I can appreciate the OP is coming from a position of genuine care and concern, however I am worried they may have misunderstood the context around RSE. Let?s take this particular example of the dice exercise and of anal sex being mentioned more generally in RSE lessons in senior schools. Whilst you could interpret this exercise as ?our teenagers being taught how to have all kinds of less traditional of non-reproductive sexual interactions?, you could also see this exercise as an educational opportunity in a safe space to inform young people that there is no ?one? or ?right? way to have sex; sex can take lots of difference forms and means something different to different people - what is key is consent. The effect of this exercise would be the inclusion and acknowledgment of sex for non-heterosexual individuals. In the long term, this reduces homophobia, discrimination and bigotry and actively includes young people who identify as LGBTQ+ or whose parents/ families/ carers may identify as LGBTQ+. Sex is in pop culture, it?s all over the internet. It?s on social media, in films, throughout song lyrics. A lack of information has far greater capacity to cause harm than any uncomfortable conversations in an educational setting may do, or even teaching a young person about something sex related they hadn?t yet come across. I appreciate 13 may seem very young, but it is important to remember (1) the typical exposure a teenager of 13 will already have had, whether in conversation, in pop culture or on the internet; and (2) just because certain RSE topics are designated ?13+? doesn?t mean they?re taught at 13; they could be addressed at 16, 17 or 18. I hope you can try to see this from another perspective, the same way I can appreciate you are trying to protect young people in the way you think is best. My advice would be that it is important to think about how we can protect (and include) all young people; not just those who act like us or who share our own beliefs or sexual preferences.
