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.

I think that the combination of the amount of teachers and parents who have read the material, and expressed concern with it, should be enough to pause this.

Instead, they are being presented as old fashioned, conservative, sex scared people, and that speaks very loudly indeed.

A fairly shocking read about the views of Prof EJ Renold, one of the invited contributors to the DCU SPHE teacher training. I feel fairly sick reading this.
https://gript.ie/on-dcus-sphe-course-prof-who-challenges-childrens-presumed-sexual-innocence/

"According to the professor “discourses of innocence profoundly endanger children” and that “such is the denial of children being sexually aware that any early interest in sex is interpreted as a warning sign that the child has been sexually abused.” Sexual innocent is, the professor quotes “something that adults wish upon children, not a natural feature of childhood itself.”

"She has written that presumptions of innocence in children were used to legitimate “whiteness”, “the family” and “hetronormativity” – and that thinking of childhood as being antithetical to sexuality was a “white, middle-class” concept.

" Age and maturity – in relation to primary school children – are considered social constructs in Renold’s writings."

The article also says

"Each key finding [of her book] is selected specifically to challenge the often heteronormative, highly gendered and ageist assumptions of young children’s presumed sexual innocence in the wider media and current UK sex education policy and guidance”, she says.
Renold writes, also adding that “one of the projects of this book is to encourage what could be described as a ‘queering’ of childhood"

That is a sinister individual. I would very much like to know who decided she should be invited to propagandise for sexualising Irish children.

Yes, I think reassurances of the curriculum being age appropriate falls hollow if the experts who decide what the parameters of age appropriateness are, share similar views as this Professor. That article is a very disturbing read.

JFC who is responsible for having this person as a speaker. This is utterly indefensible and heads should roll.
I am not a believer of censorship and limiting free speech because I actually think it’s a good thing when individuals reveal themselves for who they are. It gives the rest of us a chance to avoid people like this.

Again the curriculum is published the DCU material is not the curriculum. Conflating the two is inaccurate.

That is inaccurate Marbles, as has already been pointed out to you by other posters.
I was inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt earlier Marbles but, at this point I would agree with the poster who said you have been DARVOing the entire thread.
Reading the views of the Professor in that article was just sickening and anyone who cannot see the serious issues that are associated with what was involved in the DCU training is beyond reasoning with.

Read the actual curriculum and show me where the material you are talking is ? If I am so called darvoing????

The curriculum is published, it is in black and white. Where is the learning outcomes and topics referenced??

Big reveal, they aren't there.

@Marblesbackagain
Forget about pointing to the curriculum. The curriculum is not the educational material. In the same way that the "other" curriculum didnt include material or references that portrayed 'traditional' Irish people as bacon eating, tree cutters, living like pigs but that's what was developed to deliver in classrooms to fulfil said curriculum requirements.

So if you want to convince us provide a link to the actual material to be delivered so that we can see that what has been reported is wrong.

I have access to same curriculum as you do. The curriculum is delivered through indicative content mapped and aligned to the curriculum.

Exactly how on earth is the curriculum responsible for an independent publisher? Anyone can produce a book.

The material was ridiculous but the learning outcome was aligned to the curriculum.

The book was produced as requested to deliver the curriculum. That has been confirmed and it has been withdrawn.

So in exactly the same way in this discussion its foolish to try to shut down the discussion about this SPHE material by pointing to the curriculum. Of course it won't include any of this level of detail.

Anytime open questions are shutdown like they have been on this thread makes me wonder. If there's nothing of concern then publish the DCU material.

Well said @Ohohohohohohohohohohohohohohoh

Time to publish the bloody thing.

Renold's point (presumably influenced by Foucault) about children being potentially sexually active, and developed societies suppressing that artificially is quite true. They are also potentially economically active, and we suppress that as well. My mother had to work in the fields in the 1930s, many children did. In what Renold would now describe as the 'white' rich world children used to work down mines and in factories and in prostitution. In many parts of the world they still do.

Our society has suppressed those aspects of children's lives.

I'm very glad it has, and would like to see that protection and promotion of a privileged artificial 'childhood' where learning and play and - yes - innocence - are something every human has a chance to experience, not just those from rich families.

I can see why the porn industry, and men like Foucault who enjoyed sex with children under that pesky arbitrary age of consent object to that ambition. I can't see why anyone in the Irish education system is going along with that objection, even at a time when previous abusive practices in Irish schools and sports are in the spotlight yet again.

It's soooo ironic that with all the talk of casting off history and religion for a new age of openess and ability to question and have control over self and your kids that actually NOTHING has changed, we've just replaced religion with a new agenda. Instead of being castigated and told you are wrong and toe the line from a pulpit in the bad old days you are belittled and criticised for daring to ask what your kids will be shown on line in discussions like this. On a positive at least can post anonymously and find there are a few of us out there!!

I haven't posted on this topic, I am following but this popped up. I have a very vulnerable SN niece who will be in these classes next year.

gript.ie/fianna-fail-td-calls-for-norma-foley-to-withdraw-sphe-material-immediately/

I know not many like Gript so also this

www.leinsterexpress.ie/news/local-news/1626259/laois-minister-brands-explicit-sphe-material-a-disgrace.html

Love or hate gript, they are the only ones who will pursue issues that others shy away from.
Ben Scallen deserves credit here for not allowing Norma Foley, the Minister for Education, sidestep the questions on the SPHE curriculum. Well worth a watch because no other journalist will ask these questions.
https://x.com/griptmedia/status/1851665405665792302?t=pGM45ZUN_Jsi_YAYE9a18w&s=19