Did I just hear Sunak promise to investigate inappropriate and unsafe sex education in school?

[Nimbostratus100]

Did I just hear Sunak promise to investigate inappropriate and unsafe sex education in school?

I don't really listen to priminister questions, but I was just channel hopping waiting for the kettle to boil

So IABU to dance a little dance?

YABU - no you misheard, he didn't say that/ he said it but it is meaningless

YANBU - yes you heard it, yes it means something, dance away

They mean the same thing.

Marian Cates isn't so protective of elderly people though.
June 2021, in an article for online magazine UnHerd, Cates criticised the focus on protecting the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic as in her opinion it only had a short-term impact on the "longevity of older people" and that emphasis should have been on "the long term impact of lock downs on young peoples' lives".[28]
Quite happy to vote to protect Owen Patterson.
A town in Yorkshire was handed £24m in regeneration funding from the Government's controversial Towns Fund because of its high-profile Conservative candidate standing in a marginal seat at the 2019 General Election, according to a senior businessman involved in the bid.
So an area of Sheffield deemed low priority for 'levelling up' gets millions in investment from the levelling up fund. Funnily enough Cates' constituency.

Formed the New social covenant with Danny Kruger he of the comment that women "did not have an absolute right to bodily autonomy" in relation to abortion as "in the case of abortion that right is qualified by the fact that another body is involved".

The manifesto of this group is deeply socially conservative on the subject of marriage and family, claiming that marriage equality for same sex couples "removed [marriage's] physical basis" and that the right of couples to end a marriage had "removed its emotional and practical basis, and voided the marriage vow itself".
The primary purpose of marriage as "regulation of baby-making", implicitly valuing fertile, heterosexual couples over all other forms of families. Also rails against immigration and "globalism", promoting the antisemitic conspiracy that "cultural Marxism", purported to be an obscure school of political thought originating from largely Jewish academics in the 1950s, has infiltrated political and academic institutions with the aim of destroying the family and Western civilisation.
More to miriam than meets the eye. Evangelical christian undoubtedly who probably wants to turn the clock back for ordinary women. You can be GC but certainly not agree with all that claptrap

Yawn. More whataboutery. What exactly do you think it achieves posting unrelated stuff like that? The investigation is going ahead suck it up.

I've voted YANBU ,as I definitely heard this as well. But whether he actually does do anything about it,well,I'll believe it when I see it.

They absolutely do not. I’m British but not English. Ignorant comment.

There are some people on this thread who REALLY don't want the government to look into what is going on in schools when it comes to sex education.

They must think we are idiots if we don't recognise the tactics.

I mean, what kind of people don't want children safeguarded from inappropriate sex education in school so much that they are prepared to make false claims that there is no evidence or try to discredit Miriam Cates?

This whole idea that you can't ensure that appropriate standards are adhered to when delivering sex education unless the right person makes the right complaint at the right time for absolutely unimpeachable reasons is bizarre.

You do realise that you can agree with a person or group in one area and not another, of course unless you are going down the pit that is ad hominem arguments. This is not US politics

They only thing we are discussing here is what should be included in children’s sex education. A review - prompted by Cates is taking place, I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want a review into what is essentially the safe guarding of children - well actually I understand exactly why and it’s not pleasant.

Now if you want to discuss any of the other views held on a separate thread about those issues crack on.

But please explain why you personally don’t want a review into a children’s safeguarding issue? Do you not think children’s safeguarding is important enough to warrant a review where even Ofsted have concerns. I would love to know your answer

Indeed I am Nicola, the unhinged, far right Christian Fundamentalist trans rights activist left wing momentum supporting hedge fund manager.

Who are you?

@Effiebreast

You are spot on. You cant mention her agenda though, it makes you a danger to children apparently. We've to ignore all the red flags relating to her deeply disturbing reactionary views and assume in this one instance she's got children's interests at heart. I think it's something to do with trans people being automatic kiddy fiddlers or something. I don't know, I got bored with the cognitive dissonance and false accusations.

You do understand that we live in a pluralistic democratic society? There's not one "right" way of thinking. When setting guidelines for sex education the DfE should be taking into account all points of view. Even those you disagree with.

Because what will happen otherwise, is that if you only take into account one extreme viewpoint like stonewall and queer theory proponents, then you risk completely alienating those of conservative religious persuasions, and they will just completely withdraw their children from sex education altogether. Which is harmful to everyone.

There are ways of teaching sex education without having kids have a group discussion about masturbation or anal you know.

The DfE does take into account a wide range of viewpoints when setting RSE guidance.

In a pluralistic democratic society that means that views other than the ones you agree with are considered as well as yours, which is why a wide range of interested parties including Stonewall contribute to discussions as to what RSE should involve. Do you have a problem with that?

I just said that all viewpoints need to be considered didn't I? That includes Stonewall.

However it's clear that they have had far far too much influence. Gender ideology is controversial and contested and should not be taught as fact.

That is one view.

In a pluralistic democratic society one must accept that there is not one right way of thinking. When setting guidelines for RSE the DfE should take into account all viewpoints, including those that you disagree with.

God!

I just said they needed to be consulted didn't I. Just that one view should not be promoted over other sensitivities which may lead to detrimental impacts.

Such as what happened at this school.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/courageous-conversations-needed-over-rainbow-day-absences-union-leader?utmsource=ground.news&utmm_medium=referral

Sorry. Yes I forgot to include that I am God in the list of things I am. I will remember next time.

Children will just be withdrawn from sex education altogether if parental trust is broken. How does that help anyone?

Ah would that include teaching about the viewpoint that children can consent to sex with an adult? I mean that a view held by and campaigned for by a certain group Now it’s becoming clear

Well I for one am as outraged that the DfE who have responsibility for schools in England did not do something about what a school in Ontario was teaching. It must be the malign influence of Stonewall.

Are you quite well? You seem to be having comprehension issues.

Given we have had two Prime Ministers in the last year who think it acceptable for them to break the law, we have a Home Secretary who wants to introduce a bill into parliament that she thinks is illegal, then I suppose there is a logic to teaching children that breaking the law is fine, perhaps only if it is in a specific and limited way?

Well actually you do have claim to that - as Blake said “Jesus Christ is the only God, and so am I and so are you” - so crack on Nicola, crack on.

So what Brave New World are you hoping to create. Would you like to be referred to as Elohim? I mean it’s quite suitable, a feminine base and a masculine plural ending. You could go the full hog and argue God was non binary