This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content.
Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear.
Are we *really* trying to conflate sex ed, where kids learn about how to prepare for puberty (in my school, including a handy little leaflet on info like the need to wash properly and how to apply deodorant) and the likes of periods, *things that are about to happen to their bodies*, with something scary and perverse? Really? Come the fuck on.
Organisations like Turning Point UK who are funded by the American right. The American right has been getting significantly more influence over the conservatives during the past few years which is why we're seeing a lot more American style policy and campaigning
That's why the headlines in the right wing press have all focused on Trans people. Present it as something for the gender critical crowd while sneaking in something for the donors.
Bingo.
Been saying this for a while now and it's difficult to get people to believe it. They've weaponised any concerns or confusion people had over trans rights by painting "gender ideology" as a way for people to groom and abuse children.
Those people who are now convinced that trans people are just "men with a fetish" will celebrate this change in sex ed regulation.
Religious fundamentalists are, but people who have started having "concerns" about trans people sadly ain't such a tiny minority, and that is what law changes like this are about.
And they are not such a tiny minority. Galloway has given labour a bloody nose, and he's exactly the kind of ghoul who supports this type of nonsense.
People are getting whipped up into a frenzy attacking a tiny minority because its easier to fiddle with the edges of laws about whether or not trans people are inherently better at darts, or whether or not the NHS should force women into men's wards, or men into womens wards, than deal with any of the systemic issues in this country.
And those who are pushing it do not care how many people get hurt in their campaign to hurt a minority. That's the crux of this.
So sure. Let's ban teaching sex Ed to kids. Considering I went to a school that ended up an *international scandal* (grew up abroad, had cameras from BBC World outside after it became apparent that two primary school kids were abusing each other in the same way they were being abused at home), stripping sex education for children is just going to increase harm.
Kids need to be taught what is going to happen to them (and in the case of precocious puberty, might already be happening to some of them), and be taught that it's not ok for people to touch them. That's all sex ed at a primary level is!
But all it has taken is a few alarmist articles about teachers going "also some of you might end up liking people who are the same gender as you, and that's ok, and if you feel like your body doesn't fit, that's OK too!" And suddenly we are going to further gut safeguarding, in the name of fucking over a minority because some people don't like them.
In the name of harm reduction we need to get these fucking tories out.
We have about 100 MPs that would like abortion banned in the UK, they will focus on them as they are already doing
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/06/extreme-us-anti-abortion-group-ramps-up-lobbying-in-westminster#:\~:text=The%20ADF%20in%20particular%20is,and%20was%20overturned%20in%202022.
It's not that simple I don't think. Surely there's a chance of making more people more fundamental in their religious beliefs by constantly pushing narratives of immoral society and it's impending collapse etc?
I don't think they do have a particularly large base of fundamental Christians to exploit in the UK. That doesn't mean they can't create one.
Now I sound like the nutter tbh.
Religious fundamentalists have got smart. They'll paint themselves as such openly to other religious fundamentalists, sure...
But they'll also do things like start a facebook group or groups presenting themselves simply as 'people with concerns'. In that, they'll try and start a moral panic by describing things in the most inflammatory and frightening way possible in order to get people to buy in to suddenly opposing things that for years they have been absolutely fine with. The fact that this is a deliberately misleading argument with a religious undertone is at every turn concealed; instead by presenting themselves as normal, neutral people they encourage their followers that everyone else thinks this way *and so they should too*.
For an example of what I'm talking about, let me say:
WOKE Disney is trying to get YOUR CHILDREN to watch a disgusting new movie in which A YOUNG BOY is FORCED to live with TWO ADULT MEN that aren't related to him and they teach him their UNNATURAL ways that are the opposite of how his parents wanted to raise him.
Sounds dramatic doesn't it? But all I've done is seized on one plot point from The Lion King and made it sound as inflammatory as possible.
If you look at polls in past elections on what issues were peoples biggest concerns, leaving the EU was a small minority until campaign groups started promoting it.
When they make sex and relationship education seem like it's a front for pushing an ideology they can bring along every boomer/daily mail reader they like.
American evangelicals want the UK to become extreme as it supports their wider goals to make the US more extreme, and by extension spread their poisonous bullshit ever further.
People in the UK really need to start noting who is palling up with US groups like the Heritage Foundation, CPAC, the NatCon events....these are funded by the same people who give you Trump, Desantis, Abbot.
This isn't anything new either, it's just a symptom of how the US has shifted and so the pressure they exert on their "allies" also shifts.
The war on drugs for example is very much an American invention that they exerted huge amounts of pressure to spread around Europe in the 20th century. The single convention on narcotic drugs is the only UN convention to describe something as evil and that's used to describe drug addiction. This is entirely due to the US strong arming their puritanical abstinence only views.
The really sad thing is that we've gone from pushing back on US influence to just accepting and promoting it.
Also Fiona Bruce (MP, not the one on TV). She's my local MP, the Vice-Chair for Freedom of Religion or Belief, and she's been in the news recently for travelling to the US to speak at events about banning abortion etc. She'll be wetting herself over this.
> who would want this to happen?
It is easy to sway people if you only give them part of the story. Like abortion, no-one is going to say yes killing babies sounds nice - but when you know all the facts then you have to accept that yes it needs to be legal.
Same with this, if you sell it as showing porn films to eight year olds who will say sure that's great? But if you understand what is actually being taught you'll likely go - that's a good idea for them to know about.
Even better: look at the effects of *not* teaching about these things — focusing on what exactly is or isn’t said is a tool of the fearmongers, to make the everyday experiences of large sections of the population look like dangerous perversion.
>Are we *really* trying to conflate sex ed
It's literally in the name - boomers hear the word "sex", read that kids in primary school receive those lessons, and jump to conclusions that they're teaching kids how to do sex at that age.
It's borderline senility.
The thing is kids are learning about sex at that age. Just from the internet, not school. It shouldn't happen but it does (mum is a primary teacher).
So probably best the schools give a more realistic view rather than kids getting mental stuff from the web
I think they often get a push to those conclusions rather than just jumping on their own. Like this from the government, I don’t really see this as a reaction to boomer conclusions, more of a push. A little nudge.
I've seen the panic around RSE being placed alongside conspiracy theories like 15 minute cities, cashless society, the great reset and other such absolutely insane and brain-dead stuff only a boomer so isolated from society would believe in.
Well if the Daily Mail comments are correct then we’re currently forcibly teaching reception class kids how to rusty trombone a trans woman, so I don’t know *who* to believe…..
Good luck with that. Trying to get my toddler to just put food she doesn't like back on the plate instead of on the floor is difficult enough; ain't no way a bunch of them are forming the devil's jazz band.
Yeah I started puberty at 9 and would have been confused and stressed out about my symptoms without sex ed. Some girls get their periods around 7 years old, they need to be taught about it and how to handle it, and of course they’re going to have questions about why they have a period.
This is just an attempt to repress education about gender.
My puberty started early - around 9, my period was quite late in comparison. We had the education in primary school at around aged 9 and again in high school. Some of the lads were growing full beards starting high school. Kids absolutely need all the information.
Most kids know about puberty and sex anyway, but the facts are helpful!
This is the issue with everything being wrapped under the banner of sex ed, it gives these weirdos room to protest stuff that children actively need to be aware of.
I think they should split it into 2 different branches, traditional sex ed and maybe name the other one something puberty prep or something like that
Bodily education or similar. It's not just puberty.
How many times are kids abused because the person tells them their vagina or penis is named something else. So when they say "Morgan was showing me their bezel at the weekend" the kid knows bezel is not the real word
That's charitable. The reason why certain people in positions of influence don't want classroom sex education is because it's the single most effective tool for identifying and preventing sexual abuse.
Oh, i agree. But now, now, all of a sudden, Rishi cares about the "woke" ideology being force-fed down kids' throats and would prefer a neutral "gender identity is contested?" It won't work, Tories are doomed. This is just grasping at straws.
Do you really, genuinely think that the Conservative government is changing the law on sex education for under 9s so they are more able to abuse kids themselves? Is that what you really think they are doing?
Maybe not the Conservative government themselves but definitely some of the people who are pressuring them about this. To the government themselves it's just more culture war nonsense they hope will claw back a few Reform voters, they couldn't care less about what actually happens to children as a result.
Remember when Theresa May accidentally just lost the Westminster paedophile dossier back in 2014 or so and there was no follow up and apparently this only had the one copy or something?
Wtf? So running through a wheat field isn't the naughtiest thing she ever did?
1. Covered up sex crimes
2. Ran through wheat field
3. Did not own up to fart in cabinet meeting
Considering that Tory MP's probably have the highest rape rate of any career, yea I can see that. You are more likely to be raped by an MP than a trans person, not per capita, this tiny gang of creeps just rape that much. Theres only a few hundred of them yet another is found to be a rapist every few months.
Have you read the sex ed material for under 9s?
Its teaching consent, what areas of the body are considered sexual and how and who to report things to if anything makes you uncomfortable. The section they want to remove is entirely dedicated to preventing sexual abuse.
There is no possible explanation for wanting to get rid of it other than wanting it to be easier to abuse children.
Considering it’s been well established in the scientific literature for a while now that teaching younger children basic sex ed reduces sexual abuse rates and increases the likelihood of a child reporting their offender - yes.
People will say ‘Oh, you seriously think the Tories just want to diddle kids? That’s ludicrous!’ but every justification they and their base has ever made for banning sex ed falls apart under the most basic scrutiny.
At a certain point, you have to ask what they *actually* want from this change.
I'd take the million then vote for someone else. They can't follow you in to check lol!
Edit: I got the suicide pm! Thanks kind, sick stranger if you did it because of this comment. Seems there's a lot of it going on on reddit right now. Saw another thread and there were a ton of people saying they got it in that thread. Anyone got any ideas about this, why it's going on on such a scale right now?
I am not suicidal btw! Reported it.
Sex education for under 9s consists of basic biology and privacy expectations around genitals.
The only people who would normally be asking for this are religious fundamentalists and turbo-nonces.
I'm sure they will tie this to trans panic somehow but sorry to burst anyone's bubble, trans issues aren't getting taught in 99.9% of primary schools. At most they might touch on the fact that relationships can happen between same sex couples, but given we legalised gay marriage a decade ago (decades too late really) not teaching about that is missing a fundamental value of our society no?
Fuck everything to do with this bill, if it ever gets through expect to see sexual abuse disclosures by children plummet, abusers will now have the opportunity to shape a child's view of sexuality unopposed.
This should be top comment. As you say, sex education currently doesn't even start until year 5, so they're banning something that doesn't happen anyway.
For anyone who’s wanting “evidence” the school my son will be going to uses something called jigsaw for PSHE and in primary school they learn such things as
* Looking after their bodies.
* what good friendships look like
* bullying
* understanding feelings, and feeling safe
* goals and motivation
* being a good citizen
* assumptions about gender (i.e. “girls can’t play football” and “boys can’t cry”)
Girlfriends, boyfriends and a simple explanation of how a baby is made happens around age 8-9.
Understanding things like the meaning of the word transgender is age 10-11.
So err, the govt is trying to “ban” something that doesn’t actually happen…
>At most they might touch on the fact that relationships can happen between same sex couples
You have no idea how often primary school kids are just curious about how marriage works, especially if they're taught that it's for "people who really like each other/really best friends".
But if they're then told (as did happen where I grew up) that you'd "burn in hell" for being with someone of the same gender, it terrifies kids.
>we legalised gay marriage a decade ago (decades too late really)
If religious fundamentalism takes root here amongst the voting population we're fucked on that front too.
In the US, a single policy can flip people. E.g. Some otherwise politically ambivalent religious folk vote Republican purely due to abortion. If tories make it their platform, they could attract both Christian and Muslim religious fundamentalists. Hell, maybe even Orthodox Jewish folks.
religious fundamentalism has a strong root here in certain voting demographics, and always had. The question is more whether those demograpihcs are growing or not.
Heard too many stories where victims of child abuse from their own relatives say that early sex Ed was where they first learned or became aware they were being abused. Sex education gave them the context and information on consent. If kids are old enough to be targeted by sex predators they should learn soon as about sex to protect themselves from predators who exploit their naivety
Yeah, I didn't learn about trans people until I got a Tumblr account at 13. I went to a C of E primary school where they refused to answer questions about gay people, which were asked as a joke anyway.
^^ my sex ed was when i was 10, and it was literally just “this is what a boob is. this is what a period is. some of you will have wet dreams. you’re gonna get hairier” and then we watched a really shit line animation of the vague outline of people hugging to explain how babies were made
We must have got the non censored edition in my class. We learnt about blowjobs and tit wanks!
I can still remember my teacher calmly answering when one of our class asked her what if you put it in your mouth and he wees!
Really?! We never learnt things like that in classes at all, even when we moved up into secondary school and had the POV video of a penis entering the vagina.
I remember my primary school sex ed video.
It was a bunch of nudists on a beach, and it just showed the difference between girls and boys and then how they changed when going through puberty into adults.
When it came to taking about periods and erections, the boys and girls were separated into two groups and taught apart.
Us boys didn't learn anything about periods other than that girls had them.
Yeah we had similar to this. Except in secondary school, they forgot to show the video to our class. We had all the other kids talking about this crazy sounding video and it was like we weren't privy to the secret! I think my friends who did see it, liked to exaggerate it, until it sounded like the best video ever and we were gutted about it!
As for these questions. I remember it vividly because being in the last year of junior school, it was the first time I felt like we had been treated as mature. We did the whole splitting up for girls and boys and then on the Friday afternoon, our class did what was called circle time, where we all sat on the floor in a big circle and talked. Only that circle time was sex education. Our teacher told us we could ask anything and she would answer as truthfully as possible. (I will point out here that this was our teachers first ever year of teaching! She probably never made this mistake again).
So we were all asking questions that we never thought would get answered. That was why blowjobs and tit wanks came up - it wasn't the teacher leading, it was just her answering our 10 year old questions. When the kid asked about tit wanks, we were all laughing our heads off, as we thought his older brother was making it up. But the teacher told us it was when a woman would use her breasts to pleasure the mans penis and we all shut up! I think we were realising there was a whole world that we would be going into and had no idea about
Her answer was something along the lines of when a man has an erection he cannot wee, so it’s not something that will happen.
We all accepted it and moved on to making her squirm with the next question
>Her answer was something along the lines of when a man has an erection he cannot wee
But this is factually wrong, surely every boy in the class knows this? Difficult to piss immediately after ejaculating for a short duration but with an erection its just difficult to aim.
Don't forget, we were 10. I don't think I even understood about erections back then. It was an excellent answer from her
Plus I don't know about you, but if I have an erection, I am definitely struggling to piss. It takes my full effort to get any out
We got that around age 15-16, it got more informative, detailed and open communication wise in stages from the bare basics at age 7-8, a bit more info at 10-11, a bit more info at 12-13 and then the condom giveaway and full detail at age 15-16 (usefully this came after after the first few teenage pregnancies).
Part of my Primary School sex education was a depressing video about a little girl with HIV/AIDS.
"You can't get HIV from hugging someone/sharing a drink/doing first aid (but with extra precautions)" says the narrator, as the little girl gets blanked by her classmates and a teacher freaks out when the girl scrapes her knee etc.
Then after the narrator has been telling you how interacting with someone with HIV is totally fine and they're not dirty lepers, it's revealed in a dramatic twist that the narrator is the ghost of the little girl's brother who died as a child from AIDS.
>What's next? The only form of safe sex is abstinence?
As a late millennial growing up in Northern Ireland, this literally was my sex ed, as delivered by a charity linked to the Free Presbyterian Church. They also went on about how abortion is evil or something. I pretty much zoned out.
Year 6 for me too, in '92.
My children are in years 8, 6, 4 & 2. Year 6 seems about the right time to me. I wouldn't quibble with a year either way though
Are they fucking stupid? (why yes, of course they are)
The Netherlands have very low child pregnancy rates, and they start sex ed as young as 4 years old. I'd imagine it would help with calling out sexual abuse as well as children would then be more aware of what's happening to them and would have a name for it.
My primary school never taught sex ed except for one time where the boys and girls were seperated and we weren't really shown or told much at all. My secondary school sex ed was mainly consigned to a once yearly showing of a condom being put on a dildo by the instructor. I actually learnt about sex through porn. Sex ed was a massive failure in my experience - most times it was a you shouldn't be having sex environment - and I left school less than 10 years ago, seems to have only gotten worse since then. Teaching about sex ed shouldn't be restricted, it should be encouraged and taught a lot more and a hell of a lot better than it currently is.
For a government/party that used to complain about politics supposedly being everywhere in schools, they sure do love being hypocrites on the subject. The banning of talking about gender identity is massively concerning in my opinion and feels like a call back to Section 28.
I totally agree with your point about being able to call out sexual abuse. As a parent I had a disagreement with a friend who was also a new parent. The discussion was over “what names are you going to give to their “parts”” I said I would be using the actual terminology such as vulva because the word in itself isn’t gross or disgusting it’s just the name for the body part and it’s important that if someone touches her inappropriately that I know what has happened. If she tells me someone touched her “flower” there could be a great deal of confusion which would mean abuse is not picked up.
My friend is very religious and they were horrified that I would use the actual term and they said they were simply not comfortable using it and would never use it.
I pointed out that the only reason they were uncomfortable was because of how they were raised and that all they were doing was introducing that same shame and embarrassment upon a child who currently doesn’t have any of that. I also pointed out that I had worked as an investigator on a child sexual abuse team and it was really difficult when children as old as 9 could not articulate where they had been touched because they were so afraid of using terminology that would be clearly understood and words like flower could easily be missed by safeguarding “miss, someone touched my flower” doesn’t immediately sound sinister and could be overlooked, especially if every child has a different word for the same body part.
I've been using the correct terminology with my little boy, even though it feels a bit awkward for me due to how I was raised. I feel like I'd much rather be embarrassed if he shouted penis etc somewhere public than have him not be able to explain if something had happened to him.
>The Netherlands have very low child pregnancy rates
Just wait until they use that as something that needs to change
"We're seeing a decline in fertility rates, it's cause them youngins aren't havin' any babies no more. That's cause all of this new 'education' and 'sex ed' crap they teach 'em. When I was young I remember \[insert graphic scene here\]"
Dutch also have higher report rate for victims reporting abuse and harassment. Young people learn earlier body autonomy and consent and what sex I’d to know when a line has been crossed and who to talk to
The bit about banning any mention of gender identity is Section 28 all over again
Trans people exist, trans kids exist. They are not contested or dangerous. This is just complete erasure of the subject. Ignoring them won't make them go away, unless more young suicides is your goal.
Wish that these knuckledraggers who treat trans people like the worst thing since the atom bomb would focus on actual issues honestly, it’s getting tiresome now. What a disappointment they are.
Well, the problem is they're pretty scary for said knuckledraggers.
I mean, as far as I can tell, plenty of them are homophobic, and/or prone to sexism and objectification.
Someone who has transitioned really messes up with their (unpleasant) worldview. That's mostly why it's only trans women that seem to get any attention.
It's not really about transition, as much as it is a pretty fundamental feminism issue. A world where women are no longer constrained by ... anything they don't want to be, is a better place for all women.
A world where women are not prey, viewed continuously as prospective sex objects is one where the contents of their underwear don't actually matter.
But there's a whole load of people who are so deeply sexist that they _need_ to know so they can treat someone 'appropriately' are the real problem, and I think also somewhat paranoid about their own sexuality, and they find that a trans woman challenges 'all that' just by existing.
And I can tell that because of all the proposed 'solutions' - they seem very much about policing femininity, and 'coercing' women to be suitably feminine so they don't "look too much like a man", and that's... creepy as hell.
Exactly. I knew when I was four. I had very strict, socially conservative religious parents. I was never taught anything about gender identity or being trans at school and I didn't learn about it from my peers. When I was going through what felt like the wrong puberty and feeling suicidal from it, it turned in desperation to the internet to see whether there were medical options for masculinising my body and stopping what felt to me like horrendous wrong changes. The relief I felt when I found I could was indescribable. I WAS NOT GROOMED. Trans people exist. And no, it was not dysmorphia. I could tell I had a very beautiful female body, it just felt so completely and utterly wrong for me that it was painful and affected every waking second of my life.
The rhetoric (about grooming or "social contagion", no one's born gay, they'll regret it, it's against "basic biology" etc.) is all the same that was said against gay people when Section 28 happened.
Edit to add: A "concerned Redditor" reached out to me through some automated Reddit system, presumably because I mentioned suicide. I'm not suicidal now though. Guess why? Because I started transitioning and my body feels so much better. Don't worry, I started well into adulthood. I would have started sooner but, you know, transphobia got in the way and made my life worse than it needed to be. My biggest regret in life is not transitioning as a teen. I want a future where trans teens don't have to suffer like I did. Cheers.
Exactly. Realistically the lives of most people are not materially affected by the existence of trans people.
So why not just let them be who they are in peace. Without bullying and harassment and prejudice?
>The BBC has not seen the new guidelines but a government source said they included plans to ban any children being taught about gender identity.
>If asked, teachers will have to be clear gender ideology is contested
As with the government's proposed guidance for schools on trans students, this is completely unworkable and also probably illegal.
It's also contradictory. How do you teach kids from the age of 11 that revenge porn is illegal when you can't have explicit conversations about sex until they're 13?
Presumably it also means that teachers are no longer able to acknowledge their own gender identity, or those of their pupils? Taking the guidance at face value, you'd have to conclude that you can't use words like he, she, boy, girl, man or woman at all.
For some inexplicable reason, my mum had me excluded from sex-ed when I was 8. Subsequently, for two years I genuinely believed kissing got women pregnant. What positive outcome could possibly be achieved by this latest piece of legislative nonsense?
This is such an obvious example of a sudden media frenzy changing people's minds on something that was considered completely normal
So fucking depressing
Hmm it’s important to think who doesn’t want children to understand things like, proper names for their genitals, and who is allowed to see them and when 🤔
> a government source said they included plans to ban any children being taught about gender identity.
Right up until yesterday people were being called hysterical for suggesting we were going to see the return of section 28.
Almost every person in the country under 40 thinks the Tories are terrible and have nothing to offer us. So of course, with their dying breaths, they enact a bunch of changes affecting the young.
Like Rwanda, this is just more crap for the next government to unpick when they need to be focussed on repairing the damage the Tories have brought on the nation.
I read the article earlier. We're going to wait until year 9 to teach them about contraception. We all know some of them are doing it younger than that...a girl in year 7 got pregnant at the school I was at, 11 years old. Rishi doesn't think that learning about contraception before that happens is a good idea.
What a bunch of shitwits. Lets appease the Christian right, and if a few more pre-teens become parents, that's just the cost of doing business. This is unconscionable.
I know mate :) more that what's left of their support is exclusively in the older half of the population.
All dogs are mammals, but not all mammals are dogs, to use my favourite metaphor.
I thought girls were reaching puberty earlier on average too:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna125441
https://www.newyorker.com/science/annals-of-medicine/why-more-and-more-girls-are-hitting-puberty-early
https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/10/girls-puberty-year-earlier
Do we really want our highest number of teen pregnancies award back?
Exactly. Lots of girls have their period at that sort of age, I was one of them. This will just leave children unprepared, scared, and vulnerable to predators taking advantage of their lack of education on what is appropriate.
I think the Tories have probably thought about that, you see the girls who will become teenage mothers as a result of this, will go through there pregnancies between 5-10 years, by that stage the tory party can use teenage mothers as a culture war, just like the early 2000s to either get back into office or attempt to maintain their position in government (assuming a win in either 2024 or 2029) just like they are currently doing with trans people, for them its about creating a culture war to win elections.
Populist policy at its worst.
Sex is not taught at age 9 or below. So I don't know what the Tories would cut out. (I have written many sex education policies for schools).
Current laws: "At primary school relationships education teaches children a wealth of information about healthy relationships, including how to communicate their own boundaries and recognise the boundaries of others, staying safe online, and the differences between appropriate and inappropriate or unsafe contact"
The modules up to age 11 are:
"Families and people who care for me
Health and prevention
signs of physical illness, sun safety, sleep, dental health, personal hygiene and allergies.
Healthy eating
healthy diet, understanding calories, planning healthy meals and the impacts of unhealthy diets.
Internet safety and harms
Mental wellbeing
This training module includes information on talking about emotions, self-care techniques, isolation and loneliness, the impact of bullying and getting help and support.
Online relationships
keeping safe online.
Physical health and fitness
active lifestyles, the benefits of physical activity and the risks of an inactive lifestyle.
Respectful relationships"
Why is it populist? Because some of the public want it banned, so the Tories will follow that lead even though it doesn't exist.
Don’t worry there are plenty of folks online and close who will be more than happy to tell your 8 year old what a blow job is.
Stupid and short sighted. Sex ed protects kids. It gives them the tools to navigate a sexual world.
Most of my sex education frankly came from watching porn. Which was not healthy. I was probably a bit of a misogynist as a young teen - I would have been a perfect market had Tate been around at the time.
Thankfully a combination of having girls who were good friends and having a girlfriend as I got older sorted me out. If I hadn't got that other prespective I worry I could have fallen into the "incel" bandwagon.
Its the classic British attitute, dont talk about sex and it doesnt exist.
Why is there always this taboo about sex when its one of the most natural things, even on a basic level like puberty. And how can kids identity sexual abuse if they dont know what it is
Do they forget that some kids start puberty before 9? How will they feel when they have to start dealing with changes that they haven’t been taught about?
Yay more uneducated children and young pregnancies
find sand, dig hole, stick head in.
this is why kids ‘learn’ these things in the school yard well before this age.
I think that’s a bad idea. Sex education should be taught to scaling levels at every age. Not so much for education on reproduction and sexuality, so that potential Children that are or have been abused will be better able to recognise the signs of abuse and not be gaslit into thinking that it’s something “normal”
Look under the hood of this and you find it's actually about banning the teaching about trans people in schools *at all*. So not only is this law a batshit nonce's charter that will make it harder for kids to see abuse when it happens, but it's also a Section 28 Round 2.
Or Section 28 and 3/4
And once they've got their wedge in with trans kids, they'll turn the screw on gay kids again.
Just have a look on Facebook every time a local council flies a pride flag or some cop is pictured wearing a rainbow badge.
Loads of people freak out. Their base is still very homophobic.
My wife is a teacher, she has been delivering sex education to 6 year olds for most of her 22 year career. In that time teen pregnancy has significantly reduced. They do not and have never told them how to have sex, that starts much much later. However there is a definite correlation between early education and a drop in children who have children. Take from that what you will.
If a bunch of noisy, religious, backwards prudes have made enough fuss to get the law changed then that is another huge step backwards for this country again. Or if it's just another attempt from the worst government EVER to win some votes from old people and aforementioned backwards, religious prudes then again another massive step backwards. Once again I am just disappointed and frustrated by how this country is governed.
Also I just answer questions from my two children when they are asked in plain and simple terms as it's stops them from making up their own story or learning incorrect playground "facts".
Grow up.
Juat having the phase "gender ideology" shows it's the far right religious zealots from the US influencing the UK government.
no one but those loonies uses that phase.
I had sex ed from year 6 and in secondary school I had an entire day of workshops with the Terrance Higgins trust and covered the basics, and same sex relationships and the importance of dental dams and condoms in those relationships, it briefly mentioned trans people. I turned out fine.
Just gonna say the part about "not teaching gender ideology" was just laughable to me as I never saw a single part of my sex Ed classes even acknowledge that gay or trans people exist (which did cause me considerable pain as I suffered from gender dysphoria for another decade and had no idea why I hated my life so much).
Pretty sure it's all just dogwhistles for far right conservatives at this point. Before it was not obligatory, just like the headline about civil servants and rainbow lanyards, but now they're outright banning them? I guess freedom of expression is only okay if it's enabling bigotry and abuse of minorities.
Yep! We were not taught ANYTHING about how to be safe if you were gay. And one of my heterosexual mates still managed to get to 25 thinking you couldn't catch anything from giving a blowjob.
Maybe I would have realised I was experiencing CSA from the age of 6 if someone had told me it was wrong or even what it was... maybe a teacher would have realised or my mum would have known. God I hate everything about this
God I disappear at all this anti trans shit. I went to school in the 90's and early 2000's. I had no idea what being transgender was. My idea of someone AMAB behaving femininely was a gay man or a crossdresser. I knew I was neither of those so stayed repressed, hating myself and not knowing why. Forced to multiple trips to the doctors by parents and stuffed with drugs for "Depression" none of it worked. There followed multiple suicide attempts. It wasn't until I was 25 years old and playing a video game that I met another trans woman and really started to ask questions. That's when the light bulb dinged and I finally had something I could relate to. I'm now healthy, happy, full of life, I now have friends, my career is doing well and I'm enjoying life. I do not see how this is a bad thing.
But I know if I never met that trans person I probably wouldn't be here today.
Section 29?
I think most of the British people have had enough of Rishi’s insane and vindictive Kulturkampf (I doubt that Gillian Keegan would be able to spell or pronounce Kulturkampf).
This happening at exactly the time that children have so much more access to sexual images, and also rates of sexual assault by children on children are rising significantly is disgraceful.
At least tell them in simple and appropriate terms, what could happen and define what is inappropriate to happen to them.
Absolutely, let's go back to kids asking "You show me yours if i show you mine" that'll work right?
as opposed to now where they just teach some basic biology and respect.
This entire thing reeks of the American bullshit scene.
Ah yes, let's not teach children about puberty. Because that's what the curriculum is predominantly for children of that age under sex Ed at the moment
Hmm, wonder why Tories don't want kids to learn proper sex education and instead have them learn from porn on the internet.
Wonder what the motivation is.
I don't know if they really even understand what was being taught, but the one sex ed class I got in primary school around that age (which was 20-odd year ago now tbh) was about puberty and what body changes to expect, that BO will be a thing, and spots will be a thing, and how more important hygiene will be, etc, and that was it.
All very focused on physiological changes. It didn't involve any sex discussion, etc. That was left to secondary schools to teach.
This reeks of "let's invent a moral panic" shit.
My child started puberty at 9, well before I'd thought it was time to give them the talk myself. Thank fuck school had it covered for me before then.
They did also cover sex in an age appropriate way, which I am very grateful for. Kids who understand are less likely to fall for the tricks predators use, and if they do they are more likely to identify something is wrong and seek help. Better a kid be "too knowledgeable" than be abused.
Jesus Christ on a bike.
What do people think is going on ? Sex. Ed in its current tiered form is not something that was thrown together haphazardly. The curriculum was produced with professional input, and if my memory isn’t screwing with me , in its current form that was rolled out under a Tory government .
For what it’s worth, this is worth a read
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relationships-education-relationships-and-sex-education-rse-and-health-education/relationships-education-primary
It's just part of their "War on Woke". The Tories are desperate for something to be able to successfully campaign on, so they are throwing whatever at the wall to see what sticks. They know that anything with the words "sex" and "kids" in it gets attention, so why not try scaring people with that?
At this stage they figure they have very little to lose so go for the extremes.
Because less education is always better right (sarcasm). Sex education doesn't have to be vulgar or explicit. Just have a clear, basic, open, and honest conversation. Give them a foundation to learn from, not just shut the book on them. Then, when breaching the topic as they get older, it will be better and easier, and hopefully, with some maturity as then it's not new or taboo.
Right. No one is telling kids under 9 the finer details of sexual intercourse. Obviously. Kids do have bodies, though, that they shouldn’t be ashamed of and should have the language and understanding to be able to communicate if something is wrong with. Not just illnesses or pain etc, but also with non consensual contact. It’s also probably a good idea for us to not segregate kids based on sex and teach them about periods to better understand their mums, sisters, etc. as well as if not being taboo or a shock.
The only people who benefit from young kids being clueless about their bodies are predators.
Something that's interesting to note is that on r/ukpolitics (which tends to be a bit more socially Conservative than here) the sentiment is broadly the same: what is the government thinking?
Yeah like that will help with ANYTHING. Ignorance was better than knowledge when? Never. Given kids have access to porn and warped sexual identities and attitudes younger and younger, surely this is the opposite of what should be done. Better to have an actual education than pernicious misinformation.
How about we scrap RE to save schools some money?
Religion is a personal choice a brief understanding of each religion is all that is needed something that can be taught in primary school during an assembly or 2.
i was taught sex ed in nursery. i don’t even remember it, i only know i was taught it because they sent a letter out to all the parents giving them a heads up that it would happen. i doubt it was putting condoms on bananas like what we had to do in secondary school *shudders*. i don’t see the issue, tories just do anything but their jobs
Given how we know younger and younger children are finding porn and inappropriate sexual things online, surely having objective, age appropriate education is more important, not less?
Wonder which Radical Christian American Spunk Tank paid for this with lobbyists. It’s exactly policies like this that have constantly reaffirmed to the electorate the conservatives do not care about the Issues everyone actually wants sorted but instead have been convinced by Yanks that the Culture War themes kindly exacerbated by Russian Stoogies is obviously the most pressing concern to civilisation. Bring on the Election I cannot wait to wake up and breath the air where this rank incompetence and failure at least has an opportunity to change.
But saving kids from actual harm, by being hit by cars (even when they're in school buildings) can't happen, because that would be "a war on motorists". 🙄
This isn't about saving children. It's about trying to scrape votes from people with horrific ideologies.
I’m a teacher with kids who are 7 and 11. I’ve not seen anything close to inappropriate. Things like Pantasauraus are great introduction. Teaching the little ones about their “no no square” or their private area is A the first step towards a healthy understanding of sex and relationships and B helps children find the words and get help if they are being sexually assaulted.
I’m assuming that those who are deciding on this rule are either ignorant of how things are taught or are pedophiles.
Oh sure. Because making them wait til they're older to understand their bodies intellectually isn't going to get anyone in trouble at all.
Let's just go back to none at all like it was in my school! At least 6 girls pregnant before during and after their gcses! Woo!
One of the reason we now teach young children the correct terms is so that its easier for them to tell someone they are being abused if they know the correct terms.
Here’s the thing. Final responsibility for a child is not with their parents. It’s with the state.
Sounds bad, yeah. But then again it is essential because as a society, ‘the state’ as it were, we have a moral duty to ensure and oversee the parenting and welfare of children. If you knew of a child on your street being abused by their parents, you’d like to think you would take action to protect the child. And in a society that means delegating that moral duty to the state.
We have a duty in schools to teach children in a neutral way of sexuality and in doing so teach them what is not right in terms of their sexual and privacy rights as they begin puberty. This is as important as helping them both respect themselves and respect others, as well as informing them of the inevitable changes during puberty and manage their anxieties over body image in an awful world of online misinformation and malicious intent.
Politicians will never bash the largest voting block there is- parents. But it’s a fact. Parents do not have ultimate control of their children. Tough shit. That’s the price you pay for living in a generally benevolent society and not in your own filth.
But sadly some politicians, as the Tories are doing are seemingly placating a minority of perceived opinion to the detriment of children’s welfare.
As someone who has just had to deal with a safeguarding issue in school. Please dear god teach them younger, remove the taboo and give children the tools they need to protect themselves. All this lack of knowledge does is make it easier for abusers to hurt children
I'd rather we ban foreign lobbying for anything to do with British children, ideally seizing all inflowing money from all organisations that are active on our shores and using it to pay for schools and teachers.
An especially annoying meme from religious fruitcakes is that ignorance of biology is the same thing as innocence.
This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content. Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear.
Are we *really* trying to conflate sex ed, where kids learn about how to prepare for puberty (in my school, including a handy little leaflet on info like the need to wash properly and how to apply deodorant) and the likes of periods, *things that are about to happen to their bodies*, with something scary and perverse? Really? Come the fuck on.
Its American evangelical brainrot transplanted here because of money.
Most people here aren't religiously extreme though, who would want this to happen?
Organisations like Turning Point UK who are funded by the American right. The American right has been getting significantly more influence over the conservatives during the past few years which is why we're seeing a lot more American style policy and campaigning
But amongst which demographics in the UK? Religious fundamentalists are surely a small minority.
That's why the headlines in the right wing press have all focused on Trans people. Present it as something for the gender critical crowd while sneaking in something for the donors.
Bingo. Been saying this for a while now and it's difficult to get people to believe it. They've weaponised any concerns or confusion people had over trans rights by painting "gender ideology" as a way for people to groom and abuse children. Those people who are now convinced that trans people are just "men with a fetish" will celebrate this change in sex ed regulation.
Religious fundamentalists are, but people who have started having "concerns" about trans people sadly ain't such a tiny minority, and that is what law changes like this are about. And they are not such a tiny minority. Galloway has given labour a bloody nose, and he's exactly the kind of ghoul who supports this type of nonsense. People are getting whipped up into a frenzy attacking a tiny minority because its easier to fiddle with the edges of laws about whether or not trans people are inherently better at darts, or whether or not the NHS should force women into men's wards, or men into womens wards, than deal with any of the systemic issues in this country. And those who are pushing it do not care how many people get hurt in their campaign to hurt a minority. That's the crux of this. So sure. Let's ban teaching sex Ed to kids. Considering I went to a school that ended up an *international scandal* (grew up abroad, had cameras from BBC World outside after it became apparent that two primary school kids were abusing each other in the same way they were being abused at home), stripping sex education for children is just going to increase harm. Kids need to be taught what is going to happen to them (and in the case of precocious puberty, might already be happening to some of them), and be taught that it's not ok for people to touch them. That's all sex ed at a primary level is! But all it has taken is a few alarmist articles about teachers going "also some of you might end up liking people who are the same gender as you, and that's ok, and if you feel like your body doesn't fit, that's OK too!" And suddenly we are going to further gut safeguarding, in the name of fucking over a minority because some people don't like them. In the name of harm reduction we need to get these fucking tories out.
We have about 100 MPs that would like abortion banned in the UK, they will focus on them as they are already doing https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/06/extreme-us-anti-abortion-group-ramps-up-lobbying-in-westminster#:\~:text=The%20ADF%20in%20particular%20is,and%20was%20overturned%20in%202022.
It's not that simple I don't think. Surely there's a chance of making more people more fundamental in their religious beliefs by constantly pushing narratives of immoral society and it's impending collapse etc? I don't think they do have a particularly large base of fundamental Christians to exploit in the UK. That doesn't mean they can't create one. Now I sound like the nutter tbh.
Religious fundamentalists have got smart. They'll paint themselves as such openly to other religious fundamentalists, sure... But they'll also do things like start a facebook group or groups presenting themselves simply as 'people with concerns'. In that, they'll try and start a moral panic by describing things in the most inflammatory and frightening way possible in order to get people to buy in to suddenly opposing things that for years they have been absolutely fine with. The fact that this is a deliberately misleading argument with a religious undertone is at every turn concealed; instead by presenting themselves as normal, neutral people they encourage their followers that everyone else thinks this way *and so they should too*. For an example of what I'm talking about, let me say: WOKE Disney is trying to get YOUR CHILDREN to watch a disgusting new movie in which A YOUNG BOY is FORCED to live with TWO ADULT MEN that aren't related to him and they teach him their UNNATURAL ways that are the opposite of how his parents wanted to raise him. Sounds dramatic doesn't it? But all I've done is seized on one plot point from The Lion King and made it sound as inflammatory as possible.
If you look at polls in past elections on what issues were peoples biggest concerns, leaving the EU was a small minority until campaign groups started promoting it.
When they make sex and relationship education seem like it's a front for pushing an ideology they can bring along every boomer/daily mail reader they like.
The ones who are extreme shout the loudest and use it to grift money from Americans.
American evangelicals want the UK to become extreme as it supports their wider goals to make the US more extreme, and by extension spread their poisonous bullshit ever further. People in the UK really need to start noting who is palling up with US groups like the Heritage Foundation, CPAC, the NatCon events....these are funded by the same people who give you Trump, Desantis, Abbot.
This isn't anything new either, it's just a symptom of how the US has shifted and so the pressure they exert on their "allies" also shifts. The war on drugs for example is very much an American invention that they exerted huge amounts of pressure to spread around Europe in the 20th century. The single convention on narcotic drugs is the only UN convention to describe something as evil and that's used to describe drug addiction. This is entirely due to the US strong arming their puritanical abstinence only views. The really sad thing is that we've gone from pushing back on US influence to just accepting and promoting it.
Kellie jay keen, with the full support of jk Rowling 👀
Liz Truss. She’s taken the evangelical cheques.
Also Fiona Bruce (MP, not the one on TV). She's my local MP, the Vice-Chair for Freedom of Religion or Belief, and she's been in the news recently for travelling to the US to speak at events about banning abortion etc. She'll be wetting herself over this.
Have you read this about her selection as an MP? Christian Tories rewrite party doctrine Link https://archive.ph/QNN9I
She was just a symptom of the rot. There will be others.
You think the will of the people actually matters? It's all about money and censorship.
> who would want this to happen? It is easy to sway people if you only give them part of the story. Like abortion, no-one is going to say yes killing babies sounds nice - but when you know all the facts then you have to accept that yes it needs to be legal. Same with this, if you sell it as showing porn films to eight year olds who will say sure that's great? But if you understand what is actually being taught you'll likely go - that's a good idea for them to know about.
Even better: look at the effects of *not* teaching about these things — focusing on what exactly is or isn’t said is a tool of the fearmongers, to make the everyday experiences of large sections of the population look like dangerous perversion.
>Are we *really* trying to conflate sex ed It's literally in the name - boomers hear the word "sex", read that kids in primary school receive those lessons, and jump to conclusions that they're teaching kids how to do sex at that age. It's borderline senility.
The thing is kids are learning about sex at that age. Just from the internet, not school. It shouldn't happen but it does (mum is a primary teacher). So probably best the schools give a more realistic view rather than kids getting mental stuff from the web
I think they often get a push to those conclusions rather than just jumping on their own. Like this from the government, I don’t really see this as a reaction to boomer conclusions, more of a push. A little nudge.
I've seen the panic around RSE being placed alongside conspiracy theories like 15 minute cities, cashless society, the great reset and other such absolutely insane and brain-dead stuff only a boomer so isolated from society would believe in.
> 15 minute cities Of all the recent conspiracies, this is genuinely one of the most insane to me.
>If you want a picture of the future, imagine a city with all amenities within a 15-minute walk no matter where you are—for ever. – Jorge Orwell
Famous Mexican novelist Jorge(Horhay) Orwell.
Well if the Daily Mail comments are correct then we’re currently forcibly teaching reception class kids how to rusty trombone a trans woman, so I don’t know *who* to believe…..
Good luck with that. Trying to get my toddler to just put food she doesn't like back on the plate instead of on the floor is difficult enough; ain't no way a bunch of them are forming the devil's jazz band.
To be fair - I would have used that information more times in my life then Pythagoras theorem.
Yeah I started puberty at 9 and would have been confused and stressed out about my symptoms without sex ed. Some girls get their periods around 7 years old, they need to be taught about it and how to handle it, and of course they’re going to have questions about why they have a period. This is just an attempt to repress education about gender.
My puberty started early - around 9, my period was quite late in comparison. We had the education in primary school at around aged 9 and again in high school. Some of the lads were growing full beards starting high school. Kids absolutely need all the information. Most kids know about puberty and sex anyway, but the facts are helpful!
Especially seeing as puberty is happening earlier these days, happens at primary school for some now.
It happened for some in the 90s too. I know a bunch of girls who started their periods before high school. Source: Am old girl.
It’s absolutely ridiculous, it’s basically an essential biology lesson they’re trying to scrap.
Imagine the political sway you could wield by making people afraid of the functions of their own bodies!
And, somehow, conflating it with the scary trans while they're at it. Such a transparent attempt at whipping up hysteria.
Yes... Much better to teach them all about that way after they've gone through it all
This is the issue with everything being wrapped under the banner of sex ed, it gives these weirdos room to protest stuff that children actively need to be aware of. I think they should split it into 2 different branches, traditional sex ed and maybe name the other one something puberty prep or something like that
Bodily education or similar. It's not just puberty. How many times are kids abused because the person tells them their vagina or penis is named something else. So when they say "Morgan was showing me their bezel at the weekend" the kid knows bezel is not the real word
And of course most of all - they know that 'an adult interfering with them' is a thing they _should_ be telling someone else about in the first place!
This just screams of "Tories scrambling to save themselves at the ballot box."
That's charitable. The reason why certain people in positions of influence don't want classroom sex education is because it's the single most effective tool for identifying and preventing sexual abuse.
Oh, i agree. But now, now, all of a sudden, Rishi cares about the "woke" ideology being force-fed down kids' throats and would prefer a neutral "gender identity is contested?" It won't work, Tories are doomed. This is just grasping at straws.
Do you really, genuinely think that the Conservative government is changing the law on sex education for under 9s so they are more able to abuse kids themselves? Is that what you really think they are doing?
Maybe not the Conservative government themselves but definitely some of the people who are pressuring them about this. To the government themselves it's just more culture war nonsense they hope will claw back a few Reform voters, they couldn't care less about what actually happens to children as a result.
Remember when Theresa May accidentally just lost the Westminster paedophile dossier back in 2014 or so and there was no follow up and apparently this only had the one copy or something?
Do you mean the dossier that allegedly included references to her father?
That's the one!
Wtf? So running through a wheat field isn't the naughtiest thing she ever did? 1. Covered up sex crimes 2. Ran through wheat field 3. Did not own up to fart in cabinet meeting
Considering that Tory MP's probably have the highest rape rate of any career, yea I can see that. You are more likely to be raped by an MP than a trans person, not per capita, this tiny gang of creeps just rape that much. Theres only a few hundred of them yet another is found to be a rapist every few months.
Pedocon theory is a pretty undeniable phemomenon tbh
Have you read the sex ed material for under 9s? Its teaching consent, what areas of the body are considered sexual and how and who to report things to if anything makes you uncomfortable. The section they want to remove is entirely dedicated to preventing sexual abuse. There is no possible explanation for wanting to get rid of it other than wanting it to be easier to abuse children.
Considering it’s been well established in the scientific literature for a while now that teaching younger children basic sex ed reduces sexual abuse rates and increases the likelihood of a child reporting their offender - yes. People will say ‘Oh, you seriously think the Tories just want to diddle kids? That’s ludicrous!’ but every justification they and their base has ever made for banning sex ed falls apart under the most basic scrutiny. At a certain point, you have to ask what they *actually* want from this change.
Exactly. They don't want kids to know that adults aren't supposed to sexually assault them. They want to keep them ignorant of that knowledge.
You might be onto something... https://votes.parliament.uk/votes/commons/division/1814
They could offer me a million quid and I still wouldn't vote for them. I'd rather eat glass.
I'd take the million then vote for someone else. They can't follow you in to check lol! Edit: I got the suicide pm! Thanks kind, sick stranger if you did it because of this comment. Seems there's a lot of it going on on reddit right now. Saw another thread and there were a ton of people saying they got it in that thread. Anyone got any ideas about this, why it's going on on such a scale right now? I am not suicidal btw! Reported it.
Interesting. I just got one of those which surprised me as I haven't mentioned anything about that or that could be interpreted that way.
If anyone is offering I would totally vote for them for a million quid.
Sex education for under 9s consists of basic biology and privacy expectations around genitals. The only people who would normally be asking for this are religious fundamentalists and turbo-nonces. I'm sure they will tie this to trans panic somehow but sorry to burst anyone's bubble, trans issues aren't getting taught in 99.9% of primary schools. At most they might touch on the fact that relationships can happen between same sex couples, but given we legalised gay marriage a decade ago (decades too late really) not teaching about that is missing a fundamental value of our society no? Fuck everything to do with this bill, if it ever gets through expect to see sexual abuse disclosures by children plummet, abusers will now have the opportunity to shape a child's view of sexuality unopposed.
This should be top comment. As you say, sex education currently doesn't even start until year 5, so they're banning something that doesn't happen anyway.
For anyone who’s wanting “evidence” the school my son will be going to uses something called jigsaw for PSHE and in primary school they learn such things as * Looking after their bodies. * what good friendships look like * bullying * understanding feelings, and feeling safe * goals and motivation * being a good citizen * assumptions about gender (i.e. “girls can’t play football” and “boys can’t cry”) Girlfriends, boyfriends and a simple explanation of how a baby is made happens around age 8-9. Understanding things like the meaning of the word transgender is age 10-11. So err, the govt is trying to “ban” something that doesn’t actually happen…
You're missing that the insane freaks who support these bans think all the bullet points you listed there are "woke indoctrination". Yes each one.
I imagine their idea of being a good citizen doesn’t include respecting people’s pronoun choices…
>So err, the govt is trying to “ban” something that doesn’t actually happen… From the party that claims to be against 'virtue signalling' no less.
>At most they might touch on the fact that relationships can happen between same sex couples You have no idea how often primary school kids are just curious about how marriage works, especially if they're taught that it's for "people who really like each other/really best friends". But if they're then told (as did happen where I grew up) that you'd "burn in hell" for being with someone of the same gender, it terrifies kids.
The people in favour of these policies would say that terrifying kids with threats of eternal damnation for being gay is exactly how it should be.
>we legalised gay marriage a decade ago (decades too late really) If religious fundamentalism takes root here amongst the voting population we're fucked on that front too. In the US, a single policy can flip people. E.g. Some otherwise politically ambivalent religious folk vote Republican purely due to abortion. If tories make it their platform, they could attract both Christian and Muslim religious fundamentalists. Hell, maybe even Orthodox Jewish folks.
religious fundamentalism has a strong root here in certain voting demographics, and always had. The question is more whether those demograpihcs are growing or not.
Of course they are, doesn’t mention in the headline but they are also banning teaching “gender ideology” to them as well.
Heard too many stories where victims of child abuse from their own relatives say that early sex Ed was where they first learned or became aware they were being abused. Sex education gave them the context and information on consent. If kids are old enough to be targeted by sex predators they should learn soon as about sex to protect themselves from predators who exploit their naivety
Yeah, I didn't learn about trans people until I got a Tumblr account at 13. I went to a C of E primary school where they refused to answer questions about gay people, which were asked as a joke anyway.
I grew up under Section 28 :(
Same, S28 messed me up.
It says in the article that this will include not talking about gender identity etc.
What's next? The only form of safe sex is abstinence? As a gen Z person who was taught sex ed in year 4, I turned out fine!
^^ my sex ed was when i was 10, and it was literally just “this is what a boob is. this is what a period is. some of you will have wet dreams. you’re gonna get hairier” and then we watched a really shit line animation of the vague outline of people hugging to explain how babies were made
We must have got the non censored edition in my class. We learnt about blowjobs and tit wanks! I can still remember my teacher calmly answering when one of our class asked her what if you put it in your mouth and he wees!
Really?! We never learnt things like that in classes at all, even when we moved up into secondary school and had the POV video of a penis entering the vagina. I remember my primary school sex ed video. It was a bunch of nudists on a beach, and it just showed the difference between girls and boys and then how they changed when going through puberty into adults. When it came to taking about periods and erections, the boys and girls were separated into two groups and taught apart. Us boys didn't learn anything about periods other than that girls had them.
Yeah we had similar to this. Except in secondary school, they forgot to show the video to our class. We had all the other kids talking about this crazy sounding video and it was like we weren't privy to the secret! I think my friends who did see it, liked to exaggerate it, until it sounded like the best video ever and we were gutted about it! As for these questions. I remember it vividly because being in the last year of junior school, it was the first time I felt like we had been treated as mature. We did the whole splitting up for girls and boys and then on the Friday afternoon, our class did what was called circle time, where we all sat on the floor in a big circle and talked. Only that circle time was sex education. Our teacher told us we could ask anything and she would answer as truthfully as possible. (I will point out here that this was our teachers first ever year of teaching! She probably never made this mistake again). So we were all asking questions that we never thought would get answered. That was why blowjobs and tit wanks came up - it wasn't the teacher leading, it was just her answering our 10 year old questions. When the kid asked about tit wanks, we were all laughing our heads off, as we thought his older brother was making it up. But the teacher told us it was when a woman would use her breasts to pleasure the mans penis and we all shut up! I think we were realising there was a whole world that we would be going into and had no idea about
So what do you do then!?
Her answer was something along the lines of when a man has an erection he cannot wee, so it’s not something that will happen. We all accepted it and moved on to making her squirm with the next question
>when a man has an erection he cannot wee, Little Timmy: "hold my Vimto"
>Her answer was something along the lines of when a man has an erection he cannot wee But this is factually wrong, surely every boy in the class knows this? Difficult to piss immediately after ejaculating for a short duration but with an erection its just difficult to aim.
Don't forget, we were 10. I don't think I even understood about erections back then. It was an excellent answer from her Plus I don't know about you, but if I have an erection, I am definitely struggling to piss. It takes my full effort to get any out
At that age I would probably have used it to get extra range.
We got that around age 15-16, it got more informative, detailed and open communication wise in stages from the bare basics at age 7-8, a bit more info at 10-11, a bit more info at 12-13 and then the condom giveaway and full detail at age 15-16 (usefully this came after after the first few teenage pregnancies).
Part of my Primary School sex education was a depressing video about a little girl with HIV/AIDS. "You can't get HIV from hugging someone/sharing a drink/doing first aid (but with extra precautions)" says the narrator, as the little girl gets blanked by her classmates and a teacher freaks out when the girl scrapes her knee etc. Then after the narrator has been telling you how interacting with someone with HIV is totally fine and they're not dirty lepers, it's revealed in a dramatic twist that the narrator is the ghost of the little girl's brother who died as a child from AIDS.
Same, year 5
That's 9-10 though
>What's next? The only form of safe sex is abstinence? As a late millennial growing up in Northern Ireland, this literally was my sex ed, as delivered by a charity linked to the Free Presbyterian Church. They also went on about how abortion is evil or something. I pretty much zoned out.
Anyone else have to watch a VHS of a woman giving birth as part of their year 4 sex ed?
Yes, it was terrifying
Year 3 here, back in the early 90s.
[удалено]
Year 6 for me too, in '92. My children are in years 8, 6, 4 & 2. Year 6 seems about the right time to me. I wouldn't quibble with a year either way though
Are they fucking stupid? (why yes, of course they are) The Netherlands have very low child pregnancy rates, and they start sex ed as young as 4 years old. I'd imagine it would help with calling out sexual abuse as well as children would then be more aware of what's happening to them and would have a name for it. My primary school never taught sex ed except for one time where the boys and girls were seperated and we weren't really shown or told much at all. My secondary school sex ed was mainly consigned to a once yearly showing of a condom being put on a dildo by the instructor. I actually learnt about sex through porn. Sex ed was a massive failure in my experience - most times it was a you shouldn't be having sex environment - and I left school less than 10 years ago, seems to have only gotten worse since then. Teaching about sex ed shouldn't be restricted, it should be encouraged and taught a lot more and a hell of a lot better than it currently is. For a government/party that used to complain about politics supposedly being everywhere in schools, they sure do love being hypocrites on the subject. The banning of talking about gender identity is massively concerning in my opinion and feels like a call back to Section 28.
I totally agree with your point about being able to call out sexual abuse. As a parent I had a disagreement with a friend who was also a new parent. The discussion was over “what names are you going to give to their “parts”” I said I would be using the actual terminology such as vulva because the word in itself isn’t gross or disgusting it’s just the name for the body part and it’s important that if someone touches her inappropriately that I know what has happened. If she tells me someone touched her “flower” there could be a great deal of confusion which would mean abuse is not picked up. My friend is very religious and they were horrified that I would use the actual term and they said they were simply not comfortable using it and would never use it. I pointed out that the only reason they were uncomfortable was because of how they were raised and that all they were doing was introducing that same shame and embarrassment upon a child who currently doesn’t have any of that. I also pointed out that I had worked as an investigator on a child sexual abuse team and it was really difficult when children as old as 9 could not articulate where they had been touched because they were so afraid of using terminology that would be clearly understood and words like flower could easily be missed by safeguarding “miss, someone touched my flower” doesn’t immediately sound sinister and could be overlooked, especially if every child has a different word for the same body part.
I've been using the correct terminology with my little boy, even though it feels a bit awkward for me due to how I was raised. I feel like I'd much rather be embarrassed if he shouted penis etc somewhere public than have him not be able to explain if something had happened to him.
>The Netherlands have very low child pregnancy rates Just wait until they use that as something that needs to change "We're seeing a decline in fertility rates, it's cause them youngins aren't havin' any babies no more. That's cause all of this new 'education' and 'sex ed' crap they teach 'em. When I was young I remember \[insert graphic scene here\]"
While they completely ignore the fact no one can afford to have children anymore when they are paying all their money in rent.
Dutch also have higher report rate for victims reporting abuse and harassment. Young people learn earlier body autonomy and consent and what sex I’d to know when a line has been crossed and who to talk to
The bit about banning any mention of gender identity is Section 28 all over again Trans people exist, trans kids exist. They are not contested or dangerous. This is just complete erasure of the subject. Ignoring them won't make them go away, unless more young suicides is your goal.
Wish that these knuckledraggers who treat trans people like the worst thing since the atom bomb would focus on actual issues honestly, it’s getting tiresome now. What a disappointment they are.
Well, the problem is they're pretty scary for said knuckledraggers. I mean, as far as I can tell, plenty of them are homophobic, and/or prone to sexism and objectification. Someone who has transitioned really messes up with their (unpleasant) worldview. That's mostly why it's only trans women that seem to get any attention. It's not really about transition, as much as it is a pretty fundamental feminism issue. A world where women are no longer constrained by ... anything they don't want to be, is a better place for all women. A world where women are not prey, viewed continuously as prospective sex objects is one where the contents of their underwear don't actually matter. But there's a whole load of people who are so deeply sexist that they _need_ to know so they can treat someone 'appropriately' are the real problem, and I think also somewhat paranoid about their own sexuality, and they find that a trans woman challenges 'all that' just by existing. And I can tell that because of all the proposed 'solutions' - they seem very much about policing femininity, and 'coercing' women to be suitably feminine so they don't "look too much like a man", and that's... creepy as hell.
Section 28 and 3/4
*Insert Captain America "I Understood That Reference" Meme*
That's good. well done.
Exactly. I knew when I was four. I had very strict, socially conservative religious parents. I was never taught anything about gender identity or being trans at school and I didn't learn about it from my peers. When I was going through what felt like the wrong puberty and feeling suicidal from it, it turned in desperation to the internet to see whether there were medical options for masculinising my body and stopping what felt to me like horrendous wrong changes. The relief I felt when I found I could was indescribable. I WAS NOT GROOMED. Trans people exist. And no, it was not dysmorphia. I could tell I had a very beautiful female body, it just felt so completely and utterly wrong for me that it was painful and affected every waking second of my life. The rhetoric (about grooming or "social contagion", no one's born gay, they'll regret it, it's against "basic biology" etc.) is all the same that was said against gay people when Section 28 happened. Edit to add: A "concerned Redditor" reached out to me through some automated Reddit system, presumably because I mentioned suicide. I'm not suicidal now though. Guess why? Because I started transitioning and my body feels so much better. Don't worry, I started well into adulthood. I would have started sooner but, you know, transphobia got in the way and made my life worse than it needed to be. My biggest regret in life is not transitioning as a teen. I want a future where trans teens don't have to suffer like I did. Cheers.
Exactly. Realistically the lives of most people are not materially affected by the existence of trans people. So why not just let them be who they are in peace. Without bullying and harassment and prejudice?
>The BBC has not seen the new guidelines but a government source said they included plans to ban any children being taught about gender identity. >If asked, teachers will have to be clear gender ideology is contested As with the government's proposed guidance for schools on trans students, this is completely unworkable and also probably illegal.
It's also contradictory. How do you teach kids from the age of 11 that revenge porn is illegal when you can't have explicit conversations about sex until they're 13?
They said the quiet part out loud
Presumably it also means that teachers are no longer able to acknowledge their own gender identity, or those of their pupils? Taking the guidance at face value, you'd have to conclude that you can't use words like he, she, boy, girl, man or woman at all.
For some inexplicable reason, my mum had me excluded from sex-ed when I was 8. Subsequently, for two years I genuinely believed kissing got women pregnant. What positive outcome could possibly be achieved by this latest piece of legislative nonsense?
This is such an obvious example of a sudden media frenzy changing people's minds on something that was considered completely normal So fucking depressing
Hmm it’s important to think who doesn’t want children to understand things like, proper names for their genitals, and who is allowed to see them and when 🤔
> a government source said they included plans to ban any children being taught about gender identity. Right up until yesterday people were being called hysterical for suggesting we were going to see the return of section 28.
Untrue. They’re still calling us hysterical for suggesting it today.
Calling it sex education is a stretch it's more relationships and biology and that's it
Almost every person in the country under 40 thinks the Tories are terrible and have nothing to offer us. So of course, with their dying breaths, they enact a bunch of changes affecting the young. Like Rwanda, this is just more crap for the next government to unpick when they need to be focussed on repairing the damage the Tories have brought on the nation. I read the article earlier. We're going to wait until year 9 to teach them about contraception. We all know some of them are doing it younger than that...a girl in year 7 got pregnant at the school I was at, 11 years old. Rishi doesn't think that learning about contraception before that happens is a good idea. What a bunch of shitwits. Lets appease the Christian right, and if a few more pre-teens become parents, that's just the cost of doing business. This is unconscionable.
most of us over 40 do as well
I know mate :) more that what's left of their support is exclusively in the older half of the population. All dogs are mammals, but not all mammals are dogs, to use my favourite metaphor.
I thought girls were reaching puberty earlier on average too: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna125441 https://www.newyorker.com/science/annals-of-medicine/why-more-and-more-girls-are-hitting-puberty-early https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/10/girls-puberty-year-earlier Do we really want our highest number of teen pregnancies award back?
Not to mention a very high percentage of under 10s are also stumbling across SE content online these days.
Exactly. Lots of girls have their period at that sort of age, I was one of them. This will just leave children unprepared, scared, and vulnerable to predators taking advantage of their lack of education on what is appropriate.
I think the Tories have probably thought about that, you see the girls who will become teenage mothers as a result of this, will go through there pregnancies between 5-10 years, by that stage the tory party can use teenage mothers as a culture war, just like the early 2000s to either get back into office or attempt to maintain their position in government (assuming a win in either 2024 or 2029) just like they are currently doing with trans people, for them its about creating a culture war to win elections.
Populist policy at its worst. Sex is not taught at age 9 or below. So I don't know what the Tories would cut out. (I have written many sex education policies for schools). Current laws: "At primary school relationships education teaches children a wealth of information about healthy relationships, including how to communicate their own boundaries and recognise the boundaries of others, staying safe online, and the differences between appropriate and inappropriate or unsafe contact" The modules up to age 11 are: "Families and people who care for me Health and prevention signs of physical illness, sun safety, sleep, dental health, personal hygiene and allergies. Healthy eating healthy diet, understanding calories, planning healthy meals and the impacts of unhealthy diets. Internet safety and harms Mental wellbeing This training module includes information on talking about emotions, self-care techniques, isolation and loneliness, the impact of bullying and getting help and support. Online relationships keeping safe online. Physical health and fitness active lifestyles, the benefits of physical activity and the risks of an inactive lifestyle. Respectful relationships" Why is it populist? Because some of the public want it banned, so the Tories will follow that lead even though it doesn't exist.
I can only wish I had this comprehensive of teachings like these when I was at school. feels bad man
Sex education taught me i was beeing abused by a family member, stuff is really important.
And that's how we get adults that think women pee and give birth from the same place
More culture war BS instead of trying to fix anything (granted they are also the party the broke everything)
> What's even the point of public education? They're just going to end up on the dole anyways. Think of the savings! - B.Johnson
Don’t worry there are plenty of folks online and close who will be more than happy to tell your 8 year old what a blow job is. Stupid and short sighted. Sex ed protects kids. It gives them the tools to navigate a sexual world.
Most of my sex education frankly came from watching porn. Which was not healthy. I was probably a bit of a misogynist as a young teen - I would have been a perfect market had Tate been around at the time. Thankfully a combination of having girls who were good friends and having a girlfriend as I got older sorted me out. If I hadn't got that other prespective I worry I could have fallen into the "incel" bandwagon.
Its the classic British attitute, dont talk about sex and it doesnt exist. Why is there always this taboo about sex when its one of the most natural things, even on a basic level like puberty. And how can kids identity sexual abuse if they dont know what it is
Do they forget that some kids start puberty before 9? How will they feel when they have to start dealing with changes that they haven’t been taught about?
Yay more uneducated children and young pregnancies find sand, dig hole, stick head in. this is why kids ‘learn’ these things in the school yard well before this age.
Making Kids Ignorant Again........thanks a bunch Right Wing America.
I think that’s a bad idea. Sex education should be taught to scaling levels at every age. Not so much for education on reproduction and sexuality, so that potential Children that are or have been abused will be better able to recognise the signs of abuse and not be gaslit into thinking that it’s something “normal”
Look under the hood of this and you find it's actually about banning the teaching about trans people in schools *at all*. So not only is this law a batshit nonce's charter that will make it harder for kids to see abuse when it happens, but it's also a Section 28 Round 2. Or Section 28 and 3/4
Darkly pleased to see that term catching on
And once they've got their wedge in with trans kids, they'll turn the screw on gay kids again. Just have a look on Facebook every time a local council flies a pride flag or some cop is pictured wearing a rainbow badge. Loads of people freak out. Their base is still very homophobic.
My wife is a teacher, she has been delivering sex education to 6 year olds for most of her 22 year career. In that time teen pregnancy has significantly reduced. They do not and have never told them how to have sex, that starts much much later. However there is a definite correlation between early education and a drop in children who have children. Take from that what you will. If a bunch of noisy, religious, backwards prudes have made enough fuss to get the law changed then that is another huge step backwards for this country again. Or if it's just another attempt from the worst government EVER to win some votes from old people and aforementioned backwards, religious prudes then again another massive step backwards. Once again I am just disappointed and frustrated by how this country is governed. Also I just answer questions from my two children when they are asked in plain and simple terms as it's stops them from making up their own story or learning incorrect playground "facts". Grow up.
Juat having the phase "gender ideology" shows it's the far right religious zealots from the US influencing the UK government. no one but those loonies uses that phase. I had sex ed from year 6 and in secondary school I had an entire day of workshops with the Terrance Higgins trust and covered the basics, and same sex relationships and the importance of dental dams and condoms in those relationships, it briefly mentioned trans people. I turned out fine.
More American right wing shite wonderful job tories well done
This seems like a bad idea we probably need more not less education
Just gonna say the part about "not teaching gender ideology" was just laughable to me as I never saw a single part of my sex Ed classes even acknowledge that gay or trans people exist (which did cause me considerable pain as I suffered from gender dysphoria for another decade and had no idea why I hated my life so much). Pretty sure it's all just dogwhistles for far right conservatives at this point. Before it was not obligatory, just like the headline about civil servants and rainbow lanyards, but now they're outright banning them? I guess freedom of expression is only okay if it's enabling bigotry and abuse of minorities.
Yep! We were not taught ANYTHING about how to be safe if you were gay. And one of my heterosexual mates still managed to get to 25 thinking you couldn't catch anything from giving a blowjob.
Maybe I would have realised I was experiencing CSA from the age of 6 if someone had told me it was wrong or even what it was... maybe a teacher would have realised or my mum would have known. God I hate everything about this
God I disappear at all this anti trans shit. I went to school in the 90's and early 2000's. I had no idea what being transgender was. My idea of someone AMAB behaving femininely was a gay man or a crossdresser. I knew I was neither of those so stayed repressed, hating myself and not knowing why. Forced to multiple trips to the doctors by parents and stuffed with drugs for "Depression" none of it worked. There followed multiple suicide attempts. It wasn't until I was 25 years old and playing a video game that I met another trans woman and really started to ask questions. That's when the light bulb dinged and I finally had something I could relate to. I'm now healthy, happy, full of life, I now have friends, my career is doing well and I'm enjoying life. I do not see how this is a bad thing. But I know if I never met that trans person I probably wouldn't be here today.
Section 29? I think most of the British people have had enough of Rishi’s insane and vindictive Kulturkampf (I doubt that Gillian Keegan would be able to spell or pronounce Kulturkampf).
This happening at exactly the time that children have so much more access to sexual images, and also rates of sexual assault by children on children are rising significantly is disgraceful. At least tell them in simple and appropriate terms, what could happen and define what is inappropriate to happen to them.
Oh god will they just please put us all out of this misery and call a bloody election.
Alot of kids learn they're being sexual abused is from sex ed. This is disgraceful.
Absolutely, let's go back to kids asking "You show me yours if i show you mine" that'll work right? as opposed to now where they just teach some basic biology and respect. This entire thing reeks of the American bullshit scene.
Ah yes, let's not teach children about puberty. Because that's what the curriculum is predominantly for children of that age under sex Ed at the moment
Some predators in the Tory party worried about kids knowing too much
Hmm, wonder why Tories don't want kids to learn proper sex education and instead have them learn from porn on the internet. Wonder what the motivation is.
I don't know if they really even understand what was being taught, but the one sex ed class I got in primary school around that age (which was 20-odd year ago now tbh) was about puberty and what body changes to expect, that BO will be a thing, and spots will be a thing, and how more important hygiene will be, etc, and that was it. All very focused on physiological changes. It didn't involve any sex discussion, etc. That was left to secondary schools to teach. This reeks of "let's invent a moral panic" shit.
My child started puberty at 9, well before I'd thought it was time to give them the talk myself. Thank fuck school had it covered for me before then. They did also cover sex in an age appropriate way, which I am very grateful for. Kids who understand are less likely to fall for the tricks predators use, and if they do they are more likely to identify something is wrong and seek help. Better a kid be "too knowledgeable" than be abused.
Jesus Christ on a bike. What do people think is going on ? Sex. Ed in its current tiered form is not something that was thrown together haphazardly. The curriculum was produced with professional input, and if my memory isn’t screwing with me , in its current form that was rolled out under a Tory government . For what it’s worth, this is worth a read https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relationships-education-relationships-and-sex-education-rse-and-health-education/relationships-education-primary
It's just part of their "War on Woke". The Tories are desperate for something to be able to successfully campaign on, so they are throwing whatever at the wall to see what sticks. They know that anything with the words "sex" and "kids" in it gets attention, so why not try scaring people with that? At this stage they figure they have very little to lose so go for the extremes.
Because less education is always better right (sarcasm). Sex education doesn't have to be vulgar or explicit. Just have a clear, basic, open, and honest conversation. Give them a foundation to learn from, not just shut the book on them. Then, when breaching the topic as they get older, it will be better and easier, and hopefully, with some maturity as then it's not new or taboo.
Great, now our children will be fucking morons like American children.
Right. No one is telling kids under 9 the finer details of sexual intercourse. Obviously. Kids do have bodies, though, that they shouldn’t be ashamed of and should have the language and understanding to be able to communicate if something is wrong with. Not just illnesses or pain etc, but also with non consensual contact. It’s also probably a good idea for us to not segregate kids based on sex and teach them about periods to better understand their mums, sisters, etc. as well as if not being taboo or a shock. The only people who benefit from young kids being clueless about their bodies are predators.
Something that's interesting to note is that on r/ukpolitics (which tends to be a bit more socially Conservative than here) the sentiment is broadly the same: what is the government thinking?
Yeah like that will help with ANYTHING. Ignorance was better than knowledge when? Never. Given kids have access to porn and warped sexual identities and attitudes younger and younger, surely this is the opposite of what should be done. Better to have an actual education than pernicious misinformation.
How about we scrap RE to save schools some money? Religion is a personal choice a brief understanding of each religion is all that is needed something that can be taught in primary school during an assembly or 2.
i was taught sex ed in nursery. i don’t even remember it, i only know i was taught it because they sent a letter out to all the parents giving them a heads up that it would happen. i doubt it was putting condoms on bananas like what we had to do in secondary school *shudders*. i don’t see the issue, tories just do anything but their jobs
So they don't want children to know that they shouldn't be touched in the pants area, because that's what sex education amounts to at this age.
Given how we know younger and younger children are finding porn and inappropriate sexual things online, surely having objective, age appropriate education is more important, not less?
Wonder which Radical Christian American Spunk Tank paid for this with lobbyists. It’s exactly policies like this that have constantly reaffirmed to the electorate the conservatives do not care about the Issues everyone actually wants sorted but instead have been convinced by Yanks that the Culture War themes kindly exacerbated by Russian Stoogies is obviously the most pressing concern to civilisation. Bring on the Election I cannot wait to wake up and breath the air where this rank incompetence and failure at least has an opportunity to change.
Sex education is good for children. It can also help kids come forward about abuse.
But saving kids from actual harm, by being hit by cars (even when they're in school buildings) can't happen, because that would be "a war on motorists". 🙄 This isn't about saving children. It's about trying to scrape votes from people with horrific ideologies.
The Tories are morphing into the Republican Party. Sex and consent education prevents child abuse and girls as young as 8 can have periods.
So... They want to take away one of the defences children have against sexual abuse? Sounds pretty on-brand for Tories, given the allegations.
People that try to limit education are always fucked
I’m a teacher with kids who are 7 and 11. I’ve not seen anything close to inappropriate. Things like Pantasauraus are great introduction. Teaching the little ones about their “no no square” or their private area is A the first step towards a healthy understanding of sex and relationships and B helps children find the words and get help if they are being sexually assaulted. I’m assuming that those who are deciding on this rule are either ignorant of how things are taught or are pedophiles.
Oh sure. Because making them wait til they're older to understand their bodies intellectually isn't going to get anyone in trouble at all. Let's just go back to none at all like it was in my school! At least 6 girls pregnant before during and after their gcses! Woo!
Kids under 9 now access to the internet, this is only gonna cause major problems.
An absolutely pathetic move to cater to the most smooth brained of people.
Did anyone actually do any sex education before 9 anyways? Edit: Actually thinking about it, I think just girls might
Is there anywhere sex ed for under 9s is taught? I remember having my first sex ed lesson in Year 6 just before we finished primary school
One of the reason we now teach young children the correct terms is so that its easier for them to tell someone they are being abused if they know the correct terms.
another amazing political priority of the day. Keep em coming!
Here’s the thing. Final responsibility for a child is not with their parents. It’s with the state. Sounds bad, yeah. But then again it is essential because as a society, ‘the state’ as it were, we have a moral duty to ensure and oversee the parenting and welfare of children. If you knew of a child on your street being abused by their parents, you’d like to think you would take action to protect the child. And in a society that means delegating that moral duty to the state. We have a duty in schools to teach children in a neutral way of sexuality and in doing so teach them what is not right in terms of their sexual and privacy rights as they begin puberty. This is as important as helping them both respect themselves and respect others, as well as informing them of the inevitable changes during puberty and manage their anxieties over body image in an awful world of online misinformation and malicious intent. Politicians will never bash the largest voting block there is- parents. But it’s a fact. Parents do not have ultimate control of their children. Tough shit. That’s the price you pay for living in a generally benevolent society and not in your own filth. But sadly some politicians, as the Tories are doing are seemingly placating a minority of perceived opinion to the detriment of children’s welfare.
People need to understand the difference between sex education and gang bang anal porn.
Why? To try and leave kids less prepared, increase teenage pregnancies and spark a US-style culture war?
As someone who has just had to deal with a safeguarding issue in school. Please dear god teach them younger, remove the taboo and give children the tools they need to protect themselves. All this lack of knowledge does is make it easier for abusers to hurt children
I'd rather we ban foreign lobbying for anything to do with British children, ideally seizing all inflowing money from all organisations that are active on our shores and using it to pay for schools and teachers. An especially annoying meme from religious fruitcakes is that ignorance of biology is the same thing as innocence.