I have another backlog and my paid work ( I am waiting for someone to send me a draft document) is now adjourned until tomorrow, so here I am, riding again 😎 Yeehah!!
Thanks to a wonderful reader for today’s 1939 Western Destry Rides Again in The Western Season. Please keep those suggestions coming in.
Saloon owner Kent, the unscrupulous boss of the fictional Western town of Bottleneck, has the town's sheriff, Mr. Keogh, killed when Keogh asks one too many questions about a rigged poker game. Kent and Frenchy (Marlene Dietrich), a saloon singer who is his girlfriend, now have a stranglehold over the local cattle ranchers. The town's crooked mayor, Hiram J. Slade, who is in collusion with Kent, appoints the town drunk, Washington Dimsdale, as the new sheriff, assuming that he will be easy to control and manipulate. However, Dimsdale, a deputy under the famous lawman Tom Destry, promptly swears off drinking, and is able to call upon the latter's equally formidable son, Tom Destry Jr. ( James Stewart), to help him make Bottleneck a lawful, respectable town. But Tom Destry Jr. isn’t the kind of lawman the townsfolk were expecting! And that’s just the beginning 😊
Thanks this time to three wonderful readers ( and a separate wonderful reader for the film suggestion) for suggested pieces.
Schools Guidance
Very worryingly the trans rights organisations ( including Stonewall, of course) and their captured allies ( just look at the list at the end - I thought you might like to see all the guilty parties - some are rather shocking!) are already putting pressure on the new Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson to scrap the draft schools guidance. I reported on the draft guidance here:
They are very carefully avoiding centring on ‘gender’ issues though doubtless that is really their main concern. We need to keep a close eye on this one!
Freddie Whittaker in Schools Week( Labour faces pressure to ditch Tory RSHE reforms 14 July) reports:
More than 100 organisations have urged the new government to ditch the Conservatives’ draft relationships and sex education (RSHE) guidance, which they warn “falls short of what is required to help keep children safe, healthy and prepared for modern life”.
Organisations working across education, safeguarding, child sexual abuse, violence against women and girls, mental health, online safety and LGBT+ inclusion warned the proposed age restrictions and topic bans “pose a threat to the preventative role of RSHE”.
This could limit the “prevention of harm in relation to issues including sexual health, violence against women and girls, mental health, safeguarding from sexual abuse, inclusion and tackling current and emerging threats like online misogyny”.
The Conservative government launched a consultation in May on planned updates to guidance first issued in 2019, following a review of the reforms.
Calls for ‘fresh start’ to RSHE review
It proposed age limits on “sensitive” topics, ordered schools not to teach about “gender identity” and to share materials with parents.
Ministers were accused at the time of stirring up “culture war” issues in the run-up to the election.
The consultation closes today.
To coincide with its closure, more than 100 organisations including the ASCL and NAHT leaders’ unions, the PSHE Association, Sex Education Forum, Barnardo’s, Refuge and Everyone’s Invited have issued a joint statement calling for a “fresh start” to the review.
“We are calling on the next government to discard the draft guidance and begin this process in due course, focusing on the needs of children and young people and supporting teachers to deliver a high-quality, inclusive curriculum.”
Lucy Emmerson, CEO of the Sex Education Forum, said age restrictions would be a “backward step making children more vulnerable to abuse and harm”.
PSHE association chief executive Jonathan Baggaley, warned he had “deep concerns about the development process and shortcomings of the draft guidance, particularly on critical aspects of children’s safeguarding, wellbeing and inclusion”.
And Lynn Perry, chief executive of Barnardo’s, said introducing age limits to RSHE topics “risks children missing out on crucial teaching about abuse and exploitation”.
Scope and timing of consultation ‘problematic’
In the statement, shared exclusively with Schools Week, the signatories said RSHE “helps to protect children and young people from harm, keep them healthy and prepare them for life’s challenges and opportunities”.
Current guidance, in force since 2020, is based on “robust evidence, informed by a rigorous engagement process and a twelve-week consultation”.
They warned the “limited scope and structure” of the recent review, and “reduced eight-week consultation, is also problematic, as is the general election falling during this consultation period”.
This removed the “opportunity for planned Department for Education stakeholder engagement”.
Pepe Di’Iasio, from ASCL, said government should “redraft the consultation…school and family relationships need strengthening rather than undermining”.
Paul Whiteman, of the NAHT, said the draft guidance was “unworkable, out of touch with the realities of what children and young people are experiencing in their lives, and undermines best practice in terms of both safeguarding and pedagogy”.
“The new government must scrap it and begin a fresh review with proper collaboration.”
The full statement
Relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) helps to protect children and young people from harm, keep them healthy and prepare them for life’s challenges and opportunities.
The current statutory guidance for RSHE in England – in force since 2020 – is based on robust evidence, informed by a rigorous engagement process and a twelve-week consultation.
It had support and input from safeguarding bodies, national children’s charities, specialist violence against women and girls organisations, faith and belief groups, parents and carers, teachers, teaching and leadership unions and young people, and votes of support from 538 MPs from across the political spectrum.
The current guidance provides the foundation on which schools have improved teaching of high quality, age-appropriate RSHE since 2020, despite Covid disruption.
Any review of RSHE must build on this progress and focus on responding to the needs and experiences of those the guidance will support: children and young people, teachers and schools.
‘Falls short’
We are concerned that the draft new RSHE guidance out for consultation until 11 July falls short of what is required to help keep children safe, healthy and prepared for modern life.
Age restrictions and topic bans pose a threat to the preventative role of RSHE, limiting the prevention of harm in relation to issues including sexual health, violence against women and girls (VAWG), mental health, safeguarding from sexual abuse, inclusion and tackling current and emerging threats like online misogyny.
The limited scope and structure of the review, and reduced eight-week consultation, is also problematic, as is the general election falling during this consultation period (thereby removing the opportunity for planned Department for Education stakeholder engagement).
A fresh start and a new review is needed. We are calling on the next government to discard the draft guidance and begin this process in due course, focusing on the needs of children and young people and supporting teachers to deliver a high-quality, inclusive curriculum.
‘Future updates to RSHE must be…’
Evidence based: using the best available evidence of what works in preventative education and the needs and experiences of all children and young people, so that it is effective, relevant, up-to-date and age and developmentally-appropriate.
Transparent: any evidence and recommendations that inform new proposals should be published, as should any evaluations of RSHE under current guidance.
Representative: there should be ongoing engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, including parents and carers, children and young people, teachers and teaching and leadership unions, national safeguarding bodies, children’s charities and specialist VAWG organisations, academics and experts.
The signatories
Safeguarding, child protection and rights [ Dusty - thrown out of the window]
Barnardo’s
NSPCC
Girlguiding UK
Amnesty International UK
Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse (CSA Centre)
Lucy Faithfull Foundation
Plan International UK
Catch22
Education and Unions
ASCL
NAHT
National Education Union
PSHE Association
HMC
BSA Group (Boarding Schools’ Association)
Coram
University of Birmingham, School of Social Policy and Society
Big Talk Education
Human Values Foundation
Jigsaw Education Group
Training Works
Chameleon PDE Ltd
Wickersley Partnership Trust
PSHE Service Cambs
Violence against women and girls
The End Violence Against Women Coalition
Refuge
Women’s Aid Federation of England (Women’s Aid)
Rape Crisis England & Wales
Everyone’s Invited
Action Breaks Silence
Advance
Birmingham and Solihull Women’s Aid
Bold Voices
Beyond Equality
FORWARD
Imkaan
IKWRO – Women’s Rights Organisation
IRISi
Jewish Women’s Aid
Juno Women’s Aid
Kindling Transformative Interventions
Latin American Women’s Aid
Latin American Women’s Rights Service (LAWRS)
LMK Let Me Know
Middle Eastern Women and Society Organisation (MEWSO)
Our Streets Now
Rights of Women
Solace Women’s Aid
Surviving Economic Abuse
Survivors Of Abuse
Tender
This Ends Now
Violence Against Women and Girls Research Network
Woman’s Trust
Women’s Budget Group
Roj Women’s Association
White ribbon UK
Agenda Alliance
Standing Together
Respect
Savana
Mental health, physical health, and sexual & reproductive health
Anna Freud
AYPH
Mencap
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Terrence Higgins Trust
British Association for Sexual Health and HIV
Brook
Family Planning Association
Teenage Pregnancy Knowledge Exchange, University of Bedfordshire
The Centre for Emotional Health
Doctors for Choice UK
Dorset Healthcare Sexual Health
Islington Council
Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust
Reproductive Justice Initiative
The Eve Appeal
The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare
Turning Point
Worcestershire Integrated Sexual Health part of Herefordshire & Worcestershire Health & Care Trust
Young Person’s Advisory Service
Croydon Youth Information & Counselling Service Ltd
Internet Safety
Childnet
Internet Matters
Internet Watch Foundation (IWF)
Parent Zone
SWGfL
RSE and Inclusion
Sex Education Forum
Stonewall
DEAFAX
Engendering Change Ltd
Fumble
It Happens Education Limited
Life Lessons
Life Support Productions
Lifting Limits
Loudmouth Education and Training
Make it Mandatory
Period Positive
Race Equality Foundation
School of Sexuality Education
Sexpression:UK
Split Banana
The Schools Consent Project
TransActual
The Story Project
Faith and Belief
Humanists UK
Methodist Church in Britain
thirtyone:eight
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/labour-faces-pressure-to-ditch-tory-rshe-reforms/
Church of England Off With The Woo!
Sanchez Manning in The Mail Online ( Church of England set to issue advice telling teachers to challenge 'outdated terms' around biological sex as critics argue new guidance is pushing gender ideology that a person's sex is 'assigned' at birth 13 July) reports:
Church of England advice for teachers has been criticised for pushing the gender ideology that a person's sex is 'assigned' at birth rather than a biological fact.
Guidance set to be issued to thousands of schools states that a transgender man is someone 'who was assigned female at birth but identifies and lives as a man', and a transgender woman 'was assigned male at birth but identifies and lives as a woman'.
The statements are in the document Flourishing For All, which is backed by Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, and tells teachers to challenge 'outdated terms'.
The full article is here:
Conversion Therapy and Single Sex Spaces
Interesting interview with Helen Joyce on Spectator TV.
I think that Helen is too optimistic about what Labour might do though she does admit we will have to see what happens next. Sex Matters have put 5 questions to the Labour Government about conversion therapy but I don’t see why we can’t simply rely on the Cass Review!!?? All thoughts gratefully received.
The (Not Very) Good Law Project
In the last update I referred to a case being brought by Good Law Project:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/the-man-who-shot-liberty-valance
I mentioned that the Good Law Project were famous for losing most of their cases. I thought you might like to see chapter and verse 😊
https://labourpainsblog.com/2022/12/05/good-law-project-win-some-lose-some/
The Cass Review
Excellent conference run by the Free Speech Union. Shame no mention of the fact that the famous meeting at the House of Lords in 2019 ( which is mentioned) was organised by Kellie-Jay Keen.
The Cass Review in the States
Thanks as ever to Feminist Legal Clinic.
Opinion | Why Is the U.S. Pretending to Know Gender-Affirming Care Works? ( 13 July)
It’s been three months since the release of the Cass Review, an independent assessment of gender treatment for youths commissioned by England’s National Health Service.
After the release of Cass’s findings, the British government issued an emergency ban on puberty blockers for people under 18. Medical societies, government officials and legislative panels in Germany, France, Switzerland, Scotland, the Netherlands and Belgium have proposed moving away from a medical approach to gender issues, in some cases directly acknowledging the Cass Review. Scandinavian countries have been moving away from the gender-affirming model for the past few years. Reem Alsalem, the United Nations special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, called the review’s recommendations “seminal” and said that policies on gender treatments have “breached fundamental principles” of children’s human rights, with “devastating consequences.”
But in the United States, federal agencies and professional associations that have staunchly supported the gender-affirming care model greeted the Cass Review with silence or utter disregard.
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, an advocacy organization based in the United States whose standards of gender care are closely followed domestically, said Cass was not qualified to judge because she had not practiced gender medicine herself. (To ensure independence, the National Health Service chose Cass for precisely this reason.)
WPATH also said its own standards are “based on far more systematic reviews” than the Cass report. But four years ago, WPATH apparently blocked publication of a Johns Hopkins systematic review it had commissioned that also found scant evidence in favor of the gender-affirming approach. Recently released emails show that WPATH leaders told researchers that their work should “not negatively affect the provision of transgender health care in the broadest sense.”
In other words, the United States continues to put ideology ahead of science.
The Biden administration has essentially ceded the issue to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, incorporating gender-affirming protocols into Department of Health and Human Services policy. Moreover, recently revealed emails indicate that President Biden’s assistant secretary of health, Dr. Rachel Levine, a pediatrician and transgender woman, successfully pushed WPATH to remove age requirements from its guidelines for gender medicine before their publication, because — mixing political and public health concerns — she thought supporters of gender treatment bans might cite them to show that the procedures are harmful. (WPATH’s draft guidelines had originally recommended age minimums of 14 for cross-sex hormones, 15 for mastectomies, 16 for breast augmentation or facial surgery and 17 for genital surgeries or hysterectomies.)
Republicans have in turn seized on transgender rights and medicine as a potent culture war issue. This makes it challenging for progressives, liberals and moderates to take any stand on gender issues that might be in line with a party that has become so associated with extreme positions.
Already the gender-affirmation model is taught in leading medical schools, and all the major professional medical organizations in the United States have officially embraced it in their guidelines, a fact often cited by advocates as evidence of their validity.
Given how entrenched the gender-affirmating model has become, reversing course won’t be easy. If the medical profession turns away from the notion that transitioning young people is necessary and lifesaving, it could open itself up to malpractice suits.
Despite the personal or professional costs to admitting its errors, it is time for people in the American medical and political establishments to open their minds and listen to those doctors who have fully examined the evidence.
Source: Opinion | Why Is the U.S. Pretending to Know Gender-Affirming Care Works? – The New York Times
The Woo WHO
I previously reported on the World Health Organisation proposing to produce ‘transgender health guidance’ here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/la-marseillaise?utm_source=publication-search
In this update from the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine ( SEGM) serious concerns continue to mount about this proposed new guidance.
WPATH Influence Undermines WHO’s Transgender Guidelines
WHO’s inclusion of WPATH leaders involved in suppression of evidence sets a troubling context for the WHO effort.
JUL 13, 2024
The World Health Organization (WHO) has reaffirmed its plans to issue a transgender and gender diverse (TGD) clinical practice guideline. Its prior announcements generated significant public concern from various stakeholders: clinician groups, LGBT groups, and parent groups. These groups raised three key issues (all of which remain unresolved).
First, the WHO guideline development group lacked intellectual diversity, with most members firmly committed to the notion that hormones should be widely available to all who want them. Second, WHO decided not to review the evidence for benefits and harms for hormones and their alternatives, instead focusing on the question of how best to promote widespread availability of cross-sex hormones. Third, women’s rights advocates have noted that the mandate of the GDG [ Dusty - guideline development group] includes promoting self-identification of gender in legal settings (the so-called “self-id laws”) and expressed concern that this will allow biological males unrestricted access to private spaces which should be reserved for women and girls.
In June 2024 WHO attempted to address concerns over the lack of balanced perspectives in its guideline development group (GDG) by adding six more GDG members to the group. Even with these additions, however, the GDG remains unbalanced and heavily influenced by transgender activist groups. No changes to their methodology have been made, and the scope continues to be wide, conflating medical and legal issues. As we outlined previously, if these problems remain unaddressed, the guidelines that WHO intends to produce will be seen as a politicized effort lacking in credibility.
The heavy representation of members of WPATH on the GDG has always been a concern, but this concern has now been increased by a new development. New evidence has emerged that two prominent WPATH members involved in the production of the WHO guidelines were directly involved in suppressing unfavorable evidence related to the availability of cross-sex hormones in the process of creating their society’s official guidelines: WPATH Standards of Care 8 (SOC8). Since the availability of cross-sex hormones is a key topic for the upcoming WHO guideline, this sets a deeply troubling context for WHO’s current efforts.
In our most recent response to WHO, we expressed our renewed concern with the WHO GDG composition in light of the documents disclosed in a U.S. court case, which reveal that WPATH undertook explicit steps to suppress and manipulate evidence in the space of transgender health. The brief summary of our concerns and their implications for WHO’s credibility, should it proceed with the plan, are presented below.
The full article is here:
Californian Women’s Prisons
I last reported on the shocking situation in California’s women’s prisons here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/cold-mountain-part-1?utm_source=publication-search
On the site Woman: Adult Human Female, Lilia Jones ( 12 July) reports on the challenge being taken by wonderful Women’s Liberation Front:
Call to Action
USA: Support WoLF, Women’s Liberation Front, to file an amended complaint on behalf of four women challenging California's SB 132, a law that allows men into women’s prisons. WoLF’s case has now gained additional visibility with the rape charges filed against male prisoner Carroll.
Click this link and donate by July 19, 2024 so WoLF has the legal fees to proceed on this important action for women’s safety.
https://wahf.substack.com/p/july-5-july-11-2024-trans-identified?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
The Country Willy Association
The National Women’s Council in Ireland are known by Irish Terfs as the National Willy Council since they have a larping man on their board! Looks like the Country Women’s Association of Western Australia are heading in the same direction - thanks again to FLC.
Country Women’s Association of WA makes history in vote to allow men as members (13 July)
In short:
The Country Women’s Association of WA has voted to change its 100-year-old constitution and allow men to become associate members.
NSW, Tasmania, Victoria and the NT don’t allow men to be CWA members.
What’s next?
Men in WA will be able to apply for associate membership, which doesn’t allow for voting or individual branch membership.
—–
Following the vote, some members at the annual general meeting raised the issue of transgender women joining the association.
Ms Langdon said that while there was no specific provision in the constitution to recognise transgender women, they were welcome in the association, with some already members.
The vote means Western Australia is now the third state along with South Australia and Queensland to allow men into their ranks as non-voting members.
Queensland CWA president Sheila Campbell said the organisation had led the way by welcoming men and transgender women into the association since 2015 under a Friends of QCWA banner.
“Our association is open to all women, including transgender women, and men as non-voting Friends of QCWA,” she said.
A spokesperson for the CWA of Victoria said its branch did not have male members.
“We accept anyone who identifies as a woman to be a member,” they said.
Source: Country Women’s Association of WA makes history in vote to allow men as members – ABC News
The Apples Who Paint Themselves Orange
Great piece on the importance of ‘linguistics’ from Arty Morty. He points out, as I have done before, that ‘transwomen’ don’t want to date other ‘transwomen’ even though they say they are women ie. they know that they are not really women!
There is also an audio version.
Endpiece By Liz and Dusty
Excellent choice here by Liz to go with The Western Season
However, it did immediately lead me straight to the Blues Brothers where the band, pretending to be a Country Band, only know two Country songs, one of which is…
#BeMorePorcupine
Dear readers
This update is proving a bit sluggish in terms of viewing figures so I would appreciate it if you could push this around if you enjoyed it.
Thanks to those who pushed around Liberty Valance which went up nicely in terms of views.
Tonight's update will concentrate on Wes Streeting and puberty blockers.
Dusty
Thanks as ever Dusty for a range of great pieces.
I’m totally shocked by all the people and groups who want schools guidance looked at again. And in general, I think things are turning out the way we thought….badly. It’s all incredibly concerning and chilling. Especially as even people like Joyce are giving Labour the benefit of the doubt, although only for now I hope.
I think that we don’t give an inch to Labour. We assume the worst and hope that some of them will listen to reason eventually. Trouble is, how much further does the ideology spread during that ‘eventually’.