DfE settles in Cornwall case

[ResisterRex]

In The Times:

Parents force review of school trans guidance

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/79e44c92-3b52-11ed-a8ae-d2d57cd0511a?shareToken=0d2f7731ea5f88a5b2a41c3ab900d401

"Ministers are to review contentious guidelines on how schools should deal with gender identity after settling a court case with parents who had been accused of being transphobic.

...

The couple have now won £22,000 in legal costs after the department relented in the face of a judicial review of its decision not to support the parents in their battle with the school.

...

The Rowes highlighted to the education department what they said was expert evidence that revealed how “trans-affirming policies” allegedly can lead to “catastrophic outcomes”. But they claimed that Whitehall officials “refused to properly assess this evidence” and rejected the Rowes’ complaint.

At the High Court in February, Lord Justice Lane granted the parents permission to bring a full judicial review of the department’s decision. But lawyers for the department have now settled the case and paid the Rowes £22,000."

Getting so very bored with the whining and grumping about 'it's because you're prejudiced about' (whatever characteristic) that's getting endemic on MN across the boards.

No, it's not due to prejudice against that characteristic. It's due to your bloody awful attitude and behaviour.

And your constant expectation that you can dish out whatever you like while standing behind your teflon characteristic, but Others must treat you with kid gloves and with a respect and deference you will never bother reciprocating.

No. No thank you.

Thanks. Apology accepted.

I see you are back @RobinMoiraWhite. Any chance of you answering the questions? I am interested to see if you draw the line anywhere at gender ideology in schools.

Well now, I’m a barrister. We ASK questions rather than answering them.

I make exceptions for parliamentary committees.

Good Afternoon!

I suspect no line is drawn, so we won't get an answer. Because it's unconscionable.

With every post you show your contempt of women and children. Carry on shining the sunlight.
I will infer that you believe it is ok for schools to trans children as young as 6. And that is ok for a male to teach children whilst wearing huge prosthetic breast.
We see you Robin.
More and more people are seeing the damage this ideology does, and they will not stand for it in schools.
Carry on shining that light

It's amazing how you keep popping back to waste your gems of superior wisdom and insight upon the scum, RW.

The whole endless repeating of 'you don't matter, you are beneath me, I cannot be bothered to deign to notice you' is a bit neutralised by the continual popping, but gosh is it a really fantastic example of the misogyny and biology based entitlement to dominate and lord it over that repeatedly demonstrates why females need gatekept spaces of their own.

@ImherewithBoudica RMW just can’t help proving our point for us can RMW.

Was quite the leap wasn't it? And oh so defensive! Very odd.

Anyway, back to the thread, I'm assuming now the parents can ask for a judicial review?

Well now, I’m a barrister. We ASK questions rather than answering them.

Just as well after the pisspoor performance of the leading lights of Garden Court Chambers when they were on the stand.

Robin, this is playground behaviour.

I’m not qualified to draw lines. And I’m not sure it is right to do so as individual experiences vary.

I CAN say that I knew I felt differently about myself from age 7/8 and was able to label that - as trans - at 11 or 12 when I understood what that was.

For me this is good evidence to show up the ‘ideology’ analysis as nonsense, because that would mean that I had invented my own ‘ideology’ all for myself between age 7 and 12. Seems unlikely?

Well, it certainly seems that you developed an ideology at that age, and stuck with it.

Or perhaps my experience is just part of life’s rich tapestry for a few of us, and you might consider not spending time telling trans people that they don’t know their own minds, rather working out how to rub along together. That’s my approach, on a personal level.

I'd have thought that that had limited applicability even in the context of a courtroom, otherwise, you have the same rights and responsibilities as other citizens.

Returning to the experience of children in schools and the status of some lobby groups that valorise the testimony and advocacy of of adults, I see that I omitted to post this discussion earlier. It's a useful commentary on why lived experience might not live up to the hagiographic status awarded to those who prize it above all other indications of expertise and knowledge.

johnradoux.medium.com/the-fetishisation-of-lived-experience-c431bbffa3e1

This is, of course, distinct from concerns about recasting and unreliable narratives that may be (unconsciously or not) edited to fit with a narrative that suits later circumstances.

Interesting to see the "it happened to me so it must be fine for everyone else's children" played out on this thread.
We are in this mess because self invested adults have been allowed to influence medical practice, ethics, education policy and practice and safeguarding relating to children on the basis of their personal desires and beliefs. Those of us with qualifications and experience know to be cautious of all the self interested groups wanting to use schools as platforms to promote their ideas to children. It's only since the capture of politicians and the DfE by the trans lobby that this has ever happened. Previously political activists (of any type) have been firmly kept outside schools or invited in only as part of a balanced curriculum looking at different views /issues.
This government have presided over removing these safeguards and now are faced with the task of reversing what they've allowed to happen.

Different from what?

For me this is good evidence to show up the ‘ideology’ analysis as nonsense, because that would mean that I had invented my own ‘ideology’ all for myself between age 7 and 12. Seems unlikely?

The ideology is that a male child who feel uncomfortable in their own skin somehow is more like a female child.

Well that's at least part of an answer, so thank you for that.

Hey Robin, you didn't seem to amused when you were on these boards at 3.30 and 4 am......
👀
I suggest a nice milky drink as an alternative. Screen time isn't helpful in relaxation.

Don’t let the door hit you on the arse & remember to take your shoes

It's odd, isn't it? What makes someone think that they are more like the opposite sex, or should be the opposite sex? Children learn in early childhood that they can't actually change sex, and nobody can know what it's like to be the opposite sex, so it's odd that some people think that altering their bodies to resemble one of the opposite sex will somehow make them happier or more complete. It can only be based on a fantasy of what it would be like to be the opposite sex.

What do they imagine to be so different about life as the opposite sex?

I've read Robin's blog, and I understand that Robin is very interested in female clothing. Perhaps I just don't understand because I'm not interested in clothes. I've never thought that makes me a man, though. And surely someone wouldn't go through all that just so that they can wear women's clothes, would they?

Just musing really, as Robin doesn't answer questions, but if anyone else has any insights I'd be interested.

'It can only be based on a fantasy of what it would be like to be the opposite sex.'

Absolutely!

I CAN say that I knew I felt differently about myself from age 7/8 and was able to label that - as trans - at 11 or 12 when I understood what that was.

Interesting... the weakness in that argument is that human beings fabulate. We make narratives and connections and it's very hard to understand or predict why one narrative "makes sense" to us and another doesn't. I don't have a complete memory of my childhood or myself within my own childfhood; it would be easy for me to focus on some particular periods and incidents and to pass over or forget or suppress others, to create a narrative in which I know I have "always" felt this or that about myself.

For me this is good evidence to show up the ‘ideology’ analysis as nonsense, because that would mean that I had invented my own ‘ideology’ all for myself between age 7 and 12. Seems unlikely?

And yes if you are intelligent and thoughtful and self reflective you could easily invent an ideology of your own at 7 or 8 that still makes sense as an adult and that fits with some adult narratives that you would only discover later.

Some early elements of my feminist awareness started at that age, or earlier.
I am not saying my feminism was inevitable or innate, that I was consistently feminist (I wasn't!) but some of the experiences and perceptions and feelings and understandings started there. Like you, the label came a little later. And (r but?) I might have made something else out of them if I had been offered a different label and a different framework to fit my exisiting ideas and feelings into and to develop them further.

I am not sure that 'ideology' and TQ+ people are one and the same, since a number of TW are quite clear and quite annoyed that they know exactly what their sex is and they do not agree with the colonisation and destruction of female spaces for example, or excluding females from female only services so that male people have freedom of choice of all the services, or child safeguarding.

I have absolutely no doubt that people of both sexes experience a very wide range of development and expression and sense of self. But it widens and develops the 'bandwidth' to borrow a word from Sharpe, of their birth sex. It does not make them the other sex. Everything they do will always be an expression of their sex, and that is something to be celebrated.

Excluding and punishing women to express biological power while requiring that women deny it is happening? That is not something to be celebrated. That's just bloody awful behaviour.