A women’s rights group has accused Swindon Borough Council of promoting “soft porn” through its sex education materials, including a controversial ‘Genderbread Man’. The Mail has the story.
A council’s sex education teaching materials amount to “soft porn”, a representative for a women’s rights organisation has claimed, after the council were forced to withdraw some of its recommended teaching material.
Documents seen by MailOnline concerning the lessons included the controversial ‘Genderbread man’ – which shows someone’s gender identity, gender expression and anatomical sex to be different things.
The classes, recommended in Swindon Borough Council’s Relationships and Sex Education Programme, explained that sex is “assigned” at birth.
Caroline Ffiske from Conservatives for Women, a right-wing group which opposes the rights of trans people in single-sex spaces, told MailOnline some of the resources were tantamount to “soft porn”.
She said: “In the hands of children who are too young, some of these images effectively become soft porn.
“So that is where we have got to. These images are sexual, and early sexualisation harms children, eroding boundaries and destroying innocence. Now we are normalising ‘trusted adults’ sharing sexual images with children.
The documents also promoted the controversial ‘Genderbread man’ – which shows someone’s gender identity, gender expression and anatomical sex to be different things.
The pack included a map of a ‘Gender Galaxy’ – where gender expression is said to have “infinite possibilities” and Assigned Sex is shown to be separate and divided from Gender Identity.
“That teachers and council workers can’t see this shows how untenable this agenda has become.
“Perhaps it is time to close it down; let parents manage these sensitive and important conversations; and have schools go back to their core remit.”
But now the council has rowed back on their teaching plans – removing the support pack from circulation and waiting for new Government guidance.
A Swindon Borough Council spokesperson said: “Swindon Borough Council has removed the RSE curriculum support pack which was produced and the link for schools is no longer available.
“The Department for Education is currently consulting on new guidance for schools, which the Council will consider once received.”
Alongside a diagram of a Genderbread Person, the pack included a map of a ‘Gender Galaxy’ – where gender expression is said to have “infinite possibilities” and Assigned Sex is shown to be separate and divided from Gender Identity.
The second system is shown to have 10 different planets, but a note at the bottom encourages children to: “create your own planet (comet or moon!)”.
The guidance also gave the schoolchildren advice on how to make a dental dam – which is used for oral sex.
And other parts of the pack gave advice on how to apply condoms used for anal sex in to the rectum.
It is not claimed that guidance around condoms or dental dams is given to young children.
In the pack, schools were supposed to encourage children as young as 11 to make models of their genitals, sexual organs and bodily fluids from supermarket goods in gender-questioning classes savaged by parents.
In class plans seen by MailOnline, teachers were urged to divide children into two teams and give them items including bananas, pears, walnuts and hand lotion.
The youngsters – all in Year Seven – were then expected to fashion a penis, a uterus, testicles and ‘prostate fluid’ from the ingredients.
The guidance included detailed diagrams of sexual anatomy.
The document from the council suggests children as young as 11 should hear ‘chest tissue’ rather than ‘breasts’ from their teachers.
This part of the lesson play for 11 year-olds featured a model making element from food goods.
Lessons also encouraged the children to “imagine they were a different gender” and what they would look forward to if they were that person.
And in perhaps the most concerning part of the programme teachers were urged not to use the term ‘breasts’.
The document insisted “The term chest tissue can be used interchangeably because this language recognises that trans or non-binary people may feel negatively towards their breasts”.
Peter Williams, Director of the Family Education Trust, said some sex education classes being taught in schools were becoming dangerous.
He told MailOnline: “The increasing evidence of this kind of material related to sexuality and ‘gender’ being exposed to children in schools through RSE teaching is profoundly disturbing and appalling.
“The explicit content reported by very understandably outraged and concerned parents normalises sexual behaviour amongst children, breaking down their natural innocence and reticence to such activity and potentially leaving them open to peer abuse and even grooming by adults.
“Just as worrying is the presence of gender ideology in this same teaching, which also seeks to present the identity dysphoria connected with ‘transgenderism’ as ordinary, and encouraging children at a vulnerable stage of their development into a self-understanding which later may have life-changing and even life-ruining consequences.
“All this shows how widespread ideology under the guide of RSE is trumping a proper concern for safeguarding, and betraying schools’ duty of care for children in the process. There needs to be total transparency and far fuller engagement with parents and guardians before such material is shown to their children, a related right for them to veto any inappropriate material or withdraw their children from all RSE, and an enabling of parents to fulfil their role as primary educators and carers.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“The rights of trans people”
There is no such thing as a trans person
There are absolutely people who claim to be persons despite they aren’t. For instance, men who believe that wearing a dress combined with high heels and a neckbeard would be some sort of special identity (which can conveniently be changed to anything else at a moments notice). In reality, this is just maximized idiocy of the consumer society where people self-identify as functional appendixes of their attire.
Indeed
I’m happy about the term “transvestite” but I don’t recognise the concept of “trans gender”.
I can’t imagine that the above illustrations were pixelated when being viewed by children, so why are they pixelated for this article? Seems a bit precious to me.
It’s important that parents push back against this woke nonsense, the days when we could trust our schools to do the right thing are sadly in the past. But pushback does work.
The legalisation of PAEDOPHILIA is the aim.. nothing less. Destroy it or lose our children to the outright perverts running this evil..
I wonder when simulation training will be introduced before moving on to “Escape your virginity” classes.
Oh I’ve no doubt they’ve already got that planned and ready to go..
Dental dam? I had to look that up. I’m 66 and I think that the best way of avoiding nasty diseases is to pick your partners more carefully and spend a decent time getting to know if their standards are the same as yours.
When did this sort of discussion come within the purview of the Education Authority?and isn’t it time parents took it back?
Seems to me if enough of them said no, it would be stopped in it’s tracks…
The outcry should targert Relationship and Sex Education as something that’s part of a curriculum. Practially all humans have relationships involving sex but this is considered something that’s private and not public. Hence, the state has absolutely no business messing with it.
This is State-sanctioned grooming.
Like how the pictures on here for adults are blurred out! But they’re perfectly happy to show them to kids?! Ffs, peido’s!
Ooh, the downticker agrees with peido’s?
Conspicuously absent from all of this seems to be any mention of the actual biological purpose of sex or anatomy.
Beyond all the post-Marxist societal deconstruction, groomy vibes and so on, there’s something parasitical about it I find it hard to put into words.
This ideological movement seems irresistibly drawn to children. The only explanation I can think of as to why (other than opportunity for indoctrination) is that it is being driven by a group of narcissistic adults who have failed to overcome important stages of development themselves, and so see children as no more than an extension of their own needs.
Amongst these is a desire for self-infantilisation: to be coddled, indulge in permanent ‘play’, oversimplify the external world into black-and-white triviality, fall back on emotional impulsivity to control relationships with others, to swing between unregulated states of mindless conformity and performative rebellion against imagined authority, and probably most importantly, to normalise the childlike concept of moral equivalence that lies at the core of intersectionality (“this thing is unfair so I deserve special treatment on the basis of who I am or who I claim to represent”). All of this is a way of living in fantasy, and divorcing from a challenging and sometimes ugly, unfair reality.
For them, forcing adult ideas of sexuality and identitarian ideology onto children – making them complicit ideological objects in their adult ‘play’ – seems to be a psychological way of closing the gap between adult and child, making the fantasy world they need to inhabit a bit more real.
Motivations really don’t matter. Random adult strangers who happen to work for the state shouldn’t be holding lengthy talks about sexual technicalities to prepubescent children and the state has no business trying to regulate (in detail!) aspects of the intimate lifes of its future citizens. That incorrigible busybodies are among the least dubious characters this ‘profession’ attracts is a side aspect.
Incorrigible busybodies are the ones enthusiastically holding the door open for the most dubious characters, and given that this seems part of an ideological march, I’d argue that it’s extremely important to understand their motivations (whether my speculative assessment is correct or way off the mark).
The part of the state apparently trying to interfere in the intimate lives of its future citizens is acting way outside of its remit. Unless any government minister has approved of smuggling cultural Marxism into the curriculum behind closed doors, the State is running a parallel programme rooted in far-left ideology, and doing its best to normalise it. This ideology has a religious appeal to the sections of the state pushing it that overrides any sense of ethics or official responsibility, and hides itself under a cloak of compassion and tolerance to protect itself from scrutiny.
By the time this government is replaced, it will have bedded in and become another step towards implementation of a social order very few people have voted for or want. A future left wing government will likely consider its victory a sign of popular approval of this ideology and accelerate its implementation, if only to appease a fringe which has already shown a capacity for calculated agitation.
For anyone with concerns about its potential to vastly increase opportunities for child abuse, this ideology should be the enemy, and to fight it effectively, they need to know it and understand its appeal.
Also missing from the descriptions of sex is love!
Absolutely.
I’ve just found out what a dental dam is!
And they are teaching this to children??
Debauchery and depravity, they should be locked up!
We are fast approaching “The fall of Rome” levels of depravity.
I would have expected the commentators here to be familiar with A Huxley’s Brave New World. This is exactly what happens in it and Huxley explains why. The only pornography in Brave New World is natural birth, monogamy – and love, of course.
Which government ministers & MPs advocated & supported the launch of this school porn to our chicken ?? Who approved this in the government ? Who is responsible??