.03

Galindo-Domínguez, Hector; García-Magariño, Sergio y Losada, Daniel (2023). Discurso político en redes sociales sobre el colectivo minoritario inmigrante: análisis de las narrativas e implicaciones educativas. OBETS. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 18(1), 97-114. https://doi.org/10.14198/obets.22342

García-Mingo, Elisa; Díaz Fernández, Silvia y Tomás-Forte, Sergio (2022). (Re)configurando el imaginario sobre la violencia sexual desde el antifeminismo: el trabajo ideológico de la manosfera española: el trabajo ideológico de la manosfera española. Política y Sociedad, 59(1). https://doi.org/10.5209/poso.80369

Godinho, Ricardo, Correia, Sandra M. & Fonseca, Joana (2022). Masstige strategies on social media: The influence on sentiments and attitude toward the brand. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 46(4), 1113-1126. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12747

Gómez, Laura (2022). Apuntes constitucionales sobre el pin parental. Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional, 124, 203-225. https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/redc.124.07

González-Castro, Jacob (2023). La comunicación del miedo en la política de Vox. Revista ICONO 14, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v21i1.1912

Guilleumas, Rosa Maria & Gil, Hernan (2023). Temas y sentimientos predominantes en Twitter sobre educación en tiempos del covid-19. Redes. Revista hispana para el análisis de redes sociales, 34(2), 150-165. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/redes.972

Herrero, Jacobo; Reguero, Itziar; Berdón, Pablo, & Martín, Virgina (2022). La estrategia del odio: polarización y enfrentamiento partidista en Twitter durante las elecciones a la Asamblea de Madrid de 2021. Revista Prisma Social, 39, 183–212.

Hine, Christine (2008). Virtual ethnography: Modes, varieties, affordances. The SAGE handbook of online research methods, 257-270. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020055.n14

Hine, Christine (2017). Ethnographies of online communities and social media: Modes, varieties, affordances. The SAGE handbook of online research methods, 2, 401-415. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957992

Jaccoud, Lachlan; Molnar, Lorena & Aebi, Marcelo (2023). Antifa’s political violence on Twitter: A grounded theory approach. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 29(3), 495-513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09558-6

Kocoń, Jan; Figas, Alija; Gruza, Marcin; Puchalska, Daria; Kajdanowicz, Tomasz & Kazienko, Przemysław (2021). Offensive, aggressive, and hate speech analysis: From data-centric to human-centered approach. Information Processing & Management, 58(5), 102643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102643

Lantz, Brendan, & Wenger, Marin R. (2023). Anti-Asian xenophobia, hate crime victimization, and fear of victimization during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(1-2), 1088-1116. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221086651

López, Antonio (2019). Objeción de conciencia y servicio público de enseñanza. Una aproximación jurisprudencial al derecho fundamental de los padres a que sus hijos no reciban enseñanzas en disconformidad con sus convicciones en Gómez, L. El estado de derecho ante el cuestionamiento ideológico de las obligaciones jurídicas (pp. 45-84). Tirant lo Blanch.

Lozano-Blasco, Raquel; Mira-Aladrén, Marta, & Gil-Lamata, Mercedes (2023). Social media influence on young people and children: Analysis on Instagram, Twitter and YouTube. Comunicar, 31(74), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.3916/C74-2023-10

Mattheis, Ashley A. (2021). #TradCulture: Reproducing whiteness and neo-fascism through gendered discourse online en Hunter, S. & van der Westhuizen, C. Routledge Handbook of Critical Studies in Whiteness (pp. 91-101). Routledge.

Mollaabbasi, Mohammad & Jafari Kafiabadi, Saber (2022). News Media in the Social Networks Era: Polarization and Changing Nature of News Reporting (Semiotic Analysis of the BBC Farsi Instagram Page). Sociological Review, 29(1), 41-76. https://doi.org/10.22059/JSR.2022.88956

Osmundsen, Mathias; Bor, Alexander; Vahlstrup, Peter B., Bechmann, Anja & Petersen, Michael B. (2021). Partisan polarization is the primary psychological motivation behind political fake news sharing on Twitter. American Political Science Review, 115(3), 999-1015. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421000290

Özbaş-Anbarlı, Züleyha (2021). Living in a digital space: Everyday life on Twitter. Communication & Society, 34(2), 31-47. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.34.2.31-47

Paz, Maria Antonia; Mayagoitia-Soria, Ana & González-Aguilar, Juan Manuel (2021). From polarization to hate: Portrait of the spanish political meme. Social media+ society, 7(4), 20563051211062920. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211062920

Peña-Fernández, Simón, Larrondo-Ureta, Ainara & Morales-i-Gras, Jordi (2023). Feminism, gender identity and polarization in TikTok and Twitter. Comunicar, 21, 49-60. https://doi.org/10.3916/C75-2023-04

Pepin-Neff, Christopher & Cohen, Aaron (2021). President Trump’s transgender moral panic. Policy Studies, 42(5-6), 646-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2021.1952971

Pink, Sarah; Fors, Vaike; Lanzeni, Debora; Duque, Melisa; Sumartojo, Shanti & Strengers, Yolande (2022). Design Ethnography: Research, Responsibilities, and Futures. Taylor & Francis.

Profesionales por la Ética, (2009). ¡NI UN PASO ATRÁS! La batalla de los padres frente a Educación para la Ciudadanía. Criteria Club de Lectores.

Raposa, Ana Carolina, & Estre, Felipe (2023). Populism and Anti-Globalism on Twitter: Similarities of Conspiratorial Discourse and Content Diffusion on Social Networks in Brazil, Spain, Latin America, and Italy en Pereira, A. Right-Wing Populism in Latin America and Beyond (pp. 133-154). Routledge.

Rubin, Gayle (1989). Reflexionando sobre el sexo: notas para una teoría radical de la sexualidad en Vance, C. Placer y peligro. Explorando la sexualidad femenina (pp. 113-190). Revolución.

Román-San-Miguel, Aránzazu; Olivares-García, Francisco J., & Jiménez-Zafra, Salud M. (2022). El discurso de odio en Twitter durante la crisis migratoria de Ceuta en mayo de 2021. Revista ICONO 14, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v20i2.1858

Sunstein, Cass R. (2010). Rumorología. Cómo se difunden las falsedades, porque las creemos y qué hacer contra ellas. Debate.

Souto, Clara (2021). La evolución de las políticas educativas: de la integración a la inclusión. Revista de Educación y Derecho, 1, 406-439. https://doi.org/10.1344/REYD2021.1EXT.37713

Tolomeotti, Tamires & Cabral, Jamil (2019). Quando ciência e fundamentalismo religioso se encontram: estratégias para a produção de ódio contra as sexualidades e gêneros dissidentes e seus efeitos nas políticas públicas. Revista Prâksis, 2, 244-266. https://doi.org/10.25112/rpr.v2i0.1890

Trujillo Barbadillo, Gracia (2011). Sexismo, racismo y xenofobia. La educación como ámbito privilegiado para su prevención, en De Lucas, M. et al. Estudios sobre género y extranjería (pp. 47- 59). Bomarzo.

Trujillo Barbadillo, Gracia (2022). El feminismo queer es para todo el mundo. Catarata.

Vidgen, Bertie & Yasseri, Taha (2020). Detecting weak and strong Islamophobic hate speech on social media. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 17(1), 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1702607

Yarchi, Moran; Baden, Christian & Kligler-Vilenchik, Neta (2021). Political Polarization on the Digital Sphere: A Cross-platform, Over-time Analysis of Interactional, Positional, and Affective Polarization on Social Media, Political Communication, 38(1-2), 98-139, https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1785067

1. “The Supreme Court decides that Citizenship cannot be objected to,” El País, 28 January 2009. https://elpais.com/sociedad/2009/01/28/actualidad/1233097203_850215.html

2. https://plataformapinparental.org/2020/09/22/diecisiete-asociaciones-crean-la-plataforma-pin-parental-contra-el-adoctrinamiento-en-las-aulas/

3. https://www.actuall.com/educacion/educadores-contra-el-adoctrinamiento-canalizara-las-denuncias-de-los-padres/

4. Data as of 29 August 2023.

5. Spanish Law 4/2023, of 28 February, for the real and effective equality of trans people and to guarantee of the rights of LGTBIQ+ people.