Dept. for Education doc "Primary school disruption over LGBT teaching/relationships education"

Aghhhhhhhhhhh

Didn't you promise yesterday never to do this again, @TheJoyOfWriting..? Anyone would think we can't trust anything you post.

Blimey, it's been a while since I saw this username.

Joy is at it again I see…

🧟‍♀️

So do you think no books w positive gay relationships (I'm thinking stuff like Annie On My Mind or Last Night At The Telegraph Club, fairly standard but well written teen romance) should be allowed?

Or that no speakers for LGB rights or books about them should be allowed?

I see the issue you raise, but this seems too draconian.

How would it work for other contentious issues like abortion or divorce?

I agree bc for children without parents' knowledge is wrong. Not sure about LGB clubs. Otoh I guess if the parents were merely disapproving then you should tell them. But otoh in some families, and yes, Muslims would sadly be more likely, children might face violence. I guess the answer is to emphasise that if children are actually being abused, for whatever reason,,they can come to the school for help.

As far as I can tell, parts of 'gender' ideology are a belief or thought system that not everyone agrees with. For the govt to effectively try to use schools to impose a set of beliefs on families is ... well. It's either sinister or it's just very stupid. Let's hope the latter.

Yes, I think it's clearly so far outside of what most people believe it is seriously problematic. I think the reason people are seeing this as ok is because there is an element apart from just trying to balance the parental right vs the responsibility of the state to look out for kids who are being neglected. There is also an element that says, it is ok for the state to promote certain values and ideological beliefs to those parts of the population who might be a bit behind, or vulnerable, to inappropriate attitudes.

The question of where does the state get to insert itself with regard to ideological values, how niche would it have to be for the state to ignore it, is very difficult. I think the tactic of presenting parents objecting to some of this stuff as homophobic is really about this line. Probably a majority of people in the UK are happy with the law and social trends around LGB issues. But there are some communities of people who are not, or who are perhaps only partly, and that includes some of these parents. Maybe they are happy for others to follow their own beliefs, or for the law to be fairly secular, but their religion, their ideology if you will, generally says that marriage and maybe sex are directly related to procreation. And they don't want schools telling their kids that is a bigoted view, or that it's somehow unscientific.
So the effort to criticise all the discomfort with these teaching packages is concentrating on these people as their view is a minority view, and can be pretty successfully presented to the public as a form of hatred, and as something that will die out anyway. They are attempting to sidestep anyone questioning the legitimate role of what is supposed to be a secular state institution in taking over the parental role of teaching values, because in a society that claims to be about diversity and pluralism, that might not go the way they want. It's an inherent problem of progressivism, that it is in tension with any kind of diversity of thought because many people, without really realising it, believe there is a sort of true endpoint society is working toward, where we will all believe the right and true things.

Placemarking to digest at a later point

Yes, Goosefoot, it's always a balance between protecting children (the state needs to have the power to intervene in cases of abuse or neglect, and to check that this isn't happening, I fully support this) - and respecting families differing views and beliefs.

As far as I can tell, parts of 'gender' ideology are a belief or thought system that not everyone agrees with. For the govt to effectively try to use schools to impose a set of beliefs on families is ... well. It's either sinister or it's just very stupid. Let's hope the latter.

Here in Scotland there was consultation on new RSHP (if I've got the acronym right) guidelines. Parents were asked to read them and contribute their thoughts.

rshp.scot/

I believe they have been amended after feedback, and the last time I checked they seemed fairly reasonable (I only read for my kids' stages, perhaps selfishly, but there's a lot to wade through and my time is limited).

Is there not similar for other parts of the UK?

Yes, you make very good points there, Goosefoot.

Allowing young people to access birth control is a means of preventing them from suffering pregnancy, abortion and other life altering consequences.

Well, yes, that's the argument. But what it means is that the state, in its wisdom, has the final say about medical treatment in these cases where it deems it worthwhile. That is, it is up to the state to determine when it can suspend normal parental rights because it thinks its for the best.

The fact that many of us think that in the case of gender transition, it simply can't be, is a particular instance. There will be times when the judgement of the state on such things will be incorrect, just as presumably there will be times when parents make incorrect judgements. But we've established a principle that they are allowed to make that decision and leave parents out of it. And is that is how many fairly regular people are thinking about this, that the state knows what is best on this, and letting parents be involved is risking the children, just like it would be requiring them to be involved in their kids access to birth control.

It's one thing to complain the science they are using is bad. But if the complaint is that they have no right to go over the parents' heads, I think that battle was lost some time ago. People think they do.

There is a similar direction at the moment now with vaccination. because of the really problematic effects of the anti-vax movement, people are more and more talking about making vaccinations compulsory. And many people agree, in some cases even to the point of saying parents who refuse should have parental rights removed altogether. But again, there are wider implications every time we say, ok, we are going to lessen parental rights here and strengthen the authority of the state over people's kids.

This a bit off-topic, but I take issue with this Many people on the left have also strongly believed that students in the teen years should be able to access birth control without parental knowledge

Allowing young people to access birth control is a means of preventing them from suffering pregnancy, abortion and other life altering consequences. I am 66 and in my day we were all having sex young without being able to access birth control. Young people will have sex, some sooner than others, regardless of what their parents think or want.

Allowing young people to transition is to allow them to make life altering decisions without adult input.

This is very worrying.

I'm very much in favour of sex ed. Not in favour of gender bullshit being taught, and very much not impressed with the hostile attitude shown here.

What about Parent Councils, PTA, teachers who are parents? Governors, in England? Are they not allowed to ever raise concerns or discuss issues now, for fear of being 'disruptive'?

It is important that you pass on intel to DfE about disquiet in your local area and signs that this might be building towards disruptive activity. DfE can better support local authorities if there is a real time picture of issues in local areas and patterns of activities.

As people keep saying, 1984 is not a manual.

They have used a lot of the successful techniques used by other groups, like those trying to get adjustment put into place to integrate disabled children and children with learning disabilities which were very needed as you cannot put a child in a classroom where they cannot get in, cannot see the work, or need someone with them so that they can interpret the teacher's instructions. It is fascinating how they have taken up the language and reused it in a new context.

This is really worrying. Spying on parents and reporting them to the DfE. What could go wrong? All parents should be worried about this. Everyone has a right to be heard. Everyone has a right to demonstrate.

Teaching a child the observable fact that some children have two mummies/daddies and that is OK is not forcing that child to have same sex parents nor is it forcing that child to be gay. It is in no way comparable to the current wave of organisations entering schools to teach about gender ideology. They are not teaching children to tolerate differences. They are teaching children a whole bunch of ideology that is utterly anti science (the comparable is creationism, surely).

I'm not sure that it necessarily matters if it is similar to creationism, at this point, because the principle of who gets to decide has already been ceded. It's almost inevitably true that many people were quite happy with what was being done before, because that is how it works - we allow the governing body to become authoritarian, or ignore opposing or diverse views, when it suits us, and soon find that they maintain that approach even when it doesn't suit us. We've given them the moral, and perhaps legal authority to do so.
I don't think it's possible to see what has happened with this so long as we say, yeah, the school and state approach to LGB has only been factual/scientific. That doesn't reflect what they were trying to achieve, or pass on to students, it doesn't reflect the wider school environment that includes the books in the library, or the speakers they invite. It really doesn't include the presence of Rainbow type clubs, or the fact that many people seriously felt that it was ok for kids who were potentially LGB to attend these without parental knowledge, or to receive support from staff without parental knowledge. Many people on the left have also strongly believed that students in the teen years should be able to access birth control without parental knowledge.
Most of these things the average liberal or left wing families have been fine with, in fact they've supported them strongly, well before gender ideology became a big deal. And they have not been what you'd call sympathetic, or even just concerned, about anyone saying that this is social engineering, or that it interfered with parental rights - such people have been dismissed as bigots which should sound familiar, and more importantly, ignored. The precedent has been pretty clear, when push comes to shove on values issues, the state is being expected to uphold values even when the parents are not comfortable with those values. Those pushing gender ideology are using the tools let lying around from other educational initiatives to do their work. They didn't start letting Stonewall into the schools to influence students about gender ideology.

Given Slater was given an award from Stonewall for removing single sex toilets at three locations he really is the last person who should be having influence in schools.

Regulatory capture in action, clear as day.

Sorry posted too soon, didn't give that context.

Is this the change we are seeing now?

Slater met 1-2-1 with Stonewall to "learn about best practice and lead change".

Coyoacan that is a very interesting observation.

It’s really disturbing-it’s evil. Not sure what to do. My DD is 5 and the only way I see to fight against this is for me to continue to tell her about the facts of life and biology. We also talk about real and pretend a lot.

They are relying on us parents being embarrassed about sex and genitals - a bit like abusers rely on kids’ ignorance.