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.

If it's not in KCSIE and if Ofsted aren't arsed in my experience they don't care.

I've been battling much (MUCH) less serious shit for a decade. As soon as Ofsted rock up saying it, it's taken seriously.

And I seeth "I fucking told you so"

I got a bit emotional reading the transcript
She so gets it.

She really does get it. I expect the whole furore over the wording of the legislation allowing her to take maternity leave will have served only to stiffen her sinews.

The tide is turning and the wokies are running scared 💪

I’ve seen some people on twitter saying what the AG said is counter to the “Keeping children safe in education 2022” document but I can’t see the conflict

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1080047/KCSIE_2022_revised.pdf

Children who are lesbian, gay, bi, or trans (LGBT)

202. The fact that a child or a young person may be LGBT is not in itself an inherent risk factor for harm. However, children who are LGBT can be targeted by other children. In some cases, a child who is perceived by other children to be LGBT (whether they are or not) can be just as vulnerable as children who identify as LGBT.

203. Risks can be compounded where children who are LGBT lack a trusted adult with whom they can be open. It is therefore vital that staff endeavour to reduce the additional barriers faced, and provide a safe space for them to speak out or share their concers with members of staff.

204. LGBT inclusion is part of the statutory Relationships Education, Relationship and Sex Education and Health Education curriculum and there is a range of support available to help schools counter homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying and abuse.

Wow!
I wonder who's been advising her on this - GC spads? Civil Service?
Can't bear most of SB's policies but she right on this.

I’ve seen some people on twitter saying what the AG said is counter to the “Keeping children safe in education 2022” document but I can’t see the conflict

No it's not in conflict at all if you do not subscribe to the affirmation model.

A child who's querying a "gender identity" can still confide and be known to be having some questions without going gung ho and affirming.

Wow.

This is such a relief.

She gets this. The fact she's been looking into this, working on it behind the scenes, talking to the right people, sees what's going on and what now needs to be done just feels like a relief.

This feels like such a long way to have come from when we were challenging the Trans toolkits in LAs few years ago.

I feel grateful.
Grateful to her for committing to this fully.
And grateful to every single one of you who persisted in getting us to here, where we had Maya there, asking Suella that question.

Power to you sisters.

But it's not over yet. The ideological tentacles are deeply entwined in the schools and it's going to take time and enforcement to loosen the grip and restore sanity.

This actually feels bigger to me than the Tavi, because of the clarity that senior politicians are In It in a serious way.

Sex matters has a great explainer on her speech and whether it contravenes the equality act as purported by some

sex-matters.org/posts/updates/is-it-the-attorney-general-wrong/

I've emailed Suella to say thank you and let her know what this means to many of us.

It's not getting much reporting so good to let her know we're watching and cheering.

[email protected]

Thank you, will also do and I will share concerns about making sure Ofsted know what to look for.

I dislike her. I hate how this makes me approve of what she says. But I approve. The left has let us all down so badly

I've just emailed too 😱 firmly nailing my colours to the mast now.

In the school I work in, our policy is to allow trans identifying students the choice of which facilities, uniforms and sports they partake in. The single sex schools within our multi academy trust, have been handed the policy that they must accept trans identifying students of the opposite sex to the rest of the student community. The policy is littered with references to "if we don't do this, we are breaking the Equalities Act".

It is terrifying, and doing untold harm to the female half of the school population. Girls will "forget" their games kit, rather than change in a de facto mixed sex changing room. Gender stereotypes are becoming more and more polarised, in a harmful way that limits the girls potential.

My concern is that so many of our school leaders have taken advice that is not legal, and unless it is made explicitly clear to them, that their trans inclusion policies are ill-advised, many will just continue to follow the affirmative action pathway.

My concern is that so many of our school leaders have taken advice that is not legal, and unless it is made explicitly clear to them, that their trans inclusion policies are ill-advised, many will just continue to follow the affirmative action pathway.

The amount of BS "nhs rubber stamped schools advice" out there is humungous. And when the unions tout the stuff what hope is there?

I'm also concerned though that there are papers being published by academics/ professors of child education and educational research, including PhD students, often older and ex teachers, on the subject of "transgender children and inclusion in education."

See Suella is getting a bit of stick on twitter, as expected of course which is a shame, am thanking her on their too 😀 twitter.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1557414504614486016

Mermaids response is unsurprisingly to say they have a different understanding of the EA. I think this is what will happen (at least in the short term) with activist schools. They will continue to push back and listen to the lobby groups. There will need to be enforcement.

mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/trans-rights-in-schools-mermaids-statement/

Mermaids are just wrong.

They say:

‘Under the Equality Act 2010, people with the characteristic of “gender reassignment” are protected from discrimination, harassment and victimisation.’

Broadly true. They have protection from harassment and victimisation (never okay). They have some protection against discrimination, but rights have to be balanced, and where it is proportionate and pursuit of a legitimate aim, discrimination is allowed.

Not punishing other children for using correct sex pronouns doesn’t amount to harassment, victimisation or discrimination.

Just catching up on all of this now, so apologies, not read the whole thread, so my query may have been covered. So here we have the AG explicitly and very clearly spelling out what EA means and how it should work - this feels massive!

So if Labour where to win the next GE and they were still hell bent on Self - ID, surely they would have to change/amend the EA to allow that to happen. If this is the case, then presumably they would have to admit or make clear that they were rolling women’s rights back to accommodate self - ID? And if they don’t make this clear, it could easily be pointed out. It feels like there is absolutely no hiding place left now for labour’s wish washy statements on accommodating both self -ID and women’s rights to single sex services/spaces. They will have to nail colours to the mast.

I think an awful lot of work has gone into this speech by the AG and those that understand the implications for women and girls - and I thank every one of them.

And the General Secretary of the Association of School & College leaders says:

”Schools had been “navigating this difficult territory on their own for many years making decisions which serve the best interests of all their pupils”

twitter.com/realgeoffbarton/status/1557405994203975680?s=21&t=cs-r0WOnma8ycpEXL4z0xA

These people are utterly clueless - either to what is going on in schools or to the damage schools are doing.

Soooooooo the Labour party made the mistake of phoning me this evening! I actually felt sorry for the poor sod on the other end of the phone by the end.

The call was to see if I would "stand as a candidate for the 2023 local council elections because we're particularly keen to recruit more women candidates, who will otherwise be under represented"

I may have talked very animatedly about how they expected that to work when they couldn't even work out which half of the population that is as I could potentially be sharing the stage with a lot of men.

It felt very cathartic to say all the things that saying online would get me cancelled. I think I may have worked my way through every banned mumsnet word. And yes ALL the P ones that we are never allowed to think never mind utter.

But the bit I was adamant about was my absolute insistence that the person I was speaking with went and watched Suella Braverman talking today. The response "that is something I wouldn't normally do! (WTF????) But I am actually going to go and watch it"

I told them that if and when they sorted themselves out as to what a woman actually was I would be more than happy to talk with them again.

Anyone want to place a bet I how long I'll be waiting!

To be fair to ASCL, schools absolutely do need clear guidance. Braverman’s comments today are very welcome but do not constitute guidance which schools can rely on. We need (ideally statutory) guidance from the DfE enforced by Ofsted.

Rightly or wrongly, many schools have supported social transitioning because almost every available source said it is in the best interests of the child to do so. The speech today flies in the face of that, thus “muddying the waters” from many heads’ perspectives. So many teachers already on Twitter saying “you don’t have to use preferred pronouns, but why wouldn’t you? It’s just mean to refuse”. I’ve spent the afternoon referring them to the interim Cass review, but it is fairly obvious that most have only given the most superficial thought to the whole topic.

Lol @Boiledbeetle!