Petition : *Update the Equality Act to make clear the characteristic “sex” is biological sex*

Also that being a GC bulky weakens the GC argument but I think you already know that galaxy which is why you don't engage, even if you sadly don't denounce

Ha ha.

Can’t even hit the emoji I want now.

Fat finger, Smileless.

Galaxy

I am sorry but saying that doesnt make it true.

Neither does saying TWAM

But then I'm not advocating removing women's safe spaces

I'm just advocating acceptance and respect

VioletSky

TWAW

🤭

I am sorry but saying that doesnt make it true.

TWAW

My brother is a lovely person he is not allowed in a female prison if he commits a crime, he should not be in a female refuge, etc etc, this is not discrimination it is part of the equality act.

I do not see the vast majority of transgender people as a threat, and certainly not any more than 'males' (or females for that matter).

No, and nor do I. Nevertheless there are a few places (eg changing rooms in swimming baths, hospital wards) where men and women are segregated for a reason. Some areas have single-sex swimming baths, or sessions at municipal baths. Places where women can go in a state of undress without the male gaze or the fear of being assaulted when they are vulnerable.

It's not that anyone is saying that transpeople are dangerous. It is that transwomen are actually men, and therefore should not be in women's spaces, any more than any other men. Not because all of them are dangerous, but because some of them might be, and because some women have religious beliefs (protected in law) that mean they are unable to share intimate spaces or be undressed next to men other than their husbands.

This really has been said over and over. What is not making sense to you, FP?

Mollygo

Rosie51

Signed. I do wonder why anybody who agrees with all the other protected characteristics in the EA wouldn't think the 'sex' characteristic should be defined according to sex. Gender is a protected category. Are they frightened if sex is properly defined and protected as in biology, women might actually retain some protections?

Exactly that Rosie51.
By not signing, they make it quite clear that for them, male supremacy still rules, even if he’s wearing a dress!

You couldn't have this more wrong. NO, not in any way, shape or form!

I do not see the vast majority of transgender people as a threat, and certainly not any more than 'males' (or females for that matter). We all react according to our own entourage and circumstances, as well as reading around the subject to go beyond personal experience. The Trans friends I have, 4 of them, 3 who have had full sexual reversal and 1 not- are all gentle, kind, caring, and did so because they perceived being a 'male' as being dominant, and in their extperience, often violent and controlling. The total opposite of 'male supremacy'.

There are bad, malevolent and dangerous people who are females, and males, and yes, trans-gender. But proportionally statistics show that violence and threats come from males. But I refuse to discriminate against males- because of this. The males who have been part of my life are all great creatures, and never a threat.

And to force those friends to use Public toilets where they will be at massive risk of being bullied, beaten, raped or worse- is not something I want to do. They deserve to be safe too, whatever their choices.

Galaxy

Doodledog I wasnt taken aback at all . I was just freezing watching football.
I wasnt actually replying to you initially so it's my fault for being unclear. VS had said something along the lines that the gender critical just moan so I was giving examples of non moaning and constructive approaches.

I have a little faith in you

Today 12:39 Lathyrus I haven’t quoted your post but it was a really clear explanation of primary RSE.
I recently had occasion to discuss our RSE policy/SoW with an Ofsted inspector during a meeting about Safeguarding.
Governors as well as all staff are expected to be aware of this.

Doodledog I wasnt taken aback at all . I was just freezing watching football.
I wasnt actually replying to you initially so it's my fault for being unclear. VS had said something along the lines that the gender critical just moan so I was giving examples of non moaning and constructive approaches.

Oh dear Lathyrus I hope it isn't contagious!!!

As you say, parents are informed about any lessons referring to sex education so they have the option to have their children withdrawn. It stands to reason then that especially in a primary school setting, such conversations should not take place without parental consent.

Parents not pans

Pans have the right to withdraw their child from any part of sex education in schools, except that which is directly part of the science curriculum.

Teachers or TAs or anyone employed by the school should not discuss sexual matters with a child unless they have discussed this with the parents and obtained their permission. They should never initiate a casual discussion.

The correct response if a child raises a question related to sexual matters is that they should ask their parents. Except in issues of safeguarding. Even that should not be followed up immediately but should be referred on to the person responsible for such issues.

Every member of staff should be aware of this and have had training and guidance. The school will have a policy that covers these legal requirements and it should be followed by all members of staff.

The parents should discuss this with the Head Teacher. These are serious requirements that are in place to protect children and the adults who work with them from accusations.

At the very least it shows a disturbing contempt for the rights and responsibilities of parents. At worst it raises questions about the adults agendas.

Glorianny

Doodledog

They ignored him because he was fat and trans.

It’s a very sad and very strange case, but this is a bit of a leap. The finding that ‘gender assumptions can be detrimental in hospitals’ is not saying that at all. What is the basis for your arrival at that conclusion?

From the article
When the 32-year-old man arrived at the hospital with severe abdominal pains, a nurse did not consider it an emergency, noting the man was obese
They administered a pregnancy test so they didn't think he was male they knew he was trans. They thought he was fat.

That's not what you were saying before though. 'They ignored him because he was fat and trans' suggests that he didn't get treatment, but in fact he was tested for pregnancy exactly because he said he was trans.

It is a dreadful case, but are you suggesting that anyone of either sex who is of childbearing age should be tested for pregnancy in a busy A&E ward? Scrap that - anyone of any age. I was asked about the possibility of pregnancy when I got my Covid jab. Maybe they thought I could be a surrogate or something?

As I said upthread, there is another discussion going on about boys being asked if they are pregnant on another thread. It seems that hospitals are making an effort. At what point does personal responsibility come in, though?

I think the point being made was that we are being told that schools don't teach anything about 'gender' or sexual orientation at primary level, but then it seems that something about bisexuality was mentioned to a nine year old.

I am not saying that these things shouldn't be discussed with children. My own were brought up knowing that friends (of ours) were gay, and it was just another boring thing amongst all the other boring things to do with parents and their friends. Whatever was said at school could easily have been countered by us if we didn't agree.

But (and this goes a lot wider than the scope of this thread) I do have a deep unease about the way some school staff see their role as compensating for things that in their opinion are lacking in children's home lives. I understand that basics like making sure they have eaten, and that violence is not the way to solve things have, regrettably, become things that primary schools now have to deal with; but the main role of a school should (IMO) be to teach the children the subjects they are there to learn. Of course life isn't as easily compartmentalised as that, and there will always have to be judgement calls; but when I hear school staff talking about 'parents' inadequacies' and how they have to make up for them I am unhappy about it.

We all know that not all parents do things the way that we would, but that shouldn't mean that others should set themselves up as arbiters of what is acceptable and what isn't, outside of obvious boundaries.

Sorry, that's a bit off-topic, but it ties in with the lecture from Glorianny stating the obvious about sexuality not being linked to discussion. OTOH, if it is the case that unless something has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt then it shouldn't be assumed. Last I heard, the jury was out about that 'causes' homosexuality, so who knows, eh?

Glad to hear it.

That's made my day

Well I never had any complaints, only positive feedback so I'll let that speak for itself VS.

Would you describe yourself as a good TA then smileless?

No harmless misunderstandings under your watch!

Lol I can't with this thread anymore

Has anyone said this TA is terrible?

Indeed Lathyrus the ambiguous use of the word love can certainly create problems.

What does a parents' responsibility for homework have to do with it?

I accept that children don't always understand a concept straight away as a parent and from when I was a TA, which is why it's important as Lathyrus has posted to ensure that a child has understood. The child in question clearly hadn't understood had she, so a good thing that she felt comfortable enough with her family to say what she did.

Smileless2012

Not knowing the context of the conversation it's difficult to know how the subject could have been addressed in a clearer way.

The child thinking that loving male and female relatives meant she was bi is what I mean by "a child's feelings being skewed".

Yes, you do need to know if the child initiated it by asking about “bi” or something else connected to the conversation.

One of the problems in the answer is the ambiguous use of the word “love”. I don’t think it was a good explanation at all. I’m surprised anyone with experience with children thinks it was.

My child cane hone and said that

I'd have a chuckle and explain that it's a different type of love, that's all.

I certainly wouldn't be telling anyone this was a terrible TA or complaining in any way

That's awful