“A school faces a threat of legal action over policies that protect all children – so we’re fighting back.”

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://goodlaw.social/a8mo

the GLP are sort of the curse of bad luck so let’s see what happens…

...moving on...

If anyone knows of LED Sign Tony - it springs to mind.

https://www.instagram.com/lclightbox/

Aaah, now so many aspects of this story start to make sense. Thank you.

Can you tell us anything about the progress of your case, OP? No pressure, I can think of lots of reasons why it might not be possible or sensible...

Declared conflict of interest?

The Governors bios are collectively a DEI dream. It is Brighton, after all.

It is hard to keep your principles when someone you love makes their relationship with you dependent on ditching your principles. My wife and I each came to the conclusion that we were not prepared to be coerced into pretending that our son is our daughter. We told him so, and our relationships with him are very strained. This is horrible for us and for him, but I do not believe that a relationship based on coerced pretence is worth anything at all. I hope that at some point he will recognise that, and remember when our relationship used to be based on mutual respect despite some quite foundational differences of worldview. We continue to love him despite the pain. I believe he continues to love us despite the pain, and that his logical thinking will eventually overcome the indoctrination of gender identity ideology.

The basis of sex is reproductive role. That is the only reason we have two sexes. Sex, binary sex, existed in organisms long before any of them developed consciousness. We cannot switch from one reproductive role to the other. Some organisms have that ability, but no mammal does.

I understand.

My father kicked me out of our home when he learned I had committed to having surgery. He wasn't having any of it when he learned I'd effectively started socially transitioning with friends and even less when he learned I'd been on estrogen. He snapped at that point and that was that. Until then he would smirk when I'd arrive home. I was well used to being told I'd ruined my life and that as ex-first born son everything in his will would be going to my brother.

My mother accompanied me to my surgery. She helped with the first two weeks of aftercare. Apparently my dad was concerned enough to ask my mother how it went and how I was recovering. A year later, I was invited back for Christmas. I went with my BF as backup. My mother attributes it to 'normalcy' but I don't know exactly what switch flipped in his head but he suddenly became extraordinarily supportive. He was and remains extremely supportive and verbally proud of me and my life now in his mid 90s. I love him and I am thankful that I was able to share my life and my family with him.

I agree. But as humans, we have evolved so that our social interactions and community hierarchy are no longer influenced by the likelihood of gamete intermingling. The existence or lack of existence of viable gametes in one's body has no affect on interpersonal or public relationships. Gender theory provides a window into the interpersonal and social.

Speak for yourself. But I've now caught up with the OP's wish for the fascinating diversion into you and your beliefs to cease on this thread, so if you want to discuss further with me, you will need to start your own.

Just ignore derailers and don’t engage, is my advice.

Have a nice day.

Don’t they just.

I know, I know 🙄
But it's just SO tedious, isn't it..

….. also known as Tranada

Kind to ask. Things progress. I asked for the previous threads to be hidden until later in the future to keep things neat and tidy. I’ll do my best to be public about what I can.
still looking for Brighton parents of pupils current or past who could have been affected by this school.

I was looking at today’s news and thought about the relevance of permanency. How everything is documented.

So this post is to the Headteacher and Governors:

‘Blair's assertion in 1996, that "my project will be complete when the Labour Party learns to love Peter Mandelson", was seen as prophetic in late September 2009 when Mandelson was enthusiastically received at the party conference in Brighton.’ Wikipedia

Very different topic but the same sentiment in that what you argue for now may come back to haunt you.

You have really got to put your faith in your convictions that this is the best safeguarding solution for all your pupils. Because what ever decision you back now you need to be able to justify that it’s the best for all children and for all future children at your school. You have got to risk assess, based on evidence, whether single sex provision or mixed sex provision is safer in your secondary school. What could go wrong with your ‘project’?
In 30 years what would people say when they look back at what was documented that you said and agreed to? Blair could be forgiven in that he’s not a fortune teller. But the difference is you have lots of evidence that allowing boys to change with girls won’t work. A mixed sex environment doesn’t work in toilets or changing rooms and girls suffer the most and also girls and anyone vulnerable (medically or mentally) if all designs are changed from traditional single sex to mixed sex. You will look really silly in court trying to deny the weight of statistics, evidence and common sense. Do you really want to lose your dignity over this?

I understand the responsibility governors have as I have had a similar position. There’s so many areas you have suddenly got to be experts in. But think about the consequences to everyone, including yourselves. I think the OP will win but your words will still be printable.

Will you be naming the school publically? I know most of us here know which school it is but afaik it’s not known more widely. I understand you need to protect your daughter so I understand your reluctance but without putting the name up there drumming up support will continue to be hard. If you could perhaps post the news articles from a few weeks ago on some Brighton specific FB groups you’d get a lot of responses if you said ‘this is referring to xx’. Of course being Brighton you’d probably be called a bigot umpteen times but you’d probably get some useful DMs.

My neighbours teen daughters both go to this school and I’ve been tempted to ask about the issue so many times but I’m worried about falling out if they turn out to be on the other side of the issue.

The school needs to remain anonymous for now.

yes, the problem of recruiting parents and pupils is ten times as hard without naming it.

if your friend has female children ask if they would be upset if a males saw them undressed without their knowledge. I am very happy to give you the email address at the law firm and your friends can stay entirely anonymous.

Thank you Keep - this is so true.

I understand the responsibility governors have as I have had a similar position. There’s so many areas you have suddenly got to be experts in.

It's not even as if they've had to do any research for themselves - they've literally been spoon fed details and references for the risks and legalities. They can't claim that they didn't know.

100% this. Ignorance will not be an excuse they can use. Nor 'oh it's so complex' as OP has been as clear as it's possible for a human to be to outline the breach of the law and the safeguarding risk to girls.

If they have such massive comprehension problems that they can't understand his crystal clear letters then they're not fit to be a governor. If you're too stupid to understand something so well explained then you need to step down.

They're continuing to break the law and put girls in harms way knowingly. This will not go well for them.

If I was in their position I'd be arguing to comply with the law immediately, insisting my argument was recorded in the minutes, and if SLT refused, I'd be resigning in protest with a very clear letter as to why.

I wonder if any governors have taken this step. If any have stepped down recently, that may be the case.

Those that stay are colluding.

Edited to add: I might have an intermediate step where I asked to look at the legal advice they've allegedly received and compare to other advice available (and there is now plenty) and existing court cases. I may suggest using another firm to see if the advice is the same and scrutinise if current firm has any biases. That is the most I would do before resigning. I.e. I'd give them a chance to do the right thing and get independent legal advice however it's pretty clear that the situation is not legal so then I'd resign.

No legal advice will say ignore the law which 2 block single sex provision for students only.

The legislation makes specific provision for single units for students who need adapted toilets so the school can not even argue that moving an individual child into an adapted space is discrimination.

IIRC they claim they've received legal advice. It may be from the captured LA so 'legal' advice. And given the GLP, there are plenty of lawyers who claim they can't understand the crystal clear SC judgement.

So I agree with you but I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that they've received advice to carry on forcing girls to share their spaces with male bodies.

Also IIRC (and I don't have time to go back to check) they've refused to share their 'legal advice' with the OP. Or the generic safeguarding risk assessments. So I think there's a reasonable chance they don't exist.

I mean really anything is possible with people who are willing to lie to the extent they claim that as soon as a male bodied boy utters the magic words 'I'm a girl' the safeguarding based around sexed bodies fails to apply.