My response from Caroline Lucas re the Liz Truss proposal

[HelenDamnation1]

Thank you for getting in touch about the Private Members’ Bill that Liz Truss MP had on the list for potential debate in Parliament last Friday.

In the end, there was not time for her Bill to be debated and the Hansard record of the morning’s proceedings is here.

To provide you with some background, because Liz Truss is a backbench MP and not a Government Minister, her Bill is not likely to get anywhere. Backbenchers often use the Private Members’ Bill process to raise an issue/make a point, but such Bills don’t progress without Government support and I haven’t seen any indication that the Government are backing her Bill.

I am concerned that Liz Truss’s Bill represents an attempt to deepen the ‘culture war’ that is at the centre of the hard right playbook that politicians like her follow. Moreover, there’s a real risk around proposed changes to teaching guidance concerning transgender and gender questioning students. I'm very worried about any changes that would force schools to inform parents if a pupil seeks to socially transition in school. It is very important for pupils to know that school is a place of safety and respect for them and it would be totally unacceptable for Ministers to instruct schools to out trans children to their parents.

Outing a child to a parent/guardian is potentially a serious safeguarding matter, and it is not at all clear how this would sit alongside the safeguarding responsibilities of schools. As I understand it, schools are generally following a case-by-case approach that successfully balances respect for each child’s needs and wishes, with the school’s existing statutory responsibilities.

On the Equality Act, my view is that changing the law so that ‘sex’ is defined as 'biological sex' for the purposes of the Equality Act would gravely undermine trans-people's rights, including to go about their lives in privacy and dignity. Trans-people are often subject to serious employment or other discrimination, and to ridicule, harassment and hate crime. It is vital that there are proper mechanisms in law to protect a trans-person's privacy should they want or need it.

I am a proud feminist and women's rights campaigner and it is my view that we still have far to go in the campaign for true equality and an end to the patriarchy. I believe that standing up for trans rights is a fundamental part of that campaign, and we have more to gain by working together to challenge the prejudice, discrimination and exclusion so many women and trans-people continue to face.

It remains a great sadness to me that women's and trans rights are now characterised by some people, like Liz Truss MP, as being on different 'sides' in 'a culture war'. My view is this is detrimental to all women, both trans and cis. I remain of the view that it is both necessary and possible to promote and protect improved trans people’s rights, whilst at the same time defending and advancing hard won women’s rights.

Whilst we take a different position on this issue, I am grateful for your continued engagement. Hearing from constituents is hugely important to me

Best wishes,

Caroline

Caroline Lucas MP
Brighton Pavilion

Parliamentary Office
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

Well yes. And for the record, I didn’t.
But it’s nothing compared to the abuse and death threats I and other women have received.

And I mean actual women. Not blokes in frocks.

I know you did not make the original comment. But you appeared to be condoning it.

A brainless cut-and-paste response is not abuse. It is ridiculous to equate what CL said with the abuse and death threats of TRAs. She might be TRA, but she's not being abusive.

This. Absolutely.

This is something I don’t understand. As soon as a child changes their name and teachers use different pronouns they are outing the pupil to everyone in the class and wider school community. Now while parents may not know initially, the reason it has become news is that at some point they have found out because so many people know and someone slips up. The only way to not out a child would be not to use a new name etc. As people have said what happens if something happens in school concerning the child, an accident while playing sport, an incident in the changing room, etc. How do they go about explaining that to the parents?

The "I'm a proud feminist" is so fucking predictable. See also "I'm a feminist to my fingertips" Sturgeon.

Fuck. Right. Off.

I'm a former SNP member, I recently got a "survey" from my SNP MP - the one who thinks her chromosomes are XY. I completed it honestly and added a few comments of my own. I hope it reaches her office before 1 April or I'm in big trouble.

It is very important for pupils to know that school is a place of safety and respect for them and it would be totally unacceptable for Ministers to instruct schools to out trans children to their parents.

Caroline Lucas can take that view if she wishes. But she must recognise that most women (indeed, most parents) would strongly disagree. Schools are places where adults teach children. Not defer to their every peer-influenced whim.

Are you the HelenD from The Old Place, OP?

<waves>

How disappointing to see a politician voicing the anti safeguarding trope that parents are a threat to children and that random adults should keep secrets from them. It's one thing for people with no safeguarding experience and in thrall to transactivists to voice this anti child / anti family nonsense. But it's really serious when supposedly informed politicians take the same approach that predators use to children - "no need to tell your parents, our little secret" and all that.

Only the courts can remove parental rights, the police and social services can't do so without a court's permission. Parents of children in care of the State still retain parental responsibility and are consulted about their children's lives and activities.

Politicians who misrepresent the law in this way are professionally dangerous and should be ashamed of themselves for displaying such deep ignorance..

You could play TRA bingo with Caroline’s letter.

While I disagree with her vehemently, I don’t agree with calling her a C-word. Although her response is horrifying, at least she’s had the big brass balls to state her position clearly, with no room for doubt, unlike that confusing, wishy-washy, cowardy custard Starmer. She’s laid it all out on the line and I respect her honesty. Doesn’t stop her being very, very, dangerously wrong on this issue.

He also thinks rapists and sex offenders should be anonymous until charged

So do I. In fact I would go further and say until convicted. Innocent until proven guilty and that applies to any crime.

As for Caroline Lucas, I agree the use of the c word on this thread is totally unacceptable and while you may not agree with her, she replied although her reply is very strange - but yes the Greens are captured as we saw in Scotland.

And traffic congestion in Brighton would be worse if people didn't cycle. It's not worse because they do.

How brave are you?

Going back to get on the safeguarding point would be good.

Can we reference some best practice safeguarding which explains why she's talking nonsense?

Sick making really.

Lol no, I'm a die hard Northerner.
I used to be a green voter, but very much not on board with their ID politics. I had hoped Caroline Lucas was stepping back as she wanted to get back to grassroots environmental politics.

I do agree that "the culture war that is at the centre of the hard right playbook" is bollocks.

Their sexuality as in their sexual orientation? Or their questioning of gender?

I was meaning sexual orientation, the problem is the same parents who would abuse a child because of this would be the same patents who would do the same to a child who is confused about their gender. I would assume CL is thinking along the same lines. Sometimes children need confidentiality.

There is absolutely no excuse for calling a woman a cunt though.

Well I suggest you read more about grooming, repeat sex offenders and how they are caught. It's fairly common for police to track down victims by making enquiries about an offender, especially if that offender was prolific and had access to lots of victims e.g. school teachers, sports coaches, priests etc. This would not be possible if there was suspect anonymity. A famous example of where non-anonymity secured convictions and caused more victims to come forward being John Worboys.

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/blog/why-we-must-reject-anonymity-for-suspects-in-sexual-offence-cases/

Those are the kinds of men you want to protect with your black and white "innocent until proven guilty" approach. No thanks. I'd rather catch prolific rapists and have the best chance of locking them up.

How do you feel a teacher should deal with a vulnerable teen who says they are confused about their gender?

Dear birthing parent/father of Billy,

We did not notify you that Billy has been shooting up in the school toilets. It is very important for pupils to know that school is a place of safety and respect for them and we consider it totally unacceptable for any teacher at this school to out heroin-using pupils to their parents. We suggest you educate yourselves on this topic and remind you that the use of heroin by teenagers is completely safe and reversible.

Best wishes.

It depends what you mean by 'confused about their gender'. I think most children are probably confused about gender these days. I'm pretty confused about gender myself, particularly when people say they 'have' a gender, because to me gender is something imposed from outside, not something people 'have'.

But if you mean, for example, a girl who is saying she is a boy and wants to use a different name and for people to refer to her using male pronouns, then to do this is not a neutral act (as explained in the interim Cass report). It is a safeguarding issue for this reason, and also because this girl may be doing other things which put her in danger, such as using a breast binder or obtaining testosterone from the internet. The parents should be informed.

If it is believed that the parents would be a danger to the child if they were informed, then normal safeguarding procedures should be followed, where other bodies may also need to be informed (such as social services). But the parents should always be informed.

Keeping this a secret between the child and a teacher or teachers goes against normal safeguarding. These children should not be excluded from normal safeguarding protocols which are there to keep them safe.

I no longer believe in “innocent until proven guilty”.

This was discussed on another thread where a boy acquitted of rape, who was lauded by the BBC for his supposed “innocence” (while the probable 13 year old victim was smeared as being overly sexual) was later convicted of a different rape.

Given the appalling rate of rapes not coming to court, I think I would assume that men who actually are brought to trial probably have significant evidence against them, even if ultimately it wasn’t enough for the charge to stick.

Obviously those found not guilty should not be treated in any way detrimentally, nor should they be punished, but I think I would say that the charges against them were not proven rather than naïvely going along with the untruthful idea that anyone who went to trial, but isn’t proven guilty is innocent. I suspect the majority are not.

There's no simple answer. Children shouldn't be in this position and if the DfE, unions & schools hadn't been captured by the organisations telling children their bodies are flawed but a sex change is the solution, many thousands of children wouldn't be under the delusion changing sex is possible and desirable.
However, if a child does confide in a member of staff, the adult ignores transactivists (& Caroline Lucas), and responds using the guidance in Keeping Children Safe in Education that every adult in schools is taught:
"That sounds hard, I'm not allowed to keep secrets and if I think you're in difficulties, then I need to talk to * / DSL." with various additional comments that all let kids know they've nothing to be frightened of and they will be supported but teachers always share concerns with...."

The presumption is always that the adults with the responsibility for looking after a child (parents / carers) MUST be involved as they're can't protect their child if they don't know key issues about them. We know all this as our safeguarding guidance is statutory, developed and amended following all the Serious Case Reviews following the death of a child.

Sorry for the lengthy response but safeguarding is nuanced and child centred - very unlike the ramblings of politicians like Caroline Lucas.

I was BunnyLebowski from the old place!
<waves>

Well at least she took the time to respond at length. Her letter makes her views on this issue pellucidly clear. She's as mad as a box of frogs.

😂
It actually hurts to read that reply (from CL). It's truly shocking. (As we as lacking in any logic).

I totally agree, the name calling is completely inappropriate

I do disagree that CL has a totally thought through opinion. Just using ‘both trans and cis women’ demonstrated it perfectly….transwomen have feminine feelz, cis women (excuse the term) have feminine feelz, but there is no mention of the very very many women who don’t have feminine feelz. And I’m fed up with people like CL imposing their belief in gendered souls on the rest of us. That is very much demonstrating someone who has completely failed to follow the thought through to its logical conclusion

The Equalities Act has a specific characteristic for gender reassignment, saying that changing the Equality Act to specify sex and that would restrict trans rights seems rather disingenuous.

Quite. It could only be true on the basis that sex and gender are interchangeable.

Caroline Lucas is one of the few politicians who I respect. But whilst I don't agree with her on this matter, she has taken the time to give you a comprehensive reply (and she's correct about a private member's bill).

Yes I agree with this comment. I mean I disagree with CL but at least she's been honest about her opinion rather than just giving you some vague waffle.

Out of interest, would you say the same about a politician trying to impose Christian beliefs on to the rest of us? Someone like Michael Gove, telling us to practice "Christian forgiveness"? Or Rishi Sunak and "Christian tolerance"?

I feel very similarly about those phrases as a non believer in God, yet haven't seen much about politicians imposing those beliefs on us.