I have blogged about earlier versions of this guidance, and indeed multiple packs for other schools/local authorities. Brighton’s was the more egregious of the packs but now they have updated it. This new version is from September 2021. No school is exempt from the proselytism at work in the education system. It’s in local authority schools, academies, christian schools (Catholic and Church of England). One of the packs was produced jointly with the police force!
You can read my other work on this topic here 👇
Transgender guidance for schools
These are just a few snippets on the Brighton pack. It’s quite repetitive so the key messages they wish to impart are woven through the document like a trans catechism.
This version was published after the government issued revised guidance to schools intended to stem the tide of threatened judicial reviews; which had seen some councils withdraw guidance, rather than defend their policy.
To nobodies surprise the council are heavily reliant on Stonewall. They also link to many external links which are adduced as evidence to support their claims. Because of the level of Institutional Capture, they are able to link to organisations with reputations that are (were) pretty solid. Among these is the Office for National Statistics, Equality and Human Rights Commission and even the Department of Education.
Because this is Brighton, the Mecca of trans-activism, they make it clear they have the backing of the entire council, across all political parties. They include this, cross party, motion which endorses the thought terminating cliche “Trans women are women”. This is now a religious incantation, designed to silence troubling thoughts, a mantra which politicians are too frightened to question.
The extent of the capture also extends to religious organisations. Churches, who still lag behind in accepting same sex attraction, are embracing this ideology with alacrity. They are also quoted in the document. 👇Why would churches prefer a trans-girl over a gay boy? It’s a conundrum. 🤔
Here they quote the official organisation for the production of the Census who provide a frankly bonkers definition of “Gender”. The claim that “non-binary” has existed across all cultures is a stretch. Some cultures found a way to accept same sex attraction (predominantly in males), in creative ways such as acknowledgment of a “third gender”. Even they were not in denial of biological sex, however, and this may have been a benign way of finding a place for gay men not an outright assault on biological facts. Not much accommodation has been made for same sex attracted females, Lesbians tended not to be granted the same privileges. Third genders has little to do with the modern social contagion sweeping the, mainly, English speaking, world. One could call this out for cultural appropriation, if one were so inclined, but this is overlooked in relation to Gender Identity Ideology. Normal rules are cast aside, as satirised by Family Guy.
The cognitive capture also extends to the new notion that sex is not simply observed and recorded, as it is in 99.9% of cases, but is randomly assigned based on genital configuration. This is the new trans-creationism in which our kids are being indoctrinated, via a supine educating class.
Naturally the guidance makes egregious use of the false, data on suicidal trans youth. These statistics have been debunked over and over again and are the equivalent of emotional blackmail with something of a terrorist vibe. Here they quote Stonewall.
This guidance has shifted to recognise that a child’s idea about their “gender” can evolve over time which sits oddly with putting 10 year olds on Puberty Blockers. 🤷♂️. In the guidance they claim any medical interventions, which may be felt necessary, are outside the scope of the education sector. Nevertheless they reference the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDs) and signpost to their website multiple times, whilst also explaining referral mechanisms.
The guidance also finds time to redefine same sex attraction as based on either “sex” or a “romantic” inclination. What they mean is that a heterosexual relationship can be imagined as a gay relationship if one of them identifies as something other than their biological sex.
Of course this also covers the asexual community, who have been persecuted through the ages, no doubt, for their lack of a sex (or is it “gender”?) drive.
The guidance claims the protected characteristic of “gender reassignment” covers school children because the, badly drafted, Gender Recognition Act, has vague wording. Lobby groups knew what they were doing when they persuaded David Lammy to drive this bill through. It was intended, we were told, to cover anyone who had gone through a medical process to claim an opposite sex identity. It actually allowed anyone who is “proposing to undergo” such a process; leaving a massive loophole for the lady penis to penetrate. This wording has led to school documents, like these, arguing that “Gender Reassignment covers anyone who may only have chose a different name, pronouns, or altered their sartorial style.
This claim has, unfortunately, been endorsed by the Department of Education who agree that a child can be covered by the legislation; which is why this document feels able to claim the following:
The document proceeds to claim they are not promoting the removal of single sex provision, by selling the idea a boy, who feels like a girl, should be able to access the toilets and changing rooms that align with how he sexes his penis, in his own mind.
The “trans” child should be able to use the changing rooms in line with their “gender identity”. The school should “enable” access to opposite sex facilities. Anyone who desires “privacy” should be directed to an alternative. In plain language. If a girl objects to undressing with a boy, who will have his penis, she will have to speak up and then she will be “segregated”. Like the bigot she obviously is…..
Putting the loco into loco parentis!
The document also makes it clear that the teacher/pupil relationship takes primacy over the role of parents. The school reserve the right to support a social transition, in school, and hide this information from parents. The child can have a secret “identity” at school while the parents receive communications giving no indication a child is using a different name/pronouns in the school setting. This means your male-identifying daughter could be changing with the boys or a female-identifying boy could be changing with your daughter and the school will hide this information from you. They also argue there is no safeguarding risk implied by teachers sharing secrets with your child. They reiterate there is no risk whilst, simultaneously, they cite an elevated risk of suicide for “trans-identified” children.
They regard all this as perfectly legitimate and best practice.
The guidance badges as “supportive” those parents happy their child is identifying out of their sex and contemplating a life of medical dependence. The parents who do not, enthusiastically, embrace such a pathway are deemed in need of education. Staff are told to make sure LGBT issues are including in all aspects of the curriculum, for pupils, but also to provide teachable moments for parents/carers.
Staff are also told the child may need a “script” to describe their experiences. This is what manipulation /grooming looks like.
Woke-Stasi
Of course no transgender guidance would be complete without warnings for staff and pupils who step out of line. The school make it clear their role is to educate staff, parents and pupils about Gender Identity Ideology. They do, however, anticipate resistance and advocate a firm line be taken with the gender apostates. Staff should be in the lookout for refuseniks who don’t comply with the strictures imposed upon them. They will be bullied into compliance by the genius move of labelling them as the bullies!
There is quite lengthy guidance about how to distinguish between different kids of bullying. Is it homophobic? Sexist? Transphobic? If it is a trans-identifying child who is in “stealth” mode, which could be a boy who is presenting as a girl and, theoretically, the other children don’t know, be careful not to “out” the child. Whatever you do don’t under-record transphobic abuse. 👇
Staff are also signposted to the police if any harassment crosses a line. The woke-stasi will be on hand to invoke their own brand of carceral trans-activism, presumably after sweeping the building to hide any “Defund The Police” posters.
I am a parent in Brighton and Hove and have been fighting against this for a couple of years now. Last year their inclusion service offered a workshop on Autism and Gender Identity that I attended (my son is autistic) in which they used the phrase ‘assigned at birth’ and also said it was fine for trans youth to use the toilets and changing facilities of their chosen gender. When I pointed out this was against the equality act, I received an email telling me that Brighton and Hove schools can go on a case by case basis. So we now have 2 secondary schools that I know of that have mixed sex, or as they like to call them gender-neutral toilets. What can we parents do? Help. @suzisworld07
> No school is exempt from the proselytism at work in the education system. It’s in local authority schools, academies, christian schools (Catholic and Church of England).
This is why we need education vouchers with the funding following the child. In education as in everything else, when people have The Right To walk Away ( https://pontifex.substack.com/p/the-right-to-walk-away ), oppression is made much less likely.