I have done a number of twitter threads on School policies, ostensibly, about protecting “transgender children”.  I  have already blogged, on the way they treat parents. We are treated as potential bigots who need educating on Gender Identity issues. The Schools,  invariably, take it upon themselves to keep parents in the dark about our “Gender Dysphoric” kids.  They blithely inform us our kids are at significant risk of attempting suicide but still think it is good practice to hide pertinent information from parents. You can read that post here: Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis.   

This is the second of a series on the policies I have found. Some have already been withdrawn but we need to preserve a record of the extent of the policy capture. Note that this series will be repetitive as they are clearly modelled on a small number of templates. The poor practice is widespread due to the cut and paste nature of the policies. The positive spin on this is that we can recapture in the same way. We only need sensible templates which balance the needs of kids with Gender Dysphoria and the protected characteristic of sex. We also need schools to stop usurping Parental Responsiblity. I know of multiple parents who only found out their daughters were adopting male identities, at school, due to an administrative error! This cannot be right. I was fortunate that this was not the case for my child, possibly, because it was back in 2015.

This post is on the Suffolk guidance. It is modelled on the Allsorts toolkit, which was the first one I covered. You can access the document below:

Suffolk Trans-Inclusion-Schools-Toolkit

Educate and Celebrate? 

In the introduction we are told this was produced with input from transgender children and their parents. The other agencies they reference, quote, or signpost are listed below. Nearly all of these are Lobbying groups; advocating for the inculcation of Gender Identity Ideology in our schools, universities and other public, or indeed private, institutions. Stonewall, Mermaids, Gendered intelligence, Gires all get a mention.

I can’t possibly include all the clips I made of this document. I will just select the most egregious examples.

Predictably we go straight to the suggestion that trans-identifying children are at a greater risk of self-harm and suicide. This fear is leveraged to insist we have a “moral imperative” to act using emotional blackmail to demand “effective support”. What they propose , however, is the wrong kind of “support”.

I have rebutted the data on suicide many times on this blog. Below it is referenced once again. It is based on a study which included 27 trans-identifying people under the age of 26. Of that sample 13 had self-reported a suicide attempt. Even the author, of the PACE report, confirmed the difficulties that arise when research is used by lobby groups for their own purposes. Be very skeptical about suicide data in this field. It’s use, in my view, is not far removed from a terrorist tactic. Politicians are fond of saying they won’t negotiate with terrorists. In this case they have outright capitulated to lobbying groups deploying the most egregious of threats. Do this or I will kill myself/Your child will .

So how are Suffolk defining “trans”? Here is the list. This is unscientific nonsense and the last catetory is nonsensical. The authors clearly know we are making up genders, daily, so have added a catch-all category at the end.

Stonewall Lesbian

They also add this revealing caveat about why they are omitting “cross-dressers”.  Most people don’t know that transvestites are considered to be “Trans” and covered by the Stonewall Umbrella. 

It seems, for  children, the authors recognise  dressing up in clothes “stereotypically intended for the “opposite” sex”   (note the inverted commas around the word “sex”) doesn’t make you “trans”.  So what changes when you are an adult?  Kids who experiment with dress are not automatically assumed to be “trans” but adult men who indulge in fetishistic transvestism are?   Here we are grooming children  to accept transvestites as some kind of “woman” when many do so for a sexual thrill.  An erotic charge which  can be heightened when undertaken in a forbidden (female only) space. 

Below they engage in the linguistic gymnastics to change the definition of sexual orientation, a legally protected characteristic, by some careful wording.  We used to call gay love the love that dared not speak it’s name.  We are doing the same thing in 2020.  This alteration of the meaning of sexual attraction to “romantic” is designed to make sure a heterosexual man, who identifies as a woman,can still be a “lesbian”.  I concede that, if  you are new to this subject, that last sentence will sound like an outlandish statement.  Bear with me!

Here is Alex Drummond.  Stonewall ambassador and bearded “lesbian”.  Note the stance. I don’t think I have ever seen adult women adopt this, toes turned inward, stance.  You won’t find a better take down of Alex than is to be found on the YouTube channel of the late, great, Magdalen Berns.

Safeguarding

We have just been told that any trans-identifying children are at a higher risk for self-harm and suicide but, now we are told there are no safeguarding issues. At the same time we also telling staff that it is Ok to allow children and young people to use the toilets and changing rooms of the opposite sex. NO SAFEGUARDING ISSUES?

Our children are also being taught that all people’s bodies and genitals are different. Not males and females have different bodies but “peoples”. 

Yes we know the male people have different genitalia to the female people.  Here they are indoctrinating children to divorce sexed bodies from “gender identity”.  Specifically suggesting that recognising biological sex is based simple on “societal assumptions”. It is absolutely reckless to lower girls  boundaries about male-bodied people, in their spaces, in this way.  The tiny number of people with Disorders of Sexual development (here they use the term intersex) don’t undermine the fact that we are sexually dimorphic.  This is why the word “gaslighting” is ever-present in this “debate”.  if you don’t feel crazy trying to keep up with these teaching materials then you might not be sane!

Autism 

Next up they acknowledge the high prevalence of children with autism who are questioning their gender. Here they warn staff not to limit the autonomy of the autistic child by questioning their gender identity. In fact the guidance is contrary to what is needed here. Children who are autistic are particularly vulnerable to gender identity ideology and ought to be protected from being defined as “trans” for behaviours common in autistic children. As an aside Autistic Charities have been reckless in their rush to embrace Gender Identity Ideology. Those thathave colluded with sterilising autistic ought to be removed from their posts. A clear out of senior staff at Autistic Charities is well overdue. I suspect, instead, they will end up in the House of Lords.

Withholding Information from Parents (again!)

Another common thread is the schools deciding to withhold information from parents about their own children. Parents are not told about a child’s transgender identity despite believing this makes them in a high risk demographic for suicide and self-harm. They don’t seem to see the safe-guarding concern in the denial of salient information to parents. On the contrary they see the safeguarding risk as originating with parents. Once again painting parents as less likely to care about our children than a transient person in the school. I would argue we are setting up a situation where a child has a secret with an adult which may make them more vulnerable to grooming by that member of staff?

Furthermore other parents are not to be told that a boy, a male for clarity, is using your daughter’s changing rooms. I absolutely hated even single sex, communal changing rooms and showers and I was not alone. It is beyond belief we would consider it Ok to put girls in this position.

Here it is made explicit that this is also intended to apply for overnight stays. 👇

Overnight  school trips was that it was an important rite of passage to have nights away from home and typically the teachers left the girls unsupervised in the dormitories.  This was a key part of the trip.  The above guidance, however, means a teenage boy could be left in a girls dormitory.   What will it take before some grown-ups step in and acknowledge that sexual offences, in schools are off the scale and are being committed by males, as a sex class, not as a gender identity.  

The second point about that guidance is that any girl who feels uncomfortable will be stigmatised because she will be told she has to be the one to move. What girl will speak up in this climate?

So now we move on the case studies which, if you think I have been over-interpreting the guidance, lay out it clearly. This is a shameful misuse of the phrase “Human Rights” by the way. There is no human right to invade, women and girls, single sex, spaces.

Now we have taken away the right to single sex spaces what other ways could we screw over the female pupils? Oh, that’s right Sport. I am absolutely staggered that this policy was accepted without question. Of course a girl is going to be at risk playing a contact sport, like Rugby, against a male. And look at the language. “Trans boys are boys, not girls”. No they are females in flight from their sex but they are still female-bodied. Also make no mistake they always subsitute an example of a female (transman/boy) when they know using a male (transwoman/ girl) will look more blatantly wrong. .

Scenario 4 is yet another example of parents being painted as problematic if they resist affirming a trans identity. I think they deliberately used the idea of a Father opposting a gender non-conforming male because we all know gender non-conforming, gay, males who’s fathers had a hard time accepting having a gay son. So, let me present an alternative scenario.  Supposing a young girl, with no history of any difficulty with their birth sex suddenly identifies as “male” in her teens. The mother is aware that her daughter shows autistic traits, or had a traumatic experience with childhood sexual abuse or has been bulllied after declaring herself attracted to females.   The parents are not told about this and their daughter is allowed to express herself as male in school.  She is using male toilets and changing rooms and  she is wearing a breast binder, all unbeknownst to her parents.  She is potentially placing herself at risk,  using male facilities, and potential health issues by extended use of a binder. This can cause breathing difficulties and even , in extreme cases, broken ribs.  This is not suppositiion. There are numerous YouTube influencers who have done all of these things before telling their parents and with the complicity of the school. 

What is horrifying is that this guidance consistently ignores safeguarding red flags except when they wish to infer that we parents may be a risk to our children. Bearing in mind this risk appears to relate to parents who are not prepared to affirm a “gender identity” and any medicalised pathway for under-age kids. Does not mean we are not, for example, affirming their sexuality or their desire to mess with expected norms of dress. All of this was pretty standard fare as far back as the 1970’s. What it didn’t mean was that we advocated drugs and surgeries for teenage angst.

Here are all the usual suspects in the list of useful websites. A list of transgender lobbying groups, mainly, and not one womens’s group who might have an alternative perspective on the plight of confused girls. Also not included are any actual Gay Rights organisations. The kind that might take issue with the idea feminine gay males being told they might be girls. Make no mistake I definitely exclude Stonewall from any list of Gay Rights organisations. They have lost all credibility.

I note there is a policy for whistleblowers linked in the guidance. I feel for those teachers, of which I know many, who are apalled at what is going on in schools. Problem is this guidance is everywhere and I expect many teachers feel isolated and afraid to speak up.

This is why I do what I do. Unpaid. If you can help keep be going it would be appreciated. I email all donors and also offer to cover any topic which you may be unable to cover yourself.

This teaching has been going on in our schools now for at least 5 years. We are now seeing the fruits of this propaganda in the generation of teens who are identifying out of their sex.