Screen Shot 2015-07-26 at 5.32.07 PMProgressivism always seeks to indoctrinate the young. Like the devotees of all fascist movements, progressives recognize that their ultimate success lies in warping the very minds of future generations, substituting Pavlovian emotional response for reason and rendering them incapable of logic or morality. From The Daily Caller comes a story of attempts at just such indoctrination, but not where and how one might imagine. Not in California, Oregon, New York City or other bastions of the left, no. Iowa.

In rural, small-town Iowa, a group of parents and community leaders is seeking to prevent students from the local taxpayer-funded middle school and high school from attending future versions of an anti–bullying conference for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender teens.

Aha! Just another example of evil corn-fed types trying to deny meek and gentle LGBTQWERTY activists their deserved human rights! Not so much.

The last one — in April — left many of the denizens of Humboldt, Iowa up in arms, reports Des Moines NBC affiliate WHO-TV.

Iowa Safe Schools, an activist group out of Des Moines, hosted the conference.

It was quite something.

Among the nearly two dozen speakers, ‘only two’ addressed bullying, one attendee estimated, according to

The rest of the sessions involved issues such as ‘how to pleasure their gay partners.’

Middle school girls from Humboldt (pop.: 4,690) had the opportunity to learn ‘how to sew fake testicles into their underwear in order to pass themselves off as boys.’

One speaker wore a dress made out of condoms to which could be ‘used as needed.’ Another speaker raised the important middle-school issue of using the Internet to locate an orgy.

So? What’s wrong with that?

A father from Des Moines whose daughter attended the conference described the girl’s experience.

‘She thought she was attending this conference to learn how students can be supportive of their homosexual peers,’ he explained, according to EAGnews.

‘When she got there, it wasn’t really on bullying; it was basically a sexual education class for same-sex couples,’ the mad dad said. ‘It was crude. One presenter told students who asked whether anal sex hurt that, as a lesbian, it really depended on how big the device is that their partner straps on.

Well, there’s no denying the truth and utility of that bit of information for those teens looking to have various sizes of “devices” uh, strapped on–or in. But surely the schools wouldn’t have allowed such a program if it didn’t have at least some educational merit?

Coco Peru credit:

Coco Peru

The main, featured speaker, drag performer Miss Coco Peru, cussed a lot and encouraged attendees to vandalize the property of critics.

Peru also sang a song. It went: ‘People suck. They don’t give a fuck about you. People thrive on smashing our pride to the ground. People that suck, fuck you.

Well, OK. So much for music educational merit then. But perhaps there was at least some additional, practical information?

Still another speaker discussed ‘how pleasurable it is for gay couples to eat each other’s behinds’ and how using flavored oils can improve the taste, notes EAGnews.

Thousands of middle schoolers and high schoolers from the region attended the April event.

Screen Shot 2015-08-09 at 7.43.31 PM

There are no known reports on the rising incidence of “behind eating” or on increased sales of flavored oils in the Humboldt area. School officials were as mealy mouthed and feckless as one might imagine, basically taking a standard diversity line, but being a bit down on swearing presenters. After all, when we’re teaching the kiddies about fringe sexual practices, we ought to be polite about instructing in ramming “devices” into the anuses of others.

And speaking of politeness:

Screen Shot 2015-07-26 at 5.33.03 PM

Nate Monson, executive director of Iowa Safe Schools, said parents who worry about middle school kids hearing about anal sex with strap-ons and analingus are ‘disgusting.”

‘It’s incredibly frustrating that adults are being the problem and being the bully,’ Monson told the Des Moines NBC affiliate. We can do better in Iowa.

You read correctly: Monson thinks people that have a problem with teaching middle and high school kids about “anal sex with strap-ons and analingus are ‘disgusting,” not the people selling anal penetration and licking. Consider this from Monson’s organization’s website: 

The mission of Iowa Safe Schools is to: a) improve school climate in order to increase the personal safety, mental health, and student learning of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and allied (LGBTA) and all other students; b) increase awareness and understanding among current and future educators, school administrators, and key community agents of inequities regarding the safety of LGBTA students and their family member(s) in schools and communities throughout Iowa.  Iowa Safe Schools also seeks to empower these key actors with effective, research-based tools and strategies to combat intolerance and safety inequities.

Hmm. “Iowa Safe Schools.” One might almost be tempted to think the name of the organization a bit…what’s the word…misleading? Deceptive? Yes. Those will do nicely. has a slightly different take:

What one student thought was going to be a day to support anti-bullying at the Governor’s Conference on LGBTQ Youth, turned out to be much more graphic.

A metro high school student who attended the conference says she was overwhelmed by a sexually explicit question and answer forum at one of the workshops. She was so shocked that she recorded a portion of the Q&A, where someone anonymously asked if anal sex was painful.

The conference was hosted by Iowa Safe Schools. Executive Director Nate Monson defends the open forum and says it’s the only chance many LGBTQ teens have to get answers.

Oh really? The only chance? Monson’s militant group has no website? Kids aren’t allowed to speak outside of school settings?

We know that kids don’t have a chance to ask these questions in schools,’ he said.

Hmm. Could there be a reason for that? Perhaps even a good reason? Or two?

When their health class rolls around and they’re talking about sex ed., they’re talking about just heterosexual students. For the first time ever in a lot of these LGBT kids lives, they had a chance to ask questions about themselves.’

While some questions were graphic in nature, Monson says they’re real questions for people of all sexual orientations and argued high schools all over the country has these questions asked to their sexual education teachers. [skip]

‘We’re happy to look into other suggestions or if the student has suggestions for speakers involving anti-bullying, we would love to sit down and have that conversation,’ Monson said.

While the event is called ‘The Governor’s Conference on LGBTQ Youth,’ Governor Branstad doesn’t have an affiliation. His office allows Iowa Safe Schools to use the name because it was founded under former Governor Vilsack.

The sexual orientation of others is of no real interest to me. As a teacher, however, it is, but only to the extent that it might be used to any way make it difficult or impossible for me to teach, and kids to learn. If a student is so fixated on the sexual aspects of what they imagine–at the moment–their sexual orientation to be, that they can’t focus and learn, that’s a problem. That’s the problem. It’s a problem when kids of the opposite gender are so fixated. The issue is not their sexual orientation, it’s the distraction from what they should be doing, from the very purpose for which schools exist.

And then there is bullying. Education is notoriously susceptible to expensive and often wasteful, even destructive, fads. Administrators latch onto the newest fad that promises to transform education, and tie their plots for advancement to it, spending tens of thousands, even millions, on idiotic, politically correct drivel which they cannot easily abandon. In that, regardless of their politics, they become indistinguishable from progressives, because they cannot admit the fad in which they have invested their reputation and hopes for educational fame and fortune is a failure. They therefore spend more and more, and lie more and more, until the fad can be more or less quietly abandoned just, coincidently, as the next miraculous fad is coming into vogue. This normally takes about a decade.

The bullying fad is about mid-cycle across America at the moment. It’s beginning to peak, and beginning its slow, downward descent. I’ve frequently written about this, for example in To Anti-Bully Or Not To Anti-Bully? where I wrote

Ultimately, in schools where teachers and principals are awake, aware and doing their jobs properly, where everyone is responsible for their behavior, and where there are swift and effective consequences for committing crimes and for violations of school rules, actual bullying will still, from time to time occur.  However, if when it comes to the attention of adults it is quickly and efficiently extinguished, not because it is a special category of politically correct offense, not because teachers have endured expensive and brain cell crippling training sessions, but simply because it is wrong, usually criminal, and because it interferes with teaching and learning, what more is required? Shouldn’t that be the primary, most important reason we oppose and eradicate it?

The enormous sums of money being spent on anti-bullying ‘education’ and ‘awareness’ programs can be better spent on providing the best possible educational opportunity for students.  After all, if a school is determined–as its primary, each and every day duty–to actively suppress rude, stupid, abusive and criminal behavior in its students, what else is necessary?  Isn’t that what any school should be doing?

Which returns us to Mr. Monson and his deceptively named organization. Is there, one wonders, an epidemic of bullying of LGBTQWERTY kids in Iowa schools? If so, it’s one of the better kept secrets of the early Internet age. As I’ve previously noted, to whatever degree it does exist, the cure is not instruction in fringe sexual practices and orientations, but competent, adult disciplinary policies and swift and consistent execution of those policies. Not because they’re LGBTQWERTY. Not because they are a special, protected victim class, not because assault against them is somehow more meaningful or tragic than assault against straight kids, but because it is wrong and it makes the mission of schools harder. As I noted in To Anti-Bully Or Not To Anti-Bully, Part 2: 

While is it not entirely unreasonable to imagine that kids who are outside the mainstream, such as lesbians, gays, or even stereotypical nerds, might be prone to attracting more negative attention from their peers than others, the solution for this requires nothing more than competent adults enforcing polite behavior and the law.

What is particularly distressing about this situation in Iowa is the aggressive, self-righteous indignation of Monson and those like him, a matter I also addressed in Part 2:

When any program cannot stand public scrutiny without hiding within a more acceptable facade, its lack of value is self-evident. Such tactics are a hallmark of dishonest politicians, special interest groups and the Obama Administration. They know that their ideas are antithetical to liberty and free expression, so they resort to deception and misdirection.


Sex education is a sensitive topic in education. While I generally believe that a general, professional course of study revolving around factual information about human reproduction and relations is a necessary part of the education of any young person, I have no doubt that such information is highly age sensitive, and must never descend to the level of mere marketing and technique, something Monty Python once brilliantly satirized in The Meaning Of Life. 

Imagine, gentle readers, a seminar billed as “Human Reproductive Hygiene and Safety,” attended by hundreds of high school sophomores, which turns out, instead, to be a seminar on sexual bondage techniques, where various nude young women are suspended from the battens of the school theater, tightly bound and gagged, drooling, writhing and screaming as their nipples are clamped, weights affixed and allowed to dangle, and they are lustily whipped. And then the “presenters” accept volunteer girls from the student audience and demonstrate how to bind and mock-torture them, giving helpful pointers throughout the process. At what point might Mr. Monson, or those like him, find the presentation inappropriate? When the dildos come out? When they’re inserted into various orifices? Or only if they’re too large for said orifices? Oh to be sure, there is instruction on properly cleaning gags and dildos and various other implements, but not so much as to interfere with the fun and the “instruction.”

I hope, gentle readers, you caught the Pythonesque absurdity–I’m sure you did– but actually, that was sort of the point. There is nothing inherently wrong with consensual bondage play among consenting adults, as long as it is done with proper technique, equipment and with safety always foremost, but it would be totally inappropriate for student audiences. The same is true for discussions and demonstrations of any other sort of sexual practice. That discussion of anal sex techniques would occur in a presentation for middle school kids should outrage any professional educator and should send the parents of those kids hunting for the family shotgun (figuratively speaking, of course–maybe). What adults willingly do in the privacy of their homes, so long as it is not illegal, is no concern of mine, but school seminars are not the privacy of home.

Sex education in schools? These days, there is simply no time for it. Mandatory test preparation has displaced substantial portions of every core curriculum. There is not nearly sufficient time for English, history, math or science. Where do we find the time for sex ed? This also gets back to Monson’s argument that it is only at such school seminars that LGBTQWERTY kids can possibly speak and learn about their sexual interests, which they may or may not actually have.

As one might suspect of people who don’t honestly title their organization, this too is a lie. There is no lack of ways for LGBTQWERTY kids to learn about such things, via Internet forums, social media, and a variety of other means, often in vivid video and photographs. LGBTQWERTY kids can trade photo and video of themselves engaging in such practices like baseball cards if they wish, but that’s another topic for another day.

What’s going on in Iowa, and make no mistake, in every other state, is not an attempt to secure equal treatment and rights for those of the LGBTQWERTY persuasion, or at least, that’s not the primary goal. This is nothing more than part of the progressive agenda to exalt victim group superiority and supremacy over all. The Democrat party has become little more than a collection of victim and grievance groups whose existence and enrichment depends upon increasing their numbers and suppressing the moral, ethical sense of the majority of Americans.

That such people have any inroad to education in, of all places, Iowa, and that they are so angrily aggressive about it, should be profoundly disturbing to any American that cares about education, and the future of America. There is more than sufficient reason to question the fitness of any school administrator that in any way involves students with groups like Monson’s.

In this case, the primary bullies in evidence are Monson and Iowa Safe Schools.  Iowans might want to have a polite chat with their Governor too.