Government-funded sex education groups promote promiscuity

and homosexuality while downplaying the health and psychological risks associated with premature sexual activity, says psychiatrist Miriam Grossman.

I would go further and say the normalization of pedophilia

and "inter generational sex" is the ultimate objective.

"What Advocates for Youth is saying is that ... the notion that we are all either male or female is a repressive ideology."

by Miriam Grossman MD

You're Teaching My Children What?

(abridged by henrymakow.com)

Not long ago, I noticed a steady stream of students, most of them female, who were paying a high price for their sexual choices. I spent hundreds and hundreds of hours with these students, and they are the reason I'm writing this today....

There is a man-made epidemic of ignorance: ignorance of biological truths that should be central in any sex ed curriculum or parent education program.

I put the responsibility for the epidemic of ignorance directly on those organizations that are at the helm of teaching sex education:

SIECUS (Sexuality Education Council of US; Planned Parenthood; Advocates for Youth.) Contrary to their claims and promises, their programs are not comprehensive; they are not science-based or medically accurate or up-to-date.

I'll go even further: They are not about preventing disease. Sex ed is a social movement. Its goal is to change society. Their primary goal is to promote sexual freedom and to rid society of its Judeo-Christian taboos and restrictions.

In this worldview, almost anything goes. Each individual makes his or her sexual choices; each person decides how much risk he or she is willing to take, and no judgments are allowed.

The science that is used is selective. If it challenges this model of human sexuality, if what's seen under the microscope threatens this dream for society, it doesn't exist.

These eminent groups deceive the public and endanger the health and well-being of our children. The list of their crimes is long. Duplicity is one: promising one thing and doing another. ...

HATE-FUELED PSYCHOLOGICAL ATTACK ON HETEROSEXUALS 

My third example is that of Advocates for Youth and their approach to gender. This past August, in the House of Representatives, there was an amendment that ...would grant $50 million to organizations that promote the type of sex education that I've described. In response to that, the president of Advocates for Youth stated that this move would bring science back into sex education.

I found that astonishing, because when you go to the Web sites of Advocates for Youth--and there are many; this is a very large organization that has a lot of resources--science is one thing that is missing.

Advocates for Youth is telling kids that gender, the internal feeling of whether one is male or female, is completely separate from biology, from one's anatomy and one's chromosomes. It's an internal feeling, they say.

This goes back to the gender theory of John Money, left, a notorious psychologist from Johns Hopkins who introduced these radical ideas in the '50s and '60s. The idea again is that one's identification of being male or female is a result of one's internal feelings.

Advocates for Youth not only promotes this, but it tells kids that gender, being male or female, exists on a spectrum. Male and female are at the extreme ends of that spectrum, but it is a wide spectrum with many possibilities in between male and female.... What Advocates for Youth is saying is that Robert does not become Roberta and Roberta does not become Robert, but that they become neither Robert nor Roberta; that there are many possibilities in between, and that the notion that we are all either male or female is a repressive ideology.

What they're telling kids is that newborns are designated male or female, they're wrapped in the blue or pink blanket, and then they're socialized to fit cultural expectations. Messages from their environment teach them masculine or feminine behaviors, interests, and ways of relating. But when a boy insists he's a girl or vice versa, that should not be a concern, says Advocates for Youth. It is, they claim, "as normal as being alive."

The premise that there are only two genders, male or female, is inaccurate, they say. It restricts our freedom of gender expression. The idea that an individual must be one or the other, male or female, is an arbitrary, repressive paradigm. It's another noxious "ism," like sexism.

This organization that claims to bring science back into sex education teaches that gender can change. A 10-year-old might be certain she's a girl, but at 20 she might realize she's a man. People can realize their gender at any point in their lives, young people are told. Is this the "science" that they're referring to? Or perhaps instructing children that they could be male, female, both, or neither is an example of the critical sexual health information they need to make responsible decisions about their lives.

This lesson on gender is not only unscientific; it's a departure from reality. Here's what real science in this century says about being male or female. Cell biology indicates that the Y chromosome is teeming with units of DNA that are unique to males. There are distinct male and female blueprints from the moment of conception. Embryology provides evidence of the earliest activity of those genes: Eight weeks after conception, when the embryo is the size of a kidney bean, the Y chromosome directs the testes to produce testosterone. The testosterone travels to the brain, enters the neurons, and propels the development of a distinct boy brain with smaller centers for communication, observation, and emotional processing and larger centers for sex and aggression.

Neurobiology maps out the complex and widespread differences in male and female brains. MRIs create color images that highlight distinct boy and girl patterns of thinking and feeling. Infant development reveals that at one day of age--presumably before children have been socialized to meet society's expectations--girls show a stronger interest in the face, while boys look longer at a mobile. At one year, girls are drawn to a video of a face moving, and boys prefer the video of cars moving.

I love this one: The typical toy preferences of children are also found in juvenile monkeys. Females like dolls, and males prefer vehicles and balls. Sexual stereotypes in the animal kingdom? Male and female are culturally assigned? Gender is a feeling separate from hormones and chromosomes? I don't think so. Advocates for Youth lesson plans are based on last century's social movements and the wish to blur the distinctions between male and female. Anyone following this century's hard science knows that those moth-eaten theories have been discredited.

But in sex ed class, these discoveries don't exist. Students are being force-fed an ideology from 50 years ago: Gender is man-made, sex ed educators insist. Cultures teach what it means to be a man or a woman. Are they stuck in a time warp or just completely blinded by ideology? Either way, it spells disaster for young people.

CONCLUSION

I was told in a recent interview that I must be exaggerating: that it must be hyperbole when I say sex education is madness, that it teaches untruths and that it exposes our kids to smut. If that's true, I was told, wouldn't there be congressional hearings?

I am not exaggerating: This is madness. The priority for SIECUS, Planned Parenthood, and Advocates for Youth is not the health and well-being of young people. These federally funded organizations are fighting "repression" and "intolerance," not herpes or syphilis. To them, it appears the blisters and the warts, the worry and the depression, can be tolerated, but the "isms" must go.

From the thousands of hours I've spent with students, I can affirm that when sexual freedom reigns, sexual health suffers. Our kids are being taught that you can play with fire, and the waiting rooms of doctors and therapists are filled with people who've been burned, inside and out. Is every young person going to postpone sex? Of course not, but we are obligated to inform them of the risks they face and to teach them biological truths, even when they are politically incorrect.

The only power that I have to fight this calamity is the power of the pen. While the nation struggles over issues related to health and stands on the verge of supporting organizations like SIECUS with millions of tax dollars, it's my hope that my message will reach the ears and the heart of someone with authority who will have the courage to stand up and put an end to this fiasco.

-----------------------------------------

--Miriam Grossman, M.D., is a board-certified child, adolescent, and adult psychiatrist who writes and speaks to parents, students, educators, and health professionals internationally on the dangers of political correctness and incorrect science in her profession. She is the author of You're Teaching My Child What?: A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Education and How They Harm Your Child and Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student.

-------

Thanks to Linda K for sending this! 

Related - Five-Year-Olds in England to get Sex ed Ostensibly to Recognize Pedophiles