LGBT Relationship Lessons in UK Schools

[Volumiza]

It was a grey area a decade ago. These days it's pretty black and white for most people. The only people who still find it a grey area are archaic and need to catch up to the rest of society.

Spot on.

"Grey area discussion"

Promoting a more accepting, equal and open society is black and white, I agree.

If, what and when to teach young children is very much a grey area, regardless of what you think, that involves the beliefs (right and wrong depending on your viewpoint) and religions (whatever your belief is or whether you have belief or not) of the whole of our society. Suggesting people are 'archaic' for not agreeing with you doesn't help. Loading young children's minds with things they themselves don't even know exists let alone understand makes a lot of people uncomfortable (me included) and that isn't always born out of any kind of phobia.

Is there a benefit to a child being told about these things at 4 rather than 6? If so what is it other than for adults will? Should homosexuality be taught or also trans and what about the shades of gender identity including neutral gender identity? Or do those things follow later?

Exactly. Overloading young children's brains and personal development with things they don't even need to understand at such a young age. Lets just teach them to be fair and tolerant while learning to read and write. Sex, sexuality, gender can all come later down the line if and when necessary. The comment about 'adults will' is the most prominent part of that sentence. I don't like the thought that another adults' will concerning a subject so difficult could be imposed on my children regardless of my feelings as a parent. I have my own ways of educating my children about this subject and I want to have the right to do it at my own pace.

 

[Volumiza]

One day a day will come where we'll have to choose between our values or our homes.

Let's hope not dude!

It'll never be the man on the street that's the problem, rather the opinion makers, the influencers - they'll never be happy whilst we are who we are.

Sadly, this is true of whatever the issue is.

 

[Cascarino]

I’m sorry, I just have a very low patience level for things like the belief that people can be brainwashed into being or not being homosexual.

I grew up in, live in, and teach in a society that largely still thinks that way and I have seen the effect that kind of thought process writ large has on the mental state of students I’ve taught who are homosexual.

I think we’ve spoken before about our respective environments and how there’s a lot of discrimination. While not applied with the same religious zeal, the opinions I encountered growing up here and after moving back are similarly intentioned. I think a lot of people who live in the more liberal cities have no idea how widespread and entrenched it can be in places like these. When Brexit happened or someone like Trump is sworn in, there’s a million articles from people in London wondering how such a thing could happen, when it’s painfully obvious from where I’m standing. My nan wrote my aunt out of her will because she came out as gay, and my nan was fairly mild compared to some of the idiots here. I have friends who live in built up areas and complain about things like pride because ‘it’s all been solved now’, not that pride is perfect of course but the sentiment stands, they genuinely think it’s all been sorted and everyone’s happy now.

 

[Cascarino]

.

The Western world hasn't been kind to us Muslims lately, we get mistreated and dismissed a lot of opportunities because people have their minds set on us and think they can dictate the way we live and how we think, and if we disagree on anything we are given labels and called names and they say we are extremists because they think this so called "modern Islam" is the way we have to live and believe in, if we try to conserve our faith and our way of life we are called extremists.

I would like to add that when it comes to discussing Islamophobia everybody turn to the word "tolerance", why is that? are my believes really that hurtful to you that the most you can do is "tolerate" me? I would also like to see material in schools that teach kids how to be sensitive to people of faith and different races, we ignored this issue for so long and now we have the likes of Trump and Boris Johnson.

You’ll have no disagreement from me that the Western world hasn’t been kind to Muslims. Religion in general does have a problem with homophobia though, and while compromises must be made to ensure everyone can live their lives free of religious discrimination, there are some things can’t be negotiated. I’ve met plenty of religiously devout (predominantly Christian because of where I live but I’ve met various others too) who use their religion as a justification to discriminate against gay people. It’s still a crime to be gay in many countries and that’s heartbreaking. Atheists aren’t exempt and it’s rife there too, homophobic behaviour is cancerous and it’s important to counter it at every opportunity.

 

[shamans]

Hoping your kid doesn’t turn out gay is homophobic though, because the only reason you would hope he/she doesn’t is if you feel there is something wrong with it and that it is not a normal way of life.

There is far too much homophobia in society, and I find it encouraging that such backward and archaic views (which have no place in a modern society) are challenged strongly on this forum.

But this whole thing has been misunderstood from the very start. Relationship Education is about teaching children the different sorts of relationships that exist in a modern Britain. It is not teaching children about gay sex. And schools have the ability to set when it will be taught, just so long as that it is taught in early years education, so it isn’t even set in stone that it will be taught ages 4.

The protests in Birmingham are rooted in homophobia. That homophobia stems from a religious text that they follow. Same for the Christians who are against it. As @Wibble said, religion and education should be kept apart.

This is really narrow minded from you to assume my desire of hoping my child isn't gay is rooted in religious text/homophobia. Let me tell you, I also don't want my child sleeping around or doing anything sexual until they are an independent adult outside my supervision. Now you telling me "OH SO YOU THINK IT'S ABNORMAL TO HAVE SEX IF YOU'RE 16? SCIENCE PROVES ITS NOT" has no bearing on the issue.

You can't force people into being impartial about issues. You can and should only force people to give and respect right of people. It's quite clear you hate organized religion. What if I told you you're a bigot unless you don't care if your kids turn out to missionaries or imams at a mosque? Surely you'd want them (or your close friends) or whatever to be similar to you in mindset.

I am not arguing about the school teaching thing. Doesn't seem a big deal to me personally but it's the condescending and narrow minded tone of you and other self proclaimed "modern liberals" on here that's concerning. You're saying my desire and hope that my kid turns out straight is archaic? Nonsense.

 

[shamans]

How is it a grey area, though?

Children in EYFS are taught about forming relationships and recognising similarities and differences. There are some incredibly worldly four year olds, make no mistake.

Informing these children about the Protected Characteristics and explaining that it is illegal to discriminate against them is a very simple thing to do. Some children will understand it, some will not. But all you’re doing is telling them that “some men love other men and some women love other women and that’s ok”.

There is nothing grey about that.

There is definitely a grey area in how you teach children these things. If you've studied anything about child education you would know different countries adopt different methodologies in teaching as well.

 

[shamans]

You’ll have no disagreement from me that the Western world hasn’t been kind to Muslims. Religion in general does have a problem with homophobia though, and while compromises must be made to ensure everyone can live their lives free of religious discrimination, there are some things can’t be negotiated. I’ve met plenty of religiously devout (predominantly Christian because of where I live but I’ve met various others too) who use their religion as a justification to discriminate against gay people. It’s still a crime to be gay in many countries and that’s heartbreaking. Atheists aren’t exempt and it’s rife there too, homophobic behaviour is cancerous and it’s important to counter it at every opportunity.

Where have you met these people? I have only seen it on the most extreme youtube clips or whatever. Even religious text basically say "don't be gay" not be violent to them. For instance, Judaism and Islam forbid consuming pork but you don't see people smashing the heads of pork eaters.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Hoping your kid doesn’t turn out gay is homophobic though, because the only reason you would hope he/she doesn’t is if you feel there is something wrong with it and that it is not a normal way of life.

There is far too much homophobia in society, and I find it encouraging that such backward and archaic views (which have no place in a modern society) are challenged strongly on this forum.

But this whole thing has been misunderstood from the very start. Relationship Education is about teaching children the different sorts of relationships that exist in a modern Britain. It is not teaching children about gay sex. And schools have the ability to set when it will be taught, just so long as that it is taught in early years education, so it isn’t even set in stone that it will be taught ages 4.

The protests in Birmingham are rooted in homophobia. That homophobia stems from a religious text that they follow. Same for the Christians who are against it. As @Wibble said, religion and education should be kept apart.

Bit harsh this. I look forward to talking about girls with my boy, since I can relate to that. You are allowed to have preferences without being labeled phobic.

 

[Tarrou]

Hoping your kid doesn’t turn out gay is homophobic though, because the only reason you would hope he/she doesn’t is if you feel there is something wrong with it and that it is not a normal way of life.

There is far too much homophobia in society, and I find it encouraging that such backward and archaic views (which have no place in a modern society) are challenged strongly on this forum.

But this whole thing has been misunderstood from the very start. Relationship Education is about teaching children the different sorts of relationships that exist in a modern Britain. It is not teaching children about gay sex. And schools have the ability to set when it will be taught, just so long as that it is taught in early years education, so it isn’t even set in stone that it will be taught ages 4.

The protests in Birmingham are rooted in homophobia. That homophobia stems from a religious text that they follow. Same for the Christians who are against it. As @Wibble said, religion and education should be kept apart.

How about just not wanting your kid to have to go through whatever challenges society throws at them for being gay?

Would anyone actually choose to be gay given the choice? Just in terms of how society views you and treats you throughout your life - it's harder than being straight.

 

[esmufc07]

But surely hoping they won’t be gay means there’ll be a sense of disappointment from the parent if they turn out to be so? Perhaps homophobic was the wrong word to use so if I offended any of you I apologise.

 

[Cascarino]

Where have you met these people? I have only seen it on the most extreme youtube clips or whatever. Even religious text basically say "don't be gay" not be violent to them. For instance, Judaism and Islam forbid consuming pork but you don't see people smashing the heads of pork eaters.

If you’ve only seen people being discriminated due to religious beliefs on the most extreme YouTube clips then I have to question your powers of observation Shamans, or I think youve blinded yourself to it. People are being locked away and killed on a daily basis due to religious beliefs. You say you’ve never seen someone getting their head smashed for eating pork, what about for killing a cow? For following a slightly different version of a religion? Or not following any religion?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

How about just not wanting your kid to have to go through whatever challenges society throws at them for being gay?

Would anyone actually choose to be gay given the choice? Just in terms of how society views you and treats you throughout your life - it's harder than being straight.

How about just wanting your kid to be happy in their own skin, whatever sexual preference they have?

 

[Zlatattack]

How about just wanting your kid to be happy in their own skin, whatever sexual preference they have?

I know what's coming next, but here we go...

Pro-creation is biologically in built into us. It's absolutely essential for the survival of our species Now homosexuality is nothing new, it's clearly something built into some of us and those of us who are homosexual can't pro-create. You can adopt or whatever, or get egg/sperm donors, but you don't natually pro-create. Those of us who do pro-create, will have some sort of base boilogical desire to see our kids do the same.

I think it's completely natural to be hetrosexual and want your kids to be hetrosexual; biologically speaking.

 

[Sweet Square]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I know what's coming next, but here we go...

Pro-creation is biologically in built into us. It's absolutely essential for the survival of our race. Now homosexuality is nothing new, it's clearly something built into some of us and those of us who are homosexual can't pro-create. You can adopt or whatever, or get egg/sperm donors, but you don't natually pro-create. Those of us who do pro-create, will have some sort of base boilogical desire to see our kids do the same.

I think it's completely natural to be hetrosexual and want your kids to be hetrosexual; biologically speaking.

There's so much wrong here I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with "procreation being essential to the survival of our race."

I'm going to hope you meant species there and you're not thinking any one race is superior to the other.

Next, your idea that homsexuals can't naturally procreate. Yes they can. They're just likely to choose not to.

Finally, your postulation that parents have a natural biologically driven desire to see their children procreate is false, biology doesn't work that way. Once you procreate and raise them from infancy it's pretty well job done. The desire you speak of is conditioned by society, not biology. There is no biological excuse for preferring your kid doesn't turn out gay. Suggesting there is just comes across badly.

 

[4bars]

There's so much wrong here I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with "procreation being essential to the survival of our race."

I'm going to hope you meant species there and you're not thinking any one race is superior to the other.

Next, your idea that homsexuals can't naturally procreate. Yes they can. They're just likely to choose not to.

Finally, your postulation that parents have a natural biologically driven desire to see their children procreate is false, biology doesn't work that way. Once you procreate and raise them from infancy it's pretty well job done. The desire you speak of is conditioned by society, not biology. There is no biological excuse for preferring your kid doesn't turn out gay. Suggesting there is just comes across badly.

That statement is so right that you only need to see how prides of lions, groups of gorillas, monkeys and many other animals kills the kids of their own kids as they are seen as competition for your procreation. Even their own kids that try to copulate.

 

[Kag]

There is definitely a grey area in how you teach children these things. If you've studied anything about child education you would know different countries adopt different methodologies in teaching as well.

I know a lot about child education in UK primary schools. I have carried out and observed quality teaching and learning in relation to PSHE and there is no such grey area in the curriculum presented to our pupils.

From EYFS (as I’ve explained in detail earlier throughout this thread) to the end of KS2, pupils are taught age-appropriate content that enables them to acknowledge similarities and differences, explore the world around them, consider the wider world in which they inhabit and develop a secure understanding of the nine Protected Characteristics. It is illegal, in this country, to discriminate against these Characteristics.

The only grey area that exists does so within the ignorance and/or bigotry of others.

 

[Smores]

I know a lot about child education in UK primary schools. I have carried out and observed quality teaching and learning in relation to PSHE and there is no such grey area in the curriculum presented to our pupils.

From EYFS (as I’ve explained in detail earlier throughout this thread) to the end of KS2, pupils are taught age-appropriate content that enables them to acknowledge similarities and differences, explore the world around them, consider the wider world in which they inhabit and develop a secure understanding of the nine Protected Characteristics. It is illegal, in this country, to discriminate against these Characteristics.

The only grey area that exists does so within the ignorance and/or bigotry of others.

It is ignorance yes but most people have stated they'd have to see the content to say if it's appropriate. You obviously have that benefit of knowing it is but in the wider scheme of change and hypotheticals thrown around in this thread then that's the grey area rather than the current teaching.

I mean you'd presumably say that the content could be inappropriate as per any subject just because it isn't right now? Parents will have different views on that from those who just think children dont need to know at 4 or 5 to the religious who find it for some reason offensive.

I personally don't think wider LGBT stuff should be taught until 7 or 8 but I'm happy for equality and for books to have same sex parents etc at 4. No one has yet explained why that view is invalid beyond the usual low brow snippy comments.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

How about just wanting your kid to be happy in their own skin, whatever sexual preference they have?

Why can't I love my children no matter what but still have my own personal dreams and ambitions for them? That doesn't mean if they turn out different ill be disappointed, it just means it will be different than I imagined.

 

[shamans]

If you’ve only seen people being discriminated due to religious beliefs on the most extreme YouTube clips then I have to question your powers of observation Shamans, or I think youve blinded yourself to it. People are being locked away and killed on a daily basis due to religious beliefs. You say you’ve never seen someone getting their head smashed for eating pork, what about for killing a cow? For following a slightly different version of a religion? Or not following any religion?

I'm talking about the western world. I haven't heard of any sizable group that smashes people's heads for eating pork

 

[4bars]

Why can't I love my children no matter what but still have my own personal dreams and ambitions for them? That doesn't mean if they turn out different ill be disappointed, it just means it will be different than I imagined.

You can, but jeopardizing that your kid lives in a bigot society would be a very shortsighted, very selfish and dangerous...for your kid itself. What will bring me to what kind of parenting you persue and questions if those dreams and ambitious are right (morally included)

 

[shamans]

There's so much wrong here I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with "procreation being essential to the survival of our race."

I'm going to hope you meant species there and you're not thinking any one race is superior to the other.

Next, your idea that homsexuals can't naturally procreate. Yes they can. They're just likely to choose not to.

Finally, your postulation that parents have a natural biologically driven desire to see their children procreate is false, biology doesn't work that way. Once you procreate and raise them from infancy it's pretty well job done. The desire you speak of is conditioned by society, not biology. There is no biological excuse for preferring your kid doesn't turn out gay. Suggesting there is just comes across badly.

What on earth does that mean? Likely to choose not to is exactly the point. As a parent having a desire like that is perfectly normal. Your second point btw is wrong.

 

[Grinner]

I'm talking about the western world. I haven't heard of any sizable group that smashes people's heads for eating pork

Would you do it if there were no legal consequences?

 

[4bars]

I'm talking about the western world. I haven't heard of any sizable group that smashes people's heads for eating pork

They do for beef in some areas in India...really, they do.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/20/mobs-killing-muslims-india-narendra-modi-bjp

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

You can, but jeopardizing that your kid lives in a bigot society would be a very shortsighted, very selfish and dangerous...for your kid itself

How am I promoting a bigoted society when I myself would love, welcome and care for my child no matter what? People talking absolute garbage as usual in threads like these.

 

[shamans]

They do for beef in some areas in India...really, they do.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/20/mobs-killing-muslims-india-narendra-modi-bjp

Talking about the western world.

 

[4bars]

How am I promoting a bigoted society when I myself would love, welcome and care for my child no matter what? People talking absolute garbage as usual in threads like these.

Not wanting your kid to be influenced by premature sex/gender education because you aspire for him to be heterosexual

 

[4bars]

Talking about the western world.

Sorry I misread that part

 

[Kag]

It is ignorance yes but most people have stated they'd have to see the content to say if it's appropriate. You obviously have that benefit of knowing it is but in the wider scheme of change and hypotheticals thrown around in this thread then that's the grey area rather than the current teaching.

I mean you'd presumably say that the content could be inappropriate as per any subject just because it isn't right now? Parents will have different views on that from those who just think children dont need to know at 4 or 5 to the religious who find it for some reason offensive.

I personally don't think wider LGBT stuff should be taught until 7 or 8 but I'm happy for equality and for books to have same sex parents etc at 4. No one has yet explained why that view is invalid beyond the usual low brow snippy comments.

But you can’t hold an informed opinion on the delivery of PSHE within UK primary schools without a secure understanding of the age-appropriate content taught within the curriculum. Forgive me for standing on my plateau, but I find it difficult not to sneer at accusations levelled against schools from people that, by and large, haven’t got a bloody clue what they’re talking about.

Parents are entitled to their views. Their views are important. It’s also important to recognise that they are parents and not practitioners. They aren’t involved in policy, or delivery, or teaching and learning on the ground floor. If they wish to do so then there are many schools begging for hungry governors to join the ranks and improve their effectiveness.

As for your personal view, what do you mean by “wider LGBT stuff?” I’d need you to clarify that before I could reply accurately.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Not wanting your kid to be influenced by premature sex/gender education because you aspire for him to be heterosexual

Bit of a leap from my comments?! I am open to education from day one! Being homosexual is completely normal, it should be just as common to see a homosexual couple in magazine etc as a heterosexual couple. That doesn't change the fact that I would still like a straight child because it will make their own lives easier and I have a bias towards wanting grandchildren. I even know gay friends who say they wouldn't want their own child to be gay so stop with the social justice warrior attitude.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

What on earth does that mean? Likely to choose not to is exactly the point. As a parent having a desire like that is perfectly normal. Your second point btw is wrong.

His presumption that homosexuals can't procreate through intercourse is incorrect, they have all of the biological facilities required to procreate.

Biology doesn't deal in wishes. Yes, it's what most would consider a normal desire but it's one conditioned by society and emotion not biology.

 

[shamans]

His presumption that homosexuals can't procreate through intercourse is incorrect, they have all of the biological facilities required to procreate.

Biology doesn't deal in wishes. Yes, it's what most would consider a normal desire but it's one conditioned by society and emotion not biology.

That's not what he's saying. Homosexuals are OBVIOUSLY less likely to have kids. As for as the conditioning, I don't think that's true. You make kids, take care of them and what to be "immortal" with your genetic imprint passed down.

 

[carvajal]

Personally I would not talk about sexuality until 10/11 years although I would talk about relationships.
Children from 4 to 6 years old could be introduced to a story of a prince who rescues another prince, or a drawing with two moms,etc.
Recently I had to explain to my son all this subject (he is 10) .He knew a little for the friends and anatomy for the school and we completed the holes at home.
Personally I appreciate that it was in that way although every family is a different world I guess

 

[Smores]

But you can’t hold an informed opinion on the delivery of PSHE within UK primary schools without a secure understanding of the age-appropriate content taught within the curriculum. Forgive me for standing on my plateau, but I find it difficult not to sneer at accusations levelled against schools from people that, by and large, haven’t got a bloody clue what they’re talking about.

Parents are entitled to their views. Their views are important. It’s also important to recognise that they are parents and not practitioners. They aren’t involved in policy, or delivery, or teaching and learning on the ground floor. If they wish to do so then there are many schools begging for hungry governors to join the ranks and improve their effectiveness.

As for your personal view, what do you mean by “wider LGBT stuff?” I’d need you to clarify that before I could reply accurately.

Nothing wrong with that i don't think many here have thrown accusation at the schools and more caution that they don't know what's being taught so they'd like to understand as they have their own views which may or may not be overshadowed.

By wider stuff i meant anything identity related really i don't think I'd want my 4 or 5 year old learning anything that points to them reflecting on themselves rather than awareness and tolerance of others. Stuff like feeling the wrong gender or being gender neutral for instance is unnecessary because the idea of gender isn't something fully formed anyway. A few years down the line sure. I don't imagine any of this is taught to be fair.

To be fair i can think of many other issues I'd want parental control over too such as the idea of eating meat and veganism, climate change, brexit.

 

[4bars]

Bit of a leap from my comments?! I am open to education from day one! Being homosexual is completely normal, it should be just as common to see a homosexual couple in magazine etc as a heterosexual couple. That doesn't change the fact that I would still like a straight child because it will make their own lives easier and I have a bias towards wanting grandchildren. I even know gay friends who say they wouldn't want their own child to be gay so stop with the social justice warrior attitude.

Fair enough then. Sorry for jumping to conclusions. I apologize. Hope we reach the point no one has to be worried to have a gay kid because society.

 

[4bars]

That's not what he's saying. Homosexuals are OBVIOUSLY less likely to have kids. As for as the conditioning, I don't think that's true. You make kids, take care of them and what to be "immortal" with your genetic imprint passed down.

Is not true, biologically you are driven to throw your sperm into a female and protect your kids at most. what happen after your kids, biologically speaking, it doesn't matter

 

[shamans]

Is not true, biologically you are driven to throw your sperm into a female and protect your kids at most. what happen after your kids, biologically speaking, it doesn't matter

Why do I want my kids to be healthy then? Surely the idea of kids is to see your lineage pass down?

 

[4bars]

Why do I want my kids to be healthy then? Surely the idea of kids is to see your lineage pass down?

Because as @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær said

Once you procreate and raise them from infancy it's pretty well job done. The desire you speak of is conditioned by society, not biology. There is no biological excuse for preferring your kid doesn't turn out gay. Suggesting there is just comes across badly.

 

[shamans]

Because as @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær said

Yeah but I don't think it is. Wanting to be immortal is common in animal kingdom as well

 

[4bars]

Yeah but I don't think it is. Wanting to be immortal is common in animal kingdom as well

Most of the documentaries will show you that the dominant male will only care of the first generation at best. Actually not a few of the males once they finish copulating, they could not care less. Mothers is a different story. They care about their children more. But not grandchildren (might be an exception).

Males, at some point they can even see their kids as competition and they kill them

Anything as humans and as groups in animals that made them protect as a group is, social behaviour