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

but how many won't as they're scared of parents going ape? guidelines are one thing, but setting in stone minimum standards is easier so we can try and reduce kids falling through the cracks with their knowledge,

This is already in place though? The PANTs rule is from reception etc

so this doesn't remove that? this is why it needs to be clearer on what is actually going to be covered by each age group

"We have the highest rates of rape and assault of children occurring ON SCHOOL CAMPUS we have ever seen, according to stats from 2023. That’s predominantly boys raping and sexually assaulting girls AT SCHOOL".

And this has got much, much worse since gender ideology was brought into school and all the toilets and changing rooms were made mixed sex and boys were told they could do whatever they liked, wherever they liked as long as they said they identified as girls.

In which case, the teacher needs to talk to the DSL and decide the course of action. Not spread the issue across the whole class.

86%-14% - seems a pretty solid opinion that Trans ideology should be kicked out as a fact - how the hell do we get back to fixing it?

Did anyone see Allsorts? They literally teaching every school in Sussex pretty much - terrible people
https://www.allsortsyouth.org.uk/

do you have any links to sources that its caused by that? correlation vs causation comes to mind here.

because i can tell you, when i was at school there were plenty of assaults and such happening and none of the abusers needed to pretend to be trans to get access to us and traumatize us. there was a movement a few years ago where schools were named and the vast majority of the stories on there were from before this time.

@pointythings I think Jessica Taylor is responding to the guidance which will advise that,
"Children should not be given “explicit” lessons on sexual acts until they are in Year 9, aged 13. At this stage they can be taught about sexual consent, contraceptive options, abortion, sexually transmitted infections and how taking alcohol and drugs can lead to more risky sexual behaviour."
And will also advise that primary schools (continue to) teach about feeling safe, respecting boundaries, and what kids can do if they don't feel ok about how any adult (including family members) is relating to them.
I think Taylor is really, really wrong here.

Research that has been done shows that the rate of sexual assaults increases markedly when traditionally single sex spaces are replaced by mixed sex spaces. There are some very good resources on the FWR board on here. I will look for some links when I have some time, but two topics come to mind, one is called "Break it down for me" and I think the other one is called "This never happens", or something similar.
Safe Schools Alliance is a very useful resource specifically for information regarding Gender Ideology in schools in the UK. https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/

I'm pleased. And it needed to happen because the current tranche of teenagers are bored stupid with the subject. It is relevant for so few of them, and there are so many more valuable things to put on a busy curriculum

Sex education is less clear cut. Basics like teaching little ones that pants are private need to continue, and 9yos are clearly old enough to learn about reproduction. Any rural community knows that.

But some of the stuff my 9yo ds covered, he wasn't ready to hear for another 2 or 3 years. He came home, shocked, offended, disgusted and less willing to listen when he was old enough.

Im delighted. Dangerous and insidious ideology.

I'd love to know the thinking of that 14%. How many are so convinced that they feel like gender identity ideology is a truthful portrayal of how things are, how many don't believe that it is true but should be taught as though it is true 'for the greater good', and how many have harmed themselves or their children at the alter and feel betrayed by a return to capital T truth?

This. This absolute nonsense should be no where near places of education for vulnerable young minds. Fingers crossed we catch on soon in Scotland

I'd like to know as well - I don't agree but I really appreciate different points of view

Indeed, as someone who was being abused as a child, sex education didn’t help me in the slightest. She doesn’t have a clue what she’s talking about.

So pleased to see this. There's some wilful misreading of the guidelines whichbwhen read are much more nuanced than some claim. Removing the flag wavers for queer theory, sex work, kink and fetish is an important move. The lack of central guidance has allowed these groups to self identify as sex experts for children and that's why there's been so many problems with age inappropriate materials.

Sex ed should be child centred, age appropriate with safeguarding running throughout.

For anyone who's sceptical about some of this, here's a link to a thread about an appalling website for children in Warwickshire schools that the council funded. Safe Schools Alliance wrote an excellent letter - first post on the thread. The fact that a council signed off on this stuff shows just how necessary these guidelines are:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3712398-Petition-to-Warwickshire-County-Council-about-use-of-Respect-Yourself-and-their-promotion-of-porn-in-Sex-Ed-materials

Absolutely - it is, username acknowledged - moving the Overton window BACK that is being done here and for the best

Hopefully

The thing is, much of the age limits given to the different topics actually link up with what is usually taught, and when, in English schools.

We'd normally expect sex ed around year 5-6. The average age of girls starting puberty is 11, and for girls younger than 9, it is really more appropriate to provide any support outside of a whole class setting.

Children under 9 can still be taught about conception, as it can be discussed "in a very factual, scientific way" (quote from Keegan, the Education Secretary). This is currently what usually happens in English schools.

The proposal states that teaching materials that "present contested views as fact - including the view that gender is a spectrum" should be avoid.

This review has been requested by teachers to provide more clarity on age appropriate sex education, as well as removing campaign or lobby group materials from the classroom.

Keegan also stated that "Biological sex is the basis of relationship, sex and health education - not these contested views"

what i can see on their fact sheet is:

A 2017 study from the National Education Union and UK Feminista reports that ‘sexual harassment is highly prevalent in schools, and overwhelmingly involves boys targeting girls’. The study found that ‘over half (58%) of female students in mixed sex schools have experienced or witnessed sexual harassment at school’.

Data collected by Freedom of Information request by The Sunday Times showed that ‘unisex changing rooms are more dangerous for women and girls than single-sex facilities’. ‘almost 90% of reported sexual assaults, harassment and voyeurism…happen in unisex facilities’. It is clear that mixed-sex facilities do not adequately safeguard females from harm.

unisex facilities would also apply to classrooms, corridors and such as well i assume? as they don't state changing room/bathrooms

their solution reads well though
There are solutions which satisfy both the EHRC guidance and the Equality Act exemptions. A school may provide toilet/sink/changing facilities which are single-sex (separate male and female toilets/changing) and also provide a number of self-contained, floor-to-ceiling, lockable toilet and sink facilities which can be used by either sex. This solution achieves the legitimate aim of providing safe, single-sex spaces for female pupils, whilst also not discriminating against transgender pupils by insisting they use the facilities which correspond to their biological sex. Instead, they are able use the self-contained facilities which are open to any pupil of either sex — all of which should contain sanitary waste facilities

Sex ed is rarely taught in England before year 5, and if it is, would only be the scientific names for the organs. There is no change for this, it just formalises this.

Reproduction is usually year 7 Science, and then Sex Ed year 9 PHSE. Mensural cycle, contraception and STIs are then taught again in year 10/11 science.

The other issue, relating to GI, is that teacher training and the teaching unions are so decidedly GI, that they publicly have stated (in the press and in communication with their members) that unless the guidance around GI is statutory, they will just ignore it.

Following from the Cass report, I can see that the only way to ensure that schools must comply, is to ban it.

If the schools/unions had been willing to discuss, and plot a reasonable path, rather than demanding that GI is the one true way, I suspect this would have been different.