WHO: “Sexuality Education Starts From Birth.”

In other words, grooming starts at birth. They will not rest until they have corrupted the youth completely in their quest to destroy Western Civilisation.

From The European Conservative

By Frank Haviland

It is clear that not only are liberal administrations and activists foisting unnecessary early sexualisation on children, overarching levers of power, like the WHO, are also hell bent on doing so.

When you examine with a trembling hand that miracle of biology, the precious and tiny bundle you just brought home from the hospital, there are certain questions that traditionally strike a first-time parent: How on earth are we going to take care of this new life? Should I breastfeed or opt for formula milk? How dangerous is it for the baby to share our bed? And, perhaps most common of all, when am I going to get any sleep? That’s where we’ve all been going wrong apparently, at least according to the authorities, who seem to be working from a much simpler set of principles. Chief among them is the question of how long we should wait before we start sexualising the baby?

That is at least according to a World Health Organisation report, which asserts with ill-deserved confidence: “Sexuality education starts from birth.” The guidance is aimed at “policy makers, educational and health authorities and specialists.” It has been translated into various European languages, and promoted at both national and international events. In fact, the report isn’t all that new. It first appeared in 2010, but reworkings of it appear to have seeped their way through Western bureaucracies successfully enough to have dictated mandatory sex education for three-year-olds in Wales. This measure is so inappropriate that even Britain’s ‘conservative’ government felt compelled to undertake an urgent review. 

The push to sexualise children the moment they’re free of the womb is smuggled into the report by dubious reference to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the State’s “obligation to provide children with educational measures”:

Sexual rights as human rights related to sexuality offer another framework which encompasses the right for everybody to access sexuality education. Article 8 of the IPPF Declaration reads: Right to education and information: All persons, without discrimination, have the right to education and information generally and to comprehensive sexuality education and information necessary and useful to exercise full citizenship and equality in the private, public and political domain.

Whether or not we accept the specious legal basis from which the report claims authority, the insistence that children be sexualised from birth follows from a quite extraordinary non sequitur, in which the reports authors equate maternal intimacy with sexual education: 

In this document, it was deliberately decided to call for an approach in which sexuality education starts from birth. From birth, babies learn the value and pleasure of bodily contact, warmth, and intimacy. Soon after that, they learn what is “clean” and what is “dirty.” Later, they learn the difference between male and female, and between intimates and strangers. The point is that, from birth, parents in particular send messages to their children that relate to the human body and intimacy. In other words, they are engaging in sexuality education.

Having brought us (albeit unwillingly) to the conclusion that children must be sexualised from the get-go, here is just a taste of what is in store for them if the school, playgroup, or government legislation adheres to this claptrap. I have restricted it to the age of nine, because I’m not sure quite how much more you need. 

The guidelines for age groups are as follows. For children from 0-4 Years old:

• Help children to develop “respect for gender equality.”
• Help children to develop “curiosity regarding their own and others’ bodies.”
• Give information about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body, early child masturbation.”
• Give information about “the right to ask questions about sexuality.”
• Give information about “the right to explore gender identities.”
• Give information about “the right to explore nakedness and the body, to be curious.”
• Give information about “the influence of age on sexuality and age-appropriate behaviour.”
• Enable children to “know where you can touch.”

4-6 Years old:

• Enable children to “talk about sexual matters.”
• Enable children to “consolidate their gender identity.”
• Give information about “friendship and love towards people of the same sex.”
• Give information about “secret loves, first love (infatuations and crushes, unrequited love).”
• Help children to develop acceptance of diversity.”

6-9 Year olds:

• Give information about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body (masturbation/self- stimulation).”
• Give information about “sexual intercourse.”
• Give information about “marriage, divorce; living together.”
• Give information about “diseases related to sexuality.”
• Help children to develop “an understanding of ‘acceptable sex’ (mutually consensual, voluntary, equal, age-appropriate, context-appropriate and self-respecting).”
• Help children to develop “acceptance of commitment, responsibility and honesty as a basis for relationships.”

In other words, the WHO wants your child masturbating as a toddler, consolidating their gender identity before their first day of school, and living together, married, and divorced, all the while ill with a sexually transmitted disease by their sixth birthday. Such an approach to child education could only be undertaken by A) those who had never met a child before, B) those who had not the slightest regard for the child’s well being, or C) those who were on the take. 

To illustrate the lunacy of the report’s approach, we should perhaps recall the early stages of child development. Unlike other species, which must essentially sink or swim from day one, human infants are especially helpless at birth (or ‘secondary altricial’ as the technical term goes), because we are born too early. To accommodate evolution, which has favoured big brains, bipedalism, and a necessarily reduced birth canal, the human fetus is born well short of the 21 months gestation one would expect for its brain size. Human babies’ brains therefore are only 30% of their adult size, although this doubles within the first year. The disadvantages of this are obvious: colour vision takes six months, walking takes around a year, the first word may be another six months on from that, and it can take up to three years to develop 20/20 vision. Trying to incorporate respect for gender equality, the right to ask questions about sexuality,  and the right to explore gender identities concurrently might be considered pushing our luck. 

Bizarrely, this is something the report acknowledges:

Sexuality education is age-appropriate with regard to the young person’s level of development and understanding, and culturally and socially responsive and gender-responsive. It corresponds to the reality of young people’s lives.

Balderdash. 

Even if by some miracle you think that this report is age appropriate, the fact that it comes via the World Health Organisation should probably render it the very last port of call for matters relating to child welfare. The WHO, after all, was the organisation charged with investigating how the COVID virus escaped from China. Not only were they content to be blocked and stymied by Chinese scientists, and even denied entry to China, they then abandoned their investigation, “frustrated with Chinese officials.” Whether you read that as collusion or mere incompetence, it suggests that if you prioritise safety for your children, the WHO is not the way to go. 

The fact that this report has taken so long to provoke the ire of Western governments and media outlets speaks volumes about how relaxed those in authority have come to operate when dealing with WHO edicts. And while it may be premature to conclude that the explosion of sexual ‘education’ recently aimed at young children, such as drag queen ‘story time,’ the relentless promotion of transgenderism, and the proliferation of highly-politicised nurseries is necessarily the result of such meddling, it certainly appears that the WHO and similar agencies are at the very least a sizeable piece of the jigsaw. 

This report should be a wake-up call for all conservative and would-be governments across Europe. It is crystal clear that not only are liberal administrations and activists foisting unnecessary early sexualisation on children (who have no choice or chance to object), the overarching levers of power are also hell bent on doing so. Now more than ever, it is incumbent upon parents, teachers, and those in authority to protect children from dangerous ideas best left to the clarity of adulthood, and to oppose the indoctrination of children from wherever it springs.