Suella Braverman expected to make a speech on Wednesday

[achillestoes]

In which she will say (in advance of DfE guidance to be issued in September - apparently) that schools are not legally obligated to facilitate childhood transition through the use of opposite sex or neo-pronouns (non-binary etc), allowing children to use the toilets of the opposite sex (arrangements should be made for children to use a third space if needed), or the uniform of the opposite sex.

For some reason this has provoked an outpouring of accusations of Suella being ‘as thick as mince’. One charming person wished her dead. Someone else said we ‘don’t get to’ disagree with Suella on other things and then agree with her on this. Erm...

Anyway, this seems like a return to much-needed ordinary safeguarding practices to me.

I don’t care if boys wear skirts particularly. I do care about my daughters being bullied to pretend they are female.

I look forward to seeing what she says. I am inclined to not get too excited.

There is still so much shite resources being used by schools even after the change in guidance back in 2020. For instance, just because schools might not be 'legally obligated, just how many of them who put in gender neutral toilets are going to be able to afford to change them back any time soon.

However, I will be interested in the wording around socially transitioning children and just what the government is going to say there.

It’s a start.

Interesting.
Where is this being reported or discussed @achillestoes ?

Not legally obligated to - sounds a bit wishy-washy though. Suggests it's up to the school to decide whether to support social transition.

We need clear guidance that schools are not to support social transition without the guidance of a clinician.

So much damage already done in schools. Plus its all available on the internet so impossible to protect vulnerable children from it.

It’s in the Daily Mail I think.

It’s reported that she might go further and say it’s unlawful to let children use opposite sex bathrooms.

It's good that it will be clarified that they are not legally obliged to facilitate children's access to facilities of the opposite sex, but surely they are legally obliged to provide single sex facilities such as toilets and changing rooms in the first place. So if they have gone to the expense of building mixed-sex toilets when they are legally obliged to provide single-sex toilets, then they're just going to have to find the cash to change them back again. Yes, I know that schools don't have spare cash. Tough.

She needs to get the EHRC to pull their Technical Guidance to schools which was published in 2014 and tells schools that to not support a social transition (with no mention of a lower age or parental involvement), is direct discrimination under gender reassignment. The EHRC has ignored all emails questioning the guidance, and highlighting the issues, other than to say the guidance is correct.

Without this guidance being pulled or rewritten, schools who push affirmation will continue to fall back onto it regardless of any minister saying schools are not legally obliged to (ie there’s a world of difference between a vague, “not legally obliged to” and telling schools not to without parental or clinical guidance etc).

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/technical-guidance-schools-england

You wouldn’t think Braverman would make a speech like this now unless she had agreement from both Truss and Sunak that whichever of them wins, this will be policy.

I wonder whether it is, though.

They have to provide single-sex toilets, though. Allowing members of the opposite sex to use them renders the toilets de facto mixed-sex, so that their claim to be providing single-sex toilets is false. It might take court cases to force some schools to recognise this.

‘I wonder whether it is, though.’

It remains to be seen, doesn’t it? It might be that the law only requires separate toilets to be built for the use of male and female students, but doesn’t preclude the school making an exception for an individual. I don’t know.

But I know if she’s wrong, the law has to change. Children can’t change sex and it’s wrong to pretend they can, and deeply wrong to force children to share facilities with people of the opposite sex.

The whole thing is a mess and needs clarifying.

I hope if they are going to introduce something it really clarifies the law, safeguarding, language and best practice.

Suella is really gunning against diversity training and wokeness in general at the moment. It would be amazing if she announced really clarifying school guidance tomorrow!

So much to unpick and undo though!

Worried her reported focus on gendered uniforms is going to hit at GNC children. With the exception of the cut, why should boys and girls be forced to have different uniforms?

‘With the exception of the cut, why should boys and girls be forced to have different uniforms?’

I don’t think they necessarily should, but in schools where that is the system, the question is whether you let some children ignore the policy because they say they are the opposite sex. The answer to that should be no, although I also think they should all be able to wear a simple uniform of trousers/skirt and a shirt.

Hmm, she still refers to children who are transitioning suggesting children can change sex or there is something such as a trans child.

She appears to be saying schools don't have to support transition, but despite this I suspect most will continue to, as they'll presume it's the kind supportive thing.

This is why we need clear guidance on social transition, informed by the clinical literature and backed by government guidance and law: schools do not support social transition without guidance from a clinician.
No matter if they want to.
Or if parents request it.

They should provide privacy for the gender dysphoric to change etc and a gender neutral option uniform (probably trousers as this is usually available to both sexes) but no pronouns or referring to them as the opposite sex, because they're not and they cannot be. And other children shouldn't be confused or asked to lie.

I suspect this is primarily addressing that certain political lobby groups have repeatedly informed schools that they cannot legally protect female children or single sex spaces and that they legally must facilitate the lobby group's policies or be at risk. This is a widespread myth.

It's a start.

Extract from Daily Mail article 8 August:
"The Attorney General will this week tell teachers they have no legal requirement to allow transgender pupils to switch school uniform.

Suella Braverman, the Government’s chief legal adviser, will say schools can ignore requests from children who want to change gender about how they wish to be treated.

In a speech on Wednesday, she will say there is no legal obligation to accommodate transgender pupils’ preferred pronouns and no duty to allow children to wear the uniform of a different gender.

Mrs Braverman will warn that it is unlawful for schools to allow children who are a different biological sex to share lavatories. Instead she will say that children who are transitioning should be offered a third alternative to preserve single-sex safe spaces.

Her speech to the Policy Exchange think-tank is a precursor to guidance expected to be published by the Department for Education this autumn.

The Attorney General will tell teachers that there is no legal requirement to allow transgender pupils to switch uniform

A source close to Mrs Braverman told The Sunday Times: ‘She feels some teachers are under the misapprehension that there is a legal obligation to accommodate pupils who want to change their gender.’

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11090379/Suella-Braverman-tell-teachers-no-legal-duty-let-trans-pupils-switch-uniform.html#comments

There's a difference between a young girl wanted to wear trousers, and a 17 year old sixth form boy in revealing skirt.

A few years back, there was a US boy wearing a very skimpy skirt being interviewed about not being able to use the girls changing room. This guidance allows schools to stop it without fear of accusations of transphobia.

Gender-neutral uniform and grooming rules - including a skirt option (not trousers only) as girls often find skirts more comfortable as their bodies change, and taking account of decency concerns about boys wearing skirts (i.e. minimum length and underwear requirements) - are part of the solution, not the problem.

I think schools should be able to have a skirts only for girls policy if that's what they and parents want.

Trousers as available (in most schools) for boys and girls so there is a gender neutral option for children with gender dysphoria anyway.

School is not required to use or change uniform to validate anyone's identity. Everyone has to stick to the uniform which suppresses individual identity.
That's the point of uniform.

If there's a school with a super progressive head and parents support it a school could choose to allow skirts for boys.

You'd then have choice about whether to send your kid there or not.
I'd run a mile.

It’s reported that she might go further and say it’s unlawful to let children use opposite sex bathrooms.

This is good but still isn’t enough. She needs to say this and also say it’s unlawful not to have an adequate provision of single sex bathrooms, so those schools that have made their bathrooms “gender neutral” will sort themselves out. Maybe that’s too much all at once! But girls shouldn’t be subjected to this.

The report I saw on this was in the times on Sunday

The latest tactic against the return of common sense in schools from the TRAs is “is this all they have to focus on? People are starving!”

Yes, the question of how we deal with gender distressed children is suddenly ‘irrelevant’, which raises the question of why it’s all they talk about, why they’ve been campaigning on it for a decade, and why millions of pounds has been invested in it...

Braverman wrote an article for the Telegraph on this yesterday, and is due to give her speech at lunchtime.

@DarkDayforMN

I think she will say that.

‘A school cannot compel other children to take part in the social-transitioning. Children should also not fear punishment for refusing to take part in activities promoted by trans-lobby groups such as Stonewall or face any disadvantage for questioning what they are being taught on gender identity.’

This is key. It’s likely my children will have a realistic view on biological sex as they grow up. I’d take legal action to prevent them being indoctrinated if I had to. Schools have no right to force a belief system on my kids.