SEX education in primary schools is tantamount to grooming, in effect if not intention. That’s what MPs were baldly told by a head teacher last week. He explained it was doing this by lowering young children’s natural inhibitions.
This moment of truth took place at a Parliamentary briefing organised by the Lords and Commons Family and Child Protection Group when head teacher Ed Matyjaszek (Mat-ee-ay-chek) from the Isle of Wight said: ‘We are in danger of instituting via RSE a national grooming programme in primary schools. Obviously the predator’s aim is abuse, but the [sex education teaching] process with the child is the same, whether that is the aim or not.’
The Rev Lynda Rose, founder of Parent Power and Voice for Justice UK and co-convener of the group, pointed to worrying official statistics showing that the UK continues to have the highest rates of both teenage pregnancy and teenage abortion in Western Europe, and to what doctors have called an ‘epidemic’ of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) amongst young people in the UK.
These include herpes, chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrhoea and HIV, Mrs Rose said.
‘According to a recent report issued by the Terrence Higgins Trust and the British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH), in 2018 there were nearly half a million STI diagnoses in the UK, while in the last decade cases of gonorrhoea rose by 249 per cent, and rates of syphilis by 165 per cent. And most of these new infections – what are called a disproportionate number – were, they said, amongst young people and gay and bisexual men.’ (My italics)
It is something that is rarely addressed, but the NSPCC estimate that as much as two-thirds of all child sexual abuse is carried out by other children, some as young as five.
It is hard not to deduce, as did Mrs Rose, that this is ‘all too clearly resulting from too much information too soon’.
The number of young people identifying as ‘bisexual’ has mushroomed in the past decade to as many as 27 per cent of all teenagers, she pointed out, arguing that this was doubtless due to ‘the unremitting promotion of same-sex relationships’. While some may argue that this allows children the freedom to ‘come out’, it is hard not to see that immature and maybe unhappy children are suggestible, liking the attention their difference draws to them, and far too young to be settling on their sexuality.
The problem with schools endorsing early experimentation and apparent endorsement of such high-risk lifestyles is both moral and practical. Does school sex education perversely bear some responsibility for the rise in STIs among the young, as well as the increase in oral and anal cancers, by the normalisation and promotion of these kinds of sex to young people?
Parents who fear this is the case – and who anyway object on moral grounds that children as young as four are subjected to such ‘education’ – are being demonised, marginalised and silenced. This was the second strand of concerns put to the MPs at the briefing.
MPs heard from Jacqueline, the mother of a four-year-old girl who now persistently asks her why ‘she hasn’t got two mummies’. Jacqueline told of her distressing experience engaging with her school which runs the notorious ‘No Outsiders’ programme, on which TCW reported last year, trying to get them to consult parents as the law says they should and to heed her concerns, to no avail.
Ed Matyjaszek recounted how he had attended a head teachers’ conference on the new RSE regulations where the representative of the local education authority informed delegates that the ‘point of the consultation is to get the parents together so that you can tell them what you are going to teach their children’.
Yet the government have been clear the new RSE regulations and guidance do not require LGBT teaching in primary schools, though they ‘strongly encourage’ it. Although the regulations require schools to inform and consult parents on what they will be teaching in this area, taking into account the age and religious background of the children, the head teacher’s decision is final and there is no parental right of withdrawal outside what the school deems to be ‘sex education’ – which, as shown in the case of Warwickshire’s appalling ‘All About Me’ programme, can be defined very narrowly indeed.
MPs were told how this allows some schools, particularly where there is an activist head teacher, to use their power to ride roughshod over parental concerns.
Jacqueline said she was now looking for a different school for her daughter, and Ed Matyjaszek noted a surge in home schooling – reportedly in the thousands in Birmingham alone, where Muslim parents have been protesting against the use of ‘No Outsiders’ – as a result of the hostile environment to traditional values being created in UK schools. This is not something anyone wants.
Judith Nemeth of the Values Foundation told how previously outstanding Jewish schools in London were being failed by Ofsted because they weren’t ensuring their children were sufficiently exposed to LGBT materials and sex education.
Ofsted’s animus towards traditional beliefs and values is well known, and has been highlighted again in the past week by a Policy Exchange report which warns that the education watchdog ‘can conflate extremism and socially conservative or traditional religious practice’. It added Ofsted must cease to work ‘in opposition to communities of faith’.
But this is not just a matter of religion. It’s about keeping children safe. One of the aims of modern sex education is to lower children’s inhibitions in respect of sexual matters to the point that they no longer regard them as taboo. But there must be a huge worry about how much we should tell small children and how much they can cope with.
Isn’t it better that children get open, honest answers from parents or safe adults and individually rather than be left to digest such information in the presence of and at the mercy of their peers? Better that children seek answers when they want to that adults can keep age-appropriate, and make less of a big deal of?
The modern obsession with demystifying sex – and now homosexuality and transgenderism – and reducing it to a set of questionable actions or behaviours devoid of moral or spiritual context not only diminishes it but also puts children at increased risk. It lowers their proper, protective inhibitions and barriers, both from unscrupulous adults and also from each other, as the rise in child-on-child sex abuse shows.
A Conservative government should understand that parents are the primary educators of their children and that their deep reservations, concerns and wishes must be heard and respected. But while Ofsted and the Department for Education remain largely captive to the LGBT and sex-positive agenda there is little reassurance for parents, either that any material presented to their children will be age-appropriate or respect their values and religious background.
Without Government action on this, more cases brought before the courts and more children withdrawn from school as confidence in the system crashes for anyone not fully signed up to the state’s increasingly authoritarian and extreme woke agenda.
Gavin Williamson, Secretary of State for Education and a father, should be listening. It affects him and his children too.