We have published a very alarming review of new guidelines.
In short, we are really alarmed by what we see coming out of both UNESCO and WHO.
Tanya Carter Safe Schools Alliance said “This alarming, but sadly unsurprising, research sets out how long-established child safeguarding principles are being effectively dismantled. This leaves all children at risk. Adults, professionally charged with the protection of children, have failed in their duty to identify this and this abdication of responsibility has left generations of children at risk of harm. Children are being left to navigate a minefield of predatory behaviour online without either protection or guidance. Those who have allowed this to happen must be identified and held to account by the global community.”
Read the report: https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2023/04/29/unesco-who-sexuality-education/
Here is the rest of the Press Release
SSA has just published an independent review of two standards documents produced by UNESCO and the WHO. These standards underpin the global initiative for Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), currently promoted by UNESCO’s ‘Foundation for Life and Love Campaign.’
SSAUK believes that these Standards demonstrate how UNESCO and WHO have been compromised and are working to undermine standard child safeguarding principles.
The review reveals the extent to which the WHO and UNESCO’s standards are ideologically aligned with Queer Theory and with a ‘sex positive’ approach to Sexuality (not Sex) Education.
Queer Theory challenges boundaries that are put in place to preserve “so-called ‘oppressive’ ideas” such as the importance of child safeguarding. The UNESCO and WHO documents and guidelines do the same, stating that children are ‘sexual from birth,’ and accordingly require sexual knowledge to fulfil their right to sexual pleasure.
'Sex positivity’ is central to Queer Theory. This review finds that the WHO and UNESCO standards use the concept of sex positivity to reframe safeguarding barriers such as the age of consent as an “injustice”, and to advocate for children’s engagement in sexual activity with their peers, parents and other adults.
Both organisations appear to have abandoned a safeguarding first approach, explaining this shift as necessary to enable a ‘positive’ approach to sex and sexuality. The issue of grooming is conspicuously absent in both sets of standards, and sexual abuse is referenced primarily as justification for providing comprehensive sexuality education from birth.
It is clear that parents who do not acquiesce are viewed as a threat. UNESCO’s ‘key concepts’ promotes the idea that children’s values may differ from their parents’ and, to undermine parents’ legitimate concerns about the contents of Sexuality Education, these concerns are minimised by the UN as “misconceptions.”