Kemi Badenoch to face Women & Equalities Committee’s questions on equalities issues - 13 December 2023

[IwantToRetire]

Sorry I am sure there was a thread started in preparation for this but cant find it.

Happy to delete this if someone can give me link as search hasn't.

Still happening I think,

https://committees.parliament.uk/event/19766

https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/41208ebe-60ce-4f19-99d4-0edc4e99e384

Thanks for the link 👍

🙄🤦‍♀️ Even people who agree with GC women can’t stop themselves from admonishing the woman to 'be nice, be kind', so frustrating 🤬

If Badenoch thinks such “soft” skills are irrelevant, she may find out the hard way that they still matter

But actually in that meeting she did demonstrate an ability to be charming with that one sensible woman who clearly shared KBs views on being concerned about GI and young people. She too seemed better informed and they shared a moment. Author of the piece must have been one of those fools.

And her father a doctor and mother a professor of physiology apparently (according to Wikipedia) so fully aware of biology.

Women have to choose between being seen as competent or likeable, not both. I suspect that this will apply even more to Kemi as she is Black as well as female.

I'm not surprised that she has chosen to be seen as competent. I've done the same.

I see that the Guardian has a front page article, claiming that it's "Probably Unlawful" to follow the new advice. There's nothing to actually explain why, or how that would be, but there's a link to another article, where a teacher says that it has increased transphobic bullying in her school and that she has a transgender "daughter."

It smacks of TROSH desperation, to me.

Lawyers jumping on the gravy train as per.

I still don"t follow the argument that not allowing social transition in school is a breach of the EA2010. A person with the PC of gender reassignment cannot be treated less favourably than someone of the same sex without that PC but how does that translate into schools having to use new names, pronouns, toilets etc? Particularly in light of Cass 'not a neutral act' statement.

I suggest that those who want to ignore the guidance should bring court cases. Bring it on.

Although, it may be a pointless exercise considering there likely will be a new government by the time the case was heard and who knows if they will keep the guidance.

The Guardian is pure clickbait these days

Well, I agree, especially on this subject.

Let’s hope, with his success rate, that Foxy takes a case.

That Guardian article is some weird piece of shit writing.

Yes, it's a bit sauteed bollocks in bollock sauce.

And my God is there a LOT of that on the menu this week.

If the guidance is going to 'increase tranphobic bullying' then if you've actually read the guidance, you would have to draw the conclusion that 'transphobic bullying' actually means 'other children don't have to get undressed in front of you' and 'don't have to use compelled language for you;. And staff cannot transition children without accountability and parental involvement.

And that's it. That's what all the fuss is about. That other children are to have rights TOO, and safeguarding cannot be used to politicise children and separate them from their parents.

And then you start to realise what you're dealing with, and that 'nice' isn't going to help here.

I agree, you're spot on. They've had their own way and like all spoiled brats eventually told, "Sorry darling, you can't have that," a fist clenching, foot stamping tantrum has ensued.

If the guidance is going to 'increase tranphobic bullying' then if you've actually read the guidance, you would have to draw the conclusion that 'transphobic bullying' actually means 'other children don't have to get undressed in front of you' and 'don't have to use compelled language for you;

That literally is what many of these people think.

Yes. I think you have summed it up.

It is like the brain dead declaration that people who prioritise female people’s need for sex based rights to remain sex based are ‘anti trans’. In that logic universe it then works that those supporting the deprioritisation by elevating male people’s demands above female people’s needs is ‘anti-woman’. And those throwing around anti-trans don’t seem to like that bit of logic being pointed out ….

@AutumnCrow @EasternStandard

The Guardian seems to deliberately misrepresent data in articles to drive outrage and clicks. As soon as you look into the source data, the claims that they make often fall apart.
It is a pity as in the past the paper was a good place to look for a well reasoned article.
What was it that changed at the Guardian?

You're quite right. Maya Forstater wrote a brilliant piece on the Sex Matters website pointing out just this.

I used to read it but noticed during the pandemic how skewed and badly evidenced articles had become

TRA articles too. Apparently something to do with relying on US funding? I haven’t looked it up though

It is quite right that they don't have to do any of those things. As I understand it schools do have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, but that is it.

And to make sure that they do not victimise the pupil, which essentially means making sure they can fully access the school and education.

RMW was on GB News saying teachers and schools can ignore the guidance and Michael Foran has given his view on the guidance
https://x.com/michaelpforan/status/1737204273870483600?s=61&t=W8z-NdrPTYy21FuiQuezcw

A well known barrister on tv, advising schools to ignore the democratic government and their guidance.

And not safeguard children basically.

The 'they are out of their minds and a law change is now going to pass in the HoC and HoL' evidence file in Downing Street must be needing a couple of new shelves this week.

If schools ignore this guidance, how honest is the claim that they have crying out for guidance for years?