DM Article - being anti-wife-beating is dangerous feminism

[PerArduaAdNauseum]

"Pupils as young as five will be taught about the evils of 'wife beating' and the need to form healthy relationships.

The lessons are part of a controversial drive, unveiled today, to reduce violence against women and young girls.

They will include teaching boys that they must not beat their partners or any other female.

Last night, critics warned that ministers are cramming the already over-stuffed National Curriculum with lessons that should be taught in the home or in the community."

Here

Sorry for linking to the Hate Mail, but followed a tweeted link and was so appalled I'm actually in the process of commenting on their website - once I've breathed in and out a few times...

As the comments include: "This is the reason this country is in the state that it is.
Because of feminism... This woman is an idiot, can she not realise it is people like her have broke-up the family unit . children have no respect for their famillies or other people, and girls are the worst these days for violence.

Now can we please remove this lot freaks with their so-called ideology NOW and give this country back to the people of this land.

• Lydia, manchester uk, 05/8/2009 09:20"

Maybe some of you would like to join me?

My 5 year old was told all about Jesus, God, cruxifixion (in all it's glory) at a non-denominational state school in Scotland. It is all part of the national curriculum.

If they can teach him something that I personally think is a load of twaddle they might also have time to teach him that it isn't nice for adults to hit each other.

Well I thought this thread was about five year olds? Obviously secondary school children would/ should be taught a wide range of subjects.

In an ideal world primary children would learn a wider base such as history and geography, as per when I was at school, but alas the teachers are saying they do not have the time to teach the basics, let alone history, so why should they waste that time teaching five year olds about relationships that can and should be taught in secondary school?

Of course, if we could bring ourselves to outlaw smacking (children and boxers being the only people in our society who can legally be hit) then it would all be MUCH simpler - we would be able to teach "all hitting is wrong, people should solve their problems without using violence"

it's all about respect!

[wooden spoon]

No greensleeves actually my children's school teach the wider range of subjects and do not fill the children's head full of twaddle they need not concern themselves with at that age. Unlike state education.

my children (reception and year 1) cover a massive range of topics - they are taught history, geography, art, music, drama, lots of different sports, cookery, textiles, PHSE - AND the children are thriving in literacy and numeracy

and I didn't even have to open my cheque book

Sonic - the DM made it about 5yos - it's actually about the broad curriculum. And I hope it is a broad curriculum all the way through...

Sonic - can you be specific about what you mean by twaddle please?

My children are taught, English, Math, Science, French, Italian ( choosen ), Latin ( Hmm) History, Geography, Art, Textiles, ITC advanced, Music (piano, violin and drums ) sports include tennis, swimming, gym, music motivation, football, netball, skiing and volleyball (cricket optional)amoungst other optional activities, they have a wonderful SEN programme with one to one coaching and a child psycologist on hand at all times, as well as a nurse and no point in not opening your cheque book, you can't take it with you and a good life insurance policy will leave the children financially secure.

my 5 and six year old do all of those things apart from Italian (which I don't think is necessary at that age) skiiing (hahahahha) and Latin ()

ditto the fantastic SEN provision (my ds1 has SEN) which is backed up by a brilliant SEAL programme, nurture groups and individual teaching offered for a range of reasons and a wonderful switched on PHSE programme which enriches all of their lives and development

they are also coexisting with children from a realistic social mix rather than a weird little microcosm in which socially paranoid and snobbish parents have bought their children a (sadly temporary) ticket out of the real world

your assumptions about state education are just plain wrong

but on the main topic - apart from liberal use of terms like "twaddle", you haven't produced any arguments against teaching primary school children about adult relationships and gender relations

Yes per, twaddle is the rights and responsibilites agenda, being a good citizen in this communist labour controlled state.

In law children alledgedly have rights, in reality (as per greensleeves post about smacking) they do not.

My 8 yr old has all that at his state school, apart from Italian, they do French and Mandarin instead.

So you're against discussing citizens responsibilities in an open forum?

Are we speaking of us discussing 'citizens' responsibilities or five year olds discussing them?

I'm talking of school-age children discussing them, yes.

Greensleeves,

Why should a five year olds head be filled with things better left to secondary school?

The trouble with todays society as opposed to when we were children is that our children are expected to be wrapped in cotton wool for childlike activities ( climbing tree's, playing conkers etc) and yet thrust into adulthood with issues of responsibilities and relationships.

Yes Per, for certain issues, on a classwide basis there is no need for children to discuss certain things.

If they're certain things than can you be specific about which things they are?

Well I have no idea what the Labour party has on it's agenda at the moment, but certainly not daddy hitting mummy, or the other way round as one in 6 men are apparently sufferers of DV.

Whatever next? Teaching five year olds about PMS incase mummy gets cranky once a month, or when daddy get's to a certain age he will buy a sports car or motorbike and may have an affair, but don't panic kids, this is all quite natural evolution for parents to go through.?

So you're objecting without researching it for yourself? And pulling random extreme 'suggestions' out of the air? And where on earth do you get your 1 in 6 men suffer DV statistic?

This thread saddens me greatly, and actually highlights why teaching young children about domestic violence and attitudes to women is so important.

Agree Jazzicatz - be nice if we could teach them how to research and present an argument properly as well

Mensaid, and research statistics of the government, and I believe womansaid also had an article on it in their subscription pack?

As for 'researching' what five year olds are subjected too in schools nowadays I have no need for that, my children are not being brainwashed by labour dogma.

We were speaking of the OP, which is teaching 5 year olds about DV, not 'everything' else, therefore I have no need to research anything of the sort.

Just because you were hoping I'd come up with some issue you could get your teeth into.

There is Home Office research which states that 1 in 6 men are victim to dv, but we know that the violence is rarely as violent, is often in response to violence perpetrated against the female partner, and is not often a repeat victimisation. Whilst this does not negate their experiences, research suggests that dv is 96% perpetrated by men against women.

The OP is not about teaching 5yos about DV. It is about the appallingness of the DM article in it's presentation about what actually looks to be a good thing.

Agree Jazzicatz - according to course I went on recently, research suggests that half of the DV incidents reported by men are occasioned by the women lashing out after repeated instances of abuse against her.