Statutory guidance on RSE and health education now out from DfE

[Barbie222]

Apologies if there’s a thread running already - the DfE statutory guidance on relationships and sex education is out today: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relationships-education-relationships-and-sex-education-rse-and-health-education

This specific piece of guidance was interesting:

67. Pupils should also be taught the facts and the law about biological sex and gender reassignment. This should recognise that people have legal rights by virtue of their biological sex which are different from the rights of those of the opposite sex with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Pupils should also be taught to recognise that people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, as with the other protected characteristics, have protection from discrimination and should be treated with respect and dignity.

68. In teaching this, schools should be mindful that beyond the facts and the law about biological sex and gender reassignment there is significant debate, and they should be careful not to endorse any particular view or teach it as fact. For example, they should not teach as fact that all people have a gender identity. Schools should avoid language and activities which repeat or enforce gender stereotypes. Schools should be mindful to avoid any suggestion that social transition is a simple solution to feelings of distress or discomfort.

69. Schools should encourage young people to consider how to express their views while remaining respectful of the opinions of others. Schools should be clear that bullying or disrespectful language or behaviour is never appropriate. * *

70. Where schools decide to use external resources, they should avoid materials that use cartoons or diagrams that oversimplify this topic, that could be interpreted as being aimed at younger children, or that perpetuate stereotypes or encourage pupils to question their gender. Schools should consult parents on the content of external resources on this topic in advance and make all materials available to them on request as set out in the section on openness with parents.

It’s great that the TRA’s are seeing this as a win. That will nudge the hardline schools to toe the line without parents and women’s rights groups dragging them into line.

I work in schools and think the guidance provides the direction needed to bring back sanity.

Happy Days!

That will cone

Secondary schools will also now include lessons on incel culture, including how a piece of content online can impact a person’s understanding of sexual ethics and behaviour, as well as increasing awareness of AI, deepfakes and how pornography links to misogyny.

^ Surprised to see that in the gov link. Does this mean that "sex work is work" will no longer be encouraged for broke uni (female only) students like it was a few years ago?

A timely piece from Transgender Trend highlighting how Jigsaw (one of the main resources for primary PSHE) uses a trans activist approach to teaching gender identity. They've got hold of the hidden teaching notes for lessons for 10-11-year-olds and evidence that the resources are not compliant with the Cass Review, KCSIE 2024 and the 2025 Supreme Court ruling on the definition of sex in the Equality Act.

I know we get lots of questions from parents about how Jigsaw tackle gender identity so this is well worth a read.

Hopefully the new DfE guidance will stop this gaslighting of children in its tracks:

www.transgendertrend.com/jigsaw-hidden-agenda-primary-schools/

This is so important. Not just weeding out the literature deliberately misleading children but removing the sticky hands of all the dodgy adult groups who've been able to sell themselves and their products to schools in the name of "inclusion"

I feel quite emotional. I have been battling this for so long in school; I'd almost given up believing we'd manage to make a change.

yes to both your posts @MrsOvertonsWindow

The issue here is that not all teachers working at the chalk face will read these guidelines. And could bring any book into school to read to their class.

we do actually need to have widely shared books that are against these guidelines known about for use in schools

70. Where schools decide to use external resources, they should avoid materials that use cartoons or diagrams that oversimplify this topic, that could be interpreted as being aimed at younger children, or that perpetuate stereotypes or encourage pupils to question their gender. Schools should consult parents on the content of external resources on this topic in advance and make all materials available to them on request as set out in the section on openness with parents.

I like this. Bye bye, Genderbread Unicorn. Off you fuck, Gender Spectrum Barbie and Action Man.

Bee you have used a homophobic slur, please don't.

Most people haven't even heard the term gender identity, let alone think they have one. I know you need people to play along with your homophobic and misogynistic belief system but a feminist space is entirely the wrong place.

67. Pupils should also be taught the facts and the law about biological sex and gender reassignment. This should recognise that people have legal rights by virtue of their biological sex which are different from the rights of those of the opposite sex with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Pupils should also be taught to recognise that people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, as with the other protected characteristics, have protection from discrimination and should be treated with respect and dignity.

If schools have to teach that people have rights by virtue of their biological sex, it is no longer possible to abolish single sex toilets in school (not that it was probably legal before).

It means that there's issues here with those who have socially transitioned and immediately get sucked into this.

I will be checking my school as their is a gingerbread man bullshit in their statutory stuff.

We have two members of staff with trans children so that could get interesting.

This very much feels like a MumsNet working group, similar to the NHS one - to request details from schools, review them and report them for breeches?

As luck would have it, I had a meeting at school today with a member of the senior leadership team and the main senior contact in the Resourced Provision that my daughter attends.

I've written previously about how frustrating conversations with senior leadership (including the DSL) have been and also about how the majority of my conversations with the Resourced Provision lead have been positive. I've been increasingly impressed with the senior leader that I met today. It's highly unlikely that he'll have influence over the rest of the leadership team but it's still helpful to have these conversations in relation to my daughter and how vulnerable she is to autism-related puberty distress being conflated with gender identity, given his position in the school in relation to my daughter.

The topic of RSHE materials had already been discussed previously by me with this senior leadership member, so it was perfect timing.

I asked them both if it was clear who owned the definition of "fact" and what went "beyond fact" regarding biological sex. The law on this is clear, as determined by the SC but what about the facts if some people hold a belief that contradicts what we know about biology?

I gave an example where a Christian believes that it's possible for conception to happen without sperm. So is it now a fact that this is possible in exceptional circumstances (via divine intervention) or is this "beyond fact"? They agreed that this was unclear.

Obviously Christianity has settled this debate some time ago and I would anticipate that the majority of Christians would accept that their belief/faith goes "beyond facts".

But I'm assuming that many schools, likely including the one my children attend, will obfuscate and deflect on what is a fact when it comes to (biological) sex versus gender identity. For example, it will undoubtedly be argued that even if it is immutable and binary in law, as per the SC judgement, there is "no consensus" on this being an actual fact in science. DSDs and "intersex" pseudoscience will be wheeled out until enough people are confused about what is an actual fact. We've seen it already with Caster Semenya and Imane Khelif, for example.

Obviously the public will eventually do a collective eye-roll the longer this goes on but until then, we're going to see a lot of "it's all so difficult and nuanced to understand what the facts are around biological sex", I'm sure. Let alone what is then "beyond fact".

This guidance is statutory from September 2026, although schools can change their delivery earlier if they are ready.
Given that it has been released in the last week of term, we have read it, talked about incorporating some of the new material, and will review properly next term.

" For example, they should not teach as fact that all people have a gender identity."

I don't see why they even have to mention GI, it's a political ideology, schools are for education not indoctrination. The sooner schools stop shoe horning it into everything, the sooner it will all be forgotten about.

I mentioned it to an slt and she had no clue it was out.

Schools dont need to have read it yet. They have a year to implement it. Rushing at things does not make for good curriculum development.
It's the last full week of the school year. Things are busy. I've read it because I'm curriculum lead.

Principles in English law fall under understanding citizenship. The concept of the law needing to be just and fair and transparent enough for the average man on the street to understand and comply with is a long established one.

Therefore the point of how the average person would understand their biological sex and the biological sex of others is the baseline here. If we see this go to court it's almost certainly where it's going to fall.

Thus ideas about sex being complex fall apart - what your original birth certificate said is sufficient.

The only exception to this is where you do have someone with a diagnosis of chromosome abnormality - which is pretty easily spotted by mid teens. This absolutely does not apply to someone claiming trans status and has never had a medical reason to doubt their original birth certificate was incorrect.

If you have a biological child you know your sex. You know which gametes you produce. That's a reasonable understanding if your sex.

If something in law so universal can't easily be understood by the average person then the law is badly written. That is not the case here though.

Find some references to this principle and ask why it's not being taught. I'm fairly sure I learnt about it around GCSE level from school.

That looks good to me. I’ll be interested to see how my teacher friend who’s a huge trans ally reacts to it 🤔

No we do NOT have a gender 'identity'. The only people who believe we have a 'gender identity' are misogynistic males cosplaying as women through sex stereotypes.

I'd like to add to this thread a judicial review that I reckon is a game changer in rooting out queer theory political activism from schools. Yesterday a JR ruled that Pride was political activism and that Northumbria police should not have been marching there - as it was a political protest and the police are legally required to be politically impartial.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14911965/Police-face-ban-marching-Pride-parades-breaches-impartiality.html

Schools are also legally required to be politically impartial. This JR that states that pride is a political protest movement, therefore confirms that it has no place in schools. Nor do trans lobbyists or any other political activist groups other than as part of a balanced curriculum (ie a programme looking at different sides of a political issue).
Just like everywhere else, parents have been too scared of being called bigots and their children targeted if they raise concerns about pride clubs and activities pushing partisan political views in schools.
I've added the guidance for schools as it details the legal requirements and explains how schools can help children navigate contentious and sensitive issues while not promoting partisan political views to pupils.

This is a game changer as until now the campaigning to remove the rights of women and girls to same sex sports, spaces etc has been openly waged in schools by political activists under the guise of "inclusivity" with children gaslit that this is the right thing to do. But now it's clear that this is political activism.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/political-impartiality-in-schools/political-impartiality-in-schools

Though it is for implementation from September 2026 it should be flagged in September 2025 training as schools need to be compliant in the 2026/2027 academic year. The PHSCE coordinator will need to ensure delivery plants are in place

Completely agree MrsOvertonsWindow.

And whilst all the activists are busy on Twitter saying how awful the Sandie Peggie case is, because they don't pay attention to the news properly (only what comes up on their social media feed) this has largely slipped under the radar.

If the Sandie Peggie case goes the way I'm anticipating and there is a comment about unwritten policy being completely biased and led by activists and an example of this is saying you are an ally in your email signature, that both backs up the judicial review about policing and the statutory guidance for schools.

It puts the government in a position where they just have to suck it up because it's going to be exceptionally difficult to change the law about the equality act and biological sex at that point precisely because it is so contentious.

The only roads open then are expanding self id (which again has massive political issues and still would be restricted by sex - it's not something popular with the public) and the way this is moving, enforced pronouns are likely to be binned off at some point which renders much of the attraction null and void.

Or to look at making everything gender neutral which is actually indirectly discriminatory to women and more significantly to disabled people. That's also going to get challenged in court eventually if that happens. And this is where women need to be most aware and keep their eyes on.

The only other route available to activists is to escalate to the ECHR, if they can find a suitable case. At the moment there isn't really one that obviously will reach the threshold to be referred that far. And even if they do, the timescale is so long you are likely to see the negligence claims starting to bite as well as medical studies really starting to raise so serious questions.

If they do manage to escalate to the ECHR against that backdrop, given the current political climate, the government may well be Reform and they may well choose to ignore the ruling (there's precedence for this from other member countries) or try to pull use out of the ECHR using it as leverage.

This is effectively a game of chess and the activists are starting to rapidly lose significant pieces and are in a game of check where theres really only one long term outcome.

It's going to take a good while yet, but you can see how things are slowly closing down in terms of other protected characteristics being ignored because gender reassignment has trumped everything and everyone else.

Equality is by definition not seeing this bullshit because it's seamless within society. And there is wide public consensus that things are fair.

Not the TRAs I’ve seen.

Maybe put the suggestion on the NHS audit thread? I think people would be up for it once the whole of the UK is done for NHS Trusts, which will hopefully be in a week or so.

Though you might need some new ways of approaching it, and more volunteers to thread marshal, set up a jotform etc - there are a lot more schools than there are NHS Trusts.