We Need Right-Wing Sexual Education

What a Right-Wing Sexual Education Would Look Like

I’ve always been pissed off at the snarky leftoid activists who talk down to dumb conservatard goyim on their suboptimal sex lifestyles, especially when they turn on their educator performance. But I also remember how in my high school Muslim goyim have protested being educated on sex so they could fuck their cousins less often (and it wasn’t even about gays!). Some even made a scene and left the classroom (only to then probably jerk off to incest porn).

Not that we weren’t indoctrinated about the 6 million different genders and how being gay was awesome, but that stuff was always separate from the actual government agenda, which was aimed at minimizing HIV and AIDS prevalence and cutting down on unwanted and unprotected sex. That was the whole original purpose of sex education.

Unlike the conservative moralists, I don’t think these aims are bad, or that they should be forbidden from being taught to kids. Maybe not in middle school, but definitely in high school.

My problem with sex education in general is twofold:

1. It didn’t go far-enough.

2. It was highjacked my leftist activists whose end goal is to increase the numbers of the queer community and break up traditional gender roles.

I suppose I will start with the first one and gradually blend with the second point because they are really one in the same.

Prince A. Morrow, a NY dermatologist who founded the American Society of Sanitary and Moral Prophylaxis which fed into the American Social Hygiene Association (1914).

Formal sex education in the English-speaking world grew out of the social hygiene movement, concerned with minimizing venereal diseases, prostitution and improving the quality of the population using eugenics.

In other words, sexual education was concerned with racial betterment and not with promotion of degenerate lifestyles.

1920s America was filled with imagery of healthy babies, as the Better Babies and Fitter Families contests at state fairs (1910s–20s) became the popular-cultural signature of a Progressive society. To quote the Smithsonian:

While seemingly benign, contests like these reinforced the notion of white Americans having the most desirable characteristics, and implicitly discouraged the inclusion of people who fell outside of that range. By setting scorecards and standards, the contest organizers put forth a hierarchy of humans. As the Pensacola Journal explained in 1913, in these types of contests “A physician scores a baby in precisely the same way as a judge of experience in live stock scores cattle, horses and hogs, and a gem expert scores diamonds. It is first necessary to establish a standard and then to compare each entry or specimen with what is known as a one-hundred percent, or perfect, product.”

A book that I like citing a lot Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era by Thomas C. Leonard (2016) successfully advances the now forgotten thesis that all of the Progressive reforms of last century have advanced White racial interests and right-wing morality more broadly.

They installed instructional pavilions at international expositions... and they staged ‘fitter family’ and ‘better baby’ competitions at state agricultural fairs nationwide. Winning contestants, judged like livestock by local public health officials, were awarded medals inscribed with the motto ‘yea, I have a goodly heritage,’ from Psalms 16.

Sexual education was seen as a venue by which a population could be educated of the values of eugenics, moral sexual behavior and population control. It was believed to be a great way of improving the racial stock as well as improving the social norms towards greater virtues.

Prostitution, known euphemistically as “the social vice,” was a singular preoccupation of progressive reformers, especially those with ties to the social purity movement.

The degree to which sexual education was once awesome cannot be understated. The most direct proof comes from a 1927 survey of 1,665 American schools finding that “1,306 almost exclusively taught eugenics in sex education”, which is to say that Sexual Education was effectively a eugenics class where you learned how to improve the genetic health of your offspring.

The program was entirely altruistic and aimed at social improvement overall, to quote a leftoid professor complaining about it:

You need to reproduce in this way and select a mate to carry forth these traits that are better for society’ and it was implied that if you didn’t do so you were not a being a good citizen.

I asked Claude AI to name me all of the early Sex Education figures, explain their prominence and their attitudes towards eugenics. Here is the result:

The only active non-Eugenicist on the list was the bisexual Alfred Kinsey who has contributed to the normalization of the gay lifestyle.

The Soviet case is the odd one out especially in its early period when the Soviet Union has attempted to go away with Sexual morality.

In other words, we were once shaming leftists for not being progressive enough on human sexuality, but now the tables have completely turned and instead of discussions on healthy heredity or demonization of certain groups which are more likely to carry sexual diseases we are ourselves getting shamed for not accepting sexual abnormalities.

As I said in my highly powerful video concerning the total inferiority of non-heterosexuals in relation to heterosexuals, certain sexual lifestyles must be promoted over others. I don’t mind being taught about gays and transgenders, but I mind being taught that they are equal to a normal sexual expression, just like I mind being told that having 25 sexual partners is just as good as having 3.

We should instead teach about their suboptimality and advise healthy people against sexual contact with them. At the same time, people who have these sexual proclivities must get educated out of it in order to minimize harmful social impact that their sexuality may cause, or at least contained. LGBTQ is mostly a social phenomenon and it must be treated as such. Stop the spread like we are stopping the spread of the transgender movement.

We must resurrect the Conservative sexual morality back into the front and I’m not talking about zero protections or no kinky-sex. I am purely concerned with the social and reproductive aspect of sexuality. One which minimizes maladaptive lifestyles like poor hereditary characteristics, cheating, rape or incest and maximizes healthy heredity in the age of AI. Not every sexual activity is equal and not every sexuality is normal. The fact that abnormal sexualities exist doesn’t translate to their automatic embrace.

The queer ideologues are themselves hypocrites for enthusiastically embracing polysexuality, homosexuality and transgenderism but not pedosexuality (yes they are also born this way like gays or those with a predisposition towards multiple sexual partners) or rape and incest because the latter three are taboo even though they are perfectly natural and exist in every species.

Our point as right-wing progressives is simple. We are against all maladaptive sexual lifestyles. We are not picking one ill over another based on social approval. We are against the bad ones (including interracial) and are supportive for of the evolutionary progressive ones. Everything causing a suboptimal outcome is by default bad, I don’t know why it is so difficult to comprehend.

So when someone asks me what an ideal sex education should teach, here are 12 things every adolescent must know:

1. Venereal Diseases Prevention

2. People to avoid having sex with

3. The problems with incest or interracial marriage

4. Mate selection in general

5. Learning about human sexualities and which ones are superior

6. Importance of consent and safe sex

7. Sexual control (a lot from Sex and Culture by Unwin)

8. Importance of keeping an above replacement fertility rate

9. The Bell Curve of the Libido

10. Porn and masturbation

11. Male and female anatomy

12. Sex in relation to family and society at large

We must ask ourselves why that isn’t already the case. Why aren’t we teaching our kids proper SexEd. I think the chief villains are the same ones: The Holocaust freakout and Alfred Kinsey, the guy who decided to divorce sex from morality, viewing it purely as a descriptive individual phenomenon, and not as means by which one can improve oneself and society, the way so many other school subjects aim to.

The sexual liberation movement, the institutionalization of feminism, and now the woke queer ideology could never have spawned into existence without that early undermining of the pro-racial and scientifically grounded understanding of sex, right after the end of the Second World War.

The irony is that while prescriptive sexual education was undermined by becoming descriptive, a descriptive state cannot remain descriptive for long, it will eventually fall into a prescriptive state controlled by people of better organizational abilities.