Friday, 9 February 2007

"Sex Education"

Today’s Guardian includes an eye-popping report that teenagers, based on their levels of experience, are to be set (even if in purportedly extracurricular activities) for "sex education". Yes, you really did read that aright. Apparently, in the 13-16 age group, "some boys are still playing with Lego while others are already having sex." Well, either way, they shouldn’t be, and every effort should be made to compel them to stop. But it is at least good to see the existence of boys acknowledged at all, other than as spreaders of unwanted pregnancies and Sexually Transmitted Infections.

Speaking of which, do the "sex educators" ever wonder, when no one in this country over the age of seven or eight can now be in the slightest doubt as to where babies come from, and when condoms are now all but thrown at even very young children, the rates of underage pregnancies and STIs continue to rise exponentially? Probably not, because these are not really what concern them. If you do not have the necessary certification from the utterly fraudulent and depraved Kinsey Industry, then talking filth to children in order to soften them up for sex with adults is called "grooming", and is rightly punishable under the criminal law. But if you happen to be so certificated, then, even though the content is at least substantially and the purpose always exactly the same, it is called "sex education", and you will be paid public money to deliver it to captive audiences, even to humiliate teenagers in front of their peers with regard to their lack of sexual experience.


  1. Where did you get your statistics on the alleged rise in teenage pregnancies David?

  2. I know that the likes of the Social Exclusion Unit will tell you that the rate is coming down, but that is because (as, frankly, everyone knows) underage abortions and miscarriages are routinely recorded as other things, if the latter are recorded at all.

    In the same way, for example, everyone knows that GCSE pass rates are only a percentage of those entered for the exam, not of those in the class. Among so many other con tricks in the same vein (crime, unemployment, immigration, &c, &c, &c, &c, &c...).

    You might be about to come back with the much lower rate of teenage pregnancies in the Netherlands. But that has nothing to do with 1990s innovations such as lowering the age of consent to 12 (yes, 12!) and handing out condoms in schools.

    Rather, it was, and is, because of the strong family structures sustained by the pervading influence of Calvinism in the north and Catholicism in the south, possibly now accompanied by, as a proportion of the population, the very high number of Muslims. At least as regards cultures infused with Catholicism or classical Protestantism, something vety similar can be said about Germany, for example.