End of Gender

…… at least for governmental gender studies research of the Nordic institute NIKK with an  annual budget of 56 million for 2012. How did it happen? An intelligent comedian with a camera crew put gender experts simple questions. With their answers came an avalanche. Here’s the story:

A man, a plan, a deed.

The man
Harald Eia, with an MA in Sociology and Norway’s most famous comedian, came after his studies to the conclusion that the gender theory – just after the man and woman are, and all differences are caused by social influences, not by influences of biology or anthropology, etc. His comment: „I felt betrayed by my university teachers.“

The idea
Harald Eia’s idea was to challenge the „gender paradox“ in Norway. This paradox is a contradiction between decades of  „gender-sensitive training“ for equality (based on the Norwegian Gender Plan) on the one hand and the  classical pattern of  career choice  on the other side. Such classical career choices should have been changed during the lastdecades (!) by the equality education in Norway. That difference has been  greater in Norway for a long time than in comparable countries with fewer women funding and less  „gender-sensitive education.“ This paradox, which could not be explained the gender studies became more and more a taboo in the Norwegian public and a problem for the ruling Social Democrats. That pardox Harald Eia wanted to break.

The deed
Eia organized a film crew and offered  to Norwegian scientists critical questions about gender theory and presented their answers against those of internationally recognized scientists from other disciplines. Those were questions about sexual orientation, gender roles, violence, race and education. He did this with a sound knowledge and a naive, but humorous question technique. Such questions the gender scientists were not acustomed to, especially critical questions concerning  about gender theory. Many interviewees noted only after what had actually expired. Before they could complain, what they catching up later, his interviews went on state TV broadcaster NRK in the series „brainwashing“ on the air. The public was shocked and horrified to science. Especially the feature „The Gender Equality Paradox“ first heated to an open debate on the Scandinavian gender debate. Watch the video here...This is one video out of seven.

In the English press release of the European Federation of Journalists following summary is drawn:

„So even if Eia’s methods have been critisised, there is now a general agreement that the result of this project has been good for both the sciences and society as a whole. For the first time, science is really being discussed. Even if many strange things have been said and written, this has been (and still is) a unique educational process for both the general public and the scientific community. „

A later event in this context was even more sensational: on October 19, 2011 published a press release announcing the closing of the NIKK, Nordic Gender Institute, 31.12.2011. That also meant the stop of funding  of Gender Studies in the amount of 56 million. The governmental  funding of  the „science“ of gender studies ended with a unanimous decision of the Nordic Council. Unbelievable concerning the „Gender Country“ No. 2 to the Global Gender Gap Index 2011th Even the attempt to replace the trivial trials with ideological blinkers on meaningful projects, was rejected. The above press release was initially spread in Norway. In Germany the  media have missed it entirely, though – or perhaps because – the reasons for termination of the Scandinavian gender research are based on objections, which could have been applied to gender research in this country.

That’s all months ago. We learned about the video from a French colleague, only a few weeks ago. However, we could not start it overly much, because the background was unclear. Recently, the press release arrived via various Google Alerts to our address. Why this month-long delay, why is it so far found in the German press ? Was there a conspiracy of silence? And why? This will probably remain speculation.

AGENS opinion:

Apart from the courageous journalistic approach of Harald Eia shows the  following:

• it needs some sort of „possession“, to initiate a project and survive against an ideological front
• practiced since the 70’s the „gender theory“ – beyond the recognized sciences – has collapsed in social democratic Norway as a house of cards.
• respondents gender experts were obviously never experiencing, that their theory has been questioned. Their discourse ability was never put to the test.
• Eia could show: „Money corrupts science„.
• the state ideology of „gender“ was never  legitimized by civil society. Gender was not part of public discourse, although it was manipulating it.
• welfare state and gender ideology were staring  a malicious cooperation, financed by the Norwegian petroleum production.

What can we learn for the German situation of the Norwegian incident? The idea of equality is enshrined in Norway more  than in Germany, and yet it has taken only a comedian, demonstrate that gender theory is just a collection of assertions. The Norwegian findings are therefore applicable to our country. Similarly, the consequences …….!

Update (08/31/2012, 18:00)
Several 1000 clicks within a few hours was an astonishing fact for us, but also confirms the need for a counter public to gender studies.
Our message, that  Gender Studies are acting outside of the established sciences and  in case of a confrontation their  arguments sink into speechlessness has  obviously arrived here as well as in the Social Democracy in Scandinavia. The stop the funding  is decided by the Nordic ministers of the Nordic Council has a significant, political message, because among other things the social benefits of gender studies are being put  into question. This trend has recently started at universities in the United States.
The Harald Eia – interviews for the TV series“ Brainwashing“ and the reaction of the Nordic Council shows  that an isolated gender – „Science“ – whose social benefit is still not visible – politically can not be tolerated any longer.
A Google – Analysis of network responses to our article shows:
First The reactions are almost exclusively from the blogosphere, ie
1. The reactions mostly were coming from the blogger scene
2. The online issues of the print media did not yet react
3. The feminist scene did react either.

That can only mean that the actual discourse on gender theory has still not begun and that it is obviously shunned by gender fearful scene. For this we hear of journalists from the print media: „Gender is still below the perception threshold of a normal reader.“

AGENS’s mission is to continue to challenge the  effectiveness of gender research and to show the polarizing effects of gender theory in day-care centers, schools, public services, the army, the universities, and – increasingly – to point in the private sector. We will perform so that it will rise to prominence of the normal reader!