The content on the local government children’s services RSE programme are available in the public domain and are highly politicised and partisan in terms of it allegiance to the teachings of gender identity ideology. This ideology is contested and controversial due to its assertion that gender identity is something that everyone has and that the concept should be the determining factor in categorising services and spaces. Clearly these assertions are problematic for women’s rights, for those who are same sex attracted and, if presented as fact, inaccurate, unlawful and damaging in Education settings.
I wrote to the local authority to ask them to review the resources with regard to the safeguarding risks for all children. They did not address my concerns and have closed my complaint. I was informed by the author of the resources that throughout the [local authority] RSE Programme for secondary schools:
- Gender neutral terms will be used (people with a pens, people who menstruate, “their” as a pronoun) to include non-binary young people
- In Year 8, children will understand the differences between assigned sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation…. will learn respectful terminology used to describe assigned sex, gender identity
- In year 10 children will explore the spectrum of gender identities and the impact gender expression has on individuals and on society. Respecting multiple gender expressions means avoiding assumptions about what gender expression says about a person’s gender identity. Gender identity is internal and not something that you can tell about a person based on their appearance. Remind participants that we cannot tell a person’s sex, gender identity or sexual/ romantic orientation by looking at them.’
The local authority told me teachers are not intended, through the use of this curriculum, to encourage children to question their gender identity. Unfortunately the indoctrinating materials on the links in the resources do quite the opposite.
There is no legal basis and no scientific evidence that we are born with a ‘gender identity’ and that it can override biological sex in determining whether a child is a boy or a girl. But this is what is being taught, as fact, rather than belief, illustrated within the [local authority] resources. It is justified as being about LGBT inclusion. The term LGBT itself is constantly expanding. It’s become LGBTQIA+.
It’s worth making clear what these additional letters stand for: Q is for queer, A is for asexual, the + covers any number of things such as kink, cross dressing, BDSM, fetish, drag, polyamory, nappy fetishists, ageplay, furries, paraphilias. Queer in this context means to blur boundaries, to destabilise reality, to say it doesn’t matter what sex you are, your gender is the most important thing about you. This is a harmful way to teach children about sex.
The resources discuss ‘cisgender’ as a gender definition, ‘someone who identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth’. This is problematic for a number of reasons:
(i) not everyone identifies with a gender. (Gender is viewed by some as based on social stereotypes and if you do not subscribe to these stereotypes then you do not have a gender).
(ii) gender is not assigned at birth and neither is sex. Sex is observed and recorded at birth. (in cases where sex cannot be observed, further testing is carried out to determine whether a baby is male or female).
(iii) The prefix ‘cis’ is often used as an antonym for ‘trans’ and for this reason, together with those above, is considered offensive by some – in particular those who do not subscribe to gender ideology, and to those who do not wish to be referred to as a subset of their own sex class – eg ciswoman or cisman. One cannot promote the idea that sex is assigned and that we all have an innate gender identity as fact.
The [local authority] are required to abide by the Nolan Principles of public life, which mean they are forbidden from taking partisan and ideological positions. The biased political partisan views being taught to promote the medicalisation of vulnerable children who currently identify as ‘trans’ are contradictory to the essential safeguarding findings of the government initiated independent Cass Review. In particular, they have avoided reference to the complex presentations such as same sex attraction, trauma, sexual abuse, ASD or gender dysphoria which Cass has stated can lead a child towards adopting a trans identity.
I have since been emailed by [the local authority] to say my official complaint case is closed, therefore the indoctrinating materials are still being used and taught as fact rather than belief. This goes against people with differing beliefs and also the protected characteristics and women’s sex based rights. The case is far from closed with [the local authority] as far as parents with vulnerable children are concerned. The indoctrination and radicalisation of children into Queer theory, Gender Ideology taught as fact, and persecution of families challenging the social transition and medicalisation of children by the borough needs to be questioned.
The UN safeguards under 18s overall in article 1 of the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child which defines a person as a child until the age of 18 and safeguarding provisions apply till then which necessitates parental consent.
On what grounds is [the local authority] actively pushing the idea of gender identity in schools through unevidenced based, non factual PSHE/RSE resources pushing stereotypes against the statutory guidance etc?
Why are the resources not developmentally informed by the Cass Review?
Why are the resources not evidence based and free of activism agendas and ideological language?
How will those with a responsibility of caring for and safeguarding children respond to this awareness?