Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

They've just been taught to respect people who are different.

Shame Aurora wasn't taught this.

This is nothing to do with respecting people who are different. You repeatedly frame it as such in order to denigrate anybody whose opinion differs from your own.

Other parents are less happy with the provision in their children's schools than you are. It's a sensible measure to ensure that teaching is factually based and that the materials are available for parents to view, just as they are for other subjects. The '200 genders' is from a BBC programme aimed at children and used in some schools.

N here. Will you kindly clarify, who is the poster you intended this for?

N and M seem identical, so it was aimed at whoever said it. Why don't you start separate accounts?

 

[multitool]

Other parents are less happy with the provision in their children's schools than you are

That's weird. None of them have ever expressed this to me and I'm almost certain I speak with more parents than you

. It's a sensible measure to ensure that teaching is factually based and that the materials are available for parents to view, just as they are for other subjects. The '200 genders' is from a BBC programme aimed at children and used in some schools

Which schools?

N and M seem identical, so it was aimed at whoever said it. Why don't you start separate accounts?

What has that to do with anything and why is it any business of yours how somebody operates their account?

 

[monkers]

This is nothing to do with respecting people who are different. You repeatedly frame it as such in order to denigrate anybody whose opinion differs from your own.

Other parents are less happy with the provision in their children's schools than you are. It's a sensible measure to ensure that teaching is factually based and that the materials are available for parents to view, just as they are for other subjects. The '200 genders' is from a BBC programme aimed at children and used in some schools.




N and M seem identical, so it was aimed at whoever said it. Why don't you start separate accounts?

N here Aurora.

We are not the same person. My contributions are infrequent. I tend to post only with regard to legal positions, though I have on occasion posted to comment on Monkers absence here due to her health. I have no wish to contribute here routinely to this thread, or at any time to other threads.

I have seen some discussion around statutory and non-statutory guidance. I attempted some clarification.

I do note your endless efforts to diminish the credibility of posters by your own invention.

To quote myself:-

Keegan's new guidance, whatever my opinion of it, is not unquestionably statutory since it does not rely on competence conveyed by a previous relevant legal act.

My opinion of the guidance is deliberately unstated, and I did take the trouble to say so. My opinion is centred on an admission of ignorance of law that gives effect to this guidance becoming statutory. You have every right to post to challenge my self-confessed ignorance, perhaps most effectively by posting a link to relevant law. I would welcome such an intervention. I can not welcome an intervention that supposes to know what else I must be thinking.

I can say with safety, that should you be in the position of acting as a witness, you would very quickly be identified as a person without credibility.

 

[Deleted member 159]

There are over 32,000 schools on the UK. It has been widely reported some are pushing trans ideology

 

[multitool]

There are over 32,000 schools on the UK. It has been widely reported some are pushing trans ideology

"Widely reported" means nothing.

Certainly doesn't mean it's true.

 

[monkers]

There are over 32,000 schools on the UK. It has been widely reported some are pushing trans ideology

If there was just a single case, it could still be widely reported, that doesn't make it widespread.

I asked you earlier to attempt to define this gender ideology of which you speak. What in precise terms is 'trans ideology'?

 

[AuroraSaab]

That's weird. None of them have ever expressed this to me and I'm almost certain I speak with more parents than you

This is your usual line of 'I don't care about it so nobody else should either'. Plenty of examples on social media of parents whose lived experience differs from your own.

What has that to do with anything and why is it any business of yours how somebody operates their account?

Nothing, but it's relevant when we are being asked to believe things without proof.

 

[AuroraSaab]

N here Aurora. We are not the same person.

Let me state it plainly then. I don't believe you.
N is an invention introduced to try to give some 'I'm a lawyer' authority to endless pronouncements on laws that don't say what you want it to say.

 

[Bromptonaut]

There are over 32,000 schools on the UK. It has been widely reported some are pushing trans ideology

What is trans ideology and how is it pushed?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Let me state it plainly then. I don't believe you.
N is an invention introduced to try to give some 'I'm a lawyer' authority to endless pronouncements on laws that don't say what you want it to say.

You really can be a clot sometimes....

 

[monkers]

Let me state it plainly then. I don't believe you.
N is an invention introduced to try to give some 'I'm a lawyer' authority to endless pronouncements on laws that don't say what you want it to say.

Monkers here. Frankly I didn't give a flying fark what a known liar and hater such as you thinks.

Neither does it matter to me very much who you thought you were speaking to, you were still inventing stuff that had not been said.

N can now see the bullshit that other posters have to put up with from you. As she said, you have zero credibility.

 

[icowden]

I asked you earlier to attempt to define this gender ideology of which you speak. What in precise terms is 'trans ideology'?

I've offered this before. It's the notion that people have a nebulous unquantifiable thing called a gender identity which may differ from their biological sex. It's akin to the notion of a soul as far as I can see.

Gender critical people such as myself see it as "woo". Obviously there is nothing wrong with believing in gender identity any more than there is in believing in God, a soul or homeopathy - until it actively causes problems and hurts people. Thus in the same way that we strongly advise people that if they are ill, science is the best bet rather than magic water or sky people, we should be careful that if someone says "I'm a woman because my gender identity is female even though I have a male body" that we don't crack out the hormone pills and prep the operating theatre - not least because these things are irreversible and can go catastrophically wrong.

Similarly if someone says "you must believe in my God and follow my beliefs" the default British position tends to be "piss off". You can believe in your God and if someone is interested in what you say, that's fine, but don't tell everyone else they are wrong. This is analogous to the belief in gender identity whereby people are being told they must announce their pronouns, use non-gendered terms or be cancelled / prevented from holding an event purely for having a different viewpoint or wanting to discuss the issue in a fair way.

There are people who think that it is abhorrent that JKRowling receives huge volumes of rape and death threats for asking in the mildest way that we stop treading on women's rights and women's safety. There are other people who think she should be raped / killed etc because she's a TERF. Personally I find that latter group abhorrent.

 

[monkers]

I've offered this before. It's the notion that people have a nebulous unquantifiable thing called a gender identity which may differ from their biological sex. It's akin to the notion of a soul as far as I can see.

Gender critical people such as myself see it as "woo". Obviously there is nothing wrong with believing in gender identity any more than there is in believing in God, a soul or homeopathy - until it actively causes problems and hurts people. Thus in the same way that we strongly advise people that if they are ill, science is the best bet rather than magic water or sky people, we should be careful that if someone says "I'm a woman because my gender identity is female even though I have a male body" that we don't crack out the hormone pills and prep the operating theatre - not least because these things are irreversible and can go catastrophically wrong.

Similarly if someone says "you must believe in my God and follow my beliefs" the default British position tends to be "piss off". You can believe in your God and if someone is interested in what you say, that's fine, but don't tell everyone else they are wrong. This is analogous to the belief in gender identity whereby people are being told they must announce their pronouns, use non-gendered terms or be cancelled / prevented from holding an event purely for having a different viewpoint or wanting to discuss the issue in a fair way.

There are people who think that it is abhorrent that JKRowling receives huge volumes of rape and death threats for asking in the mildest way that we stop treading on women's rights and women's safety. There are other people who think she should be raped / killed etc because she's a TERF. Personally I find that latter group abhorrent.

Tut tut, answering for others. I specifically asked CXRAndy to define.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Monkers here. Frankly I didn't give a flying fark what a known liar and hater such as you thinks.

Neither does it matter to me very much who you thought you were speaking to, you were still inventing stuff that had not been said.

N can now see the bullshit that other posters have to put up with from you. As she said, you have zero credibility.

The arguments stand and fall on their own merits, regardless of who is making them. I don't dismiss your arguments because I find you unpleasant but because they are unevidenced and without merit. Which is why you resort to abuse at the drop of a hat.

My objection is the appeal to authority argument that you attempt when you would have us believe there is a legal expert who writes exactly as you do and has the same inclination to distort UK law. This is done solely to sow confusion about what the law says.

 

[icowden]

My objection is the appeal to authority argument that you attempt when you would have us believe there is a legal expert who writes exactly as you do and has the same inclination to distort UK law. This is done solely to sow confusion about what the law says.

I have to say that N's writing style is different and I have no issue with Monkers and N being two different people. She has explained this in detail and given us some of N's background.

Statutory guidance is a bit confusing TBH