The research SEEMS to suggest is the big takeaway. They can't really prove that it helps anything. A random check of news headlines does more than suggest kids are being trafficked and abused at ever-increasing rates. "Lower rates of teen pregnancy" - yeah, because the teacher can send an underage pregnant chick to Planned Parenthood and they'll waive parental permission. Presto! She ain't pregnant no more. Also actual research is more than suggesting that STI and rates of physical assault in dating are rapidly going out of control in teens and adults. Syphilis is making a big comeback. AIDS is still an epidemic.
Kids aren't learning how to avoid inappropriate touching in sex ed - they're learning how fun it is to be inappropriate around others who are being forced to tolerate them.
B
U
L
L
S
H
I
T
Sex Ed “researchers” are almost certainly, 100% far Leftists.
I could not give a crap about what they say, and wouldn’t listen to them in any advice about anything.
Just let children be children!!!!!
The problem isn’t that ALL Democrats are intentionally grooming young children for sexual exploitation.
The problem is that ALL Democrats are so gullible and manipulable enough to believe that teaching 5 year olds about sex and gender is not harmful.
The gullible Democrats are being used by the Groomers to champion the Groomers’ agenda unwittingly.
Funny you never hear a peep out of NAMBLA did they change their name?
Are these the same “Sex-ed researchers” who say that homosexuality and transgenderism are normal?
Only CHILD MOLESTERS want to sexualize children.
The pizzagate incident was fueled by the Podesta emails.
Why Podesta and others were making reference to using kids as entertainment in swimming pools, in between their satanic rituals, should have raised a high level of concern.
Covering up the abuse or torture of children should not be a goal of the establishment media or of political and community leaders.
I love this generalized label “Sex-Ed Researchers”. They could be NAMBLA.
All exemption given to teachers and schools regards child porn need to be cancelled. No, you can’t show it to kids because some bureaucrat on DC says it’s okay. In fact, you will go to prison.
From Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, Chapter 3:
“OUTSIDE, in the garden, it was playtime. Naked in the warm June sunshine, six or seven hundred little boys and girls were running with shrill yells over the lawns, or playing ball games, or squatting silently in twos and threes among the flowering shrubs. The roses were in bloom, two nightingales soliloquized in the boskage, a cuckoo was just going out of tune among the lime trees. The air was drowsy with the murmur of bees and helicopters.
The Director and his students stood for a short time watching a game of Centrifugal Bumble-puppy. Twenty children were grouped in a circle round a chrome steel tower. A ball thrown up so as to land on the platform at the top of the tower rolled down into the interior, fell on a rapidly revolving disk, was hurled through one or other of the numerous apertures pierced in the cylindrical casing, and had to be caught.
“Strange,” mused the Director, as they turned away, “strange to think that even in Our Ford’s day most games were played without more apparatus than a ball or two and a few sticks and perhaps a bit of netting. imagine the folly of allowing people to play elaborate games which do nothing whatever to increase consumption. It’s madness. Nowadays the Controllers won’t approve of any new game unless it can be shown that it requires at least as much apparatus as the most complicated of existing games.” He interrupted himself.
“That’s a charming little group,” he said, pointing.
In a little grassy bay between tall clumps of Mediterranean heather, two children, a little boy of about seven and a little girl who might have been a year older, were playing, very gravely and with all the focussed attention of scientists intent on a labour of discovery, a rudimentary sexual game.
“Charming, charming!” the D.H.C. repeated sentimentally.
“Charming,” the boys politely agreed. But their smile was rather patronizing. They had put aside similar childish amusements too recently to be able to watch them now without a touch of contempt. Charming? but it was just a pair of kids fooling about; that was all. Just kids.
“I always think,” the Director was continuing in the same rather maudlin tone, when he was interrupted by a loud boo-hooing.
From a neighbouring shrubbery emerged a nurse, leading by the hand a small boy, who howled as he went. An anxious-looking little girl trotted at her heels.
“What’s the matter?” asked the Director.
The nurse shrugged her shoulders. “Nothing much,” she answered. “It’s just that this little boy seems rather reluctant to join in the ordinary erotic play. I’d noticed it once or twice before. And now again to-day. He started yelling just now …”
“Honestly,” put in the anxious-looking little girl, “I didn’t mean to hurt him or anything. Honestly.”
“Of course you didn’t, dear,” said the nurse reassuringly. “And so,” she went on, turning back to the Director, “I’m taking him in to see the Assistant Superintendent of Psychology. Just to see if anything’s at all abnormal.”
“Quite right,” said the Director. “Take him in. You stay here, little girl,” he added, as the nurse moved away with her still howling charge. “What’s your name?”
“Polly Trotsky.”
“And a very good name too,” said the Director. “Run away now and see if you can find some other little boy to play with.”
The child scampered off into the bushes and was lost to sight.
“Exquisite little creature!” said the Director, looking after her. Then, turning to his students, “What I’m going to tell you now,” he said, “may sound incredible. But then, when you’re not accustomed to history, most facts about the past do sound incredible.”
He let out the amazing truth. For a very long period before the time of Our Ford, and even for some generations afterwards, erotic play between children had been regarded as abnormal (there was a roar of laughter); and not only abnormal, actually immoral (no!): and had therefore been rigorously suppressed.
A look of astonished incredulity appeared on the faces of his listeners. Poor little kids not allowed to amuse themselves? They could not believe it.
“Even adolescents,” the D.H.C. was saying, “even adolescents like yourselves …”
“Not possible!”
“Barring a little surreptitious auto-erotism and homosexuality–absolutely nothing.”
“Nothing?”
“In most cases, till they were over twenty years old.”
“Twenty years old?” echoed the students in a chorus of loud disbelief.
“Twenty,” the Director repeated. “I told you that you’d find it incredible.”
“But what happened?” they asked. “What were the results?”
“The results were terrible.” A deep resonant voice broke startlingly into the dialogue.
They looked around. On the fringe of the little group stood a stranger–a man of middle height, black-haired, with a hooked nose, full red lips, eyes very piercing and dark.
“Terrible,” he repeated.
The way our schools have handled sex education has been severely low IQ on the part of the school system.
Oh, then these people are not monsters... /s
I believe EVERYTHING printed in the Atlantic and even more so anything “sex researchers” say.
They are leaving out a very big point. The secrecy. Talking about this with children, not telling the parents, and keeping those discussions secret should raise red flags.
Even the parts of their work that were not totally criminal were based on interviews with hookers and felons.
It is a rotten foundation to build anything on.
I am going to commit a cardinal sin by commenting on the article without reading it. Why? Because I have read other opinions and statements by today’s class of so call sexual education experts. The conclusion: they are among the most perverted, evil, immoral, self serving individuals dedicated to the corruption of innocence. They are a threat humanity.
Therefore I know anything they opine will be in defense of the growing trend to sexualize children.
There might indeed be a good kind of sex ed that is the opposite of grooming. For 5 to 8 year olds this would likely be warning then how to avoid strangers and to speak up if they are being touched inappropriately. It would certainly not include a discussion of the little kids own sexual preferences or gender.
Not all Democrats are groomers but most groomers are Democrats.
Public school groomers.
Advertising is meant to build product/service acceptance by repeated mentions.
“Any publicity is good publicity” is a phrase that comes to mind.