Stonewall protest, July 5th

I will try to articulate my thoughts re the Catholic girl story in the speech.

To me it said the parents and religious groups were in the wrong - in the story absolutely. However in the trans juggernaut, queer theory times we live in it is inferring again that the parents and religious groups are wrong and the therefore the T and queer theory right. An individual child has the right to believe their body is wrong - Scotland has just u-turned on keeping transition a secret from parents, not sure rest I'm UK has even done that! With queer theory it becomes even more concerning- the child's right to a sexual relationship maybe?

I have with the speech was the bit about the cathiolic girl denied an education

Agreed - hence my uneasiness and lack of optimism concerning Spielman's plausible actions in the future.

"But as we know from many controversies of the past and of the present, the important rights we have established, and that we protect, are not in reality completely separable from each other. The exercise of one right can sometimes be seen as limiting of another right. The different protected characteristics can and do bump into each other. Many of the other rights are stoutly defended, just as Stonewall defends LGBT rights.

"And Ofsted’s position, as the checking mechanism of equality, means we are obliged to make decisions in situations where the different protected characteristics are colliding."

This was excellent. And these two bits even better:

"I spoke recently about the challenges children face in this new ‘if you’re not with me, you’re against me’ age: where there is a lack of tolerance of divergent views and where this intolerance is entrenched in the echo chamber of social media."

"And teach them about the wonderful diversity of humanity in modern Britain: a diversity of race, gender, faith and love."

She has chosen her words exceptionally well. What a clever woman.

I am so relieved that a Stonewall event speech re education has been about sexual orientation. (Stonewall will hate that)

And we don’t endorse a particular approach, but we do and we will continue to defend the rights of schools to decide how they meet their obligations, after consulting with parents.

Consultation is not taking place though, parents do not feel they have a say.

The other issue I have with the speech was the bit about the cathiolic girl denied an education - appalling. The context it was used and the wording of later paragraphs in relation to it didnt sit quite right.

And alongside this we see a wider shift in the tenor of debate. An emphasis on single issues, sometimes to the detriment of real consideration of different perspectives and willingness to find that working consensus, putting children’s interests first.

I spoke recently about the challenges children face in this new ‘if you’re not with me, you’re against me’ age: where there is a lack of tolerance of divergent views and where this intolerance is entrenched in the echo chamber of social media.

Very interesting.......

Is it me or does that read like a bit of a warning shot on the subject of no debate?

Indeed, I expect there will be a fare few quietly fuming people in that audience. Love to be a fly on the wall.

Spielman's speech is interesting and relevant to its context of Ofsted and Stonewall.

I picked up a sense that Spielman anticipates that it's society that will change on this rather than grappling with the conflict between individual and wider rights. I may be wrong. For me, it has echoes with the statements of Human Rights lawyers who acknowledge that there are fundamental conflicts between rights for individuals that have irreconcilable consequences for others (Canada comes to mind).

I confess to a bout of 'whatabouttery' while reading Spielman's speech. I was strongly reminded about responding to the consultation about RSE in the context of the number of sexual assaults in our school system and the many threads here about those assaults and how little has changed in our school system over the decades.

Possibly a personal knee-jerk and something to which I should give more consideration.

Thanks R0wantrees that's a VERY interesting speech.

Isn't it just?

I'm waiting for Stonewall's press release announcing that Amanda Spellman is now on today's banned list along with lesbians, Transgender trend, NUJ press photographers ... and who else?

They really haven't moved from #nodebate have they? They no longer say it (optics and all that) but they still do it.

Very good speech especially the fact that there is no hierarchy of protected rights - one doesn’t trump the others.

Where do I see these posters? (Been chucked off twitter for suggesting men use men’s toilets)

I wonder if the conference delegates took the same meaning from it that we have? I wonder what the reception was?

Between that speech and Posie’s protest, I wonder how happy Stonewall are today?

That's an extremely good speech. As much for what it doesn't say as for what it does.

Blimey. That speech is as balanced and fair minded argument regarding the careful balance of competing rights and the paramount importance of children's safety and rights as I have seen. I'd have liked it wherever it was made, but at the heart of an organization that simply doesn't understand any of those issues, it reads like a very explosive thing to be saying.

I thought exactly the same thing, Bernard.

The talk was about building consensus, balancing rights, putting children's interests first.

A stark contrast to 'no debate' from Stonewall.

And she rather deliberately talked about same-sex relationships. And not about gender identity. Revealing.

I thought so too, and really hope it was.

From the speech:

The exercise of one right can sometimes be seen as limiting of another right. The different protected characteristics can and do bump into each other. Many of the other rights are stoutly defended, just as Stonewall defends LGBT rights

Is it me or does that read like a bit of a warning shot on the subject of no debate?

Damien Hinds, not Green.

Well done to Amanda Spielman for raising the issues of competing rights and the need to centre children in that very good speech.

It's long overdue to hear this from an arm of government. Maybe idiot MPs like Damien Green, Penny Mordaunt, Maria Miller et al will take note

It certainly is.

Thanks R0wantrees that's a VERY interesting speech.

Is there anyone actually at the conference?

Head of Ofsted Amanda Spielman is there & this her speech:

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/amanda-spielman-at-stonewall

worth reading carefully, especially for things & words not used!

I saw the police in the video, they chatted to one of the protesters and went on their way.

It’s getting to be a habit.