December 19th, 2009

The Hyper-Sexual Indoctrination of Children

photo credit: Coyote2024

In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley writes of a dystopian future in which children are raised on sexual gratification and regular drug use as basic staples of entertainment and psychological well-being. So ingrained in the culture is this practice that the “brave new world” in which the characters live considers promiscuity a virtue.

The justification provided and encouraged by the government in the story is that “everybody belongs to everyone else”, thus reducing each individual to an objectified apparatus of sexual pleasure to be used for mutual and general benefit. The complete reversal in sexual mores can be best illustrated by the following passage from the book:

“What I’m going to tell you now,” [the Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning] said, “may sound incredible. But then, when you’re not accustomed to history, most facts about the past do sound incredible.”

He let out the amazing truth. For a very long period before the time of Our Ford [Henry Ford, the society’s messianic figure], and even for some generations afterwards, erotic play between children had been regarded as abnormal (there was a roar of laughter); and not only abnormal, actually immoral (no!): and had therefore been rigorously suppressed.

A look of astonished incredulity appeared on the faces of his listeners. Poor little kids not allowed to amuse themselves? They could not believe it.

“Even adolescents,” the D.H.C. was saying, “even adolescents like yourselves …”

“Not possible!”

“Barring a little surreptitious auto-erotism and homosexuality – absolutely nothing.”


“In most cases, till they were over twenty years old.”

“Twenty years old?” echoed the students in a chorus of loud disbelief.

“Twenty,” the Director repeated. “I told you that you’d find it incredible.”

Dystopian fiction, of course, portrays a nightmare scenario of some future situation that at the time of publication seems far-fetched, yet conveys a lesson and possible outcome based on current choices. One might read the above passage in dismay, writing it off as nothing more than imaginative fiction, or perhaps to a still distant future that has not, thankfully, arrived as of yet. However, the general and gradual realization that certain elements of other dystopian novels—1984, Atlas Shrugged, etc.—are slowly being realized leads one to wonder if and when the hyper-sexualization of our children might occur, as illustrated in Huxley’s novel.

The days of wondering are, sadly, apparently over.

In May, Mr. Obama appointed a man named Kevin Jennings to be the Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Department of Education, working in the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS). This office was established within the un-constitutional Department of Education in 2002 by President Bush, as part of the No Child Left Behind Act. Jennings is the third “Safe Schools Czar” in this office, and has easily become the most controversial.

The controversy becomes apparent when one discovers any number of the rancid facts from Jennings’ professional (?) history. The most notable nugget deals with the organization Jennings founded and ran prior to his ascension to the halls of the federal government: the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). This group is the latest incarnation of what can be termed Jennings’ life work thus far: the infusion of pro-gay literature, advocacy, and acceptance into the public school system. Ostensibly formed to end discrimination, bullying, and harassment of homosexuals (or whatever flavor of sexual preference one prefers) in schools, the organization has spread its tentacles much further.

The underlying goal of GLSEN, as demonstrated by its activities and advocacy, is to normalize what is currently seen as “alternative” or “fringe” behavior and lifestyles: homo/bi/trans-sexuality, and everything else in-between. They have either sponsored or been affiliated with events that corrupted youth and exposed them to suggestive and vulgar material, like the notorious “Fistgate” episode (google that one at your own risk; reader beware!), as well as a GLSEN-sponsored conference in Chicago in which pornographic homosexual magazines advertising “gay” sex clubs and leather bars were distributed to children. This is not about education, it is about indoctrination.

Just over a decade ago, Jennings made clear that his goal is to bring about the day—a “brave new world”, if you will—when promoting homosexuality in schools will be seen in a positive light. Suddenly the backwardness of Huxley’s sexually-active school children does not seem as farfetched.

It doesn’t stop there. As GLSEN also tries to influence the curriculum in the thousands of schools in which it has affiliated clubs or other established relationships, they promote reading material that the organization believes will increase tolerance of gay students and decrease bullying. A team of researchers recently spent some time going over this reading list—targeted to children from Kindergarten on up through high school, and teachers as well—to determine just what was being promoted under the deceptive banner of “tolerance”. After all, GLSEN’s main areas of focus are “educational resources, public policy agenda, [and] student organizing programs”, thus indicating the primacy of these educational (?) resources in the organization’s efforts.

Note: the content (text, with a few drawings) found at the link provided below is EXTREMELY EXPLICIT. If you choose to click through and read what these books contain, please, at a minimum, prepare a barf bag for use. (I’m not joking.)

The end result of this research is beyond alarming. Found therein are numerous and highly graphic references to a variety of sexual activities, primarily of a homosexual nature and by/between children. Far from being instructive or educational in any manner, these are mainly stories that glorify, encourage, and positively praise such behavior.

As Founder and Executive Director of GLSEN, Kevin Jennings most definitely had close control over this reading list, if not direct involvement in the selection of this material. With only 40 employees on staff, and with something as important to the organization’s key efforts as this “educational” material, there is no way that Jennings did not have oversight of and involvement in this process.

And now, the man who has aggressively promoted homosexual behavior under the guise of tolerance and acceptance has been placed in power to allegedly work towards creating more “safe schools” throughout the nation. Forget the dystopian fiction—Orwellian doublespeak has become our reality. War is Peace, and apparently the hyper-sexual indoctrination of children is now “education”—or, at a minimum, “tolerance”.

What exactly will Mr. Jennings be involved in with his new job? As described by its own website,

The Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS) administers, coordinates, and recommends policy for improving quality and excellence of programs and activities that are designed to:

  • Provide financial assistance for drug and violence prevention activities and activities that promote the health and well being of students in elementary and secondary schools, and institutions of higher education. Activities may be carried out by State and local educational agencies and by other public and private nonprofit organizations.
  • Participate in the formulation and development of ED program policy and legislative proposals and in overall Administration policies related to violence and drug prevention; drafting program regulations.
  • Participate in interagency committees, groups, and partnerships related to drug and violence prevention, coordinating with other Federal agencies on issues related to comprehensive school health, and advising the Secretary on the formulation of comprehensive school health education policy.
  • Participate with other Federal agencies in the development of a national research agenda for drug and violence prevention.
  • Administer the Department’s programs relating to character and civics education.

(emphasis added)

What these politically-laced euphemisms fail to convey at first glance is the nature of the position itself. Jennings has not become converted to another paradigm, nor repented of his appallingly lascivious promotion and encouragement of sexual deviance among young, impressionable children. He has, instead, been given a political and regulatory platform upon which he can foist, slowly or otherwise, his core beliefs onto children throughout the nation.

If you are not disturbed by this superficial summary of Mr. Jennings, his organization, or its practices, then you need to click the link provided above (noting the warning of explicit content) and prepare to become enraged that anyone encouraging that youth read such trash has been placed over the regulation of so-called “safe schools”, or given any political power in the slightest degree. To be clear, this material should and will infuriate any parent or concerned citizen who has any shred of decency and common sense. Mr. Jennings should be a social outcast—not part of Mr. Obama’s inner sanctum of Czars.

Huxley’s hyper-sexualized children were submissive creatures of the totalitarian state, being instructed as deemed best by those in control of their education. Alternative history (meaning, any history the government did not favor) was not taught, and the children became lab rats for experimentation and conditioning. In this environment, what was once shunned and marginalized had become natural, normal, and even necessary.

One might easily (and reasonably) fear that the promotion of the material found in GLSEN’s recommended reading list, coupled with Jennings’ insider status in the highest levels of the federal government, are the catalysts by which such dystopian nightmares are eventually made to come true. That anybody, especially a high-ranking bureaucrat, would consider it okay for young children to be exposed to such material should serve as a testimony to their insanity, if not their depravity. Along with a host of other reasons, this is yet another example of why public schools should be deemed toxic environments of government-controlled social indoctrination and altogether avoided by informed and concerned parents.

13 Responses to “The Hyper-Sexual Indoctrination of Children”

  1. Jeremy Nicoll
    December 19, 2009 at 10:24 am #

    This indoctrination has been going on in many public schools now, even here in Utah. Unfortunately though, such teachings are not only limited to schools but having them being taught through television AND schools pretty much gives children a thorough encouragement to act out sexually. I wish you could hear what many of my “mormon” friends even in the Salt Lake City area have told me about what they and others did in their schools… on second thought, maybe it’s a good thing you don’t hear about the specifics. I am appalled at what sexual behaviors they accept as OK, all the while preaching their own distorted morality like it’s gospel.

    Like you said, it’s not about “anti-discrimination” – it’s about teaching children to be just like them.

  2. loquaciousmomma
    December 19, 2009 at 1:23 pm #

    I like how you handled this horrific subject. I know about but have not been able to stomach any real following of this story line, it is so obscene.

    Your references to Brave New World reminded me of an interview Aldous Huxley did with Mike Wallace in which he said that all of the mechanisms for running a totalitarian society, like his book illustrated, were already in place. And that was before color tv, the internet, or the research that has been done into influencing human behavior in the last thirty years.

    I think the most important thing we can do as parents is to be free thinkers ourselves, and teach our children how to think for themselves. We need to point out the intended message of the media we experience, and limit exposure as much as possible.

    Clearly, Kevin Jennings was put into his position exactly because of his status in the Gay rights community. Obama’s speech to the Human Rights Campaign made it very clear, he is with them in the effort to normalize their lifestyles, and the classroom is the front line of the struggle. We need to fight the changes whenever we can, and debrief our children each day so as to correct any errors they may have been taught in class.

  3. Isaiah
    December 19, 2009 at 6:57 pm #

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

  4. Carborendum
    December 19, 2009 at 11:15 pm #

    I realize your focus was more on the actions by Jennings. But I’d like to point out many other axioms and quotes from Brave New World.

    I have been tracking many of the changes to society based on a similar list to the one I linked to above ever since I read that book in the 80s. (Interestingly, I read 1984 in the year 1984, then I read Brave New World shortly thereafter). And I find it very disturbing to find such substantive similarities between our society and that of Huxley’s “World State” as well as Oceania’s regime of Orwell’s 1984. It is more disturbing still to see the trend towards even more similarities.

    I’ve often wondered how far government would go before I would kill a government agent coming to my home. What justification could I make before God? What would I risk my life, family, fortune, and sacred honor for?

    In the movie “The Musketeer”, the captain of the Musketeers makes a decision that he would rather die than continue to cower. He finally reached the point that he had to do something even if it did no good–even if he would die without accomplishing anything–which he eventually did.

    Would there be some point where I would do the same? I’d say more. But it might be misconstrued in a public forum.

    Similarities that stand out:

    “Better ending than mending. The more stitches, the less riches.”
    Soma the miracle drug.
    Sexualization of society–especially children.
    “History is Bunk”.
    The formation of a caste system.
    “What man has joined, nature is powerless to put asunder.”
    No family ties.
    The Feelies.
    Outlawing real classics.
    Predictability of life.
    Everyone must be protected from any suffering at any cost.

    Of this list, those that aren’t a current reality are being worked on exigently.

    Here’s the irony of my life:

    As a civil engineer, my job is to create things that separate us from nature (the wild). Basically, I’m to design civilization. Yet, I’m working on making my life closer to that of John the Savage.

    I’ve moved out to the country.
    I home school.
    We’ve had several home births.
    I want to live off the land.
    A bunch of other things I’m not going to mention in public.

    If we see this pattern continue. I’m going to either be whipping myself, or put on a reservation.

  5. Clumpy
    December 20, 2009 at 12:12 am #

    Honestly, I came into this article fully expecting depictions of gays or attempts at tolerance toward the same to be equated with “sexualization” of children. The link didn’t work, though I was able to find examples from the reading list elsewhere and there is in fact some fairly messed up stuff there.

    As somebody who was regularly disturbed by our junior high/high school reading material, which often contained pretty graphic accounts of abuse and violence, I’m not sure what benefits we expect to gain from exposing children to some pretty graphic identity issues and normalizing destructive behavior. This really does go beyond the gay issue.

    That said, I keep finding the same three selections repeated everywhere. Neither am I aware of the context of the material or how prevalent this type of writing is across their reading list. (Many of these books for younger readers, for example, seem to be pretty standard children’s books with a “two mommies” twist or something similar.) From a political standpoint this is really more of a foundations of public education issue (something that’s been covered many times on this blog) than an issue with a specific cabinet appointment.

  6. Connor
    December 20, 2009 at 9:19 am #


    Thanks for the notice about the dead link. (Well, the link isn’t really dead, it’s just that the content of the post is curiously missing.) I’ve updated the link in the post to point to a website where somebody re-posted the original content.

  7. Clumpy
    December 20, 2009 at 2:32 pm #

    Many, many more examples there. Frankly I don’t think the context of these passages could save them (par my earlier comments) – they seem pretty clear and, frankly, strike me as some pretty bad writing in the first place.

  8. rachel
    December 23, 2009 at 1:47 am #

    We are in the time prophesied when the saints will be praying for the Savior to come and end the wickedness. I know I’m praying for it. I just thank God that homeschooling is still legal.

  9. matt
    December 23, 2009 at 11:20 am #

    Not only do we need to fight this insidious evil on every front possible but it would be a very good idea to Home School your children.

    Knowledge gained in public schools is not worth the price of a soul. This same knowledge can be gained more quickly, fully, and divinely at home where parents can teach by the Spirit.

  10. a concerned mommy
    December 30, 2009 at 6:28 pm #

    It’s interesting to note that the Founders intended for our schools to teach Christianity and traditional morality. The idea of that would shock most people now-a-days and have them crying “sparation of church and state!!” and yet this sexualization of children going on in our schools isn’t even on the news. This is bassackwards!!

  11. Greg
    August 28, 2010 at 12:16 am #

    This post reminds me of Elder Neal A. Maxwell’s comments given at BYU in 1978 concerning “a maximum if indirect effort made to establish irreligion as the state religion”:

    If the challenge of the secular church becomes very real, let us, as in all other human relationships, be principled but pleasant. Let us be perceptive without being pompous. Let us have integrity and not write checks with our tongues which our conduct cannot cash.

    Before the ultimate victory of the forces of righteousness, some skirmishes will be lost. Even these, however, must leave a record so that the choices before the people are clear and let others do as they will in the face of prophetic counsel. There will also be times, happily, when a minor defeat seems probable, that others will step forward, having been rallied to righteousness by what we do. We will know the joy, on occasion, of having awakened a slumbering majority of the decent people of all races and creeds–a majority which was, till then, unconscious of itself. (Prop 8 and Neal A. Maxwell).

    We now apparently live in the day when it is no longer an “indirect” but a direct effort to establish irreligion as a state religion.

  12. Sean Hullinger
    August 28, 2010 at 12:44 am #

    So, Connor, which of the portions of the mission statement do you disagree with?

    This is a rather ad hominem attack. It’s also rather disturbing that it originates from your blog. Coming from a person espousing a religion that was demonized and persecuted for holding sexual and social views considered deviant by the conservative majority of the populace, you would think that your approach to this would more closely match Sen. Hatch’s approach to the Manhattan Mosque project. You cannot shelter in the Constitution’s protections of individual liberty and religious expression without extending those protections to others. To do otherwise is the rankest of hypocrisy — the thing that Jesus hated most.

  13. Michele
    August 28, 2010 at 12:53 pm #

    Connor have your read Skousen’s newly released book, “The Cleansing of America” he starts out by explaining the adoption of Kinsey’s sexual studies and research as a basis for the sexual revolution in 1950s marked a major change and decline in America’s culture and moral understanding. Kinsey’s studies was found to be so flawed, primarily using inmates, prostitutes and other fringe people, that if was labeled as reckless and incompetent by some of his peers. Sadly his research has been used to justify sex ed in schools and other attempts to normalize sexual promiscuity. Another book to read is: “Kinsey, Sex and Fraud – the Indictrination of a People”by Dr. Judith Reisen.

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.