Opinion: The Problem With Schools Grooming And Hyper-Sexualizing Our Children

Radical woke progressives are trying to normalize the sexual grooming and general hyper-sexualization of our children and it is not OK.

The latest blatant example of this comes from a teacher at New York City’s private school, Dalton. That’s right, a teacher. You know, one of the people to whom you entrust your children for roughly 7 hours a day, 5 days a week. Mind you, this is an elite private school. This kind of thing is rampant in government schools, but parents often think they don’t need to be quite as vigilant when their kids are in a private school. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you can, homeschool your children. There are amazing programs, tools, groups, and opportunities. But I digress.

This health and wellness teacher, Justine Ang Fonte, decided that it is in the best health and wellness interest of your 6 year old children to teach them all about masturbation.

You read that right. Ang Fonte showed first graders, who are generally about 6-7 years old, a cartoon explaining anatomy, sexual arousal, and self stimulation. Additional related topics instructed children that parents should obtain consent to touch their children and discussed gender identity. Of course, Ang Fonte assured parents that she never actually uses the word “masturbation” in the class. Which is little comfort considering she essentially taught 6 year olds how to masturbate. In fact, part of the lesson is the admonition that it’s best for the kids “to only do it in private.”

Here’s the video, if you’re interested in previewing what radical woke progressives think that your 6 year old should be learning.

There are so many red flags here, I hardly know where to start. But let me explain why this is so concerning.

Warning, this is going to get a little graphic. I’m not going to mince words about the intentional predatory grooming and hyper-sexualization of our children. Avoiding the topic won’t help anything. It will simply make it easier for them to accomplish their intended goals with our children.

Firstly, let’s talk about the implication of normalizing overtly sexual behavior in children, for example, masturbation. If 6 year old Timmy is taught by his teachers and society that it’s healthy and appropriate for him to masturbate in order to achieve sexual pleasure, what happens if he sees 18 year old Mark or 48 year old Jack masturbating? What happens if one of those adult men invites 6 year old Timmy to masturbate with him, asks for “help” in his own masturbation, or offers to help him learn how to masturbate more enjoyably? What if they explain that it’s also healthy and appropriate for them to help him, just like his teachers taught him. Little Timmy will have been taught that masturbating is perfectly fine for him, so it must not be all that bad for these adult men to also participate. Teachers and society will have just groomed little Timmy to be the victim of a sexual predator.

If 6 year old Betty is taught by her teachers and society that it’s healthy and appropriate for her to masturbate in order to achieve sexual pleasure, what happens if 18 year old Mark or 48 year old Jack ask to watch her masturbate? What happens if they offer to help her masturbate or show her new masturbation techniques? What if they explain that it’s also healthy and appropriate for them to help her, just like her teachers taught er. Little Betty will have been taught that this is perfectly fine for her, so it must not be all that bad for these adult men to also participate. Teachers and society will have just groomed little Betty to be the victim of a sexual predator.

Secondly, specifically teaching the kids that it is “best to only do it in private” is essentially encouraging them to be secretive about it. To go behind their parents back. It’s true that masturbating should be done in private, so that may not be the intended takeaway, but that’s what 6 year olds will hear and understand when you tell them that it should be private. And what constitutes “private” to a 6 year old? Is it “private” if only an uncle or babysitter is there with the 6 year old? Could an uncle or babysitter convince a 6 year old that it’s “private,” just like their teachers taught them?

When my oldest son was in 2nd grade, he came home and told me about something inappropriate that had happened in class. The teacher hadn’t said anything to me, but luckily my son did and we were able to have a constructive conversation about it. Thereafter, I emailed the teacher and explained that I expect to be kept informed about situations that arise that could impact my child physical and emotional health. Obviously no need for her to divulge personal information or violate privacy laws, but I should have been informed about what occurred publicly in the classroom so I could address it with my child. In response, the teacher had a discussion with the class. My son came home a few days later and told me that his teacher explained to the class that if something bad happens at school, there’s no need to tell their parents. Instead, they should only tell their parents the good things that happen at school. Whatever she said, it sounded to my son that she feared parents would start to think that only bad things happen at school if the kids tell them the bad things that happen there and so they simply shouldn’t tell them when bad things happen. I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that is maybe not how she intended the conversation to be interpreted. She probably wanted them to focus on the good, not dwell on the bad. But what a 7 year old heard was that he wasn’t supposed to tell his parents when bad things happen at school. And that is not OK. It’s no OK for my child to think and it’s not OK for his teacher to make him believe that.

Another aspect of the class had to do with consent. Apparently, children were instructed that parents and grandparents should not touch their children without obtaining permission from the child. Now, I’m all for empowering a child not to hug someone who makes them uncomfortable, and not forcing uncomfortable physical contact with family members or friends. Teach kids to feel confident about their personal space and security. But I think that this kind of instruction fits very nicely into the longterm goal of radical woke progressives to undermine and abolish the nuclear family. It distances children from parents and undermines and rules and teachings in the home. It sets the stage for children to be removed from their parents for the crime of wrong-think. If parents don’t agree with these radical woke progressive ideals, the school or society can convince impressionable children that their parents are dangerous. And then the school or society can facilitate the removal of the child. Then society can raise the child to be a good little radical woke progressive and the parents will have no say.

Now, I used hypothetical men for my examples, but let’s not forget that women can be sexual predators as well, and can likewise take advantage of the grooming taking place in school and society. When you normalize hyper-sexualization in society and teach children that it is appropriate and healthy, you are placing them directly in a dangerous situation. You are setting them up to be victimized. And what’s worse, they might not even realize that’s what it is. They will think it’s just what healthy and happy people do.

Interestingly, Justine Ang Fonte, the teacher of this particular class, was under fire just days ago when parents learned that an elite prep school in Manhattan required students to participate in an explicit class on “pornography literacy” without any parental consent. Ang Fonte is the health and wellness teacher who taught “Pornography Literacy: An intersectional focus on mainstream porn.” Ang Fonte discussed popular pornographic search terms and genres such as “cream pie,” “anal,” “gangbang,” “stepmom,” “incest-themed,” “barely legal,” and “kink and BDSM.” Ang Fonte’s class included slides about the “orgasm gap,” which taught kids that straight women have fewer orgasms with their partners than gay men and women do with their partners. The slides also included semi-nude photos of women in sexually explicit situations including bondage.

You know what this seems like to me? It seems like they’re trying to entice horny and suggestible teenagers to experiment with homosexuality by promising them more orgasms. It seems like intentionally introducing artificial sexual stimulation through pornography to horny teenagers who have little self control and whose brains are still maturing. It seems like introducing very specific sexual proclivities and fetishes to undeveloped and impressionable minds. Mature adults can make educated decisions about sexual partners and habits, but when a horny teenager is taught in a classroom that you’re statistically more likely to have orgasms if you have gay sex, then more horny teenagers will start to wonder if they might be gay. More teenagers will become addicted to pornography. And this fits perfectly with the radical woke progressive goal of blurring gender lines and bastardizing intimate relationships.

Pedophiles and sexual predators everywhere are rejoicing that young children are being groomed for them.

Likewise, radical woke progressives everywhere are rejoicing at the hyper-sexualization and blurring of gender lines in the rising generation.

We cannot let our children be groomed and molded by those who seek to vilify our fundamental ideals and principles.