Ministers finally agree guidance on trans pupils

OK, that went horribly wrong!

Let me try those quotes again…

This is good by Joanna Williams:

”Not only have schools failed to communicate vital information but, worse, some teachers have actually <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/73lxP/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-pupils-our-daughter-school-furries-transgender-treatment-c09lqffzb" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">colluded with gender-distressed children to keep their parents in the dark. This represents a breakdown in adult solidarity and, ultimately, an abdication of moral responsibility towards children.”

She also highlights the manipulative “happy daughter or dead son” which is horrendous emotional blackmail foisted upon parents:

“ Groups like Mermaids have had astonishing success in propagating the <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/73lxP/www.theguardian.com/society/2015/sep/12/transgender-children-have-to-respect-who-he-is" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">idea that it is better to have a happy daughter than a dead son. This manipulative line is fundamentally dishonest: given love and support, gender confused children are no more likely to take their own lives than other children. But few parents are brave enough to take the risk.”

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-wont-the-tories-ban-pupils-from-social-transitioning/

With all due respect I don’t think you have really understood what I’m trying to say if you are asking that. I’m really struggling to articulate it but I have said it the best I can on other threads. I will try and answer you the best I can but apologies if I’m not making sense.

If you want to understand the difference between left and right, liberal and conservative don’t look and the blur in the centre look at the fundamental beliefs at the extremes.

The fundamental philosophical difference between the left and the right is a belief in equality, the left believes in equality the right doesn’t.

The fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives is liberals belief the state should dissolve and all norms, morals, taboos and even laws that in anyway restrict the freedom of the individual except those necessary to stop the direct harm of one individual by another. Conservatives don’t believe this, they believe in society and having social norms based on the nation’s sense of right and wrong (our morals).

In this country like any other country the political process is controlled by elites and in our country and the western world at large those elites will allow the populace to choose any flavour of liberalism that they like. Liberals see the dissolution of social norms and morals as progress and often call themselves progressives.

Labour are a liberal centre left party. The Tories are a liberal party of the centre to sometimes the centre right.

But most people aren’t ideological, the higher in society you go the more ideological and liberal the people will be. The average Labour voter is the sort of person who thinks taxes should be higher to fund a better health system, or the sort of person who wants trade unions to protect people at work. But go to the top of the parties or go to the top any other important and powerful institution and it’s liberal progressivism
at the top. This is why most teachers might be GC but amongst head teachers it will
be less GC and near the top of a major educational institution almost nobody will be GC.

Labour and the democrats are definitely progressive left.
The Tory party have tried to be progressive left socially and a bit conservative, as for years it seemed like the only acceptable game in town.
Even now they won't do the hard things that would separate themselves from this. See the schools gender guidance...

What is the so called progressive left’s definition of good? Well the removal of all moral and social constraints from the individual is a key one. Ever wondered why movements like PIE always seem to show up on the left and rarely show up on the right? That is why I believe the left are immoral, I think they see morality as a chain. Every time they dissolve a social norm or remove a moral standard they see that as progress, a step in the right direction according to them.

I'd like to know who the "progressive left" are who are being blamed for what is going on currently. In the UK the Tories have been in power for over a decade. Are they the progressive left? What about in the US? Are the Democrats the "progressive left"?

Someone put up an excellent quote on institutions based on a lie (eg changing sex) who feel threatened use tactics to survive

Can’t recall who it was from unfortunately

I think we’re entering a period where voters will push politicians and institutions will understandably recognise their hegemony is at risk

Wondering why that pp was deleted, maybe I missed what was not in guidelines

Imo we’ll see break down of post war set up due to climate and migration pressures

I’ve been saying this for a while

The Netherlands election results show this shift, there will be more

@Chrysanthemum5 I’ve sent you a DM, but I’m not at all surprised to hear that. Melvyn is utterly captured. If I were at all worried about gender ideology, I wouldn’t touch that school with a bargepole (well I wouldn’t touch it anyway for a whole host of reasons, but definitely including their social transition policy)

Who do you mean when you talk about the progressive left @Freddder ? The Labour Party?

Societies don’t really progress though do they? They just change. It’s not like technology that objectively gets better and better over time, societies just become different.

They regard their own beliefs being implemented as progress though, they believe history has a right and a wrong side and that their core beliefs are on the winning side. They believe that them winning is just inevitable.

What is the so called progressive left’s definition of good? Well the removal of all moral and social constraints from the individual is a key one. Ever wondered why movements like PIE always seem to show up on the left and rarely show up on the right? That is why I believe the left are immoral, I think they see morality as a chain. Every time they dissolve a social norm or remove a moral standard they see that as progress, a step in the right direction according to them.

They are perfectly capable of lying about reality when they don’t even believe in the concept of truth. To them truth is relative and therefore doesn’t really even exist in the absolute sense. In another sense all ideologies are lies because they attempt to describe reality which is too complicated to be modelled by any ideology. The Soviet Union was a nation built on lies.

I am of course not saying that your average centre left voter is an ideological immoral liar. I’m saying really drill into the ideology that the progressive left establishment follow and lies and the desire to free the individual from any social or moral constraints is what you are left with. And those at the top understand this full well, they understand exactly what they believe and why they believe it.

Thanks. Never heard of hyper realism but I’ll look for it now.

If they think pretending that sex doesn't exist lets everyone be who they want to be they must be a bit thick.

So they think it's progressive to force women to have no life outside the home and to call gay men and lesbians bigots and genital fetishists.

It's about as progressive as Iran or Afghanistan.

Do they think The Handmaid's Tale is an instruction manual?

Yes the family has always been on the list, postmodernist thinking is it restricts individuals. We see it now in the BLM movements aims to abolish the nuclear family and defund the police. Neo Marxism that no longer bears much resemblance to Marxism plus no one right way and norms are bad, media is good, no differentiation between sm cults and traditional religion. Watch hyperrealism if you want to see the origins of this kind of second and post modern post truth ideology.
Things like delinking the gold standard from money are actually relevant. But I'm going on a wider sociological tangent now...

Lots of reasons but did you miss the one where Suella Braverman, one of the few Conservative MPs who is actually conservative told us that? Occupying one of the great offices of state she would be one of the few people who knows how the Tory Party in government actually works.

In her letter to the Prime Minister she wrote:
”I was clear from day one that if you did not wish to leave the ECHR, the way to securely and swiftly deliver our Rwanda partnership would be to block off the ECHR, the HRA and any other obligations which inhibit our ability to remove those with no right to be in the UK. Our deal expressly referenced "notwithstanding clauses" to that effect.
Your rejection of this path was not merely a betrayal of our agreement, but a betrayal of your promise to the nation that you would do "whatever it takes" to stop the boats.
At every stage of litigation I cautioned you and your team against assuming we would win. I repeatedly urged you to take legislative measures that would better secure us against the possibility of defeat. You ignored these arguments. You opted instead for wishful thinking as a comfort blanket to avoid having to make hard choices. This irresponsibility has wasted time and left the country in an impossible position.
If we lose in the Supreme Court, an outcome that I have consistently argued we must be prepared for, you will have wasted a year and an Act of Parliament, only to arrive back at square one.
Worse than this, your magical thinking - believing that you can will your way through this without upsetting polite opinion - has meant you have failed to prepare any sort of credible Plan B.”

And there you have it. The government would not even allow their own Home Secretary to do what it would take to deliver on their Rwanda plan/promise due to a fear of upsetting polite opinion. And it’s exactly the same with these guidelines, they won’t work, they won’t do what it would take to actually stop this because of a fear of upsetting most of the very same people.

Sorry I miss read you. I thought you asked what comes after this when you actually asked why was this next.

The reason why this happened was it was the next logical social norm to dissolve in order to let everyone be whoever they wanted to be in a society that doesn’t believe in absolute truth anymore. These people think truth is relative and think social norms are wrong because the pressure people to conform to a standard.

I think progressives will try and take away parents rights next. ‘Belong’ isn’t the right word but you probably know what I mean. They will say children primarily belong to the state and don’t belong to their parents.

The Tories are scared to upset the Guardian reading elite.

What on earth about the last 13 years makes you think that? The Rwanda plan, for example?

What this and the Rwanda plan have in common is legal challenges.

"PUPILS should be allowed to identify as the opposite sex only in very limited circumstances, schools will be told under strict new rules.

Any chance that limited circumstances are 18 and 19 year old students in Sixth Form? If an 18 or 19 year old pupil has a GRC will it take precedence over the guidance ?

It’s the ‘correct belief’ because since the 1960’s the elites have believed in liberal progressivism. Their belief system doesn’t have an end point and this is just the next logical step in it.

Why is the next logical step this sexist and homophobic quasi religious belief system?

“Because for some unaccountable reason this has become the correct belief”

It’s the ‘correct belief’ because since the 1960’s the elites have believed in liberal progressivism. Their belief system doesn’t have an end point and this is just the next logical step in it. Once the progressive elites win this battle liberal progressivism will dissolve the next taboo or social norm.

Some of those who supported liberal progressivism seem genuinely upset and puzzled to find out we have arrived where we are, I think they must not have understood what they supported.

Most ordinary people are not ideological and just believe what they see, they don’t have an ideological lens to filter everything through. The higher up you go in society the more onboard people are with liberal progressivism because the higher in society people are the more they are aware that there are certain things you are supposed to believe, in fact it’s very difficult to get high in society if those already there sense that you don’t believe what you are supposed to believe. Liberal democracies don’t really tolerate elites that don’t believe in one of the many shades of liberalism.

“BonfireLady · Today 20:32

@Freddder I think you're right. (Definitely not surprised at the Guardian's coverage BTW, just frustrated at how easy it is to spin it that way”.

yeah because unfortunately it is that way, the way the Guardian spin it is actually how I see it working out in practice. The Tories are scared to upset the Guardian reading elite.

@Freddder I think you're right. (Definitely not surprised at the Guardian's coverage BTW, just frustrated at how easy it is to spin it that way)

It would also explain why Gillian Keegan has moved on this. She's presumably satisfied that there is enough of a door left open to maintain enough of a status quo on social transition. I often find myself wondering what is motivating her on this. It certainly doesn't seem to be safeguarding children.

The obvious first loophole is the Educational Psychologist reports in every EHCP 😔 Thank you for posting the linked thread @MartinEPSeligman I hadn't seen that one so will take a look.

The EP report is the most important document around which all the other inputs and assessments are based. For context that means every autistic i or other SEN child who has an EHCP is vulnerable to the risk that this poses. They are the first "exceptional circumstances" 😔 It's going to rely heavily on school safeguarding leads and parents of autistic and SEN children having awareness of the implications of social transition - and then challenging EPs in the very long and laborious EHCP process 😔

But they can't just do that as they don't have the backing. And lots of tory mps would refuse to follow the whip. Because for some unaccountable reason this has become the correct belief, gendered souls, sexism on steroids and they think of it as a vote for genocide etc. They must be wilfully blind but they believe this is right. The gov can't pass a law sadly. And labour and all the other opposition parties are even more captured somehow. This will take generations to change, probably to less surgery.

The trouble is the other side are even more in thrall to unions and look at the reality there

Total capture

If we slide backwards after next GE… well that will be really depressing and crap

Did you ever doubt this would be the case. “Except in exceptional circumstances” or however it was framed means:

1. This is totally allowed.
2. Those with the power to decide what is and is not an exceptional circumstance get to decide.

The Tories are treating the feminists like fools. If they wanted to stop this they could, they would just have to introduce primary legislation to stop it and include all the necessary notwithstanding clauses to put the legislation beyond challenge. Then they would task a public body/institution with ensuring the legislation was enforced and staff it with people who actually wanted to enforce it.