HOOK, EPPNE and a Brief History of the Language of ‘Protection of Children’ by Opponents of LGBTQ+

I wanted to speak to the organizer(s) of HOOK for this story, but the “contact us” page contained an email address that didn’t exist. Nobody responded to my request for an interview.

LGBTQ+ communities in Canada have been experiencing significant increases in threats to their lives.

A fresh new wave of reactionary political forces has been fomenting antagonisms towards the community in an attempt to create yet more fronts in the political culture wars. Raising the specter of pronouns, gender affirming care and the hormone levels of athletes competing in sports have become routine in right-leaning discourse in North America.

These rhetorical efforts have resulted in harmful consequences in the lives of the LGBTQ+ community in Canada. Reported violent hate crimes targeting individuals based on sexual orientation and gender expression have risen markedly in recent years, with a noticeable increase beginning around 2019 and a more pronounced escalation following the COVID-19 pandemic.

HOOK

Hands off Our Kids (HOOK) has been at the forefront of the so-called “parental rights” movement in Canada. HOOK is intently focused on revising or eliminating LGBTQ+ policies related to identity, curriculum, and school board governance within the education system.

Hands-off Our Kids is a registered non-profit created in August 2024. Kamel El-Cheikh is listed as the director1. Outside of a small number of guest appearances in their social media content, El-Cheikh, who is Lebanese and Muslim, is the sole public face of the organization.

The organization rose to prominence in 2023 with their first 1 Million March 4 Children (1MM4C) event. Protests against the inclusion of “gender ideology” in school curricula were held nationwide. By all accounts, demonstrations across the country were well attended. Some city’s events, such as Montreal’s, saw turnout numbering in the thousands. However, the title of the protest appeared more aspirational, with a more likely total of 25,000 people participating throughout all of Canada.

Several far-right, white nationalist organizations promoted and participated in the 2023 1MM4C, such as Diagolon, Veterans for Freedom, the Active Club Network, Stand United, Save Canada, and the Proud Boys. The event also included more conservative religious groups, particularly Christian fundamentalists such as the anti-abortion Campaign Life Coalition and other conservative Muslim organizations. Speeches at these events emphasized the need for greater Abrahamic faith-based values as the basis for Canadian education.

The structural overlap between the 2021 Freedom Convoy movement and the “parental rights” movement and HOOK was - and remains - dense. Many of the same anti-vaccination social media groups known for spreading falsehoods and online personalities which promoted and organized Convoy events, performed the same role in 1MM4C mobilizations. In Ottawa and Toronto, some prominent organizing groups called themselves Save the Children Convoy. El-Cheikh himself was a vocal supporter of the Freedom Convoy.

The fragile unity of the broad coalition of ideological and theological organizations participating in the 2023 event was ultimately doomed to fail. HOOK was organized by Muslim parents. This was a non-starter for some white-nationalist organizations. One such group, Action4Canada, refused to participate in the event because, as one of its leaders stated, it was “initiated by Muslims.”

The October 7, 2023 Hamas attack and Israel’s subsequent genocide against Palestinian people led to further internal rifts within the “parental rights” movement. El-Cheikh, who is Lebanese, has been a vocal supporter of Palestine. The Canadian Christian nationalist wings of the coalition have aligned themselves with Israel. In posts on Instagram and TikTok, El-Cheikh has attempted to downplay the internal disputes over the Middle East conflict and encouraged HOOK supporters to stay focused on “sexual indoctrination”.

HOOK’s Muddled Public Face

HOOK has trouble keeping their public messaging consistent and coherent. They are beset by the inherent contradictions between the vitriol espoused by their organizers and their attempts to present a reasonable, non-partisan face to the general public.

So, how does HOOK present itself?

Arriving at the HOOK website, the viewer is confronted by an image of an AI generated child facing a blackboard. In thick white chalk, the board reads, “Stop Confusing us!”. Below the title, the pronoun of “him” “her” and “he” and two scattered questions marks appear.

The About Us page on the website - barely - reads,

“Our mission includes safeguarding children’s rights and nurturing their growth in a safe environment by removing sexualized content in the classroomand [sic] ensuring that topics of learning are discussed in an age-appropriatemanner [sic] that does not violate the ministry of Education’s guidelines. We refuse to stand by while the Government [sic] and School [sic] systems allow sexually explicit content and gender ideology to be distributed in our classrooms.”

Note: It is not illegal to fly any flag on the same pole as the national flag of Canada.

Referring to the practice—mandated under some provincial human rights codes—of allowing schools not to disclose a student’s gender identity to their parents in order to protect the student from potential familial harm, “We want to ensure that parents are informed of all matters related to their children in schools. It is completely unacceptable when Schools [sic] foster an environment that promotes and encourages children to keep secrets from their parents.”

“It is we, as the parents relatives, friends and neighbours that are responsible for our children’s moral upbringing, NOT politicians and that is why it is our duty to speak up and have our voices heard when we say, “HANDS OFF OUR KIDS”.

In the text description of the video, an advertisement reads “Get Trudeau out of your pocket with this link”, with an affiliate link to gold and silver investments.

An animated El-Cheikh discusses the accomplishments that HOOK has had in organizing the 2023 1 Million March 4 Children events and his plans for the future “we’re planning to do My Child June, which completely demolishes Pride June!” before Clyde interrupts him mid sentence, “All right, slow down! I know you’re excited!”.

After decrying “indoctrination of our kids” by the LGBTQ+ community, El-Cheikh boasts “we’re looking to penetrate every school in the country with education ambassadors [from HOOK].”

“Parents took time off work to pull their kids out of school, it was on a Wednesday last year and they came out in floods across the country”

The irony of pulling their kids out of school at the behest of their parents to protest “political indoctrination” by dragging them to political demonstrations seemed lost on El-Cheikh.

HOOK’s Neutral Language

On the surface, the messaging of HOOK appears reasonable. Signs at their events read “family first”, “kids are perfect as is”, “let kids be kids”, “no political agendas” and “protect our kids”. Who wouldn’t want to “protect kids” from harm? The notion that young children should not be indoctrinated by outwardly partisan or fiercely ideological organizations within the public education system might seem sensible to most Canadians.

It doesn’t take much scrutiny to discover that the feigned PR is a public front for more virulently antagonistic subject matter.

HOOK’s Instagram page, consisting almost exclusively of memes and El-Cheikh speaking to his phone camera, frequently posts outwardly transphobic, conspiratorial, conservatively religious and hateful content warning about “sexual indoctrination” and “LGBTQ indoctrination” that have nothing to do with the education system. One such meme reads “It is a sad day when your seven year old son can’t pretend he’s an Indian, but a grown man can pretend to be a woman”. Another reads “remember, women’s day is for moms, not men in dresses” as well as “”I identify as” is the same as “I pretend to be””.

One TikTok video re-shared on the HOOK account originally by pastor and biblical literalist Henry Hildebrandt, warns Canadian children are “under attack by our own government” and that the LGBTQ+ community are “poking God’s eye” and “tearing the fabric of society”.

Books are characterized as odious tools of indoctrination. “The tiny, whiny pride community”, as El-Cheikh calls them, are depicted by generative AI as demons. In several videos, El-Cheikh and another unnamed man encourage HOOK followers to mobilize a “walk out” to protest the raising of the pride flag for the month of June. In several videos, the two men repeatedly assert the - false - claim that the Canadian flag is not permitted to be flown with another flag on the same pole. They deem the pride flag a “sexual movement flag” that represents “alternative sexual lifestyles”.

The HOOK website presents written pieces with titles such as “Billionaires funding Transgender movement for profit”. The article contains winding screeds against George Soros’ and other philanthropists’ funding of university faculties and how some organizations (exclusively in the United States; Canada is not once mentioned throughout the article) support gender affirming care, “It behooves us all to look at what the real investment is in prioritizing a lifetime of anti-body medical treatments for a minuscule part of the population.”. A furtive conspiratorial narrative is presented, suggesting “white rich men” are attempting to make children gay, non-binary, or what is perceived by them to be the penultimate sin, trans.

The Organizers

The sometimes careful public face of HOOK is somewhat betrayed by the statement of its own lead organizer. Chairman of HOOK, Kamel El-Cheikh called HOOK “a movement for the children and straight families”. He has stated that the LGBTQ+ flag is “the pedophilia flag”, decrying how then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau flew the flag at his office during pride month. He’s described the queer community as “monsters”, and warned, “there is a campaign to control the birth rate and heterosexuals are a problem according to these monsters”.

While referring to members of the LGBTQ+ community as “groomers” and “pedophiles” El-Cheikh has voiced his support for widely reported groomer, convinced rapist, sex-trafficker and ‘manosphere’ influencer Andrew Tate. El-Cheikh has stated, “This man said all the right things” and “is an example of one that confronts oppression without fear”. On X, he urged Tate to collaborate with HOOK on the 1MM4C.

In June 2023, the spokesperson for HOOK’s Calgary chapter, Mahmoud Mourra was charged with hate-motivated criminal harassment of an LGBTQ+ person. The outcome of those charges has not been publicly revealed. Mourra’s name had previously appeared on the HOOK website as an organizer. Although he runs a similar group Leave Our Kids Alone Calgary, his current association with El-Cheikh’s organization is unclear.

Mourra has been a vocal ally of United Conservative Party (UCP) leader and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who has passed a swath of anti-LGBTQ+ amendments to the Education Act in the province, couched in the language of protecting “parental rights”. He has met with the Premier on multiple occasions, as late as July 2025.

At a 2023 1 Million 4 Children rally in Calgary, one child held a sign which read, “kick the gays out of our country”. Despite the HOOK Code of Conduct, which urges rally participants to, “avoid using hate speech, offensive language, or discriminatory remarks”, Mourra handed the child a microphone from the stage, who then said, “I’d like to say that the gays are psychopaths and we're not psychopaths”, which prompted a rousing chorus of cheers from the audience. The kid went on, “the gays, they are disgusting!" as the applause from the crowd increases.

HOOK consistently maintains that it stands firmly against the indoctrination of children.

The seemingly innocuous and ostensibly placid slogans of HOOK’s public messaging conceal a more conspicuously loathsome and disturbing rhetoric targeting the LGBTQ+ community.

The language of ‘protecting children’ appears nothing more than a euphemistic front for more extreme beliefs; dehumanizing and delegitimizing the existence of any gender identity or lifestyle outside of a conventionally straight one. A veiled conspiratorial language, positing that “rich white men” are engineering the institutionalization of so-called gender-ideology for the purpose of indoctrinating children, is repeatedly driven by the organizers to elicit fear.

It is a tale less concerned with facts than with the necessity of the construction of a villain in the narrative, feeding into a broader mythology of moral panic and broader cultural decay.

History of the ‘Protection of Children’ by Opponents of LGBTQ+

The purported incentive of “protecting children” to ostracize and criminalize the LGBTQ+ community has a lengthy history, particularly in the West. This history has unfolded not merely in the abstracted cultural sphere of public consciousness, but within the halls of government and in the drafting of state law.

UK

In the United Kingdom in the 1980’s, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had been cultivating support from the Christian wing of the Conservative Party by stoking anti LGBTQ+ fervour amidst the AIDS crisis. She promised to address the “issue” with national legislation.

At the 1987 Conservative Party Conference, Thatcher stated, “children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay. All of those children are being cheated of a sound start in life … yes, cheated.” In 1988, Thatcher’s majority government passed Section 28, an amendment to the Local Government Act. The legislation specified local authorities “shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".

During a parliamentary debate on the bill, Conservative MP Lord Somers spoke in support of the amendment in spiteful terms, “One has only to look through the entire animal world to realize that it is abnormal. In any case, the clause as it stands does not prohibit homosexuality in any form; it merely discourages the teaching of it. When one is young at school one is very impressionable and may just as easily pick up bad habits as good habits.” The witty retort by Labour Party MP Tony Benn during debate over the bill in the Commons is worth quoting, “if the sense of the word "promote" can be read across from "describe", every murder play promotes murder, every war play promotes war, every drama involving the eternal triangle promotes adultery; and Mr. Richard Branson's condom campaign promotes fornication. The House had better be very careful before it gives to judges, who come from a narrow section of society, the power to interpret "promote”.”

Section 28’s impacts were devastating for young LGBTQ+ people in the UK. A lack of discussion of anything related to LGBTQ+ issues in the public school system led to increased stigma, bullying, shame, discrimination, censorship in public life and increased risk of violence.

Section 28 was rescinded by the UK parliament in 2003.

US

In the United States, a coalition formed by singer Anita Bryant in 1977 called Save Our Children mobilized for the repeal of 1976 Dade County legislation. The ordinance banned discrimination in employment, housing and administrative matters based on sexual orientation. The outspoken Evangelical Christian claimed that the county ordinance discriminated against her right to teach biblical morality to her children.

Bryant claimed that homosexuality was a threat to children, stating, “I don’t hate the homosexuals — but as a mother, I must protect my children from their evil influence.”, and “The recruitment of our children is absolutely necessary for the survival and growth of homosexuality.”. Her organizing efforts initially succeeded and the ordinance was rescinded at a county vote. However, numerous statutes at both state and federal levels were later passed to prevent such forms of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

In both the US and UK cases, precipitous organizing pressures from local activists forced public policy U-turns. These events are considered vital galvanizing moments for the LGBTQ+ communities, as they provoked the mobilization of new coalitions and political organization on a scale not seen prior in either country. Despite the successes of these movements to amend public policy, nearly fifty years on, the motifs in the language employed by opponents of LGBTQ+ community to ‘safeguard the innocence of children’ remain identical.

Canada

In Canada, the uniform linguistic rubric and legislative repression against the LGBTQ+ took place at the same time.

In 1969, during parliamentary debates concerning amendments to C-150 of the Canadian Criminal Code decriminalizing homosexuality, Conservative Party Members of Parliament argued that the age of consent for “homosexual acts” such as “buggery” (anal intercourse) and heterosexual acts should be distinct. The “perversion” of innocence by maligned homosexuals was frequently cited in the House of Commons to further these legislative aims. Tory MP Martial Asselin asserted, “Homosexuals are most inclined to pervert youngsters and the [Justice] Minister [Turner] opens the door even wider.” ; further stating on the parliamentary record “Homosexuals are mostly inclined to pervert youngsters”.

The theme is furthered by MP Robert McCleave, who opined “This [amendment] might allow any pervert who molests children … he himself has the right to follow his own inclination to savage young children.”. Asselin and McCleave succeeded in pushing their legislative amendments; C-150 then provided that the age of consent was 21 years old for homosexual acts and the age of consent for heterosexuals was 14. The disparity was rationalized by the need to protect children from supposed perversion by “homosexuals”.

Despite the widely fawned-over 1967 pronouncements of then Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau, “There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation", homosexuality was not removed from the Criminal Code during his tenure in office. Rather, it carved out a narrow legal exemption for homosexual acts. Prosecutions against the LGBTQ+ community for “indecent acts”, “gross indecency”, “sodomy”, “corrupting youth” and other similar charges were pursued frequently in subsequent decades.

EPPNE

All EPPNE statements have been translated from French to English

Founded in 2023, Ensemble Pour Proteger Nos Enfants [Together to Protect our Children] (EPPNE) is the Quebec sister organization of the HOOK movement. Although EPPNE is not expressly under the HOOK organizational umbrella, the demands of both organizations are largely identical, both groups were founded in the same year, EPPNE reposts HOOK content, the dates of EPPNE events coincide with that of HOOK’s and the overall tone and subject matter of the online content shared on EPPNE’s website and Facebook page appear much the same.

EPPNE demands include the immediate cessation of all sexual education across the province of Quebec. They argue that the curriculum overly emphasizes topics of sexual orientation and gender identity and that the content of these subjects is “indoctrinating children”. Further, EPPNE demands schools do not hold back any information whatsoever regarding their children’s sexuality or gender - nothing should be concealed under the guise of “protection”.

The bulk of content on the EPPNE website consists of “testimonies” written to the organization detailing the complaints of individual parents in Quebec regarding their children’s education. One such concerned parent writes,

“As a parent, I am deeply concerned about the content of the books and discussions my six-year-old son is exposed to at school. Recently, he came home and told me about an experience that left me truly unsettled. He said a woman had visited his school to read stories, including one that addressed gender stereotypes, titled "Pink, Blue and You!" by Élise Gravel. What troubled me most was that this person then mentioned that "it’s normal for people of the same sex to love each other,"

Adding that this view is different in Canada compared to other countries, “To me, introducing such complex topics to children so young seems premature and inappropriate.”.

That this person’s son is being exposed to children’s literature that discusses the fact that same-sex relationships exist was the sole thesis of the letter.

In another similarly sordid testimony, a father of a student in high school claims that the school was “blackmailing” him following his request to be physically present in the sex education classes at school. He states “remembering that the Charters recognize my role as the primary educator of my child and that I have the right to pass on my convictions to him and ensure that the school respects those convictions, I asked to attend the Quebec Citizenship class where the sex education course would be taught. I was denied. I then requested that my child be exempted from these classes”2. The school denied this request as well.

In Quebec, it is official policy that parents are not allowed to sit in on sex-ed courses and students are not allowed to opt-out of sex-ed courses. In this case, the high school in question was following the mandated education policy of the province and would have been in serious breach of provincial policy if they granted the father his wish.

When I asked EPPNE how schools should approach the subjects of trans and queer identities, their response took me by surprise,

“We believe that sex education should be based on Freudian theory” and that “the only acceptable comprehensive approach is a biological one”. That EPPNE was endorsing psychoanalysis and Freudian theories, that young girls have “penis envy”; that everything from unpeeling a banana to licking ice cream is influenced by repressed sexual desires; that the Oedipus Complex is inherent - young boys unconsciously want to have sex with their mothers, and daughters with their fathers - and that “libido”, an innate and mysterious underlying sexual energy drove most of human activity, was not the response from the organization I was expecting.

Sigmund Freud, whose main body of work was published between 1895-1930, is not an influential theorist in contemporary sexual education nor in the drafting of modern school curriculum. His work has been widely dismissed by today’s psychologists, most notably for its lack of biological, empirical and scientific foundations.

The notion that EPPNE would propose Freud’s antiquated doctrines in response to a query over how to teach queer and trans identities to students in 2025 was strange.

Their answer revealed to me not only how unserious the organization is about pedagogy in general, but how inept the groups’ solutions are in proposing alternatives to the very matters they purport to be so fed-up about.

Comité de sages

In 2023, Quebec Government, led by Francois Legault’s right-wing Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ) announced that the province would create a Comité de sages [committee of experts] to address “gender ideology” in education, sports, family, health, social services, public administration etc. The Comité des sages sur les enjeux liés à l’identité de genre [Committee of Experts on Issues Related to Gender Identity], was comprised of two healthcare professionals and one law professor. The three public servants were mandated with creating a comprehensive report on the matter and issuing general recommendations.

The undertaking was denounced by a wide range of LGBTQ+ groups for its very existence and the lack of sexual and gender diversity among its committee members, given the subject matter. The general timing of the endeavour was also of concern, as a moral panic surrounding gender neutral bathrooms and trans identities was at a fever pitch among the right, emerging as a major pillar of the culture wars. The December announcement of the formation of the Committee came mere months following the first 1MM4C event in September.

EPPNE strongly supported the CAQ’s initiative.

Public consultations drew 150 written submissions and 50 oral testimonies. Critics argue the number was inadequate given the weight of the issue and the fact that Quebec’s population exceeds 8 million inhabitants. While some participants insisted on anonymity, others made their inclusion in the consultations public. A chorus of political observers suggested that the committee’s report (delivered May, 2025) may serve not merely as a survey of public opinion, but act as a prelude to the introduction of legislation aimed at addressing so-called “gender ideology” in the province's near future.

EPPNE boasted of their involvement in the Committee’s public consultations in a brief Facebook post, "They [the Committee] told us they would be happy to read or hear all testimonies from parents, children, teachers, etc., about what is happening in the classroom, regarding sex education courses and gender ideology, … Thank you for contacting them or us to share your testimony.”

EPPNE strongly rejects accusations of intolerance or hate and are extremely sensitive to such allegations. Following an article by Pivot reporting on EPPNE’s involvement in the Committee de sages consultation process, EPPNE responded with a post of their own on their website, demanding they “publish our full response, uncensored, on the same website where the article in question appeared.” and strongly denied accusations of transphobia. The post features a cheeky image of a cross in Scrabble letters reading “fake facts”3.

Public relations is a delicate game for EPPNE and HOOK.

Both organizations want to refute accusations that they are transphobic, hateful or homophobic. These allegations could diminish the public image of these organizations and hinder their efforts to influence policy. Effective PR becomes challenging when the organizers’ statements and sentiments reflect a clear rejection of LGBTQ+ identities. These contradictions underpin the core internal tensions within HOOK.

The significance of HOOK and EPPNE extends beyond their expressions of vitriol, their screeds that academia is turning the kids gay and trans; and their organization of rallies in public space. Their true influence lies in their proximity to power. “Parental rights” groups have demonstrated their capacity to impact policy in Quebec and Alberta. These victories illustrate that wielding administrative and legislative power to target LGBTQ+ communities is not only feasible but a reality.

HOOK and EPPNE will be holding a third 1MM4C across Canada on September 20, 2025. Counter demonstrations in response are planned.