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’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.

Yes, that's true, I'm sure. The capture cannot be that extensive, surely.

I hope that Suella Braverman can follow this up with the reasoning behind it. That the biggest indicator of medical and surgical transition, is social transition. And that children are being led to believe that they have the wrong brain in the wrong body.

It would be useful if she went out of her way to confirm that this is an ideology, not an evidence or science based issue.

what she has done is put a stop to the ideological damage being done to children, and those of us who have been following the issue, know the reasons why. But for those who haven't, some background information would be useful.

Mermaids just sticking their fingers in their ears and carrying on giving out incorrect advice. I so hope this will end up in court in some way or another. It can only be a matter of time

Thank you for the transcript 👍 ⭐️

Massively important speech. Heartening to hear sense and clarity.

How is the Ofsted supervising all this going to work for those schools that can go a decade or more without an inspection? The 'outstanding' ones with middle class catchment areas and good exam results are perhaps most likely to be full of the woke theories. Can parents report the school and trigger an inspection? (That really would stop the problem!)

This stood out to me as well, and as another PP said, it almost begs the question what is the actual purpose of a GRC because there are not that many circumstances where trans women are excluded that doesn't extend to all men on a wider scale for legitimate and proportionate reasons.

In fact, I can't think of any off the top of my head!

The Hurcum thread is, perhaps unsurprisingly, light on thought and has an inverse view of reality.

I watched Suella Braverman's transphobic keynote speach she made today for the Policy Exchange so you don't have to.

Here's a thread of everything she said and how and why it will be so damaging 👇

(CW: Trabsphobia, Bullying, Suicide, Tories)
…
It's important to understand that she doesn't understand biology. That's what underpins her trabsphobia. She talks about the facts of biology in her speach, whilst ignoring the fact trans people are real and both sex and gender are not binary. The speach will sadly get worse...

Like pretty much immediately calling prolific transphobe Maya Forstater "great and indomitable" who is in attendance. Politicians idolosing those seeking our community harm is dangerous. No two ways about it

twitter.com/OwenJHurcum/status/1557357203799130116?

Any school that relies on Mermaids for legal advice and their understanding of the Equality Act is a school that will find themselves in serious hot water.

Oh dear, Owen sounds quite rattled. Never mind.

Guardian did their best to avoid mentioning the trans issue by focussing the 'curb influence of European human rights rules'

www.theguardian.com/law/2022/aug/10/uk-must-curb-influence-of-european-human-rights-rules-says-suella-braverman

What Suella Braverman has said on the rights of girls and women is excellent and clear and above all correct; but it will need stronger and ongoing reinforcement from central government. Relevant departments need to issue this advice to councils, schools, health authorities, charities, sports and leisure organisations, etc.; in fact to all organisations dealing with the public that have, either wittingly or unwittingly, accepted 'Stonewall law' and 'Stonewall's "getting ahead of the law"' over the actual law of the land as it stands.

I'm also worried that Ofsted is currently a similarly captured entity.

This bit:

"And you can't be in the process of 'gender reassignment' if you're a child."

touches on something that's been bothering me today without having figured out why or wherefore: the use of 'social transition' which I noticed earlier in the thread and again in Suella Braverman's speech.

My vague feeling of unease about it is that it sounds like a sort of imprimatur or official recognition of something of substance and formal, approved or legally sanctioned. But is it a thing? And what thing is it? If you 'can't be in the process of gender reassignment if you're a child' can you talk about 'social transition' of a child?

What is the basis of it and what does it mean? It seems to be being used without any legal or procedural basis, merely that of calling a child by a different name and using a different sex of pronoun in reference. It also carries with it an assumption of sex as something social, as well as this mere naming being part of some larger process and some destination. Is that legit, though, when it is a child? Should we be giving it that status?

Abitofalark: As I understand it, the "social transition" of children at school, is a serious undertaking, has serious ramifications, and not just "a bit of a lark", or telling people to "be kind, aawww, poor thing". It has serious consequences.

Suella Braverman's words in this respect:

"To emphasise again, before going ahead with social transition, schools should get the best multi-disciplinary team around the table – including clinical professionals – and parents. In children’s healthcare the legal presumption is that parents act in the best interests of their children, until and unless there are strong grounds to suggest otherwise. There is no other situation where a school would make a significant life changing decision about a child without involving the parents – these children should not be treated any differently."

Copied from: policyexchange.org.uk/pxevents/keynote-speech-by-rt-hon-suella-braverman-mp/
posted upthread by InTheCanteen · Today 16:04

Eh??!! I've just posted a verbatim quote from Suella Braverman's speech, as documented by Policy Exchange from their transcript, with link to the relevant Policy Exchange page - and it's been immediately deleted.

Social transition seems to be shorthand for 'live according to the stereotypes normally associated with the opposite sex'.

Put like that it makes it clearer that the whole concept of a 'trans child' is all about reinforcing sexist stereotypes.

It hasn't been deleted, it's been hidden. It happened with the same link to another poster, MNHQ will reverse it if you notify them.

Pg 3 of this thread.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4607017-suella-braverman-expected-to-make-a-speech-on-wednesday?page=3&reply=119135909

There is the aspect of telling children and young people that, sure, they can change sex, easily and breezily; but of course this is actually a complete lie that should not be pushed on adults, let alone small children.

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus: It hasn't been deleted, it's been hidden. It happened with the same link to another poster, MNHQ will reverse it if you notify them.

I'm just wondering why Mumsnet has chosen to repeat delete a reference to a valid source. Why?

"Oh dear, Owen sounds quite rattled. Never mind."

Owen rambling on about trabsphobia made me laugh. A fear of trainers?

All they had to say was this:

"In a long section on the latter issue, Braverman said it was completely legal for schools to refuse to admit a child who identified as transgender, and to not use a child’s preferred pronouns, or let them wear a particular uniform, if they remained biologically their birth gender.
She said: “A right not to suffer discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment is not the same thing as a right of access to facilities provided for the opposite sex.”"

Compare that to the transcript Mid posted above, it is so very clear how shoddy, inaccurate, lazy, lying and incredibly biased their journalism is.

A whole article by the Times or spectator could be based on just this piece of journalism. @triggernometry pick this up please. It's seriously comedy gold

The Hurcum thread is, perhaps unsurprisingly, light on thought and has an inverse view of reality.

I wonder what Owen thinks a transwoman is.

She just flat out is saying it now "... a trans woman, and by that I mean a biological male who identifies as a female". That is not what a trans woman is, but if that's what she argues the law should interpret trans women as, well then, direct discrimination is permissable...

Isn't 'a biological male who identifies as a female' just the definition of a transwoman?

Further in law, there is a duty to provide separate single sex toilets, a breach of which would be unlawful under the school premises, brackets England regulations 2012 and the education records, independent school standards regulations 2014

Schools need to be forcefully reminded of this and of what sex means and the fact it cannot be changed. Toilets in schools are segregated on the basis of sex not gender and any schools failing in that regard are breaking the laws/regulations detailed above.

Do we, however, feel that at least this is more amenable to decoding than Hurcum was when interviewed in the Nolan podcasts?

fairplayforwomen.com/nolan-investigates-stonewall-4/

I can't help but wonder if Suella Braverman has spent some time reading in this forum.

Now I just want to see the govt follow through on banning all this damaging stuff from schools, libraries, sports clubs, rape & crisis centres while booting all the blokes out of womens prisons forever.

Also want all mens crimes to go back to being recorded as mens crimes & all womens jobs/awards/scholarships etc.. to be only available for actual biological women.

Not just the 'trans child' either. Transgenderism relies on them to exist. How else could a male feel/think/live as a female. Its all stereotyping.