It's A Wonderful Life Part 1
Update 292
This post has ended up sooooo long that I am splitting it in two.
This will be the last update before Christmas unless (hopefully not!) something dramatic happens. The next update will probably be shortly before the New Year depending on whether things quieten down on the gender madness front! I know it never really quietens down but you know what I mean 😎
😍HAPPY AND TERFY CHRISTMAS TO ALL MY READERS.
I am determinedly keeping the festive spirit going here and thanks to a reader for this suggested film. The plot is far too convoluted to attempt a brief resumé. Even though the scene below is the end of the film, even if you haven’t seen it I don’t think it will give that much away.
James Stewart is George Bailey, Donna Reed is his wife Mary, Todd Karns is his brother Harry, and little Zuzu is played by Karolyn Grimes. And, though not present whilst being centrally mentioned in the scene, guardian angel Clarence Odbody was played by Henry Travers. An uplifting 1946 film, no doubt much needed one year after the end of the Second World War!
‘ Trans’ Guidance in Schools
The draft guidance has finally been published and is out for consultation until 12 March ( I will come back to the consultation later). I agree with Maya Forstater and EDI Jester that this is an enormous step forward whilst not being perfect. Let me have your thoughts.
However, insofar as it may be necessary to change the law in order to totally ban social transitioning in schools, then I agree with Liz Truss that the Government should back her Private Member’s Bill.
Steven Swinford in The Times ( Schools can overrule parents on child’s gender identity changes 19 December) reports:
Schools will be able to overrule parents who want their children to change their gender identity if they feel it goes too far under new guidance.
The long-awaited guidance states that schools must take a “cautious approach” that complies with their legal duties.
It explicitly states that some forms of social transitioning — under which children change their pronouns, names and uniform — “will not be compatible with a school’s statutory responsibilities”.
Those responsibilities include a legal duty to provide children with single-sex changing rooms and toilets and a ban on boys competing against girls in contact sports where their safety will be put at risk.
Schools will be told that they are not under a “general duty” to allow children to change their gender identity. Ministers had considered an outright ban but were advised that such an approach would be unlawful and require new legislation.
At the heart of the guidance will be a requirement for schools to inform parents if children want to change their gender identity, with some exceptions. They will not be required to do so if the discussions between teachers and children are “general” and no specific action is needed. They will also not be required to do so if there are safeguarding issues.
In a bid to bolster protections for teachers, they will not be “compelled” to address children by their chosen pronoun if they have a “good faith” objection. They will instead be advised to use a pupil’s chosen name. Schools will also be told to exercise “extra caution” with younger children amid concerns that social transitioning could have a more significant impact.
Biological boys will also be barred from competing against girls in contact sports.
The guidance, which was originally promised for the summer, is being published after months of internal wrangling. Kemi Badenoch, the women and equalities minister, pushed to toughen up the guidance.
She told the Commons earlier this month: “Social transitioning is a relatively new phenomenon. It is rooted in gender identity theory, which I must stress is a very contested ideology.
“The term is often used to refer to a range of actions that a child may take to appear more like the opposite sex, accompanied by an expectation that they will be treated as if they are. That may include requests for a child to change their name, the pronouns associated with them or their uniform, or to use different facilities from those provided for their biological sex.
“Not all of those requests will comply with legal duties on schools, particularly those to safeguard children. Social transitioning is not a neutral act, as it has been recognised that it can have formative effects on a child’s future development, which is what my Hon Friend is alluding to when he talks about cross-sex hormones. We are taking this very seriously.”
• Schools ‘do not have duty’ to let children change gender identity
Maya Forstater, executive director of the campaign group Sex Matters, said: “This guidance, though imperfect, sets the global standard for uprooting trans ideology from schools.
“No other country that has allowed the trans lobby to dictate lessons and school policies has moved so decisively to reverse course.
“It’s far better to keep gender ideologues away from education entirely, but if the moment for that has already passed, it is not impossible to push back. All it takes is political will — and courage.”
The full report is here:
Christian Calgie in The Daily Express ( Liz Truss leads Tory trans rebellion over Kemi Badenoch letdown: 'Doesn't go far enough!' 19 December) reports:
Liz Truss has blasted the Government's new trans guidance, warning it "does not go far enough", and sparked yet another Tory rebellion headache for Rishi Sunak.
Published this morning, Equalities Secretary Kemi Badenoch and Education Secretary Gillian Keegan announced new plans that will ban schools from keeping parents in the dark if their child is "socially transitioning" at school.
The new guidance also gives teachers protection from punishment if they misgender a child, and says there should be a presumption that children will be dealt with according to the sex they were born as during school hours.
However the changes are not binding, and the Government's top lawyer blocked an outright ban on schoolchildren presenting as trans in the classroom.
There are also carveouts for the new guidance on informing parents, with "exceptional circumstances" allowing for trans children to keep their identity secret.
Liz Truss © Getty
Responding to this morning's publication, former PM Liz Truss blasted the guidance for not going far enough.
She said: "During the many months we have been waiting for its publication, it has become increasingly clear that non-statutory guidance will provide insufficient protection and clarity, and that a change in the law of the land is required.
"That is why I am today asking the Government to back my Private Members' Bill which would change the law in this area to ensure children are fully protected.
"I fear that activists and others will be able to exploit loopholes in the guidance and the existing legal framework to pursue their agenda, leaving children at risk of making irreversible changes and with single-sex spaces not sufficiently protected."
The full article is here:
EDI Jester has greatly enjoyed reporting on this 😂
Thanks to Barry for all his hard work this year!
You can find the consultation details here:
My inclination at the moment is to welcome the draft guidance but argue that it should be made mandatory and see above re social transition. However I am going to wait for one or two responses from our great gender critical/ women’s rights experts before finalising my response.
However what is clear is that completely ignoring guidance must make for a sure fire legal challenge - on which point, see the article below.
Defying the 'Transgender Guidance’ for Schools
Here’s a school, dear readers, you wouldn’t want you children or grandchildren to go to! Determined to defy any guidance from the Government! Sounds like Mr Sexton obviously thinks he knows better than parents!
Mollie Malone for Sky News (Transgender support for schools: Liverpool headteacher says he'll make his own policy 18 December) reports:
A school has said it is not going to change its policy on transgender pupils despite new government guidance on how teachers should support children who question their gender identity.
A message in the gender-neutral toilets at Chesterfield High School© Other
Chesterfield High School in Liverpool - a mixed comprehensive with 1,600 pupils with about 30 of them identifying as transgender, non-binary or genderfluid - has said it has made up its own policy while waiting for government guidance.
Mr Sexton ( identifies as a headteacher) says his school made up its own policy while waiting for government guidance© Other
"I'm not going to change what has worked for our school for the last 10 years," Kevin Sexton, its executive headteacher, told Sky News.
The comments come ahead of government advice expected to be published on Tuesday.
The non-statutory draft government guidance advising schools and colleges in England has been promised since 2018 - but its publication has been delayed since the summer, with discrepancies on how stringent it should be.
At the centre of the guidance is whether children should be able to “socially transition” at school, which would allow them to live according to the gender they identify with rather than their natal sex.
This relates to their appearance, their clothing, and their chosen name or pronoun, plus whether teachers should be addressing the child by those names if they request it.
The guidance will not go as far as to say there should be a blanket ban but instead is expected to say schools should be under no general "duty" or "obligation" to allow children to socially transition, and that there will be a threshold to be met as to whether parents should be informed.
If a child is actively questioning their gender or expressing a desire to transition, the guidance is expected to say parents should be informed.
The full article is here:
The War To Annihilate Sex
I mentioned this six part analysis of the gender madness by Arty Morty in my last update. I have now managed to listen to Arty reading it and it is excellent. It would be really good for someone who does not really understand all that is going on.
Arty does not attempt to articulate the demands of the gender critical/ women’s rights campaigners, so, just to ( almost) round off 2023, I will try and do that:
NO biological males or boys in women’s or girl’s single sex spaces
NO biological males or boys in women’s or girl’s sport
NO (so called) ‘gender affirming care’ for children with gender dysphoria
NO sexualised books or teaching of gender identity in school
NO social transitioning in school
NO erasure of sex based language such as ‘woman’, ‘man’, ‘girl’, ‘boy’, ‘mother’, ‘father’ and so on.
Does that sound about right!?
You can find Arty’s piece here and thanks, Arty:
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/cp/139697908
Terf Repellent
Thanks to wonderful Feminist Legal Clinic for this piece.
Edinburgh MP hits out at major clothes chain after employee wears badge with ‘slur’ on it (17 December)
An Edinburgh MP has lashed out at a major fashion chain after she was served by a staff member wearing a badge with a “slur” on it.
Edinburgh South West MP Joanna Cherry claimed she’d been served by a man in Superdry in the St James Quarter “wearing a badge with a bleach bottle with the words ‘TERF repellent’ on it”.
She wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter: “Just been in your St James store Edinburgh where I was served by a man wearing a badge with a bleach bottle with the words “terf repellent” on it. Terf is a slur used against feminists and lesbians with boundaries. Are we not welcome in your store?”
The tweet sparked a heated debate with some showing support for the MP calling out the store for having an employee wearing a “discriminatory badge.” One claimed they would boycott the store until they confirmed ‘their position on discrimination’.
Ms Cherry said in another post on Tuesday, 12 December: “Pleased that Superdry are investigating my complaint. It’s contrary to their duties under the #EqualityAct to allow staff to wear badges indicating discriminatory intent towards any protected characteristic including sexual orientation and religion or belief.”
Source: Edinburgh MP hits out at major clothes chain after employee wears badge with ‘slur’ on it
Dr Tandy Aye
I really think that one day we need some of these gender clinicians in the dock! Try this one for size! She actually refers to a girl with a penis i.e. a boy!!
https://twitter.com/Jonnywsbell/status/1735782375441777031
Women’s Rights Network
Shout out to WRN for their great work over the year. Their latest newsletter is just out and I am just taking one piece from that.
All I Want for Christmas (17 December)
Women spread the word through our ‘All I Want for Christmas is Single Sex Spaces’ campaign.
WRN groups posted images of their leaflet drops with comments like, “Women in #Hastings say #AllIWantForChristmas is to #SaveOurSpaces. The best Christmas gift Primark could give would be to keep all men out of our changing rooms, including men who called themselves women.”
Some Bold women have been spreading the #AllIWantForChristmas message in Carrick, Northern Ireland.
WRN Australia posted their All I Want for Christmas messages to people in power.
Gript
Shout out to wonderful Gript for keeping us informed of what is going on in Ireland. Here is an excellent piece by lecturer in world religions and social ethics (and poet), Colette Colfer about the disastrous proposals to amend the Irish Constitution that I have been reporting on all year.
BRAVE NEW IRELAND ( 19 December)
‘Oh brave new world, that has such people in’t’ – Shakespeare, The Tempest
I’ll be voting ‘no’ in both constitutional referendums taking place in Ireland on International Women’s Day 2024. The referendums, if passed, will see the removal of the words ‘woman’, ‘mother’ and ‘home’ from Article 41.2 of the constitution, and will result in a more expansive definition of ‘family’ in Article 41 to include families founded on ‘durable relationships’.
I was busy being cancelled by the Irish radio station Dublin City FM on International Women’s Day 2023. They pulled a lengthy pre-recorded interview with me just one hour before broadcast. Women who publicly acknowledge the relevance of sex differences are the heretics of our times, committing the blasphemy of biology. We are often censored from the public sphere but at least we do still have a vote.
It’s the first time I’m voting the ‘wrong way’ in a gender-related referendum, my debut swim against the popular progressive tide. I voted ‘yes’ in 2015 to same sex marriage, and ‘yes’ in 2018 to legalise abortion. It feels slightly discombobulating to be on the side that is frowned upon, condemned by fashionistas.
One man who voted ‘no’ to both last referendums has advised me that the chance is slim of me being brought on to TV or radio programmes to speak about the referendums as I’m so reasonable. He said that even if I am invited it would likely be a once-off as I would make the ‘no’ vote too convincing. I think he was trying to soften the blow of ongoing ostracisations.
The Government are spinning the referendums as a chance to get rid of sexist and outdated wording in the constitution, to give wider recognition to carers, and to modernise the definition of family. I am spinning the referendums as the erasure of sex differences. In addition, the proposed redefinition of family, although well-intended, is too expansive and could, for example, see my teenage-era pen pal, who I am still occasionally in touch with, reclassified as family as we have what could arguably be considered a ‘durable relationship’.
These days, to acknowledge sex differences between males and females is deemed ‘problematic’. This is, paradoxically, at the same time as powerful non-governmental organisations promote ‘sex-change’ or ‘gender-affirming’ practices such as the use of binders to flatten breasts, ‘tucking underwear’ to hide male genitalia, bilateral mastectomies for young women, orchiectomies (removal of testicles) for young men, puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for those whose gender identities do not match their biological sex.
Transhumanism is a movement that advocates for the enhancement of humans through the use of technology. One of the world’s most famous transhumanists, Martine Rothblatt, who underwent male to female sex reassignment surgery in 1994, has written that male and female terminology should be abolished and that ‘We owe it to the children of tomorrow to free their minds from a linguistic prison of sex’.
Philosophers down through the ages, however, have stressed the importance of opposites. Dr. Iain McGilchrist who wrote the award winning The Master and his Emissary about left and right brain hemispheres and the divided nature of thought, has pointed out that an electric current does not exist in the positive or the negative terminal but in the whole ensemble, the coming together of both. The proposed amendments to the constitution are an attempt to bring about unity by negating difference but, as McGilchrist says ‘We need the unity of the forces of division and unity’, not their division.
To even point out that women and men have, in general, different interests and physical abilities is viewed by many as sexist and as enforcing stereotypes. Using the word ‘woman’ rather than ‘person with a cervix’ is perceived as old hat and tiresomely out of touch. The fact that so many politicians and academics seem unable or unwilling to answer the question ‘what is a woman?’ means one easy solution is to simply get rid of the word.
A large part of the justification for holding the referendums comes from recommendations made by the Citizens’ Assembly on Gender Equality. The Citizen’s Assembly was made up of a group of one hundred people who were selected to participate in a series of discussions about the topic. These people were not democratically elected.
Chair of the Assembly, Dr. Catherine Day, wrote in the final report that the Oireachtas resolution authorising the Assembly referred only to ‘women and men, boys and girls’. However, the report points out that the Assembly advised those making submissions as part of the public consultation process to: ‘please understand ‘gender’ to refer to any and all options in terms of gender identity’. Why did the Assembly change the meaning of gender to ‘gender identity’? Does this mean that the Assembly understood ‘gender equality’ as ‘gender identity equality’?
Gender is a protected characteristic under Ireland’s Equal Status Act 2000 where it refers to the sex binary: ‘that one is male and other is female (the “gender ground”)’. Gender identity, on the other hand, is an internal sense of a gendered self. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic in Irish equality legislation. Some websites list as many as 107 gender identities (including ‘genderfuck’, ‘eunuch’, and ‘graygender’) whilst others state there is an infinite number.
What would ‘gender identity equality’ look like, if achieved? Would it mean men who identify as women would be permitted to: compete in women’s sports; use women’s changing rooms; fill spaces on quotas for women; win women’s awards; be housed in women’s prisons, domestic abuse shelters, women’s hospital wards? Would it mean a sports category for each of the 107 gender identities? Would it mean a whitewashing, an erasure, of the acknowledgement of sex differences? Everyone has a biological sex but not everyone has a gender identity.
The current wording of the Irish constitution recognises that women and mothers play an important role in the home. This does not negate the vital role that men and fathers play in the home. Nor does it confine women to the home or tie us to the kitchen sink, the dishwasher, or the cooker. We have had a female president in Ireland for twenty-one of the last thirty-three years. Women, thankfully, have the freedom to develop rewarding careers in areas that can be freely chosen. Women can work towards the professional levels that we aspire to, as can men.
The current wording in the Irish constitution gives women and mothers a solid foundation for wider recognition in Irish society and provides a basis on which to strengthen current laws that support women and mothers and their work, including in the home. In a world of technological advances, AI, sex robots, assisted reproductive technology and gender reassignment surgeries, it can be easy to forget that the heartbeat of humanity begins in the womb.
Aldous Huxley, in his 1932 novel Brave New World imagined a dystopian future in which technology would standardise the population and iron out inconvenient differences. In the Ireland of today, technology and gender-neutral language are being used to deny differences between the sexes. Deleting the words woman and mother from Article 41.2 of the constitution is a step towards the erasure of sex differences on the path towards a dystopian ‘brave new world’.
Endpiece
As mentioned in my last update Kathleen Stock and Julie Bindel led me back to my old Tracy Chapman LPs, which I am still enjoying ( all over again!). Here is Bridges:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12883137/Teaching-children-born-wrong-body-harmful-Kemi-Badenoch-warns-government-issues-new-trans-guidance-schools.html
The consensus so far seems to be that the guidance is good and that it’s something to be pleased about, although it needs to be made compulsory. I think I agree with that although I haven’t had time to digest it all yet. The trouble is that the captured teachers are already saying that they are going to ignore it, which is what we thought would happen.
Omg, that doctor!
Will have a proper read tomorrow Dusty, thanks as ever.
I’m happy about this development but fear it doesn’t go far enough. The TRAs will be looking for loopholes no doubt. And, as TT & you have pointed out, the National Education Union have said they’ll oppose it. That’s my old union which I’m now disgusted with.
Thanks for the update, Dusty.