School trips have changed since my day…..

Way back in the 1960s there was no sex education at all, surprise, surprise most of us managed to navigate the dating and relationship challenges. 60 yrs later I see nothing that has changed for the better, in fact behavior and wellbeing has got considerably worse.
It was an ordinary state high school, there was never any sexual harassment of girls, now everything has to be sexualized from an early age - progress?.

Galaxy

I dont think I have any strong feelings about this either way, except perhaps that it somehow seems othering to me. All the books mentioned above will be in any bookshop in any town.
And of course the use of the word queer, which whilst reclaimed by some is seen by many others as hurtful.

It's the opposite of othering.
Those hurt by "queer" need to realise why it was so important that this, and other terms we claimed. Gay rights were hard won and that fight should be recognised, especially by today's youth.

*were claimed

Grandma70s.

I realise that although my children read whatever they fancied I did try to steer them away from what I considered "trash" childrens books and novels towards what I considered were better written ones. They still read Disney books and ones with odd messages - one grandchild had a book called "Rainbow Fish" which seems to imply we must all be the same.
Mercifully they didn't like Biggles!

David -
there was never any sexual harassment of girls,

Are you sure?

Also with respect MOnica you are probably I think, in the top 5% of the population terms of intelligence and find it easy to soak things up like a sponge. Also to apply analytical thinking to what you have seen or read.

I hope I won’t offend you but saying that the phrase from Miss Marple “a mind like a meat cleaver” comes to mind. I’m sure your children are much the same.

You only have to look around you to see that a number of adults find that quite difficult and my working and personal experience with children leads me to believe that their developing minds often muddle quite unrelated information and experiences.

So, again with respect, I do think there can be too much information too soon in any learning experience, especially for young children whose experiences and powers of reasoning are still developing.

David49

Way back in the 1960s there was no sex education at all, surprise, surprise most of us managed to navigate the dating and relationship challenges. 60 yrs later I see nothing that has changed for the better, in fact behavior and wellbeing has got considerably worse.
It was an ordinary state high school, there was never any sexual harassment of girls, now everything has to be sexualized from an early age - progress?.

Wow, no sexual harassment of girls in schools (and everywhere else) in the 60s! Seriously????!

Don’t see why it’s part of the school curriculum. They should be concentrating on other things.

I had a bit of a laugh, David . You are so right. Our ‘sex education’ was the biological life of rabbits . The teacher told us humans were similar. That was it. My smart friend whispered that they were ‘at it’ all the time, weren’t they ?

Maddyone, I completely agree with you. Our son is gay had happily married. His nephews and nieces have not needed to have school trips to gay venues ! They have quite simply accepted. I worried years ago how my other AC would explain the situation to their children. However there was no need , they just grew up with it and accepted it. No need to make a song and dance about it! What is important is that children are taught to respect all differences in all people - whatever those differences are! People who are gay still have much to contend with although I recognize how much things have changed for the better since our 19 year old son told us .

nanna8

I had a bit of a laugh, David . You are so right. Our ‘sex education’ was the biological life of rabbits . The teacher told us humans were similar. That was it. My smart friend whispered that they were ‘at it’ all the time, weren’t they ?

Our school sex education in the 1950s was about rabbits, too. We liked to make the teacher blush by asking about human reproduction. We didn’t even get as far as being told humans were similar to rabbits! Luckily I had enlightened parents so I knew the ‘facts of life’.

We learnt about the sex life of the frog.

We even drew a picture of a male frog's penis.

I was about 50 when I found out that frogs don't have this appendage

What our teacher was thinking I've no idea

Lathyrus3

David49

Way back in the 1960s there was no sex education at all, surprise, surprise most of us managed to navigate the dating and relationship challenges. 60 yrs later I see nothing that has changed for the better, in fact behavior and wellbeing has got considerably worse.
It was an ordinary state high school, there was never any sexual harassment of girls, now everything has to be sexualized from an early age - progress?.

Wow, no sexual harassment of girls in schools (and everywhere else) in the 60s! Seriously????!

Not in my school there wasn't 😃

(It was an all girls' school though)

Cossy

Lathyrus3

I think if you take a look at Visit London website you might be reassured. I don’t know what people are imagining but it’s not very controversial unless you truly believe that any sexuality other than heterosexual is inherently wrong.

There are some good openers for discussion on display like the door of Oscar Wilde’s cell in Reading Gaol or Alan Turing’s contribution to victory in WW2 and his subsequent shaming.

The overall ethos is of acceptance of who a person is and acknowledgement of all that “Queer” people have contributed to society, whilst having to hide their sexuality. Perhaps there are a few surprises sitting there for many people.

In regard to the age group, 11/12 years old is when most children are experiencing puberty and becoming aware of sexual feelings. It’s also when bullying about sexuality starts to come to the fore.

I think the visit is well-timed and hopefully will lead to discussion, not just about sexuality, but about being perceived as being ”different” in all sorts of ways.

👏👏👏👏

I agree. When I saw this thread, it was Turing and the dreadful things that happened came to mind.

Hopefully never again. and how can we forget, in many parts of the world being gay leads to death?

My grandson is nearly 13 and his parents would be pleased (I've checked).

There's no ugly secret agenda going on here, just mind broadening, for one day, carefully selected venues, which allows understanding and acceptance of difference as part of the norm, in a society which still has people who are homophobic.

Mine wasn’t and there was plenty of sexual harassment though not many would have called it that.

My experience of the 59s and sixties was that males were generally expected to try it on and females (the nice ones) were expected to reject their advances.

The trying it on in school mostly consisted of brushing up against you and coping a feel of of your breasts or bottom in passing. Or sexual comments.

Later workng as a teen in Law neon males masturbating as you walked past (on the Tube mostly) was so commn you hardly thought about it, as was the close brushing, moving against you if you had to stand on your journey. And again the trying it on.
It was all accepted as something males did and females had to handle.

Anyway, it’s a bit off topic, but I don’t think my school experience was at all unusual.

Sorry typos. London not Law neon 😬et al…….

Lathyrus3

David49

Way back in the 1960s there was no sex education at all, surprise, surprise most of us managed to navigate the dating and relationship challenges. 60 yrs later I see nothing that has changed for the better, in fact behavior and wellbeing has got considerably worse.
It was an ordinary state high school, there was never any sexual harassment of girls, now everything has to be sexualized from an early age - progress?.

Wow, no sexual harassment of girls in schools (and everywhere else) in the 60s! Seriously????!

Three incidents from the 1960s spring to mind.

One was at a boarding school where a 14 year old girl used to sneak out of the dorm at night and meet one of the teachers in his car.

I have a personal memory of playing hockey at school while a collection of men gathered outside the railings at the bottom of the field, some with dogs, just gawping at us
in our divided skirts and muddy, red legs. If they struck lucky some girls would have forgotten their kit and be running around in big navy knickers. Not actual harassment I know but not exactly wholesome.

A group of boys at a mixed grammar school who compared notes on various girls at the school and rated them 1-10 under various sexual criteria. Their form master found out and thought it was hilarious so he encouraged them.

Finally not school based but a reminder that Mohamed Al Fayad and Jimmy Savile were both already active in the 1960s.

NotSpaghetti

*Grandma70s*.

I realise that although my children read whatever they fancied I did try to steer them away from what I considered "trash" childrens books and novels towards what I considered were better written ones. They still read Disney books and ones with odd messages - one grandchild had a book called "Rainbow Fish" which seems to imply we must all be the same.
Mercifully they didn't like Biggles!

Rainbow Fish is a lovely book, used extensively in infant classrooms. The message is not that everyone should be the same, but that sharing is good and ultimately makes us happier.
I speak as an ex infant teacher who used this book regularly because it was included in our Reception Year planned curriculum.

David49

Way back in the 1960s there was no sex education at all, surprise, surprise most of us managed to navigate the dating and relationship challenges. 60 yrs later I see nothing that has changed for the better, in fact behavior and wellbeing has got considerably worse.
It was an ordinary state high school, there was never any sexual harassment of girls, now everything has to be sexualized from an early age - progress?.

There certainly was “sexual harassment” of girls, but it either wasn’t recognised as such, or not important enough or both!

Recognising and acknowledging gay rights, gay history and gay families is NOT sexualising it!

Maddyone it's a book which suggested to me that you can't say "no", that you can bully people till they give in and that difference, however lovely, is a bad thing.
Of course the Rainbow Fish itself, from memory, is very vain so that's not good. I'd rather it was a story about all the other fishes having something special too.

It's not one for me!

Some of the girls used to hang around pop stars and meet them after their gigs to have sex with them. I’m talking 13 and 14 year olds. This was a ‘respectable’ girls grammar school in the early 60 s. Those pop singers would have been aged in their 20s. I’d call that exploitation.

recognising and acknowledging gay rights, gay history and gay families is NOT sexualising it!

Quite correct.
So what is the visit to the gay bookshop supposed to achieve? To my mind, discussion of gay relationships is what is important. It’s important that children know and understand that gay people exist, and families exist where the parents are gay, and that everyone, no matter what their sexuality should be treated with respect. This is ideally taught through discussion, normally under PSHE. I cannot see what going to a gay bookshop will do to enhance this since all schools now have books about same sex parents on their shelves anyway, and these books will have been chosen for the suitability.
No one has told me how a visit to a gay bookshop will in any way enhance the children’s learning, nor the objectives for such a visit. It is important to recognise that the books in any shop cannot be vetted for suitability for the children in that age group.

pagesunbound.wordpress.com/2021/05/24/why-i-never-liked-the-rainbow-fish-by-marcus-pfister/

www.buzzfeed.com/mayaogolini/rainbow-fish-problematic

Just googled this.
I'm obviously not the only person to see the book this way maddy - one review I just read says it's teaching you to be a people pleaser even to your own detriment.

NotSpaghetti

Maddyone it's a book which suggested to me that you can't say "no", that you can bully people till they give in and that difference, however lovely, is a bad thing.
Of course the Rainbow Fish itself, from memory, is very vain so that's not good. I'd rather it was a story about all the other fishes having something special too.

It's not one for me!

I think that’s a very strange interpretation of the book and certainly out of sync with infant schools because it’s found on the shelves of most, if not all, schools for infant children. It’s not about selfishness, it’s about learning to share, which is something all very young children need to do.

However, everyone’s entitled to their opinion.

As you like NotSpaghetti.
It doesn’t matter, it’s found on the shelves of many infant schools anyway.