"Sex work is rewarding, pupils told by education providers."

[ResisterRex]

In today's Times:

Sex work is rewarding, pupils told by education providers.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/35cd493a-fee1-11ec-88db-ae1b6b9bdd3e?shareToken=9c11ec9640b2734f2d77adc7f059f54dd_

I think we are all familiar with these "education providers" but even so, it's another shocker. It's already been picked up by the Mail:

School children are told prostitution is a 'rewarding job' by sex education providers who promote 'kinks' to pupils including flogging, beating and locking people up in a cage

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10996893/Children-told-prostitution-rewarding-job-sex-education-providers-promote-kinks.html

You may be right. But I have seen quite a few people who believe that trans ideology busts gender open, instead of cementing it.

Because they see men in women's clothes.

And not the part that says, and therefore they are women.

Earlier thread on BISH and Hancock.

Hancock is mates with Meg-John Barker who is Edward Lord's partner.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3357713-BISH-proudly-supported-by

Lots of links on that thread provided by the much missed R0wantrees with more background on Barker and Lord for anyone unfamiliar with them.

Our genitals are on a spectrum in terms of: how much erectile tissue sticks out (clitorises and dicks and inbetween); where the prostate is; where the wee hole is; whether the gonads are inside or outside; vagina size. Many people are in the middle of this spectrum with how their bodies are configured

From the BISH website

Do you think girls should be taught in school that being a prostitute is a good thing?

‘Our genitals are on a spectrum in terms of: how much erectile tissue sticks out (clitorises and dicks and inbetween); where the prostate is; where the wee hole is; whether the gonads are inside or outside; vagina size. Many people are in the middle of this spectrum with how their bodies are configured.’

These people should be nowhere near children.

No we are not discussing whether what the DM wrote is accurate. We are discussing what The Times wrote, and which the DM covered from The Times.

You are the one disputing what is happening in schools. Yet you’ve provided no evidence for this? If the story is true do you have any issue with the sex Ed class for the pupils?

It’s covered by The Times too.

They report that on the separate website a 14 year girl asks about the safety of using withdrawal as contraception with her 16 yo boyfriend. He tells her that her chances of getting pregnant are small, tells her to use lube for anal sex and doesn’t mention the age of consent.

Helen Joyce has a link toThe Times with a share token on her Twitter.

Students who encounter this person / curriculum in schools are going to look for the website. It isn’t OK that it is separate.

Love the tantrum - it just demonstrates his lack of maturity and insight into child welfare.
Every time these grim adults who want to discuss their sexual interests with other people's children are called out, they tantrum. Every. Single. Time.

They have no rationale, no insight into the real issues about teaching sex ed like addressing the needs of:
Children with varied personal histories, including being abused
Children with SEN with a variety of needs
Children from varying religious groups,
Children in care without a significant adult to process what they've been told
How to ensure children aren't traumatised by information they're not developmentally ready for
Mixed sex vs single sex groups and so on.

It's a minefield but men like him haven't a clue. They're so focussed on their narcissistic desire to share this with children that it becomes about them - and their childish rants about right wing bigots.
(and the Times article has over 1,000 comments and still growing)

Re the sexwork part, this appears to be referring to a post on the website (and not a classroom discussion), the provider has posted this “There are many many people doing sex work who do enjoy what they do — even if they don’t necessarily enjoy the sex. It can be a really difficult job but many people find it rewarding — just like other jobs.". Make of that what you will but he does say "many" and not "all".

There are many things that some or many people find rewarding that wouldn’t go down well if recommended in schools!

I do appreciate that talking about sex for money is tricky and sensitive and it is important not to shame sex workers.

But the current narrative avoids, subverts or gaslights against any talk of exploitation, power balance, some men’s pleasure in disrespect for women, and denies there is any ethical consideration at all. Hardly balanced or realistic.

In the video to which we cannot link, when Genevieve Gluck was discussing her investigations with Glinner, she had some interesting speculations as to why there is a concerted effort to disdain and attack the viewpoint of lesbians and feminists. Gluck argues that previous attempts (1970s to 1990s) to normalise various paraphilia and to remove the age of consent by forced teaming these campaigns with gay rights etc. were successfully halted by actions from women, feminists, and particularly lesbians who spoke up about their concerns, especially around safeguarding.

There seems to be a recrudescence of concerted action to normalise these ambitions again. Gluck comments on the strategy of the pre-emptive attack on feminists and lesbian by ostracising them and "slandering them as TERFs from the start." You can see a minor version of that in the recent sustained uptick in the use of the phrase "pearl clutcher" or "pearl clutching" by new visitors.

The reason teachers can't challenge this is due to them potentially getting the sack, or ostracised if they do. That's what the whole 'get women sacked from jobs' thing is all about.

If it is framed as 'erectile tissue is a spectrum' then it automatically becomes a trans issue and anyone challenging it is transphobic.

This is what gets me. It’s safeguarding, safeguarding all the way - except when those who pose the risk are actually being invited in by the school. Except when the school itself is promoting the ideology that can cause such harm to vulnerable, impressionable children and young people.

The hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance and denial are just mindblowing.

"There are many many people doing sex work who do enjoy what they do — even if they don’t necessarily enjoy the sex. It can be a really difficult job but many people find it rewarding — just like other jobs.". Make of that what you will but he does say "many" and not "all".

When your 'job' is to have sex, but you don't enjoy the sex part of the job, what bit is he saying they enjoy?

It's absolute drivel.

This sort of person seems to confuse and conflate not wanting someone to talk to CHILDREN about something sexual and not wanting other people to do it.

Which suggests a certain difficulty with thinking.

I have no problem with consenting adults doing whatever they want. However, if they talk to kids about their sexual practices that's abuse and a breach of safeguarding.

The hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance and denial are just mindblowing.

This, it's so stark. This stuff just breaches so many descriptions of abuse in the safeguarding training given in schools that I can't believe it can possibly be happening. But it is.

People should lose their jobs.

This world has gone mad, everything is considered okay or normal now. X

Why do some schools outsource sex education these days?

Because the tories.

They decentralised education.

They are picking up the mess they created.

Labour had the curriculum and then created gov approved teaching materials- which were optional but as they were free, most used them.

Sex Ed often had some input from the LA health teams but otherwise it was also covered (under pshe). There were some well researched pshce schemes that were external but didn't really cocked sex Ed (for primary) and were more around self care, healthy living etc.

The tories expected schools to create their own materials which created the perfect storm of teachers leaving the profession to set up their own companies as well as charities and private businesses getting in on the act - especially in the realms of RSE due to the relationships aspect: LGB.

because teachers who've been around for a bit assume everything from charities and external providers is appropriate (as it was from the LEA in the past), and younger ones just trust the system, they have no reason to question it.

@WarriorN I totally agree with everything you’ve written. Margaret Thatcher.

The recent debate that Miriam Cates spoke so well at concluded that the government need to create the content to deliver the curriculum.

Charities are inventing the content or teachers are, referring to what ever they can Google (I've had to do this for my own subjects.)

Labour had done that. Granted, it needed more work over time. But it was all there, for free.

I've watched a lot of hypocrites bemoan the tories while profiting from the fact that anyone can, under the tories, write a scheme of work for anything and sell it to schools.

Total radio silence on this article on both PSHE/RSE teachers' groups I'm on on FB, including the one where Hancock is an admin. Very weird.

Obviously men who spend a lot of time watching porn are particularly keen to make sure this gets normalised.

Such a good post. From the outset, the tories binned all the existing education guidance (reams of it) and replaced it with a couple of pages of text - think behaviour, bullying, exclusions. They subsequently had to rewrite it all as predictably, schools struggled in the absence of clear advice.

Looking at the nature of some of the inappropriate, fetish celebrating, porn soaked materials on offer from certain groups, I suspect a deep dive into the hard drives of certain individuals would result in prosecutions for sex offences.

Going back to the BISH site, it bothers me that it states it is for ‘people over 14 who are having sex or thinking about it’ with no reference to the age of consent at all. In the section in consent there’s no reference (that I’ve noticed) to age and power balance. It’s another push back at boundaries isn’t it, normalising sex at 14. I have a 14 year old, I know quite a few, they are children, not mature enough for adult relationships.

They're operating from the pov that teens are doing it anyway so may as well have access to the "correct info."

And written by a man for men.

There's correct info about keeping yourself safe and recognising abuse and what consent is and what a loving relationship really means, then there's completely muddling all boundaries and throwing the sheep to the wolves.