Jacob Breslow - Schools OUT UK

[Clymene]

Thanks to Helen Joyce for this.

Jacob Breslow, the paedophile adjacent Mermaids trustee, also contributed to the School Out trans toolkit for children.

Schools Out is an education charity.

Schools OUT takes part in research, debate and curriculum development on LGBT people and issues. We deal with the Department for Education, OFSTED, The Equality and Human Rights Commission, local authorities and academies; teaching and other trade unions and any other stakeholders in the education process when and where relevant.
They partner with a teacher training organisation in Essex https://etpscitt.co.uk/

Jfc

Wow. That module.

"Transgender Children" used throughout as a term.

Studying books about preschool children being transed. Nice.

I think that's worth a thread. I'm not going to start it though as my last one kicked off in a direction I wasn't expecting🙄 it's a bit daunting!

Jesus wept, it's bad enough that they're everywhere. But the fact that they make absolutely no fucking secret about it??

What the fuck is wrong with these people who hire them.

Right? Why is it outsourced?? It makes no sense!!

SchoolsOUT link to the ILGA.

ILGA was founded by various men, among them Ian Dunn, also of PIE.

Why have any of these people in schools at all?

Tbh, I am currently fed up about the fact that my kids seem to have social justice groups in every few weeks, but only read one novel a year for their English class. I don't care what the SJ cause is or how righteous.

John Swinney, education minister in Scotland, questioned about the sex ed curriculum.

Fingers in every PIE, you might say.

Why is it outsourced?

Tory ideology about privatisation of public services is my guess. Capitalism. Someone should be making a profit from every aspect of public services then eventually public services are fully run by the private sector, unaccountable, expensive and run for profit not with the best interests of the public in mind. The Tory government can dodge responsibility and their wealthy friends have more money grabbing schemes.

By the way I am not a Labour supporter either. I’m sick of their obsession with identity politics and critical theories. Politically homeless or possibly SDP if they stand a candidate in my area.

This is very very scary, the PIE link.

Excellent thread, so informative. I hope there are members of school SLTs across the country reading this.

I absolutely agree with the key question here: who agrees that these organisations can have access to schoolchildren to talk about SEX?

Thanks for reminding me of this

gript.ie/pedophile-information-exchange-pie-founder-among-the-founders-of-ilga/

Note the author of this article has asked for clarification from ilga as to why they say they are anti paedophilia but signed a letter calling for a change to the age of consent. He has never received a response

The way the man in the audience asking the pertinent questions is shouted down, the discomfort he causes to the woman on the stage who starts moving around and waving her arms at him when he starts going into graphic detail about the images shown to schoolchildren in RSE lessons on PORN says it all.

The ADULTS in the audience not comfortable themselves with this - yet the Scottish government shows such material to CHILDREN. What can the children in class do or say if they don’t like or are confused by the images representing, for example, anal sex?

I’m appalled.

Yes, it is appalling.

Just been reading that another Trustee if Mermaids, Grey Collier, works for Liberty.

Liberty (then NCCL) was formerly associated with PIE.

Info links & evidence on PIE's affiliation with Liberty, which led to proposals to lower the age of consent to 14, are all at iicsa.org.uk

Nailed it.

I'm getting more and more baffled as to why what seems like countless LGBTQ+ orgs/lobby groups are advocating in schools in the first instance - what needs are they actually meeting apart from pushing their own agenda which seems mostly to be based around genderism and queer theory.

Is the same amount of time given over to groups representing the other protected characteristics such as disability or race?

The outsourcing is due to this government's "bonfire of red tape" for schools when they were elected. Much of which they then had to re write as schools then struggled without detailed guidance on exclusions, behaviour, bullying etc.

SRE was ignored and the captured DfE commissioned at great expense their special friends in Stonewall for some programmes and funded countless other groups. No due diligence with an over emphasis on adult groups with niche sexual interests and zero relevant education / safeguarding expertise but a preparedness to self identify as such.
Schools understandably struggle with SRE and in the absence of central government advice so many dodgy groups jumped on the gravy train and started producing the porn soaked, age inappropriate materials that we discuss on here.

JB's comparison of children and shoes is basically a straw man.

A shoe cannot consent.

If you say a child cannot consent ypu are saying a child is like a shoe, an object to be done to, lacking an inner mental life.

Of course we all know for certain that children have inner lives and are not shoes, so QED by his reasoning they can consent to being used for adults' sexual gratification.

(of course anyone with 2 working brains cells and a moral compass knows a child can't consent for entirely different reasons)

He believes children can consent and was involved in developing PSHE materials.

Everyone else involved needs to take a look at themselves.

Right? Why is it outsourced?? It makes no sense!!

Because actual teachers all have safeguarding training now and it was becoming more difficult to sexually exploit kids in schools?

I was asking about the timeline on this on a different thread. I think it’s interesting that after a safeguarding culture in schools was normalised, there’s suddenly this trend for RSE to be outsourced to dodgy blokes whose office is a van with FREE SWEETIES painted on it. I think the people pushing this trend may not have had good intentions.

It's actually bizarre, it's almost like a kind of weird prudishness. They are embarrassed to have what is included outlined but don't connect that this stuff is in classrooms.

The answer given about different parents having different views is interesting. Obviously it's true as far as it goes. He relies on the fact that they addressed experts on where to draw the line, but doesn't seem to be able to address the fact that what the experts say seems out of line with what quite a few parents would agree with.

I am inclined to think that part of the issue is that people who become experts in this stuff are usually people who have very liberal views on teen sexuality.

This!

I have had excellent safeguarding training as someone working in a school. These SRE education packs from organisations apparently primarily concerned with normalising kink rather than promoting healthy relationship behaviour directly contradict what we are told in safe guarding training. Not sure how that wasn’t highlighted when they first started pushing their agenda in schools.

That video of John Swinney is very disturbing. He and the woman who was hosting the session did not want to hear that children were being taught about anal sex by watching a banana been dipped in chocolate with the sexy woman's voice murmuring that only 40% of women have tried it.

And then Swinney had the bloody out an out gall to say that the video did not 'promote anything.'

There's plenty of reasons why women don't do anal sex.

A government study into the sexual attitudes of youngsters found that the overwhelming majority of girls do not want anal sex. And the overwhelming majority of boys know it, but get them to try it anyway.

Is that being taught in those lessons?

He said one of the main issues they wanted to address after the old-fashioned sex education was scrapped, was that of consent. And then shows kids a video with a woman's voice moaning that only 40% of women try anal sex, and showing a fucking banana dipped in chocolate.

Chocolate??? WTAF!

Christ. These people.

It’s far more than “liberal views on teen sexuality”. This is about showing graphic or highly suggestive images to children including primary aged children, such as the image described above by @Datun

This isn’t how not to get pregnant or how to avoid STIs or how to discuss consent - the basic information that teenagers need to know; this is INTRODUCING children and teenagers to niche sexual activities and telling them that some women enjoy it. It’s grooming. That Scottish government man in the video - does he have children himself?

If anyone wants to check those resources, btw, here is the RSHP site, where you can download activity plans and other materials used in schools:

rshp.scot/

Indeed.

What is very useful about this site is that we have these men come on here regularly with the exact same arguments. Clearly dodgy men.

And one of the main arguments is that teens are going to see this anyway, so let's curate it for them in a responsible fashion.

Which as an argument is fine. But that's not what they're doing. They are telling them how bloody amazing it all is.

It makes my head explode. Everybody knows that pornography is harmful to women and girls. The sexualisation of girls and teens is rife, they are growing up in a pornified world.

The lessons about pornography should include all the damage.

Girls do not want to be spat at, or strangled or forced to have anal sex.

One of the lessons was about ejaculating onto a girl's face. The first question should be, really? What the fuck is she getting out of that? That's not sex. That's sexualised humiliation. (And yes, if as an adult, you get off on humiliation, that's fine, it's not the same thing as teaching it to girls in school. And boys. )

I don't know how they can hold both thoughts in their head at the same time.

They know about society's sexualisation of girls at a younger and younger age, and then suggest they have anal sex that they've already been told they don't want.

Appalling how John Swinney and the host woman all but put their fingers in their ears when the man was talking about anal sex and 'facials'. They literally were desperate not to hear it. Yet they endorsed, (John Swinney twice), teaching it to kids.