This is the first in a three-part series on the continued sexualisation of our children. Part 1 discusses the creation and promotion of an ideology and asks what education is for. Part 2 will consider the position in Northern Ireland where the situation remains unclear, though many schools have implemented programmes based on the WHO guidelines, a summary of which will be provided. The positions of parents, churches, and teachers are also considered. Part 3 will set out parents’ rights and how they might be actioned.
Psalms 12: 5, 7-8 says, ‘You, Lord, will keep the needy safe and will protect us forever from the wicked, who freely strut about when what is vile is honoured by the human race. Because the poor are plundered’.
We have indeed seen those who destroyed people honoured by the UK honours system, lifted up and pardoned, and, most recently, Dr Fauci pardoned by the then-outgoing US President Biden. Robert F Kennedy Jr, the recently confirmed US Secretary of State for Health, in a speech about industrial pollution, had this to say: ‘[Y]ou’re going to make … a few people billionaires by impoverishing the rest of us’. He was paraphrasing his father, Robert F Kennedy Sr:
‘Governments repress their people; millions are trapped in poverty while the nation grows rich, and wealth is lavished on armaments everywhere. Few are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change’.
The WHO education guidance entitled ‘Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe’ refers to gender self-determination. The cost of gender-affirming hormone therapy is reported as $2,400 per year per person, whilst gender-affirming surgery costs range from $53,000 to $133,911 per person. In a ‘call to action’, historian Paul Cooper calls upon us to ‘resist those who have mortgaged our future for their greed and fight with every inch of your being to build a better world’.
The purpose of this series is to suggest ways in which we can resist the sexualization and indoctrination of our children via school curricula and the proposed use of medical interventions to further this agenda. A knowledge of our rights with respect to school policy and the school curriculum, and of how schools are managed and governed, is key in the fight to save our children from this evil. The series attempts to set this out. The series also seeks to invite a wider discourse around the purposes of education. It is the absence of a clear and agreed purpose which, I believe, has enabled cancerous agendas such as the amended Relationships and Sexual Education (RSE) programmes to enter schools and indoctrinate our children. I will provide a brief summary of the WHO RSE guidance, which seems to be a driving force behind this ideology. Key elements of the scientific evidence which is being ignored will also be presented. It is indeed a call to action.
Resistance
In order to resist, each of us must try to understand our own circumstances, so we can weave our way through the connections and interrelationships between the state and the individual. Many factors impact on our capacity to resist such as:
- The pervading climate of the world we live in.
- The cultural, social and religious norms of the country.
- Personal religious/moral beliefs.
- Access to politicians.
- Existing laws and regulations relating to individual rights and your knowledge of them.
The recent so-called Covid pandemic experience witnessed almost worldwide enforcement of, and compliance with, policies such as lockdowns, school closures, masking, and vaccine mandates. In Western democracies, the very basis of which are individual freedoms, it was stunning that there was neither challenge nor debate regarding the necessity, efficacy, and harms of such policies. Nor indeed was any permitted, as policies were implemented and sustained by the cancellation and silencing of opposing views. My experience is available on my Substack.
The same policy approach appears to have been adopted with respect to changes to the school curriculum, changes which would introduce very sexual content to young and very young children. These changes to the RSE of the curriculum are known as RSE in Northern Ireland but called Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) and other titles elsewhere.
President Trump may have set out US policy in an attempt to change the world climate when he stated that there are only two genders, male and female, but powerful forces are still lined up and a tide of destruction has been visited upon the UK whereby the NHS can refer to 21 genders. The outworking of this is exemplified by the experience of nurse Sandie Peggie, whose challenge was around the use of personal pronouns and being forced to change in front of a doctor whom she believes is a man. Indeed, there are some who claim there are 72 genders.
This creates a climate in which harmful ideologies pervade our institutions and thereby influence our children, themes pursued in more detail later. But let us take a step back for a moment and consider wider issues; as Plato asked, ‘What is education for’?
Mathew Arnold, one of England’s foremost 19th century critics and whose comments are still debated today, said we should teach 'the best that has been thought and said', Hannah Arendt, the foremost 20th century political theorist, advises us to ‘stop and think — [this] can make the difference between knowing what one is doing and its implications rather than just doing what others are doing’. Arendt also claimed that ‘the masses can be won by propaganda’ and speaks of ‘the tyranny of the majority’. Arendt’s writings on the power of propaganda are prescient.
It seems that is what has happened in our society. Our politicians, supported by mass media, claim that ideological changes are necessary and are being made to bring us into line with the rest of the UK, EU, and the world. In answering his own question, Plato described the purpose of education as ‘enabling individuals to distinguish between good and evil and between truth and error and to search after wisdom and goodness. If they did this, they would be less likely to be tempted by the attractions of wealth, power and the pursuit of pleasure’.
What about us? How do we answer the question of what education is for?
- The teaching of values, skills, or knowledge? If so, what are those values?
- The pursuit of learning.
- Intellectual self-reflection.
- A gateway to higher education.
- To prepare people for the world of work.
- To solve society’s ills whether it is climate, vandalism, health, or whatever the latest world crisis appears to be.
- Cultural transmission: the passing on of Western or national culture.
- Promotion of values and/or ethics.
- Fostering national identity.
I can, however, only agree with Dr Nicholas Tate when he opined, ‘It seems to me that whatever the most recent issue becomes a matter for school’.
Who does education serve? Who are the stakeholders? Are they parents, business, politicians, churches, governors, politicians, or children? What is education for? Until there are answers to these questions, it is not possible to design a curriculum to meet the needs of children. It further seems to me that this disarming lack of clarity enables pressure groups to impose their agenda on schools aided by an inability or unwillingness on behalf of officials to discuss these larger and more important issues.
And this is particularly relevant in light of the forthcoming curriculum review in England. It is concerning to learn that a recent report, commented on by Dr Tate, produced by the Oxford and Cambridge Examination Board, tells Labour to ‘Put climate change and diversity at [the] heart of [the] school curriculum’. Dr Tate was Chief Executive of the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (1994-7) and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (1997-2000).
The impact of these ideologies on children and schools is clear; consider these points raised by two parents:
‘Pupils are required to rethink everything they know about being male or female. All their assumptions about sexual relationships, marriage, parenthood and everything it means to be a boy, girl, woman or man are challenged by an adult in authority. This is not about teaching understanding or toleration of difference, it’s about abusing power to bend the minds of children, indoctrinating them. An unscientific belief system is now being pushed as fact and our children are being bombarded with two ludicrous ideas – namely, that a person can change sex and secondly that there are countless made-up genders to choose from’.
‘Sex education in primary schools is tantamount to grooming, in effect if not intention. We are in danger of instituting via RSE a national grooming programme in primary schools promoted via the culture of the school through eg the strategic choice of language including the abandonment of terms boy and girls. Schools are thereby guiding children along a journey away from being a boy or a girl into a world of gender fluidity. It’s about dividing the children from their parental influences. Educators are trying to sever the bond between parent and child in order to gain greater control’.
These issues raised are addressed throughout the series.
The Pervading Climate
In the US, former New York Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey explained:
‘SEL [Social and Emotional Learning] sounds beneficial, but that’s a disguise. In truth, it indoctrinates kids with extremist ideas many parents don’t condone” (Parents) are complaining that teachers are putting words such as “nonbinary” on the chalkboard and telling kids, including kindergarteners, they can live life as a gender different from what they were assigned at birth. Parents were told by school authorities that they can’t opt their children out … As for elementary schools, gender dysphoric kids make up less than 1 percent of the school population. Protect them, of course, from bullying and discrimination. They need to feel safe. But don’t brainwash the rest with one-sided, repeated lessons about gender issues’.
Please read Dr Sherri Tenpenny’s account of how the US Government agency USAID has previously funded the promotion of diversity, equity and inclusion ideology across the world. The US Government is taking steps to reverse its policy. Politico reports that the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, at the behest of the White House and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, launched a review of its foreign assistance projects to determine if they fund climate, transgender or diversity, equity and inclusion-related initiatives, and to ascertain if such projects align with American interests and values. The results may determine the fate of the remainder of aid. An Executive Order, ‘Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid’, signed on 20 January, 2025, stated: ‘It is the policy of United States that no further United States foreign assistance shall be disbursed in a manner that is not fully aligned with the foreign policy of the President of the United States’. The values and policy of the US is laid out in a further Executive Order entitled, ‘Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government’, which states:
‘It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality. Under my direction, the Executive Branch will enforce all sex-protective laws to promote this reality, and the following definitions shall govern all Executive interpretation of and application of Federal law and administration policy’.
UK policy direction differs. The Mail reported that British schools are increasingly adopting gender-neutral uniform policies by allowing children to choose clothes based on their self-identified gender and, in many cases, the words ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ are erased from uniform policy. The same paper reported on the ‘ridiculous push to ban the phrase “brother” and “sister”, whilst a school in Ireland said, “brothers” and “sisters” is “outdated language”’.
In England, the new Health Minister Ashley Dalton has stated that she believes women’s toilets should be abolished and that people can identify as llamas. She tweeted, ‘Personally I think we shouldn’t have gendered bathrooms at all’. The Times reported that children who identify as animals should be shown empathy, according to new Home Office guidelines.
The Mail reported that universities are 'queering' courses to be more welcoming to transgender and non-binary students. In one example, Warwick University has a Queering University Programme which promotes ‘queer pedagogies and perspectives’. It encourages teaching which is ‘inclusive of trans people’ and advises lecturers to ‘include trans and gender diverse content in teaching’. Meanwhile, Exeter University has produced a booklet written by students for academics, advising them to ‘include trans people in the curriculum’ as part of a ‘trans inclusion booklet’. It continued, ‘there should be more coverage of academics and theorists who are transgender’ as this will show that transgender identities are normal’. SOAS, University of London, said in 2022 guidance to staff that they should ‘embed trans, non-binary and intersex awareness into their curriculum’ and invite guest lecturers who are ‘trans, non-binary or intersex’.
The Impact of This Climate on Children and Schools
The Telegraph reported that some 13-year-olds have been taught that there are 100 genders, whilst some primary school children are being taught about masturbation; the same paper also reported that ‘trans ideology is as pervasive as ever — our children are the first victims’.
In England, Belinda Brown wrote in her excellent Conservative Woman article that Dr Elly Barnes, the founder of sex education charity Educate and Celebrate, encourages nursery and primary schools to be ‘gender neutral’ and says such advice is suitable for ‘children of all genders’ because young children are ‘fluid’. This includes encouraging children into role-playing the opposite sex. Belinda goes on to say that damage is being done ‘because children below the age of six or seven are at a stage of cognitive development when they cannot possibly understand these concepts. They are as suggestible as they are powerless’. This surely is inappropriate early sexualisation. She too reports that schools are removing the words ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ from their dress codes and that mixed toilets appear already shockingly common in schools.
A new report by Policy Exchange reveals that schools are increasingly becoming influenced by gender ideology and many are teaching gender identity beliefs within the Relationships, Sex & Health Education (RSHE) component of the curriculum as if they are facts. The report maintains that:
‘Gender affirmative care is prevalent within the school system, despite this being at odds with safeguarding principles that have been enshrined in law. However, over the last decade, a set of contested beliefs have become embedded within many schools, operating in a way that compromises safeguarding principles and risks jeopardising the wellbeing of children’.
The research found:
- Four in 10 secondary schools operate policies of gender self-identification.
- At least 28% of secondary schools are not maintaining single sex toilets.
- 19% are not maintaining single-sex changing rooms.
- 60% of secondary schools are allowing children to participate in sports of the opposite sex.
The Executive Summary and the full report, with recommendations, can be found here. The authors commented, ‘By uncritically accepting contested beliefs on gender identity, as well as adopting affirmative practice, which involves affirming a child’s belief that they are the opposite gender to their sex, schools are failing to consider their safeguarding duties’. The report also highlights how gender identity beliefs came to be so embedded within the school system. It does this by tracking the influence of external agencies promoting radical and unscientific beliefs within both the Department for Education and schools themselves.
Meanwhile, The Mail reported on a film about a trans teen which will be shown to pupils as young as 11. The documentary, following a sixth-former through the use of chest binders and cross-sex hormones, is set to be shown in schools in LGBTQ+ History Month, and has received support from the Department of Education. Brighton Council is one of many which have produced guidance for schools such as the Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit.
The impact on children is clear. According to recent research by the University of York, there has been a 50-fold rise in English children who think they are the wrong sex in just 10 years, with two thirds of them girls. Analysis of GP records suggests there were 10,000 diagnoses of gender dysphoria in England in 2021, up from fewer than 200 cases in 2011. The Telegraph has more with incidence rates of recorded gender dysphoria rose from 0.14 per 10,000 person years to 4.4 per 10,000 person years in this age group. And in line with other research, the majority had experienced a trauma in their lives.
In Wales, the Christian Institute reports that trans-affirming ideology is rife in schools. The Vale of Glamorgan Council’s Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit includes the following advice with respect to social transition:
‘In some education settings, School staff should be mindful that this child or young person may only have come out to a small number of school staff or their peers and, as such, their information must be kept private and confidential. Difficulties will arise for schools where a child who wants to make a social transition at school does not wish their parents to be consulted or notified’.
The Toolkit goes on to say parents and carers may seek to prevent their child from making any steps towards a transition. ‘If there is strong reason for concern that informing a parent could have a detrimental impact on the wellbeing of a pupil’ or ‘where the views of parents and children differ or where children do not want their parents to be involved, it will be necessary to determine whether the child is competent to make the decision themselves (this is referred to as Gillick competence)’. A complex and controversial decision-making tool, it is noteworthy that parents may well not be the central decision maker when it is used.
Merched Cymru, a women’s sex-based rights campaign group, reported that schools’ approaches in Wales include affirming trans identities, concealing information from parents, and allowing access to opposite sex facilities and uncovered evidence of poor practice, with policies ‘based on inaccurate, discredited’ and ‘highly ideological’ guidance. It reported, ‘every single school of the 68 that responded to the FOI requests said that they would facilitate a gender transition’. The report added, ‘Important information about their child’s wellbeing is being concealed from parents and carers. Two thirds of schools said they would not necessarily inform parents of their child’s social transition, or would do so only if the child gave permission’. It also found a ‘significant minority of schools support children to use opposite sex toilets (15%), changing rooms (15%), sports and even sleeping accommodation if they want’.
Kim Isherwood leads the resistance in Wales. She is Chair of Public Child Protection Wales, an organisation dedicated to providing the highest standards of safeguarding and raising awareness of exploitation and abuse. The organisation campaigns for Compulsory Sexual Safeguarding of Children and compulsory in-depth CSA, CSE and HSB training for all working with children and vulnerable people. It also campaigns to ensure a wholesome approach to all aspects of Education and envisage a responsible and shared partnership between schools and parents, and between parents and our elected representatives at all levels.
In Scotland, Dr Jenny Cunningham is a retired paediatrician and a Board Member of the Scottish Union for Education; Diane Rasmussen McAdie has interviewed her for UK Column about the Cass Review. Dr Cunningham reported that the Scottish Government’s 2024 Guidance on LGBT Inclusive Education (LGBT-IE) shows how thoroughly some of its education policies are being dictated by LGBT activists. She says that the Government has given the green light to these lobbying organisations to go into schools and influence pupils and teachers directly following on from the Government’s guidance, Supporting Transgender Pupils in Schools: Guidance for Scottish Schools (2021). She maintains that the group Time for Inclusive Education (TIE) has wielded unprecedented influence over policy and cemented its control of its implementation with the demand that LGBT Inclusive Education be embedded in the Scottish school curriculum. It defines LGBT Inclusive Education as ‘an educational approach of integrating the teaching of LGBT themes into the learning pathway from early level to the Senior Phase’. The Government launched a central platform for LGBT-IE containing all teaching and curriculum resources, including the LGBT Inclusive Education Implementation and Evaluation Toolkit. It is labelled as an ‘educational approach’ which includes ensuring educators in all local authority schools, early learning, and childcare providers complete a national learning course. TIE manages the platform on behalf of the Scottish Government. Parents will not be allowed to withdraw their children from LGBT-IE.
As stated above, Part 2 will consider the position in Northern Ireland where the situation remains unclear, though many schools have implemented programmes based on the WHO guidelines, a summary of which will be provided. The positions of parents, churches, and teachers are also considered. Part 3 will set out parents’ rights and how they might be actioned.
Main image: Nathan Smith from Pixabay
