Stop voting for fucking Tories

[David in Gwent]

I see s. 28 ver 2.0 is on the cards with the new sex education guidelines, which are the usual batshit culture war lunacy, and will just drive kids to shit places to fund our about sex, gender and porn.

What did kids do in the 70s, 80s and 90s? We had a biology lesson and watched "hairy bobbing man arse porn on VHS" - and those generations are almost all acceptant of today's "him/her she/them zee/zem" people. There was no need for explicit sex education and we didn't care about genders because we didn't know we needed too.

Telling very young children that they might not be who they think they are and that it's a sure fire way to get attention is actually batshit crazy, verging on evil. I'm guessing you don't have kids.

I don't normally dignify your drivel with a response, but once again, just like the majority of the shit you fling at the bored, your guess is entirely wrong. I have a daughter aged 13 and a son aged 10 and so they are right in the middle.of this EVIL.

Although now I have a son aged 13 and a daughter aged 10, so maybe all this genderbending trannie propaganda has had some effect.

Put your kids first instead of your own virtue signalling.

"oh no, my kids have the right to learn about anal sex and how many genders they could be at aged 9"

[David in Gwent]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

[Hal Jordan]

Seriously, seek professional help.

[David in Gwent]

The fucking irony.

[sockwithaticket]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

You can really quite easily look up what the parameters for this education is on the government website, including this handy primer
https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2023/0 ... education/

Of course you're a headbanging loon addicted to perpetual outrage, so informing children that LGBTQ+ people exist = 'THEY'RE MAKING OUR KIDS TRANSGENDER "

[Sandstorm]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

How many parents know enough about LGBTQ+ to be able to confidently (and without prejudice) educate their kids at home? Relieved I don't have to walk through that minefield.....

[sockwithaticket]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

How many parents know enough about LGBTQ+ to be able to confidently (and without prejudice) educate their kids at home? Relieved I don't have to walk through that minefield.....

Well, quite, but even if we restrict to specifically what DAC posted above - teaching kids about sex. Give an average adult a diagram of a vagina and ask them to fill in the labels, how many are going to accurately distinguish between the labia majora and minora. Would they think to acknowledge that not all have a visible clitoral hood? The basic biology will elude a lot of people and without something like a curriculum and lesson plans they'd almost certainly miss out something important even if they tried their best.

[Sandstorm]

Well, quite, but even if we restrict to specifically what DAC posted above - teaching kids about sex. Give an average adult a diagram of a vagina and ask them to fill in the labels, how many are going to accurately distinguish between the labia majora and minora. Would they think to acknowledge that not all have a visible clitoral hood? The basic biology will elude a lot of people and without something like a curriculum and lesson plans they'd almost certainly miss out something important even if they tried their best.

I think you're mixing up middle-school biology lessons with sex education. No young lad needs to know the difference between the parts of the labia, just how to put his willy in there safely and with the owner's permission.

[sockwithaticket]

Well, quite, but even if we restrict to specifically what DAC posted above - teaching kids about sex. Give an average adult a diagram of a vagina and ask them to fill in the labels, how many are going to accurately distinguish between the labia majora and minora. Would they think to acknowledge that not all have a visible clitoral hood? The basic biology will elude a lot of people and without something like a curriculum and lesson plans they'd almost certainly miss out something important even if they tried their best.

I think you're mixing up middle-school biology lessons with sex education. No young lad needs to know the difference between the parts of the labia, just how to put his willy in there safely and with the owner's permission.

I know you're not being entirely serious, but not knowing or understanding female genitals in any depth has generally been considered a male failing for quite some time both in relation to and outside of the bedroom. It's also a jumping off point to talk about variation outside of a purely biological context. Both sexes in general need to be educated about the variable appearance of vaginas because a lot of teenage girls and young women report being shamed by their sexual partners for its appearance, often because early exposure of those partners is through porn and there's a lack of knowledge there around the amount of the cosmetic surgery to do with the nethers that goes on. It absolutely goes beyond merely being biology and ties into the relationships and sex part of RSHE.

[Sandstorm]

I hope those lads with small willys get just as much support.

[David in Gwent]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

You can really quite easily look up what the parameters for this education is on the government website, including this handy primer
https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2023/0 ... education/

Of course you're a headbanging loon addicted to perpetual outrage, so informing children that LGBTQ+ people exist = 'THEY'RE MAKING OUR KIDS TRANSGENDER "

I'm specifically talking about sex education in primary school children, it's age 7 in Wales, kids that age do not need or require to know about the alphabet people. Only perverts and people who think the government should control all aspects of our lives think that.

The parent excuse is just that, an excuse.

[sockwithaticket]

Furthermore, you should be teaching your kids about sex and all that it entails and not leaving it to the fucking school.

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

You can really quite easily look up what the parameters for this education is on the government website, including this handy primer
https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2023/0 ... education/

Of course you're a headbanging loon addicted to perpetual outrage, so informing children that LGBTQ+ people exist = 'THEY'RE MAKING OUR KIDS TRANSGENDER "

I'm specifically talking about sex education in primary school children, it's age 7 in Wales, kids that age do not need or require to know about the alphabet people. Only perverts and people who think the government should control all aspects of our lives think that.

The parent excuse is just that, an excuse.

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

[sockwithaticket]

I hope those lads with small willys get just as much support.

It's been almost a decade since I last delivered a lesson, but we did try and get the message across that all body-shaming is wrong. You can't help but notice in popular culture, though, that insulting men's penis size and hair line are still very much considered fair game, so I'm not sure how much impact such lessons had.

[SaintK]

Even the Mail seems somewhat bemused by this!

[David in Gwent]

Of course part of the reason the school has to step into so many issues is because you can't rely on parents to even broach a topic, let alone provide accurate information.

You can really quite easily look up what the parameters for this education is on the government website, including this handy primer
https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2023/0 ... education/

Of course you're a headbanging loon addicted to perpetual outrage, so informing children that LGBTQ+ people exist = 'THEY'RE MAKING OUR KIDS TRANSGENDER "

I'm specifically talking about sex education in primary school children, it's age 7 in Wales, kids that age do not need or require to know about the alphabet people. Only perverts and people who think the government should control all aspects of our lives think that.

The parent excuse is just that, an excuse.

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

[Slick]

I'm specifically talking about sex education in primary school children, it's age 7 in Wales, kids that age do not need or require to know about the alphabet people. Only perverts and people who think the government should control all aspects of our lives think that.

The parent excuse is just that, an excuse.

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Moron. That example isn’t talking about sexual preferences.

[sockwithaticket]

I'm specifically talking about sex education in primary school children, it's age 7 in Wales, kids that age do not need or require to know about the alphabet people. Only perverts and people who think the government should control all aspects of our lives think that.

The parent excuse is just that, an excuse.

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Kids are observant and incessantly ask questions about all sorts of things, especially things that are new to them. They also have practically no filter. If you live somewhere where there are out homosexual couples, I'd be amazed if they got to seven before their child mentioned it.

[David in Gwent]

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Moron. That example isn’t talking about sexual preferences.

I am no longer surprised by people who care more about the language and the faux-offensive taken on behalf of someone else than giving sex education classes to 7 year children.

[C69]

I hope those lads with small willys get just as much support.

It's been almost a decade since I last delivered a lesson, but we did try and get the message across that all body-shaming is wrong. You can't help but notice in popular culture, though, that insulting men's penis size and hair line are still very much considered fair game, so I'm not sure how much impact such lessons had.

Body shaming? If people are obese then it should be pointed out to them that being grossly overweight is unhealthy
Just as is being excessively underweight.

[David in Gwent]

Telling 7 year olds that the two men they saw holding hands in the street are a gay couple and that some people love those of the same gender rather than opposite is only perverted in a very diseased mind.

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Kids are observant and incessantly ask questions about all sorts of things, especially things that are new to them. They also have practically no filter. If you live somewhere where there are out homosexual couples, I'd be amazed if they got to seven before their child mentioned it.

You seem to want to replace parents with the state?

I'm all for sex education, covering all of the bases at a suitable age, say 13. Not at 7.

[sockwithaticket]

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Kids are observant and incessantly ask questions about all sorts of things, especially things that are new to them. They also have practically no filter. If you live somewhere where there are out homosexual couples, I'd be amazed if they got to seven before their child mentioned it.

You seem to want to replace parents with the state?

I'm all for sex education, covering all of the bases at a suitable age, say 13. Not at 7.

So I see you decided not to follow the link I posted as to what RSHE lessons actually cover for primary school. No one is teaching 7 year olds about sex. Telling them LGBTQ+ people exist isn't sex education.

13 is too late. When I was teaching we had 12 and 13 year old girls having pregnancy scares and coming to members of staff about it rather than their parents.

There are a lot of areas where the state has to step in and ameliorate the inadequacy of parents, education is just one of them. We're never going to have a time where only those who pass some sort parenting aptitude test before popping out a sprog, so it will continue to be necessary.

[sockwithaticket]

I hope those lads with small willys get just as much support.

It's been almost a decade since I last delivered a lesson, but we did try and get the message across that all body-shaming is wrong. You can't help but notice in popular culture, though, that insulting men's penis size and hair line are still very much considered fair game, so I'm not sure how much impact such lessons had.

Body shaming? If people are obese then it should be pointed out to them that being grossly overweight is unhealthy
Just as is being excessively underweight.

You can express that obesity is unhealthy without shaming someone. Not least because belittling or ridiculing them often doesn't encourage them to take positive action to correct the problem.

[David in Gwent]

Kids are observant and incessantly ask questions about all sorts of things, especially things that are new to them. They also have practically no filter. If you live somewhere where there are out homosexual couples, I'd be amazed if they got to seven before their child mentioned it.

You seem to want to replace parents with the state?

I'm all for sex education, covering all of the bases at a suitable age, say 13. Not at 7.

So I see you decided not to follow the link I posted as to what RSHE lessons actually cover for primary school. No one is teaching 7 year olds about sex. Telling them LGBTQ+ people exist isn't sex education.

13 is too late. When I was teaching we had 12 and 13 year old girls having pregnancy scares and coming to members of staff about it rather than their parents.

There are a lot of areas where the state has to step in and ameliorate the inadequacy of parents, education is just one of them. We're never going to have a time where only those who pass some sort parenting aptitude test before popping out a sprog, so it will continue to be necessary.

You really think sex education classes would have stopped those girls getting pregnant at 12 and 13? Same thing happened in my school in the 80s. The 99.5% of the other girls didn't get pregnant and we had zero sex education other than biology.

My lad goes to school, goes to football and he plays roblox and super mario, he doesn't meet any openly gay people in school or in his/our walk of life. He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

At his age it's up to me to answer his questions if he happens to see two men "holding hands" it's not the responsiblity of the state

[epwc]

He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

What harm is done by him knowing?

[David in Gwent]

He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

What harm is done by him knowing?

What harm is done by him not knowing?

[epwc]

What harm is done by him not knowing?

Ignorance is the root of racism, homophobia etc.

[David in Gwent]

What harm is done by him not knowing?

Ignorance is the root of racism, homophobia etc.

No, environment is the root of racism, homophobia, not ignorance.

He's not going to be a homophobe because he didn't realise there were a lot of gay people until he was 13.

[robmatic]

My lad goes to school, goes to football and he plays roblox and super mario, he doesn't meet any openly gay people in school or in his/our walk of life. He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

That is statistically impressive, I have to say. I grew up in a rural farming community and even decades ago there was openly gay people around.

[David in Gwent]

My lad goes to school, goes to football and he plays roblox and super mario, he doesn't meet any openly gay people in school or in his/our walk of life. He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

That is statistically impressive, I have to say. I grew up in a rural farming community and even decades ago there was openly gay people around.

WTF is openly gay anyway? It's just a couple going to the shops or whatever, literally nothing to see, nothing to explain to a 7 year old.

[sockwithaticket]

You seem to want to replace parents with the state?

I'm all for sex education, covering all of the bases at a suitable age, say 13. Not at 7.

So I see you decided not to follow the link I posted as to what RSHE lessons actually cover for primary school. No one is teaching 7 year olds about sex. Telling them LGBTQ+ people exist isn't sex education.

13 is too late. When I was teaching we had 12 and 13 year old girls having pregnancy scares and coming to members of staff about it rather than their parents.

There are a lot of areas where the state has to step in and ameliorate the inadequacy of parents, education is just one of them. We're never going to have a time where only those who pass some sort parenting aptitude test before popping out a sprog, so it will continue to be necessary.

You really think sex education classes would have stopped those girls getting pregnant at 12 and 13? Same thing happened in my school in the 80s. The 99.5% of the other girls didn't get pregnant and we had zero sex education other than biology.

My lad goes to school, goes to football and he plays roblox and super mario, he doesn't meet any openly gay people in school or in his/our walk of life. He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

At his age it's up to me to answer his questions if he happens to see two men "holding hands" it's not the responsiblity of the state

You don't know that for certain. Underage pregnancy rates have consistently fallen over time as sex education has improved. We'll probably never get to zero, but that's no reason not to keep trying.

That's absurdly parochial. We can't set a curriculum based on whether each individual parent thinks it's likely their child will see a gay person. We still have some incredibly white areas of the country where you might not see certain ethnicities, by your logic, where that's the case, we shouldn't have any lessons that acknowledge those differences either.

The other problem with leaving it up to parents is some would tell their child that gay people are an abomination, that they're going to hell, that they should be illegal or worse It is the responsibility of the state to create a society that welcomes all its citizens. Countering damaging ideologies from bigots is part of that.

Even outside this, the notion of parental suprmacy is bunk. I remember having to explain to a boy why he got detention for cat-calling some girls. He was adament he'd done nothing wrong because his dad does it too. Some parents suck and if we leave things entirely up to them we'd have an even less pleasant society to exist in.

[David in Gwent]

So I see you decided not to follow the link I posted as to what RSHE lessons actually cover for primary school. No one is teaching 7 year olds about sex. Telling them LGBTQ+ people exist isn't sex education.

13 is too late. When I was teaching we had 12 and 13 year old girls having pregnancy scares and coming to members of staff about it rather than their parents.

There are a lot of areas where the state has to step in and ameliorate the inadequacy of parents, education is just one of them. We're never going to have a time where only those who pass some sort parenting aptitude test before popping out a sprog, so it will continue to be necessary.

You really think sex education classes would have stopped those girls getting pregnant at 12 and 13? Same thing happened in my school in the 80s. The 99.5% of the other girls didn't get pregnant and we had zero sex education other than biology.

My lad goes to school, goes to football and he plays roblox and super mario, he doesn't meet any openly gay people in school or in his/our walk of life. He does not need to know about LGB people at his age.

At his age it's up to me to answer his questions if he happens to see two men "holding hands" it's not the responsiblity of the state

You don't know that for certain. Underage pregnancy rates have consistently fallen over time as sex education has improved. We'll probably never get to zero, but that's no reason not to keep trying.

That's absurdly parochial. We can't set a curriculum based on whether each individual parent thinks it's likely their child will see a gay person. We still have some incredibly white areas of the country where you might not see certain ethnicities, by your logic, where that's the case, we shouldn't have any lessons that acknowledge those differences either.

The other problem with leaving it up to parents is some would tell their child that gay people are an abomination, that they're going to hell, that they should be illegal or worse It is the responsibility of the state to create a society that welcomes all its citizens. Countering damaging ideologies from bigots is part of that.

Even outside this, the notion of parental suprmacy is bunk. I remember having to explain to a boy why he got detention for cat-calling some girls. He was adament he'd done nothing wrong because his dad does it too. Some parents suck and if we leave things entirely up to them we'd have an even less pleasant society to exist in.

I don't doubt what your saying is coming from a good place. However LGB classes at 7 isn't needed.

[Slick]

A seven your old doesn't give a shit about two men holding hands. They give a shit about Paw Patrol.

There is a time and a place for talking about people's sexual preferences and it isn't age 7.

Moron. That example isn’t talking about sexual preferences.

I am no longer surprised by people who care more about the language and the faux-offensive taken on behalf of someone else than giving sex education classes to 7 year children.

It’s not faux offence, it’s real offence. It’s people like you who moan about “why do they need Pride” when the reason they need it is because of people like you.

I happen to live in a community where there are a lot of gay couples with children and the majority of my friends are gay, so I see and hear the real impact of ignorance. It’s not “sex education” classes they are giving kids, it’s how to be a decent human classes.

[Biffer]

I didn't think it was physically possible for someone to be a dick and a cunt at the same time.

[Biffer]

Moron. That example isn’t talking about sexual preferences.

I am no longer surprised by people who care more about the language and the faux-offensive taken on behalf of someone else than giving sex education classes to 7 year children.

It’s not faux offence, it’s real offence. It’s people like you who moan about “why do they need Pride” when the reason they need it is because of people like you.

I happen to live in a community where there are a lot of gay couples with children and the majority of my friends are gay, so I see and hear the real impact of ignorance. It’s not “sex education” classes they are giving kids, it’s how to be a decent human classes.

DAC doesn't want his kid to be a decent human being, he wants his kid to be like him.

[fishfoodie]

I see DAC is on a full Election footing, & spreading the culture wars bile, & stinking up both Politics threads, but can the rest of you stop responding to the cunt ?

I came here to get away from exactly this shite on PR

[epwc]

I see DAC is on a full Election footing, & spreading the culture wars bile, & stinking up both Politics threads, but can the rest of you stop responding to the cunt ?

I came here to get away from exactly this shite on PR

You're right. We're only encouraging him

[dpedin]

I do agree with you wholeheartedly, I think the values of parties as a whole and individual politicians should matter. Clearly the Labour leadership have decided political expediency and spectacle is a bit more important

Yesterday the Unions met with Labour over the New Deal for workers and seem to have brow beaten them into returning to a prior version that had been agreed, rather than the recently leaked one that watered down proposals.

It would certainly be interesting to see how any defectors have voted recently in relation to strike -busting bills.

Starmer holding his nose on these defections but has calculated the means justifies the end! The likes of Elphicke will disappear quickly into the ether after the GE and she will be forgotten however if it speeds up and makes more certain a Tory defeat in a GE then it might be a price worth paying?

This GE is going to get lower and even dirtier, the attack on Rayner and her ex council house sale over a decade ago is just the start! Tory attack dog MP on BBC R5 is just now referencing something that Starmer wrote about racist immigration policies in an academic law book from 1988 FFS! Nicky Campbell deals with it wonderfully well and refers to his degree dissertation written on Oswald Mosely and hopes that doesnt get out!!! Tories are digging very very deep to try and find dirt and they won't be slow in using anything they find.

They are also using culture war type issues to try and create divides, despite any damage it might do. The latest immigration figures suggest that the NHS and Care sector are heading to a real even bigger disaster due to new immigration requirements and the collapse of foreign workers in these sectors coming to the UK. Their latest 'wheeze' being sex education, including transgender issues, in primary school despite there being no evidence that there is any issues or problems that need resolved, in fact the evidence suggests that it is being handled very appropriately! Girl identifying as a cat will no doubt raise its head again? Feckin bastards!

A lot of guff there backed up with you saying "evidence" but you haven't provided any evidence.

Here's some evidence:

https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-informa ... nuary-2024

All NHS Hospital & Community Health Service (HCHS) staff - 1,499,368 Headcount in January 2024. This is 5.4% (76,319) more than in January 2023

Oh dear! When was the change in the Skilled Worker Minimum Wage and the ban on dependents announced (answer December 2023) and what impact have they had on deterring folk applying for visas to come to the UK to work in the health and care sector? Have a look at the linked document and see what impact they have had.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... plications

[Stranger]

I see DAC is on a full Election footing, & spreading the culture wars bile, & stinking up both Politics threads, but can the rest of you stop responding to the cunt ?

I came here to get away from exactly this shite on PR

[David in Gwent]

[Biffer]

I see DAC is on a full Election footing, & spreading the culture wars bile, & stinking up both Politics threads, but can the rest of you stop responding to the cunt ?

I came here to get away from exactly this shite on PR

I will try not to engage with the cunt from here on in. Because he's a cunt. A really stupid cunt but still a cunt.