School trans inclusive policy

OK, so two of you have replied to my post with more or less the same comment, so it seems there may be something here that I haven't understood. I honestly don't understand why these children have a need to change separately.

I too, don't see why they would have more need to change separately than any other child who feels insecure about their body, which during puberty, is probably almost all girls and a lot of boys.

Being seen by others who have the same kind of sexed body is not worse for transgender children than for very fat children or very skinny children, or children who started puberty before their peers.

And changing rooms are surely more traumatic for children with actual disfigurements that they can be bullied over than for perfectly normal-looking trans kids.

A school providing separate spaces for trans children to change in doesn't hurt anyone (which makes this better than forcing girls to change with boys) but it does make other children feel left behind, and/or encourage them to identify as trans just to get their own spaces.

ChickenonaMug, I find it rather sad that you have to talk about your experiences here just to try and get some empathy.

I don't see why males should get one free rape per woman before said woman is allowed to want some privacy and safety.

That's like only letting those workers in a coalmine who already have suffered a bad head injury wear helmets.
(Only worse, because helmets need to be manufactured while sex segregated spaces already exist and don't get used up.)

I have outlined ways that the Brighton Policy Document could , with thought , planning, and resources, be put into practice to enable a trans pupil to take part in sport/ PE/ games in the " chosen" group without compromising the safety and peace of mind of the other pupils. As a close relative of several formerly abused girls, as I have said elsewhere, I find the accusation that I do not care about the needs of women and girls is wrong, and is offensive to me.

KayM2 - I am a woman who was sexually abused and raped throughout a very large part of my childhood. I was groomed to have no real understanding of boundaries and the word 'no'. As an adult I have been raped once and sexually assaulted and harassed on very many occasions by all sorts of men. I have been sexually harassed/assaulted twice at work in the last four months. I still have issues with asserting my boundaries and reporting when they are violated.

So for the sake of all girls and especially sexually abused girls the answer to the Brighton/Allsorts guidance is NO. It is never ok to violate girls' boundaries or to teach girls' that it is 'right and kind' to accept their boundaries being breached.

Suceeding in something, such as a sport, is one way in which an abused girl can start to heal. It is not ok to include those with male bodies in sporting competitions for females. It will result in girls who feel that they have the inferior type of body which is less strong or fast than the 'girls with the superior bodies'. Abused girls, in particular, may be especially susceptible to feeling that their female sex body is less worthy.

The Allsorts etc guidance does not take into account the needs of sexually abused girls, the majority of which will never talk about their abuse. These vulnerable girls will often have a trauma based response to males, especially in certain places such as changing rooms or sleeping accommodation. The Allsorts/Brighton guidance places the onus on the girls to speak up if they are uncomfortable. Many abused girls would never do this for fear of drawing attention to something that they feel ashamed of. The abused girl now has another thing that they feel unable to speak about which makes her even more vulnerable.

The Brighton guidance is in direct conflict with the needs of very vulnerable abused girls. The impact on these girls, and indeed all girls, should be properly assessed. It is dangerous to teach an abused girl that their abuser was right when he groomed her to believe that her boundaries and feelings matter less than others.

But who should be considered deserving of this? A decision has to be made about who is most distressed and can get what might be seen as a privilege.

I have a file about three inches thick from DS's school career. Asking for any adjustment (like slightly different uniform or exam arrangements, and, yes, sometime separate changing facilities) always seemed to involve three multiagency meetings and written evidence running to several pages.

So, I'd say there's a precedent for asking for evidence of psychological distress and taking it from there.

(He did sometimes make utterly unreasonable demands. Sometimes, when caught up in the thick of it all, I tried to push for them, to the possible detriment of other pupils . That kind of adjustment tended not to happen.]

A decision has to be made about who is most distressed and can get what might be seen as a privilege.

Yes, it does. And that's where Working Together comes in. So that a safeguarding partnership of school, parents and any other agencies can come to an agreement about the best way to proceed for an individual child. If say, you are the parent of a child who keeps truanting to avoid PE or who has meltdowns that disrupt lessons due to genuine distress, you will want a reasonable solution found, regardless of the root issue being gender or bullying or or or.

But of course, and unsurprisingly, the Allsorts guidance that OP's school may or may not be adopting, throws Working Together in the bin. To the benefit of nobody.

FlawedAmazon - if you're still reading, aside from changing rooms, here is another important point from the Allsorts guidance that you could raise with your DGD's school:

It recommends that children are allowed to make confidential disclosures about gender to individual teachers without informing either their parents or the school safeguarding team or other professionals that may be working with the child.

This makes the child vulnerable to infiltrating abusers and is in direct contradiction to statutory safeguarding guidance, linked to below. I would recommend taking that guidance in to any meeting and asking whether or not the school is aware of this horrific safeguarding loophole.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/729914/Working_Together_to_Safeguard_Children-2018.pdf

I dont think the Brighton policy document or the way you outlined earlier takes the rights of girls into account. It still puts the validation of one person over the rights of the others.

Women don’t want males in certain spaces, provisions etc. It’s just a no. Not an invitation to try harder, push more, negotiate, jam a wedge in or endlessly ask ‘what if we..?’ The answer is just no. Leave the girls be.

In short; NO.

I can accept genuine reasons for individual changing. I can’t accept a child changing with the opposite sex.

I agree with this.

I have sympathy for distressed adolescents with all sorts of angst and think that separate changing is a reasonable adjustment.

But who should be considered deserving of this? A decision has to be made about who is most distressed and can get what might be seen as a privilege. Should the rights of the trans child trump those of someone whose anxiety about communal changing stems from some trauma or other condition? Short of changing everything to individual cubicles, which wouldn't be practical in a school, decisions have to be made about whose need is greatest.

As I understand it, girls who identify as boys aren't asking to change with the boys - and seem mostly content to change with the girls or ask for individual changing rooms. Are the boys who identify as girls asking to change with the girls or for individual changing rooms? If they're asking to change with the girls it seems that they don't have a problem with communal changing rooms. I would expect that changing with the girls, who have the sort of body they want, would be even more traumatic than changing with the boys.

We have segregation in sport for valid reasons, it's not right that these issues are disregard. Enforcing mix sex pe lessons onto girls can be dangerous, unfair, reduce girls opportunities and led to girls withdrawing from sport altogether.

You don't understand the needs of girls.

hey; I popped back; had to really, as it was said that I " flounced". I'm going to try to state my ( misrepresented ) views, and underline some of the things I have already said, but which have been missed or misinterpreted. I'm quite capable of writing stuff which goes out before being properly edited on social media.

1: I have earlier referred to "trans -identified " pupils. This is because I maintain that many of them will not turn out to be trannsexual , or to live permanently in the adopted social role. And I wanted to demonstrate that I have taken that on board.

2: I have said that the needs of what I have referred to several times as the t-i pupil do NOT trump the needs of the other pupils. Who are much more numerous.

3: As someone who has had experience of devising and putting into practice Special Needs Policies, where it is essential to be able to show that the " many" are not suffering because of the needs of " the few" I have outlined ways that the Brighton Policy Document could , with thought , planning, and resources, be put into practice to enable a trans pupil to take part in sport/ PE/ games in the " chosen" group without compromising the safety and peace of mind of the other pupils. As a close relative of several formerly abused girls, as I have said elsewhere, I find the accusation that I do not care about the needs of women and girls is wrong, and is offensive to me.

I can accept genuine reasons for individual changing. I can’t accept a child changing with the opposite sex.

This is my position. And, whether we believe in gender identity or not, I think we can all say that the associated distress is real.

Fair point, kitties.

I can accept genuine reasons for individual changing. I can’t accept a child changing with the opposite sex.

I have sympathy for distressed adolescents with all sorts of angst and think that separate changing is a reasonable adjustment.

( I have an autistic child. The question of what's a reasonable response to invisible causes of unusual distress, and what should just get 'Pfft, suck it up, buttercup' is one I've pondered quite a bit.)

Absolutely no they shoudnt have to (that’s what I mean by boundaries.) we are teaching kids that they don’t have a right to say no. That’s not good. Not good at all.

Exactly. Children with reduced boundaries is a terrible prospect.

Because, I would say, that the aim of the school should be to facilitate distressed children to take part in PE, which is a healthy activity and good for them.

I don't believe there is any such thing as an innate gender identity and neither do I believe that there is any such thing as a trans child. I'm a gender ideology apostate.

That's not the same thing as recognising distress in a child and a school making reasonable accommodations so that the distressed child can participate fully. It doesn't really matter what is at the root of that distress (although one would hope it was being properly addressed outwith the school day).

It's a wider issue than danger, though. It's a question of should a girl have to undress in front of a boy? Should a girl have to see a naked boy's body if she doesn't want to?

Absolutely no they shoudnt have to (that’s what I mean by boundaries.) we are teaching kids that they don’t have a right to say no. That’s not good. Not good at all.

I honestly don't understand why these children have a need to change separately.

No neither do I. I can understand why a child with a disfigurement might want to change privately (bullying for example, trauma following surgery,etc) but a child should change in the company of their same sex peers unless there’s a genuine reason to change in their own space. There is never a genuine reason to have them change with the opposite sex

A boy who genuinely thinks he should be a girl and is distressed by it should be allowed to change separately.

OK, so two of you have replied to my post with more or less the same comment, so it seems there may be something here that I haven't understood. I honestly don't understand why these children have a need to change separately.

Please can someone explain a bit more why they should? I realise this might sound a bit goady, but I really don't understand. Most teenagers are self-conscious about changing rooms - it's one of the less pleasant memories I have from my own teenage years. If I was a teenager now I'd be tempted to identify as trans if it meant I would get a private space to change in.

Just a reminder that schools are required by law to provide sex-segregated spaces for children aged 8 years and over:

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1943/regulation/4/made

Changing separately as an issue of privacy for gender-questioning children is a good solution (unattractive to schools because of a lack of resources, however). It's the equivalent of the third space option for adults.

I don't agree with that, actually, OldCrone. A boy who genuinely thinks he should be a girl and is distressed by it should be allowed to change separately.

If a man is in my changing room - I could be in danger. My boundaries alhave been broken.

It's a wider issue than danger, though. It's a question of should a girl have to undress in front of a boy? Should a girl have to see a naked boy's body if she doesn't want to?

Safety, privacy and dignity. For girls and boys. Whose bodies are different from each other. Whose bodies don't change just because one of them says the magic words 'I am trans'.

A boy is still a boy, even if he thinks he's a girl. He still has a boy's body and should change with the other people who have the same type of body.

I agree with all of that, Bowl. I was saying that that one sentence, taken out of context, could and would be misconstrued.

But maybe I need to leave the day job to one side on here.

It’s not a genuine comparison.

If I’m in the changing room and someone is changing and they have a disfigurement I am not at any point in danger. The woman changing next to me with a disfigurement is nondanger to me. She is not harming my boundaries.

If a man is in my changing room - I could be in danger. My boundaries alhave been broken.

The two are not equivalent, in any way.

When we treat a child with a disfigurement with compassion and educate their peers we do them all a favour. They may initially feel discomfort but that discomfort is not primed by potential future or present danger.

When we break down the boundaries of girls and boys by telling them that their discomfort which IS primed by a potential danger (males in an area they are vulnerable) then we do them a disservice. We tell them that they must disregard their instincts, disregard their own safety. We teach them their boundaries mean nothing.

It is Nothing like helping a student with a disfigurement, and I’m fairly sick of such comparisons - it’s an appeal to female socialisation to be nice, and to shove the end of the wedge in.

A bit like the ‘sex workers for disabled men’ threads.

but we know that's a false comparison

More an obvious attempt at misdirection and deflection.

Agreed.