Finally! Keeping children safe in education has been updated!

All the cognitive dissonance that people who support this must have going on in their heads. The most recent one I've been thinking about is how they can believe there is no clash of rights while simultaneously immediately defaulting to talking about transwomen when asked about women's rights. Or transpeople when asked about children's safeguarding. Or transpeople when....anything!

All those seem possible but
it is so worrying that she never even touched on specific concerns if only to refute them. It really was as though she does not know what they are.

How lucky it is that your daughter has you.

It seems she simply thinks that ‘being trans’ is the same as being gay - you are just that way. And she is a good, kind person who would of course only want to help them on their journey in life.

Yes, this describes the vibe I'm getting from her too. It also describes exactly where I was when I started this journey and my daughter told me she thought she might be trans. My response... "OK". Exactly as it would have been if she said she thought she might be gay. It didn't phase me, I just wanted her to be happy.

I was ignorant about what "being trans" meant so I set off to find out, to support my daughter. Within a short space of time I discovered the Interim Cass Report and the NHS information that the impact of puberty blockers on the developing brain was unknown.

To see the likely future education secretary reflecting a similar level of ignorance post Cass - the final report (I'll accept benefit of the doubt that it was easy to miss the Interim Report unless you're in that specific discipline in healthcare) - is both dangerous and unacceptable.

Three possibilities I can think of:

1. She knows more than she shares but she's a careerist and will wait for Keir to tell her what to do
2. She is personally invested in supporting "trans children" e.g. a relative, friend
3. She has been briefed with so much bias that she thinks anything she hears about protecting children from the impact of gender identity belief is bigoted noise

I really hope that JKR wades in with two feet on this one. I appreciate her main focus is on women's rights but this is a significant backwards step for vulnerable children and it needs lots of attention drawing to it. I worry that it will slip through largely unnoticed with the current headlines re Labour making it easier to obtain a GRC and the inevitable focus that this (rightly) generates from "GC" quarters.

Absolutely. Dismissing safeguarding often comes from the top in institutions.

But I just hoped that with a government commissioned report (Cass) that evidences the lack of any coherent evidence to support brutal surgery and untested drugs on children, most politicians would feel able to cite that. A basic expectaion that MPs understand ethics and speak out when abuse is evidenced?
The fact she doesn't mention it and that safeguarding children is nowehere in her vocabulary suggests it's not spoken about in Labour. While the terrible, intrusive requirements of applying for a GRC are of course spoken about by all of them. 😑

It seems she simply thinks that ‘being trans’ is the same as being gay - you are just that way. And she is a good, kind person who would of course only want to help them on their journey in life.

There is no evidence in anything she has said that she has read or been informed about the any of real issues whatsoever. Who would have thought it possible.

This morning the Labour policy of reforming the way gender recognition certificates need to be obtained was announced on BBC news.

Overton - Bridget also has to go with her boss on this and he doesn't care about the Cass report. She will have seen how women who dissent have been sidelined - like Rosie.

Re: basing policy for all children entirely on listening to parents of so called ‘trans’ children, would be a terrible mistake.

A former doctor from the Tavistock said he felt it was often a case of ‘transhausens by proxy’.

Susy Green’s effeminate son ( who might have grown up to be gay) was unacceptable to his father, and they had him given hormones then castrated abroad when he was sixteen.

The child Kai in America was beaten as a toddler for liking feminine things by his Christian Evangelical mother. She had said to herself ‘Is he going to be gay ?’ When he started age 4 to say ( from his depression) that he wanted to go to Jesus ( be dead), she relented and made him trans. His story is a documentary full of approbation on the internet.

I've been wondering why a seemingly rational politician like Bridget Phillipson defaulted to talking about trans people when asked about children. It's a standard tactic of all the trans lobbyists - to ignore the need to safeguard children and talk about adult wishes instead.
I suspect here's been virtually no discussion of Cass / the pathway to infertility, double mastectomies, bodily mutilation etc in the Labour hierarchy. You're not going to raise these issues when you're sitting next to parents with children caught up in this - especially if they've been cheerleading them on (no doubt suppressing any mounting horror at what's happening). With Stonewall literally in the room, how could any labour politician or staff member express anything other than positivity about a child going down this route?
That's why it's only Wes Streeting (a gay man) who's been able to appreciate some of what Cass has found (homophobia & transitioning gay children).
It's just a thought and I don't mean any disrespect to parents with children going through this - they need all the support available. But it might be why they're so out of step with the rest of the population watching in horror as children think their bodies are wrong and they must change sex. They don't have the difficult, painful, hard conversations as they're just not allowed. Only positive affirmation is acceptable. So that's why they don't talk about Cass as they haven't (and some of them can't) engage with it.
Which leaves us with a massive problem in terms of what they'll do with all this.

Yes, absolutely.

I don't think they realise quite how angry people are about this.

Sterilising children? It's not a good look, Labour.

I want to scream. You are so right and once seen it is so clear that all child safeguarding is disregarded when it comes to the trans topic. What on earth is wrong with people? Bridget is baffling me. Her background coming from working class roots and a mother of two. Why does she not see what we see?

Note how she answers by talking about trans people - children evidently not on her radar. They're just small adults aren't they? So what's right for the middle aged men must also be for children no?

The Telegraph have done an article about it, she also talks about JKR's intervention

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/23/bridget-phillipson-labour-may-scrap-gender-ideology-ban/

https://archive.ph/FTklA over the paywall

I'd summarise it as 'transpeople, transpeople, don't look at that, look at this, transpeople'.

All good @ScrollingLeaves

On a related note...

There are lots of different documents in various different stages of flight and it's easy to get lost. I previously got confused on the difference between the 2025 consultation and the imminent 2024 KCSIE guidance. I then got confused again on whether the 2024 KCSIE guidance was in a finalised state or not, ahead of its publication on 1st September 2024.

Without safeguarding-centred leadership, and a clear line to the Cass Report, from the next Education Secretary, its going to be very easy for lots of good progress on all of the in-flight documents to slip away in to the ether... I had always been sceptical of Bridget Phillipson in this regard. Today's interview has underlined why that's warranted.

I really hope that the timing of the dissolution of parliament and teachers being on summer holidays makes it unlawful/impossible for any material changes to be made to the forthcoming 2024 KCSIE guidance before 1st September. Even with the very real possibility that Bridget Phillipson removes some of the key wording in the Gender Questioning Children guidance, the 2024 KCSIE guidance provides significant safeguarding protection at a statutory level. On the one hand, she's no less dangerous than Gillian Keegan (who also still clearly believes that everyone has a gender identity) but the big difference is that she won't be tempered by non-believers in the next government if/when Labour gets in. Wes Streeting is also clearly a believer, with his talk of "trans children" when discussing the Cass Report in parliament on 15th April.

I am so sorry, @ BonfireLady, how did I miss that you’d already come on here to explain this!

Anyway, thank you @WarriorN snd @BonfireLady .

OP
Finally! Keeping children safe in education has been updated!

And Labour will not implement it.

That is, they specifically will not implement the suggested guidance against teaching gender identity, (but saying gender identity is a belief).

That was made clear ( amid obfuscating) by Bridget Phillipson on Laura Kienssberg this morning when Laura asked her about that.

There is a post about it by @BonfireLady on one of the treads, including a video clip from the interview. The thread is one of those about Labour’s policies. It also links what Baroness Foster and Denis Kavanagh each say about the interview.

Presumably because "gender identity" will be added to the statute books via their stupid "fully inclusive conversion therapy ban". Which is enabled by them NOT committing to implementing Cass "in full". They will cherrypick Cass. Ideally they'd have buried it.

Getting "gender identity" into law by hook or by crook is the aim. We should be very clear-eyed about this and what the consequences will be for women and children's safety, and for everyone's rights to the truth and to be able to access, know and speak the truth.

Linking in my comment from another thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5100697-gmn-labour-manifesto-response?reply=136231049&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

In short, it looks like the language that explains that gender identity is a contested belief and/or a belief that not everyone holds will be quietly removed because it's seen as problematic 🤦‍♀️
She has bought in to the idea that trans people's existence is connected to us all believing that everyone has a gender identity. No Bridget, they are people who exist regardless of whether we share their belief. "Trans" simply means someone who believes that they have an inner gendered soul/essence that differs from their sex. It's not "anti-trans" if I don't share their belief or say that I don't want my children being forced to accept genderist beliefs as facts.

Thanks @mrshoho
here’s the clip
https://x.com/mrsnickyclark/status/1804807512207536313?s=46&t=aj_daoQ4ub5R9J5oRcQ5qA

Or they've read and understood Cass and will continue to restore safeguarding and remove Stonewall's sticky tentacles from schools?

I long for the day when the LP come out with this statement.

Schools are going to be left without clear guidance to follow for who knows how long. And what will it look like once reviewed yet again?

I see she dropped #culturewars into her spiel, despite framing her main concern as the safeguarding of children.

Which is it?

We are in for the worst time as parents with them. I'm absolutely dreading it.