School not using "girl" and "boy"

[Personwithrage]

My year 7 DC had a session on puberty in RHSE yesterday. As part of this they labelled diagrams of "people with penises" and "people with vaginas" so as to "not make transgender people uncomfortable" as someone could be "born a boy but believe their personality makes them a girl".

I am so so cross.

I don't have a gender identity, absolutely and wholeheartedly reject regressive stereotypes and have brought DC up to challenge them and to believe they can do and be whoever they want to be. I have also always talked about biological reality and believe that whatever you do, say, wear or think you are still a boy or girl as defined by your biology.

Am I over reacting? Is it unreasonable and excluding to expect puberty lessons to refer to male and female, boy and girl? Is it not ok for my child to refer to themselves in terms they're comfortable with? Are there really lots of 11 year olds with gender dysphoria and a sense of gender identity such that this rings true?

@Personwithrage

School have replied and stated that these terms were used to highlight that some children may not identify as the gender they were assigned at birth.

That is exactly my problem and opens a fresh can of worms for me.

They don't need to highlight it. It's a lesson based on biology, not how one identifies. They are over complicating things and forsaking clear, scientific facts for ideological reasons which may impair the education of the children.

[quote Personwithrage]The Brook website has to be seen to be believed.

Imagine being 11 and trying to make sense of this - www.brook.org.uk/your-life/breasts-and-chests/[/quote]

Good god this is insane! Dominant sex hormones! Like 11 year olds are going to know what that means

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BREASTS AND CHESTS?
On this page, when we talk about ‘breasts’ we are talking about the muscles, fat and breast tissue of people whose dominant sex hormone is oestrogen. When we talk about ‘chests’ we will sometimes be talking about the muscles, fat and breast tissue of people whose dominant sex hormone is testosterone, and sometimes using the word to talk about the chest area more generally. However, the way people talk about their breasts and chests is personal to them, and may depend on their gender identity. Read more about gender identity.

It is indeed insane.

The bit about gender identity being a set of characteristics expected of you due to your sex made me RAGE

@DisappearingGirl - you've found even more things that make me cross and sad! Why can't they see some of that is so exclusionary to same sex attracted people. Why is there no recognition that their take is not based on facts, evidence or even common human experience?!

Brook used to be a well know name for contraception and abortion advice didn't it? Now they're so confusing and unclear who they're actually talking about I can't imagine anyone finding them helpful at all.

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BREASTS AND CHESTS?
On this page, when we talk about ‘breasts’ we are talking about the muscles, fat and breast tissue of people whose dominant sex hormone is oestrogen. When we talk about ‘chests’ we will sometimes be talking about the muscles, fat and breast tissue of people whose dominant sex hormone is testosterone, and sometimes using the word to talk about the chest area more generally. However, the way people talk about their breasts and chests is personal to them, and may depend on their gender identity.*

Well I've got a degree and can't figure out what the fuck this is talking about. What does dominant mean in this context? What chest area is more general than the muscle fat and breast tissue? Fucking idiots.

Sorry haven't read the full thread, but this is sadly common. A lot of pshe teachers are tying themselves in knots to avoid using the terms boys and girls. So you have lessons about periods using 'people who menstruate' and 'people who don't menstruate'when they mean girls and boys. They don't seem to get that this will massively confuse girls who haven't started yet, or mean a boy who finds blood in his pants might not realise he should go to the drs. They are relying on the fact that the kids all actually know which category they belong to already, so that they can avoid mentioning it. It is gross negligence when some children will not have been taught adequately about periods at home.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

This is what the school sent me to reassure me that their lessons are based on resources from well known and trusted organisations...

I am not reassured.

What did they send you? Did you mean to attach a picture?

No sorry, I meant the links to the Brook website stating that they base their lessons on it as it is a "well respected organisation"

Oh I see. No I wouldn't be reassured either! Schools have outsourced their brains.

Please do complain further op and follow the advice upthread. We desperately need parent power to stop this madness.

A transboy at the All girls school I teach at had a proper hysterical meltdown on sports day last year when they played "who rules the world - girls!" song over the sound system. I do wonder how triggering going to a girls school every day must be for them

That’s shocking from Brook. Why not even use the (hated and still pretty wrong) afab and be clear to your young reader who you are talking about.

They are relying on the fact that the kids all actually know which category they belong to already, so that they can avoid mentioning it. It is gross negligence when some children will not have been taught adequately about periods at home.

Absolutely. I always think this. It's madness that we're not allowed a word for people of female (or male) sex but any explanation relies on people already knowing it! Fine if you're an educated adult. Not fine if you're a child, or an adult with poor knowledge of health and biology

The more I think about it, the more I find it creepy that they're insisting 11 year olds talk about "people with penises/vaginas."

Having a conversation in a room with a teacher and classmates where you have to talk about yourself/friends in relation to your genitals seems so unecessary when girl/boy is available and acceptable. If I was in a meeting where someone referred to me as a person with a vagina, I would feel more vulnerable and uncomfortable.

The P-V focus is a bit odd and I wonder why it's not 'people with testicles/ovaries" or if going external, "penises/vulvas" instead. I wonder if Brook have any reason to choose penis and vagina over other descriptors.

I wonder whether there's any evidence that these terms are less of a problem for gender dysphoric young people, and whether the potential pit falls of using these terms have been given similar consideration. Where is the research? Where is the evidence? Does anyone care about the comparative educational outcomes?

Increasingly this type of approach shows a disregard for what believe to be the majority view - I am increasingly of the opinion that there are a small number of people influencing these policies. Children are being directed away from biology to these views which are not scientific and which encourage them in my view to move away from the norms. of course we are all different but we are now in a situation where the majority are ignored in order not too exclude the very small minority . The facts should be taught not opinion in these sessions

But what is it these people have over everyone else? Why do such a small number get to cause such widespread changes?

I wonder whether there's any evidence that these terms are less of a problem for gender dysphoric young people,

Totally agree. Unless you believe in some sort of innate 'woman-ness@, the only actual difference between men and women is our biology. Being trans is a dysphoria regarding your body. So why would mentioning how your body differs from what it wants to be not be as distressing?

It's such a problem for me, that it's all based on someone's word that this is the right thing to do. Whose word? Whose idea? Right thing for who?

Why is there no evidence, no references, no literature, no data. For things my dc are being taught, as fact, in school.

They're being indoctrinated- you don't need evidence for that

So scary.

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee I haven't read this whole thread but I saw that you think it's valid to teach a girl who is menstruating about menstruation without mentioning the word "vagina." That's just not true. No if ands or buts here. You're wrong. There is tons of evidence that children need to be able to label their own body parts for their health and safety. How would a girl describe an assault accurately? How would she describe a health problem accurately? Having a hang up about the word "vagina" and passing that on to young girls is very damaging. It's a medical word used to describe a part of the vulva. Nothing scary or rude about it.

This article is just shocking.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/may/30/most-britons-cannot-name-parts-vulva-survey

I don't think anyone is advocating never mentioning the word vagina, just that 'person with a vagina' shouldn't be used as a euphemism for girl/woman.

I'm all for learning appropriate and correct anatomical terms - strongly encourage it in fact.

I'm not at all sure about their overuse in this context though.

Gmom, I think you have missed the point - we are all objecting to the trans rights movement replacing the word “woman” with “person who menstruates” or “vagina haver”. This is offensive and depersonalising, reducing women to body parts. Nobody is suggesting we should not teach girls female anatomy!
If you want to see how unpleasant this twisting of language is, where the terms boy and girl are considered unacceptable, imagine the Head teacher addressing the children at assembly: “Good morning penis havers and vagina owners..” It’s ridiculous and beyond offensive.