School guidelines on gender identities/trans out this week

[ArabeIIaScott]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/22733965/schools-banned-letting-pupils-change-gender-parents-rishi-sunak/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12208907/PM-says-children-not-allowed-switch-identities-schools-without-telling-parents.html

These are the only two articles I could find so far.

'Schools will be forced to tell parents if students are questioning their gender under new Government guidance to be published this week, according to a report. '

It's all fucking pretend.

yep

very, very different to being gay, and therefore can’t be treated the same way at all

if a child tells you they think they may really be a member of the opposite sex then of course their parents need to know. They believe something that is manifestly impossible. They need help. They most certainly do not need any kind of affirmation or secrecy

it will be interesting to see if the guidance can get to that place

"If pupils, and teachers, are not compelled to call other pupils, or teachers, by their preferred pronouns, then I suspect the desire to identify as something they're not might wane."

yes. I suspect so. There has never been a proper study about the degree of attention having these gender identities create for a child and the persistence of that identity. I suspect like my friends children who identified as all sorts of things, without that special attention, that constant spike of endorphins because you have had someone use your insisted upon pronouns, or refer to you as being 'x gender', that these children will lose interest.

Of course, that study could never occur. However, if this guidance gives people back the freedom to correctly sex others and to stop the secrecy and further ensure that materials used for teaching are in no way teaching beliefs as facts, it is a start.

Just read this on Transgender Trend website- 2 14 year old girls writing very powerfully about their experiences and made this comment:
We should not be coerced into using biologically incorrect pronouns for classmates, and we must not be punished for refusing to do so. However, at this current time, according to Policy Exchange almost 70% of schools force other students to participate in a gender-distressed child’s “transition” – this has to change, and we are not going to stand for this destruction of our freedom of speech and belief.

Indeed.

Emily won't call me he, Miss.

That's entirely her choice, now turn to page 12.

I'd love Butterfly to spend some time on a farm, explaining the statistical constellation theory of sex to a pen of frisky bullocks.

Do transpeople eat traybakes made with butter from boars and dog-eggs?

Well now, how many more cycles of this do you think that these influencers will be able to deal with.

We have had just this year, 'Isla Bryson is obviously not trans', and now we have 'these kids should not be believed if they are saying they are a cat'.

The entire mantra of 'acceptance without question' collapsed after the rapist gender scandal. And that mantra is now so far deep in the bin with this issue.

Yet ... Montgomery comes out and makes this declaration without extrapolating it through to what it means for ANY child or teenager.

It is they other never discussed 'because that is transphobic' inconsistencies.

Why can't people now declare an age identity? Or claim a racial profile that is false?

Why can't children insist that their 'cat gender' which is listed as a recognised gender I believe be as equally recognised as any other gender?

It is incongruous that any adult cannot see that simply claiming 'special status' where we cannot discuss these issues and expect the people who identify as spokespeople and social media influencers to give logical, evidenced and truthful answers, is ever going to last. I guess they thought if they can get enough changes through then those changes will stay.

These responses to the Montgomery tweet upthread 😁

When you build a movement and a personal identity based on no strong evidence which forces people to comply with your beliefs, you will end up with no respect from the general population for the additional rights and privileges that have been demanded.

Society will simply continue or return to believing the facts and the science.

Because no matter how much any person wants to convince themselves that fundamental knowledge about the biological categories of human sex is being changed by 'new scientific thinking', that is so much crap that it is laughable.

Sure new discoveries are made about human sexed bodies. But absolutely nothing to change the categorisation. And the categorisation has remained stable over millennia, just the techniques for allowing categorisation have been refined.

It makes statements like this actually nonsense

"As our understanding of what sex actually is has grown, so has the 'width' of the concept it encapsulates. It has become clear that sex is, in fact, really quite fuzzy and uncertain and it covers quite a diverse range of different states. That isn't exactly an uncommon state, is it? The history of the last couple of hundred years has been pretty much characterised by our repeated discovery that things are vastly, vastly more complex than they first seemed."

"I don't think we need to be bound by the historical precedent of what came before"

and

"The rest of us moved on from this ideological position upon realisation that it fails to account for the existence of a very, very large number of humans. You're welcome to believe what you want."

and

'The scientific community absolutely and categorically, at every level, has so far determined that 'it's not that simple'

To make the declarations that 'science has moved on' can only be speaking of pseudo science theories and I suspect only based in philosophical based 'science'. That there is no evidence outside weakly written prose by people who declare they are expert specialists in the area is a significant failing.

There are people out there who still believe the earth is flat and can write just as strong a defence of their beliefs. And yet, the science hasn't changed no matter how much they wish it has, no matter how much they declare that it has , even as a group declaration. The science isn't about to change either to suit their theory despite their desperate need for it to do so.

When adults convince themselves that they are ahead of the rest of the scientific world and ahead of the rest of the population and have a unique and so clever understanding of it all, it is quite sad. I consider those adults to be rather vulnerable as they are clearly easily persuadable about topics to believe so readily what is effectively misinformation.

Sadly, that constellation of statistical events still revolves around the sexed body that is female. The statistical events that have significant co-relation will be those to do with the influence of the female sexed body. Simply telling your brain for 30 years that you are female doesn't change your reality. That is that you identify as a what you consider is your unique version of being 'feminine'.

That constellation of highly variable and sometimes time-variant attributes that together allow our brains to recognise ourselves is just personality and your own personal experience. When you overlay your 'constellation' over the shared constellation for all female people, you will still be a male who has adopted their version of a 'female' identity. That is what your brain has done.

There was absolutely nothing in your 'constellation' explanations that actually negated the reality of a 'female body'. Despite this claim:

"I'm an adult human, and I recognise within myself a constellation of data points that I identify as female."

However, in looking at this statement, you absolutely do realise that YOUR version of what a female is, is only YOUR version. Your 'constellation of data points' is only that you have told yourself.

Just because you have created your own set of data points around your very unique description of 'female' doesn't mean a fucking thing to the overall collation of data points from every human female . I doubt your set of 'data points' will corelate with females no matter how much you wish them to.

The very fact that you have written on this board that you identify as female is actually all any of us really needed to know.

Yeah, that well known scientific breakthrough that sex is 'fuzzy'.

I wonder what the 'other states' are and what is 'uncertain' about sex?

'It has become clear that sex is, in fact, really quite fuzzy and uncertain and it covers quite a diverse range of different states'

As we have asked for evidence and there has been none, I suspect it will revolve around the articles we have already seen. It may even pull in the experiences of women who don't have children or who have medical conditions that ultimately mean they cannot carry their own children.

But perhaps hatched will come back with a coherent list of the uncertain aspects of the categorisation of sex in human beings in this century.

They gaslight each other with this stuff until they all believe it and it's a well honed myth.

Rolling it all out on a parenting board is quite a different thing! What chutzpah!

Well at least Rishi has said that headteachers should intervene if children identify as fuzzies.

Victoria Smith.

https://thecritic.co.uk/we-know-what-a-man-is/

"It’s a thing I notice again and again. The trans debate allows familiar arguments against women’s rights to be made without the speaker having to resort to the indignity – the sheer obviousness – of using the words “men” and “women”. It allows a principle to be restated while pretending it’s not a principle – it’s just about this one issue, just this tiny minority. Only it isn’t. What is a stake here, whether the tweeter in question admits it or not, isn’t whether trans women feel left out; it’s whether male people in general, himself included, must suffer the slight of female self-sufficiency. What’s at stake is the right to restate, as a principle, that female feelings are less important than male ones."

and

"So many deeply misogynistic, anti-feminist arguments have been given new life via the “no one knows who the men are” excuse. Let me be clear. When you say “you have gender neutral toilets in your home”, you’re offering a rehash of the incel’s “you consented with him, why not with me?” tactic. When you ask questions such as “where exactly does womanhood reside? In your ovaries, your cervix, your womb, your breasts?”, you justify a return to bikini medicine on the basis that female bodies aren’t female all the way through. When you suggest seeing women as female “reduces women to their reproductive systems”, you imply that female people are nothing more than that (whereas some women, the proper humans, are male). When you sneer about women focusing “insistently on genitalia”, you echo the abuser who tells his victim she only dwells on her trauma because she’s obsessed."

Just as an aside, I hope that schools go back to single sex toilets and changing rooms.

*When you suggest seeing women as female “reduces women to their reproductive systems”,

Yes, I never get this one at all. Because they're reducing it to saying a magic sentence out loud...

Thanks, Helle - another excellent piece by Victoria!

Since we are still waiting for the guidelines, can I continue with the entertaining derail?

If continued research has made sex 'fuzzy' please can I ask that there is no further research into gravity or aerodynamics? I don't want to suddenly fall off the Earth or have my plane fall out of the sky.

Of course gravity actually is fuzzy. It's not exactly the same at all points on the earth's surface, we still don't really know exactly how it functions in relation to the rest of the universe or how it is, for want of a better word, communicated between masses.

Similarly, when you look really close up, a knife edge is fuzzy - all those atoms making lumps and bumps. And that's before we recognise that actually, it's mostly empty space anyway. And of course, all the mass/gravity unknowns exist down there in the atoms as well as between planets...and don't get me started on quantuum stuff, or the possibility we are all a simulation anyway...

And what about age? That really is a spectrum, there is absolutely no one way to be a certain age, we can't precisely tell anyone's age from biological tests although we can certainly tell the difference between a baby and an OAP, the physical change between the day before you are 18 and the day after is negligable...

And yet, despite the total unknowability of absolutely everything if you split hairs finely enough, we manage to understand gravity enough to make bridges that stay up, understand knives enough to know that getting stabbed will hurt us, and understand age well enough to base legal status on it.

It's only sex where a group of people have suddenly decided this uncertainty/imprecision makes the whole concept invalid. When the reality is that physical sex is no more imprecise than anything else we accept every day - in fact a whole lot more precise than many concepts we accept every day - and the only reason it seems so fuzzy to certain people is that they have never been motivated to question other concepts as closely as they are currently motivated to question physical sex. So they think they are seeing some great hidden insight when all they are doing is showing their own limited understanding.

On another thread, a poster told us about the 'new biology' that we'd discovered that explains all this....Didn't return to actually tell is what that was of course. Despite being invited and even encouraged to do so.

I'll say here, as I did there - if there is a new biological understanding, a scientific breakthrough, then why aren't we all being taught it as an urgent necessity. Many of us work in fields where this is crucial, critical info and it's being kept from us. All nurses, doctors, allied health professionals, sports scientists, nutritionists and dieticians...

No one has told me that your biological sex no longer dictates your calorie requirement, or your glomerular filtration rate or your haemoglobin level. That your cancer risk or your presentation with CVD is not predicated on your biological sex any more.

No one has offered me a paid for training module to outline and communicate the new findings that we all need to be appraised of. Medical schools are not disseminating this to all students as they rise through the ranks.

It seems bonkers to me, that there are so many people out there who know this new info and are hoarding it like dinosaurs (see what I did there).

Get this info where it needs to be I say.

It's here QuickWash.

https://www.horoscope.com/us/horoscopes/yearly/2023-horoscope-overview.aspx

Yes, based on these new 'understandings' of sex, there should have been huge publicity around any of these findings if they changed the way that sex was categorised.

There has been nothing. It is very clear why Hatched has not posted anything to support what they say. Fuck! They have even claimed to be 'female' due to their very own constellation theory.

So, if THAT theory was anything but in some male's head as a wonderful explanation of how they can call them selves a female, why isn't it widely published. Where are the documentaries?

It 'science' had moved on - where are the accurate and reliable tests for testing 'trans' status? No? None?

So, trying to depict that 'science' of sex is now fuzzy etc, if a piece of fiction.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4834018-trans-guidance-out-in-next-fortnight-keegan-in-the-times-rse-consultation-also-mentioned

Well... it is now out anytime in the next fortnight.

I suspect that 'cat gender' has caused a delay.

however, Keegan was clear here in her interview.

"Keegan suggests that biological boys will be barred from competing against girls. “You can assume I’ve been logical and you can assume that I’ve used common sense and logic for drafting.”"

So that clears up that misrepresentation about the sport.

She is clear that parent's wishes should be the consideration of social transition.

Yep I was thinking this. The cat stuff requires some extra work

Hatched did say that they were going to be spending a few days defying gender stereotypes by climbing over tanks, IIRC?

The new guidance avoided being instantly out of date by a whisker...