Sexpressions group in DD's school

[malloo]

A group called 'Sexpressions' has been at DD's school running a session on 'gender identity'. Parents were not told this was happening, it was included in a newsletter after it had happened. DD said it was 'fine' but she thinks I'm transphobic so no doubt wouldn't tell me if it wasn't and won't give any detail. I'm going to contact the school but thought I'd check on here first to see if anyone knows anything about this group.

Their website says Sexpression:UK is a near-peer independent UK charity with the goal of empowering young people to make decisions about relationships and sex by running informal and comprehensive RSHE in the community.

It doesn't say much about what they actually stand for but I'm not at all keen on what I see on this page. sexpression.org.uk/curriculum/ For example they have a 'dictionary' of terms that includes such gems as:

Male-to-female. Used to refer to trans women. Some trans women
do not like this term because it supports the myth that they have not
always been women
LGBT+. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender. Variations include (LGBTQ+
(LGBT+), LGBTQIA+ (LGBT+, Intersex, Asexual/Aromantic), LGBTQUA+
(LGBT+, Undefined/Unassigned, Asexual/Aromantic)). Some LGBT+
people consider this acronym problematic since it is unwieldy and, as
our understanding of gender and sexuality grows, it will only get longer.
As an alternative, most people use LGBT+, however some people
feel uncomfortable with cishet people using LGBT+, due to its history
as a slur. Moreover, several LGBT+ people value the ability to express
their particular identity as part of that. Most significantly, always include
the + otherwise it comes across as exclusionary and emphasises
the hierarchies within the LGBT+ community.

So it's pretty clear where they're coming from.

For info, I'm in Scotland, and DD is in S1, age 13.

Hm. I don't know them, OP, and nothing's coming up on a search of Mumsnet.

They are all very young, and it's a volunteer organisation. Seems slightly odd that a school would outsource RSHP, with their existing qualified and safe-guarding aware teaching staff, in favour of a volunteer organisation with little life experience/qualifications.

'every branch requires its volunteers to attend a one-day training courses. This is to make sure they are safe when teaching and to give them skills to deliver a fun and interesting lesson about sex and relationships.'

So after a one day course these students are trusted to have a full awareness of safeguarding and child protection?

'Even if you haven't been trained by your branch to teach in schools, you can still attend the events they run on campus. Branches run awareness campaigns, talks and socials throughout the year which any student can attend if they have a keen interest in sex and relationships education.'

'any student can attend if they have a keen interest in sex'😬

It also doesn't make much sense. LGBT+ used as a slur? I can see that individual identities within that might have been used as a slur, but the actual acronym? I'd have thought anyone who went to the effort of using an acronym like that, including a plus for forgotten identities, was probably trying not to offend.

I'd be absolutely furious that parents weren't informed about this prior to it happening.

This. I would be furious. Aren’t the school obliged to let you know these sessions are happening in advance? I would make a complaint at the very least.

however some people feel uncomfortable with cishet people using LGBT+, due to its history as a slur

Hmmmm … how are we ‘cishet’ people supposed to refer to ‘+’ (I’ve asterisked it out so as not to cause unwitting offence) if we don’t use that term? And of course we still have to put up with ‘cis’, no matter how many times we say we’re uncomfortable with it.

If only we were special.

They do, at least, have a Safeguarding policy:

www.notion.so/Safeguarding-Policy-11373b8b7faa4bb5901eb2006bbc6994

I would probably contact the school, OP, and ask for a meeting with your child's Head of Year or Head of House or Form Teacher. Ask for copies of the materials this org will be using and ask who exactly will be teaching and what their qualifications are.

Yes, what info there is seems pretty worrying. It surprised me that they've done this because so far there hasn't been much evidence of the school or local council pushing this agenda at all. But I will definitely complain about parents not being informed and not having the option of withdrawing their kids from this. I'll also ask for a copy of the materials that were used and detail of what was taught. Anything else I should say or ask?

13? I’d be livid.

I’d ask them for an explanation of all the content and how it is (as the website claims) ‘inline with the Department of Education statutory guidance’.

I’d point out that they are the teachers, so it’s their responsibility to ensure that the above claim is true before bringing the group in to speak to young teenagers. I would also point out that it is ‘in line’, not ‘inline’.

Then I would refer to their ‘dictionary’ and ask where in the National Curriculum it is suggested that we should be teaching young people “cisgender”, “queer”, and “drag” as part of sex education.

I’d ask why there is a circular definition given of sexual orientation.

I think asking questions is a great first step. Once you have the materials used you can ask more! Or, if you have concerns, you'll have something more concrete to discuss.

thanks for the suggestions, I'll get in touch with the school and report back!

You can bet the farm that this would not be happening unless the head/Governors are not completely stonewalled-I would be asking that for a start.

Why would you want a bunch of random kids deliver education about any topic? What a waste of time.

Is it just me, or are a group of adults who are obsessed with sex and desperate to talk about it to children exactly the sort of people that schools should be protecting children from?!

Teachers should teach the whole curriculum and lock the school gates to randoms who yearn to chat to kids about sex. Thst is literally why the school gates have a lock.

‘Cishet’?! ‘Hierarchies within the LGBT+ community’?! What a pile of horse shite. It’s like some weird cult language, no way this should be anywhere near a school 😮

Given OP is in Scotland the department for education and national curriculum don't apply, and it is quite likely that the curriculum for excellence does talk about queer and cisgender...

Most S1 kids will be 12 at the moment.

They are usually well-meaning students but the agenda of the organisation is hideous. I would focus on their attitude to prostitution when complaining.
The agenda of some of their old conferences should be online.

I'm all for a relaxed and empowering attitude to sex, but it doesn't have to come packaged alongside promotion of prostitution and other forms of commercial sexual exploitation which are recognised in Scotland as forms of violence against women.

Male-to-female. Used to refer to trans women. Some trans women
do not like this term because it supports the myth that they have not
always been women

Why have they used ‘trans’ then? Do they know what trans means? Because they’re ‘supporting’ the fact that they have not ‘always been women’ by using the word trans. Have they committed a hate crime against themselves? 🤔

Cishet is around 90% of the world, but in the faux woke world they are the ones with privilege. The language they use turns everything in the world upside down so that now the most oppressed women can be white males.

Here's the curriculum for 'level 3' which is roughly S1.

rshp.scot/third-fourth-level/

There is no use or mention of 'queer'. Gender is discussed largely in the sense of sex stereotypes, and while I may not completely agree with all of it, the curriculum is relatively straightforward and down to earth.

My own personal feeling is that if a school is actually following the curriculum things should be mostly okay. The risks lie in when they get outside agencies in - or if there is a member of staff with an agenda.

Here's the section about gender, or at least part of it:

• Most people describe themselves as girls/women or boys/men simply as a result of being born female or male (so because of their sex). Some people see themselves in a different way because of how they feel about, or choose to express their gender. When we talk about gender, there are lots of different terms people might use.
Let's clarify what some of the most common terms are, and what people mean:
• For some people their gender is not fixed, they don’t want to be defined by being either a man or a woman. They might choose a different way to describe their gender, this might or might not match their sex, they might use the term gender fluid or gender non-binary.
• If a person describes themselves as transgender (sometimes people just say trans) they feel that the sex they were born does not fit with how they feel inside. So, a transgender woman lives as a female/woman today, but was born a boy. A transgender man lives as a male/man today, but was born a girl.
• A person might describe themselves as cisgender if they identify with, or express themselves in line with gender expectations associated with their sex (so they would say their gender matches their sex).
• A person might describe themselves as gender non-conforming if they do not identify as trans or gender non-binary / gender fluid and they also do not identify with gender expectations associated with their sex.

1. Acknowledge again that this might seem confusing some of the time – and that online and when you talk about sex and gender, people can have strong opinions. Ask young people if they are connected with some of these ideas or debates online – ask/explore: ... '

I would add this is in the context of a whole section that starts off by discussing stereotypes. So although I don't agree with 'a transgender woman lives as a female/woman today, but was born a boy', it is following questions about stereotypes related to sex.