Government tells schools to teach “biological sex” and contest gender “ideology”: do you support this? YouGov Daily survey

[IwantToRetire]

Should school children be taught that it is possible to change gender?

• 53% agree wrong being taught radical or baseless theories about sex and gender
• 49% agree teach 2 sexes and gender identity a contested topic
• 53% agree should not be taught possible to change gender
• 41% agree should not be taught gender identity different to biological sex

But 49% say Government proposal politically motivated!

https://www.yougov.chat/

I've just realised there doesn't seem to be a thread about the Government statement.

So just in case anyone hasn't heard:

Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID https://news.sky.com/story/age-limits-to-be-imposed-on-school-sex-education-for-first-time-reports-13136134

Plan to ban sex education for children under nine https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69013002

But 49% say Government proposal politically motivated!

I don’t think that’s surprising. Just because you agree with something doesn’t mean you trust the motivations of politicians to be anything other than furthering their own interests. The Tory’s have been in power for a decade and now, just before an election, they decide to stop something that they allowed to happen in the first place.

But also, to a large extent, within a democracy that’s what politicians are supposed to do. And hopefully what Labour will do too, as they seem to be. Changing direction because the majority of people don’t support the way you were going is politically motivated, but it’s also what democracy is all about.

It's his the bbc are doing "balance" on this I think. "Politically motivated."

Fuck off it's science and safeguarding

This was a thread about the early leaks

"Teachers to tell children Gender Ideology is a contested belief" www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/5075106-teachers-to-tell-children-gender-ideology-is-a-contested-belief

I listened to several discussions on radio/ tv yesterday about this. I was not surprised that practically everyone who spoke implied that there was no problem, just a fuss about nothing and of course schools are not promoting gender ideology.
There seemed to be a deliberate missing of the point, even by journalists who I would have considered reasonably well informed.
That said, I thought the reported government statement was poorly worded.

Questions were really bad in that.

One about consent / sexual violence being taught to under 9s

Consent starts very early within friendships children have. Yes or no to games etc.

I'm not going to say a 7 yr old should learn about sexual violence but I am going to say they should know to check other children want to play a game etc

Calling it political is aimed at casting doubt on its legitimacy without commenting on its contents. It is the equivalent of playing the man and not the ball.

What does politically motivated mean? That it's a vote winner? Doesn't that mean most people agree with it?

Politically motivated appears to mean that the conservatives are doing it because they think it is a vote winner rather than because they think it is needed, with overtones of if you support this you are aligning with the Tories.

Those I was listening to on the radio who were saying this (who hadn't read it!) were also saying that they already complied with what it said (i.e. the summary they had heard about) and therefore the guidance wasn't needed. To which the answer is surely, "That is great!" and " This guidance is really aimed at those who are not already complying, as well as to support all schools where parents, pupils or outside bodies challenge the school's position".

Haven't heard how the Tories sold it in their statement, so it is possible they shot themselves in the foot.

If so many people are upset that schools won't be teaching gender identity to children, then the parents can teach their own children about gender identity.

Just heard C4 news virtually sniggering throughout their report on this, and then summed it up by saying it wasn't even based on any research.

Which they claim is what the Minister said.

Keegan’s case unravelled rather dramatically on the airwaves this morning in a rather mortifying exchange:

GK: I’ve always known that trans women aren’t women.

EB: But you wrote that trans women are women. I’ve got it in front of me when you wrote it.

GK: I’ll go into the details because I did think about it. Somebody who has changed their gender, who has changed from a man to a woman, has gone through the full reassignment, is who I had in my head at that time. So we were not all aware of the various campaigns and all the various groups. And of course, somebody that was a man, that has transitioned, that has fully transitioned is known as a woman.

EB: So you do still think that? So you do still think that a man that has transitioned — a trans woman — is a woman? You’ve just said that.

GK: There’s a huge difference between self-identification, people who want to identify but still have a male body, biologically are male, and then there are a very, very small number of people — but I think we have to be really sensitive about these people and not lose them in this debate — who do have and have had gender reassignment and reassignment surgery and they have gone to a great deal of a lot of pain…

EB: Are they women?

GK: Well, this is what we should say. I personally believe if you’ve gone to that level… If you’ve got the gender recognition, you’ve got the reassignment, then you are legally and medically allowed to say you’re a woman.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/listen-keegan-in-excruciating-muddle-over-woman-definition/

53% agree should not be taught possible to change gender

Does anyone think you can change gender though?

You either believe gender is social stereotypes and something imposed on people rather than something you can be.
Or you believe people are born with a gender identity that may or may not 'match' your biological sex and even if that gender changes it is still a single gender e.g. genderfluid

Do you think people answering that are taking gender to mean biological sex? It weird because they also mention biological sex.

It's the Tru Trans argument. And is held by a significant number of people.

It does eventually fall apart, but it takes time. And some people, women included, simply cannot detach themselves from the idea that women, both their physical presence and the very concept of them, should be therapy for some men.

And some people, women included, simply cannot detach themselves from the idea that women, both their physical presence and the very concept of them, should be therapy for some men.

Perfect description.

Do you think people answering that are taking gender to mean biological sex? It weird because they also mention biological sex.

That's partly why I quoted those stats.

I started to wonder if people didn't understand the word biological!

And then this:

• 53% agree should not be taught possible to change gender
• 41% agree should not be taught gender identity different to biological sex

Is there really an almost 50/50 split between TRA position and GC position amongst most people?

(YouGov chat is a self selecting group, so not really any way representative. And by now the responses could be very different.)

I think there is a school of thought that changing your gender presentation changes your gender to some extent depending on how successfully you “pass” as you will then get treated as your presentation gender. But that doesn’t change your sex and will not give you access to knowing what it’s like to be the other sex only what it’s like to be subject to their gender expectations. And obviously that experience can never be complete as you will never have “passed” your entire life and will still have the experience of being your sex and treated as your sex for some of it.

It may be a problem with understanding, but I think the questions just aren’t that coherent and are entirely inappropriate for a UK audience.

YouGov seem to only be interested in debates as two sided (a constant failing of theirs) and in this context they inevitably shape those sides as TRA v. US Right opposition. I don’t think there are many people in the UK who take either of those two positions. So the results they get are a mess of people trying to fit their round pegs into square holes.

Yes I agree @NumberTheory

TRA v. US Right opposition

Sorry there is no way YouGov does that. It is very firmly based in the UK Labour vs Tory ritual, which often make their political surveys meaningless as the cant get past the 2 part system.

And in this chat survey, as in most, the majority who respond are also very stuck in the Labour vs Tory.

I dont know why so many on FWR think the US right as any impact on UK politics (although realise some admire Trump just for being rampantly individualistic).

I'm on another thread were the majority of comments seem to think everyone is following right wing christian fundamentalist US politicss.

Ironically the only people who are obsessed by them are those who elevates themselves as pure left, and rather than accept thes are alienating many people (including GC women) with their failed politics randomly say its because we have been taken in by american reactionaries.

I think we really need to deal with the reality of the situation here in the UK. And not let the false left narrative that anyone who disagrees with them is some simple minded idiot corrupted by the UK right.

It totally fails to deal with the system in the UK which has far more to do with class and other UK historical social strands than the UK.

I think it’s because Labour bought in to the TRA approach and painted opposition as being rightwing bigotry and the left leaning media, populated as it is by people who listen to political spin doctors more than the people they serve, went along with it. But it doesn’t reflect the debate in the UK and Labour are having a hard time pivoting into reality.

The Conservatives, though, have not bought into that line and I don’t think the YouGov polls reflects the Tory position on this at all.

You’re only giving one half of the results. If 53% say they don’t think you should teach that you can change gender, that doesn’t mean 47% disagree with that position. There are always lots of don’t knows in these things.

I'm struggling to find a link to the actual consultation. Can anyone help? Lots of PSHE teachers on forums saying just wait it out; once Labour are in they can carry on teaching GI as fact.

Do you think people answering that are taking gender to mean biological sex? It weird because they also mention biological sex.

The problem is that it genuinely is complicated.

The intention of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 was that people with a Gender Recognition Certificate should be treated as if they had actually changed sex. Several court judgements have confirmed this and the Equality Act 2010 calls such people "transsexuals".

(And the EA created the mess with exceptions, once realisation about the GRA's real-world implications had dawned.)

I suspect many of the public think you can be born one sex (which they would call biological sex) and become another.

"Medically allowed to be a woman"????? Wtf does that mean?

https://consult.education.gov.uk/rshe-team/review-of-the-rshe-statutory-guidance/

The link to the pdf is at the bottom of the page.