Skip to content
Breaking News Alert It Could Soon Be Illegal For California Teachers To Tell Parents About Kids' Trans Confusion

New Sex Ed ‘Common Core’ Would Force Explicit Images, Gender Mayhem, And Abortion On Kids

sex ed video

This article contains adult-level information about sex and genitals.

Last year, three leftist nonprofits created the National Sex Education Standards, a blueprint for the “sex education” of K-12 children. In practice, the standards serve as an indoctrination camp in extremist sexual ethics designed to destroy children’s innocence and undermine their attachment to the traditional, Judeo-Christian understanding of sex and marriage.

About 40 percent of school districts had adopted the earlier, less extreme 2011 version of the National Sexuality Education Standards, according to the Centers of Disease Control in a 2016 report. The new standards are radically more extreme.

The 2020 standards unequivocally endorse abortion at any time, teach the topic starting in sixth grade, and even force teachers to provide information on local abortion clinics to students in ninth grade. The standards also insist that children must be allowed to choose their own gender and false pronouns must “be respected by the adults in their lives.”

Kindergartners learn about gender identity, and third graders learn that gender is on a spectrum, about “the role of hormone blockers” for transgender youth, and how to “explain” masturbation. Sixth graders — ages eleven and twelve — must define oral, anal, and vaginal sex as well as the benefits of withdrawing one’s penis before ejaculation during intercourse and how to use dental dams during oral sex.

New Standards Even More Deranged

The 2020 version is different from the 2011 version as explained in the standards:

The updated [Standards] have been written with a trauma-informed lens; have been infused with principles of reproductive justice, racial justice, social justice, and equity; address social determinants of health and how these can lead to inequitable health outcomes; and take an intersectional approach. This edition uses less cis and heteronormative language that reflects a broader range of relationships and identities.

The new standards have entire sections in their “Guiding Principles” section devoted to “Social, Racial, and Reproductive Justice and Equity,” “Intersectionality,” and “Language Inclusivity.” They boast that “the updated NSES (Standards) calls attention to overt and covert discrimination.”

Disturbingly, the standards directly defy parental authority: “No one else is qualified to label or judge another person’s sexual identity, including their sexual orientation or gender identity, and it is important that the language and terms young people use to identify themselves is respected by the adults in their lives.”

Compare the number of times the following terms appear in each version.

2011 Standards 2020 Standards
Transgender 3 21
Gender Identity 10 69
Sexual orientation 8 48
Gender 48 270
boy 7 1 (in context of “princess boys”)
girl 7 0
Abstinence 27 20
Racism 0 9

Here’s How Austin Teaches This Curricula

The fruits of this deranged ideology are manifested in the Austin Independent School District’s curriculum, which is based on the standards. Austin is all in on leftist gender and same-sex ideology.

In sixth grade, teachers should explain that “people [incorrectly] assume that people with a penis are boys and people with a vagina are girls” and that students should not assume boys can only have girlfriends and vice versa. Even in kindergarten, after describing the “scrotum” as “the sack of skin that hangs below the penis,” teachers are to say, “Most of the time, people born with this reproductive system are called males, or boys.”

Sixth graders are also encouraged to attend an LGBT rally, “write down ways they can challenge homophobia,” and complete a biography of a “prominent LGBT figure in contemporary history.” Also in sixth grade, students are taught that assuming boys don’t wear dresses is a “stereotype.”

In that same lesson, students are to come up with solutions for a girl who wants to come out to her homophobic mother. In another story, a child and his mother are both happy her husband divorced her and married a man instead.

In a video shown to Austin’s eighth graders, a puppet bemoans the fact that people complain to him “about their homophobic dad or racist grandma” instead of correcting them. In seventh grade, the term “fondling” is described as “the manipulation of the genitals with the hand” coupled with assurances of its legality. The same lesson discourages child rearing by claiming a child will cost $233,610 until age 18.

Eighth graders are shown a video from entitled “How to Talk to Boys, Girls, and Everyone in Between.” In another animated video on puberty, two animated breasts emerge suddenly to fill up half the screen, followed by the opening of several large bananas meant to represent penises, topped off by a large-chested animated woman in a very revealing bathing suit. Another lesson, designed for children in eighth grade, implicitly encourages anal and oral sex by claiming the only way to prevent pregnancy is “no penis-in-vagina sex” and that getting an STD is “nothing to be embarrassed about.”

A sixth-grade class claims the touching of breasts or genitals “inside clothes” “may be” considered abstinence. The same class contains a card game asking whether various acts, like “oral sex (mouth on genitals),” “anal sex (penis to anus),” and “ touching breasts (inside clothes)” are considered abstinence.

A seventh-grade class defines abstinence as anything but “sperm in vagina,” implying those who engage in oral and anal sex can be considered abstinent. In that same class, disturbing graphics from the CDC show how to put on a condom, despite a disclaimer from the CDC itself warning, “this document contains sexually graphic images and may not be suitable for some audiences.”

A lesson on sexually transmitted infections in sixth grade contains many graphic hypothetical scenarios. The following is typical: “Jamie and Jake are planning to have sex for the first time and are planning to do it the night of a party at their friends” or “Six months ago, Jonas was at a party and had too much to drink [and] ended up having unprotected sex.”

In the same class, students are asked to consider the risk of “frequent, chance sex with unknown partners” or ”sex, without a condom, with a partner you don’t know well,” among other questions. Another eighth-grade class makes a plug for the morning-after abortion pill.

This is widespread debasing of sex and the creation of new life through filling the minds of public school children with sordid sexual imagery. It interprets humans as animals operating on pure instinct.

For parents, there is nothing more disturbing than learning that their right to teach their children about sex, and the great responsibilities that accompany it, is being trampled by public schools. This must be stopped from spreading nationwide like its predecessor.

How to Address this Evil

Nothing has exploded onto the state and national scene like the counter-response to critical race theory (CRT), the idea that power in society is set up to benefit the white race. Because so many students were schooled from home during the pandemic, parents saw firsthand their hateful and propaganda-ridden curriculum materials. This has made K-12 education a fertile field for reform, and activists against CRT took advantage.

Since so many metropolitan areas have become so left-leaning, it is very difficult to enact change in localities like Austin. However, anti-CRT activists discovered a new avenue to achieve their goal — through statewide actions by alarmed legislators, governors, and appointed officials. It has occurred at momentous speed so far. Legislation to stop this harmful racial indoctrination has passed in many states.

A similar statewide strategy should be followed to combat the epidemic of sexual indoctrination in public schools. Legislation to eliminate this sex-ed horror show should be pushed through state legislatures and signed by governors. It should ensure that schools define the family as man, woman, and children, outlaw discussion of sexual topics until at least ninth grade, and prohibit sex or pronoun changes.

While CRT teaches hatred on the basis of skin color, leftist sexual ideology teaches hatred of one’s own body and hatred of the parents who believe in the truth of their child’s God-given body. Not wanting one’s child to see pornographic images in middle school; not wanting one’s children to be indoctrinated to believe they have the power to change their gender and mutilate their healthy bodies; not wanting one’s children coached in the details of anal and oral sex while at school — none of these are the exclusive project of religious conservatives. All will inspire cross-cutting ideological support capable of driving a grassroots movement.

Fighting the left on their radical sexuality agenda is at most hinted at by Republican candidates. But once parents are fully awakened to the dangerous sexualization of children as young as kindergarten, they will be just as horrified as they were by CRT.

Before the lockdowns, more than 80 percent of U.S. children attended public schools. Considering the enormous number of districts that adopted the 2011 standards and the radical left’s push to cancel those who do not bend the knee completely to their agenda, the adoption by states of the new standards is inevitable absent a massive fight to end the sexualization of public school children.