Gay men's magazine bullied into grovelling

Jesus, the state of this.

Blindly defending some seriously concerning shit because of hatred towards LGBA. It's not a good look, that one would rather defend children being groomed in schools than admit they may be wrong on this one...

These recent threads have really highlighted to me that some posters really have no true care for children and teens. Especially girls.

No actual care for females.

There is not a single poster on this board who does not believe that STDs are part of sex education

Nobody's said otherwise - just some seem to be saying that it's only acceptable to talk about STDs if it's coming from a heterosexual point of view.
It's not gaslighting to point that out.

I haven’t seen a backpedal like this since...oh, I know! the backpedal from Boyz magazine that used to be the original topic of this thread.

This is gaslighting.

There is not a single poster on this board who does not believe that STDs are part of sex education. Going out in a limb here, I would argue that everyone also agrees that it should be covered that STDs also are spread via oral and anal sex.

Stop pushing sex toys for children as a part of inclusiveness.

According to google there is a children's author called that?
Confused now, is there two different ones or what

You are advocating that female minors should be shown by adult teachers the care and maintenance of niche sex toys.

I think it might be useful telling young LGB people that sharing toys can lead to chlamydia and other STDs yes.

Fisting.

Sorry, I'm reading the thread backwards, but I wanted to note, for anyone casually lurking, that fisting is a potentially enormously dangerous practise. I would advise GREAT caution if even considering it, the risk of prolapse etc is high.

I would google for citations, info and references, but I don't have the strength of mind to do so right now.

@Floisme as in Jess Bradley of flashing fame? Great.

'Jess Bradley, children's author'.

I always thought there were two Jess Bradleys. Please someone tell me there are two Jess Bradleys.

Damn.

that are entirely appropriate is that are entirely inappropriate* of course.

Not being able to offer a master class in fetishes, sex toys and sexual postions.

Or a wonderful sex dice game as discussion openers.... but obviously those posters who are saying LGB Alliance is against LGBT sex education must think that this is appropriate for 13 + year olds sitting in groups and ‘playing’...

And teacher training should be focused on safeguarding - identifying children who may have or may be being abused, those caught up in grooming, those who have been exposed to dangerous untruths about sex particularly the rights of men and the lack of rights of women and providing clear information.

Not being able to offer a master class in fetishes, sex toys and sexual postions.

Sorry, that should be

have the people who are saying LGB Alliance are against LGBT sex education actually looked at the resources they are objecting to.

You are advocating that female minors should be shown by adult teachers the care and maintenance of niche sex toys.

We may move in very different circles, but I can assure you if I told any friend or acquaintance of mine that their children were attending such lessons in school, the answer would be somewhere between “wtf?” and “I’m calling the police”.

You're the one who keeps talking about fisting. I was talking about very common ways LGB people have sex, anal sex being one, and use of toys being another. These are not fetishes.

I asked earlier up thread, have the people who are saying LGB Alliance actually looked at the resources they are objecting to.

Because ‘fisting’ Is amongst some of the resources being objected to!!!! It is the lack of safeguarding that allowed resources and tools that are frankly not age appropriate and in class exercises that are entirely appropriate to be added to some schools curriculum.

But you sound like you have seen the resources and toolkits and are quite comfortable with it.

So that's it? Sex is when a penis is inserted in a vagina, this must be consensual and can cause pregnancy and disease. Here ends your sex education syllabus.

If this is taught alongside an appreciation that some people are same-sex attracted and love, meaningful relationships, self-reflection, boundaries, education about grooming, the age of consent, harms of porn and safe sex then, call me minimalist, but yes that's the nuts and bolts of SRE for children under the age of consent.

Eye opening thread.

Right so now we all have had so much more discussion, maybe MBD can finally answer my pertinent questions:

‘
‘They support balanced, vetted and approved LGBT education in schools. Please show us the education they don’t support. I think you will find the materials they don’t support are those that have been created by organisations that do not have experience in creating children’s educational tools that are sensitive to children’s needs, are following safeguarding protocols and are presenting complete facts. In particular the proud trust dice game, or children being told they might be ‘in the wrong body’, or some of the material discussing anal sex that completely misses the fact that many many females don’t find it actually is pleasurable (but don’t let that material fact stop you girls from doing this cool sex act even though it might cause you immeasurable pain and internal damage!)’.

‘You mean those resources MBD? These seem to be the resources I have seen them highlight should not in schools. I take it you are ok with them, then?’

And ‘ And also do you then support the use of the resources that LGB Alliance objected to being taught to children and teens?’

Please note that I am asking about the specific resources that LGB Alliance have objected to. Neither they or I object to age appropriate LGBT education.

Although, I DO object to peter Tatchell being involved in sex education in any way considering his past writings that he declares have been misrepresented.... hmmm. And any person who is not a qualified teacher for that age group regardless of their intentions.

And to further clarify, I am talking about seeing anal sex resources that do not adequately explain the potential damage, or that, and I acknowledge that some females derive pleasure from anal sex (I would expect it is not from fumbling teenaged boys though, but crack on), many many females DO not. In fact, it is being presented as being normal yet the stats are showing females are being pressured by males and society to accept it. So, have you seen the resources?

For those advocating class discussions of anal sex, strap ons etc remember an average class of 14 year olds will have a number of sexually active children, some who have been sexually abused, some exploring their sexuality, some with different levels of comprehension, some from religious families where discussion of sex may be taboo, some with regressive views about women and some who are not yet aware / interested in sex, (not to mention all the other individual needs).
By definition SRE has to encompass the needs of all these children in an age appropriate way. And that's by exploring the nature of healthy respectful intimate relationships, not a list of sexual techniques.

As in, PIV. You get told what goes where and what happens.
You don't get told any gay equivalent (for want of a better phrase!) eg anal and on this thread it's a fetish or something not to be spoken about.

Because PIV relates to pregnancy and trying to reduce unwanted pregnancies, as well as the biology of conception.

So that's it? Sex is when a penis is inserted in a vagina, this must be consensual and can cause pregnancy and disease. Here ends your sex education syllabus.

Jesus fucking Christ. You know RSE isn't one lesson right? It is a syllabus that lasts a year. Every year of school. That's hours and hours of teaching. The love and respect stuff, the boundaries that is all taught in different lessons across the year. The safe sex stuff sticks with safe sex - that's how you get clear messaging, not muddying the water with what ifs, whatabouterys and how fetishes are perfectly normal.

The love and respect stuff focuses on wider aspects of the relationship - which will include sex. But it still does not require a graphic how to because that is grooming.

For time immemorial people have managed to work out what sex they like by themselves via experimentation without the aid of supposed trusted adult explaining anal to them in a completely inappropriate setting.

The point of RSE is to get them to the point where they are safe and comfortable with that experimentation and understand that they can say no at any point. But they are still meant to do the experimentation the way people have always done.

How on earth do people pushing this shit think the human race have managed for millennia, prior to the introduction of the RSE syllabus? or do they think they are the only people in all of history to have had enjoyable sex?

RSE is there to teach you how to be safe when having sex and exploring that side of your nature. It's not there to teach you how to do backwards cowgirl with a twist.