Updated relationships, sex and health curriculum guidance

[umbel]

Updated government guidance, released today!!!

Apologies, I missed this part:

The remainder (n = 7, 4.6%) had a number of problems or reasons for referral that were not assessed as gender dysphoria (including body dysmorphic disorder, homosexual identity, discomfort with certain aspects of gender identity but not to the extent of gender dysphoria, fetishistic transvestism, and ideas about gender related to psychotic beliefs).

@JamieLeeCurtains

if it gets to the European courts (which I very much doubt)

Why? Inequality of arms?

It just doesn't strike me as a particularly strong case.

I believe that the night court rejected the due to legal technicalities?

And that a large number of academics wrote an open letter in the guardian outlining the harassment of academics attempting to research transgender issues? And that they expressed concern about the links of trans pressure groups with universities?

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/16/academics-are-being-harassed-over-their-research-into-transgender-issues

I don’t know who the guy behind the page below is, but it seems to give a comprehensive view of the case which corresponds to what I read in the papers?

mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2020/09/gender-de-transitioning.html

The good news seems to be that it is possible to support this case in the European Courts by contributing to a fundraising. I didn’t know that!! I would be very keen to see where this is going.

@sultanasofa I agree about younger people and it would be interesting to see a more complete breakdown, including a breakdown of who is actually accessing treatment by age and natal sex. I really posted it to show that it's generally not middle aged trans women who are coming out and presenting for treatment but people quite a bit younger.

@CoffeeTeaChocolate

I believe that the night court rejected the due to legal technicalities?

And that a large number of academics wrote an open letter in the guardian outlining the harassment of academics attempting to research transgender issues? And that they expressed concern about the links of trans pressure groups with universities?

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/16/academics-are-being-harassed-over-their-research-into-transgender-issues

I don’t know who the guy behind the page below is, but it seems to give a comprehensive view of the case which corresponds to what I read in the papers?

mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2020/09/gender-de-transitioning.html

The good news seems to be that it is possible to support this case in the European Courts by contributing to a fundraising. I didn’t know that!! I would be very keen to see where this is going.

@CoffeeTeaChocolate

*I don’t know who the guy behind the page below is, but it seems to give a comprehensive view of the case which corresponds to what I read in the papers?

mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2020/09/gender-de-transitioning.html*

It's hardly a comprehensive view when it doesn't even mention that the University dispute the allegation and that this decision was backed by outside adjudicators. I'd say that's pretty significant information.

According to his crowdfunder the High Court rejected his claim for technical reasons. Then the court of appeal seems to have rejected his claim for technical reasons. This is after the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education and the University's own complaints procedures found against him. He doesn;t strike me as someone on a winning streak.

The good news seems to be that it is possible to support this case in the European Courts by contributing to a fundraising. I didn’t know that!! I would be very keen to see where this is going.

I'm sure his lawyers will be delighted.

Thank you Sultansofa, that is so helpful!

Looking at your summary (and the report) it seems that jj may have misread the report though? Or maybe I am confused with the terminology?

For avoidance of doubt, it seems that the natal males were on average 34.5 and the natal females on average 24.3 - and this is before excluding all under 18 . I thought females were over represented in that category?

And the co-morbities? Scary stuff!!

I think the legal side is so interesting. When I studied law ages ago, I was taught that about 50% of cases are won on process technical issues which has nothing to do with the merits of the case.

It is just about the order papers are filed in, what a certain how claim proposes and how these corresponds to the legal framework. It is very possible to lose a claim which should be valid (and won) if filed correctly due to technical issues.

I am not sure how this works between UK courts and European courts, maybe someone know?

Also, it that is the case, surely publicity and scrutiny around the exact claims and the exact reasons for the rejection of these claims is very helpful? I mean, we all want sensible research in this area to continue!

Goodness - how have we (and I include myself in this) managed to derail such an important thread about the important new DfE guidelines into discussing all sorts of adult related issues and research?

Not meaning to thread police but this thread does have a very clear focus? Maybe those interested should start a new thread and we can keep this one focussed on children, schools, education and the important new guidelines?

www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-your-relationships-sex-and-health-curriculum#ensuring-content-is-appropriate

So yes there is a difference, but it's not trans women coming out in middle age by and large.

But there are huge numbers of heterosexual males who decide to identify as transgender in middle age. Those are the people who I was referring to. People like Jane Fae, Caitlyn Jenner, Kellie Maloney... Where are all the middle aged women identifying as trans in middle age? I can't name a single one, and yet if what you are saying is true there should be at least 2 or 3 times as many of them going by the number of teenage girls who identify as transgender.

This study found the average of of trans men seeking treatment was 24, and trans women 34

But what about those males who don't seek treatment? The gender euphorics who love their 'female penises'?

Sorry persitentwoman, I hold my hands up .

I just don’t understand how something that seems to lack any theoretical basis at all and where research is controversial and scarce ever could have found their way into schools in the first place. It is just bonkers.

Hopefully with the new guidelines, schools can focus on teaching the curriculum. And “unverified theories” advocated primarily by volunteers will go back to the drawing board awaiting validation.

What about all the children and teens going to clinics

@OldCrone

This study found the average of of trans men seeking treatment was 24, and trans women 34

But what about those males who don't seek treatment? The gender euphorics who love their 'female penises'?

I, for one, have never seen 4000 posts from trans widowers, devastated by the fact that their middle-aged wives want double mastectomies, research phalloplasties online, and spend all evening on forums talking to like minded women and meeting up at clubs at the weekend.

Can I just say: Fan-fucking-tastic updated government guidance!!

[quote persistentwoman]Goodness - how have we (and I include myself in this) managed to derail such an important thread about the important new DfE guidelines into discussing all sorts of adult related issues and research?

Not meaning to thread police but this thread does have a very clear focus? Maybe those interested should start a new thread and we can keep this one focussed on children, schools, education and the important new guidelines?

www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-your-relationships-sex-and-health-curriculum#ensuring-content-is-appropriate[/quote]
Agree. The guidelines are now coming in for quite heavy criticism from other areas mainly for these clauses, amd I wonder what people think of that:

*Schools should not under any circumstances work with external agencies that take or promote extreme positions or use materials produced by such agencies. Examples of extreme positions include, but are not limited to:

teaching that requirements of English civil or criminal law may be disregarded whether for political or religious reasons

selecting and presenting information to make unsubstantiated accusations against state institutions

promoting divisive or victim narratives that are harmful to British society*

This pretty much prohibits virtually any LGBT or Feminist group from being involved in RSE, and quite a few other groups as well such as disability charities who have all been highly critical of austerity policies. I get that most people here support the gender related aspects of the document but this is worrying surely, especially if it is an indicator of where education policy is going. Even celebrating the Suffragettes would fall foul of these guidelines.

No apologies needed CoffeeTeaChocolate. It's a regular occurrence round here and I am also guilty as charged

The new guidance is so clear - it will be interesting to see how this pans out. I hope that schools and individuals who have enthusiastically engaged with the more dangerous aspects of the ideology can quickly and quietly do their own reverse ferrets? But schools and teachers need to understand what has happened and gone wrong first

lolololol at the faux concern about feminists being shut out of schools. Much hilarity.

Does this mean stonewall will soon be not allowed into schools?

For those wondering about how schools teach 'sensitive' or political subjects, none of this is new. Schools have for years been teaching about controversial issues being bound by a variety of education law and guidance to ensure that children are not exposed to partisan one sided views. It's only in relation to trans issues that (for some unknown reason) everyone forgot the law and common sense and started to introduce biased, one sided information (think of the now withdrawn CPS guidelines etc)
The Association for Citizenship teaching has a useful summary for those unfamiliar with how teachers manage teaching controversial subjects in schools:
www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk/sites/teachingcitizenship.org.uk/files/Briefing%20for%20Schools%20-%20remaining%20impartial%20and%20avoiding%20partisan%20activity%20-%20final.pdf

@persistentwoman

No apologies needed CoffeeTeaChocolate. It's a regular occurrence round here and I am also guilty as charged

The new guidance is so clear - it will be interesting to see how this pans out. I hope that schools and individuals who have enthusiastically engaged with the more dangerous aspects of the ideology can quickly and quietly do their own reverse ferrets? But schools and teachers need to understand what has happened and gone wrong first

I'm also guilty of following the derail. But, in my defence, jj's posts required a little sunlight.

But yes, the guidelines are so explicit, I don't think anyone reading them can fail to understand exactly where things have gone wrong in the past.

Just thinking, did the Suffragettes think it urgent to get inside schools to tell children how to think?

Not so much, no.

If you think it's ok for schools to expose kids to some extremist groups or views and it's just a case then of (somehow) working out who gets to decide what's good extremism and not good extremism..... you're demonstrating exactly why the DfE (having tested to destruction really the idea that this might just work out ok if left as things were) have had to step in.

@persistentwoman
There's a very big difference between ensuring balance and banning any group which has been critical of the state or government from schools, or banning groups which promote a victim narrative - what does that even mean, being anti-racist or anti-misogyny?

SerenityNowwwww
That's such an interesting question as schools are massive income generators for Stonewall. They are a political lobby group who have openly campaigned for the removal of women's right to sex segregated spaces and sport. I believe they promote biological untruths such as women have penises and boys have periods so am not sure how in their political lobbying role they would be acceptable.
But they also have some good resources on things like homophobic bullying etc so there will have to be some careful thinking about how this could work.
Such a shame as they used to be such a respected organisation......

But yes, the guidelines are so explicit, I don't think anyone reading them can fail to understand exactly where things have gone wrong in the past.

Yes and of course, rewriting history is not possible on the interwebs. Wayback machine, archieve... they can scrabble about deleting and changing but we know. We know and have the receipts.

@MichelleofzeResistance

Just thinking, did the Suffragettes think it urgent to get inside schools to tell children how to think?

Not so much, no.

If you think it's ok for schools to expose kids to some extremist groups or views and it's just a case then of (somehow) working out who gets to decide what's good extremism and not good extremism..... you're demonstrating exactly why the DfE (having tested to destruction really the idea that this might just work out ok if left as things were) have had to step in.

Do you really believe its extremist for an organisation to be critical of the government? Or to pursue a 'victim narrative'? Or to recognise the role that illegal direct action has played in progressive causes?