Trans extremism & schools

[greenlanes]

I saw this today on TES. How can this crap be stopped?

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/transphobes-are-driving-childrens-confusion-about-gender-not-trans

By doing what I did and challenging the people who promote it in educational settings

Ask what resources your school is using to deal with transgender issues and where they are getting their information.
Read this and take it into school and ask them to consider it also:

www.transgendertrend.com/schools-resources/

Goodness she's an idiot. What a load of piffle and projection. Why are people who write these articles about horrible terrible gender critical feminists always so illogical and dim. And they seem to get unfettered access to publish whatever opinion pieces they like without anyone having the ability to challenge their assertions.

As with any kind of bullying. A good school will foster a culture of tolerance and respect.

I've got a better idea. MN critics could push for a section 28 on 'intentionally promoting transgenderism or the acceptability of a transgender lifestyle for children'. If you truly believe schools are.

Apologies for the length of this but some of it might be helpful to cut and paste.
The law and guidance:
Most transgender organisations are political pressure groups in that they try to influence public policy in the interest of their particular cause. Schools are constrained by the duty to comply with Sections 406 and 407 of the Education Act 1996 which forbids ‘the promotion of partisan political views…’

There is also a requirement found in the Prevent Duty and Teaching Controversial Issues for Schools which places a duty on schools to “secure that where political issues are brought to the attention of pupils… they are offered a balanced presentation of opposing views”. So groups trying to influence policy about say changing the use of sex segregated spaces in schools, changing school policy, changing language used in schools etc are acting as political pressure groups and if they are working with pupils there MUST be a balance of views.

Trans pressure groups present themselves as dealing with bullying, vulnerability etc but in addition to this, they are politically influencing school policy and practice - and there are laws about this. It's just that nobody has picked up on this as they only 'see' the initial anti bullying advice.

Just for another perspective. My first posts on here were about DD not being allowed to wear trousers, age 9 but applied to the whole school. If she could have transitioned she could have worn the boys uniform. Schools could start by cutting out harmful stereotypes like these then more will stop seeing gender with such significance. Won't end deep rooted attitudes to women and girls, but its a start.

Safeguarding
TG pressure groups are using training materials with schools (and others) which advises adults that they can keep a child's confidence if they disclose a wish to transition. For example, see the GIRES e learning materials where a 13 year old girl ‘Maisie’ discloses to a teacher that she believes she is a boy and not a girl. The ‘correct’ answer identified by GIRES tells teachers to ‘"reassure her that she can talk to you in confidence’, going on to add that “only if there is evidence of self harm or distress should this be reported to others". This is contrary to all safeguarding advice where adults in schools have it drummed into them that you NEVER promise confidentiality.
This sets up gender non conforming children as 'outside' school pastoral and safeguarding systems and gives adults a "hands off 'message" about them.

There's also an issue about TG training for schools 'normalising' the use of off label drugs, breast binding etc as acceptable. Arguably if you tell teachers that drug use in under age children is somehow acceptable to halt puberty , then you increase their tolerance and they may fail to refer a child who has accessed dangerous drugs online or been groomed online by adults into doing this without their parent's knowledge.

Safeguarding children is meant to be our number one priority. Trans groups are evidently breaching basic safeguarding advice - but incredibly nobody has noticed.

So groups trying to influence policy about say changing the use of sex segregated spaces in schools, changing school policy, changing language used in schools etc are acting as political pressure groups and if they are working with pupils there MUST be a balance of views.

Trans pressure groups present themselves as dealing with bullying, vulnerability etc but in addition to this, they are politically influencing school policy and practice - and there are laws about this. It's just that nobody has picked up on this as they only 'see' the initial anti bullying advice

Absolutely agree. No one is really challenging this inappropriate controlling of the narrative in schools and related public institutions. We need to, because here we can point out that safeguarding policy is not being followed and duty of care is not being adhered to.

Safeguarding children is meant to be our number one priority. Trans groups are evidently breaching basic safeguarding advice - but incredibly nobody has noticed.

We've noticed. Let's all start putting pressure on.

Great posts btw, rowdy.

Sorry for the long posts above -hopefully some of this may be helpful.
The trouble is that some of the training available is relevant, acceptable anti bullying advice and some useful ideas about inclusive practice.

But as they're pressure groups, rather than adults with expertise / knowledge / qualifications in child development, adolescence, child psychiatry and safeguarding, they have no professional boundaries. They see it as totally legitimate to start trying to influence school policies and promote dangerous practices.

They're not interested in child welfare - they are promoting their own points of view. And once you start any training session with a definition of transphobia which will encompass ANY challenge, you have effectively silenced a group, a school and a community.

The DfE have actively promoted these groups to schools.
The Equality Act 2010 and Schools, 2014’ (overarching equality guidance for schools) has three references to the Gender Identity Research & Education Society (GIRES), one reference to the EHRC and one link to Stonewall. Incredibly, there are no links to any other special interest groups in the whole document , despite coverage of a range of challenging issues for schools including race, gender, disability, pregnancy / maternity, admissions etc .

Now why would no other group be referenced? And no wonder schools meekly accept what they're being told when the DfE promotes only these groups to schools. Although I can't recall the DfE EVER promoting political pressure groups to schools before).

What tedious nonsense this all is. The vast majority of people are born with physiological characteristics which give them either a penis, testicles and semen or ovaries, eggs and a uterus. Everyone is born into a culture which more or less arbitrarily assigns particularly personality traits and behaviours to one or other of these groups. Wearing pink is not a biological imperative for the ovary people. Playing with Lego is not a biological imperative for the penis people.
The trans lobby, as far as I can tell, is saying that wearing pink is more of a defining female characteristic than having ovaries, a position which strikes me as so ludicrously illogical that it simply can’t be engaged with.
Or am I missing something?

I completed the GIRES training mentioned upthread.

The only way I could complete it satisfactorily was to give answers that went against everything I’ve been trained to do as a designated safeguarding lead with eight years’ experience. I raised my concerns about the flawed training with our PSHE lead and she now refuses to discuss these issues with me.

Good posts rowdy thanks

SuburbaRhonda
Did you report it to your Head?

Safeguarding takes absolute precedence over all other duties in schools. Arguably the opinion of the safeguarding officer about the suitability of training ought to 'outrank' the PSHE's views as the safeguarding person has the ultimate say re safeguarding because of their training.
I know it's not how we approach collegiate working in schools - but then that's covered in our safeguarding training - how to ensure that the welfare of the child takes priority when a colleague doesn't want to refer / intervene.

I don't believe that anyone with any experience of safeguarding at a senior level has ever looked at these training materials - if they had, these things wouldn't be in them. But the 'aura' around transgender issues means that matters that would normally be argued out professionally just doesn't happen as no one is allowed to challenge anything - so they come out with all this dangerous crap.

The lack of duty of care is astounding.

Yes, our head teacher is very approachable and was horrified at how this is all being dealt with by the consultants who lead in PSHE in our LA. We would have the backing of the education safeguarding team on this one.

I think primary schools like ours won’t see the effects of this in the same way as secondary schools but because I’ve been reading these threads for the past year it so, I feel I have enough ammunition to counter any extremism the LA tries to impose on us if and when it happens 💪🏼

Professionally that's great Suburban.
I know of a number of Heads who are confident and run very good schools who have managed to keep the transactivists at bay. They have excellent pastoral care systems, gender non conforming children are dealt with sensitively without being 'lauded' as brave and heroes and they work in partnership with parents and other professionals. It seems to be a case of using 'watchful waiting' although I don't think they'd call it that.
Schools should only need to review and tweak policies to make sure that they are dealing with gender non conforming children effectively. It doesn't need days of training and new language, new systems all centred round one tiny group. It's about having values that are kind and inclusive, safe and welcoming for all.

The trans lobby, as far as I can tell, is saying that wearing pink is more of a defining female characteristic than having ovaries, a position which strikes me as so ludicrously illogical that it simply can’t be engaged with.
Or am I missing something?

No, I think that's a pretty good reading of it.

But the 'aura' around transgender issues means that matters that would normally be argued out professionally just doesn't happen as no one is allowed to challenge anything - so they come out with all this dangerous crap.

Yes this is so true.

Erishkagal
I have a professional interest in this.
So what can we do to counteract this? It’s unlikely to come up
In my school as I’m primary, but I would still like to make my voice heard on this.
Also, could someone please link to the GIRES materials that are being used in schools that they have personally seen being used for training? I think I’ve probably seen them before on here, but I want to know exactly what I might be trained on. Thanks

There are two competing narratives here, both asserted, neither especially well evidenced.

Radical Fem: sex merely confers physical characteristics and has zero influence over brain functions, emotions, preferences etc. This is normally ‘evidenced’ by the poster having preferred Lego to dolls and maths to cookery.

Trans: All sexual characteristics are brain based and the physical/hormonal system is secondary and accidental. Again this tends to be evidenced by personal anecdote.

Neither narratives are useful to anyone where they stop research and intelligent discussion.

Schools try to use evidence in making policy but, because of both agendae, there is precious little available.

You missed the second sentences to both of those Larry -

Rad Fem: So people can do and where whatever they like (if appropriate for the weather and situation), regardless of their body.

Trans: So people who like things that are traditionally for the opposite sex are probably trans and would be happier if they changed their body to match.

ie. only one of these positions is actually proscriptive, and it isn't the rad fems.

Erishkagal
GIRES; www.gires.org.uk look for their e-learning section,”Caring for gender Non – Conforming Young People' "accredited" training module which is aimed at educators and other professionals. As soon as I read it I took screen shots of the dangerous safeguarding advice etc. Although I can't be sure of what is used in schools they clearly identify this as suitable for people working with adolescents including educators.

If you look at the DfE's equality document, one of the links is to 'anti - bullying advice' fro GIRES. Of course the links don't get you to a policy , it's a general page with an invitation to contact GIRES directly. Since when does the DfE allow private interest groups to advertise themselves via statutory guidance documents for schools (Never would be the correct answer).

Schools try to use evidence in making policy but, because of both agendae, there is precious little available.

You'll have to remind me which radfem propaganda is being pushed on schools, I forget.