Ending this madness but 'saving face'

This might be a useful article from Canada. It's by a man who is an atheist setting out his reasons why no one should be compelled to believe transgender ideology. www.newcenter.ca/news/oger-ndp

Me too, BeUpStanding, me too.

The current DBS procedures were instituted after the Soham murders.

YY. It's worth bearing that in mind I think.

Whenever someone trans appears on a thread to educate us poor silly wimmins, my reaction is pretty much identical to Angela Merkel here...

some of those safeguarding practices were literally bought with blood

They all were bought with blood and suffering. The current DBS procedures were instituted after the Soham murders.

Every single safeguarding procedure we have has been instituted in the wake of a scandal and to the shame of negligent institutions and authorities. This is why the rolling back of any of them is such a serious matter

yes. I haven't really thought about it properly before, but some of those safeguarding practices were literally bought with blood.

people who want to roll them back want to erase the legacy of things like Victoria Climbie's murder.

If you're campaigning for the relaxation of safeguarding proceedures, or going along with it, look at the picture of the beautiful eight year old girl in that wikipedia link and then have a really good think about what you're choosing to do with your life.

It always seems to take something like Victoria Climbie, Saville, the Rochdale scandal before big changes are made.

Every single safeguarding procedure we have has been instituted in the wake of a scandal and to the shame of negligent institutions and authorities. This is why the rolling back of any of them is such a serious matter.

This has been a reallly thought-provoking thread. I’ve nicked some of it to post on Twitter: here.

I’d assumed that if you make new law it gets rigorously reviewed by actual law experts to see if it sets up / could potentially cause conflicts anywhere within the existing body of law.

Me too.
I also used to think that to be a politician you had to have a background in politics and law! Imagine how stupid I feel.

I’d assumed that if you make new law it gets rigorously reviewed by actual law experts to see if it sets up / could potentially cause conflicts anywhere within the existing body of law

Unfortunately the bunch of self serving amateurs in Parliament are the "experts".

The individuals making the decisions don't seem to be able to step back and take an overall view. They don't seem to be aware of the various groups that these decisions will affect, and they don't seem able to see potential consequences.

Very true.

By now responsible people can see the unintended consequences of poorly written law in both the GRA and the EA.

This is something that’s struck me since I first saw the GRA - it’s badly written. I’ll admit I only ever looked at it from the science POV at the time but even then I thought ‘well that’s daft...’

It makes me wonder about the whole process. I’d assumed that if you make new law it gets rigorously reviewed by actual law experts to see if it sets up / could potentially cause conflicts anywhere within the existing body of law. (I’d also assumed things would be critiqued by subject matter experts as well but I’m well aware no one listens to scientists..)

Does this happen? Does stuff that is proposed get reviewed before it goes on the books? Or am I just really naive here (genuine question, Ok to say yes, aware I’m a scientist not a lawyer!)

This topic is not about your choice of conversation, therefore to attempt to steamroller it into your design, and then use screenshots of it to prove that the women here don't fall into line and argue with a derailment will probably fly with the credulous, but the readers of FWR, lurkers and posters alike, can see exactly what your game is.

This.

UpstartCrow, that has been a significant concern of quite a few people who can see how inept these people in positions of authority are. They see no real issue with ignoring women's vocal concerns, I don't think it should be assumed they will switch from that to a balanced and sensible position instead of just knee jerking elsewhere.

We're not going to take anything seriously from Everyday Feminism because it's a laughable website. We all know what gaslighting is thanks.

By now responsible people can see the unintended consequences of poorly written law in both the GRA and the EA.
It is my hope that the first thing they will do is get the groomers under the guise of training out of the schools.
Secondly get the fraudulent Equality Act policy documents replaced with accurate lists of protected categories.
Thirdly put an end to facilitating fraud by ending deed poll name and sex changes on official identification papers.

I'm concerned about how they can roll back without swinging wildly to the other extreme.
The individuals making the decisions don't seem to be able to step back and take an overall view. They don't seem to be aware of the various groups that these decisions will affect, and they don't seem able to see potential consequences.

are there any comparable instances where organisations have made fundamental changes to their approach without some sort of serious event to precipitate it?

It always seems to take something like Victoria Climbie, Saville, the Rochdale scandal before big changes are made.

I've actually been approaching the very content you have been discussing, equally drawing on personal & family experiences to illustrate some very serious issues being discussed. The bigger issue is you simply don't like what I am saying because its an opposing view, so then resort to name calling and gaslighting. Projecting your own behaviour onto blaming me.

everydayfeminism.com/2015/08/things-wish-known-gaslighting/

Samantha, I'm not going to engage with you except to say that you have repeatedly tried to make this thread all about you, and have been politely, and not politely, directed to start your own thread if you wish to discuss the issue of you and your beliefs, many of which have been discussed elsewhere.
This topic is not about your choice of conversation, therefore to attempt to steamroller it into your design, and then use screenshots of it to prove that the women here don't fall into line and argue with a derailment will probably fly with the credulous, but the readers of FWR, lurkers and posters alike, can see exactly what your game is.

Go well.

Well spotted "TensionWheelsCoolHeels", indeed to document trying to have a mature, informed measured debate in relation to in its self a worrying premise for the entire thread and again maturely allowing people to make up their own minds and interpret such as they wish, by providing the whole un-censored picture. One might say what Freedom of Speech, mature debate and often what real journalistic integrity/investigative journalism is all about. Especially in this heightened period of fake news, extremist propaganda becoming mainstream.

Thanks Tension.

Ignoring the merailer and back to the topic:
My greatest concern is that companies / corporations will remain in fear of the 'transphobia' allegation and it won't be until the scandals emerge publicly that they will 'get' what women have been saying all along.

We have seen today an outrageous example of what can happen when someone has no acceptable sexual boundaries - whether it is boundaries about acceptable behaviour in the office, on public transport and even more worrying , about children in schools. We really mustn't wait until those people are given a free pass to places where children and adults are vulnerable. The public gets this but unless politicians give a lead, then too many will be in fear of the #nodebate lobby groups.

I wonder whether some letters asking M & S, Top Shop etc about whether they conducted any risk assessments in terms of the safety of women and children before introducing mixed sex changing rooms?

Would M & S accept liability if a child was confronted by someone with a penis was using the woman's changing room to indecently expose themselves - not of course that this would ever happen ..... oh wait......

She's clearly trying to get Linda Riley /Diva to commission an article off the back of this.

Grey rock people.