Sex not gender, No Outsiders changing the Equality Act, DepHead/DSL captured

[Vebrithien]

Well, here we are, with a whole new thread!

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4713725-please-help-gender-not-sex-on-a-school-protected-characteristics-poster-just-spoken-to-the-head?page=10&reply=123546552

Thank you all, so so much for the support you have given me.

I am currently working on the draft of the message I want to send.

Long story short, DD's primary school displays posters by No Outsiders, showing the 9 protected characteristics of the Equality Act. Sex as been replaced with gender.

I have raised this with the Head, the assistant Head, and the Deputy Head (DepHead, as DH just doesn't work here). I have been reassured that sex is synonymous with gender in law, and, through an email stream, No Outsiders have reassured the school that it is deliberate, gender is easier to teach children than sex, especially as some will snigger at sex.

Oh, and teaching that gender is the difference between boys and girls, it makes it easier to then explain gender reassignment later on.

I'll put the message from the DepHead and No Outsiders here, and also my reply, in its current state.

Thank you all again!

@DrBlackbird Rachel Meads ET judgement https://static1.squarespace.com/static/607d6cba0ef43a2dbb27df45/t/65a00a0f1492d57d53820bba/1704987151937/2200179+2022+-+Judgment+11+1+24.pdf included the following paragraph.

279. We consider it wholly inappropriate that an individual such as the Claimant espousing one side of the debate should be labelled discriminatory, transphobic and to pose a potential risk to vulnerable service users. That in effect equates her views as being equivalent to an employee/social worker espousing racially discriminatory or homophobic views. The opinions expressed by the Claimant could not sensibly be viewed as being transphobic when properly considered in their full context from an objective perspective, but rather her expressing an opinion contrary to the interpretation of legislation, or perhaps more accurately the amendment to existing legislation, advocated for by trans lobbying groups to include, but not limited to, Stonewall.

This isn’t quite what you asked for but it is a warning to employers to use the legal definition set out in the EA2010 and not stonewall interpretation.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents which is
“7Gender reassignment(1)A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
(2)A reference to a transsexual person is a reference to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
(3)In relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment—
(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons.”

You could legitimately send the EA2010 extract and attached the Rachel Meade judgement and ask what evidence do they have that Gender reassignment means gender identity. The only argument they have is that GC is a protected belief under Religion and Belief pc and to minimise risk they are assuming GI is a similar belief but this has not been tested at ET.

The school has acknowledged receipt of our email. This is the first time they have followed the MAT policy for dealing with concerns.

Ooh...

🍿

That's a really good point @JoyousAsOtters and even if not in the planning that they may be following, could be something the teachers have conjured up given how much emphasis "safe spaces" are given these days. Trauma informed practices also use those phrases.

But of course, safeguarding should always be under pinning anything and everything.

In practise, occasionally, and from experience, I know sometimes teachers don't make links between curriculum concepts they're delivering and aspects of safeguarding unless it is explicitly pointed out.

Go Veb!! I'm so sorry you're also having to deal with this.

You were kind enough to encourage me to pursue our school for similar issues and we are just at the start - I had an encouraging call with the PSHE teacher, but once I got the schemes of work we are back to square one and I'm now drafting a tightly worded email pointing out all the places it breaches the EA/Forstater/the statutory guidance on RSE.

Luckily I also have a GC group of parents to back me up but none of them are yet at the point of signing their names to an email. I still feel very leery of leading some kind of organised campaign. I truly love this school and my DCs do too, and it makes me sad to be kicking up a fuss because they've been hijacked by a new "highly trained professional" PSHE bod aka. fully doctrinaire #bekind #nodebate.

Following with interest @Vebrithien and wishing you all the best with this.

Recently joined a local college course and end of first week up comes the gingerbread character and the gender word. It has not been elaborated upon yet as to relevance to the subject but I got an uncomfortable feeling and did the research.

Not clear yet if this teaching analogy is related to the Genderbread drawing from Sam Killerman, so popular with Stonewall et al, and protested by Safe Schools Alliance. If it is, then it is being inappropriately shoe horned into an utterly unrelated adult education course. I wasn't able to download the letter from SSA but will try again/email them, as needed

I will reread your whole thread to find the best words and sentences in which to write to the college, once the situation becomes clearer.
No wish to derail or distract, but wondering if anyone else has come across a similar situation in local adult education?
Thanks.

@Xiaoxiong and @Villagetoraiseachild

Thank you for your kind words.

I think, half the problem is, once you see the inflexible indoctrination, the safeguarding risk, the misogyny, it just isn't possible to unsee it.

I wish you both luck and support with your endeavours.

It is never easy to speak out. I am so very thankful to JKR, for so many things. "You will have to make a choice, between what is right and what is easy".

Are you "public" eg in the media? The pressure from the public from the Horizon scandal increased many fold when Mr Bates Vs the Post Office aired. The general public do not tolerate injustice, especially when it is hidden and manipulated by people who think they are untouchable eg the SLT of this school

Afraid not. No social media, I work as a secondary school teacher, so have to appear politically neutral myself. Also, DH still doesn't know about any of this. I've carried the burden alone apart for all you lovely vipers as I'm worried that he will disappoint me.

Totally understand. I would do the same as you. So continuing with the long way, I would do exactly as you are doing, stopping, writing, quoting, challenging. It will give you the feeling of control over a situation where dictators have power over our kids' education for nefarious objectives, eg GI

The other issue @Redpencil99 , is that the school threatened me with the police, for defamation, and to ban me from the school site, if I voiced my concerns publicly or on social media.

There are very many good things about the day today running of the school, and my DD is happy there.

There's a balance to be had though, when it comes to clear breeches of safeguarding, where whistleblowing comes in.

Could you contact the DS governor?

It's only defamation if it's untrue.

@Villagetoraiseachild I have found @Vebrithien 's threads useful in drafting my responses to the school, plus a combination of the materials on Safe Schools Alliance, Transgender Trend and Sex Matters.

Adult education I am not quite as sure of as most of my objections related to how this subject was being presented to children under the age of 13. I think you might be best served by the fact that lack of belief in gender ideology is as protected under the Equality Act 2010, as belief in gender ideology is (thanks to the decision in Forstater v CGD Europe). So in order for an educational instutition not to be promoting one side of a highly contested ideological and political position, both beliefs should be presented and given equal weight (if they are to be presented at all).

@Vebrithien I understand your reticence not to involve your DH. I know my DH is in agreement on the basic facts but as a teacher himself he really really REALLY doesn't want to get involved giving the school a hard time. He will agree with me sending emails but he doesn't want to read them before I send them and just says he trusts me. I don't think he really grasps why this is such a big deal to me to change things at the policy level - I think he'd prefer that we just speak to our own DC at home about our own beliefs and let other parents do the same. This ignores the fact that there are large numbers of parents at our school for whom English is not their first language and are really at sea with the linguistic gymnastics that this ideology relies on. There are also plenty of people who just aren't paying attention because they just don't have time or aren't aware of what's going on.

It feels like a long road, so let's keep encouraging and supporting each other and keep chip chip chipping away, making a multitude of small causes where and when we can.
Enormous respect to those of you who are on the educational front line.

Absolutely! Chip, chip, chip at the block.

It's so interesting, what I see with the late teenagers I teach. Many are quiet on the subject, quite a few just roll their eyes.

It is only the children with pre-existing struggles (ASD, mental health struggles, potentially gay) who show any interest at all in the ideology.

In other news, we are still waiting to hear back from the primary school.

I'm also waiting to hear back from my email - sent a while back but to be fair, half term was in the way as well.

In the interim, the PSHE teacher has sent out an email to ask mothers of children at the school to come and speak about their careers for International Women's Day.

Well, it's off to formal complaint we go.

Is that because they have not answered you?

FFS!

And

It is only the children with pre-existing struggles (ASD, mental health struggles, potentially gay) who show any interest at all in the ideology.

Because it's sold to them as the panacea to all that ails them!

And best get yourself battle ready! Eat cake!

Oh @Vebrithien what a shitter. Is it because they've taken too much time to respond? Or because they sent you an unsatisfactory response? Are the other parents going to join you in co-signing the complaint, as you mentioned up-thread?

Sorry to leave you in the lurch, internet packed up!

The Headteacher replied. Ultimately, as the book is not used as part of their RSE curriculum, but as reading comprehension, they did not need to share it with us in advance. Also, we had been warned that the children would be reading about different types of families (that's all it was, not more specific) as part of LGBTQ+ History Month so we have no reason at all to feel betrayed

Also, the Headteacher did not address any of our concerns about the book (portraying Gender Identity Ideology as fact, and harmful sexist stereotypes)

Lastly, that inclusion is highly prized at the school, by parents and children (according the the Ofsted feedback) you exclusionary witches

This was despite us raising the concern that allowing GII to be presented in this way, as fact, is directly excluding some of the children.

As of this afternoon, there are 5 parents willing to take this to formal complaint. We're just discussing whether to do this as one complaint, or several.

One parent has reported back that their son was told in assembly last year, that some children choose to be boys, some choose to be girls, and some choose to be neither.

I've typed up the timeline of conversations, and actions, from my point of view. I'll copy it below, as best I can.

but as reading comprehension, they did not need to share it with us in advance.

Yep, they get round the issue like this all the time.

Good luck. It may be better to have separate complaints, I'm not really sure, other than each one may need to be dealt with separately. So all recorded separately etc

In the other hand if it's joint they may invite a group meeting (or you can demand one.)