“A school faces a threat of legal action over policies that protect all children – so we’re fighting back.”

I'm not sure what part the GLP can play. The school & local authority have their own lawyers. If the school gets taken to court are GLP going to rock up & offer legal advice?

I’d love to see it enough to pay good money (with equal value placed on getting the school to actually safeguard children before the court case!)

As others have said, just shout if you need gardening

I note on that fundraiser that "Ten per cent of the funds raised will be a contribution to the general running costs of Good Law Project". That seems like a rather exorbitant percentage ....

As a previous poster said, in a battle between SingleSexSpacesInSchools and the GLP, I know where I'd place my bet!

I kinda guessed, lol.

Case by case is code for letting all TiMs who want access into female spaces. Where case by case is the policy the decision makers are shit scared to say “no” for fear of being accused of discrimination

A TiM was NOT the first person to raise the alarm about Epstein. Is there nothing that TRAs will not try to appropriate?!

This is not about trans people (tho the Esptein revelations include some chilling information about sex change medics and their involvement with the paedophile).
This is about safeguarding children - girls and boys - from the predatory belief that girls must be compelled to undress in front of boys and men if the males require this (and vice versa).
This is about the removal of the rights of children to have boundaries from the opposite sex.
This is about stopping dangerous adults gaslighting, coercively controlling and grooming girls into believing that they have no rights to privacy from males in showers, changing rooms, dormitories etc if men and boys insist on being present.
This is about safeguarding children from an age inappropriate, dangerous ideology and the activist adults that seek to remove the rights of children to be kept safe.

I can't wait for these adults to be standing in a court of law explaining why they're promoting the rights of men and boys to be in female changing rooms watching young girls undress.

In a week dominated by the Pedo Island files: We learn the only trans person mentioned in all the archive thus far is a trans girl who was trafficked and raped by the Island owner and friends; who was the first woman to request help from anyone and was mocked and maligned in courts and by the press in return.

🦧
The small stuff?
🙃

The risk assessment that one is or one is not likely to be a sex offender as providing a child for another to sexualy abuse is a chargable criminal offence.

🤪

So the Good Law Project are going after the most vulnerable?

The Good Law Project are going to have to defend making all schools change all their toilet cubicles and any changing room cubicles to be like the right of this picture. Any child who is medically vulnerable, including children with epilepsy, diabetes, pots and other heart and neurological conditions in an average secondary school, should have a reasonable adjustment of a door gap. That means a single sex environment in front of the door. Door gaps also prevent misuse - sex and drugs in cubicles. And it makes them easier to ventilate and clean. It’s like it said in Building Standards at the time of 1992 legislation, advantageous for: ventilation, cleaning, supervision, prevention of misuse. Schools don’t need to comply with 1992 legislation - they do need to comply with safeguarding. They also have a duty of care to those with medical conditions. Their toilet doors need to open from the outside easily in case a child collapses.

Children go in to cubicles to vape and spiked vapes have caused seizures. The University of Bath last year warned schools about cardiac arrests happening - so far teachers have done cpr, saving pupils because they have been in corridors or classrooms so could be seen. As one headteacher said, ‘Dealing with the aftermath is challenging, especially when you have to explain to the child’s family that something potentially life-threatening happened while they were in our care. It’s equally distressing for their friends who witnessed the collapse and for the staff involved—it’s their worst fear realised.”
“What do we do if it happens again and we’re unaware? One incident occurred on the playground, where many people were present to help. But what if it happens in a bathroom cubicle, and they are alone? It would only be when they didn’t show up for class, were marked absent, and we started searching for them, potentially finding them too late. We’ve been fortunate so far, but I believe it’s only a matter of time before serious injuries or fatalities occur.

I know many other examples of deaths, rapes, sexual assaults and hidden cameras in school toilets. I know which designs they happen in most of the time.

A mixed sex, private toilet discriminates against any child who is mentally or physically vulnerable, and girls.

To Jolyon - mixed sex, private toilets don’t work. They are worse for any child at their most vulnerable. They don’t work in schools or wider society - why do you think radar keys were introduced? If you try and get the DfE to change so they stipulate that mixed sex toilets have door gaps - good luck. That really isn’t going to happen.

I’ve really come to believe that Jolyon and the GLP see women and girls as something less than human.

I’m a mostly silent lurker @SingleSexSpacesInSchools but I have read a number of your threads.

I just wanted to salute your perseverance in holding the school to account despite their many and varied attempts to prevent/derail you. Good on you, keep going. If there is any gardening required I’m ready with my spade.

Case by case basis?

Even if they believe biological boys, that identify as girls, should change their clothing, share bedrooms and toilets with biological girls, how is it even possible to have a case by case basis.

What’s their criteria?

One biological boy who identifies as a girl is allowed but another isn’t? On what basis. Where’s their written policy on that?

So they have 6.5K raised.

The cause doesn’t even start to address the problems raised for girls and boys when they are put in a situation of changing in front of the opposite sex.

It’s actually unbelievable.

Do you need any gardening done @SingleSexSpacesInSchools?

Boys are more at risk reputation wise because an suggestion that a girl (or group of girls) was physically or sexually aggressive to remove a boy would be seen as more of a joke.

While the same action would be taken much more seriously if the allegation is made against a boy.

Lucky lad to be in with naked girls wink wink

v

We all know why would a lad want to be in with a naked girl wink wink

In legal circles the intervention of the GLP appears to raise major red flags about the credibility of a case, judging by the comments from numerous respected legal bods.

Grifters gonna drift. But as you say, @SingleSexSpacesInSchools with Mr Fox Botherer's record, the odds are looking more in your favour.

Good luck @SingleSexSpacesInSchools and here’s to a sane judge and plenty of publicity to open people’s eyes about just how ridiculous this is.

I'm willing to concede that not everyone at / in support of GLP is an actual pervert.

But fucking hell, they'd not be able to weed out the perverts that have infiltrated.