Teaching sex education to pre-pubescent children should be, to put it colloquially, the stuff of nightmares, or something you’d find in a sinister dystopian novel like Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Huxley’s novel explores the dystopian and degenerate possibilities of humanity’s future that has everything from adults entering drug-induced states called “holidays”, and children encouraged to perform sexual acts with each other in schools. Sound familiar?
You’d think such scenarios would only exist in the minds of curious authors in contrast to the real world. But you’d be wrong. Britain’s latest decision to teach sex education to children as young as four means you can witness such dystopian developments first hand.
Last week, the UK Conservative government announced that it would enforce sex and relationships education on all primary schools starting from 2019. The government has cunningly communicated this new policy to the public by differentiating between “relationships education”, which will be taught to primary school students, and “sex education”, which will be the focus of a secondary school context. However, this does not negate the fact that relationships education will not only be associated with sexuality in many ways, but will also open up a slippery slope to other controversial and harmful ideas.
Four-year-olds may not necessarily be taught the details regarding safe sex practices, but it is inevitable for relationships education to lend its way to other inappropriate concepts and ideas. For example, homosexual relationships and LGBT issues will have a presence as after all, we live in a day and age where many children have homosexual relatives and LGBT themes pervade our culture. It is simply not possible for schools to teach relationship education while leaving out such trendy yet dangerous topics.
Fortunately, the government possesses some competence so as to provide religious schools with a choice on whether or not to take part in the program. This itself has not been spared controversy. The left, represented by so-called human rights organisations and other education leaders, have labelled this a “get-out clause” that gives Christian schools an advantage. This in turn gives parents the option of not having to subject their children to the program, but parental autonomy is another thing the left cannot stand because they believe that children belong to the state.
Interestingly, the fact that four year olds will be the recipients of sex education is not the cause of alarm for these human rights groups, who are instead childishly offended by the government allowing religious schools to have a choice. Remember, these are the same people who claim that same sex marriage and other pro-LGBT policies will allow churches and private organisations to practice their religious freedom.
Studies have shown that earlier sex education is futile. A study by Somers and Eaves concluded that educational programs did not have a significant impact on adolescent’s sexual behaviour in the first place. The research paper stated “formal sex education was found to have little or no impact on sexual behaviours”. So why inject harmful content into children’s minds when it won’t even have an impact in the first place?
The real solution lies within the roots of the program itself. The new program is influenced by modern-day factors such as the prevalence of sexting and pornography, problems created by the rise of feminism, LGBT liberation and the sexual revolution. The Vatican itself stated that the real problem, to which many people are oblivious to, is the “resounding failed utopia of the sexual revolution and subsequent breakdown of the first institution of moral education, the family.” Today’s lack of emphasis on, and outright rejection of, morality and traditional values, which held society together in the past, has resulted in more degeneracy sweeping into our children’s minds. Everything from overly-sexualised celebrities to self-degraded women, the roots of the problem are clear.
Tragically, the modern-day solution is to exacerbate these problems by exposing more children to sexuality and sexual relationships. The Institute for American Values has called sex education an educational fad, and for good reason. Its research emphasise the futility of sex education and complements various studies that have already made this clear.
In addition, the original proponents of sex education happen to be associated with controversial ideologies themselves, a fact conveniently ignored or left out by their modern-day successors. Margaret Sanger, for example, was the founder of Planned Parenthood and was a deep supporter of eugenics in order to breed out particular groups of people, including the poor. Professor Alfred Kinsey, a zoologist who influenced academics and lawmakers into accepting sex education, not only believed children are sexual from birth, but twisted data from surveys he used to come up with his sex education theories.
Let’s not forget George Lukacs, a Marxist theorist who openly flaunted his desire to destroy Western traditions and values, who introduced sex education to the public schools of Hungary. It is their legacy we see all over the world in physical development classes and sex education sessions, along with of course programs such as Safe Schools in Australia. You can witness some of this appalling sex education aimed at children which is now accessible online. A YouTube channel called Queer Kid Stuff clearly aimed to preschools aims to indoctrinate them into radical sexuality and gender theory.
It is clear that sex education has a sinister and gruesome past, and the fact that it’ll be forced onto children as young as four should be a call to action for good people who want to not only preserve traditions and values, but to ensure a future for our children. An artefact of the sexual revolution, with interference from Marxists and eugenicists alike, sex education is a harmful and dangerous “solution” to a problem that would be better solved through the use of morality, truth and common sense. Otherwise, an education system infiltrated by the radical left will only contribute to the creation of a real-life dystopian society rampant with degeneracy.