THE WORLD KEEPS TURNING

 

THE WORLD KEEPS TURNING

In January of this year, I authored an article titled ‘Enough is Enough’ which was published by hospitality industry blogsite Propel Opinion. The article was about gender ideology and expressed a gender critical viewpoint. It can be accessed here:

https://chase-on-the-case.blogspot.com/2023/01/enough-is-enough.html

It triggered an enormous response from Propel’s subscribers, including some of Propel’s commercial sponsors. Many but by no means all of these responses were critical of the article, and I ended up being ‘cancelled’ – denounced by the Great and the Good of the industry. I haven’t written for Propel since.

Well, the world keeps turning and it is a kind of bitter-sweet moment for me to see many of the sentiments expressed in my article being articulated, virtually word-for-word, in the government’s draft guidance for schools and colleges on how to deal with trans-identifying pupils and students. Not that Kemi Badenoch has read my article or even heard of me, but the similarities stand as testimony to how a coherent and widely shared critique of gender ideology has emerged over the past year – both in and outside of Parliament. The era of “No debate” is well and truly over.

The publication of the government’s guidelines has, predictably, triggered the discharge of a considerable volume of emotive effluence from trans rights activists (TRAs), on social media as well as main-stream media. One of the most concerning narratives of these responses is the hostility expressed to the recommendation that parents need to be informed if a child or young person wants to socially transition; that parents love their kids and should not be excluded by teachers from decisions that may be made at school concerning whether and how to ‘affirm’ a child’s transgender identity by using preferred pronouns, allowing cross-dressing, and so on.

TRAs are horrified by this suggestion and seem intent on demonising parents as the enemy of children. They champion the idea that adults (teachers) should keep kids’ secrets from their parents. The guidance does acknowledge that there might be rare occasions when schools need to recognise a safeguarding concern with a particular set of parents, but otherwise parents should be involved at the earliest opportunity.

But let us take a step back: we know from the Cass Review into GIDS services for children and young people that the kids who presented at the Tavistock and other regional centres were extremely distressed and had numerous and complex problems. Research indicates that 90 percent of kids presenting for help were same-sex attracted; 35 percent were on the autism spectrum and that 70 percent had five or more co-morbidities – depression and anxiety, anorexia, body dysmorphia, ADHD, self-harming and/or suicidal ideation – the list goes on. Given this, how can anyone sensibly argue that teachers, who have no training, qualifications, or experience of dealing with such complex issues should proceed to make decisions about how to deal with a gender-distressed child without involving parents and other professionals?

The starting point in dealing with gender-distressed children at school or college has to be a recognition that gender dysphoria is a clinical issue. And once a teacher has ascertained that a child is persisting in their desire to transition, then parents and other professionals, who do possess the expertise required, need to be involved in making decisions with the child.

The government’s non-statutory guidance is in draft form, and may yet be modified and at some point, when finalised, may be subject to legal challenge. If it becomes necessary to amend the Equality Act 2010 to ensure that this long-overdue dose of common sense prevails over the carping criticisms of the gender cult, then such changes should be made. For the time being at least, the grown-ups are back in the room.