Please help! Gender not sex on a school 'protected characteristics' poster, just spoken to the Head!

[Vebrithien]

Good morning,

I started this thread before Christmas

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4684558-today-i-found-my-bravery?page=1

The overview is that my DD's primary school is displaying posters by No Outsiders, which are supposed to show the 9 protected characteristics, but shows gender, not sex.

The (male) deputy head I mentioned it to, before Christmas, has not got back to me. The posters are still there.

I summoned up my courage this morning, and spoke to the Headteacher. She seemed surprised, as I said I'd already mentioned it to one deputy head, and that I'd picked up on it due to my school expecting Ofsted, and reissuing our equality training.

The Head said that it was surprising, as No Outsiders were an organisation whose specialism was equalities.

I replied that the EA2010 says sex, not gender. I also mentioned that there were some concerning resources produced by them, including an assembly where a dad wants to offer violence to children who do not accept his trans child. (I know no more than this)

The Head is going to talk to her other deputy head, whose responsibility this is, and to try to put us in contact.

Where do I do from here?

Can any one help me with evidence? What particularly is dodgy about No Outsiders?

Is there anything that states that schools mustn't misrepresent the EA?

Is there any DofE (or whatever it's called now) guidance for schools on the resources they used or how they represent the EA?

And, how should I go about finding out if the school uses other No Outsiders resources?

Please help, I want as much evidence as I can.

Still shaking with adrenaline from speaking to the Head!

I wonder how many TRAs reading this have just smacked their forehead!

Okay, after the last couple of posts, this has to be one of us pretending to be a TRA, right? I'm beginning to lose my suspension of disbelief.

This thread is dungaree heavy

Dungaree heavy? Is this another lesbophobic dig?

We know that

And in both instances it is females whose risk levels are increased and makes who are the most aggressive.

Risk can be best managed in same sex estates.

Whilst you are there try explaining why the trans specific prison wing isn't full of transwomen who just want to be safe...

There we have it folks.

Men first and fuck the women, quite literally

They'll be reporting in all their socks.

They'll be desperate to get this deleted.

One thing I struggle with is that there is no ‘gay gene’ that has been identified. Yet I would assume most people on this thread would regard recognising homosexuality as beyond question. Now, follow yhr same logic and apply it to gender.

What?

WTF does that have to do with dungarees?

Go on - explain your lesbophobia.

Not only displaying overt misogyny but now the overt homophobia is here for us all to see.

They'll be reporting in all their socks

Yep. And as MrsO said, they'll be desperate to get this deleted.

An attempt to get us riled up and the thread deleted, I think.

I haven't owned any dungarees for years but I quite fancy some now they've been mentioned. I hear there's a good dungaree shop in Bunbury, not far from me.

I notice they none of the usual suspects have joined in!

if gayness cannot be proven biologically then the fact that gender orientation cannot either should mean there is no issue with recognising self identification in terms of gender

if gayness cannot be proven biologically then the fact that gender orientation cannot either should mean there is no issue with recognising self identification in terms of gender

Gayness is an observable reality.

What does a persons sexuality have to do with the erosion of women's single sex spaces in favour of males?

if gayness cannot be proven biologically then the fact that gender orientation cannot either should mean there is no issue with recognising self identification in terms of gender

You're right - we should basically treat them the same. No segregation by sexual orientation (I assume that's what you mean by "gender orientation") or by "gender" (whatever that is).

Any attempt to distinguish in day-to-day life by either is futile, due to the fact it's hard to identify. Not that it would necessarily gain anything if you did.

Whereas we do segregate (in some circumstances) by sex, because it's immediately physically obvious, and it is very significant in terms of behaviour and outcomes.

And there it is.

Let me correct that statement for you.
In this instance the greater good is served by a trans women’s desires trumping the safety and dignity of those women who don’t want trans women in women’s prisons. Yes, absolutely.

Shut up wims you don't matter. Your only raison d'etre is to validate transwomens womanly feelz.

It’s a reference to the character Millie Tant in Viz comic. She is not referred to as lesbian. But she is tolerant.

Always the forced teaming! Thank heavens so many of us in the LGB community see this for what it is.

What is ‘forced teaming’?

Fucking hell.