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.

She is speaking now

Listening…

She is very clear.

This is brilliant.

I still want to know what will happen to enforce all this brilliant confirmation.

An excellent speech. Brilliant

She’s certainly got a backbone, hasn’t she?

On school uniforms, I bristle slightly at having boys and girls uniforms as i don’t think there should be “boys’ clothes” or “girls’ clothes” and I think boys being able to wear skirts/dresses but still be a boy is fine. I understand that society still imposes gender though and the links to social transition, I just wish we could do away with the idea of gendered toys/clothes etc.

Other than that, it’s sounding good though!

Definitely got a backbone. Covered all the major bases in education. Just now need it to be implemented.

Thank you to Maya for asking about enforcement.

As I said above @MajorieEks boys in skirts is a flashers/exhibitionists charter and not at all progressive. Uniforms are not for self expression that's why they're called uniforms. I absolutely support boys' rights to wear any clothes on their own time.

I missed your post christina. I see what you’re saying but I disagree. I know they’re uniforms but if they’re good enough for girls they should be fine for boys too and I’m not convinced about the argument that it’d increase flashing. I suppose a workaround would be to just have shorts/trousers for girls and boys, which I’d be ok with!

Wow, the speech was brilliant, the questions answered clarify things even more.

I'm blinded by the sunlight

Hugely optimistic that the grown ups have taken charge of this issue and not left it to children who need accompanied by mummy and a pet to speak. I hope both Rishi and Liz are fully behind her

She is aware of the biliousness of the coals about to be heaped upon her head and went ahead anyway. Now THAT's brave.

Maybe skirt lengths could be standardised so boys and girls can wear skirts which stop an inch or two above the knee (so not the extremely short skirts that show the genitals of both sexes). Male teachers probably don't want to be flashed either 😳

Thanks for posting - I watched the speech and was so pleased to see her confronting the issues. Once the Tories are ousted though, could Labour immediately repeal the new guidance? Seems that we’d have to have a long time with the Tories in power for this to start having an effect (and I’ve never voted Tory before so a lot to weigh up).

I’m feeling far more positive about the upcoming DfE guidance to schools now as she seemed to be indicating it will be along the lines of her speech. Plus she mentioned names as well as pronouns. Much as I admire Sex Matters, they have repeatedly said that it would be discrimination to not adopt a name change as other pupils can change their name. IMO this is ignoring the safeguarding aspects as a name change is a fundamental part of a social transition and the impact on the child to quite different to the impact on a child who just doesn’t like their name or wants to be known as a nickname etc.

I think you're right @zen1 we would have to pray the Tories stayed in power until Labour has learnt its lesson the hard way about losing women's votes and a new crop of more balanced MPs were in the shadow cabinet. Sadly we're probably talking 5-10 years (!).

I'm a floating voter and I'd like to have choice at a general election but it seems that will not be for some time.

I can’t work out which of two problems is more the issue here: the misunderstanding of the Equality Act, or the willingness (which is much worse) to pretend the law says something it doesn’t say.

What do you do when the government of the day (say, the Labour Party) just pretends the law says something other than what it says?

I think there is real naivety here about boys and skirts.

There is the exhibitionism/flashing issue (and it is not the same as girls - I don't think the shortening of girls skirts and the battle teachers have with that is an exhibitionist thing in quite the same way, women do not become flashers in the same way either) but also the potential for sexualised versions of femininity that gets very close to what a lot of people object to in the portrayal of women by drag queens.

Just remember every every flasher, every dick pic sender, every sex offender at every level there has ever been in this country in the last 200 years was a school boy once. We don't make rules for the law abiding majority but for the for the corrupt minority. That's the argument for single sex toilets and changing rooms and toilets right? Well the same on skirts.

Trousers are women's clothes. Boys can wear trousers same as the girls who want them and consider themselves in girls' clothing. Girls (not boys) should have the choice exactly because they are not boys and they are built differently with hips and waists / pears and apples in shapes. They have periods. Get thrush. Might have doctor or nurse appointment after school. Feel temperature differently. All kinds of reasons they might prefer a skirt or trousers because they are girls with girls bodies. Not true of boys. This is biology not gender.

I would not send my DD that allowed boys in skirts nor would I apply to teach in such a school.

Maugham is saying the deaths of children will be on Braverman’s hands. He’s an extremist, isn’t he?

Children should have to wear uniforms appropriate to their biological sex, anything else is a slippery slope.

What do you do when the government of the day (say, the Labour Party) just pretends the law says something other than what it says?

You take the government to court. And if you win the government can change the law, with the consent of Parliament, and accept any political backlash.

Tbh, given how quiet Labour are being regarding trans rights at the moment I think they (the leadership at least) may have at least begun to get the message. The general public is NOT pro self-ID and are horrified at what has been happening at GIDS.

I thought the speech was good, and I’m feeling very hopeful about the new DfE guidance. In addition to all her statements regarding single sex spaces being legally allowed, I’m glad she said that allowing “trans” children to use opposite sex spaces may be discrimination against the other children. My own school has created a proper gender neutral toilet to cater for those children unable to use the correct single sex facilities - nobody is allowed to use opposite sex ones. I sincerely hope that approach is recommended in the guidance. I also hope it says that schools are required to have clinical input before allowing social transition. I must admit that before the interim Cass report I hadn’t fully appreciated how serious (and potentially harmful) a step it was.

‘I must admit that before the interim Cass report I hadn’t fully appreciated how serious (and potentially harmful) a step it was.’

Well you don’t think about it, do you? But imagine being a child and being allowed to make a decision that placed you at the centre of a polarisation of opinion like this? Every person who interacts with you is thinking about how to speak to you, is deciding whether they must lie or ‘be kind’ to satisfy the demands of their conscience? And you, the child, know this. You know you’re not what you claim to be. That has to be psychologically damaging for a developing mind.