"Teachers to tell children Gender Ideology is a contested belief"

They want GI discussed but not as a belief. They want it taught as, to embed it as a real thing. They've never tried to establish a belief in GI in law - because they don't want it as something that can be put in that category. They want to impose the New MRA World Order so having it as a belief undermines that objective.

I don’t get why DH thinks Gender Identity as a particular non-evidenced belief needs to be discussed at school. There could be a broad topic to cover flat-Earthism, Gender Identity, Alien Abductions, etc- a topic taught about how belief, delusion, propaganda, mind-control, etc, can work in such a way to sucker in even the most clever people, and the importance of critical thinking, particularly when your emotions are being heavily stoked. Basically a topic - ‘bullshit awareness and not being taken in by bullshit’ (in more academic language) is all you need - GI doesn’t need to be specifically mentioned.

Batty signal, more like.

Another one who doesn't understand safeguarding, rushing to say "they'll see it on their phones anyway".

Has a bat signal gone up? Is that the line?

If so, teachers - like Hayton- should know that children accessing sexual imagery is a safeguarding concern.

Gosh, Hayton’s having a busy week objecting to gender critical improvements to public life:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-schools-must-teach-kids-about-gender-identity/

If you don’t want to give clicks to the original article:

https://archive.is/Lezjz

If you don't do this dodgy thing we want to do to your child then something WORSE WILL HAPPEN

Not a convincing argument.

And do they not realise that here in the real world, kids have baby brothers and sisters and they see reproduction happening and ask their parents and teachers questions and get answers.

This guidance is getting extremely dodgy resources (some of which deliberately sexualise children) out of schools, ensure that parents can see what is being taught (if we're all about 'education' and 'answering questions' why the fuck are they so against that?) and getting gender ideology only taught as a contested belief, not as fact.

All these news articles that are hyperbole and nothing to do with the actual guidance. The journalists could do with going into a few schools for remedial education.

But is that three options, or four? If four, good; if three, not so good.

More "experts" weigh in:

"Children will end up getting their sex education from porn"

Well that is a safeguarding concern. As an expert, surely you know this?!

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13421073/Children-learn-facts-life-online-porn-banning-sex-education-damaging.html

The consultation asks

Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?

Possible answers are

Yes

No

Prefer not to say or not applicable

(Emphasis mine.)

Are they ...listening? 😮

The tea analogy has been around a while and is very clear

am late to this thread so not read all of it. Whilst a welcome development, it only goes half way. The advice should be "Gender ideology is made up bollocks with the same credibility as believing the earth is flat".

The consultation is open (link to pdf of draft guidance at bottom of page)

https://consult.education.gov.uk/rshe-team/review-of-the-rshe-statutory-guidance/

Just skim-read the article, it all seems sensible and refreshingly fact-based. Unless I've missed something?

They recently did a workshop on consent at the school I work at. No playdoh. Something about "unconscious people don't want tea" seemed to be the most memorable takeaway.

But it's important to say that a lot of sex ed is within the science curriculum. There's a whole reproduction topic, and HIV appears as part of disease topic.

For some reason, it's regarded as less ick when it's within science, although I had a group of girls cheer when i walked in instead of their usual male teacher, and they took the opportunity to ask questions they wouldn't have asked him.

Yes some aerated interviewer this morning probably R4 on the ban

If it’s not happening what’s the issue?

I'd forgotten quite how awful they are 'sex-positive' and 'non-binary' according to their page and also 'trauma informed' - what about kids that find making play doh genitals traumatic, or is that not the right kind of trauma? They have what I horribly suspect are play doh genitals on their front page? I'm telling myself they're not very good leaves....

I mean even if it wasn't a massive great safeguarding red flag.... what child wants to make models of GENITALS in front of their CLASSMATES? Massive cringe. What about children who find it traumatic to do anything that horribly embarrassing? And the potential for horrendous ribbing outside the classroom (J's playdoh penis looked like a (insert ludicrious item)!! hahahahaha)

They also say their approach to RSE is 'decolonising: We aim to recognise and address the impact of colonisation.'

What the Actual Fuck? What's colonisation got to do with RSE? Or children?

The one thing their approach to RSE is missing is 'reality based'.

They do not understand children at all. How ON EARTH do people this unhinged get involved in schools?

I do have to say that my DD's secondary shares every single PHSE resource with parents and it's all very sensible.

To not share such material with parents is a safeguarding failure - children will come home potentially confused and it's very hard to clear up that confusion if you don't know what they've been taught.

Not sharing is not in the best interests of the children, it can only ever be highly suspect and in the interests of the adults who don't want it shared.

Yep exactly. Funny that it's the type of lessons that paedophiles might want to manipulate that can't be shared with parents, isn't it?

… “. It should have proper, quality resources available for parents to view.”

can anyone remember that clearly dodgy company who would not let anyone see what they were teaching? They had a ridiculous reason, something like ‘they were worried other people would copy their work’.

Funny how no other resource provider felt the same. Can you imagine a publisher of maths books saying that teachers and parents couldn’t view their books in case they copied them?

i was a secondary teacher a decade ago. I taught drama.

schools were rubbish about sex Ed. There were no teachers who were specifically qualified to teach the subject - it was foisted onto form tutors as part of PSHE. As nobody had any idea of how to teach the subject well we were provided with resources from an outside company (I have no idea who they were or what else they did).
I don’t remember having any problems reaching the stuff - it was mostly mundane and unexciting - but recall feeling that this was a serious subject that should be treated seriously, not something that was foisted onto often reluctant or unenthusiastic teachers without much preparation time.

If schools are expected to teach sex Ed then it should be taken seriously, treated as a subject itself with specialist, subject trained teachers, not as an add-on given to whoever is available. It should have proper, quality resources available for parents to view.

The School of Sexuality, weren't they the bunch behind the Family Sex Show?

I've just noticed it's going to be statutory.

It's going to be statutory????!!!!?!!

If that is the case, I think I'm going to cry.

Quote from the Times article above...

"The guidance will introduce an explicit ban on the proactive teaching of gender identity. It will say that the idea that children can change their gender by using different names, pronouns and wearing the uniform of the opposite sex is highly contested. If pressed by pupils, they should instead focus on the facts of biological sex.

Teaching children about gender identity could lead to them questioning their own gender when they may not have done otherwise, the guidance will suggest. Children can be taught the law about gender reassignment — that people can legally change their gender from the age of 18 — but children will be told that that they cannot legally be classified as members of the opposite sex."

https://schoolofsexed.org/

These people? Haven't gone away.

What the new sex education guidelines mean for schools and parents

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4a2b0d57-13c9-409a-a40b-104d7a0499b2?shareToken=5d0ffe99efc0823a85f70c8d4266466f