The WHO want your four year old to be taught about masturbation and gender identity

[GrabbyGabby]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/13/outrage-over-who-advice-on-sexuality-for-infants/

This is where queer theory gets you. Women have been sounding the alarm on the consequences of the promotion of queer theory in all realms of life. This is what it looks like when applies to sex ed for very young children.

So, before you dismiss people like me as modern day Mary Whitehouses, just take a read and ask yourself why? What problem is this solving? Why do very young children need to be taught about sex and sexual pleasure? Are they benefiting, if not, who is?

(article behind a paywall, but there is a trick that will allow you to read it. A quick google should tell you).

Did I say Russian troll?

For younger children "enjoying your body" covers things like looking at how our bodies are put together such as joints, muscles, nerves, etc. and appreciating it as a well-engineered machine (for want of a better word). It also covers looking at what we're good at, for example football, climbing, running. It covers how to keep our bodies healthy so we can carry on enjoying those things.

"Physical enjoyment and excitement" would be focused on emotional literacy - e.g., how do we know when someone is happy or excited? They might smile, they might look relaxed, they could be laughing, they could be jumping up and down, etc.

"Physical closeness to others" would look at positive contact with others such as sitting together and sharing a space or activity and sharing physical affection such as holding hands or hugging. Alongside that it would also look at respecting personal space and boundaries, who it is appropriate to be physically affectionate with and when, where it's okay to touch, respecting when people don't want to be touched, PANTS rules, and so on.

Five year olds absolutely do need to know it and not all parents teach it which is part of the reason it is covered in schools.

It literally mentions teaching 0-4 year olds about masturbation and reproduction in the WHO’s sex ed document. It is available to view online. This is not age appropriate. Children don’t need to learn about sex and reproduction until they learn about puberty further up primary school (I’d say 8+). They definitely don’t need to know about masturbation.

For younger children "enjoying your body" covers things like looking at how our bodies are put together such as joints, muscles, nerves, etc. and appreciating it as a well-engineered machine (for want of a better word). It also covers looking at what we're good at, for example football, climbing, running. It covers how to keep our bodies healthy so we can carry on enjoying those things.

"Physical enjoyment and excitement" would be focused on emotional literacy - e.g., how do we know when someone is happy or excited? They might smile, they might look relaxed, they could be laughing, they could be jumping up and down, etc.

"Physical closeness to others" would look at positive contact with others such as sitting together and sharing a space or activity and sharing physical affection such as holding hands or hugging. Alongside that it would also look at respecting personal space and boundaries, who it is appropriate to be physically affectionate with and when, where it's okay to touch, respecting when people don't want to be touched, PANTS rules, and so on.

Five year olds absolutely do need to know it and not all parents teach it which is part of the reason it is covered in schools.

A winner of my voice of reason for today.

Funny how some skip straight to s.e.x. (the fucking kind).

The paper says 'this is not a curriculum nor does it provide detailed recommendations for operationalizing child sexual education at a country level'.

It's global advice for a diverse world on a framework that countries may or may not decide to implement.

It also explicitly says sex education isn't just about schools but also healthcare providers and non -stat organisations.

Literally NOWHERE is the WHO suggesting that any school in anywhere in the world teach what you quoted.

I'm not sure you understand that precocious understanding of sexuality in children is a sign of SEXUAL ABUSE. So if any child knew about masturbation and pleasure at that age, investigations would go on to find out who taught them about this. Teaching children that young is called GROOMING and is a sign of abuse or molestation. That's how doctors, child psychologists and social workers/services know a child has been abused. So if those 2 countries you mentioned allow this to occur, then if a child is actually sexually abused there is no way to tell.

Yes coming across as bot from a particular country happy to sow the seeds of paranoia…

They already know about masturbation because they all do it.
Nobody is teaching them.
And they do need to learn about boundaries.

I hadn't heard that case you mention but given the amount of staff/employees in places who are fired over not using pronouns, I would trust the employee on this, not the school who are more than likely lying to cover their backsides.

IT IS NOT A WHO DOCUMENT.

READ THE THREAD.

The employees own legal counsel say she was fired for breaching confidentiality etc. It is only the media which are reporting she was fired for not using pronouns.

If you have any genuine cases of someone being fired for not using pronouns that would be very interesting.

One of the problems with this is that paedophiles, and paedophile adjacent people, are very, very practised at choosing their wording.

It's designed to result in plausible deniability, if questioned. To the extent that it can make people feel uncomfortable if they do question it. It can make them feel they are overreacting.

The next layer of that is to tell them they are pearl clutching, hysterical, etc.

Well, firstly, I want to people who analyse what my children are learning to start from a position of deep suspicion and take it from there. What's the safeguarding alternative?

And secondly, people like Safe Schools Alliance are exactly that. They know all the code words that are used to spread paedophilia. They know the twists and turns used in language to get things rubberstamped by the naive. They know exactly how operating in plain sight works, how it is facilitated, and why it's deliberately made quite difficult to challenge it.

I'm bloody glad they exist, and I want them to crack on. I've tagged them and hopefully they'll come on and comment.

It's often considered a sign of sexual abuse, that a child has been abused and 'shown' how to do it. At least if it is overt and excessive, along with other sexualised behaviours.

WRONG.

Childhood masturbation is normal childhood development and not an indicator of sexual abuse.

https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/preschool/Pages/Sexual-Behaviors-Young-Children.aspx

https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-health-development/sexual-behaviour#article-top -

Why are so many people here not reading the thread and just jumping on to talk nonsense?

Agree with you. Very worrying that Labour might win in the autumn; they see no problem with this.

I'd like them to come on and comment about something that isn't happening too.

Of course it isn't.
Small children masturbating is normal behaviour.

So it’s been called sexuality education for fucking years does not axiomatically render it immune to questioning as the guidance evolves or is subject to further interrogation.

The recent document referenced upthread does contain guidance for 5 to 8 year olds (pg 50) that children be explained presumably by teachers "how someone’s gender identity may not match their biological sex (knowledge) and ▶ acknowledge that everyone has a gender identity (attitudinal).

I’m grateful that my DC are out of school now. I’ve tried to teach them that the idea of a socially constructed gender identity is not something everyone ’has’ (such nonsense) but rather is a construct that emerges from dominant political and economic structures embedded in a patriarchal society narrowing their definition of how to act and be.

Problem with what exactly? The information in the document supposedly from WHO which isn’t from WHO?

There are latex-free condoms you know.

I believe they brought it all to the government's attention. The government have said they won't be implementing all the advice.

But that is one of the points of the safe schools alliance.

Prevention. Which, in that case, would appear to be working.

There may not be many schools willing to teach children how to masturbate, although even one, is an issue.

But there will be very, very many organisations trying to get them to.

Yes, widespread capture in many orgs unfortunately, so trust is low. And ofc media orgs have their own agenda re reporting. But to think an organisation like the WHO wouldn't excuse 'poor phrasing' and 'first draft' after a backlash is odd to me. Just because media orgs have their own agenda, exaggerate and quote lobbyists, doesn't mean the WHO report wasn't potentially revealing.

They want to significantly reduce alcohol consumption in the EU regardless and offer a few strategies to promote this. Women were equated with children in the report too. Some of us find this paternalistic and don't disagree with the general thrust of negative media reports. I did not spread misinformation because I did not link to press that said the WHO wanted women banned from drinking alcohol. I am not a conspiracy theorist and I'm not accusing them of being a 'nefarious' org.

It's difficult to get any understanding of whats going on without insider knowledge anyway, it's all bs out there. I don't care what 'Full Fact' write lol. They are not the final word and authority. I supplied a random article on the WHO topic so the poster could know what we were discussing btw, that's it.

Another example of this, I read rants on MN re Brexit all the time but who here reads Cummings' substack? He orchestrated the bloody thing and there's zero curiosity in what he has to say. Just endless reposting of msm media and full fact type articles, that is very funny to me.

I was practically hounded off another site for daring to post a single thing written by him. He was denounced as untrustworthy on the topic of himself but telegraph et al were fine.

"The recent document referenced upthread does contain guidance for 5 to 8 year olds (pg 50) that children be explained presumably by teachers "how someone’s gender identity may not match their biological sex (knowledge) and ▶ acknowledge that everyone has a gender identity (attitudinal)."

Except it states it's not a curriculum or a recommendation of how any country implements sex Ed. Nor does it say sex Ed is about teaching in schools but CAN involve schools but also HCPs and non- stat services.

So everyone can stand down with their frothing about this guidance aka advice being taught in UK schools since it's nothing of the sort.

" Open displays of sexuality, for example, repeated public masturbation "

In a child abuse information document I have, as a sign of sexual abuse.