Posted on 11/22/2019 8:41:45 PM PST by Swarthy Greek Immigrant
So a teacher who attends a 4 hour conference suddenly is able to teach a child this, yet any other person would be labeled a sexual predator and rightly so.
So uh..Devos needs to go
I don’t know if the Federal govt has authority at the State level. I don’t even know where this is going on in? San Fran?
While we focus on Hong Kong, Iran & Venezuela, we’re being destroyed here. There is no coming back from this once it spreads.
I think that the only people who benefit from sexualizing children are people who view children sexually. Anyone who proposes such a policy ought to be isolated and put under very close surveillance.
Prerequisites to Grooming 101.
Any knowing parent who allows that is sick and/or negligent.
Germany was there in the 60s and 70s and it incorporated the F-ing Hour in school:
The Sexual Revolution and Children
How the Left Took Things Too Far
Germany’s left has its own tales of abuse. One of the goals of the German 1968 movement was the sexual liberation of children. For some, this meant overcoming all sexual inhibitions, creating a climate in which even pedophilia was considered progressive.
By Jan Fleischhauer and Wiebke Hollersen
July 02, 2010 03:22
In the spring of 1970, Ursula Besser found an unfamiliar briefcase in front of her apartment door. It wasn’t that unusual, in those days, for people to leave things at her door or drop smaller items into her letter slot. She was, after all, a member of the Berlin state parliament for the conservative Christian Democrats. Sometimes Besser called the police to examine a suspicious package; she was careful to always apologize to the neighbors for the commotion.
The students had proclaimed a revolution, and Besser, the widow of an officer, belonged to those forces in the city that were sharply opposed to the radical changes of the day. Three years earlier, when she was a newly elected member of the Berlin state parliament, the CDU had appointed Besser, a Ph.D. in philology, to the education committee. She quickly acquired a reputation for being both direct and combative.
The briefcase contained a stack of paper — the typewritten daily reports on educational work at an after-school center in Berlin’s Kreuzberg neighborhood, where up to 15 children aged 8 to 14 were taken care of during the afternoon. The first report was dated Aug. 13, 1969, and the last one was written on Jan. 14, 1970.
Even a cursory review of the material revealed that the educational work at the Rote Freiheit (”Red Freedom”) after-school center was unorthodox. The goal of the center was to shape the students into “socialist personalities,” and its educational mission went well beyond supervised play. The center’s agenda included “agitprop” on the situation in Vietnam and “street fighting,” in which the children were divided into “students” and “cops.”
Pantomiming Intercourse
The educators’ notes indicate that they placed a very strong emphasis on sex education. Almost every day, the students played games that involved taking off their clothes, reading porno magazines together and pantomiming intercourse.
According to the records, a “sex exercise” was conducted on Dec. 11 and a “fucking hour” on Jan. 14. An entry made on Nov. 26 reads: “In general, by lying there we repeatedly provoked, openly or in a hidden way, sexual innuendoes, which were then expressed in pantomimes, which Kurt and Rita performed together on the low table (as a stage) in front of us.”
The material introduced the broader public to a byproduct of the student movement for the first time: the sexual liberation of children. Besser passed on the reports to an editor at the West Berlin newspaper Der Abend, who published excerpts of the material. On April 7, 1970, the Berlin state parliament discussed the Rote Freiheit after-school center. As it turned out, the Psychology Institute at the Free University of Berlin was behind the center. In fact, the institute had established the facility and provided the educators who worked there. Besser now believes that it was a concerned employee who dropped off the reports at her door.
A few days later, Besser paid a visit to the Psychology Institute in Berlin’s Dahlem neighborhood, “to take a look at the place,” as she says. In the basement, Besser found two rooms that were separated by a large, one-way mirror. There was a mattress in one of the rooms, as well as a sink on the wall and a row of colorful washcloths hanging next to it. When asked, an institute employee told Besser that the basement was used as an “observation station” to study sexual behavior in children.
It has since faded into obscurity, but the members of the 1968 movement and their successors were caught up in a strange obsession about childhood sexuality. It is a chapter of the movement’s history which is never mentioned in the more glowing accounts of the era. On this issue, the veterans of the late ‘60s student movement seem to have succumbed to acute amnesia; an analysis of this aspect of the student revolution would certainly be worthwhile.
The Possibility of Sex with Children
In the debate on sexual abuse, one of the elements is confusion as to where the line should be drawn in interactions with children. It is a confusion not limited to the Catholic Church. Indeed, it was precisely in so-called progressive circles that an eroticization of childhood and a gradual lowering of taboos began. It was a shift that even allowed for the possibility of sex with children.
The incidents at the Odenwald School in the western state of Hesse — a boarding school with no religious affiliation — showed that there was a connection between calls for reform and the removal of inhibition. The case of Klaus Rainer Röhl, the former publisher of the leftist magazine Konkret, also makes little sense without its historical context. The articles in Konkret that openly advocated sex with minors are at least as disturbing as the accusations of Röhl’s daughters Anja and Bettina that he molested them, which Röhl denies.
The left has its own history of abuse, and it is more complicated than it would seem at first glance. When leaders of the student movement of the late 1960s are asked about it, they offer hesitant or evasive answers. “At the core of the movement of 1968, there was in fact a lack of respect for the necessary boundaries between children and adults. The extent to which this endangerment led to abuse cases is unclear,” Wolfgang Kraushaar, a political scientist and chronicler of the movement, writes in retrospect.
A lack of respect for boundaries is putting it mildly. One could also say that the boundaries were violently torn open.
Sexual liberation was at the top of the agenda of the young revolutionaries who, in 1967, began turning society upside down. The control of sexual desire was seen as an instrument of domination, which bourgeois society used to uphold its power. Everything that the innovators perceived as wrong and harmful has its origins in this concept: man’s aggression, greed and desire to own things, as well as his willingness to submit to authority. The student radicals believed that only those who liberated themselves from sexual repression could be truly free.
‘Hostile Treatment of Sexual Pleasure’
To them, it seemed obvious that liberation should begin at an early age. Once sexual inhibitions had taken root, they reasoned, everything that followed was merely the treatment of symptoms. They were convinced that it was much better to prevent those inhibitions from developing in the first place. Hardly any leftist texts of the day did not address the subject of sexuality.
For instance, “Revolution der Erziehung” (”The Revolution in Education”), a work published by Rowohlt in 1971, which quickly became a bestseller, addresses sexuality as follows: “The de-eroticization of family life, from the prohibition of sexual activity among children to the taboo of incest, serves as preparation for total assimilation — as preparation for the hostile treatment of sexual pleasure in school and voluntary subjugation to a dehumanizing labor system.”
(more at the link)
These people are sick. Parents better stop this NOW!
Marxist radical dyke Founder of NOW
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Millett
In an interview with Mark Blasius, Millett was sympathetic to the concept of intergenerational sex, describing age of consent laws as “very oppressive” to gay male youth in particular but repeatedly reminding the interviewer that the question cannot rest on the sexual access of older men or women to children but a rethinking of children’s rights broadly understood.[39] Millett added that “one of children’s essential rights is to express themselves sexually, probably primarily with each other but with adults as well” and that “the sexual freedom of children is an important part of a sexual revolution ... if you don’t change the social condition of children you still have an inescapable inequality”.[39] In this interview, Millett criticized those who wished to abolish age of consent laws, saying the issue was not focused on children’s rights but “being approached as the right of men to have sex with kids below the age of consent” and added that “no mention is made of relationships between women and girls”.[39]
The SLA, Weather Underground, Peoples Temple, and other far Left hate groups knew that to break a person down you had to rape them repeatedly.
Too late, Mil Mamasa are pro-abort and pro-trans and anti-man.
What do I think? I that there’s going to be a story on a parent throwing teacher $hit about the place.
The replies are not going well for the CBS pedos on that twitter thread.
It’s Brave New World. Children must be taught their sex play, which wasn’t allowed in the old days. Thank the Ford!
Any right thinking person would wonder what sexualizing children has to do with being a socialist or making young people more open to Marxism. To me perversions walk hand in hand and one influences another
It’s not new.
In fact young children were taught the mechanics of homosexuality and sadomasochism in Massachusetts.
Under the education secretary hand picked by Governor...
...Mitt Romney.
Despotism is about CONTROL
I think that in due time most kids figure this out for themselves, so there must be some sinister motive here and the proponents need to have the sh*t kicked out of them. Literally. That’s what I think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.