>

It's Wales. The parents are upset that the kids are being taught that a sheep cannot give consent. /S
I just wish everyone using the term "woke" was required to define it before using it. >

Whenever a person describes anything as "woke" I immediately make a judgement call about that person. Not a good one. >

Had someone in my store say something about me (52, cis white male) and being woke and I said "I  try to be as woke as possible, yes!".  He left quickly. 
Apparently I wasn't the kindred spirit he hoped. >

Yeah I think of woke as a complement too. >

I don't get how it's not. The opposite of woke is sleeping, as in oblivious to the world. >

Don’t be obtuse.
If you’ve paid any attention to behaviour of those who describe themselves as woke you’ll know they’re disgusting. >

Can you give an example of what you mean?
What does "woke" mean, for you, exactly? >

Authoritarianism
Silencing speakers you don’t agree with or like.
Getting people fired from their professions for pretty basic takes.
Equating words with violence - and so excusing censorship and even normalising censorship.
Dictating the words and language people can use. Dictating the clothing people can wear.
Overt racism.
NOW, that’s not to say there isn’t genuine people who want social justice who describe themselves as woke. There is.
But time and time again we’ve seen people act in such a disgusting manner, who say they’re being woke, or align themselves with the word, that it’s made people hostile to people like that.
If you’re interested there’s a streamer I dip into on occasion who discussed this.
He’s a very leftwing progressive, but he highlights some issues. >

Can you give me some examples of people being silenced for "pretty basic takes"? >

You’ve mixed up two points.
Getting professors fired for basic takes - Kathleen Stock.
Silencing speakers - there’s plenty of evidence of universities or organisations arranging for speakers to give a talk and having death threats, bomb threats or fire alarms pulled.
If you’re going to do the “oh, so they can still say them - just elsewhere”
Then OK, yeah, sure. But they’re still preventing people from speaking at specific areas - it is a form of silencing.
These are all “woke” people doing it. It’s garbage behaviour and should be outright condemned. >

“This has lifelong benefits for children and young people by teaching them about healthy and positive relationships, empowering them to recognise abuse and learn about their rights to be kept safe and healthy.”
"Yes, and we're outraged!" >

The people who are outraged benefit a lot from children being unable to identify harmful relationships, abuse, and their own personal space or rights.
If children knew about those things, whatever would  the religious conservatives do? They'd have to traumatize their children even worse to compensate. >

How is this a difficult conversation? My four year old knows the proper names for all anatomy, that he came from cells from me and my husband, grew in a uterus and born out of a vagina, that there are many family types, identity exists outside of a binary, and people love differently. People treat kids like they’re stupid instead of ignorant and needing education, and/or can’t say the word “penis” in front of their child. >

Here's the thing. Internet porn is easy to access, and it's insane how violent a lot of the mainstream stuff is, usually toward women. Choking, slapping, hair pulling, rough anal with no preparation (there's literally a genre called "painal"), ass to vagina with no washing in between, ass to mouth with no washing in between, dudes forcing their cocks so far down their partner's throat that she's choking, crying, and vomiting, gangbangs... It goes on and on. 
A ten year old boy can one day think to himself "Man, boobs are kinda neat", type "boobs" into Google image search, and within a few clicks have this shit in front of his face.
He can then go get on roblox or fortnite or whatever else they're obsessed with these days and tell his other 9 and 10 year old friends "Guys, look what I found!" and they won't even have to do the work themselves to see it. Maybe they'll have to figure out how to bypass a filter or something, but they'll do it. 
You think ten is too young to know what anal sex is? Well too fucking bad, because thanks to the internet, they're gonna find out real fuckin' quick. I'd be surprised if the average kid who's allowed mostly free internet use and regularly engages in online gaming or chat didn't know about all the freaky shit people can get up to in bed, to be frank. 
Somebody has to be telling these kids that these sex acts are NOT SAFE and that it's all fake bullshit that in no way resembles healthy sex. We cannot allow young children to get to their sexually active years thinking that choking, slapping, rough oral, and anal is just how sex works. 
You think the parents who are flipping out about basic sex ed are having tough conversations about violent porn? No, of course not. So it's up to schools. Somebody has to intervene, because letting them go on watching it on the sly with nothing to keep them grounded in reality is gonna fuck them up. >

So true. The same parents who are complaining about this, are the same parents who give their kids unrestricted access to the Internet. >

Or assume that restricting access will protect their kids 100%. It won't. >

“Woke” sex ed.
So, sex ed?