School proposing to use Stonewall glossary of terms in RSE classes

[Nonmaquillee]

I have received some fantastic advice here recently about approaching my children's secondary school about their proposed RSE programme and in particular about the materials they plan to use in their session on "gender" (yes, I know)

After requesting three times to see the particular Stonewall materials they plan to use, I have been told that they are "only" going to use the glossary of terms. I have googled and come across this:

www.stonewall.org.uk/help-advice/faqs-and-glossary/glossary-terms

**so sorry but this doesn't seem to have come up as a clickable link

I am utterly bamboozled by some of the terms on there ("ace" - WTF?), never mind the insistence that, for example, "Butch is a term used in LBT culture to describe someone who expresses themselves in a typically masculine way" and "Femme is a term used in LGBT culture to describe someone who expresses themselves in a typically feminine way".

It's clear to me that the glossary reinforces stereotypes and even introduces students (these are aged 13-16 BTW) to concepts where I just think...really...is this a thing? Some of it ("pan") actually makes no sense whatsoever and just reads as gobbledegook.

This is prescriptive, isn't it, and teaches an ideology as fact and as such goes against current DfE guidance?

I am due to have a face-to-face meeting with the school on this issue and want to go in well prepared. If anyone would like to give me any extra pointers, that would be so helpful.

I'm planning to take in hard copies of the recent Sex Matters - Boys and Girls and the Equality Act that Sex Matters have recently emailed me. I've already copied and pasted the relevant DfE guidance.

Doing this for our daughters...one school at a time...

They have redefined homosexuality to ‘same gender’ attracted and not same sex attracted.

So in-effect, telling young girls in schools who are lesbians that they should be attracted to TW.

They also employed someone who did a training course on the cotton ceiling - how to get lesbians to accept the be-penised form of adult - which clearly is not lesbianisn.

Really interesting point - I missed this. Thanks.

I'm doing this for our sons, too, obviously - I don't want my boys dealing with any of this bullshit either.

Here you are OP:
Safe Schools Alliance have some fact sheets analysing some of the dreadful stereotypes and myths being peddled at children in schools by these groups and their resources. You'll also find on the website some draft letters for parents to use tackling many of unsuitable materials that schools are buying / downloading:

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/resources-2/factsheets/#Parents_Guide_to_Stonewalls_Home_learning_packs

"ACE" is commonly used amongst trauma specialists to refer to "adverse childhood experiences". So that's confusing for a start.

The rest of it is typically batshit. The definition of "transgender" alone should give the school's management pause for thought:

"Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman, trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois."

Does the school really want to go along with that?

This is all terminology which, if teenagers were not "introduced" to it, would lose nothing.

SRE of this kind appears to be focused upon foisting a load of self-centred identity bollocks on kids.

I would definitely say something about ‘cis’ being considered offensive by some. At best, many people consider it unnecessary to be referred to in this way.

At the very least, it should be two words: cis woman or cis gender, not one word.

I would urge the school to add the word 'detransitioner' to the list. It always seems to be forgotten in these glossaries.

I posted recently that one of my so ‘s friends who was confidently telling his friends he was “ace” when he was 13, has a rather different view now that hormones have kicked in.

Children should be reassured that not having sexual feelings is normal for children.

@VickyEadieofThigh

This is all terminology which, if teenagers were not "introduced" to it, would lose nothing.

SRE of this kind appears to be focused upon foisting a load of self-centred identity bollocks on kids.

"Self centred identity bollocks" - absolutely.

Totally agree with cis. I find it offensive.

Thanks for all comments so far - really useful. I am actually going to ask the school not to use it at all.

Depending on how picky you want to be, I'd argue that their definition of 'Sex' is inaccurate.

Better to go with OED definition I'd say:

Either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and most other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions.

And, if you really want to push it:

Woman = adult human female
Man = adult human man

(Like all the other names we have for male and female animals).

@HermioneWeasley

I posted recently that one of my so ‘s friends who was confidently telling his friends he was “ace” when he was 13, has a rather different view now that hormones have kicked in.

Children should be reassured that not having sexual feelings is normal for children.

And yy to your final sentence, Hermione: so much focus on sexual feelings. The vast majority of these kids won't have even so much as kissed anyone else yet.

Adults telling children what it is the children feel and how it should be labelled - isn't this a bit of a safeguarding red flag?

Surely kids work some of this out for themselves anyway...we certainly did..

Their definitions are all over the place. The more you look the less sense they make. The definition of "cis" or "cisgender" allows for the term to be imposed on anyone who is "non-trans". So even if you say you do not have a "gender identity" or you don't "identify" as cis it can be forced upon you because you are not trans. Basically if you think that gender ideology is a load of cobblers you automatically become "cis" whether you like it or not. Their definition of "gender identity" is "a person's innate sense of their own gender". But Stonewall define gender as being "largely culturally determined" which doesn't really add up as how can something be both culturally determined and innate?

Very good point Signalbox

In some ways I think, with older teenagers, the Stonewall definitions are an excellent opportunity to create healthy debate in critical thinking and language comprehension.

For younger teenagers, they need some explanation of terms. But these definitions ain't it.

Stonewall lobbied to have sex removed as one of the protected characteristics under equality law.

OP, ask the school if they agree with that. And if they don't, why do they want to promote an organisation who do.

I've just re-read the part about stonewall that safe schools alliance have written.

Everything you need to know is right there, op. It's mind blowing.

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Stonewall-home-learning-for-parents.pdf

Agreed Fernlake. Every parent should read that analysis because this reflects the nature of the sexist, stereotypical garbage that is being taught to children by schools using this stuff. And because it's framed in an atmosphere of "words / criticism are literal violence", teachers are too terrified to analyse, let alone criticise.

This is the wholesale gaslighting of generations of children.

@RoyalCorgi

"ACE" is commonly used amongst trauma specialists to refer to "adverse childhood experiences". So that's confusing for a start.

The rest of it is typically batshit. The definition of "transgender" alone should give the school's management pause for thought:

"Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman, trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois."

Does the school really want to go along with that?

I think Stonewall have redefined the word 'definition', surely it's supposed to be a clear description?

That's a good document Ferndale thanks for posting.

Thanks so much to all of you for your comments. I agree about the “wholesale gaslighting of generations of children”.

[quote Fernlake]I've just re-read the part about stonewall that safe schools alliance have written.

Everything you need to know is right there, op. It's mind blowing.

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Stonewall-home-learning-for-parents.pdf[/quote]
And thanks especially Fernlake for highlighting this part of the SSA information- really useful.

It's really important to question which iteration of the Stonewall glossary the school will be using.

The list is frequently updated and definitions of key concepts changed which is a little, er, perplexing 🤔. Would be a fascinating study to log all the changes if anyone had the time to look through the wayback machine.

The current glossary you have linked has changed definitions away from gender-based ones and now uses the words 'woman' and 'man'.

Superficially, this seems better but as, in Stonewall's eyes, TW are W and TM are M, the words 'women' and 'men' are being used here as gender-based rather than sex-based terms and so do not mean what people think they mean.

It's significant then that Stonewall don't define their use of the words 'woman' or 'man' because in their world a woman can have either a penis or a vagina and so can a man. Which is not the system most schools are operating on and would open some eyes.

Curiously, in the updated glossary, it seems to be only the definition of homosexual which remains unchanged from the previous iteration where everyone's sexual attraction (including that of heterosexual people) was based on gender.

I wonder why it might not have been updated...

The lack of definition of man and woman is problematic.

The definition of gender that does not rely on stereotypes is also problematic.

Plus... the greater question of whether this ideology leads to more harm (long term medication, surgical removal of healthy body parts, sterilisation, longterm mental health issues) than it solves (long term health issues). And if transgender is not an illness, why does it need medical intervention?

ChateauMargaux, you say,
The definition of gender that does not rely on stereotypes is also problematic.

It is worse than that. I had a look. Stonewall’s ‘definition’ of ‘gender’ suffers from the defect that it does not at all tell us what ‘gender’ means; in other words, it fails to tell us what gender is.

'Problematic' understates the case. Stonewall's definition is just empty.

Here is the glossary entry, in full:
“ Gender: Often expressed in terms of masculinity and femininity, gender is largely culturally determined and is assumed from the sex assigned at birth. ”

Let us look at this.

OK, so gender is ‘ often expressed in terms of masculinity and femininity ’. -- Yes, but what is gender? What is expressed in those terms?

… It is largely culturally determined. -- Hmm, that is interesting. But what is it?

… It is assumed from the sex assigned at birth . -- Now you are just having a laugh. What is assumed from the sex assigned at birth?

‘Gender’ goes on to be used to (fail to) define phrases like ‘gender dysphoria’ and ‘gender identity’. Since we have no clue what ‘gender’ means to Stonewallers, these phrases remain likewise empty of semantic content.

And schools want to use this ‘ glossary ’? Seriously?

There is a dark empty hole in the foundations of all this gender malarkey. I advise any school to avoid it like the plague.

@9toenails

ChateauMargaux, you say, The definition of gender that does not rely on stereotypes is also problematic.

It is worse than that. I had a look. Stonewall’s ‘definition’ of ‘gender’ suffers from the defect that it does not at all tell us what ‘gender’ means; in other words, it fails to tell us what gender is.

'Problematic' understates the case. Stonewall's definition is just empty.

Here is the glossary entry, in full:
“ Gender: Often expressed in terms of masculinity and femininity, gender is largely culturally determined and is assumed from the sex assigned at birth. ”

Let us look at this.

OK, so gender is ‘ often expressed in terms of masculinity and femininity ’. -- Yes, but what is gender? What is expressed in those terms?

… It is largely culturally determined. -- Hmm, that is interesting. But what is it?

… It is assumed from the sex assigned at birth . -- Now you are just having a laugh. What is assumed from the sex assigned at birth?

‘Gender’ goes on to be used to (fail to) define phrases like ‘gender dysphoria’ and ‘gender identity’. Since we have no clue what ‘gender’ means to Stonewallers, these phrases remain likewise empty of semantic content.

And schools want to use this ‘ glossary ’? Seriously?

There is a dark empty hole in the foundations of all this gender malarkey. I advise any school to avoid it like the plague.

You’re spot on and thank you for your excellent critical analysis. Of course - in the most basic sense, if you can’t define the one word that is then used in other terms then these terms themselves become impossible to define and thus incomprehensible.

Perhaps the best way of starting off my meeting is to ask whoever I am meeting from the school to tell me what they understand “gender” to mean. If they simply refer to the Stonewall cribsheet, then I will press them further and say that I am still not clear.

After all, I would expect a history teacher to be able to define “fascism”, a geography teacher to tell me what “demography” means, an English teacher to explain “obfuscation” and so on.

Ideology aside, a school surely can’t hand out lists of words to (impressionable) teenagers that are essentially devoid of meaning.