Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

..to think Stonewall should not be involved with schools?

999 replies

ConcernedMum100 · 04/02/2021 14:02

AIBU to think Stonewall should not be involved with schools...

Historically, Stonewall has done amazing work and led the way for equality. However, over recent years their priority seems to be a different sort of activism, which has caused many of their original supporters to abandon them.

I want to stress that I am very much in favour of primary schools teaching about diversity and different types of families including same sex parents, etc. I believe that's very important. I do however have reservations with Stonewall for various reasons, as follows:

-Its school resources with regards to transgenderism and gender identity, such as An Introduction to Supporting LGBT children, breach the Department of Education’s guidelines in many ways, including the sexist and regressive suggestion that children enjoying clothes or toys typically associated with the opposite sex is a sign they may be transgender. The resources also say that children are given a label at birth (they mean their sex is recorded) and that sometimes this label will have been wrong. They are not referring to the tiny percentage of babies born with a DSD, but children whose gender identity is supposedly different to their sex. Whatever that means. The resources also say that a school should not tell the child’s parents about their gender identity if the child does not want them to. Which means they’re suggesting schools change a child’s name and pronouns without informing the parents. Seeing as they communicate that children with gender dysphoria are often vulnerable and even suicidal, this seems very irresponsible.

-Its stance on child safeguarding. Stonewall have been very clear that they disagree with the High Court’s ruling which concluded that children under the age of 16 are highly unlikely to be able to consent to puberty blockers. They are in favour of medicating children as young as 10 years old, who are experiencing gender dysphoria and say they want to live as the opposite sex. This follows research showing puberty blockers do not have a positive effect on the children’s mental health, but do cause issues with brain development and bone density. Nearly 100% of children who have taken puberty blockers go on to take cross sex hormones which will likely lead to loss of sexual function and infertility. There has been an alarming increase in children identifying as trans over the last few years and the reasons for this is unknown, and there has been no research to understand the apparent strong link between autism and gender dysphoria, nor homosexuality and gender dysphoria.

-Its stance on women’s single sex spaces. Via both Tweeting and their school resources, Stonewall have made clear they believe women and girls do not have the right to single sex spaces at time when they may be vulnerable, because they believe males who identify as women (the prerequisite of which is to declare themselves a woman-no need for any medical treatment or diagnosis) should be treated as females in every aspect of life. This means access to women’s communal changing rooms, prisons, hospital wards, toilets, and rape shelters, to name a few examples.

-Its stance on women’s sports. Stonewall disagreed with World Rugby’s decision to prevent transwomen competing in women’s rugby. This decision was reached by World Rugby because they found that to include TW in the women’s teams would be unfair and unsafe (in increased risk to the women on the team by at least 20-30%) Stonewall appear to believe (and say) that inclusion comes above all else, even the safety of women and girls and their right to fair competition.

I don’t feel comfortable that an organisation with these highly controversial and political viewpoints has access to primary school children, whether it’s via face to face sessions, training school staff, or learning resources.

Of course Stonewall are not the only organisation which has these worrying beliefs. However, they are the biggest and most well funded. They are also listed on the Department of Educations “experts” page, despite breaching its own guidelines, which I think is wrong and also makes it very difficult for parents to complain to schools.

What are your thoughts?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
jj1968 · 06/02/2021 13:49

[quote BrumBoo]**@Quaagars* the fact that you and @jj1968* cannot see that anyone mentioning Glinner would have this 'aha!' moment from people like you, really suggest you actually believe anything that furthers your cause (even without evidence). If there really was a secret agenda going on, lead by a TV writer, don't you think the last thing people would be doing would be announcing it on a thread?

'OH IS THIS WHERE WE'RE HOLDING THE SECRET MEETING AS ARRANGED BY THAT DUDE WHO GOT SUPER BANNED FROM TWITTER. KEEP IT ON THE DOWN LOW OK!'.

Maybe Glinner has shown an interest in it, I personally have no idea. I do doubt that the level of response is personally down to him. Though, I think you put far too much faith in how many dedicated followers he has on here.[/quote]
Oh come on, it's was patently obvious that off platform activity was going on to try and manipulate this discussion. Post after post of people arriving who all think exactly the same thing on every single subject and many using the weird gender critical jargon that no-one normal understands. That's hardly likely to be representative of most mumsnet posters outside of FWR.

I just found it comical that someone gave the game away so casually.

Don't tell 'im Pike.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 06/02/2021 13:53

Now we see the real reason the vote results look the way they do.

I doubt it Grin this thread has been up several days and his email was sent yesterday. He referenced the fact that 90% of 800 people who had voted by then voted YANBU. Nice try.

lifeturnsonadime · 06/02/2021 13:56

I mean it's not like a parenting board, mainly made up of women and mothers are going to be worried about these things is it!

BrumBoo · 06/02/2021 13:57

Post after post of people arriving who all think exactly the same thing on every single subject and many using the weird gender critical jargon that no-one normal understands.

Yes, everyone outside FWR are totally thickos who don't understand any GC speak. Sure thing.

You're more than welcome to check my posting history by the way. I think I've posted on the feminist forum once, under any username and don't read it that often for much the same reason I came off twitter. I'd rather balance my life with other subjects whilst occasionally engaging in these conversations when they pop up in the mainstream.

redpencil77 · 06/02/2021 13:57

@prisencolinensinainciusol2

Anyway, I have just had an email from Collection of Prostitutes.* Where is the best place to put that on here?*

Why did they ask you to put it on here? Lazy buggers..

Probably busy being hardworking vagina-owners
jj1968 · 06/02/2021 14:00

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Now we see the real reason the vote results look the way they do.

I doubt it Grin this thread has been up several days and his email was sent yesterday. He referenced the fact that 90% of 800 people who had voted by then voted YANBU. Nice try.

I'm sure there's been more than just an email from Glinner. You are after all openly plotting on FWR how to use AIBU to spread anti-trans propaganda.
BrumBoo · 06/02/2021 14:04

@jj1968 what anti-trans propaganda are you seeing? You're now just coming over as a conspiracy theorist by the way. What exactly do you fear by having these conversations on busy forums?

Whatwouldscullydo · 06/02/2021 14:05

If sex based rights are anti trans then you have to conceed that the "trans rights" being sought are indeed in conflict witg womens rights.

So thank you fir that clarification.

Now if we can.just have a list of rights that trans people in the uk don't have that will be helpful

Wotapolava · 06/02/2021 14:07

Redpencil,

Are you trying to ruin my opportunity of perks.

I feel offended now.

Wink
CoffeeTeaChocolate · 06/02/2021 14:08

There should be a choice and full visibility for parents on this. And no secrecy from the school’s side.

The fact that some people don’t want this discussion at all is incredibly sinister.

redpencil77 · 06/02/2021 14:09

@Wotapolava

Redpencil,

Are you trying to ruin my opportunity of perks.

I feel offended now.

Wink

ROFL!!
redpencil77 · 06/02/2021 14:12

@CoffeeTeaChocolate

There should be a choice and full visibility for parents on this. And no secrecy from the school’s side.

The fact that some people don’t want this discussion at all is incredibly sinister.

Maybe as school is at home in the immediate moment, parents should take the opportunity to ask the SLT in charge? Purely out of educational supportive interest
jj1968 · 06/02/2021 14:16

[quote BrumBoo]@jj1968 what anti-trans propaganda are you seeing? You're now just coming over as a conspiracy theorist by the way. What exactly do you fear by having these conversations on busy forums?[/quote]
I fully support it. Do you know how people talk about mumsnet outside of your bubble? And I don't just mean 'TRAs'. I had a long debate on another forum with people who were arguing the gender critical movement was not transphobic but just women with legitimate concerns - they soon changed their mind when I pointed them in the direction of FWR.

The more sunlight the better I reckon. For every person you convert to the cult a dozen more are carefully backing away whilst rolling their eyes.

toconclude · 06/02/2021 14:17

@AStudyinPink

I don’t want Stonewall anywhere near my child’s education. I will teach them about the evils of prejudice myself. Science denying zealots can piss all the way off.
Whilst ensuring that they will be suitably anti-transpeople. Some kinds of prejudice are clearly just fine then.
MaudTheInvincible · 06/02/2021 14:18

Shhh this is definitely to be kept top secret!

No one must know about this publicly available piece of writing!

Don't let the cat out of the bag, whatever you do!

https://twitter.com/LesbianLabour/status/1357838444609875974?s=20

JFC Hmm

..to think Stonewall should not be involved with schools?
Quaagars · 06/02/2021 14:20

Looks like conspiracy theorist gets thrown out by all on these threads lol, whichever viewpoint you come from - saw a post earlier "who pays you to post here, JJ?"
It's bonkers lol

jj1968 · 06/02/2021 14:21

@Whatwouldscullydo

If sex based rights are anti trans then you have to conceed that the "trans rights" being sought are indeed in conflict witg womens rights.

So thank you fir that clarification.

Now if we can.just have a list of rights that trans people in the uk don't have that will be helpful

There aren't really any sex based rights in UK law except for the right not to be discriminated against which all the protected characteristics share. A voluntary exemption to anti-discrimination laws in very limited circumstances is not a right. It is possible to legally discriminate on the grounds of race in very certain circumstances, that doesn't mean we have race based rights in the UK, of that this exemption represents 'white' rights.
BrumBoo · 06/02/2021 14:22

@jj1968 you know that works both ways, right? It wasn't long ago I was a full-blown TRA. People change their views when presented with all manner of information. Especially when facts start speak for themselves outside of the internet.

What anti-trans propaganda were you referring to?

sanluca · 06/02/2021 14:26

The problem isn't trans rights. The problem is trying to argue that women have no rights. And as soon as you start to pretend that transwomen are women just like female women, and so there should be absolutely none of the protections based on biological sex retained, then you advocate not for the rights of trans people, but for the abuse of women and girls.

This.

Jj, no sex based rights eh? So women don't have the right to ask for single sex changing rooms to be available, services like refuges to be single sex, sports to be single sex, not to be locked up in prisons that are single sex.... at all times women must share with male individuals and don't dare ask for privacy. Can I advise you to read the EA again?

JoodyBlue · 06/02/2021 14:33

I'm also looking for the weird GC language. Examples please or you have no point to raise. You know this is a parenting forum right?

Jintyfer · 06/02/2021 14:33

@jj1968

Hey where is this poll? I'm not familiar with this side of the forum. I only found this thread thanks to Glinner's email.

chuckles I don't think you were supposed to tell everyone about Glinner's email.

Now we see the real reason the vote results look the way they do.

Hardly. The thread was already 2 days old and already had huge traction by sheer weight of its title and serious content. Hardly a bat signal @Quaagars, I'm Grateful for the tip off and the advice on here from the hundreds parents who share my concerns. You and jj are shamefully outnumbered.
jj1968 · 06/02/2021 14:35

Jj, no sex based rights eh? So women don't have the right to ask for single sex changing rooms to be available, services like refuges to be single sex, sports to be single sex, not to be locked up in prisons that are single sex

Are you saying that sporting bodies were permit trans inclusion, the prison service/MOJ and refuge's which admit trans women are all breaking the law?

sanluca · 06/02/2021 14:36

Just for JJ, straight from the government website:

Single sex services are permitted where:
• only people of that sex require it;
• there is joint provision for both sexes but that is not sufficient on its own;
• if the service were provided for men and women jointly, it would not be as effective and it is not reasonably practicable to provide separate services for each sex;
• they are provided in a hospital or other place where users need special attention (or in parts of such an establishment);
• they may be used by more than one person and a woman might object to the presence of a man (or vice versa); or
• they may involve physical contact between a user and someone else and that other person may reasonably object if the user is of the opposite sex.

Also

This paragraph contains an exception to the general prohibition of gender reassignment discrimination in relation to the provision of separate- and single-sex services. Such treatment by a provider has to be objectively justified.

Example
• A group counselling session is provided for female victims of sexual assault. The organisers do not allow transsexual people to attend as they judge that the clients who attend the group session are unlikely to do so if a male-to-female transsexual person was also there. This would be lawful.

sanluca · 06/02/2021 14:37

Are you saying that sporting bodies were permit trans inclusion, the prison service/MOJ and refuge's which admit trans women are all breaking the law?

Yes

wellbehavedwomen · 06/02/2021 14:37

I'm sure there's been more than just an email from Glinner. You are after all openly plotting on FWR how to use AIBU to spread anti-trans propaganda.

But if there's 'open plotting' then why the need for 'secret plotting'? Something secretly plotted isn't very secret if it's simultaneously discussed openly - is it? Your definition of "plotting" and indeed "anti-trans propaganda" appears to be "women discussing our own human rights without your consent."

Again: I support trans people's rights to live free of discrimination and abuse. I agree that Gender Reassignment in the Equality Act should be updated to Gender Identity, to expand the protection, and that nobody should ever face harm or detriment for how they express gender. I agree that it should be a protected characteristic in hate crime law (alongside expanding that protection to include women, and diluting the subjective nature of hate incidents, to stop that being used to silence those voicing opinions with which others disagree). I agree with all of it. It's you who seeks to erase the rights of others. You who want to remove the rights women need to mitigate against our biological vulnerability and the related abuse, exploitation and detriment. It is you angry that we protest and push back when you demand the erasure of our rights on the basis of sex.

Stonewall are the leading group trying to achieve that erasure. They want the Equality Act exemptions which protect women on the basis of our female bodies removed (even as they advise bodies that they don't exist, in fact). They should not be allowed in schools, because they actively campaign to remove the rights of women and girls under the Equality Act.

Why are you so militantly opposed to women's rights, protections and freedoms on the basis of sex? Why do you want women to suffer such detriment, instead of advocating positively for trans people? This really shouldn't be a zero sum game. It should be possible to achieve rights, protections and freedoms for everyone - instead of which, you attack our rights and demand the rights of any male person to access any and all spaces and provision set aside for women on the basis of sex, just on their say-so, and then call us hateful when we resist. How can you not see how wrong that is?

Hatred is not women who want to keep the rights our foremothers fought so hard to gain. And we aren't the ones making death threats, rape threats, trying to lose women their jobs and trying to silence anyone pointing out that women are human beings, with rights, needs, dreams and ambitions of our own.

Swipe left for the next trending thread