Will Gender Ideology influence how you vote?

You could say that about half the EA2010.

Im getting the feeling that 'gender identity' was included and no one, at any stage, dared ask what it meant.

Anything is technically open to challenge but it's whether or not it gets past pre-action stage in the first instance.

I agree the government should bring all of this back into line. Maybe if it's just a technical amendment to make something legally compliant, there's a quick way of doing it? Who knows.

Useful lawyer threads

x.com/michaelpforan/status/1739613418204582306?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

x.com/ianssmart/status/1739617335856476367?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

The Tories do need to get this guidance in before a GE though.

The claim gov lawyers said it could be open to challenge is according to Michael Foran, and other lawyers in his mentions, not concerning nor believable as it doesn't mean they'd be successful, all gov guidance is "open" to challenge.

Reversing it would be successfully challenged as it's basically bringing the actual law and characteristic of sex back in as a key priority for all children. Keir was a lawyer too.

It's due a considerable rewrite now, Warrior. Always has been:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-sector-equality-duty-guidance-for-public-authorities/public-sector-equality-duty-guidance-for-public-authorities

"Authorities should take care to undertake their assessment by reference to the protected characteristics set out in the act. They should not use concepts such as gender or gender identity, which are not encoded in the act and can be understood in different ways."

"Myth 8: “I must consider other demographics beyond the protected characteristics.”
Unless there is a clear correlation with a protected characteristic, considering demographics that are not protected characteristics will not help you to comply with the duty. In fact, it could obscure compliance in your supporting records. Examples of demographics that are not protected characteristics include...

•	gender
•	gender identity"

Yep, cross post Rex

So that'll be due a considerable re write following the trans guidance consultation. It's still all quite a confusing mess for schools.

What has happened since is that there has been more evidence, the fall of the Tavistock etc, plus the extremely hard work of a number of groups and parents who have been raising these issues repeatedly with the government.

More from the document, also refers to gender instead of sex.

That's the one where "gender identity"
was snuck in. Although it might not have been the only document. Can't quite remember. See paragraphs 75 and 82:

" ...should be taught the facts and the law about sex, sexuality, sexual health and gender identity in an age-appropriate and inclusive way. All pupils should feel that the content is relevant to them and their developing sexuality. Sexual orientation and gender identity should be explored at a timely point and in a clear, sensitive and respectful manner."

"The Law
...

Pupils should be made aware of the relevant legal provisions when relevant topics are being taught, including for example:
...
• gender identity"

The nebulous "gender" too, eg paragraph 30

"Schools should consider the makeup of their own student body, including the gender and age range of their pupils..."

The tories love schools to make their own schemes of work up. It saved them some work and created new educational businesses. So, unless they bought in a scheme from outside (eg No outsiders, BISH, Jigsaw etc)

(Labour, when in power, provided exemplar schemes, though not statutory, most used them. The tories have now tasked Oak academy with a very over due job, far too late as everyone has either made their own up or bought in external schemes, for all subjects.)

This document does also refer schools to the pshe association, which had been thoroughly captured too, before this guidance came out.

In the wooliest way imaginable 😑

It was stipulated in the RSE curriculum.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62cea352e90e071e789ea9bf/RelationshipsEducationnRSEanddHealth_Education.pdf

Im not having a go at you personally, but as a parent im fustrated by the way trans ideological has being pushed in schools.

Its very unclear as to why schools were teaching it in the first place, why they went against safeguarding guidelines, excluded parents, and what schools position is now?

Some schools seem to be blaming the government for allowing the ideology to become enbedded, others think a growing number of gender confused children is positive and secrets from parents best practice.

Unless we know what is really going on, how can we fix it and stop it happening again?

Did it come from the government? Was is a horrible series of misunderstandings - stonewall was seen as a government supported charity and allowed to teach in schools without scrutiny, or was it pushed by a gender ideologues?

I can see how the EqA forced gender ideology into other organisations, but the EqA isnt a natural law for schools to follow.

Point 204 is certainly framed as a "safe space" (I'll keep your secret.)

But keeping children safe in education, the statutory document that the tories have added to annually, says the attached...

So not only does it communicate that "transgender children exist," it says that this is not a safeguarding risk in itself (T is, undoubtedly) it also says that there needs to be trusted adults to refer to.

It sounds idiotic in this context but dots need to be explicitly joined when it comes to outlining safeguarding - practise scenarios, based on real life ones, are common in order to do this.

There won't have been any scenarios here where the answer is to contact parents because 'lgbT is not recognised as a safeguarding trigger.' It won't have been framed as 'a secret' but as 'coming out.' And analogous with being gay. Which I imagine wouldn't be seen as something that's habitually passed on to parents unless there were other related concerns.

And as you can see, the proposed schools guidance doesn't remedy this. It actually refers schools on to KCSIE for safeguarding procedures as it's statutory.

I don't remember lgbt being in KCSIE or previous frameworks pre Tory government. It was stonewalled.

I apologise. I’m too invested seeing the consequences of Conservative rule.

I don’t disagree that those things should be provided, but I don’t see the absence of such as “hate”.

Are you a teacher? It’s awfully conflicted in schools the past few years. I have made made anonymous reports to Ofsted, nothing has been done. It’s horrible being a GC teacher in schools.

Please read all my others posts and see how it’s hard in schools. So back to the original post, I won’t vote Conservative as they have put me is this position.

There is loads of safeguarding guidance about why keeping children’s secrets is an absolute ‘no’

There has been no absolute guidance and even now it’s non statutory.

The area is so grey that the child’s best interests in heart is what schools will follow. Please search me and read my posts - you’ll read what I have had to deal with.

I think i miss read this.

Do you mean that a member of the cabinet told schools that they could or should socially transition children and keep that information away from their parent?

Are you a teacher? We have now power in schools! Young teachers have been raised with this ideology and us oldies (mid 40s) just want to keep our jobs.

And this is what i mean about ministers being letter writers, and organisations enpowered to ignore them.

What one earth possessed schools to ignore safeguarding and undermine parent/child relationships? And then get on their high horse, blaming the governing about the cost of pads and tampons?

Also, the Tories have allowed me to teach students who are transitioning without parental knowledge. This issue has been happening for around 5 years.

All my "data" is what I have witnessed over the past 13 years of the 25 years I have been teaching but especially pre and post Covid.

My school:
-supplies sanitary products
-meals (outside of FSM)
-support for young carers
-support for children of victims of domestic abuse

You may argue this is a school's role but we don't receive extra funding, and in fact, budgets have been cut. This will now have an impact on our future women.

How can our young women aspire for a life better than what they are living in when they stay at home when they're menstruating as they can't afford san pro?