Researchers Want Kindergarten Teachers to Train Kids in Perversion

We can't have kids remaining normal in an abnormal world.

By William M Briggs Published on July 25, 2017

It was early morning one day in 2017. The Lord’s Angel Longsuffering spoke to Satan. “Where have you been?”

Then Satan answered. “Well, I had just set about my daily round of going to and fro in the earth. Walking up and down on it. You know, going about like a roaring lion seeking whom I may devour? Standard stuff.

“But I made the mistake of starting at a department of Sociology. At the University of Michigan. Ask me why starting there was a mistake, radiant Longsuffering.”

“Oh, very well. Why was it a mistake, dark Satan?”

“Because they stole my job! They’re even sinking their fangs into children. They don’t need me any more! And after all I’ve done for them.”

It’s Science!

Perhaps the Father of Lies had in mind UM’s Heidi M. Gansen. She has written a peer-reviewed paper: “Reproducing (and Disrupting) Heteronormativity: Gendered Sexual Socialization in Preschool Classrooms” in Sociology of Education.

Gansen fears that normal children acting in a normal fashion in preschools “facilitates the construction of gender.” Instead of promoting more creative forms of what we once called “perversion.”

Allowing little girls to kiss little boys “may contribute to the larger rape culture.”

The scientist was perplexed by normal, sane behavior on the part of kids and their teachers. So she set out to discover sources of the “pervasiveness of heteronormativity.” Of “early socialization messages.” Because allowing little girls to kiss little boys “may contribute to the larger rape culture.”

In Gansen’s paper we learn what scientists, working as only elite, well-funded scientists can, have discovered:

Schools are heteronormative social contexts that often mirror the dominant beliefs and structures of society, including and especially the norms and behaviors associated with ‘acceptable’ sexuality. … As a result, schools are critical sites in which dominant beliefs about sexuality and gender are (re)produced and enforced.

Who knew?

This stuff is scary. Indeed, “Hidden curricula” exist. There are “covert lessons that often act as means of social control,” Gansen warns. “[W]e know very little about how teachers’ practices inform or disrupt heterosexualizing processes in schools.”

So Gansen sat and watched what happened in several preschool classrooms. Here’s what she discovered.

The Horrors of Pretending

In one class, “teachers often talked about two children, Carson and Lydia (both three years old), as if they were in a relationship.” Later, these two were observed playing house. We might be concerned that these two grow up to be adults and play the game for real.

Some anecdotes make for rough reading. “When a preschool teacher was about to get married, she talked to one child, Willow, about how the child too will wear a wedding dress when she gets married.”

The story does not turn out happily. Willow actually then wore a dress to school soon after. Worse, a teacher “complimented Willow on how beautiful she was and what a pretty bride she would make someday.”

Obviously, this teacher could have told Willow her other options. That she could some day pretend to be a man if she wanted. Or that she could dye her hair purple. Then seek out sexual relations with older women. Or that she could tattoo every inch of her skin that escapes piercing. And become a feminist sociologist.

Indeed, the options for Willow are so various. Her teachers could spend every working minute explaining to the child all the ways she doesn’t have to be normal or sane. Instead, they wasted their efforts encouraging her to be a little girl.

Normal Is Not Acceptable

If Mao’s China and Stalin’s Russia taught us anything, it’s that you have to work hard to suppress normal behavior.

Gansen says her “findings demonstrate the importance of teachers actively working to disrupt heteronormativity, which is already ingrained in children by ages 3 to 5.” Disrupt heteronormativity. “Efforts to ‘correct’ heteronormative socialization cannot focus just on teachers,” of course. We have to go after parents, too.

Why? Because “even in preschools that utilized the most restrictive approaches to sexual socialization, children still engaged in some heteronormative practices with their peers (e.g., kissing and relationships), albeit less frequently and more covertly.” If Mao’s China and Stalin’s Russia taught us anything, it’s that you have to work hard to suppress normal behavior.

Now, as the fanciful dialog at the beginning suggests, the problem is not one researcher at one institution. Gansen cites dozens of others, and they in turn cite hundreds, thousands more. Take for example Martin and Bobier who wrote the article “Preschool Sexuality Education?!” that “critically assesses formal sexuality education for preschoolers.”

This is wide-spread and spreading wider. When a culture’s “best minds” decide that it’s not normal to be normal, that culture cannot long survive.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • meamsane

    Looks like maybe Heidi M. Gansen needs a “straight Jacket” and a padded cell. “Nooooo, I’m the one who’s normal. It’s the rest of you that are craaaazzzzyyyyyyyy”!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Ryan

    One has to wonder how many more layers there are to the bottom those on the left keep peeling up?

  • Patmos

    Heidi M. Gansen is absolutely psychotic. There’s no other conclusion that can be made.

  • Nobody Specific

    I suppose it never occurred to any of these researchers that children selecting these “heteronormative” roles and games inside the class room without prompting, might indicate that they are normal, and its their own sexual perversions that are not.

  • Andy6M

    William M. Briggs:

    “Obviously, this teacher could have told Willow her other options. That
    she could some day pretend to be a man if she wanted. Or that she could
    dye her hair purple. Then seek out sexual relations with older women. Or
    that she could tattoo every inch of her skin that escapes piercing. And
    become an obese feminist sociologist.”

    I appreciate the article, and I agree with your concerns, but the above quote from your article leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It was fine until the last sentence of the paragraph. There was no need to make a personal attack on Gansen’s weight (which is what it seems you did) – It’s immaterial to the point and mean spirited. I’m sorry to say but that one word cost you the high ground. That’s too bad, because the rest of the article rightly highlights an issue of real concern.

  • Gary

    Another example of the dangers of “higher education”. If the people at UM had brains that worked, this woman would already have been fired.

    • m-nj

      it really doesn’t matter where people like this socialogists work… their lifeblood is OUR TAX DOLLARS! take that away, and they (should) come under control (unless there are $$ coming in from liberal LGBT-friendly foundations).

  • Paul

    Indeed the inmates are running the asylum.

  • “Gansen says her “findings demonstrate the importance of teachers actively working to disrupt heteronormativity, which is already ingrained in children by ages 3 to 5.” Disrupt heteronormativity. “Efforts to ‘correct’ heteronormative socialization cannot focus just on teachers,” of course. We have to go after parents, too.”

    This speaks to three things:
    1. It is absolutely true that education is necessarily religious, ethical, and political.
    2. That education cannot be universalized, because if it is the creepiest and lowest moral/biological and least rigorous standards will prevail.
    3. That the left neither understands human nature nor loves individual human beings.

  • DCM7

    “you have to work hard to suppress normal behavior.”

    And those who are doing that hard work — for reasons grounded in arrogance, deception, and self-servingness — will have a horrible judgment to face. Matthew 18:6 comes to mind.

    Such evil can’t be explained by human nature alone. If one can’t see the hand of a supernatural enemy at play here, then one isn’t looking for it.

  • cestusdei

    Children have always been their target. Molech needs to be fed.

    • Psimitar

      Molech gets more than his fill. We’ve just found a way to make it efficient. We do it right there in the womb.

  • Yawrate

    But aren’t heteronormative relationships, well, normal?

    • GLT

      Normal is an obscenity to progressives. I’m sure it is on their list of words that should be considered hate speech.

  • Yawrate

    I live in Ann Arbor and deal with this crap on a regular basis.

    Jews against Israel. Right in front of the temple(s).

    Environmentalists against fossil fuels. (That is to say, marching against fossil fuels in December and ducking into stores for a quick warmup.)

    Sometimes I feel like I’m surrounded by idiots.

    Nice idiots.

  • davidrev17

    But Mr. Briggs: Lighten-up, will ya!

    After all: just what does genocide, rape, murder, stealing, infant-stomping, lying, or even “heteronormative” behavior mean, in a wholly Darwinized universe anyway; namely the very worldview, of which includes evolutionary psychology, to which this UM Sociologist, Dr. Hansen would tenaciously cling – with fideistic (blind-faith) fervor at that – since we rational/moral H%*o sapiens sapiens are simply “dancing to our own DNA” anyway??

    I say, slap the next person’s face you see – with unmitigated Darwinian abandon – and test the proverbial “waters,” just to see if the affected individual harbors the same sort of naturalistic enthusiasm as Darwinists do. If they seem to struggle somewhat with your behavior, just reassure them by saying, “my amygdala made me do it”!

    I just love the implications of mindless, thus unintelligent evolutionary ethics…don’t you?? But how can the pronouncements of this Amoral macroevolutionary philosophy – declared by scientists, in the name of scientism – be regarded as true, or morally binding upon each other; especially when its very logic demands precisely the opposite implications??

    “In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”

    — Richard Dawkins, ‘River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life,” (1995).

Inspiration
The Strangely Mysterious Beauty of Christmas
Tom Gilson
More from The Stream
Connect with Us