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

[ConcernedMum100]

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?

Shit that a transphobic and highly gendered society did to us, not women exclusively.

If the year in your username indicates your vintage, you might remember the 80’s? A whole decade of ‘gender benders’ expanding the bandwidth of the societal constraints on their sex - make up and mad outfits a go-go. Boy George, Marilyn, Phil Oakey, Jon Pleased-Wimmin, Jimi Somerville, Annie Lennox, Neneh Cherry there were loads of them. We were on a roll - freedom was on the cards.

Why have we regressed to the 1950s?? Certain ideological movements reinforcing ever narrowing and rigid sex stereotypes. Thanks Stonewall/ Mermaids etc. This is what you’ve done.

Btw, you are aware that many transsexuals (by their own reference) don’t support self id and respect women’s single sex sieves and are actually campaigning for us because this movement is hurting them.

Do you care about those people or are they to be ignored as well jj?

I meant people who aren't trans who I could describe very easily if normal mainstream academic terms were permitted on here.

That's a completely heterogeneous, meaningless category. Our lives don't revolve around the fact that we don't think we are the opposite sex.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Some are, mostly trans inclusive feminists in my experience.

They really aren't.

If trans people disappeared off the earth tomorrow then patriarchy and gender would still exist. So where are the threads on FWR attacking the key drivers of gender in society?

Just one more comment about that 'real life test' jj.

I've already said it was devised by men. I don't know if any women were consulted at all, but most women would be deeply insulted by the insinuation that 'living as a woman' comprised of wearing feminine clothing with high heels and make up. Most women would also be shocked to discover that the 'real life test' required men who cross dressed and wanted to transition to use women's toilets and changing rooms.

Women didn't invent this test. Women who know about it are appalled by it. Stop blaming us for it. Lay the blame where it belongs - with the sexist men who devised this test.

Transinclusive feminists is a bullshit make believe term.

Anyone including transwomen in their mistaken idea of feminism is reinforcing sex role stereotypes- the set sex role stereotypes need to exist to have something to trans from and to, otherwise no one would be trans would they??

Feminism is a political movement for the liberation of women. It’s for females only. Stop claiming it can be for males. That would be like saying the communist party welcomes capitalists who identify as communists too. Stop trying to co-opt women’s movement.

jj is part of the patriarchy and has benefited from it. Not least in the entitlement jj feels to pronounce on matters of supreme importance to women.

I meant people who aren't trans who I could describe very easily if normal mainstream academic terms were permitted on here.

It's not allowed here because the word woman doesn't need qualifying. We are not a sub category of women, it isnt normal to refer to us as such in any circumstances.

So where are the threads on FWR attacking the key drivers of gender in society?

When there's a fire, that consumes all the resources. FWR has to centre this issue, because all other rights we have flow from our ability to describe our sex class and oppression.

So where are the threads on FWR attacking the key drivers of gender in society?

What many of us are trying to do right now is protect the language we need to fight for our rights. 'If you can't name sex, you can't fight sexism'.

If 'woman' is 'anyone who feels like a woman' then it ceases to be a meaningful category.

I don't care what you wear, which consenting adult you love, what you do with your blooming hair.

I need my single sex spaces, I need to be able to describe my own bodily reality so that I can fight for better healthcare, maternity rights, employment rights, protection from VAWG, fight DV, etc

You do realise that most of the feminists you're arguing with have been fighting fights you mention all their adult lives?

Just now we have to firefight this bloody nonsense notion that males share our lived reality and the word 'woman' is ceasing to exist.

If trans people disappeared off the earth tomorrow then patriarchy and gender would still exist. So where are the threads on FWR attacking the key drivers of gender in society?

We’re a bit busy trying to stop a powerful lobby trying change the law to our detriment both by stealth lobbying and plain lying.

I’d quite like to be able to focus more on the environment and other stuff but right now I need to make sure my daughters don’t grow up with less rights than I had.

Give us a break jj

The sunlight is great, but you definitely sound a bit over wrought.

There's so much sunlight here it's better than a week in Magaluf.

If the year in your username indicates your vintage, you might remember the 80’s? A whole decade of ‘gender benders’ expanding the bandwidth of the societal constraints on their sex - make up and mad outfits a go-go. Boy George, Marilyn, Phil Oakey, Jon Pleased-Wimmin, Jimi Somerville, Annie Lennox, Neneh Cherry there were loads of them. We were on a roll - freedom was on the cards.

Oh I do remember the 80s. Queer bashing as a national sport, women routinely sexually assaulted in the workplace as the norm, vile criminals like Saville operating in plain sight, page 3 clippings on workplace walls, lurid right wing attacks on perverts and gender benders in the right wing press, a deadly plague largely ignored whilst thousands died, women with kids still shamed for going to work, prime time comedy shows which mostly involved middle aged men chasing round women in lingerie half their age, scantily clad dancers on TV shows 'for the dads', shock horror that a woman might get a job as an airline pilot or even bus driver, race riots, ethnic minority run shops boarded up and daubed with swastikas and far right slogans, savage attacks on single mothers and the economic destruction of entire working class communities - yeah the 80s, what a barrel of laughs.

Non sequitur, jj

Some women, feminists particularly, are fighting against society being highly gendered.

Some are, mostly trans inclusive feminists in my experience.

I have spent my whole life fighting against the gendered expectations placed on women and girls and I see the harm that gender does to boys and men as well.

Accepting transgender ideology means accepting that 'gender' is real and that some things are only for boys/men or only for girls/women. I cannot accept that.

If you have to 'transition' to do something, it means that you believe that that thing is forbidden to someone of your sex.

I’d quite like to be able to focus more on the environment and other stuff but right now I need to make sure my daughters don’t grow up with less rights than I had.

And I'm sure if the world descends into chaos due to climate change which may well happen in your daughter's lifetime she will be ever so grateful that during the period when that might have been prevented you were devoting all your energy to keeping trans women out of women's toilets.

Accepting transgender ideology means accepting that 'gender' is real and that some things are only for boys/men or only for girls/women. I cannot accept that.

Me neither. It's a profoundly regressive, antifeminist belief system.

And I'm sure if the world descends into chaos due to climate change

That's your fault too, gardenbird! As well as the "living as a woman" requirement to get a GRC.

@jj1968

Neither religious or non-religious organisations are permitted to directly discriminate against LGB people on the grounds of proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim. Either type of organisation could potentially use these grounds as a defence for indirect discrimination.

If it can be demonstrated that it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim then discrimination can legally occur across every protected strand of the GRA, the proportionate/legitimate clause doesn't just apply to sex.

Only for indirect discrimination!

(and I assume you mean the EA not the GRA)

It is not lawful for any organisation, employer etc. to directly discriminate against someone on the grounds of proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim unless there is a specific exception in the EA that permits them to do so.

So for example, you previously said something about a builder being potentially permitted to not hire women because they are on average not as physically strong as men.

The builder would be acting unlawfully because this would be direct discrimination and there is no EA exception that permits him to do this.

The builder could perhaps incorporate a physical fitness and strength test as part of the recruitment process. Fewer women than men would be likely to pass this test so this would be indirect discrimination but it would be lawful as long as the test was proportionate to the physical demands of the job.

Much sunlight, very non sequitur.

Indeed.

You're completely right, catmaiden

Although to be fair, I've read JJ's latest & now I'm definitely off to direct my energies into campaigning against Benny Hill. Top priority.

Doesn't sound much different these days to be honest. Along with the racism and social poverty omen, women still get judgement for working rather than being at home, added in a few extras such as choosing not to have kids over a career, single mothers are still treated like scum, especially if they're on benefits, mental health help is at an all time low, and now of course the same women who are still fighting against a shitty misogynistic society are being told that the men who oppress them actually somehow know what it's 'like to be a woman'. So when they're done deying them rights to equal pay and not sanctioning them for being the ones who get pregnant and give birth, they're turning around and saying 'your sex doesn't really matter, now share like the nice kind woman you're meant to be'. I think the 80s sounded better in some parts....

I guess at least it highlights the utter nonsense TRAs use to confuse, obfuscate and deflect from the real issues!

Gosh some people are very keen to gishgallop about ANYTHING other than Stonewall in schools?