Rainbow Resources & Council of Europe
How to discuss sexuality with under twelves and overcome parent’s objections.
The Council of Europe funded the production of a “Rainbow” resources document which is saturated with Gender Identity Ideology. You may be familiar with the COE who also produced a long document comparing “gender critical” women to racists. The document is drenched in the rhetoric of queer theory and describes women as “persons with wombs” and even avoids using male and female by substituting the terms “penetrators” and “penetrated”. 😳
The COE are also wedded to the destruction of female sport, labelling single sex sports, in effect, as “transphobic”.
The COE also took testimony from Lui Asquith, of Mermaids infamy, and referenced Stonewall.
You can read my full piece below. 👇
As part of my research on the COE I was pointed to a document called Rainbow Resources. I could not locate version one of the document but version two confirms that the author of the first version was non other than Labour MP, Lloyd Russell-Moyle.
Lloyd Russell-Moyle has a very strange idea of what should be covered in sex education: This is a statement he made in the House of Commons.
The document promotes Gender Identity Ideology and advocates for teaching about sexuality to ever younger age groups even where they encounter resistance. They are clear that their approach is influenced by queer theory.
Their definition of “trans” is pretty wide and includes men who cross dress for the purposes of sexual gratification.
You can read my full piece below.
More revealing is another document, also funded by the Council of Europe, in which a group with access to young children, as teachers of youth workers, strategise how to overcome resistance from parents and co-workers about discussing sexuality with under twelves. I find this document rather sinister.
The document makes it clear that they wish to target under fourteens in this clip but elsewhere they say under twelve and the less specific “at an early age”.
Moreover that make it clear that they know parents are likely to oppose their teaching so they openly advocate the hiding of content from parents.
They also use the phrase “sexual rights” in relation to children and strategise how to overcome resistance to teaching this to children.
One of the tactics is to cloak the teaching on gender identity ideology in anti-bullying teaching.
This is an attack on parental rights to bring their children up in a way that aligns with their values. For the avoidance of doubt, most people don’t oppose teaching about sexual orientation; what we object to is our kids being taught they may need a lifetime of medical dependence because they don’t abide with the sex sterotype for their sex.
You can read the full post, together with a copy of the document below.
Apologies for my silence in recent weeks. I have been covering this issue and I am also completing a series on Hannah Barnes excellent book on the Tavistock.