Irresponsible article in SecEd

[Brainworm]

SecEd is a publication that is read by many who work in secondary education. It purports to publish articles on best practice in secondary education.

I have just read an article advising on how to support CYP with gender dysphoria, post the Cass Review. It presents high risk of suicide as fact and refers to ‘feeling born in the wrong body’ without highlighting the problems with this conceptualisation. It even goes down the ‘sex isn’t binary’ route.

What strikes me about the article is that instead of criticising the Cass Review, the article is written as though there is no conflict between the advice given in the article and that provided by the Cass Review. I’m guessing this is a new strategy as the strategy to ‘de bunk’ it has failed.

Here is the editor’s email, should you wish to point out how irresponsible and ill informed the article is:
[email protected]

Here is the article:
https://buff.ly/8t0VGMx

Few people understand that biology. Sex is not a simple dichotomy (Thornton & Gliga, 2021). Genes – XX female, XY male – do not determine biological sex. All foetuses start out on a female path. The role of the Y chromosome is to produce testosterone, which diverts development to the male path – it is the hormone that determines biological sex.

<sigh>🙄

I've noticed TRAs in Ireland using the same 'let's not argue with Cass, let's pick out the bits that we can use' approach eg TENI's (Transgender Equality Network Ireland) first, 'statespersonlike' response to the Cass review:

'While we will be taking more time to comprehensively read the full report, we agree with the findings in the report that a single centralised national service is not an effective method of delivering gender affirming care..'

And ignore the rest of Cass!

And this is why the government needs to issue guidance for schools. The last lot, that we had been promised for years, disappeared into the ether when the Tories lost the election.

It really is time the government dealt with selective reality. It cannot be tolerated in people in positions of public service, responsibility or care and education for children. Right to belief isn't a right to be mad as a box of frogs with vulnerable people.

The role of the Y chromosome is to produce testosterone, which diverts development to the male path – it is the hormone that determines biological sex.

And where pray, does the Y chromosome come from if not at conception? Does it hang around in utero and jump on board a week or two later?

It really is rubbish - don't nearly all mammals look pretty much the same immediately after conception, but they don't mysteriously produce a dog when a cat is expected.

I love the way it starts "Few people understand that biology" before confidently going on to state something entirely inaccurate. Actually, yes, sex is a simple dichotomy and biological sex is a matter of genetics. Though "XX" and "XY" are chromosomes, not genes. (Chromosomes carry genes.) I mean, that is a hell of a lot of basic errors in a few short sentences.

Apart from which, if sex isn't a simple dichotomy, why would a person want to transition from one sex to the other?

And whatever sex they are at birth, GD begins in early childhood

Hijras

They are at high risk of suicide

A percentage of those who transition will change their minds and want to return to their birth sex. Poor quality research means that we do not even know how common that is – though the research we do have suggests it is rare.

toxic

intersex

So it is entirely possible that a baby has the brain structure typical of one gender, but the genitals of the other.

All foetuses start out on a female path.

All signs that you are in the presence of a true believer

I guess it's inevitable that anything which uses the Cass Report will position gender identity as if it's a real thing. The Cass Report itself does this.

So, on the one hand it's "OK" if schools lean in to the Cass Report in this way. Just as with the Cass Report, in some ways it's helpful if believers (those who believe that everyone has a gender identity) are looking with caution at both medical interventions and social transition.

However, what's spectacularly unhelpful here is a) conveniently forgetting that there is draft guidance for schools (the Gender Questioning Children guidance) that makes it clear that not everyone believes we all have a gender identity and b) spouting misinformation about biology - as per PPs' comments.

The consequence of positioning gender identity as factual and muddling up biology is that it tells teachers that sex is a spectrum and that it's important to let children figure out which sex they want to be. FFS.

Yes, people will continue to believe that everyone has a gender identity. Just as 2 billion people continue to believe that it's possible for a virgin to give birth. In both cases, those who believe need to set aside (or find alternative explanations) for observable scientific facts about biology. With gender identity, the "truth" rests on the explanation that we're all female to start with and testosterone makes us male by differing amounts. With Christianity, the "truth" rests on the explanation that Mary didn't need sperm to get pregnant because god made it happen.

This article should make it clear that the "science" that's presented is contested. It should also make it clear that not everyone believes that we all have a gender identity - and that any teachers who position this belief as fact risk confusing children who may be struggling with the emotional turbulence of puberty. Children rely on the adults around them to make sense of the world. They don't need teachers conflating belief with facts.

I've not got many followers on X but hopefully one of those that I tagged in may pick up on this:

https://x.com/BonfireLady/status/1912092161799073922?t=-wdgHy3_nHSuhIhQWsva1Q&s=19

Thanks for flagging it OP.

It's important that the education sector recognises the importance of the Cass Report. However, cherry-picking the bits that prop up a belief in gendered souls is simply going to lead to more harm being done to vulnerable children.

It's utterly mad that safeguarding is being sacrificed in favour of spreading a belief that we all have a gender identity and the idea that children should be supported on an affirmation pathway, so that their body and perceived gendered soul can be aligned.

Hopefully enough believers will listen to Cass (a fellow believer) and take the time to understand why it's important to recognise that social transition is not a neutral act. Yes, believe in gendered souls if you must but at least understand the consequences of this belief when autistic and/or same-sex attracted adolescents absorb it as a way to understand what it means to "be" male or female. It's not an innocuous belief, it's one that leads to irrerversible life-impacting and life-limiting harm when children and young adults decide that the only way to live "authentically" is to remove body parts and take hormones which damage their endocrine system.

Everyone here has a good grasp of basic biology though it's a shame nobody seems to be able to go any further.

Further in what way?

Plenty of people on here can deconstruct the DSD (mis)information brilliantly. There are tons of threads about it, particularly so from during the Olympics.

However, there's currently no need because basic biology is all that's required.

I mean my PhD is in immunology so it's not technically my area but I feel I have a pretty good grasp of the concepts

And I can spot the logical flaws in an argument that says "biological developmental pathways can malfunction ...therefore people can change sex"

I've also never seen convincing evidence that brains can be divided into manbrain and ladybrain but feel free to educate me.

And I can spot the logical flaws in an argument that says "biological developmental pathways can malfunction ...therefore people can change sex"

It feels like it's time for a rap.....

BonfireLady · Today 11:50

I've not got many followers on X but hopefully one of those that I tagged in may pick up on this.

I've retweeted it, with a bit of luck, Musky Boy might see it. He followed me, which I'm not sure is a good, or bad thing...

Yeah, none of us know anything about science, given we are just Mums, right?

We've already had clownfish I see, next will be that Scientific American thing with the pretty spectrum

The ever brilliant (and patient) biology Emma Hilton has grabbed it:

https://x.com/FondOfBeetles/status/1912110283146899742?t=ZKgjzhNRMYeK0AhG4aaBiw&s=19

She's also looped in the Cass Review team. It's perfectly possible to hold a belief in something, yet recognise observable scientific reality (e.g. Darwin believed in god but also observed evolution). Hopefully Cass and her team recognise where the line sits on this too, given they are aware of the harms of the affirmation model.

Ideally Bridget Phillipson would step in but I won't hold my breath on that. She's been remarkably silent on the practices and tenets of gender belief being shared by schools as if they are facts. Surely she too has a line in the sand?! The "extreme caution" mentioned in the statutory safeguarding guidance (KCSIE) regarding gender questioning children presumably doesn't include promoting scientific inaccuracies.

@Bobbymoore123 if you want to have a more in depth discussion about biology, maybe pop over to X and have a chat with her?

Not sure Bobby knows what an RNA polymerase is without googling.

Quick update:

Emma Hilton's post has attracted a fair bit of attention....

8 likes so far for the original SecEd tweet that promotes the article. Over 1.2k likes for the correct explanation of biology by Emma (the image/link I posted above was her reply to their tweet).

https://x.com/SecEd_Education/status/1912024408459292750?t=NkZuuVYJ6vi8YtvhSg0BKg&s=19

Sadly there will still be plenty of teachers who read the original publication and haven't seen any of this.

SecEd on X appears to be followed by Wes Streeting. Hopefully he will pick it up one way or another. I can see you tagged him @BonfireLady

"Few people understand biology, this is how we can spout absolute bollocks and no one will question it"

I have a degree in media. This has taught me how to spot bollocks. Literal and metaphorical.

I also have a GCSE in dual science. This suffices.

That's a nice succinct takedown from Fond of Beetles.

I looked up the author, Dr Stephanie Thornton. She's a clinical psychologist and has, incredibly, written a book called Understanding Human Development: Biological, Social and Psychological Processes from Conception to Adult Life.

Presumably Stephanie is still in the process of understanding it herself. Given her failure at the first hurdle (basic human biology), she appears to have a long way to go.

Perhaps her next book should be about irony.

(Edited to clarify which she/her I was referring to here. A true pronoun fail 🙃)

Thanks to BonfireLady

I now learn that I'm not followed by the real Musk. I'm rubbish at Twatter, I can't find my followers, nor people I follow!

I went to a workshop recently not in uk that purported to be about diversity and safety but turned out to be similar in content and nobody else spoke out against the proposition that people could change sex, that men could be lesbians, and equally batshit nonsense. When hijras were included I pointed out that Hijras were well know for prostitution rings and kidnapping and castrating boys, which apart from not being a good example to follow is downright dangerous. I am lucky in that I don’t have a job to lose but everyone else was nodding along, mostly teachers and a couple of parents . Eventually the speaker, gay man stated that obviously some in the LGBTQI community don’t agree with everything. As a lesbian , I told him that I am not a part of such a community, just an L.