Another school one: all girls school welcomes a boy & hides it. Mum sues.

[SexRealistic]

Mother sues all-girls school for ‘admitting transgender pupil’

https://www.thetimes.com/article/bff0c621-9e45-44c7-9b37-7d5001d4be35?shareToken=c70721fef57c9747906f80eb75da8f7a

It just shows the arrogance of the school that they thought they would be able to hide this or they could browbeat people into submission

Good for her. Sounds like the school are contravening Trades Descriptions ( or something similar - IANAL ) act if they don’t actually offer single sex education.

Both school and parents need to consider if they are doing right by the trans gender child.

If the school is single sex then one penis makes it mixed sex.

If I recall some same sex schools can allow in a small number of the opposite sex (there is a legislative exemption) but only when it’s open and clear. This is hidden.

Thanks for posting this. I admire her.

@SexRealistic yes I think single sex schools can accept children of the opposite sex (isn’t it for children if staff members??) but as you say, it’s open and no one is pretending that there are no pupils of the opposite sex and appropriate arrangements are made for toilets and changing facilities etc

https://www.beverleyhigh.net/

"Beverley High School is the only girls’ school in the East Riding of Yorkshire."

whoops

Good to see this is being challenged.

They risk getting sued by parents who couldn't get a place there for their boys. You let one in, you have to let them all in.

I do feel sorry for the children caught up in this. The parents of the boy, there would have been mixed sex schools he could have gone to. Although by transing their child, arguably they've demonstrated that his long term welfare is not something they've really thought about. I'm assuming he's got both parents. It's not necessarily the case. He might have one utterly broken by this.

I know of single sex schools that take in the other sex for six form but there’s an exception wording that allows it.

I think one of the Oxford colleges was using it to allow men who identify as women into their college.

Except if you limit that single sex exemption to people with a trans identity it’s discrimination.

As for all the enablers - teachers, parents, governors….

This child isn’t able to change their sex. They likely don’t know what a gender identity is or the implications of what’s happening to the child. Never mind the impact on the girls in the school. Safeguarding out the window.

@singlesexspacesinschools might opine

Schedule 12

1(1)Section 91(1), so far as relating to sex, does not apply in relation to a single-sex institution.
(2)A single-sex institution is an institution to which section 91 applies, which—
(a)admits students of one sex only, or
(b)on the basis of the assumption in sub-paragraph (3), would be taken to admit students of one sex only.
(3)That assumption is that students of the opposite sex are to be disregarded if—
(a)their admission to the institution is exceptional, or
(b)their numbers are comparatively small and their admission is confined to particular courses or classes.
(4)In the case of an institution which is a single-sex institution by virtue of sub-paragraph (3)(b), section 91(2)(a) to (d), so far as relating to sex, does not prohibit confining students of the same sex to particular courses or classes.

————————————————————————

The rules on single-sex schools are deliberately flexible, to allow, for example, for the fact that in sparsely populated areas, it might otherwise be difficult for both sexes to get local access to a full range of subject matter teaching. 3(a) allows for 'exceptional' opposite-sex admissions with no further explanation. The school might try to rely on this.

I think one of the Oxford colleges was using it to allow men who identify as women into their college.

It was Newnham.

Except if you limit that single sex exemption to people with a trans identity it’s discrimination.

They will say the trans status is 'exceptional' for the purposes of para 3(b)

Yes , I think it was for boarding schools, to allow the children of staff to attend - I imagine rural boarding schools a la Mallory Towers.

Looking at the staff list, they already had several penises there which the claimant doesn't seem to have had any problem with.

Are you saying there were some transwomen employed there?

Oh dear.

@GenialHarrietGrouty - when we talk of a single sex school we mean the pupils/students, not the teachers.

And are the girls being forced to pretend that there other penis-havers are women? Are the penises in the same toilets and changing rooms as the girls?

Newnham is in Cambridge.
There are no women's colleges at Oxford - last one went mixed in mid-2000s.

My apologies - I should have known better (or at least googled!)

Newnham use Schedule 12 to justify trans-inclusive undergraduate admission criteria.

OTOH they recently sought women-only candidates for a specific Fellowship, relying on Schedule 9 (occupational requirement exemption) and the fact that their founding instrument predates the Employment Act 1992.

So they haven't completely forgotten their founding purpose of promoting the education of women, unlike every other college.

[email protected]

But the poster concerned was talking about the ownership of penises being the major factor, not the status of the owners.

They wont be able to hide it when his voice breaks and he grows a beard

Looking at the staff list, they already had several penises there which the claimant doesn't seem to have had any problem with.

It’s penises in the toilets & changing rooms that are the issue but as pupils do not share facilities with staff that won’t be a problem. A girls school could have 100% male teachers but would remain a single-sex school.

It’s irrelevant that there are male teachers in girls schools. Everyone knows they are men and safeguarding works for that cohort.

the problem is that a boy has been given a place at the girls’ grammar by stealth. That directly discriminates against the girls and indirectly against boys.

The family who’s daughter was first place on the waiting list for this grammar will feel rightfully very upset at having been excluded

“They were talking about who they were friends with at primary school and my daughter’s friend said: ‘Oh I was friends with’ — and then she said a female pupil’s name — ‘but I was friends with her when she was a boy’.”

It's just possible, in the absence of further information, that this is a girl who briefly called herself a boy at primary school.