It’s no surprise that education bureaucrats have sneaked Safe Schools back into the curriculum, defying the ban imposed in April by their boss, Education Minister Rob Stokes.
This is the permanent bureaucracy, yet again, subverting the people’s will and defying the people’s elected representatives.
They know that radical queer theory, a fringe and highly contested area of academic voodoo, is rejected by parents and school communities, so they use deception to keep Safe Schools alive.
They don’t care that parents don’t want their children taught that girls aren’t girls and boys aren’t boys, and that gender and sexuality are “fluid”.
Miranda Devine. Picture: Peter Brew-Bevan
They don’t care because they are a law unto themselves.
But that has to end. They have been exposed as insubordinate and duplicitous.
Pretending that the Orwellian-named Safe Schools was an “anti-bullying” program was their first deception. It’s nothing of the sort.
At heart, it is radical sex education for primary and secondary school children designed to stamp out “heterosexism” — which is the idea heterosexuality is the default position for human relationships.
Its stealthy aim is to turn biology on its head by demonising traditional families as incubators of bigotry.
Safe Schools posters with slogans such as “GROSS! BEING STRAIGHT IS JUST A PHASE” and class exercises isolating children whose families hold orthodox views about sex and gender, put the lie to the idea the program ever was about preventing bullying.
If anything, it authorised bullying against a new class of victim.
The DEpartment of RE-Education. Illustration: John Tiedmann.
It’s not the right of fringe academics to indoctrinate captive children in classrooms, especially without the permission of their parents. Nor do they have the right to dictate societal norms.
Irresponsible politicians opened the school door to radical queer theory. Putting the genie back in the bottle, as Rob Stokes is trying to do, is a lot harder than it seems. It is a credit to Stokes that he ordered Safe Schools be replaced with a genuine, broadbased anti-bullying program. But the resistance he faces from education bureaucrats is extraordinary.
In cahoots with teacher unions, and like-minded left-wing media, they believe they have the power to undermine a minister, systematically destroy political careers, even bring down governments.
It was only thanks to alert parents, who run the “You’re Teaching Our Children What?” website, that we discovered this week that Safe Schools material had been reintroduced to the curriculum. Otherwise the link may have gone unnoticed, buried in a guide on “sexuality and sexual health education” for Years 1 to 10 posted on the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) website.
The guide linked teachers to a teaching resource from the Safe Schools program, which included activities for Year 7 students that require them to swap gender roles.
A Year 9 exercise asks students to imagine they are gay and then answer questions such as “Could you invite your partner home with you?” and “Will you be able to get married in Australia?”.
The students are scored on their answers and the student with the lowest score is left standing in front of the class. And this is supposed to prevent bullying.
To his credit, Stokes immediately ordered the link removed this week.
But he also must remove the recalcitrant bureaucrats.
They must face the consequences of their blatant insubordination, and their colleagues must understand they will be next if they defy any more instructions.
The fact the sneaky resuscitation of Safe Schools has come from NESA is particularly ominous. Known as the Board of Studies until this year, NESA is the agency responsible for setting and regulating curriculum, assessment and teaching standards in NSW schools.
And explicitly embedded in the organisation’s Statement of Equity Principles is the edict that curriculum material produced for NSW schools “will promote the value of inclusivity from an equity perspective by … providing opportunities for students to evaluate and deconstruct gender and sexuality”.
The concept of “deconstructing” gender comes straight from the queer theory textbook.
It is not evidence-based, but highly contested fringe academic theory which has no place in schools. And yet, there it is, in the very DNA of our education policy — the imperative to “deconstruct” gender and sexuality.
Clearly NESA needs an overhaul. Parents expect their children to go to school to learn basic skills in a safe environment in which everyone is treated with respect.
They don’t expect their children will be fed propaganda that sexualises and disrespects them, nor that their family values will be secretly subverted.
If social justice warriors want to use their own children for social engineering purposes, go right ahead, though I bet they won’t thank you when they grow up.
But stay away from everyone else’s children.Share