..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?

@OldCrone

It's incorrect and probably actionable to say that schools are no longer allowed to have anything to do with Stonewall.

Really jj? Someone voicing their opinion about their interpretation of government guidance is 'probably actionable'?

If the government guidance is not clear, it needs to be made clearer.

Voicing their opinion is different to the many people here and elsewhere that have claimed Stonewall are now banned from working with schools even to the point of insisting people contact heads and tell them this. That could be very damaging to Stonewall's revenue stream and it's not true - that's a pretty open and shut defamation claim. Their teacher training wouldn't even be covered by RSE guidelines because it's training for adults and their resources are still recommended in the guidance head teachers are told they must read and follow to comply with the law.

It's not true that Stonewall go into schools as such, They provide educational resources and run training for teachers on supporting LGBT kids and tackling bullying. They did not teach or run sessions with kids directly.
No but their policies are directly informing school policy.
Also, I have a problem with the concept of "LGBT" kids. Why is the sexuality of children an issue in schools? Children may get bullied because others perceive them as being gay, or lesbian, or even trans, (one of these things is not like the other by the way) but the way to deal with this is to crack down hard on any bullying of pupils for being "different". Which sex children are attracted to is not the concern (and should never be the concern) of adults.
At my kids school there are "trans kids" and many kids who declare themselves "bisexual"-cheered on by teachers and encouraged to parade about with rainbow flags. In my view the innate sexuality of minors is not the business of trusted education professionals

We will be homeschooling as we feel it is the only way to keep our children safe from this sort of thing. I work in a school (Scotland) and I know that the curriculum is changing. I've seen it change in the years I work there. What is spoken about in classrooms is changing and I don't think parents know the half of it.

It's not for me.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's incorrect and probably actionable to say that schools are no longer allowed to have anything to do with Stonewall.

"Actionable" by who? Posters here aren't accountable to Stonewall.

They are if Stonewall decide to sue them and they lose. Mumsnet isn't some magic free of consequences space, not even the FWR bit of it, and especially not this forum which has a much bigger reach.

The specific bits on gender identity I was referring to are from the organisation's Introduction to Supporting LGBT pupils guide, which is a free resource for schools.

Some pretty inappropriate stuff there. Do you have a link to that document?

I'm sure I've seen this derail and dismissal of the updated guidance before. In fact, I'm sure it was the same poster who managed to distract, dismiss and deny all the way up to 1000 posts. Meanwhile, those of us in schools kept talking about the actual impact of the update. The reference to Stonewall resources I think extended to a selection of inclusive greetings cards to colour in. Not quite the same as the ideological agenda evident throughout their materials for schools.

So, I'll ask again (third time now) why do you think it's acceptable for Stonewall to override the safeguarding guidance in schools? I'm referring directly to withholding information about a child's identity from their parents.

@jj1968
So the statutory guidelines still stand and the DfE still recommends Stonewall resources which is presumably why Stonewall are still producing them. It's incorrect and probably actionable to say that schools are no longer allowed to have anything to do with Stonewall
Actionable By whom? Will you be reporting the posters on here?
Is your knowledge of law as good as your grammar?

#nodebate no longer working for you jj? So now you're trying to scare us with threats of legal action for posting on a forum?

Children should not be going to school to be indoctrinated with Queer Theory, which aims to strip them of their innocence so they can be activists from a young age. NO!

By whom? Will you be reporting the posters on here?

They were clearly saying Stonewall, as in you can't just go around saying something like fact about businesses/people/whoever if you're not sure.
That's always been the case.
Not that they were going to report it themselves!

@OldCrone

The specific bits on gender identity I was referring to are from the organisation's Introduction to Supporting LGBT pupils guide, which is a free resource for schools.

Some pretty inappropriate stuff there. Do you have a link to that document?

This document: www.stonewall.org.uk/resources/introduction-supporting-lgbt-children-and-young-people

@Whatstheweatherlike

I'm sure I've seen this derail and dismissal of the updated guidance before. In fact, I'm sure it was the same poster who managed to distract, dismiss and deny all the way up to 1000 posts. Meanwhile, those of us in schools kept talking about the actual impact of the update. The reference to Stonewall resources I think extended to a selection of inclusive greetings cards to colour in. Not quite the same as the ideological agenda evident throughout their materials for schools.

So, I'll ask again (third time now) why do you think it's acceptable for Stonewall to override the safeguarding guidance in schools? I'm referring directly to withholding information about a child's identity from their parents.

Yes I think it's absolutely vital that in some cases schools should not out LGBT kids to their parents.

@OldCrone

#nodebate no longer working for you jj? So now you're trying to scare us with threats of legal action for posting on a forum?

No, I merely pointed out it was actionable to make claims about Stonewall which could have serious financial implications for them and which aren't true. But more importantly, it's just a shitty thing to do isn't it, to lie about an LGBT charity to try and prove your point? It doesn't suggest there is much integrity in some people's arguments around this subject.

How are they "erasing women?"

Sex is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act, for very many, very good reasons. The law says:

In relation to the protected characteristic of sex—

(a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a man or to a woman;

(b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same sex.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/11

Stonewall's position is 'acceptance without exception' and 'twaw' so according to Stonewall I now share the protected characteristic of sex with any male person who says 'I am a woman'.

'Sex' becomes meaningless. 'Woman' becomes meaningless. I don't have any sex based rights any more because there is no longer a meaningful definition of that protected characteristic.

Thankfully Stonewall don't make the law but they misadvise an absolute fuckton of organisations on what the law says and they do this knowingly. They simultaneously tell organisations that the law says they must allow tw into female only spaces and at the same time they campaign to remove the exact EA exceptions that say organisations don't have to do this.

Yes I think it's absolutely vital that in some cases schools should not out LGBT kids to their parents.

What does this mean? Do you think that schools transing children behind their parents' backs is acceptable?

YANBU.

It's a massive worry to me, as the mother of a soon to be secondary school age daughter. The whole gender ideology is hugely regressive and the more I hear about it the more astonished I am that people are so supportive of it.

Any lobby group has no place in schools snd neither do their teaching or materials.

@Ijustreallywantacat

Forgot to attach image

Did you even read this.

It says that censorship and silencing is bad (true) while saying that teachers should have a scripted 'shut down' phrases ready to stop talk of transgender pupils...what?

It states that a student asking a question that is intrusive and meant to be disruptive should be treated neutrally and yes, attention redirected. What do you advocate? Allowing the latecomer to interrupt the class mid lesson and getting into an off topic discussion about a student that deserves privacy and respect.

Please tell us what you would recommend?

But more importantly, it's just a shitty thing to do isn't it, to lie about an LGBT charity to try and prove your point?

Lying? Who was lying? People have given their honest opinion about their interpretation of the government guidance.

And as LangClegsInSpace has just pointed out, Stonewall lie all the time about things like the Equality Act.

Thankfully Stonewall don't make the law but they misadvise an absolute fuckton of organisations on what the law says and they do this knowingly. They simultaneously tell organisations that the law says they must allow tw into female only spaces and at the same time they campaign to remove the exact EA exceptions that say organisations don't have to do this.

I'm referring directly to withholding information about a child's identity from their parents.

Surely it might not always be safe to do so, there's some incredibly homophobic views out there for example (using homophobic instead of transphobic in case someone tells me there's no such thing)
If someone was to come out to parents as LGBT in their teens for example, do you think it would be always OK to do so - not all parents would be supportive.

@LangClegsInSpace

I increasingly am inclined to think that any lobbying organisations should not be in schools, and activist type groups need to be either kept out or seriously limited in some way.

Yes, and this is the position of the government as well.

www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-your-relationships-sex-and-health-curriculum#using-external-agencies

www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-your-relationships-sex-and-health-curriculum#choosing-resources

Any school that has properly followed government guidance will have given Stonewall (among others) a very wide swerve.

The problem of course is that all kinds of social issues, that people feel deeply should be dealt with in schools, are controversial. And while they might not want to see Stonewall, they will be very upset as soon as some parents with different POV on their pet issue would prefer the school not undermine their views.

As soon as that is suggested, what you here are cries that THATissue is different, it needs to be taught to all kids as a matter of urgency, otherwise it's hateful/erasure/racist/unmoored from reality, or whatever.

There is a certain amount of mental discipline involved in really following that advice and maintaining a truly secular stance. And very few people these days seem willing to accept that across the board.

I think we all should, but I'm not holding my breath. And it makes it difficult to stand up to examples like this as a matter of principle.

This is from the Stonewall advice for Schools document
There may be some learners in your school, college or setting who realise that they are asexual or aromantic and don’t experience sexual and/or romantic attraction in the same way as their peers.
I'm sorry, what??
We are talking about school kids, of 11, 12, 13 (younger??)
Some of those children are pre-pubescent, so no, they do not neccessarily experience sexual attraction. So rather than say "well, they are kids, so have no need to worry about this" STONEWALL say that these young people may be "asexual or aromantic." Rather than being, you know, children..
YES, some people are asexual, but do children really need to label themselves as such? I find the gender bollocks and sexism of the idea of trans kids horrendous, but the it is actually the sexualising of children that bothers me most.

I completely agree OP. Stonewall is not an organisation I want any where near my child.

@OldCrone

Yes I think it's absolutely vital that in some cases schools should not out LGBT kids to their parents.

What does this mean? Do you think that schools transing children behind their parents' backs is acceptable?

How on earth can a school 'trans' a child? All a school can do it respect a trans child's wishes regarding names, pronouns and uniforms and make arrangements for them to have somewhere to go to the toilet and change safely.

I can't imagine what it would have been like to have had some support at school about my gender. There was no Stonewall, no LGBT clubs, no sympathetic teachers, I dealt with my gender dysphoria on my own. I was a homeless alcoholic by the age of 18.

But if by chance I had opened up to a teacher about how I felt about my gender, and they had immediately contacted my parents and told them all about it I would never have trusted another adult again in my young life - and my home life would have been even worse than it was already.

@Quaagars

I'm referring directly to withholding information about a child's identity from their parents.

Surely it might not always be safe to do so, there's some incredibly homophobic views out there for example (using homophobic instead of transphobic in case someone tells me there's no such thing)
If someone was to come out to parents as LGBT in their teens for example, do you think it would be always OK to do so - not all parents would be supportive.

You're conflating two things there. There is no safeguarding issue with a child coming out as lesbian or gay.

The Tavistock (GIDS) advises that children who believe themselves to be transgender shouldn't socially transition until they have been assessed by the clinic. Schools have been doing this behind parents' backs with no medical advice or diagnosis (at least one person on this thread has experience of this). This is the first step on a pathway to lifelong medical treatment which is irreversible and has implications for the child's future fertility and sexual function. Schools should not be doing this.

T is not like LGB.