Sex between 13-year-olds is NORMAL, says controversial 'traffic light tool'

Rate this post

traffic light tool
Daily Mail UK: Sex between 13-year-olds is ‘safe and healthy’ behaviour, according to controversial guidance offered to schools to teach youngsters about relationships. Family campaigners warned teachers were being urged to encourage behaviour which was against the law, while MPs said youngsters should be told that under-age sex is ‘harmful’ and ‘dangerous’.
The ‘Traffic Light Tool’ produced as part of sex and relationship education lessons also suggested masturbation and ‘consensual kissing’ was a ‘Green behaviour’ for child as young as nine.
Recently-published supplementary guidance on sex and relationship education (SRE) for schools included a link to the ‘Traffic Light Tool’ from sexual health and advice service Brook. The tool on sexual behaviours, which is available online, is meant to help professionals assess whether children and young people’s sexual behaviours are healthy or unhealthy. It sets out green, amber and red ‘behaviours’ for different age groups.
Under the 13-17 age group, it lists a number of green behaviours, which are described as behaviours that reflect ‘safe and healthy sexual development’ displayed between children and young people of similar age and developmental ability and ‘reflective of natural curiosity, experimentation, consensual activities and positive choices’.
The approved list of behaviour for 13-17-year-olds includes ‘having sexual or non-sexual relationships’, ‘sexual activity including hugging, kissing, holding hands’ and ‘consenting oral and/or penetrative sex with others of the same or opposite gender who are of similar age and developmental ability’.
Sarah Carter, of the Family Education Trust, sounded the alarm about the guidance, warning that sometimes what is taught in school sex and relationship lessons is against the law.
She told the Commons education select committee, how the Brook’s tool ‘states that young people who are consensually sexually active from the age of 13, this is normal behaviour and development, whereas actually the law states that young person should wait until they are 16 at least, never mind if they are ready or not’.
Miss Carter added: ‘That’s awfully unlawful behaviour, and so quite often what’s taught in SRE isn’t always lawful.’
The supplementary guidance on sex and relationships education (SRE), which contained links to a number of resources that could be used by schools, including the Traffic Light Tool, was developed and published by the PSHE Association with Brook and the Sex Education Forum.
Graham Stuart, the Labour MP who chairs the education committee, warned that critics might argue that to send out messages that 13-year-olds having sex together is part of growing up and ‘not to send out a message that it’s wrong, that it’s harmful, it’s dangerous, is in fact to almost to collude with something which we know is damaging to young people’.
Joe Hayman, chief executive of the PSHE Association, said that all the resources that the PSHE Association produces are clear about teaching about the law. ‘I think the only challenge with dealing with these subjects, and this is why we need really well-trained teachers, is that we’ve got to deal with children’s realities,’ he told the committee.
Mr Hayman said: ‘What I was saying was that it’s really, really important that a dictatorial-from-the-front lesson on what one should and shouldn’t do is less likely to have an impact and I think we’ve got to start from where children are, their reality. There’s no one in our community who feels we should be trying to sexualise children, or any of those kinds of things.
‘What we want is children to develop healthy and safe relationships and it’s really important that teachers are provided with the necessary training in order to do that.’
Questioned further about Brook’s Traffic Light Tool, Mr. Hayman insisted it was difficult for him to be accountable for every piece of information linked to in the PSHE Association’s supplementary guidance, which has many links within it. He agreed to write to the committee about the issue.
messed up

Please follow and like us:

0 responses to “Sex between 13-year-olds is NORMAL, says controversial 'traffic light tool'

  1. One word: DEMONIC.

  2. Much of the Ten Commandments was written to keep us from doing things that are “natural”. Come to think about it, much animal life, if not all, needs self control of one kind or another.

  3. Pingback: Sex between 13-year-olds is NORMAL, says controversial ‘traffic light tool’ | necltr

  4. I spoke with an 8 year old last night… she told me simple jokes, sang a cute song, and played a small prank on me while asking about my crochet….
    Tell me again how is a 9 year old needs to learn masturbation from a government run school??

    • ‘Cause let’s make gov’t fun… liberals don’t want you to go anywhere else for everything.

      • true, Anonymous… true.
        …or even go anywhere FOR the truth as well.
        Thanks for responding to me! 🙂

  5. The deviant has become the norm, and this is demonic. Let’s be clear: They are coming for our children.
    Please investigate the UN’s Rights of the Child Treaty, another bad piece of legislation in the works.

  6. Note also that they use the same sentence to say homosexual sex between 13 year olds is normal (apparently homosexuality and pedophilia/hebephilia are working together, again). Both outright lies. Children of the “tweens” are especially unstable, the last thing they need is to be having sexual encounters that can drastically alter (and retard) their development, but then this whole scenario was planned, first the sex ed classes, then the cameraphones and the sexting followed by sextortion, then a clamor from the politicrats to do something to fix the problem, which is then more perverse sex ed to “make sure they know how to do things safely since they’re going to do it anyway” and other similar lines of claptrap, leading to further corruption of minors and individuals who get “sexual experience” earlier thereby stunting or skewing their development in formative years, leading to more dysfunctional people with many problems of every sort, as well as a plethora of spiritual problems as well, no doubt with some leading to devilish activity.
    Steven is quite right, the children are priority 1 targets for the satanists, and the best thing to do is keep them out of schools and away from digital media at the very least, and away from televised media as a rule (might be a good idea to pray for their protection as well). Anything less than that will just permit the cycle of corruption to continue.

    • Perhaps Vladimir Lenin said it best. To paraphrase as best I can: “Give me a child for the first five years of his education, and I will own him for life.”
      You know, it’s a funny thing. I’ve looked at the left-right paradigm, the Nazis, the Communists, etc., etc. It seems to me that God actually made it easy; It’s we who make it difficult: Don’t be distracted by different flavors and “57 Varities”! Vladimir Lenin seems to me to be the PARADIGM: Every other tin despot follows off of him. Just a thought.

  7. I’m starting to see a pattern here. Teaching other people’s kids every kind of debauchery and perversion imaginable at very early ages-but WHY?

    • Remove parental control, God, rules, morals, personal responsibly, etc. There is only one entity that can save you – government, in the eyes of many commies, socialists, and fascists.

    • corruption and damage to the individual, prevention of them realizing who God wants them to be. That and plain old hatred for humanity which the devil and his minions have, for whatever unjustified reason. God views little children as precious and innocent (remember the remark about a millstone being better around their necks and them being thrown in the sea if they should stumble them?), therefore to try to hurt God, the devil attacks them by proxy through his agents, by whatever means he can.
      As for why else, corruption as such becomes a virus if the child in question begins to play host to it and reaches the extremes of identifying with it (as people afflicted with the vile illness of homosexuality do) then the person with the illness becomes harder to reach as they consider any truth about the illness as a personal attack, and they aid in the spread of the disease by their willing participation in propaganda campaigns, this way it maximizes damage done to themselves, and to others, ruining lives and tainting said lives with horrors that they don’t think are horrors at the time, Lives that may well have been better had they not ever been exposed to the pathogen of sexual deviancy/debauchery.
      That is why they do that, to my understanding, for the sole purpose of destroying a life that could have been different, and stripping away quality of life, in effect “trying to ruin God’s plans”, while also venting hatred upon mankind.

  8. Hey, I thought we had an age of consent because folk shouldn’t be having sex below a certain age… when did that change? (Thanks, liberals!! When your 6th Grader is pregnant and doesn’t know who the father is be sure to blame Bush… )

    • Hey, that’s true… especially when I watch old movies…. I think it was Cary Grant (in some movie) that said.. when she is under 20 the law protects her. If over 60 nature protects her…. or something like that. Great thought! Seems like no laws protect anyone especially when they are disregarded. That is more than likely why God’s laws are perfect. To keep us ALL protected regardless it would seem what most people think now days. I never hear them say how happy they are breaking God’s law. They always seem to me to be the most miserable and cruel kind of people.

  9. It appears that it isn’t just this one incidence that is pushing this whole thing, a recent article posted on Mr. Makow’s site shows planned parenthood is aiming to sexualize kids as well:
    Also it seems that these “light” standards are not just confined to this one sector either: As you can see from this site alleging to “keep children safe” (but sponsored by the “global children’s fund”) they are pushing the same set of corrupted standards with a bit different wording consider “Lying on top of each other naked or ‘sleeping’ together naked” given as normal child behavior… the marks around the word sleeping gives a certain ambiguity to it that may suggest something not so wholesome.
    It would seem the attacks on Children are growing, it certainly seems as if the pedophilia agenda has been “fast tracked”.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.