Assigned female at birth

I do wish people who spout the law knew what they were talking about. It is gender reassignment that is the protected characteristic not gender identity in the Equality Act. Unfortunately too many accepted Stonewall's deliberate misrepresentation. Sex is also a protected characteristic.

If you take something which is delivered as training for dealing with children and translate that, without any sort of differentiation, into policies for women you are effectively equating women with children. You are infantilising them.

Iam64
How on earth does this equate to infantilising women? Well it doesn’t.

FarNorth

^they (trans children) have the right to use the toilets that align with their gender and saying they don't isn't following safeguarding.^

Why isn't it?
How do you know that a boy who says he's a transgirl won't be a risk to the girls or that a girl who says she's a transboy won't be at risk in the boys toilet?
Bearing in mind that sexual assaults in schools are increasing all the time.
Also bearing in mind that sex & gender are not the same thing.

Because there is already a legal basis to protect single sex spaces which is done on a case by case basis and that must be a proportional means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Which means that if it was proven that trans children were causing issues in children's toilets then the provider could legally change that provision.

However the opposite is true and it is more unsafe for a trans person who presents as female to use a male bathroom.

So here we are. That's where we stand, within the law.

trisher

Mollygo

Doodledog

Whether or not trisher ever intended to go in person, or decides to view the event online has nothing that I can see to do with the accusation that I support violence against transpeople (or anyone else for that matter). I do not, and never have, and I find the accusation offensive.

It is offensive and untrue and they will know it. It’s another lie like TWAW.

I have just taken part in a safeguarding course, which included the dangers of being a facilitator.
In relation to my work, it mentioned facilitating abuse of children by not tackling the possible causes, conditions and opportunities for abuse, by not being aware it may be occurring or if we ignore signs of abuse in the children we teach.

It isn’t sufficient to say that you would never condone harm of a child, mental or physical or just to acknowledge it happens. In order not to be a facilitator you must tackle the opportunities for abuse and identify potential abusers.

I sat there thinking, it isn’t sufficient for “someone” to say they don’t condone violence done by TRA and some TW or the cheating by some tw in female sport, or the harm done to females by allowing TW in female safe spaces.
In order not to be a facilitator, the “someones” must also acknowledge that certain conditions provide opportunities for that violence or harm to occur. e.g. Refusing to give support for safe spaces for women on the grounds that TW can be vulnerable too is being a facilitator for harm to women.

FFS are you now equating women with children? How does that help? It's the infantalising of women that led to a lot of the restrictions put upon them.
I have always supported the law as it stands. The fact that I won't victimise transwomen to suit you just means I recognise people matter and no one should be abused.

How on earth does this equate to infantilising women?

Safeguarding is complex. It can’t be reduced to the assumption that any boy declaring themselves to be a girl, can’t possibly be a threat to others.

they (trans children) have the right to use the toilets that align with their gender and saying they don't isn't following safeguarding.

Why isn't it?
How do you know that a boy who says he's a transgirl won't be a risk to the girls or that a girl who says she's a transboy won't be at risk in the boys toilet?
Bearing in mind that sexual assaults in schools are increasing all the time.
Also bearing in mind that sex & gender are not the same thing.

Opinions don't really matter on this one.

You either follow the training or you risk the mental health of young people and your own job.

Secondary schools are often able to provide gender neutral toilets and changing spaces and most trans young people will choose those but they have the right to use the toilets that align with their gender and saying they don't isn't following safeguarding.

There really isn't any argument there. Unless you are saying that all children should not be safeguarded in favour of a majority. Which is legally discrimination.

But if you mean do I see the “someones” as facilitators, then yes I do.

I do too.

Instant acceptance of a child who says they are trans, or says they are the opposite sex, is not safeguarding.

Really?

Because gender reassignment is a protected characteristic under the equality act. Safeguarding children means that trans children and young people must be supported to use the toilets that align with their gender identity.

So unless those are the rules you are following then you aren't safeguarding all children.

All children must be safeguarded, not just from "others" but from everyone. This is why you can report other staff to the designated safeguarding leads and why whistleblowing is in the training.

I don't really think anyone could suggest I don't follow my training to the letter. I've done the training on 3 levels.

As would anyone who says they work with children.

But if you mean do I see the “someones” as facilitators, then yes I do.

Mollygo

Children and young people can be trans.

So you would have to be careful that your knowledge and training does not allow you to express views that make you a facilitator for harm to trans children too.

If you have condemned the violence and threats which meant this event couldn't be held liveDoodledog I'm really pleased. But I'm afraid I must have missed that post. Please could you Quote or cut and paste it for me. Thanks.

Oh, is that the best you can do? I made no comment about the event other than to say that it wasn't cancelled. How does that equate to approving of violence, and why would you be 'really pleased' if I had said otherwise?

Maybe you could quote or cut and paste a comment from you where you say you believe the Earth to be round? I must have missed you saying that.

No, to use your favourite phrase trisher,
* you’re twisting my words*.

Mollygo

Doodledog

Whether or not trisher ever intended to go in person, or decides to view the event online has nothing that I can see to do with the accusation that I support violence against transpeople (or anyone else for that matter). I do not, and never have, and I find the accusation offensive.

It is offensive and untrue and they will know it. It’s another lie like TWAW.

I have just taken part in a safeguarding course, which included the dangers of being a facilitator.
In relation to my work, it mentioned facilitating abuse of children by not tackling the possible causes, conditions and opportunities for abuse, by not being aware it may be occurring or if we ignore signs of abuse in the children we teach.

It isn’t sufficient to say that you would never condone harm of a child, mental or physical or just to acknowledge it happens. In order not to be a facilitator you must tackle the opportunities for abuse and identify potential abusers.

I sat there thinking, it isn’t sufficient for “someone” to say they don’t condone violence done by TRA and some TW or the cheating by some tw in female sport, or the harm done to females by allowing TW in female safe spaces.
In order not to be a facilitator, the “someones” must also acknowledge that certain conditions provide opportunities for that violence or harm to occur. e.g. Refusing to give support for safe spaces for women on the grounds that TW can be vulnerable too is being a facilitator for harm to women.

FFS are you now equating women with children? How does that help? It's the infantalising of women that led to a lot of the restrictions put upon them.
I have always supported the law as it stands. The fact that I won't victimise transwomen to suit you just means I recognise people matter and no one should be abused.

Doodledog

Whether or not trisher ever intended to go in person, or decides to view the event online has nothing that I can see to do with the accusation that I support violence against transpeople (or anyone else for that matter). I do not, and never have, and I find the accusation offensive.

It is offensive and untrue and they will know it. It’s another lie like TWAW.

I have just taken part in a safeguarding course, which included the dangers of being a facilitator.
In relation to my work, it mentioned facilitating abuse of children by not tackling the possible causes, conditions and opportunities for abuse, by not being aware it may be occurring or if we ignore signs of abuse in the children we teach.

It isn’t sufficient to say that you would never condone harm of a child, mental or physical or just to acknowledge it happens. In order not to be a facilitator you must tackle the opportunities for abuse and identify potential abusers.

I sat there thinking, it isn’t sufficient for “someone” to say they don’t condone violence done by TRA and some TW or the cheating by some tw in female sport, or the harm done to females by allowing TW in female safe spaces.
In order not to be a facilitator, the “someones” must also acknowledge that certain conditions provide opportunities for that violence or harm to occur. e.g. Refusing to give support for safe spaces for women on the grounds that TW can be vulnerable too is being a facilitator for harm to women.

Rosie51

trisher

Doodledog

Would you please respond to your direct accusation that my pointing out that a poetry event moving online was not cancellation (and in fact opened it up to more people) was the same as supporting violence, trisher?

Or is it ok for you to throw around libellous accusations, but different when you read them into the comments of others?

Doodledog the organisers have said they would move the event on-line .It hasn't happened yet so to all intents and purposes the event no longer exists therefore it is cancelled.I've been on the website and tried to find tickets for the on-line event there aren't any. If and when it appears I will apologise until then it's cancelled. It no longer exists. It is a dead parrot event.

They say a new date will be scheduled. From their website We will be in touch with ticket bookers next week. next week, not today or yesterday or even tomorrow. You'll hear from them next week trisher always assuming you had a ticket booked for the performance.

If and when it appears I will apologise until then it's cancelled. It no longer exists. It is a dead parrot event.

Sorry for the distraction Doodledog I was just putting her right about the event being cancelled. It hasn't been. Yes it is grossly offensive, and you deserve a full apology

Doodledog

Whether or not trisher ever intended to go in person, or decides to view the event online has nothing that I can see to do with the accusation that I support violence against transpeople (or anyone else for that matter). I do not, and never have, and I find the accusation offensive.

Ditto Doodledog but it doesn't matter how many times I post I believe all violence is wrong I'm still accused of things I haven't said - see Mollygo 14.46.
If you have condemned the violence and threats which meant this event couldn't be held liveDoodledog I'm really pleased. But I'm afraid I must have missed that post. Please could you Quote or cut and paste it for me. Thanks.

Whether or not trisher ever intended to go in person, or decides to view the event online has nothing that I can see to do with the accusation that I support violence against transpeople (or anyone else for that matter). I do not, and never have, and I find the accusation offensive.

trisher

Doodledog

Would you please respond to your direct accusation that my pointing out that a poetry event moving online was not cancellation (and in fact opened it up to more people) was the same as supporting violence, trisher?

Or is it ok for you to throw around libellous accusations, but different when you read them into the comments of others?

Doodledog the organisers have said they would move the event on-line .It hasn't happened yet so to all intents and purposes the event no longer exists therefore it is cancelled.I've been on the website and tried to find tickets for the on-line event there aren't any. If and when it appears I will apologise until then it's cancelled. It no longer exists. It is a dead parrot event.

They say a new date will be scheduled. From their website We will be in touch with ticket bookers next week. next week, not today or yesterday or even tomorrow. You'll hear from them next week trisher always assuming you had a ticket booked for the performance.

trisher

Doodledog

Would you please respond to your direct accusation that my pointing out that a poetry event moving online was not cancellation (and in fact opened it up to more people) was the same as supporting violence, trisher?

Or is it ok for you to throw around libellous accusations, but different when you read them into the comments of others?

Doodledog the organisers have said they would move the event on-line .It hasn't happened yet so to all intents and purposes the event no longer exists therefore it is cancelled.I've been on the website and tried to find tickets for the on-line event there aren't any. If and when it appears I will apologise until then it's cancelled. It no longer exists. It is a dead parrot event.

What has any of that got to do with you accusing me of supporting violence?

VioletSky

trisher and when you see that translates to attacks on lesbians or other masculine looking woman...

It's very obvious it is transphobia

What attacks?