GDST schools announce trans policy

Timefortea I don't believe there have been any cases, no. I do think that the GDST is sensible to get a policy in place, as frequently companies have clearly never thought about the possibilities and scramble to catch up when a situation kicks off.

I would like to know what the proportion of males wishing to transition to female who have been at a boys' only school or boarding school is. My anecdotal impression is that in the past it's been quite high. I have had the brutalising effect of being in an all-boys' institution with heavy gender pressure described to me. To dress, behave and have interests like the majority, when you feel absolutely nothing like what 'boys' seem to be and are surrounded by misogyny and homophobia which are constantly looking for targets... is quite traumatising.

Artichoke, I would be more hopeful. Truss has slowly but surely set the Equalities Department on a new direction, and got her own people in the EHRC without having the issue explode within either the Tory party or as a national political issue. In parallel case law has been building up and more people are aware that this issue goes beyond ‘being nice’ to a tiny minority. Maya, JKR, Glinner, Harry, Keira etc making a huge contribution.

In the meantime bullying TRA behaviour is increasingly exposed and Stonewall themselves have shown an astonishing ability to shoot themselves in the foot. They are no longer the authoritative advisor on LGB issues that schools were comfortable working with. Gender issues have hit some schools, perhaps particularly affluent girls schools, like a virus and they will have struggled to know what was best. They will already be practiced in recognising symptoms of teenage distress like anorexia and self harming and some teachers will have wondered why guidance for rapid onset gender dysphoria is so different and why organisations like Stonewall whose experience was historically around gay adults and teenagers were considered the experts.

Have there been any cases of single sex state schools admitting pupils of the opposite sex?

I think my concern with the wording is that it is unclear whether the GDST would like to be able to admit transgender males. It could be that they would like to admit males but but have had advice that the law does not allow this and therefore they want clarification from the Government

I don't believe for a split second that GDST schools want to admit boys. These schools are massively proud of their single sex status and the history of pioneering girls' education. They describe themselves as specialists in girls' education and tailoring their teaching to how girls learn best.

Like all schools they were originally captured by a lobby that specifically targeted children and it's taken some time to gain the confidence / courage to stand up to the potential toxic attacks that the usual suspects will now launch.
I think this is huge and maybe it will end in a court case. But these schools have some hugely wealthy parents who would happily support the GDST if say Stonewall takes them on in an attempt to force the issue.

"The equality watchdog has now urged the Government to “show leadership” and publish its own guidance.

There is a whole lot of scared buck passing, and it's because they all know they are looking for someone with the backbone to say the necessary 'no' and stand behind it. That's what they need, and they all know it.

And as pp says, this is not about trans issues because it does not apply to all trans people; this is specific to the protections of female only spaces, resources, facilities and meeting of specific female only needs from male people. This is a sex based issue. TW/TG and female are not the same thing, and there are lines that identity cannot cross without meaning that male, as a sex characteristic, unacceptably removing and trumping the rights of females.

I'm very glad to see all this being set out and public knowledge and will settling and addressing all this. It means that should a Labour government get into power, they will not be able to immediately throw away sex based rights; the window in which that could happen is now visibly closing.

Which is good. Trans people of both sexes should have everything they need. What they do not need and cannot have is the removal of female equality and access.

I'm very glad to see

Excellent lead from the GDST, I'm so glad to see this.

I hope it paves the way for girls state schools to adopt a clear single sex policy.

Just imagine what life would have been like if the organisations like the Fawcett Society, WEP, Guides, Rape Crisis and all the sporting organisations had followed the law and legally centred women and girls in their policies as the GDST are doing.

couldn't read the Telegraph article, so can I check - are they saying they wouldn't accept a new trans boy (only that they would allow an existing female pupil who transitions to stay)?

That's how I read it. There's a bit about how they would support any existing pupil who expresses an interest in transitioning. So a natal girl who has doubts can stay. But you must be a natal girl to get in at all.

I think my concern with the wording is that it is unclear whether the GDST would like to be able to admit transgender males. It could be that they would like to admit males but but have had advice that the law does not allow this and therefore they want clarification from the Government. Or it could be that they want to be able to keep GDST schools single sex, but fear of backlash means that they have to say that they have a single sex policy because the law does not allow them not to rather than because they actively want the schools to be single sex.

If we looked at the actual wording from GDST (rather than how it is reported) it may help, but I haven't done that yet

Surprise surprise they don't mention transboys (females).

As ever, this is really about the demands of people with a penis to enter female spaces and how we're supposed to deal with that.

Transboys:

1. are presumed not to want to join an all-girl school anyway, so no need to mention them,
2. If they do want to join they'd likely be accepted because they aren't legally male, guidelines only talk about excluding the legally male,
3. There's no mention whatsoever that transboys are normally excluded from all-boy schools because common sense seems to still exist. Being the only person with a vagina in a school full of the bepenised would not be good for the transboy.

[quote PurplePikachu]Pleasant surprise! I’m a former GDST girl and will be contacting them to support this policy. If anybody else wants to show them some support (to counterbalance the trolls) you can contact them here: www.gdst.net/contact/[/quote]
Thanks for this link. I’ve sent them an email in support of the new guidance 👍

The end of the article seems to throw up a confusion. It says:

"The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) was due to publish guidelines to help schools interpret the 2010 Equality Actt_ and how it applies to trans pupils.

But last year the guidelines - that would have forced girls schools to admit trans pupils - were scrapped by the equalities watchdog, blaming a “lack of definitive case law” on the issue."

It's not clear why the EHRC needs definitive case law to do this. Does anyone know why?

It also says:

"The equality watchdog has now urged the Government to “show leadership” and publish its own guidance. “We recently wrote to the Department for Education to ask whether they intend to do so and to offer our advice and support in the process if they decide to do so,” a spokesman told The Telegraph.
A DfE spokesperson said: “Appropriately supporting all children in a school can involve balancing complex and sensitive matters, and schools are best placed to work with parents, pupils and public services to determine the best approach. All pupils should be supported and treated with kindness and respect.”"

But isn't the EHRC the body that publishes such guidance? If not, why did they publish anything at all before withdrawing it?

BettyFilous, I think it could be the other way round.

In central London at least it is not unusual for very affluent and powerful parents to throw their weight around and to reach for lawyers if they don't get what they want. Including entry to a desired private school. A quick look at the education boards and the angst around entry to KPS, NHHS, WHS, PHS, NHEHS, BHS and more of the alphabet soup gives a flavour. Tutoring begins for 4+ entry at places like Kensington Prep School. And if little Johnny thinks he is Ava, and th parents are on board, they will see benefit in them going to an all girls, and very sucessful and sought after girls primary. I think that is why the statement sounds so legal. It is firing a warning shot to anyone thinking of it. This is our interpretation of the Equalities Act, which inter alia protects our right to supply a single sex provision. We are not following Stonewall/lobby group law. We want Government guidance.

Good! My dd is at a single sex school - big part of this organisation sadly but hopefully this decision will allow some clarity for other single schools to look to when assessing these matters.

I couldn't read the Telegraph article, so can I check - are they saying they wouldn't accept a new trans boy (only that they would allow an existing female pupil who transitions to stay)?

You can't get a GRC until you're 18, so unlikely that any potential trans boy pupil would be legally male, so I think they would be excluding them on the basis of gender reassignment, which is a protected characteristic. Does the EA allow them to do that?

(I'm asking because we're often at pains to make clear on these boards that it's not that we want to exclude trans people from female-only spaces, just male people.)

Oh interesting. My local girls school is gdst and super proud of being Stonewall level silver or something. How can they square that with this sensible announcement that they will be, um, following the law?

You have to wonder if they took legal advice under threat of legal action by parents who chose single sex girls schools for their daughters and wanted them to stay that way. Don’t forget, these are parents ponying up for hefty fees (the 2 academies aside) who expect to get what they are paying for.

Anyway, good to see an organisation referring to the actual law, as opposed to the makey-uppy Stonewall version, and providing a clear policy on this issue.

Haven't read the article, but I welcome the commitment to keep the schools single sex. I went to a girls' school from the age of 11 and so did my daughter. I feel it was beneficial in both cases. There are pros and cons, but on balance the absence of boys and having a mainly female staff was a good thing.

I thought Eton came out a couple of years ago and stated firmly and clearly that they would remain single sex, so no transboys to be admitted. Oddly enough, they haven't been relentlessly attacked over this.

It's my impression that a significant number of parents who choose single-sex day schools do so for religious reasons, especially girls' schools. I assume they would think again if it turned out that the school had started admitting male pupils who would be in class and changing rooms with their daughters.

Good.

I do suspect timed to get positive PR before the teachers strike.

Interesting! If there's a belief that this will be positive PR with the general public rather than negative..... doesn't that say a very great deal about where public perceptions of all this now are?

It's also exactly where all this is going to have to go to move forward. Trans needs respected, met and provided for. Lots of mixed sex facilities available to ensure this. And female only provisions equally respected, met and provided for. Everyone's a winner. Any dog in the manger 'we don't want females to have accessible things too' is not acceptable behaviour in an inclusive society.

Dumb headlines, as they wouldn't reject a girl for being transgender, the point is that they are single sex schools.

Day by day institutions seem to be moving to a clearer understanding of sex vs gender and the differences between the two.

They seem quite right. By allowing M2F transgender pupils to apply but not other males they would be guilty of discrimination.

The lack of guidance from ECHR has been an issue but perhaps a good thing it was delayed to the point where there was a societal debate around gender ideology.

So good to see this. They're also right to criticise the lack of national government guidance. The more that Stonewall and the other self interested lobby groups are removed from having influence at the heart of government, this more of this we'll see.
This should also give confidence to schools generally in standing up to bullying by the mob.