Therese Egebakken (Christian Democratic Party – KrF) believes that teaching about gender in schools is not always scientifically grounded, and that Pride flags can be divisive. This prompted a reaction from several political parties.
On Monday, Stavanger City Council discussed a parliamentary question from Therese Egebakken (KrF) regarding the teaching of gender and identity in schools. Egebakken posed five questions, which sparked a reaction.
“I am quite simply fed up that we in the city council constantly have to spend time debating whether people should be allowed to love whoever they want,” said Benedicte Solaas (Ap).
We’ve heard this far too many times before. But nobody is denying anyone the right to love whoever they want, provided they stay within the law. But it is quite another matter to demand that everyone else should celebrate precisely your gender-confused sexual preferences and fetishes.
Would people like Solaas react if someone obsessed with pornography were allowed to use school time to post about their fantasies, whilst all pupils, right down to Year 1, were told they had to treat this with the utmost respect? Everyone knows the answer.
Egebakken’s ‘crime’ was that she had sent the mayor five questions about the Stavanger school’s teaching on gender, identity and sexuality. Among other things, she believes that pupils need to be given clearer information about biological sex.
– We become concerned when our children are taught at school that they may have been born in the wrong body, and that they might be able to change their gender. Or when they are taught that there are more than two genders,” said Egebakken.
She also asked why the distinction between biological sex and self-declared gender identity is not always made clear in the teaching. Egebakken seems to understand that one must resort to self-evident truths when discussing this contentious topic.
– Human reproduction is based on two biological sexes: male and female.
Stating the obvious does not work on people who are unable to define what a woman is, yet have no problem introducing quotas for women, or allow taxpayers to fund gender reassignment surgery costing over 20 million kroner per patient, if one includes the costs of the necessary medical treatment on which the patient will be dependent for the rest of their sterilised life.
In other words, men are allowed to undergo surgery in public hospitals without being physically ill, in order to transform themselves into something that cannot be defined, and the bill is sent to the taxpayers.
Anyone with school-age children who has retained a measure of common sense coupled with a modicum of understanding of reality knows that one must actively re-educate one’s own children so that they do not lose much of their sanity. Incidentally, this applies to several subject areas, not just gender education.
Such details do not bother the gender ideologues, who can never get enough of sexual diversity.
Egebakken said that the Christian Democratic Party (KrF) also supports teaching on identity, relationships, sexual orientation, inclusion and respect. But KrF is breaking all the rules of the ‘woke mafia’ by insisting that such teaching must be scientifically grounded.
Everyone should soon realise that the ‘woke’ crowd prefers pseudoscience and an ideologically and tyrannically controlled fantasy reality to people who can define a gender and are capable of something as unfashionably old-fashioned as thinking for themselves.
– The Pride flag divides
The KrF politician also disapproves of schools flying the Pride flag, as this takes sides in a contentious debate and fails to take into account those who, for various reasons, find such displays problematic.
– It is problematic when schools fly the Pride flag, and it divides more than it unites. It does not represent the full spectrum of society.
Many people find it difficult to communicate with the school management about such issues. But such subhumans are of no value to Pride-loving politicians.
Mette Vabø (V) questioned whether Egebakken had investigated what pupils actually learn about Pride.
– None of the teachers I have spoken to recognise themselves in her description of reality. Nor can we see this reflected in the curriculum. What is, however, discussed in schools is diversity, human rights and equality,’ said Vabø.
Vabø rejected the claim that pupils are asked to take a political stance or change their understanding of gender and family.
Firstly, she is wrong: pupils have had their exam marks reduced because they have not followed gender-ideological rules. One boy took a place at NTNU from another boy by defining himself as a woman for a single day.
Such things are inherently unreasonable: marks or university admissions are determined by ideological convictions, or by one’s ability to exploit these delusions.
Moreover: what is the point of education if not to change people’s understanding? What is the aim of teaching pure ideology?
What’s next – teaching fascism or communism? It sounds far-fetched, but gender ideology is precisely that: an ideology, just like fascism or communism.
Furthermore, it is obvious that a diversity of opinions is not accepted; only those who swallow the indoctrination are tolerated. People who refuse to be cowed have no rights and are certainly not regarded as equals by the crowd who believe there are thirty different genders and that all sexual preferences are equally acceptable.
This is embedded in the curricula, including through the topic of public health and life skills, and in subjects such as social studies, natural sciences, Christian, Religious and Ethical Education (KRLE) and Norwegian, Vabø points out.
– The aim is not to get pupils to support a particular organisation or political movement, but to provide knowledge and promote respect for people from different backgrounds and with different identities.
Once again: Pride, the FRI association and the whole gender ideology are a political movement. It is almost inconceivable that so many of today’s politicians seem to be completely incapable of understanding something so obvious.
Pride events are about creating a safe and inclusive school, claims Vabø. But the ‘woke’ school is neither safe nor inclusive for those who do not accept this madness.
– Deadly serious
Siri Borge (Rødt) pointed out that queer children and young people are particularly vulnerable to bullying, shame and exclusion.
– Pride or the queer rights movement is, for the most part, a movement designed to prevent this bullying and suicide. A movement that says you should be proud of who you are.
Neither Borge nor most other politicians seem to have any problem subjecting pupils from conservative and/or religious families to precisely this bullying, shame and exclusion, if they have retained any of what everyone previously recognised as truth and common sense.
Even Birger Wikre Hetland (Sp) reacted.
– When Pride, the rainbow flag and efforts to promote inclusion are described as ‘activist influence’, it creates a certain impression and tells children that they do not have the right to be themselves.
How many pupils are dependent on flying an ideological flag and forcing everyone else to be taught their ideology before they can be themselves?
The Right are in good company. Jonas Molde Hollund from the Decline Party – which history buffs may recall as the country’s second-largest party – asked politicians to consider what it is like to be young and uncertain about one’s own sexual orientation.
– This is not ideology, this is not activism, and it is not divisive. Celebrating Pride and rainbow symbolism ensures that everyone who feels they are different can be confident that they will be allowed to be themselves.
Of course it is both ideology and activism, and, not least, divisive. But the LGBTQ dictators refuse to accept that there are people with opinions different from their own, who will not put up with being forced to accept something they regard as utter nonsense, which is also extremely harmful to those affected.
Mayor Tormod W. Losnedal (H) emphasised in his response that schools should not engage in political activism.
– Schools must not be a forum for activism or party-political influence. Teaching must be based on the Education Act, the curriculum framework and the school’s academic and pedagogical professional responsibilities.
Why, then, is one of today’s most divisive forms of political and ideological activism being introduced as part of the curriculum for innocent children, against the wishes of many parents?
Therese Egebakken is a courageous 28-year-old. She deserves support in this matter, regardless of whether one may disagree with the Christian Democratic Party’s policies in general.
