Read on Twitter
Every child in the UK deserves good Relationship and Sex Education (RSE). But does that mean telling primary school kids that they might have been born in the wrong body, that some girls have penises, and that pronouns include “ze/zir”?/1of12
Our main campaign for the next few months is helping the UK govt to get RSE right./2of12
The UK govt says it wants to ensure that LGBT issues are included in primary education. It explains that it wants to help prevent bullying and ensure that kids are given age-appropriate material in RSE. That sounds fine. But the planned curriculum is full of problems./3of12
In our view, it’s clear what “LGB-inclusive” education should mean in primary school. Teach kids that sometimes two women or two men fall in love and that is fine. That in some families there are two mums or two dads, or just one mum or one dad, and that is fine./4of12
But what should “T-inclusive” education look like? Does it mean teaching that some kids are born in the wrong body? We think the government has got this wrong. It didn’t think things through when it gave the task of preparing a primary school curriculum to Stonewall. /5of12
The “LGBT-inclusive curriculum” for primary schools, set to be rolled out in September, teaches Stonewall’s dogma: it teaches that everyone has a gender identity, which may be different from the sex they were “assigned” at birth./6of12
It teaches that some kids are “non-binary” and you must use their “preferred pronouns” like “they” or “zir” and you must correct people who get it wrong. It teaches that all activities & spaces (including sleeping places on school trips) must be based on “gender”, not sex./7of12
It includes a list of suggested books for all ages. For 3-4-year-olds the list includes “Introducing Teddy” about a teddy bear called Thomas who says “In my heart I’ve always known I’m a girl teddy. I wish my name was Tilly.”/8of12
The curriculum is full of information about “gender” that misrepresents the law and teaches girls that they can’t set boundaries. It teaches a minority-held view as fact. And it takes a problem affecting a tiny minority of kids and presents it in a confusing & harmful way./9of12
So what should a “T-inclusive” curriculum really look like? Surely part of a wider set of lessons teaching kids to treat each other with kindness & respect. Including people who are different. That’s it. We feel that teaching “gender identity” at primary school is wrong. /10of12
Gender identity theory is not the law, it is not factual but a belief system. It is confusing to kids and has the potential to cause real harm. The curriculum must be withdrawn and a new, more sensible curriculum prepared. With wider consultation./11of12
Please help us spread awareness of the plans to introduce this curriculum. Help us fund our ad in a national newspaper. We need your support. We all want kids to receive good age-appropriate RSE. The Stonewall curriculum is not it./12of12
To be absolutely clear: the criticism in this thread relates not to the government's original guidance but to the booklet "Creating an LGBT-Inclusive Primary Curriculum" which the government commissioned from Stonewall.
Schools are free to choose what resource to use to achieve the objectives. However, this is not the suggestion created in Stonewall's introduction to its own resource. It contains the statement (p. 6):
"Making your curriculum LGBT inclusive plays an important role within a whole-school approach to tackling homophobia, biphobia and transphobia. Ofsted, SIAMS and the Independent Schools Inspectorate (ISI) will look to see that you are doing this."
