Democratic governor forbids Kentuckians to talk kids out of sex changes



Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear signed an executive order Thursday forbidding so-called "conversion therapy" for Kentucky minors.

Radicals are still permitted to groom confused children into becoming transvestites even though Republicans have thankfully banned sterilizing sex-offender drugs and irreversible genital mutilation in the state.

However, medical and mental health professionals certified or licensed to practice in the state are now effectively barred from helping kids get over their gender dysphoria and accept their bodies.

The executive order — which both echoes and cites the Trevor Project as an authority on the subject despite the falsity of one of the radical activist group's core claims — defines conversion therapy as:

any practice, treatment, or intervention that seeks or purports to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions toward individuals of the same gender.

This definition reflects the successful campaign by gender ideologues to bundle efforts to treat gender identity disorder with efforts to dissuade homosexuals from being gay.

Beshear, who unsuccessfully attempted to veto Republicans' ban on sex-change mutilations for kids last year, said, "This [EO] is about protecting our youth from an inhumane practice that hurts them."

'He can't just issue an executive order and prescribe law.'

The language of the executive order suggests that those professionals who would dare coach children through their delusions and to accept the reality of their biological sex could lose their licenses.

Beshear's order makes clear, however, that affirming a confused minor's "gender identity" and facilitating the minor's "identity exploration and development" are acceptable, as is "any practice, treatment, or intervention that assists an individual seeking to undergo a gender transition or an individual who is in the process of undergoing a gender transition."

Beshear has tasked state agencies with taking reports of offending professionals to their respective certification or licensing boards for potential disciplinary action.

The governor appears keen to pressure those institutions beyond his reach to fall in line, encouraging all professional certification or licensing boards, departments, and autonomous agencies in the state not subject to his supervision to "explore and implement all options to prohibit the practice of conversion therapy on minors and the referral of minors for conversion therapy."

The order also makes it illegal to use state or federal funds "for the practice of conversion therapy on minors, referring a minor for conversion therapy, or extending health benefits coverage for conversion therapy with a minor."

Chris Hartman, director of the LGBT activist group Fairness Campaign, said in a statement, "Today Gov. Beshear sends a crystal-clear message to all of Kentucky’s LGBTQ kids and their families – you are perfect as you are," evidently missing the irony that the order bars professionals from helping kids accept the physical reality of who they are.

'This EO stands to chill and stigmatize Christian counseling in the midst of a mental health crisis in KY.'

Richard Nelson, executive director of the Commonwealth Policy Center, told the Lexington Herald-Leader that the ban's failure to advance in the Kentucky legislature is evidence that it shouldn't be enacted unilaterally by Beshear.

"The legislative route has been tried, which is how we arrive at laws and public policy in the state, and they've not garnered legislative approval. There's a reason for that," said Nelson, adding that the ban might infringe upon First Amendment rights.

Conservative attorney Chris Wiest suggested to the Herald-Leader that it amounts to political theater.

"He can't just issue an executive order and prescribe law. This is really basic Con Law 101 stuff, and I think the governor knows it, frankly," said Wiest. "He's not stupid, but he gets the headlines and he excites the base."

Republican state Rep. Josh Calloway tweeted, "Why is [Andy Beshear] determined to keep vulnerable children confused? I will fight this with every fiber of my being."

"Leave the kids alone!" added Calloway.

"This EO, which similar forms have been determined to be unconstitutional, will have a chilling effect on Christian counseling, and possibly violate religious liberties...I expect this to be s[w]iftly challenged!" tweeted state Sen. Robby Mills (R).

"Parents have the right to raise their children in a manner that is based on biblical standards and to help their children receive faith based counseling. This EO stands to chill and stigmatize Christian counseling in the midst of a mental health crisis in KY," added Mills.

Matt Sharp, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, told the Washington Post, "The government has no business censoring private conversations between clients and counselors, nor should counselors be used as a tool to impose the government’s biased views on their clients."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

WATCH: 5 craziest TikToks from last week



If you needed any more evidence that TikTok is a cesspool you should keep your children far, far away from, look no farther than what was posted on the platform just last week.

In Liz Wheeler’s favorite segment of her show, “The Liz Wheeler Show,” she reacts to “the most insane, the most hideous, heinous TikToks of the week.”

From Tim Walz being “Minnesota nice” to rainbow-haired “groomers” beckoning to children, you don’t want to miss this week’s viral videos.

Laugh, cringe, or stare forlornly into the distance as you contemplate the sad state of our country. Check it out below.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Want more from Liz Wheeler?

To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

16 state AGs press SCOTUS to take up case about schools covertly transitioning children



Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) and 15 other attorneys general have filed an amicus brief on behalf of their respective states asking that the U.S. Supreme Court take up a case regarding schools' covert efforts to transition children into sexually-confused transvestites behind their parents' backs.

"Parents have the right to be involved in major decisions affecting their children's lives. This case presents an opportunity for the U.S. Supreme Court to provide much-needed clarity and reaffirm that government officials cannot override parents' fundamental rights simply because they believe they know better," Miyares said in a statement.

Background

A group of parents in Wisconsin sued the Eau Claire Area School District in 2022 over the guidance it provided to schools and employees regarding how to handle students suffering from delusions about their gender.

The guidance, which wasconfirmed by a district spokesperson at the time, noted that some "transgender, non-binary, and/or gender-nonconforming students are not 'open' at home for reasons that may include safety concerns or lack of acceptance."

Accordingly, school personnel were instructed to first discuss the matter with the student before considering discussing the matter with the student's parents.

The parents' complaint claimed that the policy "mandates that schools and teachers hide critical information regarding a child's health from his or her parents and to take action specifically designed to alter the child's mental and physical well-being. Specifically, the Policy allows and requires District staff to treat a child as if he or she is the opposite sex, by changing the child's name, pronouns, and intimate facility use, all without the parents' knowledge or consent."

Teachers were apparently further instructed that "parents are not entitled to know their kids' identities" and that such "knowledge must be earned."

Educators in the district evidently took the guidance to heart, in one case textually informing students, "If your parents aren't accepting of your identity, I'm your mom now."

"The obvious purpose of such secrecy is to prevent parents from making critical decisions for their own minor children, from interfering with the school's ideologically-driven activities, from caring for their children, or from freely practicing their religion," read the parents' complaint. "The insidious invasion of parental rights at issue in this case cannot be tolerated by a free people who value liberty."

The plaintiffs, represented by the firms America First Legal and the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, claimed the district had violated their fundamental parental rights both under the 14th Amendment and under Article 1, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution, along with their constitutionally-protected religious freedom.

Stephen Miller, president of America First Legal, stressed at the outset "Eau Claire schools have adopted a monstrous plan to secretly 'change' the genders of children as young as 5 — without parental consent — effectively subjecting them to unnatural ideological experiments contrary to their health and biology."

Setback

The case, Parents Protecting Our Children, UA v. Eau Claire Area School District, was kicked up through the courts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The appellate court ruled on March 7 that the district court was right to dismiss the parents' complaint "for lack of subject matter jurisdiction."

The court wrote that "Parents Protecting is clear that their members harbor genuine concerns about possible applications of the School District's policy. Unless that policy operates to impose an injury or to create an imminent risk of injury, however — a worry that may never come to pass — the association's concerns do not establish standing to sue and thus do not create a Case or Controversy. The district court had no choice but to dismiss the challenge for lack of Article III subject matter jurisdiction."

To the high court

Last month, the AFL and WILL filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court, stressing that the plaintiff and petitioner in the case — an association of parents who have children in the district — are both subject to the offending policy and directly harmed by it, contrary the conclusion reached by the district and appellate courts.

The petition posed the following question: "When a school district adopts an explicit policy to usurp parental decision- making authority over a major health-related decision — and to conceal this from the parents — do parents who are subject to such a policy have standing to challenge it?"

'Government officials cannot interfere with this right — 'perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by' this Court — just because the government officials believe that they know better.'

According to the petition, parents are injured in multiple ways, including by the loss of their exclusive decision-making authority over whether a sex-change transition is in their kid's best interest; by their inability to obtain information to which they are entitled, which is a "cognizable 'injury in fact' for purposes of Article III standing"; and by the strain placed on the parent-child relationship introduced by the policy's student-facing invitation to keep secrets from their parents.

It indicates also that the "policy facially deprives Petitioner's members of their statutory rights, which presently harms them by making it impossible for them to withhold consent from the application of the Gender Support Plan process to their children. The denial of this right to information, protected by the Constitution and by statute, constitutes concrete harm under Spokeo, Public Citizen, and Akins."

The amicus brief

The attorneys general for Virginia, Florida, Georgia, Texas, and a dozen other states filed an amicus brief in support of the parents in the case, stressing they too have a "compelling interest in protecting parents' fundamental right to make decisions about 'the care, custody, and control of their children.'"

"This case presents the opportunity for this Court to reiterate that government officials cannot interfere with this right — 'perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by' this Court — just because the government officials believe that they know better," said the brief.

The brief noted that Article III's standing requirement comes down to answering the basic question, "What's it to you?" and that the "answer in this case is plain": Parents have an interest in making decisions about their children and the interference by school officials clearly amounts to injury.

It further emphasized that "[s]chool districts have no interest, compelling or otherwise, in wholesale concealment of children's gender transitions from parents, absent any evidence of abuse or neglect. 'Simply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the state.'"

Virginia AG Miyares added in a statement, "It is essential that schools work with parents, not against them, to support a child's wellbeing."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Content advisory: Footage captures disturbing child drag show in Dallas, Texas



June may be over, but we’re certainly not done talking about the nefarious ripple effects of Pride Month.

Two summers ago, Alex Stein busted an event hosted by Mr. Misster, a gay bar in Dallas, Texas, for exposing children to sexually explicit content.

To say the video footage is disturbing is an understatement. Viewer discretion is advised.

EXPOSING Disturbing Child Drag Show In Dallaswww.youtube.com

The footage captures several drag queens dancing erotically in front of a neon sign that reads, “It’s not gonna lick itself,” while taking money out of children’s hands. Some of the kids even got to strut the catwalk alongside the performers.

What’s even more disturbing is that several policemen were present at the event, and all of them were perfectly content to allow children to enter a bar where they would be exposed to sexually explicit content.

At least none of them got away without facing some of Alex’s infamous trolling. Check it out for yourself in the clip above.

Want more from Alex Stein?

To enjoy more of Alex's culture jamming, comedic monologues, skits, and street segments, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Parents can't fully access their kids' medical records after judge partially blocks parental rights law



Washington state's Republican-backed Initiative 2081, referred to as "A Parents' Bill of Rights," was approved earlier this year by the state legislature in two landslide votes. The Democrats who control both chambers apparently permitted it through knowing they will likely be able to transmogrify it in the next legislative session.

Nevertheless, to the chagrin of leftists and other groups ostensibly keen on cleaving children from their parents, Republican state Rep. Jim Walsh's Initiative 2081 became law on June 6.

The law declares 15 rights that parents and guardians of public school children necessarily have, such as the right to:

  • examine textbooks and curricular materials used in their kid's classroom;
  • inspect their kid's public school records, including their health, academic, mental health counseling, vocational counseling, and disciplinary records;
  • receive prior notification when medical services are being offered to their child, except in the cases of emergency medical treatment;
  • receive immediate notification if their child is being taken or removed from campus without their permission;
  • receive assurance that their kid's school won't discriminate against their child based on the family's religious beliefs; and
  • receive written notice and opt out of student engagements that include questions about the child's sexuality and sexual experiences or the family's moral and political views.

Walsh underscored that the focus of all the elements of the bill was information.

"Custodial parents and guardians cannot be kept in the dark about what their minor children are going through in their lives," Walsh said last month. "Parents have to be told — whether it's things happening at school or things happening in the healthcare or mental healthcare space connected with school, or really anything affecting a minor child."

The legal acknowledgement of such natural rights in a state where the family is otherwise under siege prompted legal action from a number of radical LGBT organizations, represented ultimately by the activist firms QLaw and Legal Voice along with the ACLU of Washington.

They sued last month to halt the implementation of the initiative. This week, a judge granted them a minor victory.

Upon filing their lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the legislation in the Superior Court of Washington for King County on behalf of various LGBT groups, the pair of legal outfits and the ACLU of Washington recycled debunked rhetoric intimating that a failure to allow kids to transition at school behind their parents' backs and receive "affirmation" with the help from adults outside the family would result in "irreparable harm."

Adrien Leavitt, staff attorney for the state chapter of the ACLU, claimed, "The initiative passed because of deception and confusion, and it will cause life-altering negative outcomes for queer and trans students if it is implemented."

According to their complaint, the Parents' Bill of Rights "undermines, contradicts, and amends numerous laws that protect students' rights to privacy, healthcare, education, and an affirming and inclusive school environment."

On Friday, King County Superior Court Judge Michael Scott, appointed to the bench by Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee in 2018, granted a temporary block against parts of the law. Specifically, Scott blocked the requirement that parents are to be granted access to all of their children's medical and mental health counseling records and the requirement that school districts promptly turn such records over, reported the Washington State Standard.

Most parts of the Parents' Bill of Right will, however, remain in place for the time being.

While Scott figured the plaintiffs had done enough to demonstrate harm and potential unconstitutionality, he stressed, "It's not this court's position to determine whether that's good policy or not."

In response to Scott's ruling, Leavitt intimated in a statement it's not enough for parents to only partially be left in the dark.

'It is the student's decision when and if their gender identity is shared, and with whom.'

"We are pleased with this ruling as it will prevent parts of I-2081 from causing further harm while we seek a final decision in this case — but this is not the end," said Leavitt. "We will keep fighting this case in hopes of a final judgment that shows this harmful law violates the State Constitution and should not be implemented or enforced."

Walsh, meanwhile, indicated he was "encouraged that the judge left the bulk of the parents' bill of rights in place," reported the Seattle Times.

Democratic State Superintendent Chris Reykdal indicated that while the court did not block the remainder of Initiative 2081, he would effectively usurp the power of lawmakers and instruct Washington school districts not to apply aspects of the law.

"Until additional clarity is provided on the areas where the initiative conflicts with existing state and federal law, school districts should not make changes to any policies and procedures that are implicated by the conflicting sets of law," Reykdal said in a statement. "When in doubt, school districts should follow federal privacy laws."

In his statement, Reykdal also emphasized that schools don't have to disclose a student's transvestism at school to their parents.

“Our state's guidance has maintained that, in order to protect student privacy and safety, schools should communicate with students who disclose they are transgender or gender expansive about the student's individual needs, preferences, and safety concerns," Reykdal continued. "It is the student's decision when and if their gender identity is shared, and with whom."

Brian Heywood, a businessman from Redmond who helped bankroll the effort to advance Initiative 2081, suggested Reykdal was actively "shredding democracy."

"WA state Superintendent of Schools believes he is above the law and that the state knows better than parents what is best for your children," added Heywood. "In November he needs to go."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

North Face faces heat over sponsorship of overnight LGBT camp where kids perform in drag, explore sexuality



The North Face is again facing scrutiny, this time over its sponsorship of a non-straight camp where children engage in sexualized activities.

The American athletic clothing company is listed with Toms, Brooks, and Eno among the leading sponsors of Camp Brave Trails, a "fully accredited overnight summer camp specially designed for LGBTQ teens, ages 12-17" with campgrounds located in New York and Southern California.

The North Face has apparently been shelling cash and gear for the camp for years, noting in a June 2021 post that it was donating over $70,000 in LGBT-themed products to the camp.

According to the camp's website, children attending the camp bunk with 9-10 peers of the same age group, never divided by gender. Campers are "encouraged to spread their wings and make their own decisions" and told to anticipate a "strong expectation of maturity, kindness, consent, and compassion."

The Daily Wire highlighted how in an appearance on the "Kelly Clarkson Show," the camp's lesbian founders, Kayla Weissbuch and Jessica Weissbuch, stated, "All of our housing is genderless, bathrooms are genderless, we ask for names and pronouns from campers, and they can change them all they like."

Kayla Weissbuch noted further that the camp has a clothing closet so that children can explore their gender identity and "try and find, like, who they are and what feels good to them."

One camper told Clarkson, "I was able to perform, do drag, I was able to do ... so many activities."

One promotional video for the camp shows children dressing up in drag and putting on performances.

The camp makes no secret of these activities, stating on its website, "We bid farewell to gender-segregated spaces and activities, tossed aside arbitrary dress codes, and ensured our campers wouldn't have to justify or explain their identities."

"Campers also embark on a journey of self-discovery and learn more about the LGBTQ+ community through exclusive programs you'll only find at an LGBTQ+ camp," continued the write-up on the camp's website. "This includes identity-based groups, captivating drag shows and workshops, enlightening queer history lessons, and a fantastic clothing closet where you can explore gender expression or experiment with a new look."

Kayla Weissbuch made clear in a Forbes interview that the camp is not just about isolating children from parents and society in a place where they can stage drag shows and explore their sexual identities. It's also a means of weaponizing children in the culture war. She suggested that non-straight kids are an "overlooked resource" when it comes to fighting for so-called social justice.

"If we can hone in on that, these ripples will start to show," said Kayla Weissbuch. "It's all about creating and starting those ripples."

The North Face, which still categorizes its clothing in accordance with the sex binary, appears keen to continue creating ripples of its own with leftist propaganda.

Last year, the company courted controversy and calls for a boycott with an ad campaign featuring a transvestite inviting viewers to "come out ... in nature with us."

— (@)

Newsweek noted that while Bud Light was taking a financial beating over its marketing partnership with transvestite influencer Dylan Mulvaney, The North Face doubled down, writing, "We recognize the opportunity our brand has to shape the future of the outdoors and we want that future to be a more accepting and loving place."

The clothing brand is not just committed to pushing LGBT propaganda. It is also apparently captive to the strain of identitarianism that predominates on the left.

The Sun reported last month that the company offered customers a 20% discount if they agreed to suffer through an hour-long course on racial inclusion and "the unique challenges that people of color face when accessing the outdoors."

One critic noted that "the irony is that The North Face is implicitly acknowledging here that all its customers are white."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats And Republicans Have Been Talking About School Reform For Years While Everything Has Gotten Worse

On education, both Republicans and Democrats are out of ideas as schools continue to crumble.

NBC News defends LGBT activists' threat, 'We're coming for your children,' and reassures that it 'has been used for years at Pride events'



Conservatives concerned about the safety and welfare of their kids recently expressed outrage over the news that LGBT activists marching in New York City's annual transvestite parade Friday had threatened, "We're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children!"

NBC News attempted to defuse the situation and put parents' fears to bed Tuesday with the reassurance that LGBT activists have been threatening to come after American children for years.

Los Angeles-based NBC News journalist Tyler Kingkade, formerly an editor at HuffPost, wrote, "To conservative pundits, activists and lawmakers, the video confirmed the allegations they've levied in recent years that the LGBTQ community is 'grooming' children."

According to the original organizer of the NYC Drag March, Brian Griffin, "If that's the worst they heard, it's only because he wasn't there this year," said Kingkade.

"Griffin said he chanted obscene things in the past, like 'Kill, kill, kill, we’re coming to kill the mayor,' and joked about pubic hair and sex toys during marches. People at the Drag March regularly sing 'God is a lesbian,'" reported NBC News.

Kingkade, who elsewhere claims he is best known for his "coverage of abusive treatment of young people," stressed that the "'coming for your children' chant has been used for years at Pride events, according to longtime march attendees and gay rights activists, who said it's one of many provocative expressions used to regain control of slurs against LGBTQ people."

Besides, it's not the only threat chanted at the march, according to Kingkade.

At last year's march, transvestites reportedly chanted, "Ten percent is not enough: Groom! Groom! Groom!"

The NBC News journalist indicated that conservatives have long stigmatized the "queer community" by associating those who defend drag performances in front of children and "classroom discussions of gender identity with pedophiles." In claiming that those who defend sexual displays and sexual conversations with children are "groomers," Kingkade reckons conservatives are trying to "paint the community as a threat to the country's youths."

The liberal publication's reassurance that there is a precedent for LGBT activists threatening to take and groom American children appears not to have achieved the intended effect.

Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, responded, "DEMONIC: @NBCNews defends targeting of children by extremists."

Musician Brad Skistimas of Five Times August recommended that somebody "please check the writer @tylerkingkade's hard drive."

The DeSantis campaign noted, "According to the media, the chant isn't the problem. You are the problem, because you noticed it and objected."

"'We're coming for your children' is a threat, and you do not get to pretend otherwise when people treat it as such," wrote Mark Hemingway of RealClearInvestigations.

The Heritage Foundation tweeted, "It just confirms conservatives have been spot on about how perverse the #Pride movement is for a very long time."

— (@)

Conservative commentator Ian Miles Cheong wrote, "Oh, so it’s okay then? They chant about how they’re 'coming for your children' and promote the sexualization of kids and have been doing so for years so that apparently (according to NBC News) makes it normal and acceptable because America as a society has become tolerant and apathetic to degeneracy. Welcome to the last days of empire."

Brittany Hughes, managing editor of Media Research Center TV, quipped, "We've always been coming for your children, why are you surprised?'"

Nationally syndicated radio host and co-founder of Blaze Media Glenn Beck noted that regardless of the activists' intentions, it's not a good look, using the analogy of conservatives taking to the streets and saying, "Hey, we're here, and we really are Nazis," as a means of regaining control of slurs used against them.

Except "nobody would do that as a joke; nobody would do that to taunt the media because that’s horrible — we are not Nazis," said Beck. "So why would they say 'we’re coming for your children' when half the country thinks you are coming for our children? That’s the worst strategy of all time."

WATCH: These LGBTQ activists have the WORST STRATEGY EVER! youtu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why Does The Left Insist LGBT Activism Means Exposure To Kids?

The Biden administration actually argued that removing books containing 'graphic details of sexual acts' creates a hostile environment for LGBT kids.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded group trying to bury video of twisted interviews with little kids about sex and masturbation: 'Do you play with your ****?'



A Dutch organization funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is facing scrutiny over one of its videos featuring children as young as four being asked wildly inappropriate questions about sex and masturbation.

While the Rutgers Foundation is desperately trying to deep-six the video, the right-wing Dutch populist party Forum voor Democratie has drawn attention to its contents in an effort to expose what the group is really up to, reported Reduxx.

Rutgers, like Planned Parenthood in the U.S., claims to be in the business of educating and supporting young people in sexual matters but also advocates for gender ideology and abortion appreciation in schools with the help of other activist groups.

The group states on its website, "We want young people to be free to enjoy their sexuality and relationships, while respecting the rights of others in an inclusive society," admitting to advocating "for progressive language and norm-setting on sexuality education."

Rutgers kicked off an initiative targeting children on March 20 called "What do I like?" as part of a national "Spring Jitters Week" campaign to expand sexual education in primary schools.

"Learning about your body, talking about what you like and a positive self-image. This is the focus this year during the Week of Spring Jitters, an annual project week about relationships, sexuality and resilience in special and primary education," Rutgers wrote on its project page. "We want to make children think about what they like and teach them to express their wishes."

"When children in primary education learn about their bodies, relationships and sexuality from a positive message, they know better what they like and what they don't like," said Elsbeth Reitzema, a so-called sex education expert at Rutgers.

Atlantic staff writer Olga Khazan cited Reitzema and her work with Rutgers in an article last year in an effort to stand up her argument that contrary to the claims of conservatives, parental groups, and Republicans, talking to kids about graphic sex acts wasn't a matter of "grooming them to be abused by pedophiles."

Rutgers, along with Khazan's model sex-educator, went into Dutch elementary schools again this spring to provide children with an understanding of sexuality and sex acts from an early age so that they can be "better able to communicate ... their wishes and limits and learn to treat each other more respectfully."

According to Rutgers, "When children of primary school age reach out about sexuality, the conversations most often revolve around making love, fingering and jerking off, the first time, masturbation and kissing."

The teacher-facing page for the initiative contains various videos to show kids, including "giving permission for children" and "first times - cumming."

The specific video that piqued the interest of Dutch anti-groomer groups was entitled "Wat vind ik fijn," or "What do I like?"

Reduxx reported that the video features children as young as four being asked about their sexual proclivities.

In one scene, a 6-year-old boy named Loek appears alongside his gay guardians, one of whom asks, "Do you like it when someone is petting you?"

The boy shakes his head no, then the adult male asks, "And what about being tickled?"

After the boy answers in the affirmative, the man says, "Oh, we'll have to do that every night then before you sleep."

In another scene, a woman talks to a 9-year-old girl about ejaculation and the "nice feeling" she can attain via orgasm. The adult then describes the various parts of female genitalia to the little girl, emphasizing that she will get a "very nice feeling" from rubbing her "little button."

"You can rub it with your finger," stressed the woman.

A 4-year-old boy is pressed about his masturbation routine in another scene.

His alleged mother, asks him, "What about you? Do you ever play with your dick? Do you ever touch your willie?" ... How does that feel? And when do you do that?"

Despite the boy's confusion, the mother lays in with additional questions: "Do you do that when we're eating? ... Why don't you do that in class?"

Another little boy is told in the video to refer to sex as "f***ing or sucking."

\u201cA Dutch youth sexuality charity is under fire for releasing a video showing adults discussing sex and masturbation with young children. \n\nThe Rutgers Foundation has deleted the video and is threatening legal action against those who re-upload it.\n\nREAD: https://t.co/5jKJipuyvy\u201d
— REDUXX (@REDUXX) 1686236044

The video was reportedly taken down just 24 hours after it appeared on Twitter. Rutgers claimed it had removed the video because it had been taken "out of context."

"Unfortunately, there is quite a bit of fake news and misinformation ... going around at the moment," tweeted Rutgers. "We have also just taken a video offline, in which parents are talking to their child. The topics covered in the video are: learning about your body, talking about what you like and setting boundaries."

"We find that the video is being taken out of context by some people online and used to spread misinformation," wrote the organization, citing protection of the children involved as cause.

The right-wing populist part FVD spoke out against both Rutgers' initiative and its video in late March, calling the "sexualization and indoctrination" of children "disgusting."

\u201cJaarlijks ontvangt de Rutgers Stichting miljoenensubsidies voor de 'Week van de Lentekriebels'. Wat gebeurt er met al dat belastinggeld?\n\nOp basisscholen krijgen kinderen vanaf 4 (!) jaar deze hele week te maken met seksualisering en indoctrinatie. Walgelijk. #FVD #lentekriebels\u2026\u201d
— Forum voor Democratie (@Forum voor Democratie) 1679409114

Recognizing that Rutgers' deleted video was revelatory of the group's alleged sexualization of young children, FVD reposted the video to its own YouTube channel with the title, "Deleted video. Shocking sexualization of young children."

According to the Dutch publication Algemeen Dagblad, an FVD spokesman suggested in a voice-over at the end of the video that it was "obvious Rutgers feels caught" and is doing everything it can "to cover [its] dirty tracks," adding that it was matter of public interest to disclose what elementary-school children were being subjected to.

Rutgers reportedly attempted to get the video taken off YouTube, stating, "The parents and children have not given Forum permission to publish the images."

Reduxx reported the sex group is now threatening to sue the FVD unless the video is taken down. At the time of publication, the video was still on YouTube.

TheBlaze recently detailed Tucker Carlson's claims in his most recent Twitter video concerning the apparent societal effort to normalize child sexualization.

"One by one, with increasing speed, our old taboos have been struck down. Those that remain have lost their moral force. Stealing, flaunting your wealth, striking women, smoking marijuana on the street, shameless public hypocrisy, taking other people's money for not working — all of these things" were previously viewed as "unacceptable in America," Carlson said. "Not anymore."

Carlson emphasized that child molestation is now "teetering on the edge of acceptability."

\u201cEp. 2 Cling to your taboos!\u201d
— Tucker Carlson (@Tucker Carlson) 1686261625

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!