This story sounds like something out of the old Nazi or Communist Germany, but what I am about to tell you is present day.
The Orwellian German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs backs a brochure that aims at changing the behavior of preschool-aged children who are raised by “right-wing” parents who oppose “gender” theory, “sexual diversity,” the “sexualization” of children, and “immigration.”
Germans were always so good at science, perhaps that will go the way of the lederhosen.
Many Germans are opposed and understand the state should not intrude in this way. Many recognize the Nazi and Communist ideologies from their past in this brochure.
The German government has 4,600 euros for the project.
The brochure was published last month by the Amadeu Antonio Foundation. Dr. Franziska Giffey, the social-democratic German Federal Minister for Family Affairs, contributed a foreword to the 60-page document his office funded.
The goal is for the state to redo the education traditional parents are giving their children. That way, the children accept the LGBTQA and mass migration goals. It makes them “immune to group-related misanthropy and violence.” All that they say is “motivated by religious or political goals,” she writes.
Dr. Giffey writes that “our society has become increasingly polarized” over the last few years, and while there has been “much support for refugees,” there can also be seen “a significant increase of right-wing populist movements.” She appears to be indirectly referring here to the 2015 mass immigration of one million refugees, most who come from the Middle East and Romania.
The minister calls the brochure an “important work”.
‘Diversity pedagogy’ for pre-school children
The goal is to adapt the communist 1989 “UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.”
The “UN Convention on the Rights of the Child” is a communist doctrine that turns children’s education over to the state. It diminishes the parents’ role. Indoctrinated children have lost all their rights, not gained them as the convention says.
Their re-training is geared towards children of “racist” and “misanthropic” parents. Those are parents who oppose gender theory, sexual diversity, and mass illegal migration. In other words, conservatives.
They want to fight right-wing populism with “diversity pedagogy”.
Premature sexualization is a good thing, mass migration is too
They write that it is “right-wing” parents who foster “racist debates” about [fake] refugees and “premature sexualization of our children”. They reject “gender and sexual diversity,” and foster fear of “an Islamization of the Occident.”
Actually they accept biology over gender theory.
The educational task is to re-educate the children so they can adapt “part of a democratic attitude.” It “is crucial in order to avoid discrimination because of the sex or sexual orientation” and to “empower inter- and transsexual children.”
“Additionally,” the authors continue, “for many children, it is a lived reality to grow up in a rainbow family and thus should also be the lived-out reality in pre-school institutions.”
Conservatives, right-wing populists, are the nuts, not them.
In the eyes of the authors, “right-wing populist, neo-Right, or religious-fundamentalist groups stir up hatred against the communication of diversity. They do it with defamatory words such as ‘genderism’, ‘gender madness’ [“Genderwahn”], or ‘premature sexualization’. Children must be re-educated. They cannot anymore be ‘real’ girls and boys.
This attitude, they say is “anti-feminist, and homo-, inter- and trans-phobic positions.” The two who wrote the brochure say average Germans hold these right-wing populist attitudes.
Glaser and Rahner say these attitudes increased from 2015 on.
The state-funded brochure provides examples of attitudes in children (and parents) that must be addressed.
Two professors describe two children from a family as “quiet and passive”, and “obedient”. Both are in traditional roles. In other words, they come from a “racist family” [völkisch family]. These “learned” people equate traditional with racist.
In such cases, write the authors, it is recommended to teach such children (as well as their parents) about “children’s rights” and the existence of “diversity.” [LGBT]
They want schools to have snuggle corners for boys and rough play for girls. This comes from their gender theory. The thousands of years developing gender roles must be thrown out the window, seemingly for the tiny portion of the population who don’t fit the mold.
The authors state that “authoritarian and gender-stereotype parenting styles limit the manifold possibilities of children and [adversely] affect their development.”
Boys can be girls and girls can be boys
Another scenario in the brochure is of a mother who is upset at a teacher for letting a male child dress up as a girl in the pre-school dress-up and make-up corner. “A boy lets his fingernails be painted by them [other children].” The next day, the mother of that boy comes and “declares that this has a bad influence upon her child; children should not be further confused; boys are boys, girls are girls, and she herself wishes that her boy ‘will later turn out to be a real man.’”
The teacher must then respond, “explain that gender diversity and tolerance are welcomed at the pre-school” and that children should be encouraged to “experiment with themselves.” The teacher must tell the mother that her “assumption” that boys do not paint their fingernails points to her own “gender-specific, social roles” that “are being given” to her son.
The authors don’t want children deprived of the “possibilities for an individual development.”
[Yes, we don’t want to keep the future drag queens from being all they can be.]
According to the “pedagogy of diverse lifestyles” and the “freedom of choice in socialization,” such a mother who rejects her son’s painting his fingernails, “has to be located in the context of neo-Right or fundamentalist ideologies.”
Those with ideas about family must be made to understand that “freedom of choice” is important in “processes of socialization” among children.
There are prominent people who reject the re-training brochure and even recognize that it is not the duty of the state and of pre-schools to check and correct the way of life of parents.
The new Germany could become the old Germany of social engineers
Gunnar Schupelius, a German columnist, says that the brochure “goes clearly too far.”
“It is not the duty of the state and of pre-schools to check and correct the way of life of the parents,” he comments. If one allows the state to “get access to the private life of families” in this manner, he adds, then “a principal line is crossed.” Under this type of indoctrination, Germany is heading back to the days of Communists or Nazis with ideological control and where children were used to spy on their parents.
Shred the thing
Nadine Schön, the vice group chairman of the Christian Democratic Union, says the brochure is state instruction “on how to spy on parents.” It should immediately be “shredded”, she adds.
The newspaper Berliner Kurier reported that many parents were indignant over the stereotypes in the brochure.
As one Catholic commentator, who wishes to remain anonymous, says concerning the brochure: “One can clearly see here a new form of social engineering.”
“Just as earlier the sociologists of the Frankfurt School (Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse) had tried to create a ‘revolutionary personality’ – which they then renamed into ‘democratic personality,’ due to protests – so, too, do these state-funded experts try to create a new personality in Germany, a personality which is supportive of the globalized, pro-LGBT ideology. A person deeply rooted in the Christian Faith must stand here in the way of this,” the source said.
Many others are opposed, but will it be enough?