Textploitation - political correctness for students

Today, even Victoria’s history students are being used as crash-test learning dummies. According to Heinemann Humanities 2: A Narrative Approach, for instance, pupils are asked to believe that (page 77):

1. “Before Islam … Women were treated as possessions.”
2. “Before Islam … Women had no personal rights."
3. “Before Islam … Women could be married against their will."
4. “Before Islam … Women could be forced to dance naked.”
5. “Before Islam ... Baby girls were regularly buried alive.”
6. “Before Islam … Women were uneducated.”
7. “Before Islam … Women were not as important as men.”

I call this “texploitation”. There are no primary sources to back the authors’ views. And make no mistake: they are selling far-leftwing views (not facts).

The above, in my view, borders on racism. Should one, for example, assume that all races (across all continents) treated their women “as possessions”? Were all “girls regularly buried alive” before Islam? Were they all “uneducated”? Are they all “educated” now?

It stands to reason that Islam (or any religion for that matter) never brought sexism to an end. In any case, a relatively balanced UN report (prepared by Islamic intellectuals) openly acknowledges that more than half of Arab women are - oops! - illiterate.

In reference to the above, Phyllis Chesler, a self-identified feminist and the co-founder of America’s Association for Women in Psychology states: “The report cites enormous gender inequality and the stifling of women at every level, which has resulted in the stagnation within the Arab and Islamic World.”

The students’ text, of course, correlates with the Victorian Essential Learning Standards. However, this is just a taste of things to come. Surprised? I was. That made me wonder if there were other examples of “textploitation” - and so I set out to analyse seven classroom history books. I found 99 unsubstantiated claims.

One text by Maureen Anderson and Ann Low makes it abundantly clear how pupils should weigh history too. In Jacaranda Essentials: History 2, there are:

• two pages dedicated to Germaine Greer. On the other side, John Howard is only mentioned in a few paragraphs (here and there), and mainly because he refuses to say “sorry” for the so-called sins of his fathers.
• two pages reserved for Charles Perkins, the “peaceful” aboriginal activist, because he was a “significant individual,” as opposed to a little businessman like, say, Rupert Murdoch. Or Jesus Christ.
• two pages are set aside to shower Bob Brown and his “green politics” with praise. Forget Family First. Ignore One Nation. Take no real notice of the National Party. There is only one important minor party in Australia.
• two pages are also set aside for “a significant individual” who “abolished private ownership of the nation’s resources and improved food supply through seizure of grain.” Yes, Vladimir Lenin. Altogether now: “Peace! Land! Bread! All Power to the Soviets!”

Unsurprisingly, Ronald Reagan is portrayed (in only a few paragraphs) as a “vehement anti-communist” who practically started the “New Cold War”.

In furtherance of this stratagem, teenage students are encouraged to marinate in the West’s sin. As a Protestant, I am astounded by the establishment’s anti-Catholic bigotry, misogyny, hatred of Israel, and taste for conspiratorial plots (involving evil conservatives in smart suits, of course). Is there room for balance? Not anymore. Not in the left’s mind.