Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Labour’s Clause 20 sex education amendment fails in the Commons

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. An absolute disgrace.

  2. Mihangel apYrs 12 Jun 2013, 12:57pm

    Those that need it, won’t get it!

    The way religions perpetuate themselves is through indoctrination

  3. Nice to see that so many Lib Dems opposed the measure, including that slippery Greg Mulholland. Based on his prior track record and statements, his opposition will likely reflect his history of scaremongering about religious people allegedly having their rights violated by legislative changes that would benefit lesbians and gays.

  4. Given his history of arguing that legislation that could benefit gay and lesbians risk violating religious freedoms, it’s unsurprising to see Greg Mulholland (LD, Northwest Leeds) oppose this.

  5. Robert in S. Kensington 12 Jun 2013, 1:34pm

    So, let more children succomb to STDs, become pregnant and let the state continue forking out for it. Madness! Other more progressive EU countries already have mandatory sex education and have far better outcomes than we do. Burying one’s head in the sand isn’t a recipe for success, but total failure.

  6. Classic “playing politics” move by Labour – looks like a postive thing for LGB people, actually through the choice of timing it just helps derail the passage of the same-sex marriage bill through the Lords.

    1. Its got nothing to do with the ssm bill, has it? Can’t see how it can delay it at all…

  7. Children should be taught, not indoctrinated with falsehood. If as the THT adviser suggests, part of that teaching is that it is “ok to be gay” or how to practice safe sex being giving higher priority to relationship building and abstinence from sex outside of marriage then count me out because the slippery slope is for some teachers to have to teach something that they do not believe to be true. Bullying, including homophobic related must be dealt with and respect and understanding of those in same sex relationships or so inclined ought to be encouraged. I believe these are the issues that should be addressed before putting forward changes that I cannot support.

    1. Perhaps no longer so insane as it sounds, JohnB, it would appear that some of the more usual suspects contributing to this thread would prefer indoctrination over teaching.

      Broken society, anyone?

  8. Jock S. Trap 12 Jun 2013, 2:50pm

    On my trip to the hospital a nurse told me she was shocked at the levels of young people coming to the clinic now for HIV.

    This speaks volumes and the necessity for education.

    People and parents might like the thought but they should learn from themselves as many of them, including myself were sexually active very young and we Have to educate the facts.

    It’s just not an excuse to bury heads in the sand and pretend… we need to educate now and young.

    The problem is major enough so what will it take to listen and do the right thing?

    1. Jock S. Trap 12 Jun 2013, 2:51pm

      Sorry meant “People and parents might Not like…”

  9. Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!

    Teaching sex to kids is a tricky thing as it needs to be done in such a way that is sensitive and entirely appropriate to the individual child’s needs, and does not incentivise youngsters into prematurely participating in the very behaviours they are being taught about.

    On that basis, one must ask does THT really believe it would be best at teaching a classroom of kids with what would have to essentially amount to a one-size-fits-all approach, notwithstanding what gives it the right above parents to decide what their kids are taught at school, and at what age?

    Sorry, but with THT’s uber liberal PC-at-all-costs approach, it could only lead to the ever increasing sexualisation of our school kids, with a crash course in hardcell.org.uk no doubt for fast learners to progress on to.

    I shudder at the very thought of the sex education policies and approach of the likes of THT being adopted by our schools.

    1. @Samuel B: I think you put it well!

      One of the best things my son’s primary school did for my son was to preserve his innocence. It is a difficult balance I realise as making children aware of these matters may be important for the reasons other contributors have articulated.

      I try to discuss all these things with my son as appropriate and would rather it be something parents do, although I recognise some of the more vulnerable children don’t have this privilege. While I encourage critical thinking, I’ll be dammed if I let a vociferous, progressive liberal elite teach things that undermine what is being taught in the home – thus my grave skepticism and concerns when this issue periodically arises!

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 12 Jun 2013, 4:09pm

        In an ideal world, it should be up to the parents to impart this sort of education to their children but this is not such a world and it is not widespread as some would think, The majority of parents do NOT discuss sex with their children, many are uncomfortable and many bury their heads in the sand yet oppose sex education in the classroom. So be it. Let their children go through life ignorant and unarmed with the requisite information to protect their health and their lives. If they succumb to an STD or their daughters become pregnant, tough! Ignorance in this context will never be bliss. We have one of the highest rates of STDs and out of wedlock pregnancy. Obviously, parents aren’t doing a very good job.

        1. Robert, if they succumb to an STI in adult life then that is as much a fault of the appalling standard of STI awareness and information programmes being dessimated and dispensed generally by the likes of woolly-minded liberal outfits like THT as anything else.

          In fact, on the basis of the appalling levels of STIs on the London gay scene as an example – and at which many STI awareness programmes are targeted – that in itself should send up a red flag preventing the likes of THT having any input on guiding children’s sexual health.

          May I remind you that it was similar thinking that has liberally provided contraceptives on tap to school girls unbeknownst to their parents and other such schemes which have served to sexualise our kids and rape them of their innocence.

          But I suspect you know that full well already.

          1. Jock S. Trap 13 Jun 2013, 9:33am

            Actually as we’re talking about young people it can only be right to teach the dangers of STI’s through a proper education system.

            Surely that is to blame for the high levels if STI’s and now HIV numbers in young people.

            We need to take responsibility for those youngsters and provide them with the fact.

            At the moment it is those that continue to bury their heads in the sand that are to blame for the failures, the rise in the young getting HIV and other STI’s…. no one else’s.

      2. Jock S. Trap 13 Jun 2013, 9:24am

        So the choice is to better educate or to hide it and pretend it doesn’t happen.

        Well I became sexually active at a young age. I have always know who I wanted sex with, men. I was brought up in a strict christian household. I also know several girls/boys who were active young. In fact on of my best friends in school had here first child at 12.

        You may say it’s protecting innocent childhood but it’s also denying what we all know happens because people would rather bury their heads in the sand.

        Knowing the facts doesn’t make any difference… In fact denying, esp to a child makes it adventurous and more likely to try.

        Parents are actually the worst people, in most part, to educate as they will only educate by bias not facts. Most parents will be unwilling to accept that young people have sex and here lays the problem.

        Teachers are their to teach, so let them teach about the facts, the dangers, the harm as well as promoting the loving and relationships.

        1. Jock S. Trap 13 Jun 2013, 9:27am

          Fact is not teaching properly means those sexually active, learn for themselves. That leads to the problems because of an inadequate education system that fails them.

          Whether you like it or not there has to be some responsibility from education even in matter some don’t like but if it produces more careful youngsters surely that is what has to be best.

      3. Hodge Podge 13 Jun 2013, 1:08pm

        Somewhat naive there JohnB. My dad’s a vicar and my mum a homophobe, but kids in the playground taught me about sex in year 3.

    2. Staircase2 12 Jun 2013, 4:07pm

      What a load of abject rubbish

      I expected better of you to be honest…

    3. Let me get this straight Samuel, you are not in favour of providing good quality sex & relationship teaching in schools & colleges, yet this seems at odds with the picture you often present to PN readers of how young gay men are ill equipped when it comes to safer sex & being able to negotiate safer sex with their partners. It really is time you realised that good sexual health practices & understanding should be encouraged from an early age which continues into early adult life & beyond.

      We all know you have a huge dislike of THT (& others by association) but what does this have to do with THT, this is education policy for goodness sake, get with the program! Ahhh yes, some Local Authorities are working with THT to provide good quality sex & relationship education in their schools because those LA’s understand the importance of equipping their pupils to be confident about sex & relationships in later life. Any excuse to shoehorn THT into the argument eh Samuel?

      1. Rather than “cheery pick” THT resources to suit your 1950′s sexual health argument, why not show the links to the resources that are being targeted at young people? Take a look Samuel you might just might learn something!

        http://www.talksafe.org.uk/

        http://www.ygm.org.uk/home/

        https://www.youngandfree.org.uk/Default.aspx

      2. Trust you to throw one of your grenades into the proceedings, W6.

        Kindly re-read what I have posted.

        Nowhere have I said that kids should not receive some form of sex education:- education which I believe whose consent should ultimately rest with the parent.

        What I HAVE said is we should be wary of the TYPE of education they receive:- it should be sensitive and non-incentivising, requirements that would pose several challenges as by necessity it would require a one-size-fits all approach.

        And I have made it clear that the ultra-liberal PC approach of the likes of THT is the last thing that should be foisted on developing and vulnerable minds.

        NOWHERE have i said kids should not receive sex education, but as ever so quick are you to attempt to denigrate and smear me any which way you can that, as usual, you only end up falling flat on your face and looking even dafter than you usually manage to do.

        Which is admittedly some feat in itself worthy of note.

        1. Nice try Samuel, but how about answering the questions I have raised, rather than deflect attention away from yourself? Explain to other PN readers why the amendment to the bill has anything to do with THT in your view. Explain to the readers why you have “cherry picked” a singular THT resource to advance your argument, when there are many others that are much more targeted at younger individuals.

          You are out of step with with general opinion on this – which we have seen both here & in the Equal Marriage debates. Here you are subverting the debate & to discredit THT, whilst being inconsistent in your argument.

          Perhaps we will see a similar U-Turn from you in comments as we saw on the Yvette Cooper Story on this matter – what on earth did Bilderburg have to do with sex & relationship education? How silly of me, one of your other passions in life is conspiracy theory, we only need Pharma Co’s to be brought up & we will have all 3 of your one man crusades foisted upon us!

          1. Come now, W6, surely even you aren’t so naive as to doubt THT’s prevailing interest here:-

            http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/05/24/terrence-higgins-trust-receives-200000-government-grant/

            …and no doubt THT was poised to bid for sex education for kiddies contracts on the back of this amendment receiving sufficient votes.

            But what qualifies THT to preach to kids and what oversight is there?

            I’m grateful to JohnB’s response as a parent:- if any detractors here were in a similar position, and bearing in mind that HIV rates and other STIs have almost only ever risen under THT’s watch – despite the millions it’s been funded to prevent – they wouldn’t want such an outfit teaching their kids either, nor any educational syllabus the likes of THT had any influence in.

            And that’s partly why MPs voted against today’s clause 20 amendment; because some are aware that ultra-liberalists and cultural Marxists are intent on sexualising kids to the point where childhood no longer exists.

          2. Nicely shoehorned in Samuel I give you that- the conspiracy theory, lets see how you intend to include the Pharma Co’s in this debate! I am sure it has not escaped your attention that THT is a 3rd sector service provider & as such is entitled to tender for such contracts & the Government seem willing to award them the contracts. That said I am sure you would prefer Virgin Healthcare or some other for profit company to have won that particular contract.

            Have you scrutinised Brook Charity which is the UK’s leading sexual health charity for young people under 25. In the financial year ended March 2012 they received £13.7million from the Government with their total income was £15.2 Million. I hate to remind you but THT are not the only service provider in town, yet you seem to think they are.

            Whatever your personal quarrel with THT by now we all know about it & perhaps in future you can take it up with them directly rather than use these comments pages to peddle your propaganda!

          3. You say conspiracy theory in an effort to besmirch me, W6:- I say critical thinking.

            Still, a change to see you almost lost for words for once, and flailing around for a suitable riposte but failing abysmally as usual.

            Now kindly return to your Twitter feed where no doubt THT’s Lisa Power’s ample bosom awaits to provide succour and TLC…

          4. Lol you call it “critical thinking” I think you will find that critical thinking in it’s true sense requires the analysis of factual evidence not hearsay or your warped perceptions.

            Nothing to say about Brook Charity – thought not!

            I will be sure to pass on your warmest wishes when I next happen to tweet Lisa. You really should get with the program as social networking is a great way to have a say on all sorts of issues & to gain valuable up to date information.

    4. “and does not incentivise youngsters into prematurely participating in the very behaviours they are being taught about.”

      What complete and utter rubbish, this is about as dumb as the people who oppose comprehensive sex education because they’re afraid it will turn their kids gay. I’m not sure if you completely forgot what it was like being a kid but they already know what sex is and how to have it, this class in school will teach them nothing new in that regard. What it will teach them is how to be safe and how to avoid STIs, something that teens do not know automatically. Prudes such as yourself can keep your head in the sand and think you can somehow stop teens from having sex but if you want to actually help teens and reduce STI rates come join us in the real world in maybe we can do something productive on this issue.

    5. “and does not incentivise youngsters into prematurely participating in the very behaviours they are being taught about.”

      What complete and utter rubbish, this is about as dumb as the people who oppose comprehensive sex education because they’re afraid it will turn their kids gay. I’m not sure if you completely forgot what it was like being a kid but they already know what sex is and how to have it, this class in school will teach them nothing new in that regard. What it will teach them is how to be safe and how to avoid STIs, something that teens do not know automatically. Prudes such as yourself can keep your head in the sand and think you can somehow stop teens from having sex but if you want to actually help teens and reduce STI rates come join us in the real world in maybe we can do something productive on this issue.

  10. Staircase2 12 Jun 2013, 4:04pm

    I can’t understand how any Government would believe that teaching our children about how to respect each other and their right to say “no” as well as “yes” should not be a compulsory subject for ALL students…

    1. Staircase2 12 Jun 2013, 4:11pm

      @JohnB
      What a complete crock of sh!t

      By ‘maintain his innocence’ in this case you do of course mean ‘maintain his ignorance’

      Railing against some mythological ‘progressive liberal elite’ speaks volumes about the fearful place inside your own head…

      Yeah – God forbid our children’s education should be progressive eh…?!

      1. I don’t mean that at all – I happen to believe that allowing children to be children and to grow up in a safe and loving environment should be our priority. Sadly, our culture means they become aware of sex related issues at an increasingly earlier age and wisdom is therefore needed how we tackle these subjects and the right education is needed. While I expect at least to earn the right to teach my values on other peoples children, I don’t expect the likes of the THT spokesman to impose their wrong values on mine. Sure children need to be taught the facts of life at the right time but let’s ensure it is facts they are taught and not the values or agenda of misguided individuals.

        1. Who are these mis-guided individuals you quote, this shambles of a Tory led Government? You have fallen for the diversionary argument put forward by Samuel B. regarding THT. This article is all about Government educational policy, it has nothing at all to do with any charity involved in sexual health education.

          No doubt you like Samuel B. you will be the first to vocal when we see another increase in newly acquired HIV infections & point the finger at anyone but yourself & your frankly outdated views! I should also clarify that if you are suggesting I am the spokes person of THT, yet again I have to disappoint you & say that this is a myth peddled by Mr Samuel Bass in an attempt to stymie good debate & deflect attention away from the real issues at hand.

          You have fallen for it hook, line & sinker!

        2. JohnB, while there are thoughtful and conscientious parents like you around, the crackpot PC zealots who have a grip on our kids’ education will not be able to ply their disgusting efforts to sexualise and debase childhood.

          These dangerous misfits are right now scheming to put porn awareness/education on the school syllabus, and are actively calling for convicted paedophiles to be allowed to work among children and to decriminalise historical cases of child abuse.

          They are utterly sick in the mind, yet Cultural Marxism seeks to destroy the family unit in what ever way it can using political correctness to drive through its policies and agendas via foot soldiers such as some who, indeed, post regularly on PN, not needing to name any names (ahem)…

          Be very wary of the aims and objectives of the “Third Sector” and Cameron’s so called “Big Society”, if it isn’t already crystal clear what it really represents.

          1. I read where you are coming from Samuel B and while I wouldn’t be as rabid as you in your comments, I do share your concern that there are harmful influences in our education system, which need to be resisted.

            While I am wary of anything driven by political ideology, I see the Voluntary and Community (Third) Sector as on the whole a good thing (indeed I’m part of it). The Big Society ideal has been around long before Mr Cameron and if allowed to flourish can not only achieve a deal of good (especially to the poor and vulnerable) but could help combat the cultural Marxist tendency you fear.

          2. I would love to believe the lauded and much trumpeted Big Society is well meaning and not driven by political ideology, JohnB.

            But the vehicles via which Cameron’s dream will be realised – including Third Sector charities such as THT – are by definition ideologically driven because they receive a substantial chunk of their funding from central government on the proviso that they work to ideological and blatantly Marxist-inspired dictates that have served to trash the social codes upon which a cohesive and stable society are founded.

            If I may proffer GMFA as an example of a “charity” that, when it was happy to hoover up state funding, adhered to PC dictats that turned HIV prevention upside down and helped fuel record rates.

            With its public funding now axed and thus freed from such dictatorial constraints, GMFA finally says it is now listening to what WE have to say as it seeks retribution from its slavish adherence to ultra-liberal dictats.

            Too late, damage done, move along.

          3. Of what is that phrase????? It will come to me, I’ve heard it so many time……………………………….ahh yes “hoisted by your own petard” eh Samuel????

            As for GMFA, sadly unless they secure some funding very soon they may not be around for much longer, because despite your protestations against public funding the truth is HIV charities are very low down on the list that individuals give to, precisely because of the way you like to portray them on these comments boards.

            We all know that you do not think HIV / Sexual Health services should be publicly funded, as you do not see them as “worthy” charities. If it is cancer or Alzheimers it is a very different story, but not an illness that has ravaged Gay men in the last 30 years, it is not respectable enough for you!

            Time for you to put your hand in your pocket or even get off your backside & do something instead of bleating & bemoaning on these comments pages! Shout load & do jack all that is Mr Samuel Bass through & through

          4. If I may remind you, Chris Williams, prior to charities becoming an adjunct/extension of government and dependent on the teat of public funds, charities – that is, in the true, unprostituted sense of the word – were independent concerns that depended on sheer will and determination to find resourceful and imaginative ways of raising income from the public.

            And such charities, which still do exist, were/are able to do so on by reputation alone, and direct evidence of their positive effect and impact of society.

            I’d ask you to familiarise yourself with the kinds of voluntary organisations oft sought out by the benefactors who take part in C4′s The Secret Millionaire for an inkling of the sorts of organisations I mean.

            The likes of GMFA are nowhere near their selfless, community-serving league and I wouldn’t even pee into one of their collecting tins.

            As you so oft lament, W6, you “reap what you sow”.

            Or was it “be careful what you wish for”?

            I never can remember which!

          5. It has very little to do with reputation & much more to do with public perception when it comes to health related charities, cancer charities for example do very well because the public in general can empathise with cancer patients.

            HIV & sexual health charities are not well supported because they are associated with sex & intimacy, together with the prehistoric views perpetuated by individuals like yourself Samuel.

            Humour me, which HIV organisation would you actually support today not 25 yrs ago?

          6. Not one to hang around threads that have fizzled out, W6, but to humour you:- show me a self-funding grassroots HIV set-up run by the people for the people, not corrupted by outside interests nor brainwashed by PC ideology, and it’d have both my money and man hours.

            I don’t think you really appreciate why Britain is broken, do you?

            Why, for example, people were encouraged to become dependent on welfare:- why immigration is out of control:- why kids today leave school unable to spell:- why the NHS has been trashed…

            Why nothing no longer works, basically.

            And until you do wake up and smell the coffee you’ll continue investing your well-meaning loyalty in the same mindset/mentality that also allows HIV to spread unhindered.

            Me? I’ve my Kleenex at the ready as I catch up on some episodes of The Secret Millionaire I’ve missed, if only to marvel at the efforts of the kind of selfless, tireless, gracious, REAL people who have a genuine desire to help and do better by others.

          7. PS:- you do make me laugh, W6!

            While everyone else has moved on to new topics of import, you continue to loiter here like a little boy tampering with the thumb scores!

            I do believe this story left the front page of PN just after 11am, yet since then, miraculously, the thumb-scoring has massively turned around in your favour.

            However do you do it, Chris:- the most I can muster is one vote per comment on my iPad at my boutique concession up to 6pm:- the other on my desktop computer – including, finally, one to myself – around 8:15pm when i finally get home after my Pilates class!

            One has to marvel at your sheer nerve, W6:- so transparent for someone who goes to great pains to insist that they pay no attention to the scoring system on these here boards!!

            Miaaaooow :)

          8. Lol…………..If you consider that I am “loitering” then so are you – do you not see the irony in what you post?????

            I perfectly understand your concerns & share some of them, BUT I am a practical individual not an ideologue, we are all dealt a hand of cards I make the best of what I’ve been dealt. I fight for what I believe in, from within the system rather than sit outside it, divorced from reality & unable to influence – that is the big difference between us.

            It is said that those who court conspiracy theory do so because they feel they have little control on their personal circumstances & believe that there are bigger influences at work conspiring & preventing them taking control of their lives – this to me sums you up in a nutshell! You seek to blame others for your feelings of not being in control, this is evident in the case of your health & particularly HIV / STI’s.

            It truly is a sad state of affairs in my view that you live with such constant fear, a real pity!

          9. PS – can we bottom out this obsession you have about the scoring system. What you are essentially accusing me of is fraud. You may wish to believe that I am well connected & have the ability to over-ride the scoring system, sadly I am neither that talented, well connected or have the inclination. Does it never occur to you that other PN readers may not just agree with your point of view? You pose the question “However do you do it, Chris”? Has it not occurred to you I don’t do it & that others are marking you down? It is pleasing to note that you on the other hand are habitually skewing the scoring, good to know for future reference!

            I suggest you contact PN & put your concerns to them, that said I will declare now that Ben Cohen is amongst my followers on Twitter. Make what you will of that, but I can assure you there is no impropriety resulting in your perception that I am able to tamper with the scoring system………………..

          10. Your psycho-analysing is way off the mark, W6.

            You accuse me of conspiracy theory without evidence:- which in itself is a conspiracy theory (think about it).

            You say you do identify some of the rot within the system yet function within said system and play along with the charade as you won’t step out of your comfort zone and hold the likes of Lisa Powell, Matthew Hodson et al to account, even while holding court with these people on your Twitter feed.

            As we’ve discovered over the last few days with brave souls who have spoken out about the NSA spying activities and Google’s sleight of hand tax evading, it takes truly brave and selfless souls to use their platform to blow the whistle on grave wrongdoing.

            You, it seems, are neither, and are content with the status quo being unshaken and are more interested in maintaining your place within the system rather than step out of line and question its pervasive groupthinking.

            I suspect you’re really far better than that at heart.

          11. All very laudable Samuel, BUT how can you criticise me, when from where I’m standing you certainly are not prepared to put yourself out & hold the individuals you mention to account.

            We all function within the system whether you like it or not, you can protest using these comments pages, but what does that achieve in reality?

            All the time I have been commenting here you have failed to change anything in terms of HIV policy at THT, GMFA or indeed the Government. At least I can say I try & I am prepared to put myself out, attend meetings & have my say.

            There have been recent community events concerning things you say you are passionate about, were you there, did you put yourself out, did you even know that you might be able to have influence?

            I am not the sharpest pencil in the box but I walk the talk & do my best, mock or criticise all you want, but until you match my commitment then you are in no position to make judgements about me.

          12. I have thumbsed up your last few posts as they are non-combative and also make some good points.

            What am I doing if I am not holding the HIV sector to account on PN boards, W6:- the most widely read and regarded oracle of record re. all things gay and pink-hued?

            As I’ve said many a time, W6, free thinkers like myself function more effectively outside of the system looking in and commenting on said system’s failings.

            Besides having a 9/5 job to maintain a reasonable standard of living, quite honestly the likelihood of any dissident voice ever being welcomed into public service – where individual thought and self-expressed identity are frowned upon – ain’t ever going to happen, as well I suspect you know.

            The only place where dissenting voices can be heard are on free and open boards such as these, and all credit to PN that it allows such voices free flow, even if that means along with it the outrageous and despicable outpourings of David Skinner et al.

          13. Call me a coward but I’ve no desire to be lynched by THT or GMFA’s “bovver boys” publicly: – accounts of their aggressive intimidatory tactics against those who’ve attempted to hold them to account publicly are as legendary as they’rr sickening.

            In speaking out on PN boards over the years I’ve given permission for others to come out of hiding and do likewise where previously they were averse to raising similar points due to the fear of being denounced and ostracised for going against the tide.

            That never stopped me, however, so by maintaining my stand we now see PN luminaries and stalwarts from Eddy to Sister Mary Clarence adding their 2 cents to such debates.

            So my stand on PN HAS made a difference in that now people are no longer afraid to openly criticise THT et al for their failures.

            Whether THT take any notice or not isn’t the point:- to be forewarned is to be forearmed, so those following these debates can make better informed decisions whether to use its services.

          14. As I have said earlier we have very different approaches, which approach is more effective can not be judged by others. I can only draw on my record of making a difference to the lives of others, no big statements just individual tangible changes where I can say “I enabled that to happen”.

            Not wishing to blow my trumpet I have saved individuals from homelessness, by doggedly taking on uncaring councils. I continue to work with other positive individuals & have recently become involved in better understanding drug & alcohol problems within the gay community.

            Yes I have time which you don’t but what upsets me most about the way you go about highlighting various issues is the deliberate inaccuracies you post here – I just do not understand your method to embellish & overstate these clams. A good example is THT finance, many of your claims are wildly inaccurate as can be seen by anyone who reads the audited accounts. How can that help your argument to be taken seriously?

          15. Perhaps you are privy to information I am not, despite what you consider to be my very close relationship with THT. I am not aware of the bullying you highlight so I cannot comment.

            My experience is very different, not always positive, but in taking a balanced view I have seen improvements in the way the organisation is moving. As an organisation they have their weaknesses, but I am not inclined to criticise because sadly I believe that would only give you even more licence to criticise me & THT.

            I make my disquiet known to those who have influence & I believe I have been heard & my views taken on board. I am not 1 to deal with foot soldiers I prefer direct communication with those who can make change happen, be that a Council, Housing Association or THT.

            I am aware of my failings, but I have to say I dislike the tactics you employ to make your point. Eddy & SMC are the opposites of me, I get they think like you, but someone has to put an alternative view forward.

  11. Proper sex education is so important. What we got at school was ridiculous. You cannot rely on parents to do this as so many get embarrassed. I was lucky, my father was a former nurse and neither he nor my mother had any problems answering any questions I had. Nor did they have problems talking about sex and relationships. But most parents are not like mine.

    And although I didn’t know ALL details, I was told at an early age where babies came from. It was never hidden. Details where given when they knew I would understand it better. But I think I was around 6 when I knew about babies.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all