British Columbia’s public school teacher’s union has proposed a solution to those who object to radical sex education curriculum: just make everything queer – including the outdoors.
Tristin Hopper of the National Postbroke the story this week in his Canadian politics newsletter, “First Reading.” A BC Teachers’ Federation publication, Teacher Magazine, featured an article by Jody Polukoshko titled, “Queering outdoors education.” Polukoshko is “a Vancouver teacher and past president of the Vancouver Elementary and Adult Educator’s Society.”
Polukoshko, Hopper noted, “invites B.C.’s approximately 50,000 public school teachers to employ leaves, seeds, and even clouds towards ‘debunking the universality of heterosexuality in nature.’” According to Polukoshko, this should start in kindergarten. Her article highlights just how thoroughly the BC Teachers’ Federation has been captured by LGBT activists. Polukoshko writes:
Working within the current backlash against SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) in schools, and against 2SLGBTQIA+ rights, it’s essential that we demystify and move SOGI work out of the silos of humanities and physical health and into our day-to-day teaching, inclusive practice, and relationship building. This also means a critical examination of some of the performative allyship and pink-washing that affects activists working for fundamental social change.
In other words, it is the task of educators to ensure that LGBT ideology is part of everything children learn, regardless of the subject, because this is an essential part of the ongoing goal of “queering their pedagogy.” In case you thought that “drag” events were just child-friendly, fun-filled dress-up events – as so many LGBT activists repeatedly state for public consumption – let Polukoshko disabuse you of that notion:
Drag pedagogy is the result of the work of queer and trans academics, teachers, and drag practitioners, who have recognized drag as a portal to possibility and the decentring of static, binary, colonial, and imposed categories such as male/female, cis/trans, right/wrong, and inside/outside. It brings concepts of play, invention, creativity, and creation to the forefront, not only for student identity but also to the whole system (or cis-tem) for the purpose of shifting or destroying it.
In case you missed the point in all that gobbledygook, “drag pedagogy” has been designed by LGBT activists for the purposes of “shifting or destroying” the entire system (“cis-tem”) of “heteronormativity” and even the sex binary itself. It is a systematic demolition of knowledge itself, in order to replace it with LGBT ideology. This is where outdoor education comes in – Polukoshko explains that “a small group of queer and trans folks” and their allies in Vancouver have been working on a new program.
“Queering outdoor education practitioners work across K–12, and the project reflects a curiosity about accessibility and the cis-heteronormative assumptions that often flow from biological inquiry,” she writes. Experiencing nature with students provides educators with an opportunity to undermine the “primacy of hetero-essentialist and gendered reproduction” and to ask important questions, such as:
What lenses do we use when we make our analyses, inferences, and conclusions? Are they disproportionately and persistently gendered and binary? Do they include assumptions about family structure that silence queer narratives and organization?
In fact, traditional science itself is one of the enemies, because heteronormativity is “clearly perpetuated in science and pop culture,” which she predictably claims causes “harm.” Children, Polukoshko wrote, should be instructed that “imposed categories” like “right/wrong” and “male/female” are to be rejected. “Why do we continue to rely on gender as a sorting category despite the broad existence of natural diversity and informed advocacy against such categorization?” she asked.
The 40-page “Queering Outdoor Education” curriculum linked in Polukoshko’s article is truly wild. “Activities include having children remove invasive ivy and using it as a metaphor for the oppression of gay and trans people,” Hopper wrote. “‘Highlight that much like native plants, queer people have always been here,’ it reads.” Another example: “Teachers are also told to have their charges observe the ‘fluidity’ of clouds, and then to consider what this means for the fluidity of their own gender and sexuality.”
[C]olonization has offered a pseudo-science narrative of binary gender, as exemplified by the saying “birds and bees” to analogize gender and assigned sex at birth and assumptions of sexual orientation. These harmful narratives and ways to talk about gender and sexuality need to be countered with empirical understandings of biodiversity and gender identity and sexuality. Two-Spirit, Trans and Gender Diverse (2STGD) folks have existed for time immemorial but colonial pseudo-science has shadow-banned and acted to erase 2STGD history.
Other suggested outdoor discussions defy parody. Children are advised to “Identify species in nature that support or create conditions for others to thrive (e.g. nurse logs, pollinators, etc.).” Then, children can be asked to extrapolate from this: “What does it mean to be an ally? How can people use their voice, actions, and presence to support 2SLGBTQIA+ classmates and communities?” Finally: “How can I be like a nurse log or pollinator in my community?”
The entire 40 pages is packed with ideas just like that. Another sample discussion question: “How do normative approaches to the study of mammals and birds reinforce normative conceptions of the family and gender roles? (e.g. exclusive focus on reproduction-related sexual activity, primatology’s depiction of gorillas as models of nuclear family, chimpanzees as het-monogamous ideal, species that mate for life, etc.”
It may be tempting to simply mock this stuff, but the truth is that Jody Polukoshko and her allies are actually shaping the curriculum, and thus they are shaping the minds of the next generation – with the stated intent of destroying “Western values.” LGBT activists see parental rights being respected in Alberta and hear complaints from parents about SOGI and their solution is simple: queer everything, so that no matter what they do, we get the minds of the children.
**THESES AGAINST THE CORRUPTION OF CHILDHOOD EDUCATION**
*On the Duty to Protect Children from Ideological Capture*
—
**I. ON EVIDENCE AND OBSERVATION**
1. Children must be taught to trust their own observations of reality, not to distrust them in favor of ideology.
2. Sexual reproduction through male and female is observable, falsifiable, and mechanistic—not “colonial pseudo-science.”
3. That clouds change shape tells us nothing about human biology. Metaphor is not evidence.
4. Biological diversity exists within strict categorical boundaries. Visual variety does not prove the absence of natural law.
5. When pedagogy requires children to reject what they observe, it has become indoctrination.
—
**II. ON AGE AND DEVELOPMENT**
6. Kindergarteners cannot distinguish between metaphor and evidence. This vulnerability must not be exploited.
7. Four-year-olds lack the cognitive capacity to evaluate ideological claims. Teaching them contested theory as fact is abuse of trust.
8. Children develop reasoning capacity in stages. Curriculum that circumvents this process damages their epistemic formation.
9. The younger the child, the more sacred the duty to teach clearly and honestly—not to manipulate through emotion and metaphor.
10. Age-appropriateness is not “colonial.” It is recognition of developmental reality.
—
**III. ON PARENTAL AUTHORITY**
11. Parents bear the primary right and responsibility for their children’s moral education.
12. Schools exist to teach skills and knowledge, not to form children’s identities according to institutional ideology.
13. When schools hide their pedagogical methods from parents, they reveal consciousness of wrongdoing.
14. “The current backlash” is not evidence that teaching is necessary—it is evidence that parents recognize harm.
15. Those who bear no consequence for a child’s development have no right to override those who do.
—
**IV. ON INSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY**
16. Teachers who implement this curriculum may be sincere, but sincerity does not excuse harm.
17. Union protection that shields educators from accountability enables corruption of their mission.
18. Curriculum designers who never meet the children they shape operate without the feedback that constrains error.
19. When institutions cannot answer “Is this appropriate?” without responding “How dare you ask?”—they have lost legitimacy.
20. The question “Should we teach this to kindergarteners?” is always valid. Always.
—
**V. ON NATURE AND TRUTH**
21. Nature does have rules. They are called biology, and they are observable.
22. Removing invasive species teaches ecology, not gender theory. Using it as political metaphor is pedagogical malpractice.
23. To teach that male/female categories are colonial impositions is to teach children that reality itself is suspect.
24. “Queering” outdoor education means using nature dishonestly—as a screen for predetermined conclusions.
25. Empiricism means following evidence to conclusions. This curriculum reaches conclusions first, then finds metaphors to support them.
—
**VI. ON HARM AND PROTECTION**
26. The harm from confusion about one’s own body is real and lasting. This curriculum induces that confusion deliberately.
27. Children cannot consent to ideological formation disguised as nature study.
28. “Inclusion” that requires rejecting biological reality is not inclusion—it is compelled unreason.
29. Vulnerable children are not helped by being taught that their observations are oppressive.
30. Those who invoke “safety” to prevent questioning are not making children safe—they are making themselves unaccountable.
—
**VII. ON LANGUAGE AND HONESTY**
31. Calling sexual reproduction “pseudo-science” while claiming to teach “empirical understanding” is Orwellian.
32. Framing all resistance as “backlash” makes the framework unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific.
33. Using “decolonial” to justify any claim makes it a universal solvent that destroys meaning.
34. When words are used to obscure rather than clarify, education has become propaganda.
35. Teachers who cannot explain their methods plainly to parents should not be teaching children.
—
**VIII. ON INSTITUTIONAL MISSION**
36. Schools exist to develop children’s capacity to reason, not to tell them what to conclude.
37. A teacher’s duty is to the child’s development, not to the advancement of social ideology.
38. When curriculum serves political ends rather than educational ones, it has betrayed its purpose.
39. Institutions that cannot distinguish between care and control have become dangerous.
40. The question is not whether teachers mean well—it is whether their methods harm.
—
**IX. ON CORRECTION AND REFORM**
41. This curriculum will not be reformed through polite dialogue—its architects view questioning as violence.
42. Parents who can exit should. Parents who cannot must organize.
43. Teachers who recognize this corruption should speak, knowing they will be condemned for doing so.
44. School boards that enable this curriculum should be replaced by those who will not.
45. When institutions cannot self-correct, they must be corrected externally or replaced entirely.
—
**X. ON WHAT IS OWED TO CHILDREN**
46. Children are owed truth told clearly, not ideology wrapped in metaphor.
47. Children are owed teachers who respect their development, not activists who exploit their trust.
48. Children are owed education that strengthens their reasoning, not pedagogy that corrupts it.
49. Children are owed protection from those who would use them as instruments of social transformation.
50. Children are owed adults who will say clearly: This is reality. These are the reasons we believe it. Judge for yourself when you are able.
—
**XI. ON THE PRESENT MOMENT**
51. What is happening in BC classrooms is not education. It is ideological formation of captive children.
52. The teachers implementing this believe they are protecting children. They are wrong.
53. The administrators defending this believe they are advancing justice. They are wrong.
54. The politicians evading questions believe they are preventing harm. They are wrong.
55. And they will continue to be wrong until parents make the costs of being wrong exceed the benefits of compliance.
—
**XII. FINAL THESES**
56. A society that teaches its children to distrust their own observations will not survive in recognizable form.
57. Institutions that cannot answer basic questions about appropriateness have forfeited the right to shape young minds.
58. The damage being done is real, measurable, and will compound across generations.
59. Those who see this clearly have a duty to speak, regardless of social cost.
60. The time for polite objection has passed. What is required now is organized resistance and the building of alternatives.
61. Our children are not experimental subjects. They are not vehicles for ideology. They are not abstractions.
62. They are real. Their development is real. And the harm being done to them is real.
63. This must stop.
—
*Let those with authority over children exercise it with humility, transparency, and accountability to reality.*
*Let those without such authority cease claiming it through appeals to care.*
*Let parents reclaim what is theirs to protect.*
*Let teachers remember they serve the child, not the ideology.*
*And let this corruption be named clearly for what it is: the sacrifice of children’s reasoning capacity on the altar of institutional moral display.*
**The truth is not colonial. Reality is not oppressive. And teaching children to think clearly is not harm.**
**It is the most basic duty we owe them.**