Also in the News - Part 2

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

So you are ok with schools affirming something which parents disagree with or are unaware of?  Bloody hell.  You are completely mad.  You think institutions are better placed to make decisions which protect kids?  Hello?  Have you been living under a rock for the last 50 years?

When look at the association between childhood neglect/trauma and gender dysphoria then it probably isn't a good idea to report the child to the people who have inflicted suffering upon them.

[Lionator]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Unfortunately you're making the mistake that at least some people involved in this matter actually care at all about that and instead simply view it as fair societal cost of maintaining "traditional family values" and parents having near to absolute autonomy on such matters.

It's basically genocide of Trans people through the back door (aka drive them to suicide). 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

It's basically genocide of Trans people through the back door (aka drive them to suicide). 

I wouldn't go that far at the present time (though other folks may think differently), but in terms of creating a hostile environment for them to live, the current government is certainly taking lines from some of their counterparts Stateside.

[The Doctor]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Unfortunately you're making the mistake that at least some people involved in this matter actually care at all about that and instead simply view it as fair societal cost of maintaining "traditional family values" and parents having near to absolute autonomy on such matters.

I mean there are some for whom that'll be the case, like that absolute berk Laurence Fox, but I genuinely believe most people aren't bad people, that most have a genuine concern for kids and are barking up the wrong tree having been misinformed by the media (like this guidance is coming off the back of a coordinated policy exchange media blitz a couple of months ago to manufacture consent for their repugnant ideals:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Captain...]

11 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Teachers aren't there to fix kids personal issues, but they have a duty of care, and that means not informing parents of things the child has told you without the child's consent, particularly where you can reasonably believe that disclosing may put the child at risk (which this does. Youth homelessness rate is higher for LGBT youth than non LGBT youth and that's driven by familial rejection)

It does say in the article that the child's safety will be first and foremost:

 

 

I think there are a few elements. You can't allow a child to change their identity, pronouns, uniform without the parent's knowledge, how do you even begin to manage and regulate that secret school identity.

 

What name do you put on school books, letters, emails permission slips, how do you keep a uniform change from their parents?

 

It is a clumsily worded article, but it doesn't say that a teacher must tell the child's parents if they speak to them in confidence about their identity, only if they request a change in how they are treated. See above, you can't change a child's identity behind their parents back.

 

The third part, which I think is the debatable part, is the parent has to consent. This is the bit I would question, they have to be informed, you just can't keep a change of identity a secret and puts teachers in an impossible situation, but you can allow children to self identify as long as their parents are aware that at school they will be called by the name and pronouns of their choosing and they will be allowed to wear the uniform they identify with. 

 

And yes safeguarding, see above, is priority number 1, but rules give teachers guidelines to cover themselves so don't end up in an impossible situation and possibly even put their own safety at risk. Someone who would act violently to a child that comes out as trans is also liable to react violently if they find out that a teacher has been calling their son a female name and female pronouns behind their back and encouraging them to transition.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

I mean there are some for whom that'll be the case, like that absolute berk Laurence Fox, but I genuinely believe most people aren't bad people, that most have a genuine concern for kids and are barking up the wrong tree having been misinformed by the media (like this guidance is coming off the back of a coordinated policy exchange media blitz a couple of months ago to manufacture consent for their repugnant ideals:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that's fair. The issue is that the "some people" I mention often do have the power and influence to act exactly in the way you describe here.

 

And when that is combined with an issue like this, you have both Hanlons and Greys Laws/Razor happening. Paraphrased:

 

"Never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance, but any sufficiently advanced incompetence/ignorance is indistinguishable from malice".

[Lionator]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I wouldn't go that far at the present time (though other folks may think differently), but in terms of creating a hostile environment for them to live, the current government is certainly taking lines from some of their counterparts Stateside.

I don't think that's the government intentions, I don't think they're that evil. Rather it's just a political ploy. However, there are definitely people out there who would support this. 

[The Doctor]

12 minutes ago, Captain... said:

It does say in the article that the child's safety will be first and foremost:

 

 

I think there are a few elements. You can't allow a child to change their identity, pronouns, uniform without the parent's knowledge, how do you even begin to manage and regulate that secret school identity.

 

What name do you put on school books, letters, emails permission slips, how do you keep a uniform change from their parents?

 

It is a clumsily worded article, but it doesn't say that a teacher must tell the child's parents if they speak to them in confidence about their identity, only if they request a change in how they are treated. See above, you can't change a child's identity behind their parents back.

 

The third part, which I think is the debatable part, is the parent has to consent. This is the bit I would question, they have to be informed, you just can't keep a change of identity a secret and puts teachers in an impossible situation, but you can allow children to self identify as long as their parents are aware that at school they will be called by the name and pronouns of their choosing and they will be allowed to wear the uniform they identify with. 

 

And yes safeguarding, see above, is priority number 1, but rules give teachers guidelines to cover themselves so don't end up in an impossible situation and possibly even put their own safety at risk. Someone who would act violently to a child that comes out as trans is also liable to react violently if they find out that a teacher has been calling their son a female name and female pronouns behind their back and encouraging them to transition.

Put simply telling the parents if they kid doesn't want the parents to know is not compatible with safeguarding, regardless of what the request is (name/pronouns). In a world without a moral panic being concocted by the Tories to distract from partygate, cost of living crisis, rising mortgage costs, a kid called James asking to be called Lucy in class would be as notable as asking to be called Jimmy - it's a minor change with little impact on anyone else (you'd still use legal name on anything official like permission slips for liability).

[The Doctor]

Also worth remembering how section 28 was used as a cudgel by abusive teachers, "I'll tell your parents you're gay" as a permanent threat, made justified by it rather than the clear breach of safeguarding it now is recognised as. This would recreate that, just with gay replaced with trans.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Teachers aren't there to fix kids personal issues, but they have a duty of care, and that means not informing parents of things the child has told you without the child's consent, particularly where you can reasonably believe that disclosing may put the child at risk (which this does. Youth homelessness rate is higher for LGBT youth than non LGBT youth and that's driven by familial rejection)

Keeping confidence of a discussion with the child is very different to affirmative name change and pronouns without parental consent.  No duty of care applies to such actions.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Also worth remembering how section 28 was used as a cudgel by abusive teachers, "I'll tell your parents you're gay" as a permanent threat, made justified by it rather than the clear breach of safeguarding it now is recognised as. This would recreate that, just with gay replaced with trans.

Well remembered that teachers also can be abusive. 

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Keeping confidence of a discussion with the child is very different to affirmative name change and pronouns without parental consent.  No duty of care applies to such actions.

....and the theoretical situation of a child discussing with a teacher regarding changing their pronouns and name when that will put them at risk at home?

 

Those are not so dissonant areas as you would like to represent.

[leicsmac]

Anyhow, in other (better) news, China and the US have actually got round to doing some talking rather than the diplomatic equivalent of yelling at each other like an old married couple.

[Captain...]

2 hours ago, The Doctor said:

Put simply telling the parents if they kid doesn't want the parents to know is not compatible with safeguarding, regardless of what the request is (name/pronouns). In a world without a moral panic being concocted by the Tories to distract from partygate, cost of living crisis, rising mortgage costs, a kid called James asking to be called Lucy in class would be as notable as asking to be called Jimmy - it's a minor change with little impact on anyone else (you'd still use legal name on anything official like permission slips for liability).

Hmm, I still think you are oversimplifying.

 

If a parent is the issue then starting to call James Lucy will very easily get back to them in this age of parents WhatsApp groups and social media monitoring. Even with the best intentioned parents if I heard kids or teachers calling my son a girls I would assume they were bullying them before I would assume my son had come out as trans to the teacher and class before me. Either way I would not be happy.

 

I would hope a logical solution could be reached within the guidelines without putting Teacher or child at risk.

 

James: Can you call me Lucy

Teacher: If you want to change your name you need parental notification.

James: But I can't tell my parents

Teacher: OK, well how about I call you by your surname?

James: But my surname is Thomas and that still comes with masculine connotations which make me feel uncomfortable.

Teacher: OK how about I call you JT and that J can mean anything you want it to. I will also try to only use gender neutral pronouns.

JT: Thank you that's better.

[The Doctor]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Keeping confidence of a discussion with the child is very different to affirmative name change and pronouns without parental consent.  No duty of care applies to such actions.

Duty of care always applies. 

 

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Well remembered that teachers also can be abusive. 

So don't undermine safeguarding then? Take this scenario:

 

currently the teacher would be breaching their duty (you don't disclose without consent unless not doing so would endanger the child, but that's cases of CSA or violence in the home, not a kid being LGBT), under the sort of guidance being talked about, this hypothetical teacher, who is making stuff up to endanger kids, would be following guidance.

 

 

 

 

58 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Hmm, I still think you are oversimplifying.

 

If a parent is the issue then starting to call James Lucy will very easily get back to them in this age of parents WhatsApp groups and social media monitoring. Even with the best intentioned parents if I heard kids or teachers calling my son a girls I would assume they were bullying them before I would assume my son had come out as trans to the teacher and class before me. Either way I would not be happy.

 

I would hope a logical solution could be reached within the guidelines without putting Teacher or child at risk.

 

James: Can you call me Lucy

Teacher: If you want to change your name you need parental notification.

James: But I can't tell my parents

Teacher: OK, well how about I call you by your surname?

James: But my surname is Thomas and that still comes with masculine connotations which make me feel uncomfortable.

Teacher: OK how about I call you JT and that J can mean anything you want it to. I will also try to only use gender neutral pronouns.

JT: Thank you that's better.

Potentially, but then that would also be the case now, parent WhatsApp groups aren't going to spring up as a result of this guidance, and we end up back at this guidance being a solution in search of a problem and having no impact beyond informing LGBT children they aren't safe to be themselves at school

[Dunge]

Been reading this with curiosity through the day.

 

Surely here though the question is one of private vs public, and I’m a bit unclear from the article and discussion where the line is being proposed to be drawn.

 

If a child, Lucy, goes to a teacher of choice and says “I’ve been thinking about this for a long time. I want to be called Luke and have the pronouns he/him, but there would be a lot of trouble from my parents if they found out,” then the teacher should not be mandated to report this to the parents. That child has reached out and needs a safe space, because of the home issues. There should then be another trusted adult brought into the situation, although still kept private, at least into the short term under safeguarding. But if that teacher (or the child) believes they can just start using Luke, he and him in a public classroom setting and also believe that won’t get back to the parents then that’s surely also a failure of safeguarding? In which case I totally understand why there would be a mandate in that case.

[LiberalFox]

I'm surprised people are giving this so much attention.

 

It's designed to appeal to conservative people who believe that children are being 'transed' (cis children somehow groomed or brainwashed into believing they are trans). Also designed to appeal to the same people who think half the girl's sports teams are filled with cis boys who pretend to be girls. Oh and cis boys identifying as trans to go into the girl's toilets. None of this shit happens in the real world of course. 

 

I don't think these rules are saying that teachers have to report children to their parents for not being boyish/girlish enough. At least I hope that isn't the case. 

 

 

[Captain...]

40 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

I'm surprised people are giving this so much attention.

 

It's designed to appeal to conservative people who believe that children are being 'transed' (cis children somehow groomed or brainwashed into believing they are trans). Also designed to appeal to the same people who think half the girl's sports teams are filled with cis boys who pretend to be girls. Oh and cis boys identifying as trans to go into the girl's toilets. None of this shit happens in the real world of course. 

 

I don't think these rules are saying that teachers have to report children to their parents for not being boyish/girlish enough. At least I hope that isn't the case. 

 

 

The very clumsily worded Sun article is implying that teachers have to warn parents of any evidence of trans behaviour.

 

That's really not the case as it later goes onto say that safeguarding will be top priority. 

 

As I've said above they need to protect the children and the teachers and teachers accepting someone's trans identity without consulting the parents could, sadly, lead to threats, protests, legal action and violence.

 

It's a simple solution that will give teachers an out if asked to use someone's trans identity without causing offence. I can use your trans identity if your parents give permission. If the parents are going to freak at the idea of a trans child then it is probably not a good idea for a teacher to use that name/pronouns in public as it will easily get back to them.

 

 

[Daggers]

*shut up Dave, you’ve had a gin

 

</comment>

[Trav Le Bleu]

Years ago (double figures) I worked in a call centre and someone with a male voice called wanting to access the account of "Mrs...." and I refused to do it as I suspected it wasn't that person and I got into a world of trouble with my team leader for it. Conversely we were taught that people phoning up saying their surname was for instance, Davies or Johnson, but with a foreign accent, were probably fraudulent. I always thought this was more prejudice, as the British empire had shagged it's way round the world leaving its surnames everywhere.

 

Like I said, this was a very long time ago, but from an ID fraud point it is a minefield.

[Dr Marco]

 

[Daggers]

Latest results:

 

Boris Johnson 7 - 20000+ Dead

[Daggers]

 

[pazzerfox]

I know it's only a Daily Fail article, but this seems staggering if true!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12210119/Fury-radical-sex-education-lesson-plans-pre-teen-kids.html

[Zear0]

6 minutes ago, pazzerfox said:

I know it's only a Daily Fail article, but this seems staggering if true!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12210119/Fury-radical-sex-education-lesson-plans-pre-teen-kids.html

Not sure there's really much need to set masturbation as homework for the majority of male school children...