Not again! - Government is proposing to allow trans-identifying boys into under 18s girls’ school sport - unless it is deemed unsafe

I’m baffled. If sports or activities are separated by sex then boys can’t participate with girls regardless of their unverifiable feelings about themselves.

if the sport or activity is mixed sex then anyone can participate.

Never dawned on you that girls might not be telling you what they really feel, given you dont come across as being open to alternative opinions?

@AStonedRose This is where we disagree. 'A trans kid' is a statement of belief - a belief I do not share.

There are children pretending to be a different sex to the one they actually are.

Schools are having to manage this situation as they have to respect this belief, but also should be respecting other's who believe this to be a nonsense and somehow keeping both groups safe and balancing their rights.

This guidance is about keeping children safe, which is why safety is its most important factor.

Also important is acknowledging that the Equality act's ability to allow sex segregation is related directly to biological sex, so not to 'belief' of what sex/gender you are - usally called gender identitity.

A girl can enjoy tennis or whatever against ‘trans kid’ who are also female. She doesn’t need to pretend her opponent is actually a boy.

Male ‘trans kids’ can enjoy playing tennis with other boys.

You know full well the whole point of ‘social transition’ is to make other children lie and pretend you are the opposite sex.

100%

I'm busy confusing myself now.

I am totally against people pretending that boys are girls and that girls are boys.

However, some children will enter secondary school with this pretense ongoing and schools need some help to manage this situation.

These children should only use provision of their actual sex, despite this pretense - so correct sex toilets and changing rooms.

In primary school sports are likely to have been mixed sex so the change to secondary may cause some issues for a school.

I think the clause is to provide schools in this situation with some guidance on what to do - and it allows them to take a holistic view for the child - but also to balance this against the needs and rights of others.

So a girl that has pretended to be a boy at primary might retain the name and uniform at secondary but still has to use girl's facilities. It might be assessed that they could join in badminton, but not football with the boys due to safety.

A boy who pretended to be a girl at primary might also retain the name and uniform at secondary - but again must use boys facilities. It might be assessed that they could join in dance but not athletics due to fairness.

Ideally pretending people are something they are not would get in the bin - but school are asking for how to manage the current situation.

The EA says the only permissible reason to segregate sport is for either or both of safety and fairness. If a school offers segregated sports it has already decided that either fairness or safety will be compromised by mixed sex participation.

The guidance says that fairness can (not must, but can) be overridden as a criterion.

There are two options then:

either it’s suddenly not unfair to allow a cross-sex child to participate in which case the law says in black letter that it must be mixed sex throughout and this policy is moot -

or else that fairness (and it will never be unfair to boys, unfairness to girls) is sacrificed.

If a sport is segregated it must be for a good reason, and must stay so. If it’s possible to make exceptions then it must not be segregated at all.

If sports were strictly single sex that 10 year old girl could still play tennis with that 10 year old trans kid if that trans kid was female.

I said mixed sex lessons not sport. You can race girls against other girls within an otherwise mixed sex lesson.

There's nothing in the policy that 'pretends a boy is a girl'?

It allows a 10-year-old girl to enjoy a game of tennis or whatever else against a 10-year-old trans kid.

Sorry, but you're tilting at windmills here.

Safeguarding is never the child’s responsibility. And being taught to submit to boys desires and lie about sex is a safeguarding issue.

It is not fair to girls to pretend boys can be girls, no .

I am aghast at people saying swimming could be a mixed sport at school. Ok if this is just for swimming lessons (up to a point) but competitive swimming would be deeply unfair for girls past age 10 or 11.
I used to swim competitively for my (secondary) school and would not have a chance if I had to compete against boys, either for a place in the team, or in races against other schools. Even if the boys weren’t always bigger initially, they were definitely either stronger or faster, or both.

It makes it easy for ideology to trump everything else, especially as there will be a lot of pressure on schools from parents and TRA groups to socially (including sport) transition children. There will be a lot of arguably grey cases, where ideology will win out. Only a clear NO in law or in decisions by sports associations who are prepared to risk a court case will work.

Pretending this is about 'trans kids' when it is about Boys and Girls is part of the problem.

Pretending that boys can be girls is the threat.

Pretending safeguarding doesn't exist when a boy pretends he is a girl, is a threat.

Hope that helps.

setting male precedence and importance over females in law.

I'm confused, the policy identifies safety as the number one priority?

The mere existence of a trans person is not, per se, a threat?

Oh it absolutely does mention social transition, though it's not the heart of the thing and the policy appears sensible with or without the trans aspect.

My point was that people were repeatedly saying the policy completely rejects any notion of fairness, whereas it's repeatedly mentioned. At this point, it seems some anti-trans posters just want something to rail against, whether that thing actually exists or not.

No girl is going to pipe up and lose all her friends and have parents and teachers telling her it is simply not a problem and dont be a bigot.

And why should she, the adults are supposed to be Keeping them SAFE in Schools, hence the title of the policy?

I think schools can consider carefully whether a boy is sincere in wanting to do dance/yoga or whether they are likely to cause issues . Same as whether a girl wanting to do a boy specific sports provision fully understands the safety risks.

I am confident that PE teachers (who are renown for being tough nuts) can put any boy at the front or get rid of them if they are causing issues.

Also, boys can be just as shy of their bodies as girls.

I do yoga and dance in mixed sex groups and any issues are dealt with by the teacher.

I'd repeat, if there's a Gregory's Girl scenario where a girl is really good at football, or a Billy Elliot scenario where a boy really wants to do dance, I have no problem with that in principle, schools need a framework that enables them to do a proper risk assessment.

I do object to DfE sneaking in social transition as a justification, when there's been a sustained argument over whether or not schools should support social transition at all (aren't the DfE draft guidelines on this yet another piece of guidance currently warming Bridget Philippson's bum? It's hard to keep track)

It simply is there, when they refer to Social Transition twice. Bolded for you.

97 Where there are no safety concerns and a child makes a request relating to
how they participate, schools and colleges will need to consider the request in light of the advice on “considering requests for support with social transition”. This means that the school or college would need to take into account all the relevant factors, including whether supporting social transition is overall in the best interests of the child, as well as considering the impact on other children and the aim of creating safe and fair environments for children to participate in PE.