How do you teach gay relationships to children?


'Dear God, please help me...'

UPDATE: I posted this on my MyTelegraph blog site and guess what!? It was removed! So obviously I re-posted it. I think my account is in danger! I don't believe in being controversial for its own sake, but apparently, I'm not allowed to say this...

Let's just take Nick Clegg at his word and imagine we are in the classroom observing a lesson on gay relationships in sex education. Exactly how is this lesson going to be taught? Personally, I failed as a teacher in a PGCE in Primary Education and the experience was so horrific I don't want to set foot in a classroom as long as I live, but, that said, I do know how teachers teach. Firstly, there is a lesson plan and at its heart is a 'teaching objective'.

So, then, teaching objective for this lesson is, 'That the children have a good understanding of same-sex relationships.' I don't envy the task of the teacher who has to teach this most likely certain future sex education lesson, since whatever decrees even opposition leaders issue in gay mags eventually get onto the statute book. After all, wasn't it a Lib Dem who got the ball rolling on abortion? Teachers, as we know, have to confront a class of giggling, snotty schoolchildren and many find even teaching standard sex education an unmitigated trauma. Not only is this field of education ground on which children can be outrageously crude and show off to their friends, but it is without doubt a moral, intellectual and emotional minefield for the teacher. Who knows? In a few years time maybe faithful Catholics and other Christians will be unable to teach in schools on the grounds of conscience alone, so if you are a Catholic teacher, enjoy the profession while you can.

Children, even teens have an innate understanding of what is 'natural', therefore what we are dealing with here is a re-education of the minds of the young. The reason why children suspected of being gay are teased and bullied, which is always hurtful, is because children know that homosexuality goes against natural law and any teacher educating children should be aware of that one acute fact. The graphic nature of modern sex education, which nowadays steers itself away from the need for adolescents to be aware of the 'facts of life' and to know that sexual expression is reserved for one person in the stability of marriage, sets up a pornographic stage in which the 'normality' of same-sex relationships will be taught.

How do you teach 'same-sex relationships' without recourse to imagery, mental or actual which will cause children confusion at best and profound scandal at worse? I have to say, there will be few teachers who are not floored by children's questions during the lesson on the equivalence of gay relationships. Questions children are likely to ask and statements they are likely to make in a dialogue may include classroom boulders such as this (...granted these children are quite eloquent...)

"So if the man puts his penis in the other man's bottom what is the purpose of this? If it is not to make a baby then what is it for?"

"If it is for pleasure alone then why is it good? What is good about one man putting his penis inside another man?"

"Wouldn't it be better if the man put his penis inside a woman because then a baby can be born?"

"Wouldn't it be better if the man put his penis inside a woman because if lots of men did what these men are doing women would be lonely?"

"Wouldn't it be better if the man put his penis inside a woman because if lots of men did this instead then there would be a lot less babies being born and babies are good, my mum just had another one?"
"Aren't these men just being selfish?"

"But isn't that where poo comes from?"

"I'm glad my Dad doesn't do that."

"Is this really 'natural'?"

"Isn't this just dirty?"

"Is that hygenic?"

"Isn't that really painful?"

"Does anyone else feel a bit sick? Please can I go to the toilet?"

"What if any of us are gay? Who here actually wants to do that?"

That is the problem with trying to introduce a sexual sub-culture into a classroom.

"Next week, kids, S&M with Katie and George."

Children know full well that homosexual sex is not 'natural' and that while teachers can tell them it 'feels good' they know that it is not love. If I learned anything in my PGCE, it was that children are not dumb and they can smell bullshit, lies and fear a mile off. Teaching this will involve all three. To anyone who has to teach this garbage to children, in a way, you have my sympathy, because in what is already a challenging task, it looks like our legislators are going to make your job a thousand times harder and what is more, you're going to have to mark their papers to see whether they 'got' the lesson objective!

I have every sympathy for any children who will grow up to be 'gay' and feel miserable and outcast, but, I assure you, Nick Clegg's suggestion is most certainly not the way to approach this inflammatory and highly sensitive issue...That said, why bother? Nowadays, whatever a teacher may say, children's 'sex education' comes from TV and the internet which is uncensored as I know only too well. 'Dear God, please help me.' The chances of finding a lesson involving those five words in five years time are not looking good, but as a lesson objective, it would serve children better.

Comments

well how far does one go ? and how does one teach that
a] Some gay men don't engage in sexual activity - what one does doesn't make one who one is
b] some gay men don't participate in penetrative sexual activity [and it doesn't make them any less homosexual]
c] some gay men who do participate in anal sex prefer to solely perform one aspect of it ; while others will do both
d] some men who consider themselves heterosexual will perform certain homosexual acts with friends because they're friends and it's 'just sex' or an extension of 'just being friends'
e] some men who consider themselves heterosexual will perform homosexual acts with strangers because it's just 'sex without strings'
f] whatever men can do with each other there's 'equipment' that can make it possible for women to do it with women or do it with men !
g] how does one even encroach upon certain fetishes or sexual practices - the gay porn categories that one feels far from 'with it' by having no idea about what they're referring to ???!!!


Does anyone need to know any of this ?

I think you might also find that as most teenagers are avid 'south park' viewers they know more about this stuff than most adults and definitely most teachers !

Plus there's the factor of being 'scene' or 'non-scene' ; the distinctive body-type and age preferences and race preferences; those who prefer 1-1 relationships and those who are sexually profligate ; those who prefer relationship sex and those who prefer stranger-sex - those with open relationships , those with exclusive relationships...

and then there's bisexuality, and bisexuals who prefer to keep their sexual partners apart or participate in three or more-somes

...and these are kids that have problems trying to construct a sentence and multiply fractions ?
How are they supposed to absorb and reflect on all this ?

...and where does love come into any of this ?

No wonder Boy George said he'd prefer a cup of tea !
Maria said…
LOL. And a little child shall lead them...God have mercy on us, yes?
Anonymous said…
What a load of sexually prejudiced nonsense. Nearly, if not, all the list of circumstances, exceptionalities and proclivities listed by OTSOTA are also applicable to heterosexuals yet we don't expect sex and relationship education to cover all these aspects (nor attempt to use such as excuses for heterosexuality to be excluded from the curriculum). Neither is it necessary to think of all possible bizarre (and probably unusual) possibilities when covering gay/bisexual or other sexual-orientation issues.

OTSOTA, you do seem to know (or at least think you know) a lot about gay activities and lifestyles. I wonder why (and how) that might be?
Is it a coincidence that your blog is covered with either (a) photos demonstrating your 'pretty boy' persona; or
(b) semi-homoerotic images?