It's not 1 April, is it?
Gender fluidity and social experimentation inflicted on children, courtesy of WA's Labor government. But did they ask parents? Or does the State know better anyhow?
A question and an omen for the future, 'Just how many times does gender get a mention in the federal Labor platform?'.
Absolute and utter rubbish and all it would do is confuse young kids -- this sort of thing has really gone way over the top now and needs to STOP!
When my kids were going to school back in the '80s both their primary and secondary schools had 'dress up' days. They were actually days when for a small donation kids could wear whatever they wanted to school rather than the school uniform.
One little boy turned up dressed as Wonder Woman. While the adults present tut-tutted a bit the other kids didn't even seem to notice. Maybe it's not such a bad thing.
But anyway, the last paragraph of the article ...
A spokesperson from the Western Australia Department of Education wouldn't confirm or deny whether 'dressing up' will be part of the 2019 gender education program, stating the 'curriculum is still being developed.'
... suggests just another beat up by the sound of things.
Leonie
Slam the gate and shush everyone until it is too late for parents to do anything?
I have never heard of State primary and secondary schools having 'dress up days', especially nearly forty years ago as you claim and certainly never with the Marxist tactic of gender fluidity to undermine family and valued social institutions.
It is cultural Marxism, as is Labor's 'Safe Schools' which was openly boasted as being Marxist social change dressed up as anti-bullying and directed at the most vulnerable, school children.
If the WA Labor government and federal Labor want to do something constructive, what about improving that dreadful report card given by UNICEF? Where is the public consultation on gender fluidity policy directed at children? Who is asking for that?
Re 'dress up days':
I worked in NSW state schools continuously from 1967-2007. Over that period we often had dress up days in the various schools I was in, sometimes themed e.g. Country/Multicultural Days, Book Week Parades, Easter Parades or as fundraisers, e.g. Mufti Days. All-in-all usually at least four per year. The state school my grandkids currently go to in Queensland has similar days on occasion.
Had to have a bit of a giggle about the Marxist comments, but then I got worried and checked under my bed, just in case.
Cross dressing a sign of socialist activity, really. From what I have seen of the British Public School System of the last century it makes me wonder, those boys couldn't wait to get into a dress and put on a show. A more right wing instituition you would never find, and now it has been exposed as a hot bed of socialist activity.
To try and work political agendas into every thread has been tried before, fortunatley it always fails, it does not lead to any degree of credibility. But keep going, best to get it all out of your system, it's doing no harm.
Unfortunate because I quite enjoy the majority of your comments, I actually agree with most.
On the UNICEF Report, who would have thought ripping billions of dollars out of the Education System would have had such an effect? I can't imagine how the Marxists got control of the countries budget.
ex PS, What about you put up your evidence to back your allegation, "ripping billions out of the Education System".
The Parliamentary Library seems to disagree with you.
Regarding the UNICEF Report, you are ducking the issue, because Australia would be spending at least the same if not more per capita (pupil) on public education than many of the comparison countries that beat us hands down. What is being posed by my use of that report is to show the odd priorities of WA's and federal Labor's policies.
As well, you should be aware of 'Safe' Schools co-founder Roz Ward and others. It is on the public record. As is the preponderance of gender mentions in the federal Labor platform. Why so? Who is demanding that?
Meanwhile, from LJ’s Daily Mail link about the new program which states: “Up to 10 schools in WA to take part in $1million Respect Relationships program”
Government of Western Australia page on the program Respectful Relationships.
https://gdhr.wa.gov.au/learning-activities-by-topic/respectful-relationships
Learning activities in the Respectful Relationships category will allow students to gain an understanding of the importance of valuing people who are like themselves and people who are different, and the skills to build healthy and respectful relationships.
Includes a range of activities from Pre-Primary to Year 10, which you can check out directly LJ, from the page link above.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Victorian Education Department’s page on the program Respectful Relationships.
https://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/Pages/respectfulrelationships.aspx
The Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence recommended Respectful Relationships be introduced to all government schools (Recommendation 189).
Includes the following myths amongst a lot of other information:
• Myth: Respectful Relationships teaches radical gender theory
• Myth: Respectful Relationships and the Safe Schools program are the same
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with Leonie’s statement “suggests just another beat up by the sound of things.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------
As for the declining standards of student achievement in Australia ... that's a whole other issue IMO.
Such as some of those touched upon in the article linked below.
https://theconversation.com/educating-australia-why-our-schools-arent-improving-72092
There was quite a comprehensive discussion about just that here on YLC a little while back but I can't find it now.
RnR
First, we agree that education in Australia is sorely in need of improvement. That is good start.
Brick bats to those who want to shut the gate and shush public discussion of the gender priorities of State and federal Labor AND aimed at schoolchildren AND without proper parent & public education and discussion.
Now, what about addressing the State and federal Labor priorities? Starting first with that hundred or so (according to some sources, but even one would raise the question, Why so important?) mentions of gender in the federal Labor platform. What is that all about? How many people does it affect? Whereas all children can be victims of educational standards. Any wonder the Asian students feature so prominently in secondary school results and in university graduation ceremonies, particularly higher degrees? -And good on them and their supportive parents too.
What average small boy would be willing to dress up in girls' clothing, especially in front of his peers?
If this is to be enforced, it could be seen as abuse.
I agree Twila
Why not make it a choice and let the children and parents decide? Or is that too simple?
No question in my mind. It is abuse to be so intrusive into a childs psyche.
Gender dysmorphia is a real condition which affects a very small percentage of children. Dressing up for role plays will not cause it. Girls dressing in shorts and long pants do not get confused about their gender do they? Equally, boys dressing in dresses and skirts for role playing are in no danger of thinking they might be girls. I think most boys would find it funny and have lots of fun with the role playing. I imagine the idea behind such programs is to inspire an empathic understanding about roles men and women can adopt or get locked into which might be negative for both. It would inspire discussion, understanding and support between male and female genders.
Tisany 2019,
You are absolutely correct that dressing up for role plays will not cause gender dysmorphia, not gender confusion! Absolutely correct.
Are the little boys to sit in class dressed as girls. This to my mind not role playing.
Role playing certainly has its place. Being put in another's shoes and experiencing what they may. For example going for job and being turned down because of gender or sexual identity.
This form of role playing does not require "dressing" up. I feel dressing up would tend to diminish the message.
Yes it’s true that role playing can be effective without dressing up. Costume may emphasise and add power to the role play though.
I would think that respect for others comes from one's family background.
Parents are the "primary" educators of their children.
Also, children see the interaction between their parents, which does much to influence them as to gender roles/attitudes.
Teachers could show examples of major achievments, which were made by women, thus refuting ideas that men only achieve. Personally, I think this is the way forward. By education ... not by using some form of propaganda ... or coercion.
Totally agree that the primary education about respect in relationship comes from that modelled by parents. The era in which we grow up also plays a role in how we perceive our respective power as a male or a female.
Meanwhile, in the real world,
"UN agency rates Australia 39 out of 41 high- and middle-income countries in achieving quality education, in the latest international report to find that the country is falling behind in basic measures of teaching and learning.
Only Romania and Turkey were rated below Australia in education in the United Nations Children's' Fund (UNICEF) report card."
UNICEF's Australian spokesperson Amy Lamoid said, "Education is such a strong predictor of life outcomes and we're setting a fairly concerning strategy". What a diplomatic understatement that is.