"Teachers to tell children Gender Ideology is a contested belief"

[WarriorN]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/14/teachers-pupils-gender-ideology-trans-guidance/

Teachers will have to make clear that gender ideology is a “contested belief” rather than fact if they bring it up in lessons, Gillian Keegan will say later this week.
The Education Secretary is set to issue guidance on Thursday following criticism that some pupils were being taught that there were 72 genders.
Schools will not be told to hold lessons on gender ideologygy, which states that people can be born the wrong sex and that they can change their identity to the opposite sex or other categories such as non-binary.*
But if they do hold lessons on the issue, they must make it clear that it is a contested belief.
In other words, they must say that the “gender-critical” beliefef that there are just two biological sexes is also valid.*
The guidance - which will be out for consultation - will also order schools to show parents all classroom material to ensure they are comfortable with what is being taught.

It's incredible that there are some teachers going on the radio saying that it's not taught in schools - how do they know what's happening in other schools.

It's gaslighting. If challenged robustly, they change the definition of "it". If challenged more "it" turns into something unrecognisable from here that, of course, isn't taught in schools.

It's similar to "there are no furries in schools", that as the conversation goes on, turns into "furries are not using litter trays in schools".

Yay!

It’s infuriating that any HT or educator can say “well it’s not happening in my school so it’s all ok”.

Are they thick, or do they not care about the safeguarding of ALL children?

HipTightOnions · Today 08:23

+ + there's no evidence that teaching is taking place in schools according to gender identity ideology + +

My head would also say this but it's not true, and he knows it.

So many of them dissemble like politicians, when questioned. They deny it, even in the face of evidence from parents who have seen the materials used. I suppose at least parents can now see the materials and schools can't claim commercial confidentiality any more.

I am wondering if, when Starmer gets in, Labour will simply overturn the guidance enacted by the current Government.

Either or both but also likely politically motivated

The same reason some posters on here dismiss safeguarding

Don’t cheer too soon.

Also picked a message saying ‘what is gender ideology? I don’t understand what it is, and as a transwoman I want to be able to explain it to my child’ 🙄

I noticed that, and there was no comment of explanation of what a Transwoman is.

So probably many Woman’s Hour listeners will think this was a woman and mother with masculine presentation, rather than a man who would like to be a woman and mother.

Also, there was no comment as to the comparatively small number of transpeople parents there are, and they will be teaching their children if they have them ‘gender identity’ anyway.

It perhaps also shows the problem that a lot of teachers will be people who have been brought up on all this GI bollocks as young people themselves and as university students. Now they are young adults with careers and in a position to seek to promote this crap in their workplaces.

They deny it, even in the face of evidence from parents who have seen the materials used

I agree.

At s @Vebrithien’s DC’s school, even after finally promising not to teach ‘gender identity’ to the children, under the pretext that it wasn’t PSHE but PRIDE month so it didn’t count, they brought in the book:

She's My Dad! A Story for Children Who Have a Transgender Parent Or Relative
It is actually a fairly problematic book on many levels. But the main point here was the dishonesty and dissembling Vebrithien was put through.

Infuriating item on Matt Chorley/Times radio just now - a Tory MP (Esther McVey?) banging on about how no sex ed at all should be taught before year 5, and conflating the whole gender ideology thing with a general rant against sex ed as a whole. MC easily demonstrated that her comments in the HoC that teaching how to do choking safely and 72 genders were “what passes for sex ed in this country” were untrue, and then quoted some guy whose name I didn’t catch who said that teachers were the experts on trans issues and there was nothing to see here. It was infuriating and I was shouting in the car 🙄

Apologies, in my last post I explained badly: at her school they finally promised @Vebrithien and her group of concerned parents that if ever they were going to teach a ‘gender identity’ lesson, they would tell the parents about it first. ( So n.b. it was not as though the parents had been unreasonable.)

The school broke this promise.

I don’t get the there’s no evidence statement

I mean children are learning about gender ideology at schools, is this really contested?

How can someone make this statement

If they do ban it as the radio news headlines suggest then that’s great

Frankly we need someone centrally to work with reputable experts and create materials that schools must use. Evidently schools are strapped for cash but can afford to spend out on private companies producing this crap! Why is this allowed?

We currently have teachers, some of whom are so unprofessional that they collude with students and affirm you can change your sex and say 'yes, we'll call you by x name and will/lie to your parents. We also have religious schools who won't teach what they are supposed to. We need some adults in the room.

Separate the trans out, don't include it under 'sex' education because it isn't. Include in a section about beliefs with religion etc,

So glad my children aren't at school any more,

Frankly we need someone centrally to work with reputable experts and create materials that schools must use. Evidently schools are strapped for cash but can afford to spend out on private companies producing this crap! Why is this allowed?

Absolutely this. We need a proper curriculum for this., that teachers can pick up and use. Politically and ideologically motivated groups should have not role in teaching in schools.

This issue is going to be discussed on Jeremy Vine on R2 at 12 if anyone's interested

Separate the trans out, don't include it under 'sex' education because it isn't. Include in a section about beliefs with religion etc Also agree with this.

Selective memory!
Until 2022, Ofsted were downgrading primary schools for (amongst other things) not teaching gender identity. Then complaints from Stonewall to Ofsted complaining they weren't talking enough to primary children about this were leaked to the Telegraph.
As soon as an embarrassed Ofsted were outed for taking directions from Stonewall, they abandoned being a diversity champion & did a silent reverse ferret. Until then they were actively telling all schools to teach this nonsense.

Unbelievable that Headteachers have no memory of all this:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/06/18/ofsted-cites-lack-gender-identity-lessons-factor-primary-school/

And honestly, speaking as a school governor, schools cannot afford these private companies and the only reason they're using them is because teachers are so stretched. It's the perfect storm for bad actors to insinuate their way into schools. It's a safeguarding risk.

Something that is freely available from government would be much better and ensure there is equality among what is taught to students as well. It is not fair that some students are told utter politically motivated lies or - in the worst case - inappropriate sexual content that would be considered abusive under KCSIE.

Christ on a bike that Jeremy Vine show was terrible.
Steve Chalke was brought on to advocate for showing porn to kids as far as I can tell - because he was shown inappropriate sexual material age 8 we need to talk about sex to all 8 year olds. Just because he was subject to a safeguarding failure we should just throw safeguarding out the window? Yeah, not at all dodgy. Vine was useless, and Chalke just talked over the woman trying to give the other view. Complete bollocks.

I see you Steve Chalke, and I don't trust you.

He also said all children are on the internet all the time - well, I have no doubt that might suit Chalke but that's utter bollocks which Vine didn't push back against. There's a growing movement not to allow smartphones for children and I don't know a single primary aged child who has access to the internet without an adult present. Neither of my children had / have internet connected devices until the age of 12. And even then I have strict restriction and a way I can monitor usage remotely.

Most teachers know children having unfettered access to the internet is a big safeguarding red flag - particularly at primary.

It's also as if Chalke has lived under a rock recently (hmm?) with no knowledge of the Online safety act and all the charities and organisations pushing for greater controls on children's internet usage. The work of parents like Ian Russell and Esther Ghey to restrict social media access / online access to children.

I hate this 'oh they're going to be exposed to the WORST POSSIBLE PORN/ THINGS online anyway so let's GET IN EARLY!' approach. Anyone saying this needs their hard drive checking.

No, many - I would argue most (particularly at primary age) children are NOT exposed to this stuff at a young age and if you introduce it to THEM you are committing child abuse.

BBC love Steve chalke

Very few people are saying they shouldn't be told scientific facts about reproduction and puberty at the end of primary (whether by parents or the school). What they're arguing about is all the other crap that has gone on.

It was such a journalistic bin fire. Lack of understanding of basic facts about what actually happens and a non -realistic polarisation of debate.

One line of argument beloved of those wanting to break down boudaries around children is to say that if a safeguarding measure cannot be guaranteed as being 100% effective in all circumstances, you might as well put it in the bin.

Then an offence was committed. Is this bloke arguing for the repeal of the Sexual Offences Act? And why?

While the gender stuff is encouraging, I'm very much concerned about other bits such as contraception not being taught until aged 13. There's been a line for decades that some like to push that if you talk about contraception then young people will start to have sex. This kind of attitude contributed to the U.K. having high rates of teenage pregnancies in the 1980s for example.