To be really, really pleased about the explicit ban on the proactive teaching of gender identity?

[BiologicsBeforeIdeology]

It's just such madness that we even got here. My family has been badly affected by activists pushing this madness on my Autistic son, who now half believes he's a girl because some nitwit came into the school and told him people who feel uncomfortable and like they don't belong are trans (not maybe gay, not maybe Autistic, not maybe just Puberty, but trans)

I won't apologise for wanting to safeguard children. This is not a Section 28 thing, it really is protecting vulnerable kids.

"Gender identity
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."

More info on the changes https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4a2b0d57-13c9-409a-a40b-104d7a0499b2?shareToken=ed46490f36a6c9fbb0f70d6bf03c0a99

And what's more, doing that isn't neutral. It requires other children to prop up the imaginations within a classmate's head. That is unfair, it's adultification, and it's a safeguarding concern. It's helping to lock in an identity that - as we know from Cass and the WPATH leaks - harms the trans-identified child.

Exactly.

But that's your opinion. Mine is different. Why does yours trump mine, because you shout louder?
My child will be fine, she'll be appropriately educated in an age sensitive way every step of the way, because I'm her mum and I want what is best for her most in the world. But not everyone has that at home. Limiting what teachers can talk about at the place where children should be able to talk freely is not the answer here.
In the same way that I'm not really bothered about trans identity being taught in schools, I accept other people are. But the answer is not a ban on talking about it for either of us.

Parents who follow religion at home will teach it to their children as fact.

Schools teach it as belief.

That's the difference.

Gender identity is a belief so parents are free to teach their belief to their child at home as a fact.

Schools are not obliged to do so.

It doesn't trump your opinion, and I didn't say it did? You don't approve of these guidelines and I do. As I said, you can teach your own children, other people's children are not your responsibility.

But they're not yours either? So why does your desire for them not to be taught something trump their parental desire for them to continue learning something in school?
If you don't like it, stop your child from accessing that area of education, don't stop the education for other children

What is it you feel should stay? The gender ideology education or other

If it it gender ideology why do you value it

Limiting what teachers can talk about at the place where children should be able to talk freely

Another misunderstanding of the draft guidance. And of safeguarding. Children can't "talk freely". Children who say racist things will be reprimanded. Children who talk about watching porn, or violent acts will be assessed for a safeguarding intervention.

Also teachers are actually limited in what they can say anyway. They're not allowed to promote partisan views.

But they're not yours either? So why does your desire for them not to be taught something trump their parental desire for them to continue learning something in school?

You've expressed your opinion, and I've expressed mine. Obviously you think you're right and I'm wrong and I think you are wrong and I'm right that's the nature of disagreement. Thankfully it isn't up to either of us to write guidelines for schools.

If you don't like it, stop your child from accessing that area of education, don't stop the education for other children

No, I think this is pretty much the right approach in the new guidelines. You are free to teach your children what you consider appropriate, and other children won't be inappropriately sexualised at an early age. Abuse should be dealt with as a safeguarding concern.

I think general guidelines are one thing but we shouldn't be stipulating to this level of detail what can be taught when.
I don't have strong feelings about trans teaching either way. I know some people do and some of their reasons I understand and can actually support (for example that some women will lose access to health services because they are unable to be seen by a biologically male doctor).

I feel very strongly about ever limiting access to education because someone else doesn't want it for their children, and so my child is disadvantaged as a result.
I have no issue with every parent choosing for themselves whether their child can be taught about trans or sex education, I have an issue with another parent deciding for children that are not theirs.

Including women?

It's not one parent deciding for another, it's a decision by the government that some sexual themes are not age appropriate.

It's a government desperate for votes pandering to a minority that shout a lot.
Hopefully you will view it the same way if the next government make the decision to allow a different level of teaching?

How do you know what the minority or majority view is on these guidelines?

It's a government desperate for votes pandering to a minority that shout a lot.

That doesn't make sense. Surely they would want to pander to the majority view in order the garner the most votes?

It's a government desperate for votes pandering to a minority that shout a lot.

It is the minority that shouts a lot, threatens, abuses and demands that was being pandered to the Government, finally, are reversing this to be in line with what the majority want.

The guidance on the actual sex Ed is crap - they should have just specified, we’re doing this because we don’t like trans stuff being discussed in schools, don’t use the gingerbread person, these are the specific resources we don’t like - done. Instead the age restrictions on what you can discuss re sex has muddied the water I feel. I used to have to teach PSHE and this guidance would have set me up to fail because it’s unworkable - there a baffling paragraph about what do to if you get asked a question that is outside of the age restrictions which basically says - we don’t know, you work it out. There is also a bizarre inclusion about not mentioning ‘the details’ of domestic violence until year 9 and not talking about consent with reference to sex until year 9 🤷🏻‍♀️

It's a government desperate for votes pandering to a minority that shout a lot.
Hopefully you will view it the same way if the next government make the decision to allow a different level of teaching?

I'm simply pointing out that it isn't one individual parent deciding for another, as you said. That's a bizarre way to frame it. We've established that you don't agree with it.

Should we not be taking advice about what is age appropriate for the majority of children from child development experts? No single parent’s opinion should override all others in either direction. In school we have to do what’s developmentally best for most of the kids, and I would prefer that experts in the field decided what was right.

Sorry no children should be taught about sexual fetishes in school! What is so hard about that?

@zaffa pandering to a minority that shout a lot.

But the government is not pandering to the trans ideologues.

They are doing the will of the majority.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I mean teachers ‘using’ texts to promote their own political opinions (eg trans Shakespearean characters). Or more subtly, selecting texts that do explore particular social or political issues but not reflecting objectively on them, uncritically accepting the perspective in the text.

Surely it's obvious that's it's possible to teach your child something they haven't learnt in school, whereas it is not possible to unteach your child something they HAVE learnt in school?

@IdgieThreadgoodeIsMyHeroine unteach? Why can't you just talk to your child?

The reason schools are teaching so much of this is because they are already exposed through the internet. Wait a second, the same internet access which their parents grant them.

Whilst it might be possible to admire your commitment to pointedly not getting it, it's not a case of "meh, some parents let their kids have access to porn so what can we do". The entire point of the draft guidance is to protect children from things they're not ready for - and if children have been exposed then that is a safeguarding concern. Not "well they've seen it so let's tell the entire class about it".

I need to catch up on all the links but the draft guidance also seems broadly in line with the Online Safety Act plans: www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-safety-act-explainer/online-safety-act-explainer. Or at least I can see a read-across between the two.