SPHE whistleblower

[TheLurkingOne]

Is there already a thread about this? I didn't see one.
This teacher is speaking about a training session she attended re the delivery of the SPHE content in irish secondary schools. It seems the topic includes teaching children about porn, fisting, rimming.....

I'm all for classes for teens approaching the topic of porn, what it is, what it's implications are and the exploitation that comes with it, what constitutes a healthy relationship, sex, consent etc etc but this just seems unnecessary and graphic.

The later part of the video refers to the indoctrination of children, how politics and education are linked.

I'm interested in other people's views here. I almost don't know what to think. I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of my young teen children being taught these things, but is it me who is being unreasonable? Is this stuff they need to know?

Not sure how to do clicky link; maybe this copy and paste will work.

Exactly.

Pearl clutching the other way.

I don't agree. My reading is most who agree are staying quite because they get accused, as I have of not being focused on the learners. That they will be corrupted. That the curriculum encroaches child protect law.

On another thread, since deleted I was accused of child abuse. Simply because I don't agree with another's view.

The written submissions which were published and taken into account included the National Women's Council, TENI, BeLongTo, ShoutOut and other pro trans lobby groups and NGOs
Yet the submissions of the primary educators, the parents, were ignored.
Marbles, I am interested in your view that the majority of parents are supportive of the current SPHE curriculum. What do you base that on? The evidence of the NCAA submissions would suggest otherwise.

Fire and brimstone catholicism had gone by the mid 60s, and even anyone who grew up with its violent and repressive aftermath in boys' schools (warped male sexuality rather than religion) then lived through the 70s and 80s when everything was endlessly questioned and discussed (often following the leadership of Gay Byrne's excellent production teams on radio and television) and the explicit sexual health education at the start of the AIDS era.

That's the grandparents' generation.

This new compulsory state-set agenda, to be delivered in secret, seems very odd. The dominance of the IT and pharmaceutical industries in modern Ireland gives them the capacity to be more damaging than the church ever was.

@Sunlightinclouds I have spoken to a lot of parents recently who said they agreed and liked the curriculum but felt they couldn't say it openly.

I think I have been to about six parents events since the school year started,and given the nonsense online its a hot topic.

My own experience has been horrendous abuse for holding a different opinion to very vocal voices.

I have spoken to some 16 year olds and asked their opinions. They want more information, they want to be included in discussions around gender awareness, they want to form their values themselves.

Again I am sure I will be told how unreasonable it is to include the learner. But that's my honest opinion.

In the 90s I can confirm there was plenty of shame inducing sex education. My younger sibling went through in the early 00s, it sadly hadn't changed.

Yes there were progressive schools dotted around. But sadly a lot of us were still being given the guilt and shame approach.

I have spoken to some 16 year olds and asked their opinions. They want more information, they want to be included in discussions around gender awareness, they want to form their values themselves.

Again I am sure I will be told how unreasonable it is to include the learner. But that's my honest opinion.

I would suggest you are unreasonable for talking to 16 year old about a curriculum that has nothing to do with them. It would have been much more reasonable to talk to 12-15 year olds, the learners for whom the curriculum under discussion is designed.

@Marblesbackagain whether intentionally or not you have been DARVOing the pants off this thread since its inception. You have made what should be an entirely reasonable conversation about developmentally appropriate sex education into a culture war. Which is really disappointing as all it does is further undermine trust in educators.

We do not live in the past. The Liberal feminist and LGBTQ lobby groups are some of the most powerful in this country. There are openly gay teachers teaching, and openly gay students learning, EVEN in religious schools.
Please remember @Marblesbackagain that kids are just kids whatever flavour they come in. Gay kids deserve developmentally appropriate sex education just as much as anyone. The team in DCU appear to have forgotten this, or like you, have mistakenly conflated junior cycle with senior cycle. It is never 'nonsense' to ask questions or seek clarification, especially if and when mistakes are made.
Anyway I'll leave it at that. I wish you well.

I spoke to 16 year olds about the senior cycle curriculum and the junior cycle curriculum why wouldn't I. I have a sixteen year old him and his friends have very strong held opinions on these subjects.

I am not going to ask random kids 🤣.

No Idea what on earth darvoing is, that's a new one on me.

I simply gave my opinion and addressed the 25+ times I was tagged. To be quite honest I was facing challenges attacks and accusations of having agendas. Nope just a mother, yes education back ground who is sick of seeing some friends being scared for no reason.

Is life better for LGBT young people yes. is it equal? No, sadly it is not in my opinion. The stats show higher bullying incidents and we don't have to go far to hear disgusting homophobic slurs sadly.

I wish you well also

Funny that your son and his friends would have similar opinions to you! I spoke to my own 16 and 17 year old boy and girl about this and showed them some of the material in the books They were horrified and said they would have been mortified if a teacher had tried to teach this stuff in class. I didn't present this as valid research, though, as I would expect my children who were raised in a household with my value system to espouse similar values (not without critically analysing them mind you!) I would assume that as an educator you would expect the same so to present your son and his friends opinions as that of the majority of young people his age, is again disingenuous in my opinion.

Well there were about 15 of them and other parents I knew also asked. I didn't carry out research.🤷‍♀️

Trust me my 16 year old has a variety of views on many topics that differ widely from mine. He is well capable of clearly holding his own opinion. I reckon he has done so since about age 7🤣

Oh and to clarify they looked at the curriculum not the variety of real and very suspect collection of books doing the rounds. I have been sent screenshots of so called books which were when reverse image searched weren't real.

I have spoken to some 16 year olds and asked their opinions. They want more information, they want to be included in discussions around gender awareness, they want to form their values themselves.
Which turns out to be your son and his friends, yet you assume that their opinions, which are similar to your own, are indicative of the wider student population. Forming values for themselves would involve developing critical thinking skills, which is glaringly absent from the unquestioning, borderline religious approach, re gender identity currently present in schools across the country.

I have spoken to a lot of parents recently who said they agreed and liked the curriculum but felt they couldn't say it openly.
Which, again turns out to be a handful of parents. Yet the opinions thousands of parents in the NCAA submissions, similar to the parents on here, would surely be a far more reliable source of the opinions of the wider population.
I think the NCAA relying on TENI, BeLongTo and the NWCI as reliable sources for the development of the current curriculum, is reflective of the bubble that the NWCI showed themselves to be in during the recent referendum, which was completely out of touch with the majority of people in this country and, as @Link3 said above, is a reason why people are losing trust in the people in charge of the education system.

Gender is a social construct . I don't have a gender I have a biological sex. 'Gender identity ' is a theory or belief not a fact

To have a gender is to agree to conform to a sex-role stereotype. A person who does not conform does not have a gender. Gender and sex are different things.

This isn't an anti trans thread.

No one except you has said anything about 'trans'.

I'm not anti trans

Every thread that refers to gender on here always turns into a hate fest.

Correct. It isn't an anti-trans thread. Nor is it anti-trans to not share your belief about gender identity. Note, belief. Not fact. Not science, not evidence-based. Belief.

Back to the actual topic of the thread. First page in you've a total dismissal of this "scam". And yet Norma Foley and DCU do not dispute the veracity of the video content. So what fact-checking is it you think people should be doing?

Just un-lurking to say I haven't abandoned the thread that I started. I'm reading all the replies. Thank you to everyone who has replied and engaged with the thread.

Which brings me back to my original argument... about anomalies in the updated specification which have left the content which would be taught open to a wide interpretation from authors and others...for example the glossary lists sexual intercourse (in all its forms), while gender identity is presented as an undisputed scientific fact.
The teacher in the video which prompted this thread....shared what was presented to them in the DCU course...technically much of this could be justified as their interpretation of the learning outcomes...she did not say that this was being taught in most schools but that it potentially could be..the fact that one of the books has a full chapter on masturbation is fact...not sensationalism, misinformation or scaremongering.
I have the books from all 5 publishers sitting in my kitchen...I was asked to review these last April as the SPHE convenor with a view to choosing which one would be most suitable for our students....while some of the content in the books for other parts of the SPHE course is very good and will certainly engage students...I could not in good faith recommend any of the books or the online resources in relation to RSE...we have hence had to take the decision to produce and edit our own resources (with great input of time and effort) as this is the only way that we could stand over our RSE programme...I know for a fact that many schools in the country would not have the knowledge or will to do this and have thus settled for using one of these books/online resources, hence exposing 12-15 year old students to non-age appropriate material which like it or not has not come home to most parents due to the free junior cycle book scheme introduced this year.

@Concernedspheteacher my understanding is the tools and indicative materials haven't been shared.

Nope not going down that rabbit hole thanks.

I'm talking about the SPHE Toolkit on the NCCA website www.curriculum.ie not the DCU resources...they are definitely available for teachers to access...not sure if they are available to the general public...maybe a log in is required 🤔

@Concernedspheteacher so was I . I may be at this stage thinking of a statement on the senior cycle I have been in and out of curricula a lot I'm recent days trying to clarify questions.