Written by Guest Writer Ian Wishart

A warning for all parents. The US CDC issued a report last week that confirmed 1/4 (25%) of all US high school students now identify in the LGBTQIA+ category, up from around 1.5% in the 1980s.

It hasn’t happened by accident.

Many kids are now utterly gender confused and are asking for puberty blockers.

Why are kids seeking chemical castration drugs that will ruin their health, fertility, sexual enjoyment and leave them with osteoporosis normally found in the elderly? Because an organization of radical trans activists called Inside Out has an NZ government contract to push gender confusion and puberty blockers in all NZ schools… from the ages of 5 upwards.

The pedagogy (teaching policy) behind this is Gender Studies and Queer Theory, largely pioneered by a bisexual pedophile psychologist from NZ named John Money…who believed that gender roles and identity were “learnt”, not connected to our biological sex.

Queer Theory now plays a key role in our teacher training, and particularly the belief that it’s a good thing to create “sexuality and gender disruptions” in children from preschool upwards, so that they can break free of “heteronormative” family conditioning and find their own gender identity.

Money (Google him), described as “the man who invented gender”, gave us a phrase we all use today around the world: “sexual orientation”. He, along with fellow pedophile Alfred Kinsey, is listed as the father of gender identity theory.

But Money embraced his darkness. He experimented on six year old twin brothers, one with a horrific genital injury. As part of “treatment” he made the boys strip naked and fondle each other. He also forced them to simulate sexual intercourse with each other. These were twins.

He filmed the sessions and told the boys “never tell your parents”.

Both boys – one turned into a transgender girl by Money – later died, one blowing his head off with a shotgun and the other from a drug overdose.

Despite this, the Eastern Southland Art Gallery has named its main wing after John Money, and the Inside Out “charity” contracted to the Ministry of Education is now recommending that NZ school children be taught how John Money is a transgender pioneer.

Attached, in addition to screenshots backing up what I have just said, you will find the government’s new transgender ideology curriculum rolled out since 2020.

In the past, sex education was optional in schools and restricted to specific classes that parents could pull their kids out of.

Since 2020, however, trans ideology including encouraging primary school children from years 1-8 to consider “hormone blockers”, has been woven into the general school curriculum… classes that parents apparently have no say in (although this may not be correct – more at the end of the article).

Your children are being groomed by predators hired by a heterophobic Ministry of Education to deliberately “disrupt” their innate “sexuality and gender”.

In a nutshell, the Labour Greens government (with no fightback from National), is socially engineering kiwi kids in ways that Josef Mengele couldn’t even dream of.

Let’s take a deep dive into Relationships and Sexuality Education: A Guide for Teachers, Leaders and Boards of Trustees, Years 1-8. This is the curriculum guide for 5-12 year olds.

At page 19 of the document, the crucial role of schools as a mechanism for active social engineering is spelt out. “The school culture is very powerful…all schools give akonga (students) and their families messages about what is acceptable and what is not, in terms of gender and sexuality. Values are inherent in the practices, policies, and language used by teachers and school leaders.”

Having declared their power, schools are then told to break the values that families may have given their kids:

“Schools are encouraged to question gender stereotypes and assumptions about sexuality, including:
• Gender norms
• Gender binaries
• Gender stereotypes
• Sex norms, for example, the assumption that sex characteristics at birth are always male or female”

Remember, until very recently gender was synonymous with biological sex. In scientific terms, it still is. The ecosystem would collapse to extinction within in a decade if fauna suddenly decided to ditch gender behavioural patterns and courtship. But in Gender Studies/Queer Theory which drives Education policy, gender is separate from biological sex, not just for a minority but for every child that wants to explore.

The document continues, saying primary school cultures should acknowledge “the sexual diversity of Aotearoa New Zealand communities. The culture should recognise and actively support the rights of those who identify as takatapui, lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, intersex, transgender.”

At page 21, the curriculum guide says primary school boys should be able to use the girls’ changing rooms:

“Trans, non-binary and intersex akonga should be able to choose a toilet and changing room that matches their gender identity. Trans girls (boys identifying as girls) should be able to use the female toilets if they prefer to.”

If you thought the rollout of gender neutral toilet cubicles was going to solve that problem, think again. The Ministry of Education says “trans, non-binary and intersex akonga should not be required to use this rather than male or female toilets”.

Again, this policy advice is directed to primary schools. Transgender surgery is not available until 16 at the earliest, so all the trans, non-binary kids in the girls’ changing rooms after swimming or sport will be biological male in body form, regardless of what they say they identify as.

At page 23 the main briefing on how to teach relationships and sexuality education in classrooms begins. RSE is primarily part of the Health and PhysEd syllabus, says the document, and “it must be included in teaching programmes for years 1-8”.

The next paragraph is crucial, for parents who think sexuality education is confined to one class a year that they get notified about. No, the trans ideology is embedded in all learning areas:

“RSE can also be taught in other learning areas and contexts. In years 1-8 classes, there are many opportunities to focus on this learning while working across the curriculum or in authentic social contexts.”

In English on page 28, for example, five year olds might be read a story about a heteronormative family and then encouraged to “critically explore how the diversity of families, schools and communities is represented in the texts…explore and critique the representation of gender roles and relationships in texts…engage in dialogue and debate in the context of provocative online posts linked to relationships, gender and sexuality.”

This is the insidious “gender and sexuality disruption” that Queer Theory academics want – teachers are to present supposedly heteronormative stories and then carefully tear them apart in front of impressionable primary students.

Having raised doubt, the school curriculum then hammers the wedge in by getting youngsters to “study sets of texts that showcase different perspectives on gender roles, identify these roles and then critique these perspectives, arguing for and against them”.

The quality of the for and against will be directly related to which “facts” the teacher brings to the table.

To further mess with the kids’ minds, the curriculum says students should “write an argument from the perspective of a polarising character in history (someone with a different world view) in order to convince a loved one to agree with what that character believed…”

In Science, “akonga can consider how biological sex has been constructed and measured over time and what this means in relation to people who have variations in sex characteristics.”

Look at that statement again: “biological sex has been constructed”? The existence of every advanced living animal on the planet has depended for hundreds of millions of years on the reality of biological sex.

Yet New Zealand’s Ministry of Education wants science lessons to create an assumption in impressionable young minds that biological sex is just a social construct.

But it gets worse. Even though countries around the world are backing away from puberty blockers at a million miles an hour because of serious health dangers, the Ministry of Education wants to float the possibility of using blockers to ALL primary school students:

“Akonga can consider variations in puberty, including the role of hormone blockers.”

To further break primary children’s sense of their own gender identity, students are made “to explore what ‘male’ and ‘female’ mean in relation to various living things, for example plants, sea creatures, and fungi.”

The mocking quote marks around male and female are in the curriculum document. Young children at primary school are education sponges. Now the Ministry is brainwashing kids into thinking they are sponges.

In Tech classes, page 29, “akonga can explore symbols linked to the gay and transgender rights movements”.


No wonder kids have been dropping out of school under Labour. But, again, it gets worse:

“Akonga can identify how gender expectations are embedded in technology, for example in the design and style of power tools and other tools”.

So a drill is a secret phallic symbol rather than the most efficient design to create a hole? A RocketLab rocket is a hidden symbol of the oppressive heteronormative patriarchy rather than the most efficient design to overcome atmospheric drag?

In Social Studies, years 1-8 will “consider famous ‘rainbow’ figures from history”.

And on it goes.

The specific RSE goals for the various primary learning levels, 1 to 4, show the goal by the time your child is six (Level 1, page 30) is that they “understand the relationship between gender, identity and wellbeing.”

At ages 7 and 8 (Level 2, page 31) your child will get good grades if they are able to “identify gender stereotypes, understand the difference between gender and sex, and know that there are diverse gender and sexual identities in society.”

By 9 and 10 (Level 3, page 32) your child should “understand how communities develop and use inclusive policies and practices to support gender and sexual diversity (eg, at public events, during physical activity and sports, within whanau..”

When you, as a parent, are finally asked at Level 4, page 33, whether you want your child to attend the sex education class for 11 and 12 year olds, there’s already been six years of brainwashing your kids to consider a transgender future with hormone blockers under the bridge – none of which your school asked you whether you consented to your child being exposed to.

The curriculum guide notes (page 41) that schools can now provide contraceptives to “young people of any age”, but that parents still have the right to withdraw their child “from contraceptive education (under section 51 of the Education and Training Act 2020).”

Section 51 of the Act, however, is very vague and it may be possible for parents to request, in writing, that their child be withdrawn from any lesson incorporating the RSE ideas listed above during years 1-8.

The reason for this is that s51 doesn’t restrict withdrawal rights to contraception education. In fact, it doesn’t even mention contraception.

The Act says
51 Release from tuition for specified parts of health curriculum
(1) A parent of a student enrolled at a State school may ask the principal in writing to ensure that the student is released from tuition in specified parts of the health curriculum related to sexuality education.
(2) On receiving a request under subsection (1), the principal must ensure that—
(a) the student is released from the relevant tuition; and
(b) the student is supervised during the period of release from that tuition.
(3) Subsection (1) does not require a principal to ensure that a student who is to be excluded from tuition in specified parts of the health curriculum related to sexuality education is excluded at any other time while a teacher deals with a question raised by another student that relates to the specified part of the curriculum.
Nowhere in the Act is “specified parts of the health curriculum” defined, meaning the withdrawal rights might apply to the entire RSE indoctrination.

The RSE curriculum guide for schools backs this up, at page 42, where school principals are required to ensure “that any student whose parent has applied in writing to have their child excused from tuition in any particular element of RSE is excluded from the relevant tuition and is supervised during the period of that tuition.”

At page 43 of the RSE policy, the Ministry again writes that even if a Board of Trustees has adopted the complete RSE teaching package, “…according to the Education and Training Act 2020 (section 51), parents or caregivers may write to the principal requesting to have their child excluded from any particular element of sexuality education in a health education programme. The principal is required to ensure that the student is excluded…”

At page 8 of the RSE document, it states that everything in section three (where the wider curriculum integration discussed above came from, is part of the RSE Health curriculum:

“These guidelines describe the place of health education, including RSE, in the curriculum (in section 3) and set out the legal requirements for schools (in section 4).”

Ultimately it’s a question for lawyers, but if parents gave written instructions to the principal that they wanted their kids pulled out of lessons mentioning these issues, someone somewhere would have to get a legal opinion and test it in court. It would be impossible for schools to deliver RSE across the whole curriculum if teachers had to arrange for alternative supervision of children every time that day’s lesson plan strayed into gender ideology – and you can multiply that disruption across all the classrooms on a given day.

I strongly urge you to share this far and wide, as the mainstream media have kept all this hidden behind pathetic cries of “transphobia”, while ignoring the heterophobic mission statement of the Ministry of Education.

It’s not the ordinary trans folk that are the problem, it is the activist groomers and Queer Theory/Gender Studies academics who are making your kids question who they are.

Read the official curriculum guide for your children. Contact your local school principals for a briefing. Email Boards of Trustees members. Write an email to your principal requesting the withdrawal of your child under s51 of the Act from any class lessons that cover issues described in the RSE Curriculum Guide 2020. That will force the schools to respond.

If you don’t speak up for your kids now, then when? The Pied Piper is already marching them out of town.



Leave a Comment

This Feature Coming Soon!