Articles, Focus

This mad sexual brainwashing must be resisted

This mad sexual brainwashing must be resisted

Mad sexual brainwashing resisted full


Maybe it was inevitable that once same-sex marriage was on the books, activists would double down on their goal of indoctrinating our children with postmodern notions of sexual experimentation and gender change.

Well, inevitable or not, that’s the stage the sexual revolution has now reached. Under the guise of reducing bullying and improving self-respect, the promotion of ‘family diversity’ has moved into schools with disturbing rapidity. It joins the already prevalent pushing of libertine attitudes to sexuality on to teens.

As of September 2020, Relationships Education will become mandatory in all primary schools in England (both state and independent) and Relationships and Sexual Education will become mandatory in all secondary schools. The government has made no secret that one of the principal aims is to promote the acceptance of LGBT lifestyles and identities, with Ofsted having already placed this controversial agenda at the heart of its school inspection regime.

Parents will retain an absolute right of withdrawal from the subject in primary school but will lose it in secondary school, where head teachers will have the final say. Furthermore, children themselves will be able to overrule their parents from the age of 15.

The loss of this parental right is significant. Until now it has allowed social conservatives to protect their children from school-based indoctrination. It has also protected all pupils insofar as schools have had to operate in the knowledge that parents can withdraw their children if content is outrageous or indecent. With the right gone, there is no meaningful check on the elites’ pursuit of their sexualisation agenda.

Concerned parents have been calling on the government to amend the draft regulations to restore the absolute right of withdrawal. One petition in particular reached the required 100,000 signatures and was debated in Parliament on Monday. Labour MP Chris Bryant, a longstanding advocate of compulsory sex education, used the debate to welcome the change, the BBC giving him a platform to make all kinds of grand unsubstantiated claims for sex education including its supposed role in lowering teen pregnancy.

The legality of the move has been questioned. Campaigners have pointed out that the 1998 Human Rights Acts enshrines the right of parents to ensure ‘education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions’, and that the European Court of Human Rights has consistently upheld the right of parents to withdraw their children from any classes they deem objectionably indoctrinating. 

The difficulty for campaigners is that this agenda is coming from the very top. The drive towards compulsory sex education is part of a global campaign led by the UN to bring Comprehensive Sexuality Education to the world by 2030, embedding the ideology of the sexual revolution across the whole of humanity.

The World Health Organisation in 2010 published its Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe – a model of how to pass off an ideological manifesto of pansexuality as neutral science. ‘Sexuality education is based on a (sexual and reproductive) human rights approach,’ it explains. ‘Sexuality education is firmly based on gender equality, self-determination and the acceptance of diversity.’ Very importantly: ‘Sexuality education starts at birth.’

The document sets out what children of different ages should be introduced to and taught, including encouragement to masturbate from as young an age as possible. Here’s a summary of the recommended curriculum, courtesy of the Stop RSE campaign (Warning: explicit language).

Age 0-4: right to explore nakedness and the body and gender identities. Learn to differentiate between good and bad secrets and learn ‘my body belongs to me’.

Age 4-6: name each body part – caregivers are instructed to ‘wash each body part’ and ‘talk about sexual matters in sexual language’. Children should be given information about enjoyment and sexual pleasure when touching one’s own body in early childhood masturbation, taught about friendship and love towards people of the same sex, secret love and first love and an awareness of rights.

Age 6-9: informed about menstruation and ejaculation, choices about pregnancy, different methods of contraception, sex in media, enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s body, difference between friendship, love, lust, same-sex love, STDs. Children should examine their body, use sexual language and accept diversity.

Ages 9-12: 1st sex experience, variability of sexual behaviour, contraceptives and their use, pleasure, masturbation, orgasm, differences between gender identity and biological sex, learn about STDs, HIV and sexual rights. Acquire media competence using internet, phones and deal with pornography. To talk about sex and make decisions to have sex experiences or not.

Age 12-15: learn skills to obtain and use a condom (in reality this is taught in primary schools in UK), communication skills to have safe/enjoyable sex, deal with shame, fear, jealousy, disappointments. Modern media competence and deal with porn.’

Such an explicit and hedonistic curriculum will clearly contribute to the early sexualisation of children and to their vulnerability. What is never explained is how such relentless encouragement from birth to regard sexual pleasure as an available leisure pursuit is supposed to protect children from abuse, from risky sexual behaviour, and from regret for immature sexual adventures – all things unhappily prevalent in our society.

The old wisdom that humans thrive best when sex and child-bearing are kept for maturity and preferably marriage – and all the research that proves it – is deliberately suppressed in favour of a bewildering array of choices and identities that children are transparently not in any position to make informed judgments about. No wonder, then, that sex education programmes have been shown by numerous academic studies to have no impact at all on improving rates of teen pregnancy and STIs.

What such programmes undoubtedly do have an impact on is young people’s readiness to become sexually active and experiment with risky forms of sexual behaviour as well as to change their sense of what is normal as opposed to transgressive. Such ‘education’ plants ideas in children’s minds that might never have occurred to them otherwise – such as that they might really be the opposite sex, that they might be sexually attracted to people of the same sex, or that it might be a good idea to have sex underage and sleep around.

This is wonderful, of course, for adults who push an extreme libertarian agenda, or worse who want to sexually abuse children or seduce teenagers (all consensual, naturally), but it’s very hard to see how it is good for the children themselves. Watching teenagers have sex has even now become mainstream entertainment, at least as far as Channel 4 and Netflix are concerned. Makes a mockery of all this concern about safeguarding children and young people, if you think about it.

Time to draw a line and push back. This move by the least conservative Conservative government in history, revealing too how at odds Parliament is with the people, is another power grab by an over-mighty state over our children’s lives, determined to indoctrinate them regardless of their parents or of traditional family values. All real conservatives should oppose it.


Dr Will Jones

This article was first posted on The Conservative Woman

Leave a Reply