Primary school new RSE policy including "trans children"

[Useruser1]

This has come to review for me as a governor. Included in the year 5 section:

"However, special consideration and sensitivity will be needed for any pupils who identify as being transgender. Throughout teaching this topic, it is acknowledged that there is the possibility that a person can identify as a gender different from that assigned to them at birth."

I can feel myself having a panic attack at the thought of raising this but I know I need to. I DO NOT want children in my school being told girls who want to be boys can be.
safeschoolsallianceuk.net/schools-resources-and-policies/

Good luck! Make sure you have your arguments & references all sorted out - it will help if you feel well prepared. You will be doing a very good thing for the children in your school 💐

Well done OP. The Cass Review and the NHS consultation into the new gender services are your friends. Clear & informed that children should not be socially transitioned and that for most it's a phase:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4661605-most-children-who-think-theyre-transgender-are-just-going-through-a-phase-says-nhs

I think schools guidelines on children with gender dysphoria are coming out soon, can you at least stall them using that?

That is brave of you OP and good luck.

There is a related petition about RSE in schools teaching gender ideology which people here may be interested to sign.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_notice
oard/4585082-rse-content-on-gender-vs-sex?reply=118747502

Petition:

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/618970

www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4585082-rse-content-on-gender-vs-sex?reply=118747502

Good luck.

It's possible that they will cite KCSIE which does talk about lgbt bullying, but this is entirely different. Be ready to make the distinction between being respectful and keeping all children safe from abuse and allowing medical abuse of a child via the back door via solid affirmation.

Latest updates/ consultations from the nhs should make it clear that there's no such thing as a trans child.

Also highlight the sexism of the idea of a trans child.

The word sexism is firmly recognised and helps shift pov, highlighting the regressive gender stereotyping involved and separating from basic biology. And leads to conversations around medical implications of fully affirming.

It sounds like they are trying to be careful with that statement, but I agree with stalling till the guidance is issued. The second sentence should be removed simply based on the grammar.
I’d try opening with talking about safeguarding concerns in this area, confusing the children and taking a cautious approach.
Are there any trans-identifying children in the school? If not, there is absolutely no need for the school to include this in RSE teaching.

What’s wrong with that? It’s not teaching kids that you can change sex, just that there’s a possibility that someone may identify as ?

That's sexist

Schools are supposed to be challenging sexist stereotypes

Because "identify as" is these days often used or perceived as "I am"

What exactly are you objecting to here?
Are you saying that treating children who think they are trans sensitively is a bad thing? So you think they should be treated insensitively? Or should schools ignore the fact that vast swathes of children are now identifying as transgender because you think that will somehow protect your precious child from being influenced?

People like to respond with wide-eyed faux innocence when people say this forum is transphobic and say that people should point it out when they see it so I will.
This post comes across of you objecting to treating children confused about their gender sensitively and with consideration which seems pretty transphobic to me.

This recent statement from ACAUK could be helpful too:

acpuk.org.uk/the-cass-review-and-its-implications-psychologically-informed-considerations-for-the-future/

The Cass interim report and the NHS draft guidelines and this guide use ‘children with Gender Dysphoria’ never ‘transgender child’ which is a disputed concept.

This post comes across of you objecting to treating children confused about their gender sensitively and with consideration which seems pretty transphobic to me.

The OP said,
“I DO NOT want children in my school being told girls who want to be boys can be.”

Sensitivity to a primary school age child ( age 4 - 10) who says (or more likely whose parents say )they are transgender, need not mean official social transition and ‘affirmation’, lying to and confusing the other children, and teaching them in RSE lessons with non-speak words like ‘assigned at birth’, ‘gender identity’ or there is a ‘spectrum’. That is not sensitive.

Thanks for the good faith question :/

Clearly I'm not suggesting anyone be treated insensitively

• I am objecting to the concept that a child who says "I am actually a boy" should be agreed with
• I am objecting to planting the seed in childrens' heads that if they don't conform to sex based stereotypes that they might have been "born in the wrong body"
• and I am objecting to someone's "gender identity" being anything other than a personality trait.

If we are writing that "some children say X and we should be kind to them" that's great. If we are writing "some children say X and we have to affirm them and praise them and there is to be no debate" that is a problem

thanks this is a good angle. The sensitive approach to a child who says that they identify as something they're not or have body dismorphia issues is to be kind to them, get to the bottom of why they feel like that and ultimately to be comfortable with their body.
Not to affirm them

I think we are reading the statement differently then because to me it doesn't imply anything about agreeing with the child. It just says there might be children who identify as transgender. That's not the same as saying that girls can be boys or vice versa.

In your position I would want to know details of how this will be applied in practice before going in all guns blazing as you are making a lot of assumptions.

Lilithslove · Today 11:40
I think we are reading the statement differently then because to me it doesn't imply anything about agreeing with the child. It just says there might be children who identify as transgender. That's not the same as saying that girls can be boys or vice versa.

In your position I would want to know details of how this will be applied in practice before going in all guns blazing as you are making a lot of assumptions.

That is good advice to first ask more about how dealing sensitively with a child who says they are trans gender would be carried out in practice, and in regards to the other children in the school too.

Given the wording here (copied below),
‘assigned at birth,’ the OP may be right to feel concerned. Sex is recorded at birth, or often before now days. So what are they saying when they use the words gender assigned at birth (U S jargon that migrated here) ? ….,

What do they mean by ‘gender’? A euphemism for sex? If so why say ‘assigned’?

Or do they mean ‘gender’ a stereotypical expression of male and female as a social role? In which case are they saying that
everyone may have a gender different from the sex of their body so we always say ‘assigned at birth’ because no one can know your gender at birth? You may have the wrong body for your ‘gender’?

“However, special consideration and sensitivity will be needed for any pupils who identify as being transgender. Throughout teaching this topic, it is acknowledged that there is the possibility that a person can identify as a gender different from that assigned to them at birth."

Yes concerns are fine but immediately jumping to worst possible interpretation and acting on that won't necessarily lead to the a good outcome for the op. Especially as she doesn't yet have the full information.

I think it's better to ask questions than accuse the school of indoctrinating pupils into gender idology or make assumptions on how they would deal with a young child with gender dysphoria.

You are right, and along with other posters I thank you for the input. When I wrote it last night I was in a bit of a flap.

Im going to ask about what it means and how it would be applied before going off the deep end, but not approve it with this wording about "assigned at birth" etc

You remind me of parents from the early 1990s who were concerned that children would be exposed to gay paedophiles of gay people were given more rights and recognitions.
good luck with reaching a mor enlightened mindset. : )

SamTamit· Yesterday 19:39
You remind me of parents from the early 1990s who were concerned that children would be exposed to gay paedophiles of gay people were given more rights and recognitions

good luck with reaching a mor enlightened mindset. : )

People’s sexual orientation towards the same sex does not involve the mentally and physically dangerous proposition that someone has been born in the wrong body and that it needs to be changed with hormones and surgery; it does not involve the lie that sex is a spectrum and people can be a different sex from the one they were born.

Also, a child who might grow up to be gay should not be given the idea that they aren’t gay, but actually a different sex. This happens. There should be no sense that their non-conformity or same sex orientation needs to be transed aways.

There should be no sense that a trauma, or previous sexual abuse can be escaped by changing gender.

Maybe your own mindset is not as enlightened, or informed, as you seem to be presuming.

I worked for gay men’s lifestyle in the 90s.

I don’t recall any of the discussion re: rights for gay men and lesbians being anything like the discussions regarding children and adolescents (or who believe themselves to be) experiencing gender Dysphoria.

Perhaps previous poster was in a completely different country to me?

*lifestyle magazine

not just lifestyle, that would be weird!