You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Bandit?

2

Comments

  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    I would hate to upset anyone on this topic, particularly through my lack of knowledge.
    So I wont say very much.
    I think that the era of political correctness, has meant that we now produce memos like this with a very small minority of people in mind.
    The fact that in doing so, they risk outraging the overwhelming majority doesnt seem to matter.
    I suppose that when I was growing up very small minorities seemed to accept that everything would not be perfect for them, and maybe that was the price they paid for being in a very small minority.
    They covered this story on Sky News this morning, the women were clearly not amused.
    I dont think we should deliberately set out to upset anyone, however small a minority, but every bit of political correctness seems to lead to more, there seem to be no bounds.
    Where will it end?
    Completely agree. You have a lack of knowledge.

    It is not "political correctness". It is as simple as ensuring, for example, that sanitary products go to the people that need them. That is just common sense.

    It does not "outrage" the "overwhelming majority". At all. I speak from personal experience. So, for example, my youngest legally changed her gender and passport while under 18. Without my consent-in fact, I never knew until it was done.

    You seriously believe Trans people believe everything will be perfect for them? Would that be the group that are statistically far more likely to take anti-depressants, to have mental health problems, to commit suicide? Oh. Pretty perfect.

    "Price they paid"? How offensive is that!

    The vast majority of people in this country are inclusive, decent human beings. Including, by and large, the Straight Community. Even old people, like you and me. Our language can be hopelessly outdated, and at times downright offensive, but Minorities know the difference between offensive and deliberately offensive. People tend to be curious. Not judgmental.

    Attacks on Trans people are increasing. Primarily due to a hate group. The LGB Alliance. So-for example-the LGB Alliance campaign to stop schools making provision for Trans people. Straight people just believe it is part of life. Attack Stonewall for including Trans people. Attack Trans people on Pride marches.

    Because a section of the Gay Community believe a different Minority should not exist.
    This week it emerged that the main NHS webpages on ovarian, womb and cervical cancers — suffered only by people born with female biology — no longer refer to women. England’s NHS website previously said ovarian cancer was a common cancer “in women”. Now it says: “Anyone with ovaries can get ovarian cancer but it mostly affects those over 50.” It was claimed that NHS Digital had not consulted the government before making the changes.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    edited June 2022
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    I would hate to upset anyone on this topic, particularly through my lack of knowledge.
    So I wont say very much.
    I think that the era of political correctness, has meant that we now produce memos like this with a very small minority of people in mind.
    The fact that in doing so, they risk outraging the overwhelming majority doesnt seem to matter.
    I suppose that when I was growing up very small minorities seemed to accept that everything would not be perfect for them, and maybe that was the price they paid for being in a very small minority.
    They covered this story on Sky News this morning, the women were clearly not amused.
    I dont think we should deliberately set out to upset anyone, however small a minority, but every bit of political correctness seems to lead to more, there seem to be no bounds.
    Where will it end?
    Completely agree. You have a lack of knowledge.

    It is not "political correctness". It is as simple as ensuring, for example, that sanitary products go to the people that need them. That is just common sense.

    It does not "outrage" the "overwhelming majority". At all. I speak from personal experience. So, for example, my youngest legally changed her gender and passport while under 18. Without my consent-in fact, I never knew until it was done.

    You seriously believe Trans people believe everything will be perfect for them? Would that be the group that are statistically far more likely to take anti-depressants, to have mental health problems, to commit suicide? Oh. Pretty perfect.

    "Price they paid"? How offensive is that!

    The vast majority of people in this country are inclusive, decent human beings. Including, by and large, the Straight Community. Even old people, like you and me. Our language can be hopelessly outdated, and at times downright offensive, but Minorities know the difference between offensive and deliberately offensive. People tend to be curious. Not judgmental.

    Attacks on Trans people are increasing. Primarily due to a hate group. The LGB Alliance. So-for example-the LGB Alliance campaign to stop schools making provision for Trans people. Straight people just believe it is part of life. Attack Stonewall for including Trans people. Attack Trans people on Pride marches.

    Because a section of the Gay Community believe a different Minority should not exist.
    We are not going to agree on this
    The point I was trying to make was merely this, the document refers to people as per the below,
    students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”.
    You would assume that the overwhelming majority would happy to be referred to as women and girls, because that is what they are.
    The reaction from the women on Sky this morning concurred.
    They found the above terms offensive.
    The overwhelming majority of British people are English.

    By your argument, you believe that the rights of the minority are irrelevant.

    OK if I refer to you as English, then?
    DUP minister launches scheme for ‘pupils who menstruate’ – avoiding any mention of females
    …The 400-word press release today includes no mention of the terms “female”, “girls” or “young women”.



    At the behest of transgender campaigners, it has become increasingly common for organisations not to refer to women or girls, but rather to “people who menstruate”, “pregnant people”, or “people with cervixes”.

    They also believe that there are many genders, not just male and female, and so someone could belong to the gender “two-spirit neutrois” and still menstruate.


    In addition, many transgender activists also hold that school children are capable of making decisions on whether to live as the opposite gender from the one they were raised, and have succeeded in some areas in getting advice on this matter written into school guidelines.

    It seeks to “explore the nature of menstruation, which many perceive to be a strictly female bodily function despite many scholars’ recognition that menstruators are of various gender identities”.

    Last year bestselling children’s author JK Rowling sparked an angry reaction from transgender campaigners when she mocked this phenomenon, saying: “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/dup-minister-launches-scheme-for-pupils-who-menstruate-avoiding-any-mention-of-females/ar-AAOF88x
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    I would hate to upset anyone on this topic, particularly through my lack of knowledge.
    So I wont say very much.
    I think that the era of political correctness, has meant that we now produce memos like this with a very small minority of people in mind.
    The fact that in doing so, they risk outraging the overwhelming majority doesnt seem to matter.
    I suppose that when I was growing up very small minorities seemed to accept that everything would not be perfect for them, and maybe that was the price they paid for being in a very small minority.
    They covered this story on Sky News this morning, the women were clearly not amused.
    I dont think we should deliberately set out to upset anyone, however small a minority, but every bit of political correctness seems to lead to more, there seem to be no bounds.
    Where will it end?
    Completely agree. You have a lack of knowledge.

    It is not "political correctness". It is as simple as ensuring, for example, that sanitary products go to the people that need them. That is just common sense.

    It does not "outrage" the "overwhelming majority". At all. I speak from personal experience. So, for example, my youngest legally changed her gender and passport while under 18. Without my consent-in fact, I never knew until it was done.

    You seriously believe Trans people believe everything will be perfect for them? Would that be the group that are statistically far more likely to take anti-depressants, to have mental health problems, to commit suicide? Oh. Pretty perfect.

    "Price they paid"? How offensive is that!

    The vast majority of people in this country are inclusive, decent human beings. Including, by and large, the Straight Community. Even old people, like you and me. Our language can be hopelessly outdated, and at times downright offensive, but Minorities know the difference between offensive and deliberately offensive. People tend to be curious. Not judgmental.

    Attacks on Trans people are increasing. Primarily due to a hate group. The LGB Alliance. So-for example-the LGB Alliance campaign to stop schools making provision for Trans people. Straight people just believe it is part of life. Attack Stonewall for including Trans people. Attack Trans people on Pride marches.

    Because a section of the Gay Community believe a different Minority should not exist.
    We are not going to agree on this
    The point I was trying to make was merely this, the document refers to people as per the below,
    students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”.
    You would assume that the overwhelming majority would happy to be referred to as women and girls, because that is what they are.
    The reaction from the women on Sky this morning concurred.
    They found the above terms offensive.
    The overwhelming majority of British people are English.

    By your argument, you believe that the rights of the minority are irrelevant.

    OK if I refer to you as English, then?
    DUP minister launches scheme for ‘pupils who menstruate’ – avoiding any mention of females
    …The 400-word press release today includes no mention of the terms “female”, “girls” or “young women”.



    At the behest of transgender campaigners, it has become increasingly common for organisations not to refer to women or girls, but rather to “people who menstruate”, “pregnant people”, or “people with cervixes”.

    They also believe that there are many genders, not just male and female, and so someone could belong to the gender “two-spirit neutrois” and still menstruate.


    In addition, many transgender activists also hold that school children are capable of making decisions on whether to live as the opposite gender from the one they were raised, and have succeeded in some areas in getting advice on this matter written into school guidelines.

    It seeks to “explore the nature of menstruation, which many perceive to be a strictly female bodily function despite many scholars’ recognition that menstruators are of various gender identities”.

    Last year bestselling children’s author JK Rowling sparked an angry reaction from transgender campaigners when she mocked this phenomenon, saying: “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/dup-minister-launches-scheme-for-pupils-who-menstruate-avoiding-any-mention-of-females/ar-AAOF88x
    That would be the supremely talented JK Rowling.

    Brilliant author. And, regrettably, a bigot.

    The standard bearer and main supporter of the hate group who have attacked my youngest.

    There is a simple reason why one of the greatest ever authors is also a pariah.

    Feel free to report on her hate speech.

    And attack my family.

  • tai-gartai-gar Member Posts: 2,688
    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    edited June 2022
    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    Exactly this.

    The LGB Alliance has a main focus on attacking Trans people. As an example, here is the Wikipedia page:-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

    It is perfectly fine for an organisation to be founded in the belief that the rights of LGB people are different from the T. But that is not the way that organisation works.

    It spends little or no time positively campaigning for the Rights of LGB Members. And nearly all of its time attacking 2 groups. Firstly, Transgender people in the belief that they are a threat to the LGB Community. The Founders of the LGB Alliance believe that people who transition do it to attack women generally, and Lesbians in particular.

    Secondly, the attack is against Stonewall. Because there was an argument as to whether Stonewall should continue to support the rights of all the LGBT community, or only the LGB part. It was decisively determined that it was to be all 4 strands, not just 3. Hence the breakaway movement founded in 2019.

    An example of this is the current case of Allison Bailey v Stonewall. It makes for fascinating reading.

    Ms Bailey is a Barrister. And a Les bian. Personally, I think her orientation should be irrelevant. But she clearly does not. She has opposed Stonewall's views for many years. Her Chambers (where she works, as a self-employed Barrister)had, at one stage, signed up for Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme (they left a year or 2 after). Ms Bailey is suing Stonewall. Because she believes that Stonewall have the "wrong sort" of diversity. That her version is the only correct one. And that she may have lost work as a result. So-she is suing Stonewall, the LGBT Charity. For discriminating against the LGB Community.

    Founding an organisation whose stated aims are to (for example) prevent schools from doing anything to help Trans people-only LGB people. And that Trans people have to accept that the only correct gender is that assigned at birth. And to say otherwise is an attack on the LGB Community-or at least the activists in her splinter group, as opposed to the ones who want to live and let live...

    Did I mention that this poor Barrister has crowdfunded £600k for her legal action? Largely supported by JK Rowling. Because, apparently, an organisation founded to support the whole LGBT Community is the organisation that is causing problems for gay people. Because she believes she can say whatever she likes about Trans people. And anyone who says otherwise is discriminating against a Minority.

    Nothing is ever certain in a Court or Tribunal. But I have never wanted someone to lose a case more in my entire life.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    Essexphil said:

    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    Exactly this.

    The LGB Alliance has a main focus on attacking Trans people. As an example, here is the Wikipedia page:-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

    It is perfectly fine for an organisation to be founded in the belief that the rights of LGB people are different from the T. But that is not the way that organisation works.

    It spends little or no time positively campaigning for the Rights of LGB Members. And nearly all of its time attacking 2 groups. Firstly, Transgender people in the belief that they are a threat to the LGB Community. The Founders of the LGB Alliance believe that people who transition do it to attack women generally, and Lesbians in particular.

    Secondly, the attack is against Stonewall. Because there was an argument as to whether Stonewall should continue to support the rights of all the LGBT community, or only the LGB part. It was decisively determined that it was to be all 4 strands, not just 3. Hence the breakaway movement founded in 2019.

    An example of this is the current case of Allison Bailey v Stonewall. It makes for fascinating reading.

    Ms Bailey is a Barrister. And a Les bian. Personally, I think her orientation should be irrelevant. But she clearly does not. She has opposed Stonewall's views for many years. Her Chambers (where she works, as a self-employed Barrister)had, at one stage, signed up for Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme (they left a year or 2 after). Ms Bailey is suing Stonewall. Because she believes that Stonewall have the "wrong sort" of diversity. That her version is the only correct one. And that she may have lost work as a result. So-she is suing Stonewall, the LGBT Charity. For discriminating against the LGB Community.

    Founding an organisation whose stated aims are to (for example) prevent schools from doing anything to help Trans people-only LGB people. And that Trans people have to accept that the only correct gender is that assigned at birth. And to say otherwise is an attack on the LGB Community-or at least the activists in her splinter group, as opposed to the ones who want to live and let live...

    Did I mention that this poor Barrister has crowdfunded £600k for her legal action? Largely supported by JK Rowling. Because, apparently, an organisation founded to support the whole LGBT Community is the organisation that is causing problems for gay people. Because she believes she can say whatever she likes about Trans people. And anyone who says otherwise is discriminating against a Minority.

    Nothing is ever certain in a Court or Tribunal. But I have never wanted someone to lose a case more in my entire life.
    I think you are now going off at a tangent.
    You dont have to look very hard on the internet to find that ordinary women, rather than activists, take a dim view of the terminology used in the original article.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    Exactly this.

    The LGB Alliance has a main focus on attacking Trans people. As an example, here is the Wikipedia page:-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

    It is perfectly fine for an organisation to be founded in the belief that the rights of LGB people are different from the T. But that is not the way that organisation works.

    It spends little or no time positively campaigning for the Rights of LGB Members. And nearly all of its time attacking 2 groups. Firstly, Transgender people in the belief that they are a threat to the LGB Community. The Founders of the LGB Alliance believe that people who transition do it to attack women generally, and Lesbians in particular.

    Secondly, the attack is against Stonewall. Because there was an argument as to whether Stonewall should continue to support the rights of all the LGBT community, or only the LGB part. It was decisively determined that it was to be all 4 strands, not just 3. Hence the breakaway movement founded in 2019.

    An example of this is the current case of Allison Bailey v Stonewall. It makes for fascinating reading.

    Ms Bailey is a Barrister. And a Les bian. Personally, I think her orientation should be irrelevant. But she clearly does not. She has opposed Stonewall's views for many years. Her Chambers (where she works, as a self-employed Barrister)had, at one stage, signed up for Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme (they left a year or 2 after). Ms Bailey is suing Stonewall. Because she believes that Stonewall have the "wrong sort" of diversity. That her version is the only correct one. And that she may have lost work as a result. So-she is suing Stonewall, the LGBT Charity. For discriminating against the LGB Community.

    Founding an organisation whose stated aims are to (for example) prevent schools from doing anything to help Trans people-only LGB people. And that Trans people have to accept that the only correct gender is that assigned at birth. And to say otherwise is an attack on the LGB Community-or at least the activists in her splinter group, as opposed to the ones who want to live and let live...

    Did I mention that this poor Barrister has crowdfunded £600k for her legal action? Largely supported by JK Rowling. Because, apparently, an organisation founded to support the whole LGBT Community is the organisation that is causing problems for gay people. Because she believes she can say whatever she likes about Trans people. And anyone who says otherwise is discriminating against a Minority.

    Nothing is ever certain in a Court or Tribunal. But I have never wanted someone to lose a case more in my entire life.
    I think you are now going off at a tangent.
    You dont have to look very hard on the internet to find that ordinary women, rather than activists, take a dim view of the terminology used in the original article.
    You quote Members of the LGB Alliance. and believe they represent "ordinary women".

    I take a dim view of anyone who wishes to tell my son that he is not allowed to be my son. That because he was born female, his legal processes and passport are all invalid. And that his purpose for doing so is to attack women.

    If you think that is a "tangent" then I pity you.

    And would remind you that you are continuing to attack my family.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    I would agree 100%.
    Although I find it difficult why there is the need to describe women, and girls in the way that they were described in the original article.

    “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”.

    I am not sure that I will ever be able to get my head around some of the stuff that goes on.
    But I intend to leave it there.

    School bans girls from wearing skirts under new ‘gender-neutral’ rules



    A secondary school has banned girls from wearing skirts in order to create a “more gender-neutral” uniform policy.

    Parents of Tiverton High School (THS) students in Devon were informed on June 9 that the “modifications” to the school uniform would come into effect from September this year.

    Pupils at the co-ed secondary school will have to ditch their skirts, which are currently permitted, and attend lessons wearing only trousers, with the exception of PE sessions.



    A number of parents expressed frustration after the announcement of the major change, which was decided without any prior consultation.

    Among those angry about the lack of warning was Stephen Moakes, who said: "As a parent, I have concerns...These have been made without any consultation with the pupils or parents and are simply being imposed.

    "I feel that as a school that encourages its pupils to be engaged and have a voice this seems to be a complete lack of democracy by not allowing the established pupil forums to have input on school uniform changes.”

    https://uk.yahoo.com/style/school-bans-girls-wearing-skirts-181423045.html
  • HENDRIK62HENDRIK62 Member Posts: 3,202
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    This last bit is not true
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    Exactly this.

    The LGB Alliance has a main focus on attacking Trans people. As an example, here is the Wikipedia page:-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

    It is perfectly fine for an organisation to be founded in the belief that the rights of LGB people are different from the T. But that is not the way that organisation works.

    It spends little or no time positively campaigning for the Rights of LGB Members. And nearly all of its time attacking 2 groups. Firstly, Transgender people in the belief that they are a threat to the LGB Community. The Founders of the LGB Alliance believe that people who transition do it to attack women generally, and Lesbians in particular.

    Secondly, the attack is against Stonewall. Because there was an argument as to whether Stonewall should continue to support the rights of all the LGBT community, or only the LGB part. It was decisively determined that it was to be all 4 strands, not just 3. Hence the breakaway movement founded in 2019.

    An example of this is the current case of Allison Bailey v Stonewall. It makes for fascinating reading.

    Ms Bailey is a Barrister. And a Les bian. Personally, I think her orientation should be irrelevant. But she clearly does not. She has opposed Stonewall's views for many years. Her Chambers (where she works, as a self-employed Barrister)had, at one stage, signed up for Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme (they left a year or 2 after). Ms Bailey is suing Stonewall. Because she believes that Stonewall have the "wrong sort" of diversity. That her version is the only correct one. And that she may have lost work as a result. So-she is suing Stonewall, the LGBT Charity. For discriminating against the LGB Community.

    Founding an organisation whose stated aims are to (for example) prevent schools from doing anything to help Trans people-only LGB people. And that Trans people have to accept that the only correct gender is that assigned at birth. And to say otherwise is an attack on the LGB Community-or at least the activists in her splinter group, as opposed to the ones who want to live and let live...

    Did I mention that this poor Barrister has crowdfunded £600k for her legal action? Largely supported by JK Rowling. Because, apparently, an organisation founded to support the whole LGBT Community is the organisation that is causing problems for gay people. Because she believes she can say whatever she likes about Trans people. And anyone who says otherwise is discriminating against a Minority.

    Nothing is ever certain in a Court or Tribunal. But I have never wanted someone to lose a case more in my entire life.
    I think you are now going off at a tangent.
    You dont have to look very hard on the internet to find that ordinary women, rather than activists, take a dim view of the terminology used in the original article.
    You quote Members of the LGB Alliance. and believe they represent "ordinary women".

    I take a dim view of anyone who wishes to tell my son that he is not allowed to be my son. That because he was born female, his legal processes and passport are all invalid. And that his purpose for doing so is to attack women.

    If you think that is a "tangent" then I pity you.

    And would remind you that you are continuing to attack my family.
    It was not my intention to attack anyone.
    I thought the comments I made were quite clear.
    You need to calm down.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HENDRIK62 said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    This last bit is not true
    Exterminated is the wrong word.

    Forced to revert to the sex they were born with. Regardless of their wishes.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    tai-gar said:

    Live and let live I say.

    We are all equal in life - disabled, transgender, male, female, black, white or any colour.

    Why on earth should it matter?

    I don't believe it should anyway.

    Treat everyone with dignity and respect and hopefully that is how you are treated yourself.

    Exactly this.

    The LGB Alliance has a main focus on attacking Trans people. As an example, here is the Wikipedia page:-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

    It is perfectly fine for an organisation to be founded in the belief that the rights of LGB people are different from the T. But that is not the way that organisation works.

    It spends little or no time positively campaigning for the Rights of LGB Members. And nearly all of its time attacking 2 groups. Firstly, Transgender people in the belief that they are a threat to the LGB Community. The Founders of the LGB Alliance believe that people who transition do it to attack women generally, and Lesbians in particular.

    Secondly, the attack is against Stonewall. Because there was an argument as to whether Stonewall should continue to support the rights of all the LGBT community, or only the LGB part. It was decisively determined that it was to be all 4 strands, not just 3. Hence the breakaway movement founded in 2019.

    An example of this is the current case of Allison Bailey v Stonewall. It makes for fascinating reading.

    Ms Bailey is a Barrister. And a Les bian. Personally, I think her orientation should be irrelevant. But she clearly does not. She has opposed Stonewall's views for many years. Her Chambers (where she works, as a self-employed Barrister)had, at one stage, signed up for Stonewall's Diversity Champions Scheme (they left a year or 2 after). Ms Bailey is suing Stonewall. Because she believes that Stonewall have the "wrong sort" of diversity. That her version is the only correct one. And that she may have lost work as a result. So-she is suing Stonewall, the LGBT Charity. For discriminating against the LGB Community.

    Founding an organisation whose stated aims are to (for example) prevent schools from doing anything to help Trans people-only LGB people. And that Trans people have to accept that the only correct gender is that assigned at birth. And to say otherwise is an attack on the LGB Community-or at least the activists in her splinter group, as opposed to the ones who want to live and let live...

    Did I mention that this poor Barrister has crowdfunded £600k for her legal action? Largely supported by JK Rowling. Because, apparently, an organisation founded to support the whole LGBT Community is the organisation that is causing problems for gay people. Because she believes she can say whatever she likes about Trans people. And anyone who says otherwise is discriminating against a Minority.

    Nothing is ever certain in a Court or Tribunal. But I have never wanted someone to lose a case more in my entire life.
    I think you are now going off at a tangent.
    You dont have to look very hard on the internet to find that ordinary women, rather than activists, take a dim view of the terminology used in the original article.
    You quote Members of the LGB Alliance. and believe they represent "ordinary women".

    I take a dim view of anyone who wishes to tell my son that he is not allowed to be my son. That because he was born female, his legal processes and passport are all invalid. And that his purpose for doing so is to attack women.

    If you think that is a "tangent" then I pity you.

    And would remind you that you are continuing to attack my family.
    It was not my intention to attack anyone.
    I thought the comments I made were quite clear.
    You need to calm down.
    The last thing I want is your pity.
    Although, I would be happy if you were a little less insulting.
    It doesnt suit you.
  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz

  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz


    Julie Scott 🍒
    @judgejules75
    ‘Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’

    Govt advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.’

    ⚠️NEWSFLASH⚠️

    ‘Women’ & ‘girls’ are not dirty words 😡 Stop dehumanising us
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz


    Julie Scott 🍒
    @judgejules75
    ‘Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’

    Govt advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.’

    ⚠️NEWSFLASH⚠️

    ‘Women’ & ‘girls’ are not dirty words 😡 Stop dehumanising us
    Ah. Julie Scott.
    That would be the Julie Scott, LGB Alliance Activist.

    Here is an example of her Trans views. A tweet from last week:-

    ‘Cook is a male transgender activist who has publicly questioned the law on rape by deception, has accused the LGB Alliance of being a hate group and attacked parenting website Mumsnet as “a centre for transphobic hate.”’ And he’s now working for the CPS🙄"

    That would be Sophie Cook. Began to transition to female in 1998. completed journey in 2015. Has chosen to identify as female for many years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Cook

    But the LGB Alliance refuses to accept that she is female. Because she was born male.

    Keep believing in your non-existent "overwhelming majority". The overwhelming majority don't care, and are happy to let people lead their own lives.


  • HAYSIEHAYSIE Member Posts: 35,862
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz


    Julie Scott 🍒
    @judgejules75
    ‘Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’

    Govt advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.’

    ⚠️NEWSFLASH⚠️

    ‘Women’ & ‘girls’ are not dirty words 😡 Stop dehumanising us
    Ah. Julie Scott.
    That would be the Julie Scott, LGB Alliance Activist.

    Here is an example of her Trans views. A tweet from last week:-

    ‘Cook is a male transgender activist who has publicly questioned the law on rape by deception, has accused the LGB Alliance of being a hate group and attacked parenting website Mumsnet as “a centre for transphobic hate.”’ And he’s now working for the CPS🙄"

    That would be Sophie Cook. Began to transition to female in 1998. completed journey in 2015. Has chosen to identify as female for many years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Cook

    But the LGB Alliance refuses to accept that she is female. Because she was born male.

    Keep believing in your non-existent "overwhelming majority". The overwhelming majority don't care, and are happy to let people lead their own lives.


    I have finished arguing on this now.
    I am not sold on any reason for not referring to women, and girls, as women and girls, although it seems that the document is currently being amended.
    I am also not sold on gender neutral school uniforms.
    I am not sure that gender neutral toilets are a step forward.
    There are a lot of nasty people out there, and gender neutral toilets will make it easier for them to target the users, for harassment etc.
    Bye.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz


    Julie Scott 🍒
    @judgejules75
    ‘Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’

    Govt advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.’

    ⚠️NEWSFLASH⚠️

    ‘Women’ & ‘girls’ are not dirty words 😡 Stop dehumanising us
    Ah. Julie Scott.
    That would be the Julie Scott, LGB Alliance Activist.

    Here is an example of her Trans views. A tweet from last week:-

    ‘Cook is a male transgender activist who has publicly questioned the law on rape by deception, has accused the LGB Alliance of being a hate group and attacked parenting website Mumsnet as “a centre for transphobic hate.”’ And he’s now working for the CPS🙄"

    That would be Sophie Cook. Began to transition to female in 1998. completed journey in 2015. Has chosen to identify as female for many years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Cook

    But the LGB Alliance refuses to accept that she is female. Because she was born male.

    Keep believing in your non-existent "overwhelming majority". The overwhelming majority don't care, and are happy to let people lead their own lives.


    I have finished arguing on this now.
    I am not sold on any reason for not referring to women, and girls, as women and girls, although it seems that the document is currently being amended.
    I am also not sold on gender neutral school uniforms.
    I am not sure that gender neutral toilets are a step forward.
    There are a lot of nasty people out there, and gender neutral toilets will make it easier for them to target the users, for harassment etc.
    Bye.
    Finished telling me that I don't know how best to protect my son?
    Not going to trot out any more haters pretending to be mainstream?
    Telling me to calm down and not be insulting while you have 3 separate goes at my family?

    Gee, thanks.

    Just want to educate you on gender-neutral policies in schools. and why they are vital.

    Everything to do with the World we live in. And the choices schools have to make.

    I have advised many schools in relation to this in the past. Simply, because I am a professional. Who puts any personal feelings to 1 side. In order to provide the best solution for the Client. I would also mention that the advice I gave was last in 2017, and matters have changed since then-I will explain how.

    The first point to be aware of is that the majority of Secondary Schools have Transgender pupils. And those that don't are aware that they need to take steps for when they do. Simply, because that is the Law as it stands.

    People like my younger son are, at law, men. Male in relation to legal name, legal gender, HMRC, exam results, etc. A school can't go forcing a man to wear a skirt to school. Likewise, someone who has transitioned the opposite way and is legally a girl, cannot be prevented from wearing a Skirt when other girls do. That is Discrimination.

    The advice I always used to give was this. Trousers for the Boys, Girls to have the choice between trousers and skirts. And, until recently, that all worked fine. In my view, it struck the right balance between choice and inclusivity.

    Until the LGBA was formed. You see, they refuse to accept that Transgender Girls are Girls at all. And insist that they must not be allowed to wear skirts. And threaten publicity, social media campaigns, legal action, blah blah blah. The LGBA campaign that there must be NO help at all for Trans pupils in schools.

    So now, increasingly, girls (including, of course the vast majority who were born girls) are not being allowed to wear skirts. Simply because schools want to concentrate their resources on teaching.

    Not Gender Wars. On either side.

    So now, regrettably, schools are increasingly insisting all pupils wear trousers. Simply because they have no other practical choice
  • HENDRIK62HENDRIK62 Member Posts: 3,202
    Essexphil said:

    HENDRIK62 said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    This last bit is not true
    Exterminated is the wrong word.

    Forced to revert to the sex they were born with. Regardless of their wishes.
    this is also untrue
  • TheEdge949TheEdge949 Member Posts: 5,686
    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz


    Julie Scott 🍒
    @judgejules75
    ‘Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’

    Govt advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.’

    ⚠️NEWSFLASH⚠️

    ‘Women’ & ‘girls’ are not dirty words 😡 Stop dehumanising us
    Ah. Julie Scott.
    That would be the Julie Scott, LGB Alliance Activist.

    Here is an example of her Trans views. A tweet from last week:-

    ‘Cook is a male transgender activist who has publicly questioned the law on rape by deception, has accused the LGB Alliance of being a hate group and attacked parenting website Mumsnet as “a centre for transphobic hate.”’ And he’s now working for the CPS🙄"

    That would be Sophie Cook. Began to transition to female in 1998. completed journey in 2015. Has chosen to identify as female for many years.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Cook

    But the LGB Alliance refuses to accept that she is female. Because she was born male.

    Keep believing in your non-existent "overwhelming majority". The overwhelming majority don't care, and are happy to let people lead their own lives.


    I have finished arguing on this now.
    I am not sold on any reason for not referring to women, and girls, as women and girls, although it seems that the document is currently being amended.
    I am also not sold on gender neutral school uniforms.
    I am not sure that gender neutral toilets are a step forward.
    There are a lot of nasty people out there, and gender neutral toilets will make it easier for them to target the users, for harassment etc.
    Bye.
    Finished telling me that I don't know how best to protect my son?
    Not going to trot out any more haters pretending to be mainstream?
    Telling me to calm down and not be insulting while you have 3 separate goes at my family?

    Gee, thanks.

    Just want to educate you on gender-neutral policies in schools. and why they are vital.

    Everything to do with the World we live in. And the choices schools have to make.

    I have advised many schools in relation to this in the past. Simply, because I am a professional. Who puts any personal feelings to 1 side. In order to provide the best solution for the Client. I would also mention that the advice I gave was last in 2017, and matters have changed since then-I will explain how.

    The first point to be aware of is that the majority of Secondary Schools have Transgender pupils. And those that don't are aware that they need to take steps for when they do. Simply, because that is the Law as it stands.

    People like my younger son are, at law, men. Male in relation to legal name, legal gender, HMRC, exam results, etc. A school can't go forcing a man to wear a skirt to school. Likewise, someone who has transitioned the opposite way and is legally a girl, cannot be prevented from wearing a Skirt when other girls do. That is Discrimination.

    The advice I always used to give was this. Trousers for the Boys, Girls to have the choice between trousers and skirts. And, until recently, that all worked fine. In my view, it struck the right balance between choice and inclusivity.

    Until the LGBA was formed. You see, they refuse to accept that Transgender Girls are Girls at all. And insist that they must not be allowed to wear skirts. And threaten publicity, social media campaigns, legal action, blah blah blah. The LGBA campaign that there must be NO help at all for Trans pupils in schools.

    So now, increasingly, girls (including, of course the vast majority who were born girls) are not being allowed to wear skirts. Simply because schools want to concentrate their resources on teaching.

    Not Gender Wars. On either side.

    So now, regrettably, schools are increasingly insisting all pupils wear trousers. Simply because they have no other practical choice
    I don't understand the problem. If both trousers and skirts are official uniform then surely what choices of those to wear should be up to the individual.

    All you have to do is say that official uniform is XYZ, it's the seperation of uniform into "Boys" and "Girls" that causes the problem so take that out of the equation. If you identify as a male wear male clothing, if you identify as a female wear female clothing, same with make up, hairstyles or anything.

    If people have a problem with that then that's their own prejudices showing through.

    Oh and as for the LBGA they are dangerous, fanatical, morons. I had the displeasure of encountering a few at the last Stoke Pride and they are more extreme than any right wing group.

    Tell Samuel, walk tall, proud and look em straight in the eye.
  • EssexphilEssexphil Member Posts: 8,780
    HENDRIK62 said:

    Essexphil said:

    HENDRIK62 said:

    Essexphil said:

    HAYSIE said:

    lucy4 said:

    HAYSIE said:

    Tikay10 said:


    Have to say, assuming he's healthy in all other respects, I think giving a one-armed man the "Bandit" nick is pretty funny. Thanks to an overdose of political correctness these days I guess it wold be OOL. Still difficult to resist a chuckle though.

    There was lots of banter when I was growing up, none of it was politically correct, and you wouldnt get away with it today.
    Although it was never malicious, nobody sulked or cried, everybody tried to give as good as they got.
    Not having to worry about everything you said was probably a bit more fun.
    I totally agree with you, but nowadays where does it start and stop? What was classed as 'Banter' is now considered 'Abuse/UN PC'.
    You couldnt make some of it up.

    Advice turns schoolgirls into ‘pupils who menstruate’



    Government advice on free sanitary products in schools repeatedly referred to “students who menstruate” rather than to “girls”.

    A document on the Department for Education (DfE) website detailed how providing menstrual products to girls did not disadvantage anyone under the Equality Act. Its wording angered women’s campaigners, however, who have warned of the dangers of alienating women and girls by using more inclusive gender-neutral language.

    The seven-page 2020 memo told of “students who menstruate”, “young people menstruating” and “learners who menstruate”. There was one mention of “girls” and one of “women”, both in the footnotes, and two of “female”.

    The wording was changed last night after The Times brought it to the attention of education chiefs. Sources said ministers had not been involved in



    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/advice-turns-schoolgirls-into-pupils-who-menstruate-hxrr55kdz
    My youngest identifies as a man. Has done since he was 13. Goes by the legal name of Mr. First name Samuel. He menstruates. Even though he is most certainly not a "girl".

    Schools have a difficult enough job to do. The Government position is correct. The DfE website is not. Not least because under-18s cannot have corrective surgery.

    If anyone believes that someone who identifies as a girl but has male genitalia does need sanitary products, and the reverse does not, and believes neither is "disadvantaged" then they are an idiot.

    PS. It is important to note that when people say "women's campaigners" they are normally referring to the LGB Alliance. A group of Gay people who believe Trans people should be exterminated.
    This last bit is not true
    Exterminated is the wrong word.

    Forced to revert to the sex they were born with. Regardless of their wishes.
    this is also untrue
    Here is the founder, speaking on the formation:-

    "The main difference is that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals have something in common because of our sexual orientation, that has nothing to do with being trans. We welcome the support of anyone — gay, straight or trans — as long as they support our commitment to freedom of speech and biological definitions of sex. So we are a very broad and accepting group. We will be called transphobic, but we're not."

    So-to be clear-will accept trans people on the proviso that they agree that gender at birth is the key issue. Rather than any, er, transgenderism.

    And not what the person wishes to be, not what the Law says they are. Not what medications they have taken, not what gender reassignment someone may have had. In short, that you accept that you can never be Trans. It smacks of the "compromise" in some Churches, which say Ministers are allowed to be Gay, provided they promise never to have gay relationships.

    Of course there is a place for a separate LGB Group. No-one seriously believes any of the separate Groups are identical.

    The LGBA has been going for what, 3 years? What Headline positive stuff has it done for the LGB Community? Anything at all?

    Negative stuff? Campaigning/seeking a Judicial Review for Trans people to be excluded from the Equality Act. Campaigning against Trans people, demanding any laws supporting Trans people are changed. Attacking Stonewall for wishing to represent the entire LGBT Community, not just 1 section of it. Regular attacks on the SNP's John Nicholson. Campaigning against Trans people and anyone who is not anti-Trans at Pride marches.

    Is it really too much to ask that people live and let live?

    I don't expect everyone to agree with Transgenderism. Just to let people live their life in the way they choose. Provided they are not harming anyone else.

Sign In or Register to comment.