Another legal challenge in a school

In the employment context:
You can take non-disabled people into account when considering what adjustments to make for a disabled person. You are only required to make "reasonable adjustments". An adjustment which is very detrimental to other staff is arguably not a "reasonable" adjustment.
But transgender people don't have the right to reasonable adjustments. Those with a GRC have the right not to be treated detrimentally because of their GRC status (so in comparison with non GRC staff). So it's unlawful discrimination not to promote a GRC person because you reckon GRC people in general don't make good leaders. However, it isn't unlawfully discriminatory not to promote a fat person because you reckon fat people in general don't make good leaders. And it isn't unlawfully discriminatory if, for example, the trans CEO of your company only ever promotes trans people (whether or not they have a GRC). It could be grounds for a constructive unfair dismissal claim though.

@Musomama1

You may want to check with your church's view on gender ideology and whether its linked in any way with Oasis Charity and Steve Chalke. The other week I was listening to Chalke promote transgenderism, spinning parts of the Bible to justify his assertion that all Christians should joyfully embrace transgenderism. Very disturbing given that he is a very influential and wealthy man.

You may want to check with your church's view on gender ideology and whether its linked in any way with Oasis Charity and Steve Chalke. The other week I was listening to Chalke promote transgenderism, spinning parts of the Bible to justify his assertion that all Christians should joyfully embrace transgenderism. Very disturbing given that he is a very influential and wealthy man.

My local education authority makes a lot of use of the Cornwall guidance, and quotes quite a bit of it. One part that caught my eye was this:

“Unlike most of the protected characteristics, such as sex, race and religion, but like disability, this protection works in one direction only […]”

(Their emphasis)

I think that’s a false equivalence. I can’t think of any disadvantage to a non-disabled person from adaptations made for the benefit of disabled people. But by insisting that it’s one direction only, they’ve ignored (or not even thought about) the effects on non-transgender children; indeed, the sentence continues: “not being transgendered is not a protected characteristic.”

So if a pupil is confused, or even distressed, by the changes of name/pronouns/clothing then their feelings can be ignored because they don’t have a “protected characteristic”. What about the protected characteristic of age? A young child should have the right for their age to be taken into account.

My child spent bloody ages insisting they were a puppy. We considered it cute & an extension of his Halloween costume. Kids have great imaginations. They are also very literal. This does not make a 5 year old transphobic! .

The letter from the school’s head teacher and the chairwoman of the governors warned that pupils would be viewed as transphobic if they demonstrated an “inability to believe a transgender person is actually a ‘real’ female or male”.

Fucking ridiculous

Scares me witless that people like this have any input into schools

Gaslighting children and teaching them you have to pretend to believe if you don't actually believe otherwise youre a bad person. It is so damaging.
Yet another WTAF moment. They keep on coming.

That's a good question YouSetTheTone. I'd hope the DfE are becoming more aware of their responsibilities to children rather than their mates in GIRES, Stonewall etc, but have yet to see evidence.
I know from some senior leaders in schools that there's a growing awareness that what is happening is not right - they're seeing vulnerable children with numerous mental health issues being in the grip of a social contagion and realising that this is not emotionally healthy and actually dangerous for children.
With parents increasingly challenging schools, there'll be some tough situations ahead but I'm cautiously optimistic that teachers are beginning to see an adult agenda led by exceptionally self interested adults who have no place in schools. But if the captured DfE don't stop funding the lobby groups then ....

Is it too much to hope that Nick Gibb’s departure will bring any positive changes of direction in the DofE? Or is it too entrenched?

Yep. The wolf in Little Red Riding Hood isn’t a wolf. It’s grandma. Don’t believe your eyes.

Then. Whoops.

They are grooming children to not trust their own instincts.

This is a child abusers tactic. Make the child doubt their boundaries and then you reformulate them so it is easier for you to abuse the child.

In my volunteer work with abuse victims I’ve seen it many times. It’s scary that a school is doing this. You can be sure that none of the adults there are going to able to properly safeguard the children.

I too would pull my children out.

The selfishness of this movement winds me up so much

Hear hear.

I mean the trans kids are placed in equal danger. A preteen /teenage biological female ( the current majority cohort ) using the male changing area . Massive risk to their safety if its discovered they are female which let's face it unless they have been taking testosterone for years will be entirely obvious.

If this was really about making things easier fir kids they'd want them to have the same levels if safeguarding as everyone else.

This is entirely about validating identities and decisions of adults.

One could also argue that anyone content/happy with the decisions and actions on life they have taken it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks. Uou wouldn't need to encourage others to do the same.

If you need validation how sure are you really

The problem with this is that there's a vulnerable child at the centre of it. Thus any challenge can be interpreted as being about the child rather than the foolish captured adults - and in a small community that's hard.

This is why certain adult groups are so determined to place even the youngest of children at the centre of their battles - because any challenge can be called out as 'bullying' or being unkind. Much harder for people to challenge than objecting to 50 year old Jim, now Jane, demanding to undress alongside women in the swimming pool changing rooms.

Its a massive safeguarding issue to teach children to ignore their eyes and their instincts.

If we teach children that people can be any sex l, what happens when a strange man makes a little girl feel uncomfortable, but insists to her 'don't worry I am a mummy!'...

It is absolutely sick.

We need to teach children to be observant to follow their instincts, to tell the truth. All of this to make a group of fucking priviliged numpties feel better about themselves. The selfishness of this movement winds me up so much.

I've joined my local church recently and a part of the reason is because of opening up the faith school option to my child.

I find I actually enjoy going though personally.

I digress. Yes, I will enquire, maybe under a different name having read this though. This story gets more and more bizarre.

My opinion is that is even more a transgression that many other ideologies or religions. You are actively falsifying the material world in front of the child's eyes. Not just exploring an abstract and theoretical/theological idea.

Oh my goodness it is a faith school! Wtf?!

This is wrong wrong wrong. You can't justify such a hard line over what is an ideology, especially to children! I would make this an opportunity to educate my child on this, but come on, they are so young!!
Even in a faith school I bet kids could say they don't believe in religion and not get the same treatment.
There needs to be a way of saying, respect the other child for the way they want to live and who they want to be.

It all smacks of extreme laziness and avoiding real conversations.

Also have to mention an Interview I say with Amnesty Ireland's dude. He/she/furry was deploring how the Catholic Church dictated to the country in the past, and this will never happen again. Against self appointed, authoritarian movements, you'd think.

Then I remembered when this wee wannabe Ayatollah signed a letter which actually called for political and media representation to be withdrawn from women who have the temerity to be vocal in how they are being trodden on. I don't think even those with croziers who posed as righteous outdid these repackaged misogynistic 'progressive' dudes rights movement. Which is what Amnasty Ireland appears to have become.

Irrespective of membership of any particular religious belief, I would regard myself as an abusive parent if I told my child they were a sex which they were not. Or, insisted a male or female they encountered was a sex which they were not.

I'd have it weighing on my conscience. However, with all the abuse against women and children which has been occurred in Ireland, I know that many in roles of authority don't give a toss about how children and women are treated or damaged. The shame is when they get away with it and are not held accountable by their supervisors or watchdogs.

i was going to say abuse in the past. However, I do know that the Irish gov't and public services are locking women up with convicted male rapists and paedophiles at the moment. Also, in many other areas in Irish life, the overwhelmingly male government are active in trying to rip away safety and fairness for Irish women.

This is the chappie (of course it's a bro) minister for education who heads the department which are striving for girls' safe single sex spaces to be removed. Spaces where they are in states of undress and will vulnerable to predatory behaviours such as secret cameras filming them increased. Indeed, spaces where they may at the very least be stressed or intimidated or self conscious because they may be groups of teenage boys. At a point where intimate care is taking place. No Minister, we will not pretend it is a progressive move to make access easier for other chappies. However, you try to launch it. It is almost as if this generation of Irish male politicians are the same as the ones of the past. Just as careless (if not complicit) in allowing an abusive environment, and repackaged under the pretence and guise of a fake 'progressive' instead of 'Catholic'.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/o-gorman-unisex-toilets-make-school-life-easier-wq5p0g570

kildare-nationalist.ie/2021/04/17/campaign-group-calls-for-rethink-on-putting-mixed-sex-toilets-into-irish-schools/

YouSetTheTone
I also had a similarly creepy letter from Nick Gibb dismissing the safeguarding concerns raised about mixed sex changing rooms, showers and toilets in schools.
I suspect he was very influential (along with the self interested senior civil servant Slater) in enabling Stonewall, GIRES etc to gain privileged access schools and children with zero due diligence being conducted (let alone awareness of the Nolan principles). Which is why we are in this mess.

More from CC: christianconcern.com/news/parents-challenge-of-trans-school-policies-goes-forward/

Mail: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10509429/School-sends-letter-parents-six-year-old-warning-transphobic-behaviour.html

Christian Concern: christianconcern.com/cccases/nigel-and-sally-rowe/