An Australian legal academic last week published a critique of the Safe Schools program, pointing out “serious flaws” in its medical, legal and academic foundations.
“There is certainly a place for an anti-bullying program that addresses the issues with which the Safe Schools program is concerned, but this program needs to be rescued from its progenitors.”
He pointed out that the Safe Schools program is rife with poor statistics, including a claim that 10 percent of people are homosexually inclined. This statistic “cannot be validated by any reliable research”, according to Parkinson, and that La Trobe University – closely linked to the Safe Schools program – reported a figure of one percent only a few years ago.
Additionally, Parkinson described “gender fluidity” as an “odd and unscientific belief” which has no medical foundation. While the Safe Schools materials describe gender as fluid, “for about 99.5% of the population, there is complete congruence between sexual characteristics and gender identity”.
He also highlighted that while the Safe Schools materials present sexual orientation as fixed, adolescent sexuality is “volatile” and many same-sex attractions are temporary (page 12-15).
“It is not the case that someone who identifies as being same-sex attracted at 13-14 years of age has a fixed and stable orientation… Teenage same-sex attraction may or may not say anything about their adult sexuality.”
It is irresponsible to teach that same-sex attraction is fixed when the evidence states otherwise. It is also irresponsible and dangerous to promote gender transitioning “without the need for any medical and psychological guidance and even without parental knowledge or consent.”
The Parkinson paper also described how deep-seated the ideology of the Safe Schools program is:
“The differentiation made between sex and gender, and the notion that gender is fluid and may be socially constructed, lie at the heart of the Safe Schools program… This is now quite a widespread belief system, especially in parts of the western world. This belief system is deeply held by some, and has many characteristics of being a religious belief …[It] is not the more rational because it is a belief that is sincerely held. Sincere people hold all sorts of strange beliefs.”
He also raised fair and reasonable questions, such as why such beliefs should even be taught to children in schools:
“Should such odd and unscientific beliefs, emanating from philosophy and gender studies departments rather than medical faculties, be taught as fact to primary and secondary school age children?”
As an editorial in The Australian noted last week:
“[T]he Parkinson paper notes that advocates for Safe Schools in effect bully schoolchildren and parents who do not subscribe to the fluidity faith, branding them as homophobic or transphobic. Safe Schools never was an innocuous anti-bullying program.”
The Safe Schools problem is a fraudulent attempt to impose “gender ideology” on schools. Safe Schools perpetrates false claims about same-sex attraction and gender, thereby setting up students to struggle later in life when grappling with the difficult topics Safe Schools promotes. The Australian people deserve to know the truth about Safe Schools. In addition, our children must be taught the truth about sexual attraction and gender, not indoctrinated with falsehoods to promulgate a controversial agenda.