"Great Relationships and Sex Education is an innovative and accessible guide for educators who work with young people to create and deliver Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) programmes. Developed by two leading experts in the field, it contains hundreds of creative activities and session ideas that can be used both by experienced RSE educators and those new to RSE."
"Drawing on best practice and up-to-date research from around the world, Great RSE provides fun, challenging and critical ways to address key contemporary issues and debates in RSE. Activity ideas are organised around key areas of learning in RSE: Relationships, Gender and Sexual Equality, Bodies, Sex and Sexual Health. There are activities on consent, pleasure, friendships, assertiveness, contraception, fertility, and so much more. All activities are LGBT+ inclusive and designed to encourage critical thinking and consideration of how digital technologies play out in young people's relationships and sexual lives."
This is an excerpt from the very first page of "Great Relationships and Sex Education" written by Alice Hoyle and Ester Mcgeeney - a resource for schools and educators working with young people, from age 11 - 16.
Ester Mcgeeney has a PhD on "Young People's Relationships and Cultures" (whatever this is) from one of the most "woke" Universities in the UK - Sussex, and Alice Hoyle is a relationships and sex education advisory teacher. These two women are deemed as "leading experts in the field" and have co-written this resource which has been distributed and used within educational institutions all over the UK, and beyond.
The age of consent in the UK is 16 years old. First and foremost, why are these women providing activities on consent and pleasure within their training packages? Shouldn't the purpose of any sex education at this age only be focused on the consequences of consent, instead of empowering children way beyond their capacity, to "negotiate" sexual encounters? Why have they included "pleasure" within their scope? Wouldn't that be a dangerous thing to teach to minors, who are under the legal age to even have sex? We'll discuss this in much more detail in further chapters.
In Chapter One of this resource, within the introduction, "Sexual Pleasure" is mentioned several times, with a real emphasis on its importance as part of a "healthy" RSE (relationships and sexuality education) curriculum. Professor Emma Renolds of Cardiff University is highlighted for her work in developing new framework for RSE in Wales that is underpinned by "rights, gender equality, inclusivity, creativity, empowerment, and co-production." Emma Renolds teaches "Queer Theory" and is a danger to children everywhere.
"Queer Theory" challenges the notion that heterosexual desire is "normal". This is open to interpretation (only being introduced in the 1990's publicly) and depending on who is promoting it - it can mean more than gay, lesbian, or bisexual. What is stated by some so called "gender theory experts" is that ANY "sexual desire" is "normal", and this includes bestiality, incest, and pedophilia. It's a very shaky term and should be considered in ALL its contexts.
For example, if you can stomach it, please read this essay by feminist activist and "theorist of sex and gender politics" Gayle Rubin - Thinking Sex, whereby the boundary between sexual orientation, and sexual desire are blurred into acceptance of bestiality and pedophilia. It's a very difficult read, sickening in fact. This was written forty years ago, and Rubin has achieved most of what she set out to do! The only thing remaining is accepting pedophilia as a sexual orientation. We are almost there. Can you "normalise" queerness without normalising pedophilia? Gayle Rubin has been quoted within this resource, along with an activity for children that she had supplied, named "The Charmed Circle", which I'll explain in later parts of this blog, supplying a visual from the activity section within the resource.
Considering that the Welsh Government has consistently denied that the new Sex Education introduced within our public school system is part of a global roll-out, on page 3 of the introduction it clearly references UNESCO (2018) International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education which is the United Nations document, provided globally for Sex Education, and used widely among educators within the UK. Furthermore, on page 9 of the introduction, the authors elaborate on this point....."UNESCO (see reference on p.3) has recently published comprehensive guidance for developing an RSE curriculum, based on the available international evidence"
It is stated that "Great RSE" is based on different theoretical and philosophical approaches. In other words, as a pedagogy, and not based at all on scientific fact - just "theories", therefore it's nothing more than an experimental approach, and your children are the trial runners. This is very dangerous considering that a Global Review was completed back in 2019 which concluded that RSE was 87% ineffective. Clearly this was completely ignored of course, and many countries have since adopted the same curriculum. To read the review, please click here.
According to this publication, RSE was co-produced with young people, and the best practices came from children's suggestions about what they believe should be taught in regards to sex education. I find this extremely odd? We don't ask young children to define what or how we teach any other subject, so why would they put this on the shoulders of a young mind and expect them to dictate to adults with their very limited experiences on this subject, what SHOULD be taught? As above, the age of consent is 16. Our brains are not fully developed until we are in our early-mid-twenties. The pre-frontal cortex, responsible for executive function: decision-making faculties; ability to control impulses; evaluates risk, reward, and danger is the last part of the brain to develop. We've all been teenagers and we know how irrational we could be. Adolescents can make terrible decisions that are created from and influenced by their environment. It's like handing a 6 year old the keys to a BMW and expecting them to be able to drive it.
Inclusivity is a word that is littered throughout this publication in an effort to maintain fairness and equality in the eyes of the public, stressing that it's essential for RSE. Loosely thrown around as much as possible, and constant repetition ensures this message is rammed home, and down everyone's throats, even though it's so far from the truth it's frightening. If it were inclusive, as it pertains to be, then why is disability only mentioned once within this resource? as an after thought at that. As much as they state that parents should be involved, barely any of them even know there is a new curriculum, never mind what is actually being taught to their children. In fact, they are purposefully kept in the dark. Watch this short clip of Elly Barnes, another dangerous influencer, speaking to educators at a conference, advising them NOT to inform parents.
"A rights-based curriculum is the foundation for a curriculum that can be empowering and transformative"
The whole curriculum is beefed up with children's rights, which sounds great doesn't it? I would agree that children obviously have rights too. However, underpinned within these rights are children's "sexual and reproductive rights" which is extremely concerning. Why do children need "sexual and reproductive" rights? For what purpose? Children should not be exercising sexual rights, it's EXTREMELY dangerous. As stated above, empowering young children beyond their capacity is not a smart thing to do, as we are now witnessing. Also, most parents have absolutely no idea that their children are being educated in this way, until it's too late and they are right in the middle of a battle between themselves, the school, and their child. Depending on the circumstances, Social Services can also get involved and it's a very slippery slope from there. There are many cases of young children exercising these rights and ending up in a hellish nightmare that they can't wake up from.
The authors insist that RSE is safe and ethical. If this wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. Unfortunately this is very serious and children's lives are literally being ripped apart, along with their family relationships - those who genuinely care for them and love them. They vow to cover topics that may be considered "taboo" which they admit can be "risky and uncomfortable", hence the need for a "safe space" to talk about these things to children. This is outrageous. How many parents feel comfortable that strangers at school are talking about "taboo" subjects with their children, within a sexuality curriculum? What is classed as "taboo?". We'll discuss exactly what they mean by this in further chapters, and I can state with confidence that you're going to be absolutely mortified.
RSE is described as creative and curious, with learners having a lot more input. For example, this model might involve an educator giving young people information about the law in relation to "sexual consent" and students listen to this information without being able to "explore the grey areas of consent" (that are not covered by legislation). Just to note, there are NO "grey areas of sexual consent" when it comes to minors! Everyone under the age of 18 is a minor! This is extremely dangerous and becomes highly problematic in prosecuting cases of rape and sexual abuse. For children, it's a simple NO! and for young people, we teach them the consequences of consent! This resource basically teaches them HOW to give consent, a groomers paradise. They no longer have to do any grooming because the schools are doing it for them, it's just easy pickings for every predator out there. Not to mention that institutions are magnets for predators, where they have access to children.
Lots of activities within this resource aim to encourage young children to create objects, posters, poems, songs, films, crafts, and social media campaigns and are told to showcase them at high profile events. After reading through each activity in this book, I can indeed clarify that this is encouraged regularly, which is why we are now witnessing young people outside of the school setting, at busy places, in towns, cities and at events, who are actively engaging in socio-political-activism, encouraged by the educators at school. In other words, instead of having to do this themselves, they have basically recruited young impressionable minds to change societies values for them. Our children are being preyed upon and recruited into cults that are extremely dangerous to the whole of society.
Although the new curriculum is referred to as "RSE - Relationships and Sexuality Education", what we're really receiving here is "CSE - Comprehensive Sexuality Education" with the aim to teach RSE "Holistically". Although teaching a holistic education sounds appropriate and even innocent, they intend to teach from a much broader spectrum. Therefore, it covers a huge range of different areas surrounding sexuality via a "whole school approach" method. This means that RSE is no longer a stand alone lesson - one that can be opted out of. It is being taught through-out the entire curriculum, embedded in every single subject. The only "opt-out" at this point would be to deregister your child/children from public school and home educate, which many parents have decided to do.
Teaching holistically ensures that the child has sexual knowledge to build upon....
"To deliver high quality RSE you will need to build a project, lesson or scheme of work using activities from across the chapters. It isn't possible, for example, to facilitate meaningful learning about contraception without first exploring what the human body looks like and feels like, what we mean by "sex", how to communicate and negotiate in relationships and how gender and sexual stereotypes shape our contraceptive decision making and choices."
Although very clever, this is extremely sinister in my opinion. Most people are under the impression that this sex education is to safeguard children from abuse, bullying, and harassment, and will be taught appropriately and accordingly. In fact, it's main goal is to teach children about sex as young as possible, under the guise of "keeping children safe". As they state, in order to understand certain aspects of sex, you MUST know other aspects first. This gives them the green light to talk about a whole host of sexually related topics, without boundaries.
This education is clearly a sex positive one. We've gone from introducing sex education into schools solely for safety reasons, focusing on sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies, and sexual violence, to exploring the pleasurable aspects of relationships and sexuality such as "desire and intimacy". Can I just remind you that we are talking about 11-16 year old children here? This is hugely inappropriate and dangerous. It is stated that they need to move away from the negative side of sex in order for children to appreciate what good sex is, first and foremost. Here is an excerpt from the resource....
"They also invite young people to explore the joys and pleasures of their own bodies and their relationships and experiences with others. As part of a holistic approach to RSE we encourage you to abandon the frames of 'risk' and 'pleasure' and the risk/pleasure binary and to use the activities in this book to have conversations that are open to exploring a whole range of motivations, outcomes, and feelings including risk, pleasure, ambivalence, boredom and indifference to sex and relationships."
The pleasurable and desirable part of sex is littered throughout the publication. They focus on this repeatedly in an attempt to bring this to the forefront of a child's mind. Even when, on the very rare occasion as potential risks and dangers are discussed, it's always followed by the importance of "good, healthy sex" and the need to stress sex positivity over any negative affects. Children are being constantly told how amazing and pleasurable sex can be, with one partner, or multiple partners, same sex, or opposite sex, and how many different ways a healthy sex life can be achieved. Adolescents are renowned for wanting to do what adults do and to take risks. As explained earlier, the part of the brain responsible for reasoning, thinking, logic, evaluating risk, reward and danger is the pre-frontal cortex, undeveloped until at least mid twenties. They are being empowered way beyond their capacity and we are witnessing the results, which are sure to become increasingly worse the more this insanity progresses.
According to the authors, RSE is age appropriate. In order to establish age appropriate in the context of sex, there MUST be a scientific statement or an assessment tool to which educators can adhere to. It does not exist. If you ask educators for this, they look at you like you have three heads, precisely because it's absolute nonsense to suggest that a subject as sensitive as sex can be blanket taught age appropriately, considering the legal age to have sex is 16. This is without the extreme dangers to neuro-diverse children, who are at a much higher risk of harm. I just want to point out at this point, that although this particular resource is aimed at 11-16 year old's, RSE starts from 36 months of age, mandated, with no parental opt out.
In the same breath, it is stated that the best way to ensure that it is developmentally appropriate is to involve the children AND the parents, in order to find out their ideas and to establish what concerns they may have. As discussed and evidenced previously, the parents not only have no idea what is being taught, they are intentionally being blocked out of their child's education by educators. This is absolutely disgusting behaviour, and highly dangerous, a genuine cause for huge concern.
References of interest at the end of the introduction are:
End of Part 1.......to be continued.....