Agenda Profile: Rain Epler
Interpellation regarding curriculum subjects concerning human sexuality and the associated rights of parents (No. 616)
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political focus is on protecting children from the "gender doctrine" and "sex-affirming treatment" imported from America, which are considered harmful industrial activities for children. The stance is strongly value-based and oppositional, criticizing the minister's demagoguery and the scientific basis that denies the existence of two biological sexes. The speaker's position is that the harming of children must be prevented, based on a traditional scientific foundation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge regarding the operations of gender identity clinics and medical procedures (puberty blockers, hormone therapy, surgical operations). The argumentation relies on alleged whistleblowers, suicide statistics, and the political decisions made by the United Kingdom concerning the ban on puberty blockers. He/She emphasizes the scientific basis of biological sex, as opposed to social gender.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is combative, critical, and highly emotional, accusing the minister of demagoguery and the use of "newspeak." Strong figurative examples are employed (such as the "Die Hard" airport metaphor) along with extreme terminology ("satanic misanthropic sects") to underscore the ideological threat. The speaker also offers procedural justifications and proposals (a dictionary of newspeak), balancing the emotional reaction with more formal demands.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker actively participates in the Riigikogu interpellations, delivering both substantive statements and making procedural interjections, as well as offering apologies (for emotional reactions and failing to press the voting button).
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main adversary is the minister, who is accused of skillful demagoguery and the use of "newspeak" that conceals the true objectives. The criticism is aimed at the minister's scientific foundation and value judgments, which, in the speaker's view, will result in harm to children. The opposition is intense and philosophical, rejecting the concept of social gender proposed by the minister.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker refers to an ideological common ground with colleague Vooglaid and others who rely on science regarding biological sex. He is seeking support for his position that there are two sexes. Cooperation with other political parties is not mentioned.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus remains heavily on international trends, warning specifically against the rapid importation of American culture and medical practices into Estonia. Reference is also made to the United Kingdom’s decisions concerning the banning of puberty blockers, using these examples to guide Estonian policy.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic views are limited to criticizing how "gender-affirming care" in the United States has turned into a harmful industrial business targeting children. General positions on taxes, regulation, or fiscal discipline are absent.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The sociopolitical focus is on strong opposition to gender identity ideology and its application to children. The speaker emphasizes that there are only two sexes, and considers puberty blockers and surgical interventions to be the abuse and harm of children. He/She sharply criticizes terms like "social gender" and "positive self-image" when they are separated from biological sex.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on the interpretation of existing child protection rules, requiring that harm assessments be based on biological science rather than the concept of social genders. The speaker is making a procedural proposal to publish a glossary of neologisms within the board to ensure better comprehension of the ministers' terminology.
3 Speeches Analyzed