To be really, really pleased about the explicit ban on the proactive teaching of gender identity?

@IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine yes plenty do and equally plenty have watched pornography. I know it's an uncomfortable truth but it needs addressing and I don't think that should be a lottery of parenting.

What I find so frustrating is the government pitting parents against teachers simply to stoke more division. (You wouldn't believe the amount of parental abuse my colleagues and I receive on a near daily basis).

Have you met any 11 year olds?! Some of them still believe in Father Christmas!

Yes, there's no need to start wanging on about anal to 9 year olds.

This is covered with the sentence, "If you ever see anything online which upsets you, talk to an adult you trust or call Childline."

Appreciated

I may have missed it, are you a teacher @Perfect28 ?

I apologise, you use the term expose rather than show. The point is they are exposed to it. If a third have seen it, they will pretty much all be aware of it.

The perception that we are showing children pornography is absurd and offensive.

Year 6 children should absolutely be aware that they may encounter sexually explicit images as a risk of using the internet. They should be signposted to further support if they feel they need it, be it parent, DSL, or reputable site (childline for example).

What's the alternative here? A third of them see porn and it's pot luck if they have parents that they would talk to/ would talk to them about it?

And 73% of them haven't so your brilliant idea is to make sure that that 73% should be exposed to it. Yeah, that's a really superb idea.

@Perfect28
Quite right. So we should probably cover anal sex in reception, fisting in Yr 1, and bestiality in yr2. Kids need to know how to strangle each other safely (it will probably come up in their SATs anyway). We must tell every kid in detail about every sexual fetish ever devised by man, because we can't risk one kid somewhere seeing something online that hasn't already been explained by an excruciatingly embarrassed primary school teacher.

Yes, I am a teacher. Would you have me teach my Year 6s about anal, strangulation and slapping? If so, I sincerely hope YOU are not a teacher.

@IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine are you a teacher? I hope not. If you are you should be aware that the children's commissioner report on this topic states 27% of young people by age 11 have seen porn.

Which means they have likely seen anal, strangulation, slapping etc.

No. Because earlier, I was making the point that it seemed the government had discovered its SG responsibilities and that child development ppl were back in the room. Then you said - where's the evidence? So I said "I'd said "it seems"" and gave you the links to the guidance. And said if you want to bring points made by those deriding it, do. Let's discuss. But you didn't. So there we are.

As to your second point, there really is only so much teachers can do to make up for shitty parenting. I shouldn't have to teach 11 year olds about anal sex, for example, just because one kid's feckless parents haven't protected them from porn.

This.

I don't really understand your first point, and I don't think you understood mine. I am advocating FOR parents to talk to their children and teach them what they want them to know. If that is more than they have been taught in school, great. If it is less than they have been taught in school, then there is a problem, since they can't unteach them what they have already been taught.

As to your second point, there really is only so much teachers can do to make up for shitty parenting. I shouldn't have to teach 11 year olds about anal sex, for example, just because one kid's feckless parents haven't protected them from porn.

@ResisterRex just to respond to an earlier point, you literally asked me where you could read responses to the guidance. Nothing to do with 'doing my research for me'?

Whilst it might be possible to admire your commitment to pointedly not getting it, it's not a case of "meh, some parents let their kids have access to porn so what can we do". The entire point of the draft guidance is to protect children from things they're not ready for - and if children have been exposed then that is a safeguarding concern. Not "well they've seen it so let's tell the entire class about it".

I need to catch up on all the links but the draft guidance also seems broadly in line with the Online Safety Act plans: www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer. Or at least I can see a read-across between the two.

@IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine unteach? Why can't you just talk to your child?

The reason schools are teaching so much of this is because they are already exposed through the internet. Wait a second, the same internet access which their parents grant them.

Surely it's obvious that's it's possible to teach your child something they haven't learnt in school, whereas it is not possible to unteach your child something they HAVE learnt in school?

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I mean teachers ‘using’ texts to promote their own political opinions (eg trans Shakespearean characters). Or more subtly, selecting texts that do explore particular social or political issues but not reflecting objectively on them, uncritically accepting the perspective in the text.

@zaffa pandering to a minority that shout a lot.

But the government is not pandering to the trans ideologues.

They are doing the will of the majority.

Sorry no children should be taught about sexual fetishes in school! What is so hard about that?

Should we not be taking advice about what is age appropriate for the majority of children from child development experts? No single parent’s opinion should override all others in either direction. In school we have to do what’s developmentally best for most of the kids, and I would prefer that experts in the field decided what was right.

It's a government desperate for votes pandering to a minority that shout a lot.
Hopefully you will view it the same way if the next government make the decision to allow a different level of teaching?

I'm simply pointing out that it isn't one individual parent deciding for another, as you said. That's a bizarre way to frame it. We've established that you don't agree with it.

The guidance on the actual sex Ed is crap - they should have just specified, we’re doing this because we don’t like trans stuff being discussed in schools, don’t use the gingerbread person, these are the specific resources we don’t like - done. Instead the age restrictions on what you can discuss re sex has muddied the water I feel. I used to have to teach PSHE and this guidance would have set me up to fail because it’s unworkable - there a baffling paragraph about what do to if you get asked a question that is outside of the age restrictions which basically says - we don’t know, you work it out. There is also a bizarre inclusion about not mentioning ‘the details’ of domestic violence until year 9 and not talking about consent with reference to sex until year 9 🤷🏻‍♀️