Following on from the introduction we move onto “creating safer spaces” as per the resource discussed in this blog. This is where the activities begin, which are lesson plans for educators to use with their students.
Again, the importance of educators working with students is highlighted in order to be able to “work together to create a positive and safe space”
It is emphasised that educators should “not shy away from topics that may feel uncomfortable or unsafe as there is value in moving out of our comfort zones and having our thoughts and values challenged.” – in other words, they absolutely know that the subject of sex is not appropriate for children, but they’re going to teach it regardless, and the educators better just get used to it. This is a very sensitive subject and should only be “discussed” by experts in the field of safeguarding children, and shouldn’t be falling on the heads of teachers who are not trained in child safeguarding, the weight of responsibility is both unfair and extremely dangerous.
I’m not suggesting that all teachers are predatory, however, it would be foolish to deny that predators aren’t attracted to schools considering they are full of children, where they obviously have access to them. This is not an opinion, this is a fact. According to the The Data set from the Education Workforce Council, fitness to practice panels reveal Educator perpetrated Child Sex abuse accounts for over a third of all proven cases of unacceptable professional conduct. It is also stated that sex abuse within schools is “an open secret”.
How do parents feel about strangers speaking to their children about sex in general? At this stage some of you may feel that it’s appropriate for teachers to teach your young about sex, based upon the assumption that teachers are qualified to safeguard your children around this subject. This is a very dangerous assumption and that will become more evident as we progress into further chapters.
Most people who learn of this new curriculum initially say things like “I can’t imagine the teachers wanting to teach this stuff to children” and they would be correct in some cases. Obviously, as above, there are those that will seek out positions where they have access to children because they’re child predators, there are those who will not teach this because they know it’s wrong, (these are the ones who will leave the profession, as well as those who have already left), and there are those who are freshly indoctrinated by the woke far left themselves, who actually believe that it’s empowering to teach children about sex. The former and the latter are clearly dangerous individuals.
According to the authors, in order to create a safe space for LGBT+ people there should be posters on the walls showing that these spaces are LGBT+ inclusive. This seems like a reasonable idea until you realise that these posters are literally littered all through-out the school, on doors, in corridors, on white boards, within notices, everywhere you look. To get an idea of how they’ve redesigned schools to accommodate, read my blog “Educate and Devastate” – you simply cannot get away from it, wherever you go within the school environment, and beyond.
Within the ‘points to consider’ section of this chapter, again we are informed of the importance of pleasure and desire. Although for both sexes, as mixed groups, we’re advised that some activities should be focused with a single sex group.
“For example, work around positive relationships, masculinity, pleasure and the body. Make sure that you don’t fall into the trap of only exploring masculinity with boys and femininity with girls. Remember that everyone needs to learn about different bodies and genders, as well as about menstruation, contraception, pleasure and desire.”
Notice how menstruation, something that is important for girls to learn about, is thrown in with pleasure and desire surrounding sex? It goes on to state:
“When doing single gender work allow trans and non-binary young people to choose which group they would feel most comfortable in.”
Although this may seem fair and inclusive, this choice is extended to bathrooms, changing rooms and other private spaces. Single sex spaces were created to protect women and girls, whose rights have been completely trampled on in place of the rights of males who identify as females, which is contrary to the Equalities Act.
In an activity for twelve year old’s regarding creating safe spaces, an example is used asking the students to imagine they knew nothing about themselves and that they were entering a brand new society.
“You don’t know if you are gay, or straight, or bisexual, or whether you are transgender or questioning your gender. You also don’t know whether you have had sex before or not, or whether you have been sexually abused in your past or have escaped this kind of trauma.”
Just a reminder that this activity is designed for twelve year old’s. At twelve years old children are still innocent. Or at least they were a few years ago. Unfortunately the normalisation of sex to younger and younger children has been creeping into society for a long time and that is why we’re at this stage where educators think that talking freely and openly to children about sex is acceptable. It is not.
In an activity called ‘Sex Talk’ aimed at eleven year old’s and older, students are asked to brainstorm the words they would use to talk about sex when talking to friends, their parents, a teacher, nurse or other professional, including different ways of describing people who have sex or people they are attracted to….
They go on to explain what pronouns are in more detail and also state the importance of not accidentally assuming or guessing someone’s gender – being ‘misgendered’ can cause offence and upset. Children should also be aware of gender ‘diversity’ at this age according to this resource, even though they should still be riding bikes and playing in parks as far as I’m concerned.
There is a heavy push towards being ‘inclusive’ for ALL, including transgender and ‘genderqueer’. As discussed in the introduction, ‘queer’ is a very deceptive term and can mean ANYTHING sexual, including pedophilia, bestiality and incestuous relationships, which are now being normalised through the corporate owned mainstream media. Here are some examples.
In aid of ensuring that educators do not make assumptions and misgender their students, it is advised that they always check which pronouns are preferred by each student and to only use the word ‘partner’ as opposed to boyfriend or girlfriend, when referring to relationships. How on earth do they find the time to do any Maths, English, or Science?
It is explained to the teachers that a young person may choose to ‘come out’ to them as educators as a result of RSE lessons because these activities signal to the student that they are a ‘safe’ person to talk to. I find this extremely dangerous. These are extremely sensitive issues that actually shouldn’t be discussed with strangers in a classroom. The children do not know these people, regardless of parent-teacher relationship status, and resembles a sinister form of grooming, whether the educator realises it or not.
Within this section of the publication, educators are expressly instructed:
“You are not required to pass on information about a young person’s sexual orientation or gender identity to anybody else unless you suspect there is an additional safeguarding issue.”
This has happened here in Wales, at least once. How do you feel about this? Not only purposefully keeping this information away from the parents, but also encouraging your children into extremely dangerous ideologies, whereby if you as the parent don’t affirm your child’s mental illness, which has been mostly influenced within the schools and online, then Social Services can get involved and remove your child from your care.
My blog on Dr Elly Barnes “Educate and Devastate” explains how this agenda proudly boasts to ‘smash heteronormativity’ and promote ‘queer theory’ instead, as discussed in part one of this blog. This is why we’re witnessing the abomination of hypersexuality – especially in young children, absolutely everywhere.
“In your practice, talk about people of ‘all genders’ rather than ‘both genders’ and challenge the heterosexist assumptions. For example, that there are only two genders, that everyone identifies as male of female, that everyone identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth, that being straight/heterosexual is ‘normal’.”
Although this resource is aimed at eleven years plus, this is actually being taught to primary aged children also. According to the authors, based on this paragraph, being heterosexual is not normal, as well as suggesting that there are more than two ‘genders’ and that you may not be the sex you were born as. This is totally against basic biology and scientific fact! Notice that they also use ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ interchangeably, which confuses people. Your gender is your sex, they are not different in any way, even if so called ‘academics’ say so.
Moving onto the next activity, aimed at eleven years, students are given examples on how to make school more inclusive for LGBTQ+ and what they can do to help create a safer space for this minority group.
* What posters or wall coverings denote this space is safe and LGBTQ+ friendly?
* What toilets are available – is there a gender neutral toilet?
* What everyday words are said in the space that could be considered sexist, homophobic, biphobic or transphobic? (e.g. phrases like ‘that’s so gay’ or terms like ‘slag’)?
* What assumptions are made in the room that could be considered sexist, homophobic, biphobic or transphobic? How are these expressed?
* What action is taken if someone does express sexist, homophobic, biphobic or transphobic language or assumptions?
* What ground rules should be put in place to make sure a safe space is developed and maintained?
Having spoken to staff that work in secondary schools and as discussed earlier on in this blog, I’ve been told that there are indeed posters and wall coverings littered absolutely everywhere, all over the school, and on most classroom doors. What defines any of these so called “phobias?” WHO creates that definition? We’ve seen cases of students being suspended and thrown out of the classroom for suggesting the fact that there are only two genders. Here is just one example from Scotland. This isn’t an isolated case either. A drag queen, an ADULT entertainer was invited into a school on the Isle of Wight just last week who traumatised some of the children, in particular one that stated there were only two genders. Thankfully, the backlash of this incident which left one pupil shouted at by this adult entertainer has forced the suspension of the new RSE curriculum. Read about that here. These “ground rules” under the guise of “inclusivity” are nothing more than authoritarian slurs and it seems that anyone to disagree at all is being punished. This is anything but “inclusive”.
In an activity targeted at thirteen year old’s involving quick fire debates, students are encouraged with examples published in this resource, and to “make up their own statements” to use additionally. Take a look at some of these statements. Remember these are thirteen year old CHILDREN and the age of consent is sixteen. This is absolutely disgusting and most parents have absolutely no clue that this content is being delivered to their children without their knowledge. This is NOT safeguarding children as they pertain, as discussed previously, this sex education is a “sex positive” approach first and foremost. They are not teaching the consequences of early sex, they’re teaching them all about the different ways you can have pleasurable sex, as you’ll see from examples in later chapters.
In section 3 of this chapter ‘Developing a curriculum with young people’ it is noted….
“Although not covered here, remember it is a good idea to consult and involve parents in developing and reviewing your RSE curriculum”.
Absolutely astounding. I almost spat out my drink when I read this sentence, knowing full well that parents were/are not only not informed about any of this material, they are purposefully kept in the dark about it as educators are instructed NOT to inform parents! This little sentence is nothing more than a token gesture. They have absolutely zero intention of telling the parents, hence why so many parents STILL don’t know what is going on in their children’s classrooms.
An activity titled “What Jars You?” for eleven plus encourages participants to think about what is unfair and unequal in society. In order to identify key issues it states that it is a “great way of embedding social change and activism within your curriculum from the start.”
This is more evidence that this agenda fully intends to manipulate social change within the environment, with only one way to achieve it – through the children. Key questions for participants to consider are:
* What shocks you about relationships, sex, gender and sexuality today?
* What disturbs you? What disturbs others?
* What would you like to change about sex and relationships today?
Please be reminded of the age of these students. Do you think this is “age appropriate” so far? As discussed within the introduction of this blog, there is no such thing as “age appropriate” when we’re talking about sex. Anyone under the age of 18 is a minor, regardless of “age of consent” – these children aren’t even teenagers and they’re being exposed to sexual content, as well as being encouraged in sex positive activism, it’s abhorrent.
Within the key questions at the end of this section for educators to consider when involving young people in the RSE curriculum design, (and the only time that it’s mentioned throughout the whole 300 plus pages of this resource) it reads:
“Have the needs of participants with special educational needs been met?”
I can assure you that the needs of NO child have been met, let alone those with special needs, who ironically are at a much higher risk of harm by being exposed to this curriculum and the graphic explicit material that comes with it. Notwithstanding the ideology of ‘being born in the wrong body’ as discussed earlier.
At the end of this chapter, Professor Emma Renolds of Cardiff University is thanked for her contribution of an activity designed for age eleven plus called ‘Sort it out’. As mentioned in part one of this blog, Emma Renolds believes in queer theory and doesn’t believe in childhood innocence, therefore doesn’t believe in childhood full stop. She is also responsible for writing the framework for the RSE curriculum for the whole of Wales, appointed by previous Education Minister, liar Kirsty Williams, who consistently told us that our new RSE curriculum was a Welsh curriculum and not an adopted global curriculum written by the United Nations.
However, on page 40 of this publication directly from Emma Renolds, it states that this activity was “Using images based on the key concepts in the UNESCO (2018) International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education”. Furthermore, UNESCO is mentioned another four times over the next few pages. So much for a ‘Welsh based curriculum’ apparently put together by educators, professionals, experts, parents and students from Wales! Such utter LIES!
To finish off this chapter, students from fourteen years were shown this image and asked…
* What is this?
* What was it used for?
* When might it have been made?
In pairs the children were asked to discuss:
* Why would a parent want to give such an object to a daughter on this occasion? (Discuss ideas: parents play a role in preparing their children for sexual relationships. How does this happen today? Is this object meant to be sexually arousing or educational? Would a parent today give something like this to their child?)
* Can you think of words to describe this image of a couple? (Discussion ideas: Is the depiction intimate? Affectionate? Showing mutual pleasure?)
* Why would parents hide this at the bottom of the trunk? (It could be seen that sex is a taboo subject. Alternatively this could be seen as placing the object somewhere safe and a special indicating that sex is something to be treasured.)
* Do you think they would have given such an object to a son as well? Are girls expected to be more innocent, for example?
Students were then asked to design their own modern day object for their parents and teachers to use to help start conversations about sex.
This is normalising incest as far as I’m concerned, please listen to Australian MP Bernie Finn in Parliament speaking about ten year old little girls who were sent home to ask their fathers about their erections and ejaculations as part of their homework.
References of interest at the end of Chapter two are: