Well done Irish Parents! Protest today in Co Dublin against Trans ideology in schools! Link to video inside!

[Bláthannabuí]

https://gript.ie/keep-gender-ideology-out-of-schools-protesters-gather-in-dublin/

Link to video inside! 11 minutes covering the parents protest in Swords Co Dublin today. Protesting against the proposed sex education in primary schools. There was a small counter protest who had a very loud alarm trying to drown out the poor parents.

Watch the video, very encouraging!

Young adults is 12-17. This is for 17+.

Could you not be more mindful of the voices you're amplifying? If you don't agree with the rest of the politics it's on you to distance yourself.

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/education/2023/02/22/parents-will-have-right-to-withdraw-kids-from-new-sex-education-classes/#:~:text=The%20National%20Council%20for%20Curriculum,identity%2C%20pornography%20and%20sexual%20consent.

This is an article about the new proposed sex curriculum. Hopefully the push back will be even greater.

RTE = propaganda
Gript = legitimate news outlet 😆🙄

@Wonderingiforifnot can you posts RTÉs link to the peaceful parents protest yesterday?
And please post RTÉs link to the book being removed from the national curriculum?

That is caused by a vacuum of more moderate people who won't engage with these points.

When you have people afraid to say that these books, for example, are not suitable for people under 17 because they're scared of being called toxic shits, only toxic shits are left to state the obvious.

Why blame the toxic shits instead of the moderates?

This is where "no debate" gets us. It's a complete busted flush. Nobody is on board with this. Moderate, normal people are coming to terms with it and are horrified. You have failed to make your case that 12-17 year old children need to read about anal fisting and how to upload photos to Grindr and are astonished that parents object in the strongest possible terms. That's your problem.

And, as usual, you're trying to make it the fault of women rather than accepting responsibility for public engagement if you think your ideas are worthwhile.

If you just look at the words "conservatives" and "progressives", you would naturally guess that it's probably the progressives that started the culture war. That's the meaning of the words yes?

Another thing that gets said is that conservatives are "exploiting" an issue like drag queen story hour.

OK then, progressives should stop pushing this stuff, and then conservatives can't "exploit" it as a "distraction". Why is it so important to progressives that they would allow conservatives to use it as a distraction?

Such a shit show.

The issues of self id-ing, then Barbie K, then Giulia Valentina and probably more that I'm forgetting, were left (in the main) to be highlighted by a group of people who have other fish to fry as well, and (in the main) have different agendas.

I am totally GC and support female only spaces and hate the idea of my rights being taken away or diminished to pander to any man who feels entitled to what little society 'allows' 🙄 me.

However, there is an element to this group that demonstrated in Swords that is self-serving and dangerous, and while I agree with this issue, I do not agree with their stance towards immigration, vaccines, chem trails etc. The Natural Women's Council was founded by an American in Ireland who seems to spend all her time on social media while being a stay at home Mumma of two bubbas, and from what I have seen of her on Twitter, enjoys harassing and haranguing shop workers on minimum wage contracts. She is a dangerous person, and now it seems that she has linked up with Aontú, the same Aontú that opposed Repeal.

We (the government, I mean, our political representatives) have missed our chance to debate the self-id issue, the trans issue etc clearly and reasonably. We were so quick,or more likely,stupid to show how cool we were with self-id that we agreed to everything! Now the only people fighting against it are fucking racist right-wing lunatics. There is one guy who is a crazy religious zealot, not saying his name here but you can message me if you are desperate to know 🙄 he is not someone you want to be on the same side as. Neither is the Natural Women's founder.

I am so worried and stressed about where this will end, and on top of that, I can also look forward to visits from these arseholes to my place of work where they can basically say what they want and if I say anything back to them, I will be jeered at by their followers. Oh and they might record me secretly and put it on sm as they have done to other colleagues. That was nice! So pro-female of them to encourage their followers to call the female librarian a hag and stupid etc etc (/s) Very Natural Woman of them.

Before anyone on this thread throws their lot in with this crowd, make sure you know what exactly they stand for.

In fairness no other agenda was pushed in that video. Parents peacefully protesting & advocating on behalf of their children's future.
You're completely right the government has missed the boat & radio silence from RTE
I was my women's rights & single spaces back too. The push back really has to start from somewhere..

The problem is respectable people are afraid to be called bigots etc, which they are with even mainstream middle of the road pushback.
This is allon the activists who put bit the bigots/ farright label on anyone who objects - this has been observed for years.

Its not unsolvable, moderate media should fairly articulate both sides. But RTE, I'm naming them in particular, as state broadcaster, haven't done this.

But my question remains. What is pornogrphic about it and why are people protesting at libraries about it?

@Flounder2022
Plenty of moderates are also upset about the inclusion of this book and others in YA sections in libraries. The HSE has very recently agreed to remove it from the Junior Cycle resources.

Pupils start JC aged about 12...it's really not suitable for this age group and it's nothing whatsoever to do with it being about gay sex, it's just that sort of content - whether gay or straight - is not suitable for the age group. Sex education sure, but this is too explicit and advises how to use apps to hook up for casual sex etc.

From the Irish Times re removal from JC -
"The inclusion of This Book is Gay by Juno Dawson in a “recommended reading” list has prompted criticism from campaigners.
The book, a non-fiction exploration of growing up as LGBTQ, addresses a variety of issues including sex, politics and stereotypes. However, it has been challenged due to sections that provide detailed advice on anal sex, oral sex, sexual positions, sexting and using “sex apps” for casual sex. Age limits for these apps is typically 17 or 18 years of age."

I really question it's inclusion in these resources in the first place and wonder on whose advice it was included. Was it teachers or educational psychologists or child development experts who recommended it? Or was it included on the advice of other groups whose focus is to fight for LGBTQ and who are not experts in dealing with child development or safeguarding? Because the latter scenario - which I suspect but do not know for certain to be true - is actually a very worrying one for parents.

Ok let's agree that the book was aimed at too broad an age group when added to the suggested reading list.

I am still struggling to understand how providing basic information to young adults/teenagers about different types of sexual activity (alongside info about safer sex etc) is pornographic.

I think that, for parents, anal fisting isn't considered basic information for schools to provide. Even to later aged teenagers.

There is no mention of anal fisting in the book!

Grand so @Flounder2022 - I'll take your word seeing as how you have the book in front of you and I don't.

So really we're disagreeing about what is basic information for 12 years olds.
I think descriptions of sex acts, encouragement of going on sex apps - let's be clear, the point is to meet randoms for sex - and the lack of context about loving relationships etc is beyond basic information.

I'd say there's a consensus on that - maybe not. But real dialogue is the answer not underhand tactics and character defamation.

@Flounder2022 I'll take that dad's word on the Gript for the fisting thank you & I would be convinced otherwise unless of course RTE decide to finally produce an article for the nation🤔

No, I have already said I agree that the book is better suited to older kids than 12. There is still nothing pornographic about it and to label it otherwise is disingenuous.

So I have it straight.... You've been linked a Copy of the book so have had the option to read it. I have told you I have the book and have read it and there is no mention of fisting in it. But you take the word of a 'concerned dad' (aka racist, Covid denying anti vaxxer) and will only believe otherwise if RTE tell you so?

We agree on the age group unsuitability then and that's the point people have been making.
I have no problem with the book in itself, but it's not suitable for younger teens. It's not intended as pornography, but more as an instruction manual or guide. However, the instructions for sex that are given are very graphic and explicit so I guess it could be used as a source of pornography if people wished. I have no problem with any of this, just the age group it was being aimed at.
Sex education in schools is of course very important, but not like this at this age. It seems you agree?

Yes because RTÉ are reporting nothing so I will believe that Dad who was absolutely horrified by what he read.
Why are you attacking him & insulting him. He's an outraged dad of two little girls & the nation are applauding him for calling out the grooming for what it is. We can all see the transology for itself. I really hope that dad starts on the women's rights & the GRA next.

I don't know why you think you can argue this @Flounder2022 . The author of the book herself said it is not suitable for children & it was being peddled to 12 year olds.

Well, what counts as porn is subjective, isn't it. You nor I don't get to make that judgement on behalf of society.

So, sunlight. Talk. Discussions. No more of the morally righteous unilaterally deciding what we should think and feel about complicated consequential topics, and maligning those with a different view.
It was wrong when the church did it, its wrong when the progressives do it.

It was not being peddled to 12 years old. Get a grip. It was on a suggested reading list aimed at teachers in secondary schools and is available in the YA section of the library.

@Bláthannabuí until you saw this Gript video did you know who the man was? Because I did and his type should frighten us all.

Can I ask, now you have the book will you read it?

@1Week have you read the book yet?

It was available to 12 year old kids, given the imprimatur of authority as well. It is perfectly fine for parents to question their trusted institutions in regards to their kids.
That's not Far Right, regardless of your man in the video.

Let's keep talking. Sunlight is the answer.

I already said upthread I flicked through it while in my local library. Saw the pages about how to give handhobs and blow jobs.
Wasn't sure if that was the book with the advice to go on sex apps, but I'd seen that promoted in one of them.
So just skimmed it briefly. Didn't think it suitable for kids or young teenagers.

Noted the large amount of other books on trans topics, written by the likes of Fox and Owl and Meg John Barker so expecting them to be on a particular side of the debate. Did not see anything that could be construed as gender critical - but maybe there was - so I'm guessing that the Libraries service are heavily influenced by activist organisations. Which is contrary to what I had always assumed the library stood for, open information (yet age appropriate), neutral, trustworthy, non political etc.