Andrew Moffat (No Outsiders) at it again

He's still personally to blame for the content. The tories have given him a platform.

I also query whether he was in any way involved with early consultations and documentation around the RSE. An early version had the equality act all over it (so NO fitted very well) whereas cross party documentation didn't.

This is the Tories though.

It's happening all over education.

They've decentralised and put everything out to tender. People see the opportunity and snap it up.

I've seen it in all other areas of education; schemes and approaches have been developed independently of the government and been bought into by schools, businesses have been set up to facilitate cpd for schools. They invite teachers who've networked and teamed up with others.

It's all fine if it's differing approaches to maths (or is it?!) not so fine if it's an ideology that has safeguarding issues many simply can't see or actively deny.

It offers and provides training to other trusts, so this soon snowballs into a number of schools (especially in neighbouring communities) then teachilng children the same gender ideology, which is worrying.

What is his deal? He knows it’s incorrect and yet he persists. He has an agenda I assume

Yep, why on earth would a grown man persistently lie about the characteristic that protects women and girls. Telling young girls their that 'gender' is more important that their sex and pretending they have no right to object to forced mix sex spaces.

Love the baroness! “ we in parliament put into the law of the land” well said!

To be fair the dfe guidance lists sex etc correctly but how many people will read it cover to cover?

There's something worrying about small institutions and the ability of mediocre men to progress to the top of them.
The lack of due diligence at the DfE is I suggest explained by the ability of Stonewall and other lobby groups involved in sexual politics to literally sit alongside civil servants and dictate the agenda. The motivation of an individual deliberately misrepresenting the law to little children is another matter - I couldn't possibly speculate about why a man wants children to believe there's no such thing as sex or sex based rights.

What is his deal? He knows it’s incorrect and yet he persists. He has an agenda I assume. Who died and made him god of facts?

He's teaching children lies.

He's re written the preface of the NO book to include sex. He's lying.

I want to email the charity about this as a teacher but I'm too scared to use my work email. I'm sure this means they'll dismiss me as a crank who isn't really a teacher. It's utterly maddening.

His work is also promoted to neighbouring schools and trusts on social media by senior leaders at his MAT, then also shared by some very senior educators (including those covering Warwicksire, and we all know that LA's history with dubious school sex ed guidance).

I’m really very concerned about the influx of faulty information being fed to our schools. There are multitudes of organizations being given access to our children and young people and their work is seriously lacking in facts and some of it is downright dangerous.

Why are our head teachers not on to this? Why is it that an organization puts in a rainbow lanyard and they are given access to our children without schools investigating robustly the actual content of their resources???

Good spot Cavemum

I can't help wondering whether a charity, which has appointed itself to the task of educating about the Equality Act, writing out one of the protected characteristics in this way could be in breach of the Equality Act:

Good point.

Just a thought, but was the Baroness targeted at Booker because of her persistence in pointing out the law.

I can't help wondering whether a charity, which has appointed itself to the task of educating about the Equality Act, writing out one of the protected characteristics in this way could be in breach of the Equality Act:

13 Direct discrimination

(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.

He’s not stupid because he put the wrong word on the poster, he’s stupid because he deliberately put the wrong word on the poster and thought no one would notice.

He's either stupid or a liar.

@CaveMum thanks for that information, I really didn't know. I used to work in the field but I'm obviously out of touch.

Journalist Shelley Charlsworth wrote about Moffat and No Outsiders previously

www.transgendertrend.com/no-outsiders-queering-primary-classroom/

Isn't one of the main complaints against Moffat (by parents) that he lacks communication? He's well known for imposing things and ignoring anyone who questions him.