I thought I couldn't be shocked anymore (No Outsiders programme)

[LesbianMeansSomething]

You know the No Outsiders programme which that gay teacher came up with all by himself to challenge homophobia in primary schools (and which just happens to promote a lot of the current transactivist ideology)?

Well, guess what? No Outsiders was a £575,435.85-funded project dating back to 2006, which this teacher and other individuals and groups such as Gendered Intelligence were involved in developing from the start.

What they were discussing is worth looking at for yourself: www.transgendertrend.com/no-outsiders-queering-primary-classroom/ but, to quote the article:

"There is an air of unreality about all this. ‘At what cost do we deny children’s and teacher’s sexuality? What do we lose if desire and pleasure are banned from the classroom? What is the place of the research team members’ own bodies, desires and pleasures in this research?’ Reading these questions, you have to keep reminding yourself that the bodies in question are those of adults and the children aged 5 to 11 who are in their care to learn."

Skyzalimit

Non-issue at all with teachers being out at school and the all families are different, and boys can marry boys chat. But that's a bit different from:

the desexualisation of children’s and teacher’s bodies, the negation of pleasure and desire and the tendency to shy away from discussion of (sexual) bodily activity

and

What do we lose if desire and pleasure are banned from the classroom? What is the place of the research team members’ own bodies, desires and pleasures in this research?’

And

led team members to make repeated claims that this project in not about sex or desire – and that it is therefore not about bodies. Yet, at a very significant level that is exactly what it is about…”

And

This thread demonstrates the dangerous trend towards homophobia in this forum.

Did you read the article and the particular aspects we are objecting to?

Do you think children should be taught they can change sex?

This thread demonstrates the dangerous trend towards homophobia in this forum

I’m loving the way that now that ‘transphobia’ has lost all meaning ‘homophobia’ is now being chucked about like confetti.

I’m pretty sure half this board IS gay

I’m loving the way that now that ‘transphobia’ has lost all meaning ‘homophobia’ is now being chucked about like confetti.

It's very clever the conflation of two completely different things in order to try and shut down conversation

"At what cost do we deny children’s and teacher’s sexuality? What do we lose if desire and pleasure are banned from the classroom?"

My children are not growing up in a heterosexual family group and we have been to two gay/lesbian weddings in recent years. We are not remotely homophobic. But that quote has nothing to do with homosexuality and has a distinct whiff of paedophilia about it.

Children's bodies should be sexless FFS

Where does pleasure come into the curriculum?

The aspect of No Outsiders that teaches that families come in various shapes and sizes seems innocuous to me, and is presented on this forum as common sense, although I expect conservative communities - not just Muslims in Birmingham - might object. Timmy lives with his mum and her new boyfriend; Lily has two dads; Ahmed lives with his grandma and auntie.

The part about 4 year olds being taught they can change sex is ... problematic.

But so much else is outwith the remit of No Outsiders, and risks getting caught up in the backlash too. The mechanics of reproduction need to be taught age-appropriately, from the correct names for parts of their body, to information about puberty, to how plants and animals and humans create the next generation.

Respect and relationships need to be taught explicitly, and modelled throughout a school's life. The schools have to deal with porn, since many parents are manifestly unable to.

But what about pleasure? Where, from age 4 to 18, are they taught that sex can be a source of pleasure? At what point are they told that, if and when they choose to be sexually active with someone else, both above the age of consent, it should be a mutually pleasurable experience? It doesn't have to be about love, but it shouldn't be about peer pressure, or boyfriend expectations, or performance, or anything like that. I fear that some girls expect to put up with pain. They shouldn't.

I'm sure mine is an old fashioned view but I just want schools to teach kids about maths and geography and all the subjects I was crap at and can't teach them at home. I'm already telling my 3 year old son stories about a prince marrying his boyfriend and he sees one friend at nursery who has two mums. He is being raised in a family with a mum and a dad but it doesn't mean he doesn't see other family structures.

I was crap at maths and languages I really just want them to cover the bits I can't. Schools have no resources for the basics how can they be expected to do all this anyway? I really don't think they have their priorities straight!

I really don't think desire and pleasure should be covered in primary school, I'm not sure it wouldn't be horribly cringeworthy for teenagers. Teach them how to prevent teenage pregnancy and STDs/STIs sure, teach them the mechanics of sex, by all means but what and who you desire and how to please them, surely that's personal, it depends on an individual and should be what they explore in the privacy of their own bedroom and together ...do we need teachers doing that?

Like I said, maybe I'm old fashioned...it's good to read some background to this OP, all a bit suspect really, hope it gets more sunlight.

The name salkeld rang a bell and I found this:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3298715/Children-young-FOUR-given-transgender-lessons-encourage-explore-gender-identities.html

They're also bullying/brainwashing children with references to the law. Since when did teachers teach children about particular laws at primary school?

"In the plenary session of the lesson there are these notes for teachers:

‘Say,…..”What does British law say about gender identity?” Refer to the seven characteristics on the Equality Act poster. Say, “Which characteristic is relevant to this story? (Gender identity) Ask, “How can we make sure we are following the law at our school?”’ (A reminder: Gender Identity is not a protected characteristic.)"

That's very interesting NeurotrashWarrior. So a teacher named Katie Salkeld was involved in developing this whole thing from 2006 onwards, introduced the No Outsiders programme into her primary school and spoke at a Gendered Intelligence conference in 2010 about having introduced gender ideology to her primary pupils.

Then in 2015, a primary school teacher called Katie Salkeld tells the Mail On Sunday, in response to Gendered Intelligence delivering training to her primary class on trans identities, that she had been uncomfortable with the speaker telling pupils they were trans but, by the end of the lesson, had been completely won over.

to know that some of their classmates might have two mums or dads and that's ok.

Should it not also be explained how "two dads" can have a child ... that it has to involve the use of a female body to create that child? That, if surrogacy is involved that this involves the buying of that child from a female who sold it to those men?

They're also bullying/brainwashing children with references to the law. Since when did teachers teach children about particular laws at primary school?

Only when they are scaring them into not asking any difficult questions and not raising concerns about anything which makes them feel uncomfortable (such as undressing in front of the opposite sex) for fear that they'll go to prison?

Repeal the GRA

"I’m loving the way that now that ‘transphobia’ has lost all meaning ‘homophobia’ is now being chucked about like confetti."

Love this. Transphobic seems to mean that you believe in scientific fact and place this higher than unsubstantiated belief. I'm rather proud to be one myself.

The biggest irony is that if children are aware that same sex relationships exist and are nothing to be ashamed of and homophobic bullying is tackled and sexism challenged - no more than that - it may help to avoid confusion over sex/gender in young children.

Should it not also be explained how "two dads" can have a child

The two dads I know of adopted their child.

So how do we address someone talking about "pleasure and desire" with regards to 5-11 year old school pupils without being deleted, Mumsnet? Or is that elephant just going to remain seated in the middle of the room?

Adults who work with children to meet their own needs as opposed to wanting to meet the needs of the children is a recognised safeguarding concern. Why is that not being recognised here?

They're also bullying/brainwashing children with references to the law. Since when did teachers teach children about particular laws at primary school?

And misrepresenting that law, to boot.

I don't approve of framing primary school curricula around EqA. Equalities law must balance conflicting rights. This is way above the heads of children at primary school level. And, as we see, the No Outsider curriculum pays little to no attention to important protected characteristics in the Act, particularly sex and religion.

Overall, we have a gross misrepresentation of the law. Something which is contextualised in this article's research on the genesis and funding of the programme.

Since we are currently dealing with an epidemic of sexual abuse and assault in our schools and it's therefore of the utmost urgency that we address the protected characteristic of sex, drop the peer on peer abuse obfuscations and teach girls how to assert healthy boundaries and boys to respect them, I see the No Outsiders programme as a gross dereliction of duty.

I'm happy for secondary schools to talk to my children about pleasure and desire. But not primary schools. Children should not be sexualised.

I don't have a problem with the No Outsiders programme, I hear Andrew Moffat speak on the Today programme a few weeks ago and he sounded very reasonable.
Isn't it a good thing that children are coming home and asking their parents questions? It opens up a space for discussion in the family.
I know if my childrens' school was using materials that I felt were inaccurate and misleading (i.e Mermaids based info) I'd feel I could go into the school and ensure that information being discussed was factual, balanced and open for debate. And I'd be happy my children were coming home to me with questions.

I never thought I'd see the day when parents would have to inform their 4 year old children that humans cannot change sex to protect them from a regressive and homophobic agenda they'll be taught in school.

It's not okay to teach children that they can change sex ihaventgottime, no. I don't send my children to a religious school because I don't want them being told a bunch of beliefs I don't ascribe to. This is no different. These aren't facts,they are beliefs. And they have no place in state funded education

Orchid I haven't seen any evidence that No Outsiders is telling children they can change sex. That seems to me like complete exaggeration.

If the No Outsiders program was seeking to uphold the Equalities act, it would need to reflect each protected characteristic in its curriculum. The No Outsiders programme however, sees fit to cherrypick it’s protected characteristics.

Indeed the characteristics which do not fit it’s purposes, sex, are ignored/re-written.

Sex-based biological difference, just happens to be a useful classifier when examining the demographic at disproportionate risk of sexual violence, but why teach the kids about consent, boundaries and staying safe.

I am just amazed that Moffat was shortlisted for an international teaching award in recognition for this dogs dinner of a programme.