This game concerns me on so many levels.
I do think sex education needs to cover all bases in terms of safety and hygiene as well as puberty and reproduction - and safety and hygiene may now be a broader field than previous, whether we like it or not. However, children also need to know about consent, sexual connection, pleasure, the dangers of porn, sexting etc. These are fundamental and need to be covered to put sexual activity in context. I see no definite opportunity for discussion of any of these things, it's a totally warped perception. I'm sure there are people who discuss these things whilst using the dice, but not the people who designed them, most tellingly.
Despite my earlier assertion that there is a wider field to cover these days, some of the combinations in this game are also likely beyond the ken of many teens and it's just something they perhaps don't need to know. Teens are suggestible. I don't think they need a game to explore what could be covered implicitly via safety and hygiene and consent discussion- rather than suggesting that anus -to-vulva is mainstream and that they SHOULD be doing it. Similarly, whilst teens hear all sorts, the Warwickshire website puts out information that I didn't know as an experienced adult- because it's niche and NOT everyone does it. It's too much.
I also have serious concerns about who ever came up with this as a concept for schools and teens. Not only is it less nuanced, inclusive and helpful for discussion starting than the actual game it is based upon, but I agree with Pp saying that if a teen came into school saying they'd played this with an adult, there would be a safeguarding investigation. If teachers - or outsourced SRE presenters do it, it's fine. Given the presentation and the way the activity seems designed to flow, surely this sets an incredibly vague, unsolid and somewhat shady boundary for young people, as well as being an incredibly bizarre discussion to have with a teacher. I therefore have concerns about the minds that came up with this idea as acceptable. I also wonder when they last came into contact with teenagers or considered a classroom and how the average class will take this activity. In my experience, teenagers just like to be treated as adults, too and would rather just have a chat. I also can't imagine this working in mixed sex groups- uber embarrassing- or doing anything to put shyer teens at ease, either, in an already awkward situation.
Looking at the content provider, too, I have concerns about the agenda with which they will have approached this task. An LGBT organisation will have a priority audience whilst covering a topic which needs to speak to all young people equally, no matter what their orientation- safe sex is safe sex, consent is universal. Further more- and equally as worrying in itself and as part of a wider trend- within the demographic they claim to serve, the dice and activity have a male-centric skew, unacceptably prioritising men, knowledge of the male body and male pleasure over that of women. This presents a worrying, inadequate view of heterosexual sex and lesbian sex- especially with no context.
Those dice do not contain breasts, nipples or, most importantly, the clitoris as options; Pps who counted have verified that female anatomy options come up less often than male options, too. How does this educate about the female body, female pleasure, looking after the female body or provide the level of info or opportunity for young lesbians (the L in LGBT, after all) that their male counterparts receive in the same session? This is the erosion of the female, yet again.
Also, as a woman who paid for this via the tampon tax, I am truly upset. How does this ridiculous activity serve the needs of women and girls? Having gone to an all girls school and then received female only sex-ed at a mixed sixth form, a male body centric programme would have taught us very little about ourselves or given us a healthy perspective and the man-on-man combinations on the dice would have been pointless. What a let down.