Sunday Morning Live

[JeannieDark]

Did anyone see the discussion this morning? I caught it but my kids were being so loud I couldn't hear most of it! It had Lowrie Turner and Ella Whelan plus a trans person and a gay guy. I heard bits of Lowrie & Ella sounding sensible and the gay guy comparing a school telling parents about a child transitioning to section 28 (I think that's what he was saying).

Yes I saw it; your synopsis was good.

Had no idea Lowrie was up on this.

Ella was good but no one quite pointed out that the implications of a child being gay is not equal to a child being trans.

teachers wouldn't need to know who is gay. There are no name / pronoun changing or changing room implications which could mess up record keeping and exam names and links. There is no potential for taking illegal xsex drugs. These are major safeguarding situations which a teacher should not be keeping as a secret.

There is no equivalency.

We need to be countering the section 28 comparison at every single turn.

You don't need medication to be gay.

We need to be countering the section 28 comparison at every single turn.
Agree 💯!

Yes I think Lowrie tried to counter that argument. Not entirely successfully though. Interestingly my 7yo walked past the tv and said 'that woman sounds like a man' about the trans person. And then a few mins later my 5yo walked past and said 'why is that man wearing women's clothes?'

Thanks for the share. Great to see Lowri break cover, I thought she was good in what she said and she expressed the sense of astonishment that mothers had been eclipsed from the conversation about their kids very well. Looking foward to hearing more from her. I am always impressed with Ella Whelan. The section 28 comparison is ridiculous. As was the trans person saying "there have always been trans people" as some kind of gotcha. There is nothing wrong with kids at school giving themselves different names. There is everything wrong with teachers having to get involved in that. I liked the way Ella made the distinction between teachers needing to become involved if there was a genuine and apparent need for safeguarding kids from parents. Rare cases. This conversation about keeping information deliberately from parents is entirely different. Only idiots can't see that. It is also very stark that 2 males without kids are arguing for this, and 2 females, one certainly a mother are arguing against it.

I still do have to pinch myself regularly to believe that this is where we are in 2023.

I wasn't sure why the gay guy was in the discussion, I don't think he was a parent (it was hard to hear as my kids were being a bit feral), he isn't a woman and he isn't trans. His only contribution seemed to be about section 28 which is a complete red herring.

The trans person is a Scottish teacher.

Not sure age they teach.

But yes, out of the mouths of babes...

His only contribution seemed to be about section 28 which is a complete red herring.

Completely this.

This is where the forced teaming has led to. A "balanced" discussion with lgbt v two women (both parents?).

Except that this is NOT about being gay or bisexual.

This is not section 28.

The wolves in sheep's clothing are going to be coming out to play hard and strong for the next few years on this.

Lowry/lowrie/Lowri did try but I do think there some some very simple phrases that many just don't know about to use to cut through the crap.