Still Asleep at the Wheel: A Further Examination of Gender and Safeguarding in Schools - Policy Exchange

You understand that you kissed another student at school. Do you believe that no parents should have been told about that? Or not?

That's why Safeguarding guidance is standardised and statutory isn't it? We all have our own experiences, beliefs and vulnerabilities and it's so important that adults are supported to put the child first and not let our own feelings influence how we respond.

It's not easy - DSL's often spend time supporting adults who've listened to something awful from a child or who get involved in gruelling safeguarding issues where children are carrying the most unimaginable burdens and unexpectedly share it with an adult they trust.

Front line social workers learn the skills of distancing and have professional supervision regularly. Few teachers have that and often you can see the toll safeguarding takes in schools. In my last school we had several DSLs which allowed for prompt responses and provided gave an immediate source of consultation and "how the hell do we manage this?" from others trained to the same level.

Standing back and removing yourself and your emotional responses from situations is critical. It's not about us which can be a challenge to acknowledge sometimes.

Sure. I imagine all the parents would have wished to be notified that a boy was kissing other boys in class. I was five or six, I don't remember why I did it. We were in a play period in kindergarten.

You kissed another student at school? That is a very serious issue regardless of the sexual orientation of either student.

I imagine a large part of school and systems' actions around trans students is focused on preserving the privacy of students and the prevention of massed angry adults keen on stalking, hurling abuse and other threats at a minor.

My parents were notified that I had kissed a boy in school when I was very young. Before they were notified, I was physically punished at the school. I was also kept out of class for the remainder of the week. I assume the parents of the boy I'd kissed were told. I can't recall if the other boy was punished.

The environment was different, yes. Homosexuality was understood to be something that was deviant and should be quashed. North America was yet to be under seige by newly formed conservative Christian political action groups empowered by a shared love of Jesus to preserve the purity and innocence of children (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_Our_Children).

You don't have to look very far to see low personal boundaries in some of the people who end up effectively arguing to support lowered safeguarding.

Yes there is a certain worrying consistency there.

I was convinced that the poster in question hadn't wanted to tell her mum that she was having sex with an older boy when she was at school. And it had all stemmed from that.

But, of course, it could be an awful lot more disturbing than that.

I sometimes can't help but think of this.

'Dads! Don't make good points in the wrong tone, or people like me will help you lose custody of your children.'

A few years ago, I would have thought there must be more to this. However, in recent years I am no longer sure.

The amount of times we get told on here that if we write about situations and facts accurately but in a way that some people find objectionable, they simply cannot read it or engage with it. How many fucking times do we see, 'I agree but you swore / used correct sex language / were blunt' so I will not answer you sometimes on this board.

To find out that some of these people are involved in safeguarding is concerning. To hear that some people with very low personal boundaries are involved in safeguarding adds to that concern.

Yeah, I don't get it from that description either. Why did anything have to escalate, or get worse, if his point was correct?

And I don't quite know what using the toilet freely means? Girls can use it whenever they want? I don't know if that is allowed. It certainly wasn't when I was at school because the bloody class would've been empty 90% of the time.

But I should imagine that's changed.

The other dad had a really good point too. His was about toilets even, but being able to use the toilet freely. I agree with him. What nobody agreed with is how he went about it

Unfortunately to get anything at all done in this world, a certain level of arseholeishness is a prerequisite.

Writing sternly worded letters and using the correct legal processes is one thing. Leaving bottles of piss on doorsteps and smashing windows is another.

I think Glove is referring to the Dad in this story.

GlovedhandsCecilia · Today 11:48:
'I think he sounds like the angry dad's that I protect children from all the time.

A couple.years ago I.worked with a lovely young girl who was school refusing, why? Becauae her father had a bee in his bonnet about something, embarrassed her in front of the whole school and was extremely aggressive to her female teachers.

He had 50/50 custody. We thankfully helped her and her mum get it changed so she was not expected to spend that time with him any more. He didnt give a shit about her schooling. He just wanted another medium where he could control and dominate.'

So this post is a follow on about the same people.

GlovedhandsCecilia · Today 12:22:
'The other dad had a really good point too. His was about toilets even, but being able to use the toilet freely. I agree with him. What nobody agreed with is how he went about it, how he behaved towards staff and how he dismissed his daughter's worsening mental health in his quest to be right.

That is why his daughter ultimately distanced herself from him as soon as she knew she could without her mum getting in trouble.'

So what is the message here?
'Dads! Don't make good points in the wrong tone, or people like me will help you lose custody of your children.'

There must be more to this.
Or less to it.

This is just silly hyperbole.

Everyone is allowed to advocate for their own cause. Let’s save the accusations of violence for those threatening to fuck women with splintered rolling pins, shall we?

Given that legal action is imminent, it's great that SSSiS is ignoring openly provocative personal comments.

There's no doubt certain people will be poring over his words looking for an opportunity to discredit him.

Exactly. And some children can tell lies - I knew a girl who accused her parents of abuse so she could get a council flat (many years ago).

Kids can do and say some very odd things (because they are kids) and adults must be careful what they do with that.

Not to mention, as PP pointed out, teachers must be very careful to protect themselves from legal action by following the rules and protocols. If they take decisions they don’t have the authority or expertise to take (like when to keep a secret either a child) they are open to accusations. If a teacher participated in alienating my child from me I would certainly be looking at my legal options.

Across multiple topics, no less.

Methinks somebody has self-identified as the definer of all correct language and thought, if we could all just affirm this and meekly slink away, that would be the Righteous thing to do.

What 'other dad' are you talking about?

I think he goes to another school.

So politely but determinedly writing and talking to the headteacher (a man I believe), governors, external bodies with an interest in safeguarding, insurers, politicians etc etc over a long period, and then as a last resort taking legal action because no one else has taken any measures to protect girls at this school ... is "using fear and intimidation or violence and violent language"?

@SingleSexSpacesInSchools has every reason to be angry at his concerns for his daughter and other girls at the school, and their discomfort and safety, being ignored. It is clear that he has worked very hard on controlling that anger and directing it along the correct safeguarding and legal channels, with huge patience and persistence. The professionals who have blocked him at every turn are entirely in the wrong and have shown themselves not trustworthy.

Not to mention the fact that anyone who has even a passing understanding of trans issues will know that children are often told by the trans community online that their parents will definitely hate them for adopting a trans identity and will try to force them to change their minds, and that the parents are therefore evil and bigoted and not to be trusted - before a child has even considered telling their parents. A school cannot simply accept at face value a claim by a child that their parents will be abusive if they learn about the child’s supposed trans identity.

Indeed. Arseholery doesn't alter the school's wrong doing.

Why are you attacking this PP with accusations of ‘toxic masculinity’ and now accusations of violent and toxic language and behaviour?

We can all see what he’s posted and you twisting his words and making stuff up isn’t going to work.

Btw the school don’t just ‘disagree’ with him - they are blatantly refusing to follow the law. I thought you were very knowledgable and keen on safeguarding - why are you attacking a dad that is advocating for safeguarding for the female students in that schools to prevent them being forced to change in front of a boy?

And if a parent (male or female) is an arsehole to staff, why give them a gold plated reason to be right?