oh dear the nuts are loose again, its no longer the 1950 people. We want or kids to learn about sex in safe and informed environment.

Gone are the days where..
Kids are taught anything or worst taught to hate through religious bigotry.
Nor do we want your priests to show the them.

Big Nana how convenient for you that the website has changed didn't take a copy of it did you? or maybe the misinformation your spreading comes form somewhere else?

The old suicide card is pulled in order to make people who believe kids should be allowed to be kids to feel guilty when they oppose sexualisation of kids. The simple reality is that the more perversion and pornpgraphy a kid is exposed to, the risk of suicide increases dramatically. The regressives are in denial, demonise anyone not wanting to accept their failed dogma and are more interested in their agenda than the bullying of kids.

Thanks for the comment Runner. It is precisely because of pornography that such programs as Safe Schools are necessary. Leaving aside any debate on whether pornography is valuable or not, it is there and it is not going away and in many cases a non-discerning (i.e., some but not all younger people) reading of that porn produces overly-narrow views on sex/gender roles and behaviours. It is VITAL we have programs like Safe Schools to help counteract that with knowledge; to help people see the REAL diversity of sexual and gender behaviour that really is really, factually out there. We simply cannot shut this away, pretend it doesn't exist, or (to Armchair Critic) say nothing about sex until a kid is an adult!

Thanks also for you comment Big Nanna. Likewise, it is because there is a LOT of wrong information available online to young people (who may not have developed the digital literacy to be discerning about what they read) that we need programs like Safe Schools. It is an opportunity to provide "correct" information (on breast binding, penis tucking etc.) that minimises harm. I don't think we can argue that preventing harm to genitals by correct information is any more sexually-explicit than teaching children correct genital hygiene.

Suseonline
You are one of those who completely missed the points made on the article. Its nothing to do with transgender or whatever, but in the design of the program. It seems to want to take over the whole discussion on sexuality over issues that affect a tiny minority of students, and thrust explicit material in the face of very young Children.

While I agree that almost anything is available on the internet, the children at least have the choice of not looking, and not looking at at material that does not interest them.

Cobber, and Rob. Firstly I didn't take screen shots of this material because as an inherently honest person it didn't cross my mind that people would try and hide material that could be seen as evidence against the program. However, a group against this program have got copies of all the material and will be presenting it to the official review. And I'm not the only person who has reported reading all this material. Many other people have reported seeing it.
Rob, as a nurse I am horrified that anyone would promote dangerous physical procedures like chest binding and penis tucking by recommending web sites. These type of procedures should only be done under medical supervision to prevent permanent damage and any child who is at that stage of gender change should be getting counselling anyway.
All that is necessary in sex education is teaching kids about conception, contraception, safety and the importance of emotional input in sexual relationships. They should be taught that porn does not represent normal sexual behaviour and that all people should be treated with respect, regardless of their sexual proclivities.
Anything more is indoctrination. More indepth discussion should be done with parents or another trusted adult, not in a classroom.

yes Rob it wasn't long ago that the regressives argued that porn was harmless and what you watch has no affect on you. The filth on sbs and other stations were justified on this basis. NOw the regressives want to fix a problem they are largely responsible for creating. Please give us a break. Certainly confusing kids with perverted behaviour will only increase issues not decrease. I would say it is those pushing this agenda that deliberately have their heads in the sand not those parents with genuine concerns. The reality is that promoting sex of all persuasions to young kids with no boundaries is as dumb as giving them needles filled with herion. Surely someone with Dr before there name can't be that stupid they can't see that.