Times article on the CPS guidance withdrawl

[Igneococcus]

Not sure my thread title makes sense or is spelled right (waiting for migraine nedication to kick in) but here it is:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/73b14124-8bc6-11ea-8030-261bf7d8ac38?shareToken=d0f1b79461622bc4560ac347cee25f8d

The bigbad - Please could you tell the girl how amazing she is to challenge. The loss of female only spaces would be disastrously dangerous for females. The emphasis In schools should be on males accepting that males can be naturally effeminate and gay, females can be naturally masculine and that stereotypes belong to the 1950’s. Part of the problem is that misogynistic groups/individuals are in powerful influential positions have twisted things to make trans ideology seem PC and appealing to the misogynistic far left. Sadly a lack of consultation with women’s groups is evident.

You must be incredibly proud of your daughter, TheBigBad. She has shown the courage and common sense, that so many of our so called educators are very lacking in. I’m sure she’s emotionally exhausted, now that this bit is over with, so please pass on my thanks to her.

The only people who make decisions about whether to prosecute (in England) are the CPS.

This is the worst aspect of this. Is this another reflection of an anti-woman bias that needs to be urgently addressed with the CPS? A bias shown in the failure to prosecute rapes? And the failure to prosecute stalkers and harassment of women but pursues cases against the likes of Kate? Where is the schools guidance to deal with the huge problems of sexual harassment and assault girls suffer in schools?

The "exclusion from friendship groups" bit is mad even by TRA standards. In what universe would it ever make sense for the government to decide who people are allowed not to be friends with?

Yes, it's all completely bonkers. A fact which they knew, beyond doubt, because the 'guidance' was never meant to be public in the first place. No one was supposed to see it, comment on it, and challenge it.

Outraged parents and eagle eyed women forced them to bring it into the open.

When extremists think they are trying to push through something that even they think is extreme, little wonder it comes across as crazy.

And this is the bloody CPS, the CPS!

The friendship group thing is really horrible, isn't it? The bloke in the toilets is eye catching - if you've seen the pictures in the guidance, it's one of the more glaringly outrageous bits of 'don't believe your lying eyes' - but it's the more subtle digs at boundaries that are really unnerving. It reminds me of that TW ages ago who was complaining because the women at their place of work were planning a night out among friends and didn't invite the TW, and the TW thought that the TW should be automatically included on a 'girl's night'.

That fact is, enforcing that doesn't stop bullying, it just creates resentment and bad feeling, and incredibly superficial relationships.

And this is the bloody CPS, the CPS!

Well yes Datun, but don't forget the CPS won first prize for the government's Transgender Health Check in 2017.

https://twitter.com/onlyobjectivity/status/1150370972995870721?s=21

I asked on another thread but I couldbt find the answer.

When this stuff is withdrawn or reviewed do they they have to email/inform every school in order to tell them not to use the guidance?

Do they say why? Because of they dont people would then assume anything from " Its wrong/illegal" to "they forgot to put someone/organisations ' name on the credits "

How can we be sure that schools are not using it.

When this stuff is withdrawn or reviewed do they they have to email/inform every school in order to tell them not to use the guidance?

They should do, shouldn't they? Like when a batch of yoghurts are contaminated or a dangerous toy is put on sale. They should recall it.

Hm. My kids' school used to have a lot of insistence that the kids had to be friends with everyone, one of the school rules, I think. I had to reassure my kids that while they had to be polite and respectful to everyone but there is no way they have to be 'friends' with anyone they don't want to be friends with.

I think it's the thin end of a very dangerous wedge.

TheBigBad, your daughter is amazing. I am in awe of her. I hope she continues to be so brave, compassionate, clear sighted and determined. She really does give me huge hope for the future.

What a very brave young girl. It really shouldn't have come to the point of a teenage girl having to be the adult in the room. The fact it has says it all really.

The CPS should be hugely embarrassed by this. What the hell were they thinking?

What is good about this and the GEO/Equaliteach situation also is that this insidious form of lobbying and policy capture I think is now on the radar of some people who may actually do something about it.

They should do, shouldn't they? Like when a batch of yoghurts are contaminated or a dangerous toy is put on sale. They should recall it

Usually all these things are buried on website or pc file and not touched until one day its needed fir a reference. I wonder how many schools have been read it after downloading any update...

It should be a legal obligation to inform everyone that it's been withdrawn and bloody explain why.

Well yes Datun, but don't forget the CPS won first prize for the government's Transgender Health Check in 2017.

'A:gender' who are, as shown in the Twitter thread linked, based in the Home Office have been influential in shaping government policy for a long time. Presumably with Press For Change/Beaumont Society etc (before Stonewall became involved)?

Is Spousal Veto based on Swiss Cheese?
November 9, 2013 by Helen Belcher

"Last weekend Prof Stephen Whittle posted his legal reasoning why the requirement for spousal consent is important. Stephen is a professor of law, and his credentials in terms of campaigning for the rights of trans people are impressive, to say the least.

After an event in July, Stephen, Jacqui Gavin (of a:Gender) and I sat down in a small cafe in Westminster, where Stephen started outlining the thoughts he has now expressed in his blog."
(continues)
challengingjourneys.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/is-spousal-veto-based-on-swiss-cheese/
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007?pg=6

from the link by WootMaggie

""a:gender" is the UK Government's own network of: "Transgender, Transsexual, Non-Binary, Gender Fluid, Genderqueer, Gender Variant, Cross-dresser, Genderless, Third gender or Bigender, and anyone who is Intersex."

You do not have to be ‘out’ in the workplace to become a member. We maintain absolute discretion." it also includes "Any member of the Civil Service who wishes to support the aims and objectives of the a:gender network"

This Transgender network's email address is particularly interesting: [email protected] - (the Home Office being the government department that controls the Police). Does this not signal conflict-of-interest?

The network's home page links directly to Mermaids, the controversial child sex-change support charity.

The network states: "We liaise and attend internal meetings with Civil Service departments and external meetings on behalf of the Civil Service, such as with providers of support for Trans and Intersex people (e.g. GIRES, Stonewall, Mermaids)"

This Transgender network also performs an annual "Health Check" across Government departments. The Crown Prosecution Service (who decide who should be prosecuted, and for what) state:
"In 2017 the CPS was awarded first place in the a:gender health check."

I could say more, but I am sure that you can draw your own conclusions from the information, links and downloads available at agender.org.uk "

Westminster
Women and Equalities Committee Trans Enquiry
Tuesday 13 October 2015

Witnesses: Peter Dunne, Visiting Researcher, New York University Law School, Karen Harvey, Chair, a:gender, James Morton, Manager, Scottish Transgender Alliance, and Ashley Reed, initiator of online petition on gender self-definition

parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/4e7f52c6-1357-43f8-98c0-af160b156b40

It baffles me that people might not have questioned the agenda of a group named a:gender

When this stuff is withdrawn or reviewed do they they have to email/inform every school in order to tell them not to use the guidance?

They will probably just say they are ‘updating it’ which everyone will assume means style changes not ‘we knew it was illegal so when someone threatened to take us to court we withdrew it and hope to get away with some minor amendments when the publicity has subsided’.

Can any teachers confirm that office staff regularly check for updates etc?

I mean the numbers of schools accessing these things are in the thousands. Wouldnt it invalidate their insurance if they were following unapproved guidelines?

Can any teachers confirm that office staff regularly check for updates etc?

Teachers will be accessing and using a vast number of resources in all subject areas. They will have used, in good faith, trusted providers. It would be impossible to monitor each provider for updates.

There will need to be much more proactive alerts by Department for Education about those toolkits, resources & training which have provided demonstrably false & harmful information/ guidance to teachers.

So if they dont read the times then....

I'm going to hazard a buess and say that OCC havent informed their schools either...

I have looked for these policies on my local council website but haven't found them yet
I did think about writing however I disnt want to also prompt them into putting it up or seeking advice of that makes sense.

They will have used, in good faith, trusted providers.

Same issue with the rolled out training.

This has been sold due to government funding and involvement legitimising and giving a trustworthy veneer to what is, in fact, a political lobby. This has effectively hidden that it is a political lobby, and presented it instead as a neutral expert voice.

It has happened alongside overworked, busy people in schools who are constantly bombarded with guidance packs about this that and the other from govt that has to be implemented yesterday and the appropriate targets waved at OFSTED. Multiple packs arrive each week, there's been about 20 years of hyperactive legislators/guidance producers churning this stuff out by the bucketful, schools are drowning in it, and it isn't like they don't have a day job.

Schools have not considered the need to do due diligence, essentially because no political lobby group has pulled this one before, and they've assumed govt validation. Trust has been successfully exploited, and people in govt have quietly enabled this along while bypassing the HoC, MPs and boring things like democratic mandate.

People without qualifications to speak on safeguarding, because of (knowledge in the public domain) having no training in safeguarding and in one case the lack of capacity to understanding safeguarding, or equalities because of no training, knowledge or experience in any other group covered by legislation, plus easily found online histories that should preclude their being delivering training to schools at all, have trained on safeguarding and equalities, encouraged and in some cases helped to write policies incompatible with safeguarding and equalities and law.

Including the fear and taboo against whistleblowing, this is a system that has been very successfully exploited.

This has been sold due to government funding and involvement legitimising and giving a trustworthy veneer to what is, in fact, a political lobby. This has effectively hidden that it is a political lobby, and presented it instead as a neutral expert voice.

This is not just true in regards to schools but all across the board. TRA orgs present themselves as experts and people believe them. Doesn't seem to matter that just to take one example Susie Green was an IT consultant and has no training in child development whatsoever.

This is not just true in regards to schools but all across the board. TRA orgs present themselves as experts and people believe them. Doesn't seem to matter that just to take one example Susie Green was an IT consultant and has no training in child development whatsoever.

What also does it say of the extent of experience/knowledge of those responsible for writing policy within Ministry of Justice, Police, NHS, Social Care, education etc?

Great posts (again)
Until the government stop funding and signposting schools to these groups, nothing will change. Frankly we needed the CPS guidance to be taken apart in the courts because without this, there is no impetus for the government to do anything. And the status quo is that they are hand in glove with Stonewall, Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence via the civil service.
Our children cannot wait for another 'Rotherham grooming in plain sight' scandal to erupt. They must be protected from these groups now - not after immense harm has been done.

truthisarevolutionaryact I totally agree. I was disappointed that the CPS withdrew the guidelines. I know it would have been a huge emotional toll and financial risk on those pursuing it so for their sake it was good news. But it needs to go to court and be properly pulled apart, it needs the court to say ‘this guidance is illegal, it discriminated against girls, undermines safeguarding, and breaches the human rights of all children, it undermines the impartiality of the prosecution service bringing its ability to function into question, and the government must answer serious questions about how a political lobby group has been allowed to use the justice system to proper gate their interest, and the government must write to all schools to ensure that they are all aware that this guidance and any similar guidance must be binned’

BigBad What an inspirational young lady, perceptive and acting with integrity.

As every school seems to have an lgbtq++ society, is it time more schools had a feminist society?

Just in the last hour on this thread, the insights are very revealing.

This is not just true in regards to schools but all across the board. TRA orgs present themselves as experts and people believe them. Doesn't seem to matter that just to take one example Susie Green was an IT consultant and has no training in child development whatsoever.

People don't understand the trans ideology, or grasp what they are trying to promote.

They don't understand the underlying agenda, but neither do they understand the overt, open agenda. Because it's all so opaque and deliberately difficult to understand - or complete bollocks, depending on your viewpoint (and command of language).

So they just take the word of which ever person presents themself as an expert, because they think there is something to understand, that they're not getting.

"a:gender" is the UK Government's own network of: "Transgender, Transsexual, Non-Binary, Gender Fluid, Genderqueer, Gender Variant, Cross-dresser, Genderless, Third gender or Bigender, and anyone who is Intersex."

As every school seems to have an lgbtq++ society, is it time more schools had a feminist society?

I think that would be really hard to achieve. The very first argument would centre around whether boys can join (NB boys, trans or just any boy who is a 'male feminist' in the making). It would immediately split the group into factions with half the girls pandering to males who wanted in. They'd probably win the argument and it would become as useless a group as Sisters Uncut.