Is foreign-designed Sexuality Education being slipped in through teacher manuals, while the syllabus uses vague wording

 

Sri Lanka’s new education reforms plan to introduce “sexuality education” for Grades 6–11. Whether the curriculum is funded by UNFPA, UNESCO, WHO, or any foreign partner is irrelevant. What matters is the scientific reality: Children are biologically incapable of understanding sexuality, gender identity theory, or sexual decision-making. An Education Minister attempting to introduce the term “sexuality education”, automatically links Sri Lanka to the UN’s global CSE–SOGI syllabus — the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE), designed by UNESCO and UNFPA. Officials may hide this fact, but the international connection is unavoidable and undeniable.

 

1. Why “Sexuality Education” automatically Introduces CSE–SOGI in Sri Lanka

 

ITGSE is the ONLY global framework for “sexuality education.”

UNESCO, UNFPA, WHO, UNICEF, UN Women, and UNDP jointly endorse ITGSE as the official definition of “sexuality education.”

This means that when Sri Lanka introduces “sexuality education,” it is legally and structurally bound to adopt the ITGSE learning outcomes — including SOGI, gender identity, sexual rights, and identity exploration modules.

 

Sri Lanka already has partnership agreements with UNFPA/UNESCO.

 

These agreements require alignment with ITGSE learning outcomes.

Every country that adopted “sexuality education” ended up teaching:

• Gender identity theory
• Sexual orientation theory
• Sexual pleasure
• Masturbation
• Self-defined gender
• Pronouns
• LGBTQIA+ identity labels
• Sexual rights
• Identity exploration

These are explicit ITGSE modules.

 

The public syllabus NEVER shows the full content.

The full SOGI modules are usually inserted through:

• Teacher manuals
• Training workshops
• UN-funded capacity-building
• NGO partnerships
• Youth and influencer outreach

This is the global rollout pattern, repeated identically across the world.

Sri Lanka is now entering the same sequence after years of failed attempts.

 

2. Scientific Reality: Children cannot make Sexual or Gender Decisions

ITGSE assumes children can make sexual identity choices, explore sexual feelings, or adopt gender identities.

 

Science shows the opposite.

The prefrontal cortex — responsible for judgement, consequences, identity stability, and long-term thinking — does not fully mature until around age 25.

Children rely primarily on the amygdala, meaning their decisions are driven by emotion, impulse, and imitation, not logic or risk assessment.

 

Neurological Science

• Theprefrontal cortex (decision-making, consequences, identity formation) matures only at age 25.
• Children function through theamygdala (emotion), not logic.

Meaning:
Children cannot evaluate, interpret, consent to, or understand sexuality or gender identity concepts.

 

Psychological Development

Children:

• imitate adults
• confuse fantasy and reality
• cannot separate temporary feelings from identity
• cannot foresee emotional or social consequences of identity experimentation
• absorb information without analysis
• seek approval
• cannot assess risk

CSE–SOGI requires adult cognitive abilities children do not possess.

Concepts such as gender identity, sexual rights, autonomy, or self-defined identity require advanced abstract reasoning — a neurological capacity not present in children or early adolescents.

 

3. CSE–SOGI Causes Confusion, Not Education

 

CSE–SOGI asks children to:

• explore gender identity
• assess sexual feelings
• choose identity labels
• question their biological sex
• consider gender transition
• challenge “heteronormativity”
• normalise sexual pleasure and masturbation
• adopt LGBTQIA+ identities

These are adult ideological concepts, not educational content for children.

 

Developmental psychology confirms:

• identity stabilises only in late adolescence
• childhood emotions fluctuate rapidly
• imitation is natural but temporary
• children cannot foresee long-term consequences

CSE–SOGI converts temporary feelings into permanent labels.

A tragic example is the 14-year-old transgender child who took her life — proof of the emotional danger and irreversible confusion caused by premature identity experimentation.

 

4. ITGSE Content: Direct Proof of SOGI in “Sexuality Education”

The ITGSE (Revised 2018) includes all of the following for children aged 5–18:

 

SOGI Modules

• Gender identity
• Gender expression
• Non-binary, transgender identities
• Sexual orientation
• Questioning gender roles

 

Sexual Pleasure Modules

• Sexual pleasure
• Masturbation
• Exploration of sexual feelings

 

Sexual Rights Modules

• Bodily autonomy
• Choosing sexual partners
• Self-defined gender
• Self-defined identity

 

Identity Exploration

• Exploring identities
• Exploring gender norms
• Challenging biological sex norms

 

These are NOT sex education.

They are sexual identity and gender ideology modules created for adults, but inserted into children’s curricula through teacher manuals and UN-backed training.

Sri Lanka cannot escape these modules once “sexuality education” is adopted.

 

Besides of the 7million below 18 year children in Sri Lanka – how many are actually categorized as “transgender” – in all probability zero.

This does not justify confusing all 7 million Sri Lankan children with identity experiments designed for a minuscule fraction of cases.

Childhood nonconformity (tomboy/tomgirl behaviour) is natural and resolves with age — it is not grounds for ideological programs that may cause lifelong regret or psychological trauma.

 

5. What CSE adopting Countries Teach — Evidence of What Sri Lanka Will Face

 

Netherlands

• Masturbation taught at age 6.

 

Canada

• Pronouns + gender identity at age 5.
• Sexual attraction “normalisation” in primary school.

 

Germany

• Sexual pleasure taught in primary school.

U.S. CSE States

• “You can choose your gender” taught from age 5.

 

Kenya

• UNFPA’s CSE rejected by parents due to hidden SOGI modules.

 

Philippines

• LGBTQIA+ identity modules for 10-year-olds.

In every country, the content enters through teacher training, not the public syllabus — exactly what is happening in Sri Lanka.

 

Year	Training Activity	Public Evidence / Source	Notes / Caveats
2018	Generation‑to‑Generation (G2G) dialogue & CSE policy alignment	G2G‑5 Post-Brief references ITGSE + teacher / policy capacity building. A)	Confirms alignment with ITGSE,
2019	Teacher training / capacity building for CSE	UNFPA Policy Brief 8 by Sri Lanka UNFPA B) UNFPA press release on “Overcoming Shame” in CSE B)	The study shows 50% of teachers had not received SRH (sexual & reproductive health training)
2020	Delivery‑role dialogue & CSE stakeholder engagement	UNFPA publication Delivering Comprehensive Sexuality Education – Whose Role Is It? C)	The document discusses roles of teachers, parents, and policymakers; mentions the national study,
2022	In‑service teacher training on CSE + life skills	UNFPA Sri Lanka Annual Report 2022: “554 teachers from six districts trained on comprehensive sexuality education & life skills.”	This is clear evidence of teacher training

 

2018

• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/G2G-5.pdf

2019

• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/en/publications/policy-brief-8-comprehensive-sexuality-education-sri-lanka
• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/en/news/overcoming-shame-teaching-sexuality-education-imperative
• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Policy_Brief_08-FINAL_0.pdf

2020

• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/en/publications/delivering-comprehensive-sexuality-education-whose-role-it

2022

• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/en/unfpa-sri-lanka-annual-report-2022

2023

• https://srilanka.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/unfpa_sri_lanka_annual_report_2023.pdf

 

This proves beyond doubt:

• Sri Lanka has already been receiving SOGI teacher training for nearly a decade.
• The content enters through teacher training, NOT the public syllabus.
• This is identical to the global CSE–SOGI rollout model.

 

6. High Influence + Low Maturity = High Risk of Manipulation

Because children:

• trust authority
• believe teachers without question
• cannot detect ideological agendas
• cannot distinguish feelings from identity

CSE–SOGI becomes indoctrination, not education.

SOGI doesn’t protect children.
It programs children before they can think independently.

 

7. The Hidden Rollout in Sri Lanka — Why Parents must be alarmed

Evidence now shows:

• secret SOGI teacher training
• SOGI content across 13 ministries
• attempts to neutralise police oversight
• influencer campaigns targeting children
• corporate DEI programs teaching pronouns
• NGO involvement without parental consent
• UNFPA presence in policy groups

The concealment is intentional.

This is a coordinated ideological rollout, not an educational reform.

Because the public syllabus excludes SOGI, but teacher training includes it, implementation happens through teacher manuals, workshops, NGO partnerships, and UNFPA/UNESCO capacity-building — the exact method used worldwide.

 

CSE–SOGI Violates Child Science and Child Protection

Children cannot:

• understand sexuality
• assess identity
• give sexual consent
• evaluate risk
• make gender decisions
• predict emotional outcomes

Therefore, it is scientifically and ethically wrong to introduce:

• gender identity theory
• sexual rights
• sexual pleasure
• LGBTQIA+ identity labels
• self-defined gender
• gender transition concepts
• sexual exploration

 

CSE–SOGI is not child education. It is developmental interference and psychological manipulation.

 

Once Sri Lanka adopts “sexuality education,” it is automatically adopting the UNFPA–UNESCO ITGSE framework, which contains explicit CSE–SOGI modules.
Scientific evidence proves children cannot process these concepts.

 

CSE–SOGI disregards the core principle of child protection: children must not be exposed to concepts they are biologically incapable of processing or consenting to.

Therefore, introducing sexuality education to Sri Lankan children is a violation of:

• child development science
• child psychology
• parental rights
• cultural norms
• religious values
• the legal obligation to protect minors
• the constitution & penal code

 

Sri Lanka must reject sexuality education and protect children from foreign ideological experiments.

The public is being deceived. Religious leaders are being deceived. Concerned parents and professionals are being deceived. The reforms are being promoted as harmless “sex education,” and mainstream media columnists appear to have been mobilised to downplay the dangers. But every UNFPA–UNESCO document clearly defines sexuality education — not sex education — as the global CSE/ITGSE framework. Sexuality education includes gender identity, sexual orientation, sexual rights, and ideological content. None of this appears in the public syllabus. Instead, it is inserted silently through teacher training, teacher manuals, and UN-funded capacity-building programmes.

 

The topic is being smuggled in through teacher training, using vague references to “gender” while deliberately avoiding explicit LGBTQIA terminology to prevent public resistance.

 

 

 

Shenali D Waduge