Section 28 not to be revoked!

[Jbr]

And the worse thing is, it seems 49% of "people" (are they human?!) agree it should stay in place. I was very young when Thatcher brought this in, but I don't understand how it was made law without anyone demonstrating against it.

You would take your children out when a teacher was telling them how to protect themselves from dying of an AIDS related illness? Why?

Saying that, my little sister got told nothing off my Mum and Dad, she only knew this sort of thing from asking me and watching television eg Eastenders (to name a couple). I honestly think she wouldn't know anything if I hadn't told her!

She is straight but it doesn't hurt to know. I remember when some man complained to ITV about Zoe on Emmerdale. How many sex scenes have there been on Emmerdale Farm/Emmerdale since it started? You could argue it is on too early in itself apart from anything else, but this guy and his daughter see Kim Tate in bed with Dave Glover both wearing nothing literally nothing and thinks it's ok. Two women kiss quickly and he says "how do I explain that kind of filth to my daughter"?!

I remember Byker Grove as well. This lad started falling in love with his best friend and tried to kiss him when they went to the pictures. There were complaints! I couldn't understand why those kids didn't already know in the first place!

JBR, why does Section 28 prevent advice on the use of condoms to prevent HIV?. This is standard advice now for all heterosexuals.

Jbr, who has said "I'm not prejudiced but.."? I haven't seen that anywhere. As regards anal sex, the whole body is sexual. Everyone has an axe to grind, and it's natural that someone who enjoys anal sex would seek to elevate it. Still doesn't mean that having sex in someone else's poo is the same as having sex in cleaner body fluids. "cleaner" means the number of bacteria likely to cause disease.
You wouldn't want your toddlers playing with someone else's poo would you, so why are you apparently quite happy that they do so when they're older? Hetero or homosexual of course.

Winnie, the confused teenager you refer to would not be best served by being told that a relationship involving vaginal sex and childbirth is totally equivalent to one involving anal sex, for the differences which I mentioned before. Am not making an attack on the majority of male homosexuals here, merely saying that presenting an idealised unreal picture of the choices available is not constructive either.

Snowy, there seem to be 2 issues here to do with sex education, namely influencing what children will do themselves, and protecting children from being bullied. On the second point, children are bullied if they're different in any way from other children: foreign, fat, studious, glasses wearer, poor etc. Why are you so sure that telling children a homosexual relationship is the same as a heterosexual one will solve the problem? For a start it's not true. If a very fat child is being bullied, do you tell the class that it's just as good to be very fat as of average build? If so, that would seem to go against received medical opinion on obesity. Surely ALL bullying should be tackled with a common strategy to stop bullying, not merely diverting the attacks from one aspect of differentness?

Exactly SML your right, and my policy when in a classroom is to say "I will have no prejudice in this classroom" and I mean racial, sexual, fatism(?) or homophobia etc. I point out that all prejudice starts with 'but they are different it's alright' and ends up with death camps. You can't pick and choose, prejudice is right or it is wrong its not a sweetie counter. I will not have name calling of any kind, ever. That is my bullying policy, taught in the context of Hitler's Germany it has a big impact on them.

The students sometimes reply at this point but my Mum/Dad/Granny says that gays are dirty so its ok to call them. Tell me what do I say when they say this?

One of our student teachers at the moment is gay - what should he say?? Children are not stupid.

Confused gay teenagers will be helped so much by being told they have a 'choice' I was under the impression they had no choice they just 'were'. And if vaginal sex is linked to childbirth, do I tell children who do not want children they are wrong to want sex? If sex linked to body fluids is wrong what about oral sex?

Everyone wants what they belive to be taught. What I teach is that there are a number of options open to people and they must make there own decisions. I talk about decision making, and being true to yourself and about prejudice being wrong. I try to help them become who they are and who they want to be in a sexual context. We are not filling empty vessels.
When I taught that technically I was breaking the law, well shame on that law and shame on anyone that supports it.

Tigger I thought section 28 had been revoked in Scotland.

Janem, Snowy, thanks for telling us what the real problems are with Section 28 when dealing with young people. I have always fallen into the cosy liberal category of thinking that Section 28 is not very nice and wrong in principle without a moment's thought as to how it ends up as a bully's charter, and how it affects a teacher's ability to intervene or put the record straight. I was really shocked by your posting, Janem. Shame on that law, indeed.

Hi Snowy, you've raised a lot of good points, was hoping you'd come back with some experience from the front.
The trouble is, anal sex is dirty and this fact can't be got away from, and it's a fair assumption that male homosexuals may have practised it, and if you try to deny this, you'll lack credibility. But this doesn't give anyone else the right to start attacking someone for how they live their lives. There is NO justification for bullying. That's the honest position, how you get it over to a bunch of streetwise knowall 13 year olds must require lots of stamina and ingenuity!

I think it's a mistake for individual teachers to talk about their lives, it should form part of the anti bullying and respect for others even if you don't agree with how they live their lives campaign.

Re childbirth, I certainly think that children should be realistic about vaginal sex leading to childbirth. There's no 100% certain form of contraception after all. It's a bit misleading to talk about "right" or "wrong" kinds of sex. I am not saying that vaginal sex is the only right kind of sex, just pointed out a few disadvantages of anal sex.

I agree with teaching about options and being true to yourself, but equally, one should be realistic about the implications of the options.

The argument about your child playing with poo is a spurious one. You wouldn't want your toddler jumping out of an aeroplane either, but when they are grown up and understand the need for adequate protection ao a fully functioning parachute you have no right to stop them. Besides which, the use of condoms makes the hygene question less important.

Section 28 makes me VERY angry. As a teacher I see every day the effects that homophobic culture has on adolescents. It kills me not to be allowed to reassure vulnerable and confused teenagers that what they are feeling is neither uncommon or more importantly, wrong. The culture of fear and prejudice that section 28 must be responsible in some part for the high depression and suicide rates amongst british teenagers.

I have deliberatly chosen as godparents for my child a lawyer and a policewoman, both fine upstanding members of the community and, as well as being good long term friends of mine, both gay. I want my child to understand that gay people are ordinary normal human beings. That they have stable and happy relationships, and that everytime someone makes a homophobic comment, they are making it from ignorance or prejudice, not because being homosexual is inherently wrong.

One of the kids in my dd class had 2 mothers. dd and I chatted about it in passing, and I told her that different people had different family groups. Having 2 parents of the same sex, or only 1 parent of either sex, is different in our area, but I would always try to ensure that different meant just that, not better or worse, just different. The sex aspect didn't really come into it as she is too young, but I will try to explain homosexuality in the same way, different, not right or wrong. We aren't all the same, some or fatter. some taller, some good at games, some good at maths. Until teach that different does not mean better or worse, we will continue to get prejudice appearing.
BTW as regards the link between sexual abuse and homosexuality, I believe this is a result of cases about men abusing boys. We should remember that these men are PAEDOPHILES, not homosexuals. Connecting the 2 is like saying I am likely to abuse my friends 6 yr old boy because I enjoy having sex with a man.

Snowy you are clearly a very balanced and sympathetic teacher. If we all had excellent teachers looking after our children I'm sure the loss of Section 28 would hold no fears. However, there's always the worry that teachers might not handle the whole sex education thing well - its such an important area, the pity is some teachers won't be very good, but then neither will some parents. I don't know what the answer is.

However, can I just ask what everyone's view on teaching religion is, because I think it relates to section 28 exactly. I mean I strongly disapprove of religious schools. It should be taught as a subject so that all religions can be discussed and understood - but why should my child have to go to a religious assembly, what right has a school to enter into the personal arena of childrens beliefs. I have a friend whose child of 5 comes home taking that Jesus is her firend and he's going to save us. She goes to a Roman Catholic school and its scaring her parents!

I don't want to get off the point of section 28 as is all v. interesting, but does anyone else think the same about religion. Shouldn't religious schools be banned for the same reason?

Hear hear Batters. Lil, if your friend finds that upsetting, as she is quite entitled to do, then why is her child attending a church school in the first place? She is quite within her rights to withdraw and send her to a state primary, where comparative religion is taught from a secular perspective.

But its the only decent school around! I suppose it is really hypocritical, but when all the good schools are religious, and the government is encouraging more and more, then it leaves the other schools off even worse. The govnt shouldn't encourage this kind of exclusivity surely? What you believe in shouldn't determine whether or not you get a crap education. That really is discrimatory!!!

Snowy, there is a lot of heated discussions going on at the moment, regarding Section 28, teaching of Child Abuse, Religion in Schools and the role it plays, good grief my daughter thought the local minister who I cannot abide was god!. I was married in my husbands church and the minister there is one of the most open minded people I have ever come across, I don't go to church, I don't believe you have to go to believe in god or whoever and he accepted that. The Education System in Scotland is very good, but, we still have some of the "Old School" who think that Homosexuals should be burnt at the stake, which is so damn wrong, bloody old farts living in the dark ages if you ask me. I think that Sex Education has to be approached in the right manner, with no opinions shown by those teaching it. Me eldest niece went to a discussion at her High School, where there were representatives from the Lesbian and Gay community, she said it was an excellent discussion. She said that you could ask someone who new what it was like to be gay, rather than someone who was not telling them about it and one thing she did say was that they were informative about HIV/Aids, peoples blinkered attitudes, and telling their families.

What a lot I'm learning from this board. Thanks everyone for helping me to give my brain a workout.

Tigger, what an excellent idea at your daughter's school. Don't know how old she is, not primary age? Anyway, bringing in gay representatives to tell it like it is, seems to neatly sidestep some of the teacher-in-classroom problems.

Tigger, your niece's school was breaking the law (if it still applies in Scotland). A school in England would be very reluctant to have that kind of group in because of section 28, which is why it needs to go.

Section 28 prevents open discussion, that is the problem. If you want the kind of lesson I describe you must support the removal of section 28.

Teachers (Some? most ? all?) try not to give opinions in these situations, but as I've said promoting marriage at 7 months pregnant while clearly not married, they ask you reply. What do you do tell them not to ask questions?

Governments lay down guidlines but they forget that kids ask questions.

Lil from my experince it's not the supporters of section 28 that are the problem. Some (most) teachers are from ....how shall i put this.. the older gerneration. While I do not claim to be 'right on' and 'with it' alot are a lot less 'with it' than me!

As for religion in school, its a joke, unless taught as an academic subject in which case it is as valid as History and Physics.

Exactly Snowy, religion as a subject should be as valid as physics and history. Taught in a balanced sympathetic way. Not as an exclusive club where either kids are IN or OUT. That's how you breed bigotry etc, and these religious schools are probably the first to BACK section 28.

BTW your school sounds fantastic Tigger. To allow gays etc to talk about their lives to the children direct, is so-o-o sensible. If that what revoking clause 28 means, then I have definitely changed my views today.
thank-you!

My local school and the church to which it is attached seems to take a liberal, inclusive approach to people's backgrounds. There are gay parents at the school and gay people involved in the ministry. And no-one makes a big deal out of this. As Snowy correctly highlighted, Section 28 prevents teachers from answering childen's questions honestly, so hopefully the atmosphere in both places gives the children a constant, positive message. Moreover, some places every year are reserved at the school for local children who need have no Christian faith at all. Recent takers have mostly been political refugees. They are treated exactly the same as all the other children and contribute greatly to the life of the school.
Not all branches of the Christian church subscribe to the view that homosexuality is a sin and there are a lot of practising Christians who feel that discriminating against individuals or groups on the grounds of their age, sex, orientation, nationality, politics or skin colour is profoundly offensive.

But Lil, surely by sending your child to a religious school, you are agreeing to the fact that religion will be a central tenet of that education. That's the whole point of religious schools - they believe that religion is part of education and you can't divide the two. Frankly, I can't believe that someone could choose to send their child to a catholic school and complain when the child comes home and quotes catholic teachings. Are you suggesting that the various religions should have no right to run schools?.

Snowy, it was conducted out of school hours, but was organised by the Elder Pupils 16 and above i.e. the Prefects of which my niece is one. All the kids that were there and I know most of them were very interested in what the lady and man had to say, said it was a very informed and open discussion, also it didn't actually take place in school either, the location is unknown to me and many others, as we still have the "Bully Boys and down right thugs" who don't even have the brains to understand what these people were talking about and I don't think they ever will. My niece has scolded me for saying it was in the school!, it was frowned upon apparently by the older generation of teachers, some of whom taught me in the 1980's!

Marina I certainly didn't mean to offend those who do follow a faith. But its difficult to raise doubts about religious teaching in schools without being non-PC. I know the religious schools tend to be top of the league table, but do you think the government should encourage this segregation. How can it be a good thing to put Roman Catholic children in one school, protestants in another etc etc.

If it was suggested that gays and lesbians should be taught in seperate schools so as they could promote their lifestyle without grief - people would be shocked. That sort of segregation doesn't foster tolerance and understanding of others does it? So isn't it just as bad to bring children up in a mono-culture without much access to children of other faiths.

Thinking about Northern Ireland and parts of Glasgow is a good arguement against segregated schools. Has anyone else seen the photo of the little girl crying on the front of one of the papers today? It makes me want to bang a lot of people's heads together!

At least I've got some people thinking LOL!

Two last little bits, I knew someone who was a Jehovah's Witness at school and believed everything in her Bible word for word including the idea that straight people are better than gay or bi-sexual people. We rowed in RE!! You could argue I was prejudiced against her because of her religion but I said she started it (childish as it sounds now).

Also, I saw something on a website called Urbia I think it was, and this woman on the problem page said "my son is gay, what should I do about it" and another woman who said "my son's teacher is gay, what should I do about it". I despair sometimes, I really do. I think someone answered with "oh no what will you do" and I had to laugh!

Message withdrawn