Some time ago I was rushing around with Russia today (Hi Katya, Andrej and Aleksej – gender aware greetings to you! 🙂 ) in Stockholm. Or more precisely, they were rushing after me with a camera and filming, while I was filming the Swedish gender awareness with my own camera. I have not been a part of editing the film or choosing which material should be included (imagine me talking and doing things from morning to evening for several days – it’s quite a lot 😉 ). I see that the team has picked out some fun parts – I often forgot I had a microphone on me all the time – but I also miss some parts that I was talking about, so before I link to the film you are about to see, I want to complete with some information (with so many hours of video material I understand that the RT-team could not take in everything that I was talking about – then the film would have to continue for many days… ) since I think some important stuff was left out, although the film is entertaining, not least for my friends who are sending me sms-messages right now, stressing me to blog about it. 🙂 I hope you will enjoy it too and together with this text understand what the gender madness is about.
I often see that a lot of people from abroad are trying to read my blog by running the URL:s through google translate, so let me try to summarize things here, so that you fully understand the dumbing down industry that is taking place in Sweden, and the gender madness which surrounds us every day. The best way to illustrate things are with concrete examples – otherwise you may think that this gender madness really has something to do with equality between men and women, and not with an ambition to deconstruct our whole civilization as such – which is it´s final goal, obviously… The madness has gone too far, but by motivating everything with words like equality, gender, democratic ideals etc, the gender lobby has finally managed to convince the politicians that the solution to almost every problem of society is a gender analysis. And then we also have projects that are so crazy that they illustrate Poe’s law: Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won’t mistake for the real thing. Maybe that’s why I should have sent my mathematical parody of the project ”The Trumpet as a gender symbol” (70.000 Euro from the Swedish Research Council to investigate the trumpet from a gender perspective – The Tumpet -research description ) to the Swedish Research Council, instead of the newspaper where it was published as a parody.
I would, in the same manner, probably get funding for trying to investigate equations in two variables x and y, where x is the female component and y the male component, from a gender perspective. For example, I could count the number of times x and y occur in the students’ textbook, and investigate which variable is constantly being assigned a larger exponent in research articles – and how this inherent gender power structure is affecting the self-confidence of the female students, and which mathematical norms are responsible for the rigid society we are living in – namely a normed vector space. And what about the gender neutral complex variable z? After integration of a function with respect to z – what can we say about the primitive function?
There is strong experimental evidence that the complex variable z is female and that the primitive function is male – but I have to prove this in theory, and for that purpose I would like the Swedish Research Council to sponsor this interesting an still unexploited area with some millions Euro, or rater, its whole budget. What is a little collapse of the whole economy compared to the progress we can make when it comes to gender awareness? But that was just a parody that I made of the gendered trumpet project (which is for real, and now recall that the drums, guitar, saxophone etc are still not investigated from a gender perspective) – now let me present some real madness, but let me begin with a warning of high blood pressure – I don’t take any responsibility for the mental or physical condition you may end up in after reading this text. 😉 But first see my music video about the gender trumpet – which is not only a gender symbol but also a symbol of the whole madness in the academia and the rest of society when it comes to gender (then I will give you high blood pressure):
GENDER MADNESS IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
In 1999 the professor of Pedagogics, Moira von Wrigh,t wrote a report (”Genus och text”) to the Swedish National Agency of Education (Skolverket) which is now used as ”recommended gender literature for becoming teachers in Physics” where she examines the Swedish school books in Physics from a gender perspective, and concludes and suggests, among other tings, the following crazy things:
* A school with gender equality works with respect for the pupil’s own life world and world view, and a democratic education can then not be a matter of replacing the pupil’s ”everyday understanding” with a ”scientific” one. According to Sundgren (1996 p.31), there must be a dialogue, so that the school does not exercise symbolic violence on the pupils by imposing a given meaning. (p 7)
* Fact-based, objective knowledge is what from a feministic perspective usually is categorized as ‘male’ knowledge. The requirement of objectivity is often regarded as the basic criterion for science. (p 59)
* The decree of narrow knowledge with a given meaning is not consistent with the school’s gender equality efforts.(p 64)
* A gender-aware and gender sensitive Physics requires a relational approach to Physics and that a lot of the traditional scientific knowledge of Physics is removed. (p 65)
* Sylvia Benckert (1997) says that Physics as a university discipline seeks an impersonal purity, and a quest to appear as being above and free from human desires, and it is precisely this apparent impersonality and absence of gender that is tied to notions of masculinity, which makes Physics unattractive to girls. (p 16)
* One can, by Sundgren (1996, pp. 86ff), question this tradition that insists on mediating scientific concepts and their given priority of interpretation, as it is invading everyday understanding by also taking over everyday concepts and give them priority in terms of interpretation, such as the concept of “force”. (p. 24)
* The idea of the scientific thought’s supposed supremacy is in conflict with equality and democratic ideals … If one does not pay attention to this one risks making misleading assessments. For example by unquestioningly assume that scientific thinking is more rational and therefore should replace everyday thinking.(p 24)
* It is likely that a gender equal curriculum would be seen as a challenge or a provocation to many teachers and to many in the scientific community, who would like to see their own knowledge being taught in school. (p 65)
NOTE! Several physicists and mathematicians protested against her appointment as headmaster because of this report and its implementation, but the Swedish Government ignored it and appointed her anyway. In 2011 she was also appointed as a member of the Swedish Government´s Advising Agency on Research Issues! Good luck Sweden with falling PISA-results etc… A new gender aware Physics will fix it, of course. We forgot that Physics is male patriarchal knowledge based on the dubious concept of objectivity…
How could I spend five years of my life studying Maths and Physics at the university, and then five years doing research in pure Maths resulting in my PhD thesis and at the same time teaching students, without being gender aware?! Have I done all this for ten years of my life in vain?! I hope the gender experts will invent their gender aware Physics soon (without any education in Physics, of course…) and it will be interesting to see if any technical device will work after they are done with deconstructing Physics. But does it matter? Everything is a social construct anyway…. 🙂
SEX CHANGE ON CUTLERY
Two gender experts in the south of Sweden got money (1 miljon kr = 100.000 Euro) from the state to ”educate” employees in the educational system (utbildningsförvaltningen) to make them gender aware (source ). Let me quote from the article about it in the newspaper – just the fact that they publish these crazy things says someting about how unaware they are of the madness that is going on, or that they are trying hard to normalize it by bringing it up:
”I hold a knife and a fork. Which is feminine and which is masculine? That’s the question the gender pedagogues Helena Magnusson and Britten Dehlin got recently at a meeting. – All responded that the fork was the most feminine. Then they replaced the fork with a spoon, and suddenly the spoon was feminine. We had made a sex change on cutlery, says Helena Magnusson!” Britten Dehlin celebrates five years as gender educator in Simrishamn. She needed help, and got it. In 2009, Simrishamns municipality got one million crowns for gender projects. Helena Magnusson was hired at 75% and Britten Dehlins employment was expanded. – If I sit astride like a man on the chair, people are watching me strangely. We are so controlled by our society, says Helena Magnusson and slips down on the chair so that people around really turn their heads and stare. Both Helena Magnusson and Britten Dehlin are convinced that the deliberation from old gender roles benefits all citizens.”
Thus – taxpayers´money go to sex change on cutlery and gender experts sitting astride on a chair making people watch and wonder about how they cross hidden gender boundaries, and employees in the educational system watch sex changes on cutlery during working time, as a part of mandatory courses on gender awareness – that according to the Swedish government, will ”benefit all citizens” – doctors, policemen and teachers – nobody is allowed to miss this important gender propaganda and idiocy, and if the health care suffers, the crime rate goes up, and the educational system collapses – the answer to all these problems is more gender courses enlightening and informing the citizens of its importance – a gender analysis is the ultimate tool to solve all problems of society.
And if there is a field with no major problems, then the gender experts create problems that don’t exist, and then write reports and get money from the state to solve these non-existing problems, arranging compulsory courses for employees and thus, taking their valuable time, actually indeed creating problems – which of course, have to be solved with yet another dose of gender madness propaganda. Abstract or concrete nonsense with no connection to reality. And the citizens accept, since the gender mafia has succeeded in fooling the population, but most of all the politicians, of this nation that their gender theories have something to do with equality between men and women, which they don’t.
They confuse the word gender with equality on purpose, so that anyone who opposes or criticizes any project with the word gender in it, is labelled as a reactionary caveman who wants to take away all the human rights of women. And who wants to be accused of that? People have to understand that the gender madness really is madness and nothing else, and more and more people are waking up realizing this. But then we miss another important component – namely courage. In some countries people risk their lives for what they believe in, but in Sweden, far too many are afraid of even having a quarrel in the coffee room at work. And so the madness and the ruining of the educational system goes on, while the gender experts and gender pilots, as they also call themselves, are taking over society and leading this dumbing down industry to its ultimate perfection – that is destroying thousands of years of civilization.
By the way, 15 gender pilots were recently educated at Vinnova – the Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (with the explicit mission to promote sustainable growth by improving the conditions for innovations) in order to be able to read the applications for funding from a gender perspective. Vinnova invests 2.7 billion kr (270 million Euro) every year – here you can read about a project with gender perspective on embedded and intelligent systems research which was funded by 4 million kr (400.000 Euro) One example of many…
THE 50/50-OUTCOME AND LEGISLATING ABOUT THE SAME ABILITY
According to the Swedish politics, in proposition 2005/06:155 from the spring of 2006, the Parliament changed the main gender equality goal and decided that “the outcome better reflects an equal society” – that is the desirable outcome (50/50) resulting from “men and women having the same rights possibilities and ability.” First of all, one can’t legislate about the outcome without sacrificing the free will (that’s where the need for brainwash and mandatory courses come in). Secondly, the proposition explicitly makes a distinction between “possibility” and “ability” by using both words to describe the gender political goal – but how can one legislate about the ability? This is why it is now possible to lower the limit of physical ability for students who want to become policemen and firemen. The reality can’t be changed, so they lower the requirements of physical ability instead, in the name of equality, thus putting peoples lives at risk. Because the ideology of what equality should mean – namely a 50/50-percentage outcome in every working place and every profession when it comes to the number of men and women – is more important. But at the same time, how come gender becomes so important, when it is actually unimportant and a social construct according to the gender experts? Then why this obsessive counting of men and women, when the gender is changeable and continuous, or even for some, non-existing?!
EXPLAINING BOYS’ DECREASING RESULTS IN SCHOOL
Anna Ekström is the director of The Swedish National Agency for Education. Before this appointment, she was responsible for two reports on gender equality in school (2009:64) and preschool (2006:75) – that is, the reports were published before her appointment as general-director in 2011 (In 2013 she was also appointed by the government as chairman of Linköping´s University). I met her in a debate in the Parliament in 2010 after blogging about these public reports ordered by the government an confronted her with the contents (she clarified that she stood behind all the conclusions in the report after me quoting from SOU 2009:64) in which is was stated things like:
* In summary, one can say that there is still a gender order in the school subjects content that affects girls and boys motivation. (p 220, note – in the content!).
* Under the heading ”Underachievement as an effect of social constructions of masculinity in school,” one can read the following: ”Gender Theoretical masculinity theories sees the creation and defense of hegemonic masculinity as a crucial mechanism. The risk for the boys to seem unmanly allows them to avoid behaviours that may be perceived as feminine. This includes being good in school … In the section above, I have tried to put together some different explanations for boys’ underachievement which all assume that it is masculinity / male identity itself that is the problem. A common assumption is that social gender order is crucial for boys’ underachievement at school ” (p 237)
My comment: how come then that the results were much better some 30 -50 years ago when it was okay and not controversial for boys to ”construct” their masculine identity and there were no gender experts sent into the educational system, and secondly: how come the East Asian countries have good results without any gender experts in sight telling the boys to deconstruct their masculinity? The gender experts have convinced the Swedish politicians that the problem with the decreasing results is a gender issue… and despite all the gender coaches, gender experts, gender consultants, gender inspectors and gender pilots and the whole gender mafia sent into the educational system, the results keep falling…
The question all gender scientists should ask themselves is: how dysfunctional can a society get before it collapses? And how do we define “collapse”. As a matter of fact, this is just what the Swedish state is busy doing with our taxpayers’ money. To investigate the most efficient way to cause the final collapse of the educational system and not to mention common sense, and eventually the whole society. Common sense is being “deconstructed”, with the motivation that it is imposed on us and completely unnatural. But how come then that common sense costs nothing, while gender awareness projects cost millions of Euro every year? If it is so natural to be gender aware in the mad sense, then it would arise naturally without forcing it onto people and emptying the whole budget to maintain the “awareness”, right?
THE PROBLEM WITH ACTIVE SPERMS AND PASSIVE EGGS
The gender madness permeates the whole educational system. In one Swedish school (Frejaskolan i Gnesta, class 1-9) the teachers in biology and other natural sciences cooperate with local employed gender experts and have together come to the conclusion that The metaphor that sperms are active and eggs are passive in the reprodution process reinforces gender roles (source). Let me quote from the newspaper which brought this up already in 2011 as a good example of how one can bring in gender awareness into all other school subjects – something which is an explicit Swedish political goal. So the activity in this school is highlighted to give other schools inspiration, but also, probably, to normalize this phenomenon among the readers and the Swedish population in general. Once you think you have reached the bottom, there is always a new even more crazy ideas and idiocy waiting behind the corner. Quote from the interview:
”The teaching of sex and relationships has been left behind. This fall  a new curriculum is introduced [in Sweden] with the requirement that the subject ”sex and relationships” is included in several school subjects. But Frejaskolan in Gnesta is one step ahead.
– The important thing is that students see the interconnectedness of everything, says Maja [math and science teacher] and Karina [equality and gender expert]. How sexuality is often guided by other people’s standards and values. Therefore, teaching is also done in a neutral way. In the anatomical teaching, they try to be as clear as possible.
– We want to get away from metaphor that the sperms are active and the eggs are passive in the reproduction process, or that men’s and women’s genitals are described as complementary. Such descriptions only serve to reinforce traditional gender norms and heteronormativity, they say. ”
So in the autumn of 2011 this curriculum was introduced in the Swedish school system – with more explicit guidelines and descriptions of how to integrate the subject ”sex and relationships” and a norm critical perspective into the school subjects. The gender perspective is of course already introduced and included. And in 2013 the The Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket) launched a campaign to increase the focus and help the schools to integrate sex, gender and a norm critical perspective into every school subject. In a conference held in March now in 2014 The Swedish National Agency for Education, together with two organizations that work with sex education (RFSU and RFSL) held discussions about how to integrate sex into all subjects and how to ”avoid heteronormativity” in the teaching. The National Agency for Education has presented tools on its website for how to do this, adressing the Swedish teachers in all schools. Sex is describes as an ”overall subject” that should permeate and be integrated in all other subjects in school (Source ).
One could have expected that the decreasing and alarming results presented in December 2013 in the latest PISA-tests, in particular when it comes to Natural Sciences and Mathematics, but also when it comes to reading and writing, would make the National Agency for Education focus on how to increase the knowledge of the subjects, and not on how to integrate gender perspectives, norm critical perspectives and sexuality issues. Swedish 15-year olds also performed under the OECD-average in an additional PISA-test, which tested the pupils’ ability of problem-solving – a test which according to the press release from April 2014 has a strong connection to critical thinking, creativity and endurance. Which in quite ironic – considering the fact that the gender experts claim to improve critical thinking and creativity. Obviously we can see that the more gender scientists that are let into the school system, the worse the results get. Just take a map and convince yourselves of this fact.
Before the conference one could read in the newspapers ideas from one of the organization (RFSU – the National Association for Sexuality Education) on how to integrate sex into all school subjects – Religion as well as Physics, Chemistry and Geography. In English by learning how to flirt in English, in Physics by studying how sustainable a condom is, in Chemistry by studying how glidant affects the sustainability of a condom, in Geography by studying how common condoms are in different regions of the world, in Maths by calculating the possibility to get a sexually transmitted disease, in Technique lessons by studying technical products connected to sex, and in drawing lessons learning about erotic figures and ”consumption of pornography for pleasure-enhancing purposes.”
TO MOTIVATE THE GENDER MADNESS EXISTENCE
It is also important for the gender expert to motivate their activity and existence by continuously pointing out that the pupils have prejudices. This is a key point. In a newspaper article from 2009 (source) one could read about a school in Stockholm where the male teacher, also being a gender expert (a merit thus) was teaching children in 7th grade (during a lesson on social studies) about norms. The article is quite long, and describes how the teacher asks the pupils questions about male and female behaviour. The pupils obviously had no prejudices and were completely aware of the fact that a woman can paint the wall, and a man can cook etc, so finally the teacher showed them ”a picture of a pregnant person who looks like a man” and asks the pupils if this is a man or a woman. In the interview he comments this with the words ”I want to teach the pupils to become aware… For example that one can change clothes, wear makeup and make operations and thus say other things with the look by changing the identity marker” (say what?). Now this is a former woman that has made an operation to become a man and then got pregnant (and we have all seen her on the Oprah Winfrey show) – but the key point is that no matter what the pupils answer – man or woman – the teacher can prove them wrong, and thus conclude that they need further ”education” in gender issues. And this is crucial – to be able to show the authorities that the people must continuously be ”educated” in ”gender awareness” – it´s a lifelong project.
SWEDISH PRESCHOOL – A ”GENDER-POLITICAL PROJECT”
First of all it is stated in the public report on equality in Swedish preschools from 2006 (SOU 2006:75) about the need for a gender perspective in the pedagogical work with children, that “Preschool of the Swedish model represents both a child-pedagogical as well as a gender-political project.” Thus we send our 1 to 5 year old children to this gender-political project on a daily basis. We also find the following statement about the mission “The Preschool mission to counteract traditional gender roles and gender patterns is largely about demolishing old beliefs about what is normal behaviour for boys and girls.” My own first experience of this, before I even knew of the word “gender” – except for the mathematical notion “genus” which in Swedish coincides with the word for gender – was when we got a letter from my, at the time, 4 year old daughter´s preschool, that we had to remove those pink princess-like costumes with a flounce and replace them with shorts and T-shirt in gymnastics lessons. I the asked myself, and then also the preschool teachers, why. They answered that they wanted all the children to look the same, and of course, my following question was why they, in their gender awareness, didn’t instead remove the shorts and T-shirts from the boys, and let all the children wear the pink dress with a flounce – that is: why did they follow the male norm regarding the dress code? Did they perhaps need further courses in gender awareness?? Indeed, the Swedish state and the gender experts are really worried about the so called “ignorance” regarding the gender issue when it comes to the staff in preschools and schools, so they continuously overwhelm them with new projects, conferences and courses on gender and equality awareness.
In many preschools they set up a camera filming the childrens’ play, and then the staff has to go through the material with the gender experts, in order to discover unwanted behaviour among the children, as well as their own inadequacy when it comes to how they treat boys and girls in different ways. One common example is saying that a girl has a “sweet” dress, while a boy has a “cool” shirt – according to the gender scientists, this reflects a deep underlying prejudice about boys and girls being different, and it also has the effect to reproduce stereotypical views to express oneself in that manner. It makes girls want to be sweet and boys to want to be cool. The gender scientists usually just want to reverse the roles of boys and girls, for unknown reasons, or, in many cases – they want the behaviour to be split up in a 50/50-percentage outcome. These words (sweet and cool) are so to speak gender coded, and will result in boys and girls growing up becoming different, that is, the preschool staff write their own gender prejudices on the children, which are being born as blank slates.
GENDER CODED PLAYGROUNDS
There is no limit to the gender education needed for grown-ups working with children. One researcher found out in her PhD thesis (!), which was highlighted in a Swedish newspaper (with the heading “Forest play makes children equal”), that children “gender code” toys, even outside the preschool (in the yard) – something which she claims reinforces gender roles and power relations among the children. This is manifested when for example girls prefer the swings and boys prefer playing football or riding bicycles, so to avoid such preferences her conclusion was to let the children play in the forest, a totally harmless zone, where the children can’t gender code non-existing toys, and can’t act “gender police” against each other. However, and this is what I asked myself, and this gender scientist, in the first article I wrote in a Swedish newspaper: what will happen when more than 50% of the boys boys pick up stones, and a majority of the girls pick flowers, and thus gender code the whole forest? They will have to eliminate everything in the forest which can be connected to gender roles and stereotype perceptions of gender. Thus, the forest is also a potentially dangerous playground. And so further research is needed regarding gender neutral playgrounds.
IT ALL CRUMBLED IN A FEW DAYS
One interesting phenomenon is when the gender experts on a regular basis claim that gender education and gender awareness has to follow the children from the age of 1 in preschool and all the way up to the age of 18. So in one preschool (Ängsbacken) where they filmed the teachers and the children on a daily basis using gender consultants (this was highlighted in a Swedish newspaper, DN), one can read the gender preschool pioneer Kajsa Wahlström express her deep concern about her own project with the first famous gender preschool (Tröjde förskola, avd Björntomten och Tittmyran) where the children, after leaving that preschool at the age of 7 and entering a regular school with no gender consultants in it, suddenly started behaving as boys and girls usually do, when not supervised and monitored by gender experts, and she said: “It only took a couple of days, and it all crumbled”. So this is interesting – in only a couple of days, the school staff with no gender education unconsciously managed to reconstruct the childrens’ gender and ruin 6 years of hard work done by the preschool gender experts in deconstructing the gender roles (which unknowing parents had imposed on them from the day they were born)!
Now, instead of drawing the conclusion that the behaviour at least in some parts may be genetic, and that it is okay with differences, she comes to the conclusion that more gender education is needed for the new staff and that the children must be monitored even after preschool so that they don’t start behaving in a stereotypic way, which of course should be blamed on the grown-ups surrounding them – parents and other relatives with no university courses in gender awareness (and who contribute to reinforce the gender power relations). The question is if such people even should be allowed to have children, when they contribute to reinforce the gender power relations (and the male hierarchy) in our society?! Maybe that’s why Swedish politicians now suggest compulsory preschool from the age of 3!? And in a follow-up of the outcome of the first Swedish gender-profiled preschool led by Kajsa Wahlström (Törje förskola – departments Björntomten och Tittmyran) and Ingemar Gens twenty years ago, it is concluded that the teenagers chose higher education in exactly the same manner as adolescents not having participated in the gender project, that is in a stereotypical manner. And again, the solution to this s more gender education among adults working with children and teenagers. Why are differences a problem – this is not even a question any more in the Swedish public debate.
TAKE A MAP AND CONVINCE YOURSELVES
One can indeed ask oneself why there are more women engaging in Mathematics and Physics in East Asian and East European countries, although these counties are free from gender experts in their school systems. One can actually take a map and see that the more gender experts that are let into the educational system, the less inclined are the girls to choose Maths or other technical subjects later on. This is something the Swedish government (which probably will be removed in the elections in three weeks, and replaced with an even more ”gender aware” government which will fund even more projects and deepen and broaden the brainwash– so by 2018 we will have to solve this issue) should think about – see reality, open your eyes, think, solve the mess you have contributed to or leave the political scene forever please, we had enough of this nonsense.
So every failure of a gender project – that is: most projects – is so to speak “solved” with more gender propaganda and education and new theories, instead of accepting reality and letting the children develop according to their own preferences. But in Sweden You can get a PhD by pointing out that boys and girls play in different ways and suggest solutions to this problem, since the preschools have a legal responsibility for these questions – one example is a public report to the state (SOU 2006:75) which suggests that the preschool boys should be stopped in the doorway and prevented from rushing out on the playground before the girls, since the boys even at that early age of 3 to 5, start constructing their hegemonic masculinity, which later on will affect our whole society in a negative way by creating differences between men and women.
PRESCHOOL MISSION: DECODING THE TOYS
And differences are always interpreted as a power imbalance by the gender scientists, but the question is: who is assigning male activities a higher value? That’s right – the gender experts themselves. That is why it is so important to get boys to play with dolls and girls with cars. One method is therefore to remove the most ”gender coded” toys from the preschools. In the report on gender equality in Swedish preschool (2006:75) on page 106 we can read about how a preschool in Luleå (Svartöstadens förskola ) took away all the cars since the boys ”gender coded” them by playing with them, and thus assigned a ”higher value/status” to the cars. And on page 110 we can read about another preschool (Kullegården i Partille) where the staff decided not to take away any toys, but let the employees: ”work to decode all the material and assign the same status/value to it”. So the preschool teachers spend their days ”decoding” the toys so that the children can play with them without becoming victims of power relations. The report doesn’t say exactly how this is made in practice. But one can notice that it is the gender experts themselves that assign a higher value to male activities, and downgrade female activities – such as playing with dolls in preschool when it comes to children, but also later on when it comes to women’s activities such as taking care of children etc.
THE AGE POWER STRUCTURE
But it doesn’t stop with gender. With an intersectional perspective, not only gender should be considered, but also ethnicity, religion, age and sexuality should be taken into account for a complete analysis of the power relations that children reproduce if they are not surrounded by gender experts 24 hour a day. One quite new phenomenon, which appeared recently, is “the age power structure” in preschools – recently a preschool (Paviljongen) in Stockholm stopped celebrating birthdays with refernce to the age power structure. The preschool works with so called “intersectional normcritical education” (as almost all preschools do nowadays…). And I quote the teacher interviewed in the newspaper:
”We have discussed whether it is good to celebrate birthdays, as we simultaneously work so hard to challenge the age power structure. We don’t think one should connect incompetence to being young and a lot of power and competence to being old…. explains Aisha Lundgren, who is employed as a gender pedagogue at the preschool.” (source)
Well, it’s good at least that they admit that they themselves are at the same competence level as the children they take care of at the age of 1 to 5. Considering the content of the Swedish public reports on gender issues, nobody should be surprised. 🙂
WHAT IS FREE WILL?
One thing that also has to be mentioned is the double standards when it comes to men and women in behaviour and choice of profession and other life choices. For example, if a girl wants to become a nurse, then she is considered to be a victim of the surrounding patriarchy and its imposed values that women want to take care of others, while if she decides to become a fireman, then this choice is an expression of her true will. New – how can the gender scientist know what the philosophers have been pondering about for thousands of years: what’s free will and what’s not. But wait a minute – this means that I as a mathematician (a male-dominated field) have chosen my profession out of free will (and thus spent years of my life contributing to the gender experts’ statistics), while the female gender experts (being active in a female-dominated field) have not chosen their profession freely, ha ha! 🙂
THE DOUBLE STANDARDS
Another example is a daily newspaper that recently reported that 50% of the women read for their children on a daily basis, while “only” about 30% of the men do the same. According to the gender expert interviewed in this article, this is a really tragic phenomenon since the women thus fall into a so called “women’s trap” which affects their income and career, while the men “miss the opportunity” of the enriching activity of reading stories for their children. How come that reading fairytales for children is a trap for women but enriching for men? How come it is not enriching for women? Also, when it comes to staying home with newborn children, Swedish authorities, politicians and gender experts encourage men to take half of the maternity leave and the propaganda is massive. A woman who wants to stay at home with her child the first years is ”trapped” while a man expressing the same wish is considered to be ”equal”.
EQUALITY PROBLEM: CAN’T MEN BREASTFEED?
But men can’t breastfeed, which is also of course a manifestation of the inequality in our society, so one of the leading TV-profiles in Sweden set up a TV-show where he invited a man, who wanted to be “equal” with his partner, in order to get him to produce breast milk using a pump. Every doctor however knows that the only “natural” way for a man to produce breast milk is having a brain tumor in the pituitary which leads to an overproduction of the hormone prolactine. However, this didn’t stop the TV-host from inviting a gender aware professor (Sigbritt Werner) which has been especially engaged in male breastfeeding – expressing her thoughts about the breast feeding pump-project with the words: “I think our whole society should gain if more men try to breastfeed their children.” This professor of course also has a history as a chairman of the council for gender equality and diversity at her department. But still, is there no common sense left or any connection with reality at all in their minds? No, everybody has to behave in the exact same manner – everything else in interpreted as an inequality. There is actually a medical term that perfectly describes the state when somebody is completely disconnected from reality, and that term is psychosis – in this case we are talking about a general gender madness mass psychosis. And it will be exported to as many countries as possible through the EU.
THROW AWAY THE BOOKS IN PRESCHOOL
Moreover, we have several contradictions in public documents and guidelines regarding the preschool project, as the gender experts are the ones nominated to interpret what gender equality means in practice. The Swedish preschool has an explicit mission to communicate and pass on the cultural heritage. In public documents with the guidelines (Lpfö 98) we can read that the preschool has a task to “carry over a cultural heritage – values, traditions and history, language and knowledge – from one generation to the next.” At the same time gender coaches/experts/consultants/pilots (etc, whatever they call themselves) remove books with fairy tales as well as songs and poems, or make changes in their content, since they are considered to collide with the other explicit preschool mission – namely “to counteract gender stereotypes and traditional gender roles.” And the cultural heritage is considered to communicate these things according to the gender experts.
Therefore, gender consultants are employed to investigate methods of how to counteract gender stereotypes in preschools, something which can result in changing sex of the characters as well as changing the actual story to make it gender neutral. But, as a matter of fact, the gender experts actually just promote reversed gender roles, making the men behave in a traditional female manner and vice versa. In the fairytale Little Red Riding Hood, some preschools make the huntsman a woman, and in a song about a farmer, in the name of diversity (although everybody should be equal, but not when it comes to sexual preferences obviously), they change the old text from “The farmer has a wife” to “The farmer has a husband”. There are also examples where the preschool staff is recommended by the gender consultants to solve the problem by just taking away the literature with well-known fairy tales and old Swedish songs beloved by the people. On page 114 in a report to the government with recommended concrete measures of how to counteract gender roles in preschool (SOU 2006:75) one can read about preschool personnel reporting back to the gender experts about their progress:”We have been discussing back and forth how to handle the cultural heritage when it goes against our mission to counteract traditional gender roles. Finally we have decided to lift off some of the titles from the children’s shelves because we don’t feel that we can account for what the books contain. We may read these books in the future, when having discussions of how it has been in the past, but we don’t want the children to open and browse through the books where both images and texts convey passivity for girls and activity for boys.”
IS WEARING A SKIRT GENDER EQUALITY?
Several preschools encourage boys to wear a dress or a skirt to abolish gender roles and in this way free the boys from the narrow gender role they are given – because according to the gender experts, equality is not only about girls, it’s about liberating boys and men from the (imaginary) masculine identity, and one way of doing this is changing the way they dress. But if this is a step towards equality, then the gender scientists must consider several cultures in the Middle East to be very equal since the men wear white dress-like outfits and the logical consequence is that Swedish men and boys should go on a trip to the Middle East and learn from the progress on crossing gender boundaries in these countries. And maybe the gender scientists should follow to study this norm breaking behaviour that they can only dream about will come true in Sweden.
FUCK HAPPINESS – IDEOLOGY COMES FIRST
The gender experts are also open with the fact that their gender equality goal does not necessarily coincide with happiness among parents and children. Quote from the public report on gender equality in preschool (2006:75) page 58: “[Those who wear their gender glasses] probably need go no further than into the hall to discover it…The children are happy, the personnel is satisfied’ and the parents are satisfied. But as we have already noted, well-being does not automatically mean that the preschool has gender equality.” In the public report one can also read that the parents of the children often are reluctant to the gender projects and experiments but they have to accept them since the preschools have a legal responsibility to achieve gender equality, and it is the gender experts that decide what counts as equality and what doesn’t, and clearly happiness and satisfaction is not a priority.
IS THERE A MALE PERSPECTIVE OR NOT?
Another astonishing fact one can read about in the public reports on gender equality is that Swedish gender scientists criticize gender experts in other countries like Norway, Belgium and Great Britain (Scotland) (page 52 under the heading 2.6: ”Män + förskola = jämställdhet?” In SOU 2006:75) since the gender scientists in these countries working with childcare and preschools want men to be employed in the preschools for the wrong reason – namely because men have something to contribute with because they are men. The mistake those other gender experts are doing is “assuming that gender/sex as such has an important function”. Swedish gender experts however also want 50 percent men as employees in the preschools, but not because they have something to contribute with because they are men, since: ”The Nordic view however is that gender is a social construct and that masculinity is changeable.” .
Then it becomes natural to ask: who do Swedish gender scientists want 50% of the staff in the preschools to consist of men – if the fact that they are men has no relevance whatsoever?? And here we also have another interesting phenomenon – men have nothing to contribute to in preschool which is related to their gender – there is no “male perspective”, but when it comes to company boards, there is, according to most Swedish feminists and gender experts, a “female perspective” that is important in order for the company to be successful. So when it suits them there is a difference (a male vs female perspective) but when it doesn’t suit them, there are no differences whatsoever.
Now I am finished with my short introduction with information (a short blog post – as always 😉 ) – here is the film by RT (link to film on RT here or here) and on Youtube:
By the way I recommend my readers to start watching RT Crosstalk where I have found some very interesting programs during the last months.