Emma Barnett and Gillian Keegan.

She is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Makes much of having left school at 16 and succeeded in business. Good on her. But analysis, concepts, critical thinking, anything vaguely 'intellectual'? Meh.

Thanks for sharing this.

Keegan kept conflating gender with sex and therefore contradicting herself.

I'm a regular on these boards but name changed for this to say Gillian Keegan is my MP. I have yet to listen to her interview with Emma Barnett on catch up but she is talking utter bollocks to say she didn't know about this before 2020.

I wrote to her about the proposed reforms to the GRA in October 2018 and asked her to attend a discussion meeting at the House of Commons to which she had been invited. Her office replied to say she was aware of the issues and had already had several meetings with constituents to hear their thoughts and her diary manager would put the upcoming meeting in her diary.

And I wrote to her again in the run up to the election in 2019.

Oh dear, Gillian. Pants on fire.

Yes, my kids primary school uses a fairly rubbish outside provider (not in a dodgy way, just not that good) who will only let parents see the broad brush 'what is covered' bullet points and not actual teaching materials because 'copyright'. There's a lot of devil in the detail, or could be. Frankly the school budget could do without paying for this. I'm sure some of the teachers could do something much better with a day of cover.

I think they'd probably allow parents in school to see it there if needed but a lot of parents don't have time 'I need to take time off work because my school is being secretive about RSE' is a fairly ridiculous. Any reasonable employer will say 'why on earth can't they email you the slides?!'

And as PP have said, they're not so cagey about Maths teaching.

My daughter thankfully tells me pretty much everything. However as she's quite young it can come back quite garbled. It's not in children's best interests to not allow parents to see what they're being taught - not least so they can clear up misconceptions.

What I think is telling is that a lot of these dodgy organisations really thought they'd get away with doing this and the kids wouldn't tell their parents. Just no sense.

The idea that RSE needs to include something about colonisation is still blowing my mind.

What are you expecting from Labour?

They introduced the GRA and make statements on defending it

As the Tories have had 14 years to amend the GRA, i don't know why you think Labour would be less likely too? both parties are equally committed to it.

The GRA was backed very widely by both the Tory opposition and the Govt, in both the Lords and the Commons.

Cross post sashagabadon

There's absolutely no doubt that some grim stuff has been taught to our children. From the bloody sex dice to play with your teacher, to the awful man who told a 12-year-old girl that it was fine for her to watch porn every night.

Didn't someone say she specifically mentioned copyright?

Because there was a school who would not let parents see what gender identity ideology materials were being taught to their children on the basis that the outside agency doing it claimed it would infringe on their copyright.

they seemed to think that if people saw it, they would be clamouring to duplicate it. Well, that's what they said. 🙄

Most people suspected that what they were worried about was parents seeing it and going ballistic.

And I don't think they were alone. There has been a push to stop parents seeing what is taught in terms of sex education and gender ideology.

I think one school said parents could see it, but only if they came in and looked at it in the office, they couldn't take it home.

Who would have thought that teaching little kids about sex would attract so many dodgy players?

I think the issue was that schools were / are using 3rd party providers who refused to hand over the training information using copywrite as the reason. Parents were sometimes given permission to view the training at a specific time in school but couldn’t take photos and clearly most parents aren’t going to have time to do that so it effectively means parents didn’t get to see what their kids were being taught. I think that will now have to change and the providers can no longer object

The thing about changing birth certificates is that they are signed and dated so even if Belinda previously Barry does produce one that says female it’ll be dated 40 or 50 years after he was born so clearly not the original.
unless I am missing something?

It's not irrelevant. It's part of the explanation as to why 10- 15 years down the line we started facing problems because of it. Not everybody is aware of the history.

I agree there's no appetite even with the Tories to repeal it yet and it's even more unlikely Labour will because it was their government that brought it in. Politicians on both sides of the house like to refer back to it because they think it makes them look like they are 'reasonable'. Any of them that were truly on top of their brief would understand the GRA is a big part of the problem.

Keegan was talking crap about the sex education changes. She has no idea what was already in the curriculum. Spouting about changes like parents seeing what's in the curriculum when that's been the case for years.

With hindsight this was clearly a trojan horse move that most of the 2004 government probably couldn't see

Thats irrelevant, 20 years has passed, plenty of time to amend the law, yet there is no intention to do this.

Thanks. But I'd say, and I expect many would agree, that no-one should be allowed to change their birth certificate anyway. Amend it, possibly, but a certificate should always show birth sex and given name.

It's the privacy clause in the GRA that causes a lot of problems for women/orgs/businesses. Stupidly it was decided that nobody can ask for proof of a GRC because that would be discriminatory. Even if the person in front of you is clearly male.

So many businesses/orgs decided that means you have to work on the basis that all men with any degree of identity might have one...but you can't ask so you have to let them all in!

With hindsight this was clearly a trojan horse move that most of the 2004 government probably couldn't see.

They can change their birth certificate. The actual recorded fact of their birth.

So you're left in a position where an obvious man says he's a woman, and he's got the birth certificate to prove it, and what can you do about it?

Plus he's legally a woman.

But yes, I completely agree that you shouldn't be able to change driving licenses or passports either.

It does kind of make an utter mockery of what one thinks of as national security, when you can simply change your name and sex on your bloody passport with a letter from your doctor.

But a GRC doesn't really 'entitle' anyone to do anything they couldn't do before, does it? It's not required prior to changing names on driving licences or gas bills, is it? As far as I can see, the only real purpose of a GRC is a bit of validation for the holder, isn't it? Or is there more to it than that?

I don't think, legally, there is any difference between a man who has had surgery and someone who has a GRC is there?

96% of GRC applicants get their certificate and the costs are now just £5 (thanks Mr Johnson)

And they also need to know that the criteria for a GRC does not preclude being a sex offender. And nor does surgery.

And that men with an extreme fetish will often gravitate towards surgery as part of that fetish.

It's this idea that men who have surgery must have completely different motivations from those who don't. Likewise obtaining a GRC.

There's no way a GRC should entitle a male holder to anything reserved for women. It's not exactly difficult to get one. And a lot of people would be quite surprised, as it's always billed as being some kind of humiliating ordeal.

The nitty-gritty of these issues is autogynephilia, what surgery does, or doesn't achieve, what's necessary to get a GRC and what exactly would preclude a man from getting one?

it's about time this was all aired.

Safeguarding is an absolutely key concern of schools and education departments.

There's still the obvious question of if a man has a GRC and no penis, can he get a job as a teacher and share the single-sex spaces of little girls?

Parents need to know so they can properly safeguard their children.

GK did differentiate between TW with surgery and those without but I felt she left the answer ‘hanging’.. more political waffle
If she really thinks having surgery makes a man a transwoman then I think she sounds a tad transphobic with regard to those who don’t want surgery
Not a good look
I thought Emma was great and think she should have pushed the point more!

Folks can listen and decide for themselves I feel she was evading the specific question about whether TWs are women.

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001z6p6?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

2hrs 40.

With the gender ideology ban today and puberty blocker ban earlier I feel like all the backlash against women has been worth it

We spoke up and got stuff changed