Wales primary the sex education experiment

[justasking111]

Now Wales has been ahead with some things, kudos to that. But sex education in primaries, masturbation at nine, advice from the WHO . Parents not allowed to know the content of lessons. It's out of hand now IMO. Are the staff of primaries happy with this.

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/education/wales-sex-education-plans-court-23776923

gov.wales/curriculum-wales-relationships-and-sexuality-education-rse-code

I feel we're being bamboozled into this

YABU dinosaur thinking

YANBU primary is too early

Same, born in 1990, we had it in year 6 I think, two women I think nurses came in, explained all about periods, pregnancy, and puberty.

Just before we went to "big school"

But yes we all knew where babies came from by then, thanks to the farms around us 🤣

1. Which parts? (curriculum references as per OP's link, please)

2. How is not providing sex education going to solve anything?

pointythings

1. Learning about things like CSE and grooming is all taught in a victim blaming way.

2. Again, for the 2nd time given you ignored it the first time, I have no said this.

I can see literally nothing in the curriculum that is victim blaming in the slightest.

But how would you change the curriculum we are discussing to avoid this then out of interest?

Almondsandraisins
You won't see it on the curriculum, it is how it is delivered and the materials use that are victim blaming. I would remove all victim blaming from the way it is taught. The teachers and the policies need to ensure that it is taught in a non-victim blaming way.

When teaching about grooming it should be - what the perpetrator did wrong not what the girl did wrong for example like she was in the wrong for giving out her number online changes to she was groomed and tricked by the perpetrator into giving her number online.

Almondsandraisins
Actually teaching children what token resistance is when teaching consent and explaining why consent is often ignored again by the perpetrator as a result of this.

@bigfootisreal You need a separate campaign for that. Banning all sex Ed isn't going to help with ensuring the curriculum is taught in the correct way.

Sex and relationship education is so much better now than it was even 10 years ago. Let's keep refining the resources and funding training for teachers to ensure they are kept up to date.

Was just going to say this.

Hercisback
I've not asked for anything to be banned. 3 times I have said this now. Seems a few of you are really struggling to read.

Sex education is no better than 10 years ago at all. It is very much the same.

Hercisback
Let's keep refining the resources and funding training for teachers to ensure they are kept up to date.

It needs a complete overhaul of the system and not just training but a change in attitude from teachers and those above towards what sex education should be like.

In my school it is much better than 10 years ago. Consent and relationships is now included. Coercive control is covered. Safe use of social media. (There's more but this is just the top of my head). Perhaps we were at a lower stating point than some places.
My sons school it is infinitely better than anything I had at primary school 25 years ago.

I stand by you needing a separate campaign, apologies for misinterpreting your posts.

I think I was the first one to say about banning it.Because you are disagreeing with the posters arguing for sex ed it it really does read at least to start off with as if you are against the curriculum being discussed and sex ed.

If it is in fact that you want sex ed changing then that was not immediately clear. If several people misunderstand me I tend to assume I have not been clear about something rather than other people don't have clear reading comprehension.

If you want to change sex education to make it better, then see if MN will run a campaign on it. Ironically some of the people you are being rude to here would probably be the first to back you up.

Hercisback
Consent and relationships were already included where I have taught, I've never not known it to be. However, it is how it is taught that needs addressing. In much the same way that advice for the way we teach maths was recommended in 1982 but not really put into place until the past 10 years. That needs to happen for this subject.

Consent education is pointless without teaching kids why it mostly gets ignored. We need them to understand why people ignore consent and that is down to what we teach them through the media etc. Consent education alone is not good enough and pointless.

Internet safety again I've never not taught but we will struggle when the government release documents such as the new KCSIE which is victim blaming in some of the paragraphs. Those at the top need to sort themselves out.

Almondsandraisins
I'm not at all. I am disagreeing that sex ed is good when it really isn't at all. I am against a lot in the curriculum in how it is delivered not the content.

I was very clear, I stated that 2 times for you and you ignored it. Not sure how much clearer I can be when I categorically state something and you ignore it? I was very clear.

I am rude to people who are rude to me and given that you were ignoring me and making statements about me then I have every reason to be rude to make you listen when stating it clearly is not working.

Please do point out where you had to tell me a second time as I can only see one post where you said this to me, the first one where you clarified it. I cannot see where I have ignored it at all after that.

I have not ignored you, or made statements about you, although I have responded to you.

1. At 21:23
2. At 22:11

I'm sorry you are complaining about my reading comprehension because you had to reply to a completely different poster the same thing you replied to me

Unless I am somehow responsible for everything anyone who disagrees with you says I think perhaps it isn't my reading comprehension of your posts where the issue is 🙄

But no you didn't have to tell me the same thing twice. You told me once as I have already stated. Perhaps you will leave me alone now with your self proclaimed rudeness.

Almondsandraisins
My mistake they weren't for you but you said you had read my posts and you thought what was implied then somehow you didn't read those? Funny that?

Again, as I teach the children, people will be rude to you if you are rude back.

So you complaint is that essentially I hadn't read your posts at 22:11 and 22-28 when I posted at 20-58? Okay then apologies my mind reading abilities hadn't kicked in at that point

I really don't know what you are trying to accuse me of at this point. I, and several other posters, thought you meant 1 thing. You told me you didn't at 21:23 and you are now complaining that I ignored you the two subsequent times when I never said anything about it afterwards.

I wasn't rude in the first place, although my last post was frustrated. You were rude when you complained about our reading comprehension. Its concerning you are saying you are a teacher.

(Its also concerning you are complaining about the way sex ed is taught when you are in fact one of the people teaching it...)

You mean when you posted at 22:38

(Its also concerning you are complaining about the way sex ed is taught when you are in fact one of the people teaching it...)

I don't teach it in that way though do I, again another assumption of yours. I actually challenge everything at both subject level and safeguarding level but then given you seem to know a lot about me then you will already know this won't you?

When I posted at 22:38 it was in response to you complaining about why posters were saying that you didn't want sex ed, so I thought I would explain why I had thought that originally.

Hence why I said:

I think I was the first one to say about banning it.Because you are disagreeing with the posters arguing for sex ed it it really does read at least to start off with as if you are against the curriculum being discussed and sex ed.
If it is in fact that you want sex ed changing then that was not immediately clear.

i.e. I wasn't saying again that you weren't, I was explaining why I thought that in the first place.

I only actually said it once, at 20:58 before you ever said it wasn't the case.

Almondsandraisins
I understood that perfectly well first time.

Apparently not as you then keep berating me for not knowing something before you said it. Enough, I am done now.