Sunak telling Robin White that biological sex is important live on GB news

Most people would barely know it imo, and likely not the damaging influence it’s wielding

Why is that a problem but Tufton Street think tanks aren't? What's the difference? (Beyond the obvious lack of transparency discrepancy?)

There is a difference between safeguarding and generally having an opinion and casting judgement.
Parenting teens is hard enough without other parents passing judgement. Safeguarding is possible without being judgemental.

Would the average Joe who maybe knows Stonewall from its original remit understand how much its remit has changed, its deliberate misrepresentation of UK law, and how much it has quietly insinuated itself into government, education, public services, business etc?

I don't support stonewall.
But they haven't called themselves "institute for social integration" and pushed themselves as a "non-partisan educational charity".

We all know who they are and what there agenda is.

Any school that has been busy socially transitioning children

I was challenging a hyperbolic statement.

I know a lot of teachers and none of them have time to be "busy socially transitioning children". They have to manage an epidemic of transitioning caused by social contagion, that's a different thing.

Teachers are leaving in droves. Schools have no money to cover staffing levels to do basic safeguarding. It's horrific to be a teacher and they are still there educating our children in terrible circumstances.

So when I read an implication that schools are driving an agenda to transition children it gives me the rage. We should be supporting teachers, not kicking them.

“I’m as GC as anyone, but….”

Probably not, Stonewall would fit general views

At least with Stonewall when you see the name you know it’s a charity and you know exactly what they stand for and what their agenda is. The same can't be said for Policy Exchange, Institute of Economic Affairs etc.

Now I know you’re pulling our legs.

They don't appear to I think unfortunately it's a bit like paying tax and unscrupulous companies exploit loopholes.

I wish the Government would make it a bit more transparent what organisations are politically aligned think tanks, what are lobbyists and what are charities. But there appears to be no motivation to do so. The cynic in me would say that's because a lot of these institutions donate money to them.

At least with Stonewall when you see the name you know its a charity and you know exactly what they stand for and what their agenda is. The same can't be said for Policy Exchange, Institute of Economic Affairs etc.

I was not expecting the mention of Tufton Street to cause such uproar. Obviously its hit a nerve, I'm not sure why.

Come now, you know exactly what you’re trying to imply.

You’re barking up the wrong tree mind.

I’m sure a complaint to the Charity Commission would put a stop this ‘masquerading’.

1. happy to discuss on another thread so as not to derail this one (although just posting appears to have done that so I should not have bothered)
2. and 3) schools don't have money to do "basic safeguarding". That's a fact. It's a fact beyond trans issues. None of the recommendations can be implemented without resource. Hardly controversial.
3. I was responding to this comment: "We have two TRA teachers at ours who've transed their own kids." Only the parents know their own situation, I think its not really anyone's business how parents choose to handle their child's identity issues. Again, not controversial.

People can read what I wrote for themselves but this putting words into people's mouths is not OK.

No I said I understood another posters reasoning for ignoring it when she read the policy exchange was describing itself as a "non-partisan educational charity".
I agree with her. That's deliberately misleading therefore I would treat anything they said with caution.

I was not expecting the mention of Tufton Street to cause such uproar. Obviously its hit a nerve, I'm not sure why.

And, you're using an analogy that gave pupils information, to back up your daft premise that parents should not ask for information.

If you want parents to stop asking questions, you're going to have to do better than pretend they're pearl clutching, when they're actually asking for more information, not less.

Can I just add that effective safeguarding requires every single person to 'be interested'.

Mind your own business, would be the mantra of those who don't want effective safeguarding.

I'm not saying that's you, Adam, necessarily, but just so you know.

Safeguarding is about mitigating risk, and in the specific circumstances of transing a child, that is a risk not just for that child, but all the children they come into contact with.

Yes, this sums it up quite well. And now I think we see further minimisation/dismissal. Plus a false equivalence being used too to make an accusation.

From where I am it appears to be
. Ignore the evidence
. Minimise
. Deflect (eg saying schools need funding for this when it is just basic safeguarding)
. Imply other parents shouldn't be concerned (even though 1 child transitioning can impact all the children in a class)

There's none so blind as those who will not see (or whatever the quote is)

Indeed.

All your posts are there to read.

Anyone relating it to teen pg has lost perspective

What exactly do you think "my approach" is?

The last sentence about getting noticed is quite telling.

But that isn't what you said, is it?
You said that the findings and recommendations of a specific think tank - the Policy Exchange - should be ignored because it had an address in Tufton Street. You dismissed them on spurious grounds. It was also explained to you that Policy Exchange had been described as an educational charity when the poster should have said, charity with education as one of its core purposes. That is not the think tank masquerading as anything, it was an honest mistake by a pp.
You also said that how a parent chose to deal with their child's gender identity was nobody else's beeswax. That is not true because other children and teachers can be affected. And it is also not the same as saying that adults have the right to parent their children as they see fit. Not that that would that preclude anyone from criticising or pointing out problems because safeguarding children is everybody's business.

Indeed,it's all the rage.

right wing think tanks masquerading as "educational charities

I dare say they can identify as whatever they like.