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!

Well, thanks to the ONS census we now know that transwomen are 5 times more likely to be sex offenders than men without the gender feelz. 1 in 585 compared to 1 in 2500-3000!

But yeah, women should accept them in their spaces 'for the greater good'

See also this thread for further information
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3858425-Andrew-Moffatt-No-Outsiders-online-lessons

-sorry, I see someone upthread has already linked to this

Slightly off-topic but until not long ago I always assumed that 'No Outsiders' was some sort of anti-immigrant group. It's a weird name.
Plus the phrase 'no one is the same' grates my grammar gears.

It's another shocking thing that no-one HERE are actually shocked about! Isn't it.

Doesnt seem to be much attempt to argue our thoughts on this thought today yet.

Hopefully this will wake up more of the be kind and the But but but brigade.

Since ELO's comparison of self-identifying as gay and self-identifying as female has come up again, I'll say that what I see as difference.

Being gay doesn't affect anyone other than the identifying individual, since everyone involved has to actively consent to sex

But which sex category someone is in affects everyone in the female sex category. Because we depend on all men being excluded from some public and communal spaces and services, to allow us to participate safely and fairly/afford us privacy and dignity (hence single sex exemptions in the Equality Act)

I think only a couple of sentences directly address my point and they are pretty weak sauce.

Your complete non sequitur about if people can accepted to be gay on their say so, which affects no one else, why can't any man pretend to be a women on his say so, which affects women, you mean? Now that was weak sauce.

X posted with Just.

Well, thanks to the ONS census we now know that transwomen are 5 times more likely to be sex offenders than men without the gender feelz. 1 in 585 compared to 1 in 2500-3000!

But yeah, women should accept them in their spaces 'for the greater good'

The numbers

There are 48,000 transwomen.

Of that 30.4 million women, 125 are currently incarcerated as serious sex offenders. 1 in 243,000

Of the 48,000 transwomen, 82* are currently incarcerated as serious sex offenders.

1 in every 585.

As a Lesbian, I'm really sick of this coopting and forced togetherness. I have nothing to do with trans, queer, or gay men.
As a woman I fear sexual assault from men. I don't fear it from other women and straight women don't fear it from me.
Also no one has to accommodate me. I always found romantic female partners in lesbian social groups. My sexuality doesn't affect anyone.

These days I stick with my fellow lesbians and women's groups only.
That's it; no G &B for me.

Also, ELO, you were saying that being gay is not something that can be proven biologically. Well, it doesn't matter because homosexuality is evident enough that it could be proven in a court of law when men were prosecuted for having sex with other men and when denying same sex couples a legal right to marry and adopt.

Talking of weak sauce, can you define gender for me, or trans, or can you even articulate a meaning for transgender? One that is equally robust in law?

Here here.

I am also not going to build my sexual orientation around what would please men.

It is another sex based duty dumped on lesbians - learn to cope with sex that you dislike and don't want because you have a birthright of duty to care for men

Just fuck off with this God-awful sexism!!!!

And this from a political movement that never stops wittering about 'deeply held feelings' and 'being your true self' and 'leading your best life' - no lesbians, we didn't mean you!

Also, feeling attraction for something is different to feeling like you are something that you are not

I could say I feel like a tree. Firstly that wouldn't make me a tree, secondly, since I am not a tree I can actually have no idea what it feels like to be a tree. ( Even if I believe I am psychologically a tree!) If people object to me saying that I am a tree they would be objecting on the grounds that they can see that I am not a tree and they do not feel obliged to deny objective reality.

I might, however like trees and feel affection for trees. A particular tree might be very special to me. Other people cannot tell me I don't like trees because these are my actual feelings and they are not, themselves, obliged to like trees too.

I really don't think it's the proveability of sexual orientation vs trans identity that matters.

It's gay sex that was illegal, not orientation. The act of sex can be proved, but same sex orientation can't be proved either way.

The equivalent proveable act for Trans people is gender non-conforming behaviour or presentation. Gender identity - like sexual orientation - can't be proved either way.

And of course, I and others on the board have no problem with any of the above.

What I disagree with is changing a person's sex categorisation wrt the very few situations where we legally treat men and women differently in order to be fair to women. The exemptions in EA basically: sports, prisons, changing rooms, medical care, rape crisis services. That's the problem because it has an impact on everyone else.

There isn't an equivalent to that for LGB.

"NancyDrawed*, thanks. That is words from a Scottish case, as you say. Scottish law in some areas is not the same as English law so not necessarily a precedent but certainly might be the case the poster meant.

Comment therefore to the posting person who made the reference to this - that does not really change the fact the list on the school poster here leaves out "sex".

Gender is not better, being a social construct. And it is sex, not gender, that is protected under the EA2010. So gender is not preferable and not fine.

Exactly. Preferable to people who want a woolly definition. Sex is real. Gender is a social construct at best.

@JustWaking

What I disagree with is changing a person's sex categorisation wrt the very few situations where we legally treat men and women differently in order to be fair to women. The exemptions in EA basically: sports, prisons, changing rooms, medical care, rape crisis services. That's the problem because it has an impact on everyone else.

To this I'd also add things like women-only STEM initiatives, women-only activity groups, political groupings and officials. Female-only spaces and voices are important mentally and socially as well as physically. Women cannot recover from our systemic marginalisation and disempowerment without mental space away from the demands and narratives of men.

Sex being physical, it's understandable that the focus is usually on physical threats or different physical capabilities but women (original female meaning) also suffer from the different socialisation and cultural expectations placed on the sexes. I don’t think men (original male meaning) often appreciate just how much they benefit from a culture where they are "the norm", nor how much effort women are expending deferring and accomodating them.

And while TW who pass undoubtedly experience some of the disadvantages of society's systemic sexism, they haven't the same experience of living under it from birth and how that influences the developing sense of self.

The need for female only provisions and support is rooted in the body but the provisions needed are not only physical.

@FlirtsWithRhinos exactly this👏

We were discussing at work (I’m a Maths teacher) how this would affect girl only STEM initiatives and maths competitions. The department staff (male and female) were unanimous that sex matters here (due to socialisation and these subjects still being seen as “male” by some). Very heartening. Especially as I’m in Scotland!

There’s plenty of definitions of transgender out there - just Google them.

What about a gay virgin or someone who is celibate?

is someone only gay if they are having sex? How often do they have to do it to qualify by your definition, and what kind of activities?

you guys are struggling with this one.

That's good to see in Scotland radrado. I hate seeing all the data about women and girls that's been collected over the years being tossed aside in favour of what is in essence male supremacy.

Why is this relevant? You don't need to have had sex to know what kind of bodies you're attracted to, male/female/both, or what preferences you have. Some people experiment more before they decide what their sexuality is, but not all.

You don't need to have had sex to know what kind of bodies you're attracted to

Or indeed to know what sex you are - ELO's last post didn't seem to be connected to the thing being quoted, talking about sex.