French Family Associations Call New Sex Education Programme “Ideological Brainwashing”

All forms of non-parental "sex education" are ideological brainwashing. Of course, the entire public school education in France is the same.

From The European Conservative

By Hélène de Lauzun, PhD

Predictably, the initiative promotes gender ideology under the pretext of harm prevention.

Controversy is brewing in France over the reform of its national sex education curriculum, which would be introduced in state schools and any schools under contract with the state. The proposed curriculum promotes gender theory and violates the privacy of the very young, prompting family and religious associations to mobilise against it.

Even the deputy minister for education is concerned that the programme is unsuitable for children, although the Left is now criticising the ‘conservative offensive’ against the project.

The new sex education curriculum, currently being drawn up by the Ministry of Education, has been in the works for over a year and a half. The project was created on the initiative of former Education Minister Pap Ndiaye, known for his militant progressivism, who made it one of his priorities. It is due to be submitted to the Higher Education Council for approval in mid-December. Many associations have protested against its content, which they consider inappropriate.

Education ‘in emotional and relational life’—in official terms—is to begin at the age of three. The text’s supporters explain that the first years of the programme should focus on the discovery of the human body, self-esteem, and consent, and that sexuality has no place there. But family associations are worried, as other similar initiatives have blithely crossed the boundaries of decency in the past.

Ludovine de la Rochère, president of the Syndicat de la famille (Family union), which grew out of the La Manif Pour Tous movement against gay marriage, is alarmed by what amounts to “ideological brainwashing from the age of 3,” adding

Adults talking to children about sex without their consent. That’s a problem.

While she welcomes certain common-sense aspects of the programme—respect for privacy; responsibility and control of one’s impulses; control of feelings; the dignity of the human person; rights and duties—she highlights the omnipresence of concepts inherited from neo-feminism and gender theory. The ‘fight against gender stereotypes’ would be inescapable in the content taught, from nursery through to secondary school. Children are encouraged to ‘deconstruct’ gender stereotypes from an early age, with the underlying message that ‘women are all victims and men are all guilty.’

De la Rochère is concerned about the ideology underlying the programme, which is apparent at every turn, with a central and major problem: the deliberate failure to take parents into account in the process of educating children about their feelings. In its detailed analysis of the programme on its website, the Syndicat de la famille points out:

Parents have nothing to say about [sex education], which is not in keeping with parental authority or the Education Code. They are put on the same footing as school administrators, which is unacceptable in this area. It is unacceptable not to encourage them to do this education themselves at home, to listen to them and engage in dialogue, and to listen to them if they have criticisms or warnings to make.

Many other issues are open to question: the encouragement of a ‘scientific’ examination of the body in very young children; the assumption that all children have an active sexuality by the end of secondary school; the failure to take sufficient account of the ravages of pornography from the earliest age, and so much more.

The Syndicat de la famille is not alone in sounding the alarm. In an official press release, Catholic education also expressed “serious reservations.” Private educational establishments under contract with the state, which in France are mainly Catholic schools, will be subjected to this programme. The Secretary General of Catholic Education says it “takes the side of replacing the educational responsibility of parents.” He denounces its “adult approach,” a design unsuited to the mentality of children.

Even  Alexandre Portier—the minister responsible for school success—expressed his reservations to the senators who questioned him about the current reform: 

This programme as it stands is not acceptable.

Declaring concern about the omnipresence of gender theory, he said he would make a “personal commitment” to ensure that it “has no place in schools.” Portier is also concerned about the high risk of activism inherent in the use of outside speakers in schools—echoing the scandals denounced by parents’ associations, which have rebelled against LGBT activists approved by the ministry appearing in front of their children.

In response, Planned Parenthood took aim at the minister, accusing him of being “the mouthpiece of conservative and reactionary movements.” Some teachers’ unions are finding it “problematic” to be giving “a sounding board to some very dangerous small groups”, and are urging the Education Minister, Annie Genetet, to stand firm and keep the programme as it is. 

According to France info, the expression ‘gender identity’, which appeared 17 times in the latest version of the document, could be deleted by the ministry. The battle is far from over.