The BBC children’s network CBBC has defended airing its first lesbian kiss because it “showed children ‘that they can be who they want to be.’” Responding to complaints that the scene in Canadian mockumentary drama The Next Step was inappropriate for younger audiences, the BBC said it was important to ensure that all children were properly represented on its channels. According to The Telegraph they insisted:
‘“This is an important part of our mission to make sure that every child feels like they belong, that they are safe, and that they can be who they want to be.”
CBBC is aimed at 6 to 12-year-olds, and surely most licence-fee payers would prefer the BBC to protect children from inappropriate adult content rather than evangelise on behalf of the sexual diversity campaign. BBC’s responsibility should be to see themselves in the place of parents, developing the imaginations and intellects of children, while shielding them from harmful material. Instead, they seem to see it as their mission to shield other people’s children from the apparently harmful views of their own parents.
Most seriously – and without any debate – they are sending the message that children can be gay, presumably based on the deeply flawed research of Alfred Kinsey, whose Male and Female reports, published in 1948 and 1953 respectively, justified the belief that children are sexually pro-active beings. Kinsey believed that children are naturally bisexual and that repressing their sexuality leads to mental illness. As ascertained in Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People, by Judith Reisman and Edward Eichel, his beliefs now dominate schools’ sex education, despite the fact that his findings were based on the testimonies of prisoners and child molesters.
Such theories, pushed as fact upon children who have no way of questioning or even processing the information, can be confusing and upsetting, since they naturally fear that their own same-sex friendships prove that they are gay. It would not be surprising if such fears were driving the sudden explosion of young people who believe that they are transsexual. Ironically however, some critics of the “trans” ideology argue that such young people are really gay, and now society is being groomed to believe that children can also be gay. At the very least, children will be encouraged to look favourably on a lifestyle that would expose them to harm, to abuse and even to death.
Homosexuality has been linked to childhood sexual and other physical abuse, so normalising same-sex relationships will increase the risk of child sexual abuse, since it will be considered quite normal and natural for children to welcome same-sex activity. The paedophile’s excuse – that the victim asked for it – will be officially accepted.
However, in a statement, the BBC disagreed that the relationship portrayed between characters Jude and Cleo was inappropriate for the audience age. They argued that “‘CBBC regularly portrays heterosexual young people dating, falling in love and kissing, and it is an important way of showing children what respectful, kind and loving relationships look like.’”
In other words, they must show same-sex kissing because they show heterosexual kissing; but there is nothing in the 2010 Equality Act to force them to do so. Indeed this Act, pernicious though it is, has become a handy stick with which to beat the reluctant into accepting sexual diversity ideology, while acting as a convenient cover for those only too eager to fall into line.
But it is not normal for pre-teens to want to watch grown-ups kissing. In reality they more likely have an aversion to it, and at our own peril do we break down this natural childhood protection against child sexual abuse.
Despite such dangers, the BBC stated: “‘We believe that the storyline, and the kiss, was handled with sensitivity and without sensationalism.’” No doubt the idea is to put out such material in such a way as to avoid too much advance publicity, and by the time the damage has been done it is too late to reverse – a hit-and-run approach. No wonder the BBC wanted to park children’s viewing online, away from parental scrutiny.
The BBC was also quick to point out that they had already aired a same-sex kiss in children’s series Byker Grove back in 1994, and that same-sex relationships had “‘already featured in other CBBC shows such as Jamie Johnson, 4 O Clock Club, Dixie and Marrying Mum and Dad.”’ They seem to believe that doing the wrong thing over and over again makes it right.
And clearly, the sexual diversity campaign approves, since “[d]espite courting some criticism, the episode has been widely applauded on social media for increasing LGBTQ+ representation on-screen.” Indeed, Head of Policy and Research at Stonewall, Eloise Stonborough, told Metro that the kiss was an exciting moment for LGBT representation, saying: “‘It is important for everyone to be able to see themselves in mainstream media and to know they have a place in society.’”
The sexual diversity fairy tale is one in which same-sex relationships are portrayed on screen in a positive light, and heterosexual relationships get a bad rap – especially marriage. But for the sexual diversity campaign, it can never be enough to allow children to think that all same-sex couples do is kiss; presumably the next step in this media-led child-grooming programme will be to show a same-sex couple in bed.
We cannot complain that we have not been warned. Viewers should now demand the end of the compulsory television licence fee, so at least we will not be compelled to pay for the dubious privilege of having our children and grandchildren corrupted at the behest of sexual revolutionaries. For the viewing public, that really would be an exciting next step.