Those Birmingham parents are right Teaching primary-age schoolkids about sexual matters is weird.

[OtepotiLilliane42]

I think the parents of this school were right to object to teaching primary school children about complex sexual issues. As Brendan O'Neill says, the basic biological facts of human reproduction should be sufficient at that age.
Anyway, what do others think?

Something sinister is happening in both official and campaigning circles: people are using children, very young children, to try to reshape adult thinking and society more broadly. Perhaps fearing they will not be able to convince actual adults that transgenderism is a good idea or that children as young as six can be ‘gay’, instead the new moral instructors seek to inculcate kids with these ideas in the hope that the ideas will then filter into the home and into stupid adults’ brains. It is a highly undemocratic and sly way to try to bring about social change. If you want that school in Birmingham to teach children about gay sex and trans lifestyles, then convince the parents first – don’t use the kids as moral shields against what you clearly view as the imbecilic, backward adults they tragically have to go home to every night.

www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/06/those-birmingham-parents-are-right/

how that might encourage a rise in homophobia.

The irony is I believe Moffat started to write the packs initially in order to tackle homophobia.

He's male though so the cotton ceiling wouldn't affect him. He needs a chat with Jonny Best.

Joyfullittlehippo, that I think is the second school which is only 1/4 Muslim (or thereabouts).

This is a chain of academy primary schools and they have tried to push out the same stuff in at least two schools.

FWIW, my understanding is that as a Christian, it would be deemed criminal for him to say 'Islam allows you to do X' in lots of countries. I don't think many Muslims would accept his interpreting their religion at all.

These parents were complaining about the inclusion of homosexuality! It must be included as it's part of society and there will probably be kids at the school with gay relatives. The spokesman was a bigot who claimed it was a lifestyle choice which is complete rubbish.

And it worries me immensely how gay kids (who are already being hurt by trans ideology) are being caught in the anti-trans crossfire.

Agree

There's actually a list of schools in the drop down here

alumrockpcg.org/2019/02/23/stop-proselytising-lgbt-ideology-to-pupils-demand-parents/

They are quite clear - we think homosexuality is sinful, and we don't expect our children to be taught otherwise.

It’s good to teach primary age children about diversity in families, but LGB is presented as part of the adult world (‘some families have two mummies’ where transgender stuff is being taught as part of the child’s world (see the book ‘I am Jazz’ - bear in mind that Jazz’s TLC show starts with a ‘themes inappropriate for children’ warning).

Treating respect for difference is a good thing.
Teaching children that it’s always ok to be gay and that changing sex is possible and no big deal is setting them up for cultural conflicts and /or medical interventions that they are not yet equipped to contextualise. To do it prior to puberty is unnecessary.

Of course gay or gay questioning teens of conservative backgrounds need reassurance that being gay is legally fine in the West, but presenting it to them as completely unproblematic is untruthful, and won’t help them avoid family conflicts/be happier in the long term.

This tries to introduce a hierarchy of rights. Religion is protected just as much as sexuality. Whether or not you agree with religious belief or not, other teachings don't get to trump that right. You might not agree with their views but they absolutely have the right to them. And it's possible to teach about sex, contraception and relationships in a way that doesn't alienate entire communities.

I wonder what the logic was in the No Outsiders chap choosing such a Muslim - heavy school for his project? I can't say I particularly like the guy, having come across him. I think he's being deliberately provocative and doesn't have the interests of the children he teaches at heart.

It’s good to teach primary age children about diversity in families, but LGB is presented as part of the adult world (‘some families have two mummies’ where transgender stuff is being taught as part of the child’s world (see the book ‘I am Jazz’ - bear in mind that Jazz’s TLC show starts with a ‘themes inappropriate for children’ warning).

Excellent point Betty

The forced conflation of LGB with the T (and with the T, the whole gender identity ideology, not just the existence of trans people) is causing all sorts of problems.

The No Outsiders programme is forcing parents - regardless of religion - to object to all equality and anti-bullying curricula because of the insertion of gender identity theory. It's a Catch 22 and policy makers should be intervening. Policy makers should also be asking why there is nothing whatsoever in there about girls' needs for privacy and dignity and for their boundaries to be respected. This last is particularly important since primary schools are currently facing a significant problem with sexual harassment by boy pupils of girl pupils.

Like I say, babies and bathwater.

Of course gay or gay questioning teens of conservative backgrounds need reassurance that being gay is legally fine in the West, but presenting it to them as completely unproblematic is untruthful, and won’t help them avoid family conflicts/be happier in the long term.

Exactly, Betty. At GSCE level, kids follow an RE curriculum that's basically a combination of ethics and comparative religion. It teaches the approach of all faiths accurately. This is separate from sex and healthy relationships education. At primary level, particularly KS1, there is not room for the sophisticated understanding of such complex issues. And Andrew Moffat should not be misrepresenting any religion's teaching to KS1 pupils - even if he, you, and I disagree with it.

Excellent point Betty

Yes, it is.

I'm currently reading the book via google books. I'm not sure why I couldn't access it previously though I've now reached my limit.

The introduction is very illuminating, this did very much come from an LGB background and then the EA. But sex is not used as a characteristic, gender is mentioned and 'transgender identity.'

'Gender' and 'transgender identity' are listed as characteristics that they protect on his school visitor signing in screen, among the others, race, religion etc.

He writes "regardless of your opinion on equalities, if you want to come in here you sign up to ours; after all we are following the guidelines set out in British Law."

He goes on to describe the "Equality Act posters they have on every wall so that when parents collect their children they will see them everyday*"
*
(this is a primary school.)

These have on them:
"(School logo)
We respect each other's race, religion, gender identity, age, disabilities, sexual orientation, and gender. There are no outsiders here!"

The fact he's put sexual orientation on a visible, "weather proofed" poster on a the perimeter of the primary school and inside blows any thoughts I'd had about were they using gender instead of sex because it's a primary school.

So gender identity is being actively pushed as a thing you have in primary school no matter what the actual teaching resources say.

They're doing this in my son's school but I feel powerless to query it fully. I've screen shotted but understand I can't post due to copywriting law (?)

Yes baby bath water but in the light of everything going on regarding the end point of pushing trans identity, blockers etc I feel this is really quite significant.

TBH I think (among other things) he just sounds like a racist who is deliberately trying to provoke his parent community. Really not a good look on a Headteacher.

They're doing this in my son's school but I feel powerless to query it fully. I've screen shotted but understand I can't post due to copywriting law (?)

What are they doing? I don’t think posting a copy of a school poster you are concerned about would be a problem with copyright law would it, unless I have misunderstood something?

I get the impression of a someone with a massive ego who believes that if you threaten people with the word "bigot" you can get them to align their beliefs with yours. Not a great way to proceed.

You just can't object to homosexuality or gender identity without been seen to object to the other. Thats where we've come to.

Lum I've typed the poster out as it's a photo from his book, from the few pages google books allowed me to read.

Thankfully my son's school aren't taking it to the extreme he did in his own school with the weather proofed posters on the perimeter fence.

It's described in the introduction of the no outsiders book.

I completely agree with the Birmingham parents.good on them..I'm white cathoilc ,I wish I had their their guts to do the same

I do query the need to put the posters up around the school perimeter. And what message that sends parents coming in. And who those parents are, the demographic of the school.

And that a visitor (so parents) is asked to sign a page that includes the so called EA protected characteristics - except they're listed differently to the actual Law; using 'transgender identity' rather than gender reassignment and 'gender' rather than sex. But sexual orientation has remained.

The thing is, semantics are everything as we now know.

I'm attaching a screen shot of the example of his schools' EA poster that he's included in the book:

https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/NoOutsiderssinOurrSchool.html?id=3EArDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kpreaddbutton&rediresc=y

Obviously pages are limited. I looked at the introduction as I wanted to clarify how the EA was being used by the book.

I think my problem with the 'born in the wrong body' crap, is this whole idea that some people are 'born wrong'. Is that an idea we want to be pushing onto children, particularly at a time when they are developing real self awareness and are about to come into a time of their life where things naturally feel uncomfortable and 'wrong' as their body changes?

Like, in what other area would we quite happily chirp to children that people are born 'wrong'?

We should be teaching children that they are perfect just the way they are. That they don't need 'correcting' in any way.

The more I think about this the more fucking angry I get, especially as I know that my own kids are hurtling towards the age where they are going to become influenced by this.

Gender identity is different to reassignment.

Is this being gender non conforming? In which case, everyone is different. Stereotypes are restrictive. Every child can do everything.

Or believing you're 'in the wrong body?' Which is the essence of the actual teaching plans that reference being 'assigned a gender at birth.' (1000 dresses lesson plan.)

Sorry my post is more to do with the conflation of T with LGB than the main subject of the thread.