Social engineering at work: Australian councils auditing children’s book to consider a ban on terms “boy” and “girl”

Dog eyeroll

From Victorian councils could ban books and toys from kindergartens, schools and libraries if they don’t meet strict gender guidelines, according to reports.

The Herald Sun revealed Manningham and Melbourne City Councils are among those auditing children’s books and urging a ban on the terms “boy” and “girl”.

It follows research from the Australian National University that showed children were influenced by gender stereotyping.

The research suggests educators should “minimise the extent to which gender is labelled” and avoid telling children what girls and boys should do.

Parents reacted angrily to the story on social media. “For goodness sake, this is social engineering gone crazy,” Marie Hardwick wrote on a post by state Liberal MP Tim Smith. “Leave kids alone to be kids. Stop trying to destroy kids’ childhoods.

Sarah Lovejoy took to Sunrise’s Facebook page after it was debated on the program this morning.

This needs to stop. I’ve got a two-year-old daughter (yes I picked her gender based on what genitals she was born with) and she plays with cars, trains, tractors, Barbies, dolls and uses her imagination and pretends she’s cooking food or being a doctor. Let’s just let kids be kids.”

Billie Deborah Chin wrote: “Banning the availability of anything, or taking choice away, is definitely the wrong way to go about making classrooms gender neutral. It should be about making everything available to everyone.”

But commentator Cath Webber urged calm. She said “it sounds outrageous” but it’s actually not a bad idea.

“The research is actually very interesting. What they’re telling people to do is … don’t tell girls they have to play with Barbies and don’t tell boys they have to play with Lego. It may seem crazy but we know it’s an unconscious thought pattern that little girls get into or little boys get into.

“There has to be a reason why in science, technology, engineering, maths in this country we have such a low rate of females in that industry. If they were choosing to play with Lego … why not just encourage people to say ‘play with what you want as kids’. That’s all this is about.”

Ron Wilson from Smooth FM told Sunrise “it’s about inclusion, not exclusion” but that it’s important “boys are boys and girls are girls”.

“I wouldn’t be banning things, but I would be including more things for everybody to be involved in. When you’ve got kids, you suddenly realise that boys are boys and girls are girls and viva la difference. I don’t want to see androgyny out there.

“I don’t want to see our children just being children. The fact (is) they are boys and girls and they are different and there’s no question about that. We should celebrate that. I think we need respect. We don’t need social engineering.”


15 responses to “Social engineering at work: Australian councils auditing children’s book to consider a ban on terms “boy” and “girl”

  1. Serious question: Why do the Left find genders — males and females — to be such a threat?

    Liked by 4 people

    • The answer to your question Dr. Eowyn lies in the fact that gender identity is a vital part of a person’s individuality. It is what makes us unique. A man defines himself as a man; a woman defines herself as a woman. Because we are unique individuals, our civil rights are individual rights, not group rights. The Founders understood this perfectly, which is why the three instances in the Constitution in which the phrase “the right of the people” appears, have consistently been interpreted to mean “the right of the individual,” not the right of a group.

      The Left understands that so long as people believe they are unique individuals, they will be nearly impossible to rule. But the Left, like the Jihadists, are taking the long view. They know that if they are able to raise up a generation that has no individual identity, but only a group identity, then the generation can be taught that its loyalty is not loyalty to an individual, but to a group. In that case, there is no such thing as civil rights for the individual; there are only rights for the group. Therefore, the “rights” of a group can be eliminated or subjugated at will by a ruling elite, and there is nothing an individual could do to stop it since the individual in that society would have no rights. There is ample historical justification for this point, the most egregious example of which was Hitler’s “Final Solution,” that resulted in 6 million people being murdered simply because they were members of a group, i.e. Jews.

      In its effort to eliminate individuality, the Left has taken a page straight from George Orwell’s novel 1984. Winston Smith, the novel’s protagonist, works in the Ministry of Truth, a governmental organization charged with propaganda, destruction of historical documents, rewriting history, and creating a new language that in theory would make a revolution unthinkable and impossible. Ayn Rand echoed a similar notion in her novel Anthem.

      This is what the Left now is pursuing—a class of citizens that is uncertain of, or simply doesn’t know what it is. How is a boy going to define himself if there is no word “boy” in the dictionary? How is an adult woman to define herself in such a society? If we can expunge the words boy and girl, man and woman, can we also expunge the words father and mother? Will the pronoun “I” be replaced by the word “we,” as it was in Rand’s novel? In such a society there is nothing but control, repression and slavery. And that is the Left’s ultimate goal.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Surely you must already be aware of the answer to this question if you have read any measure of H Makow’s articles? But just in case…..

      So there are two objectives here: The first is to erase any source of individual identity; that is, the erasure of nationality, religion, culture and gender. All these identities constitute a framework in which stability, strength and a rootedness in history ( time and space) form, enabling people to organically come together to protect and defend, an preserve their interests in order to create a future and project themselves into that future. The controllers ( the left) do not want anyone having any say in creating anything contrary to the dystopian, inhuman future they have planned.
      Secondly without gender, the state will eventually lay claim to all reproduction. With the majority of people so sexually messed up, and gender confused, or androgynous, there will be few that have the clarity an strength to form or maintain a family. Homosexual couples already have to go to some type of institution to get an infant, whether through adoption or artificial insemination, or surrogacy. So homosexual couples who demand the rights to be parents are like a cutting edge sword being used to throw more weight into the psychology and acceptance that biological humans are commodities that can be regulated, and sold, and have no connection to the biological parent, leading to procreation being legislated by the state.

      If one couples the above with Clifford Carnicom’s theory on chemtrails, which is to turn humans into a form of synthetic life, it all becomes consistent with a perverted and thoroughly evil vision that turns man into nothing but a robot without any identity.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Surely you must already be aware of the answer to this question if you have read any measure of H Makow’s articles? But just in case…..

        Gosh, Lana, bless your heart for the patronizing contempt that just oozes out of you! I asked a humble serious question because, unlike you, I don’t have the 100% certain answers that you seem to have. Why do you even read FOTM if you harbor such contempt for its owner?

        Liked by 1 person

    • As I understand it, the devil has made war upon all of creation, (even down the the dirt, so to speak.) and loathes everything God has made, so in trying to destroy mankind’s genders, and corrupt the natural order of things, he is trying to attack God by proxy, and also to attack mankind on the side, because he knows God Loves Us. Attempting to destroy genders in mankind (notice how this never seems to get applied to animals, persay, you don’t see transcyophants trying to get a female lion to grow a mane… yet, anyway.) also presents a lot of “opportunity” to “use and abuse” human beings, and just generally mess them up really really badly, (even with potential to make them a follower of evil and thus damn them) something the filth delights in. All this under a cover of pretending to “care about people’s feelings” adds even more vitriol to the already nasty mix, as well as a component of “irony” in the modern sort of jargon use of it.

      There is no “left” or “right” to it of course, so I’ve noticed, both sides work for the same boss, its just one pretends to care about Christian social values, (and can thus snooker many of the Christian demographic into supporting them) while the other is more open in who they serve, both are played off each other to continually push the same agenda. (Think of “right” and “left” as two legs under a ball of filth, marching in the same direction, but kicking supporters of either leg, to keep them running back and forth supporting the opposite leg, keeping them busy, and thus keeping them from seeing what is doing the marching.)

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Dr. E, the only answer I can give you would be to absolutely destroy the traditional nuclear family, therefore creating 100% dependence on The State, therefore ensuring lifetime of voters. Communism/Marxism……

    Liked by 5 people

  3. But gender clarity is “racist” or something…

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Madness. Why are we kowtowing to this tiny group of (deranged) people?
    “3.8% of Americans identified as gay/lesbian, bisexual, or transgender:
    1.7 percent as lesbian or gay, 1.8 percent as bisexual, and 0.3 percent as transgender.”

    Liked by 5 people

  5. They are theoconsummateojoiners. Not belonging terrifies them. They hate everybody and everything. They think that by buying into a crazy agenda they will be swaddled in the embrace of other sick people. Anyone not desirous of this is a threat. o

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Comrade Obama

    Oz must be filled with a large number of insane, degenerative, and hateful people. Otherwise how could any group come up with a policy like this?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. OF COURSE: “children are influenced by gender sterotyping….” This is a STOOOOOPID and vacant statement. It is also ERRONEOUS on its face: my DNA and my female innards and exterior are NOT A STEROTYPE. THEY ARE BIOLOGY. They way I responded to my biology was not enshrined in “stereotype.” I was socially free to wear bluejeans, the same tennis shoes as boys…played with trucks/jumped over fences, camped out in the meadow, compete in school sports, go to college, rennovate my first home almost all by myself….WITH POWER TOOLS. I can outshoot my husband at target practice. (Conversely….my boys sewed uniforms and accourterments for their play soldiers when they were little). HISTORY is full of women who still grew up to be reproductive women assured of their sexuality even as they took on traditional “male roles” of the day through every-God-forsaken WAR we’ve ever fought for this country. Now, women are on the front lines of battle and are top gun fighter pilots). ALSO: The psychological and social connection with the same-sexed parental (or otherwise) role model from earliest days of life is what has fueled the survival of humandkind on Earth for thousands of years. It is also what allows a little girl born XX with female external and internal parts to grow up with a clear understanding of her sexuality and the hormones that feels urging her as she matures. Ditto for the XY male. NOTHING about this is “sterotypical.” What IS stereotypical is the mewlings of the pusillanimous LEFT about anything and everything, including trying to BUTT IN on how to raise our kids, including the BOOKS we read to them……What it is to be a “boy” or a “girl” through the prism of their family life, social culture, yatta yatta, has not stopped or hindered in the development of our most precious commondity as humankind: reproducing adults. It also has not hindered or hurt the development of “other-directed” adults who have gender-identification issues and choose another pathway through their lives. Change the language—but you will NEVER change the outcome.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. I’m not a scientist, just an engineer, but I am familar with the distinct genitalia of the 2 existing sexes. If a 3rd or 4th exists I would gladly retake physiology to study them so I can be up to date. Why no classes?

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Pingback: Virginia school board: No such thing as biological male/female genders | The Olive Branch Report

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s