Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Sexualization of children

AT press time the Secretary of the Department of Education seem to have stepped back from implementing the sex education curriculum saying “we have decided to hold sex education module in abeyance until a final decision is made on the consulting process.”

At first blush that seems to be happy development. But this is no cause for jubilation for the parents who went out of their way to sue the Education Department. Because, if there is going to be any “consultation process” it will merely be, as perhaps before, a rubber stamp of an aggressive implementation of a curriculum that will allow neither concession nor compromise—despite media statements of the Department to the contrary.

The reason why this curriculum is “immutable” is, it is crafted or, better still, dictated, by foreign sponsors that have bundled both content and logistics in one well-funded program. This present sex education curriculum that was supposed to be piloted, or in fact, already implemented in several schools this year carries the content of a sex-ed curriculum model issued by UNESCO in which five year olds would be literally taught about the pleasures of masturbation. The cover of the sex-ed manual carries the logo of both DepEd and UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund.

There should be an overarching agenda why this seeming obsessive-compulsive behavior of international grand planners seems too overt. They are the same planners that met in Cairo in September 1994 on Population and Development; in Beijing in 1995 on the 4th World Conference on Women; in Davos Switzerland on Climate Change and Tourism UNWTO in 2007 and elsewhere.

Whatever the grand plan is, it is troubling to finally realize that these supposedly technocrats stand on a theory that children’s innocence is a myth. Their psychological premise is that children younger than five already know about sex and are sexual “agents”—hence, the logic and necessity of teaching them about sex. This, of course, is not true no matter what modern theorists says—unless, of course, they have already changed human nature in the same fashion that George Soros is famed for changing a financial scenario by mere currency speculation.

It is not therefore far-fetched to say that this sex education proposed by the education department will certainly disrupt the natural development of sexual awareness of children by deliberately feeding them more advanced knowledge which is still beyond their realm. This indeed is a form of “sexualizing” the children which in itself is already a form of sexual abuse that may progressively prepare them for physical abuse should any occasion arise.

No comments: