Are school trip dormitories single sex?

It has to be single sex, that is what is defined in the Equalities Act.

Just to add to the mix, if the trip includes VI formers a single gender policy could have an adult male sharing with female children or a female adult with male children.

When else would that happen?

Keep going @crumpet let us know how you get on.

I will always find it shocking how the parents are having to fight so hard to safeguard their own children whilst the teachers and head teachers are trying to break down safeguarding boundaries that are known about and have been in place for decades, since overnight trips became possibles

That is what is happening, boundaries are being broken by 'educators' and parents with concerns are being dismissed.

“Case by case” might work for private sleepovers in people’s homes (where parents will take a view based on the particular children involved) but it’s not an appropriate policy for organisations that need to apply universal rules, should be highly aware of safeguarding issues, and which will be held responsible when/if a teenager gets pregnant in an unsupervised mixed sex environment.

I’d simply refuse to supervise a residential with mixed sex sleeping arrangements. I’d give the simple reason that it goes against standard safeguarding practices and I’m not doing that. However, I wouldn’t get in to a detailEd row about it or worry if anyone thought I was transphobic.

Sex segregation is the protocol for safeguarding..

There are no exceptions. Its perfectly legal to segregated by sex are children are legally their birth sex.

I guess it depends what you mean by problem.
If you wait for a problem then really you have already failed to safeguard the children in your care.
You should anticipate where problems might arise, have a default position which is the least risk and only change from that where there are very good reasons.

No. Uts too bloody late then. And the kids deserve privacy and dignity. You don't get that buy changing om fromt of the opposite sex.

And if you let one os cos they are "lovely " then the next one kicks off cos they aren't allowed.

Single sex solves that problem.

No one should sacrifice their own safety privacy or dignity to go along with what someone else has been told. That's not their job.

Why not wait and see whether you actually have a problem to deal with?
Case by case seems quite a sensible approach to me!

Course we all known its fine. Has been for decades. Gay men and boys are capable of getting on with getting changed.

Why are men and boys so worried about the sexuality of the other boys and men they are in with.

Is it the girls changing room or " anyone who might not fit in on thr boys " changing room.

All men and boys should feel safe in the mens and behaviour dealt with with within the men's.

After all do the gay male pe teachers supervise the girls changing?

Why do people use that as an excuse

I recently had a conversation with my now Adult Dds which went along the lines of "remember when you said it was ok for Fred to come to our sleepovers because he was gay? 🤣🤣😂😂"

I didn't much enjoy realising how thoroughly they'd pulled the wool over my eyes. Teens will often use any means they can to do that .....

Gay men belong in with the men/boys . Up to them to control their behaviour .

The lesbians manage it.

No ones making the bi sexuals change separately .

Ffs what nonsense

I have this issue at the moment with our school - have been brushed off so far but am not letting it go

I don't think sexes should be mixed, but some people will argue that a homosexual male is more likely to focus their attention on other males which is also difficult to argue against.

Oh god more "case by case " nonsense.

The kids should not be put in that position. End of. Whether they are friends or gay or consent etc wtf is wrong with the adults thinking its OK of specific sets if circumstances are met. Its not.

And it relies totally on kids speaking up whilst knowing that all the abused children have skewed boundries as it is, and need help to rebuild them. Not taken advantage of for not having them, whilst knowing that kids will do what teachers ask of them no matter how bad they feel about it, and religious kids just won't go.

Its no. No explanation required.

Oh, I see. Thanks.

What a spurious bunch of bullsh*t.

Asking Eg with Karen White, some TRAs claimed this was nothing different to any other time a female prisoner attacks other women in prisons and so nothing different should happen than what would happen if they were female.

And then it's dismissed as being one bad egg, on which others must not be judged because that would be like punishing all Muslims for one terrorist.

I know a fair few trans people none of whom is violent or sexually abusive, though one was violent when he was male and is a pita as a performative female drunk. This does not mean violent and/or sexually abusive trans people cannot exist.

Or, it's someone pretending to be trans, which is nothing to do with the policy, but instead a lack of risk management, because Women Do It Too.

To be fair, it seems that there are men who pretend to be trans for nefarious reasons. And they seem to be good at evading risk management measures.

What do Women Do Too though? I don't understand that bit.

That's the 'well it doesn't matter (for girls) unless it's happening Right Now' approach.

It's usually followed by:

When it does happen, then we aren't allowed to complain until Something Very Bad happens.

And then it's dismissed as being one bad egg, on which others must not be judged because that would be like punishing all Muslims for one terrorist.

Or, it's someone pretending to be trans, which is nothing to do with the policy, but instead a lack of risk management, because Women Do It Too.

Failing that, the women and girls just shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Etc.

That's the 'well it doesn't matter (for girls) unless it's happening Right Now' approach.

It's usually followed by:

If it is happening there's nothing wrong
If there is something wrong then it's not that bad
If it is that bad then it's justified
If it isn't justified its because you're thinking about it all wrong
If you're not thinking about it all wrong, then you're a bigot.

Equality legislation protects males by their sex.

That means - they must be protected within their own bubble from harm.

In plain speak: males, budge up and accept your feminine brothers in your protected spaces.

Equality legislation works both/all ways.

As a teacher or adult I would not volunteer for this.

As a parent of secondary aged children I would not want my children to go on a trip like this.

My parents would never never ever had let me go on a mixed accommodation trip when I was a child. Such a shame that girls like I was are basically going to be excluded from these opportunities.

What about children who's parents/their faith prohibits sleeping in the same room/tent etc as a member of the opposite sex. Again another load of children denied opportunity of over-night trips.

Safeguarding of school age kids, especially away from home, is a big deal.

I would have had massive anxiety at 13 to find an 18 year old male in a dorm or bathroom. Even worse if it was 50yr old ‘Ms’ Smith looking after us (however nice and respectable they were). I would not have said anything! (Be cool and all that) We’re putting teenage girls in a really tricky position.