Pro-LGBT groups call on Govt to abandon sex education guidance for schools

A host of controversial pro-LGBT groups, including Stonewall, have demanded the new Government scrap draft sex education guidance for schools.

In May, the Conservative Government launched an eight-week consultation on proposals to reform Relationships, Sex and Health Education (RSHE) in light of the “safeguarding scandal” of inappropriate materials being used in English schools.

The draft guidance was praised for stating that gender ideology should not be taught, and that sex education must be age-appropriate, but groups including Stonewall, TransActual and Sex Education Forum have called on the new Government to ditch what has been seen as a significant step forward in safeguarding children.

Current proposals

The document called ‘gender identity’ a “highly contested” subject which should not be taught. It asked teachers not to use materials claiming as fact that “gender is a spectrum”, and if asked, should teach the facts about “biological sex”.

Under the guidance, primary school children would not be taught about puberty until at least the age of eight, or given sex education before age nine. “Explicit” sexual acts would not be taught before 13 years old.

The guidance also emphasises that older pupils should not be pressured into sex as “many young people wait until they are older”, and that it is possible to enjoy romantic relationships without sex.

The proposals do say that these older pupils should be taught about contraceptives, as well as “choices in relation to pregnancy”. This would include abortion, though the guidance also mentions “keeping the baby” and “adoption”, and says all information should be “medically and legally accurate and impartial”.

‘LGBT+ inclusion’

But in a statement also backed by Humanists UK, the Methodist Church and ThirtyOne:Eight – a charity that undertakes DBS checks for churches – the LGBT groups dismissed the new guidance as a threat to “inclusion”, and claimed it fails to prepare children for “modern life”.

The statement was released to coincide with the closing of the consultation on Thursday 11 July.

An accompanying briefing complains about “arbitrary age restrictions” on teaching sex education, and a lack of “recommendations on LGBT+ inclusion”, adding: “It is vital that all LGBT+ people see themselves reflected in RSHE and that information relevant to them is proactively planned into the curriculum”.

Cass ignored

The statement laments the ban on teaching about ‘gender identity’, but makes no mention of the landmark Cass Review.

Dr Hilary Cass’s comprehensive evidence-based review found no good evidence that children are helped by affirming them in their perceived gender identity and states that the importance of what happens in school “cannot be underestimated”.

One resource which would be banned under the guidance is the now discredited ‘Genderbread Person’ graphic, which teaches children that ‘gender identity’, ‘gender expression’ and biological sex can all be different, and that ‘woman-ness’ describes ‘gender identity’, not ‘anatomical sex’.

The Genderbread Person resource

Misrepresentation

The statement also misrepresents the draft guidance, suggesting that age limits will limit the ability of schools to teach on preventing sexual abuse.

In fact, the draft guidance specifically states that Relationships Education in primary schools should equip children to recognise and report abuse.

It explains that parents will retain an automatic right of withdrawal from sex education in primary schools, but not from Relationships Education, although it is clear that the subject “should not include topics which involve explaining different forms of sexual activity”.

“The new Government needs to decide whether it is going to stand with parents and vulnerable children, or with the lobby groups making money by encouraging gender confusion.”

‘Welcome pushback’

The Christian Institute’s Acting Director Ciarán Kelly said: “Although the previous Government’s draft guidance on RSHE was far from perfect, it was a welcome pushback against trans-affirming ideology and teaching that was clearly not age-appropriate for young people.

“It also made it clearer that parents have the right to see what their children are being taught, and that they, not schools, are the primary educators of their children. Prioritising parents in this way, rather than keeping them at arm’s length, will better ensure children are properly safeguarded from abuse.

“The new Government needs to decide whether it is going to stand with parents and vulnerable children, or with the lobby groups making money by encouraging gender confusion.”