Finally! Keeping children safe in education has been updated!

[WarriorN]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6650a1967b792ffff71a83e8/Keepingchildrennsafeinneducation_2024.pdf

The Telegraph have done an article about it, she also talks about JKR's intervention

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/23/bridget-phillipson-labour-may-scrap-gender-ideology-ban/

https://archive.ph/FTklA over the paywall

I'd summarise it as 'transpeople, transpeople, don't look at that, look at this, transpeople'.

Note how she answers by talking about trans people - children evidently not on her radar. They're just small adults aren't they? So what's right for the middle aged men must also be for children no?

I want to scream. You are so right and once seen it is so clear that all child safeguarding is disregarded when it comes to the trans topic. What on earth is wrong with people? Bridget is baffling me. Her background coming from working class roots and a mother of two. Why does she not see what we see?

Cass should definitely have been mentioned by her

Labour avoids committing to draft schools gender guidance www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxxx821l57go

Yes, absolutely.

I don't think they realise quite how angry people are about this.

Sterilising children? It's not a good look, Labour.

I've been wondering why a seemingly rational politician like Bridget Phillipson defaulted to talking about trans people when asked about children. It's a standard tactic of all the trans lobbyists - to ignore the need to safeguard children and talk about adult wishes instead.
I suspect here's been virtually no discussion of Cass / the pathway to infertility, double mastectomies, bodily mutilation etc in the Labour hierarchy. You're not going to raise these issues when you're sitting next to parents with children caught up in this - especially if they've been cheerleading them on (no doubt suppressing any mounting horror at what's happening). With Stonewall literally in the room, how could any labour politician or staff member express anything other than positivity about a child going down this route?
That's why it's only Wes Streeting (a gay man) who's been able to appreciate some of what Cass has found (homophobia & transitioning gay children).
It's just a thought and I don't mean any disrespect to parents with children going through this - they need all the support available. But it might be why they're so out of step with the rest of the population watching in horror as children think their bodies are wrong and they must change sex. They don't have the difficult, painful, hard conversations as they're just not allowed. Only positive affirmation is acceptable. So that's why they don't talk about Cass as they haven't (and some of them can't) engage with it.
Which leaves us with a massive problem in terms of what they'll do with all this.

Re: basing policy for all children entirely on listening to parents of so called ‘trans’ children, would be a terrible mistake.

A former doctor from the Tavistock said he felt it was often a case of ‘transhausens by proxy’.

Susy Green’s effeminate son ( who might have grown up to be gay) was unacceptable to his father, and they had him given hormones then castrated abroad when he was sixteen.

The child Kai in America was beaten as a toddler for liking feminine things by his Christian Evangelical mother. She had said to herself ‘Is he going to be gay ?’ When he started age 4 to say ( from his depression) that he wanted to go to Jesus ( be dead), she relented and made him trans. His story is a documentary full of approbation on the internet.

Overton - Bridget also has to go with her boss on this and he doesn't care about the Cass report. She will have seen how women who dissent have been sidelined - like Rosie.

It seems she simply thinks that ‘being trans’ is the same as being gay - you are just that way. And she is a good, kind person who would of course only want to help them on their journey in life.

There is no evidence in anything she has said that she has read or been informed about the any of real issues whatsoever. Who would have thought it possible.

This morning the Labour policy of reforming the way gender recognition certificates need to be obtained was announced on BBC news.

Absolutely. Dismissing safeguarding often comes from the top in institutions.

But I just hoped that with a government commissioned report (Cass) that evidences the lack of any coherent evidence to support brutal surgery and untested drugs on children, most politicians would feel able to cite that. A basic expectaion that MPs understand ethics and speak out when abuse is evidenced?
The fact she doesn't mention it and that safeguarding children is nowehere in her vocabulary suggests it's not spoken about in Labour. While the terrible, intrusive requirements of applying for a GRC are of course spoken about by all of them. 😑

It seems she simply thinks that ‘being trans’ is the same as being gay - you are just that way. And she is a good, kind person who would of course only want to help them on their journey in life.

Yes, this describes the vibe I'm getting from her too. It also describes exactly where I was when I started this journey and my daughter told me she thought she might be trans. My response... "OK". Exactly as it would have been if she said she thought she might be gay. It didn't phase me, I just wanted her to be happy.

I was ignorant about what "being trans" meant so I set off to find out, to support my daughter. Within a short space of time I discovered the Interim Cass Report and the NHS information that the impact of puberty blockers on the developing brain was unknown.

To see the likely future education secretary reflecting a similar level of ignorance post Cass - the final report (I'll accept benefit of the doubt that it was easy to miss the Interim Report unless you're in that specific discipline in healthcare) - is both dangerous and unacceptable.

Three possibilities I can think of:

1. She knows more than she shares but she's a careerist and will wait for Keir to tell her what to do
2. She is personally invested in supporting "trans children" e.g. a relative, friend
3. She has been briefed with so much bias that she thinks anything she hears about protecting children from the impact of gender identity belief is bigoted noise

I really hope that JKR wades in with two feet on this one. I appreciate her main focus is on women's rights but this is a significant backwards step for vulnerable children and it needs lots of attention drawing to it. I worry that it will slip through largely unnoticed with the current headlines re Labour making it easier to obtain a GRC and the inevitable focus that this (rightly) generates from "GC" quarters.

All those seem possible but
it is so worrying that she never even touched on specific concerns if only to refute them. It really was as though she does not know what they are.

How lucky it is that your daughter has you.

All the cognitive dissonance that people who support this must have going on in their heads. The most recent one I've been thinking about is how they can believe there is no clash of rights while simultaneously immediately defaulting to talking about transwomen when asked about women's rights. Or transpeople when asked about children's safeguarding. Or transpeople when....anything!