ShredderLivesOn

ShredderLivesOn, 17 days ago

@Wen I would hope so as well. He was one of the headbangers who voted against measures to protect public health during the pandemic.

I think he will at least use his platform to raise awareness of and campaign to tackle sepsis moving forward.
So that will definitely be a positive.
Sepsis unfortunately claimed the life of my last grandparent just a couple of years ago.

ShredderLivesOn, 17 days ago

@Wen Oh most definitely.

Now all we need is for Tories to discover they have disabled, gay, transgender, and minority relatives, for them to stop hurting people.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

Now this is purely political posturing, as kids currently don't learn sex education until they're in Year 6. At which point they would be 10 years old. And even still, parents have the right to withdraw their kids from those classes.

While my biggest fear from this legislation was that they would also undo the guidelines on teaching about boundaries and consent, that appears to at least thankfully not be the case.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

As those are much needed to both teach young boys to keep their hands to themselves and give kids the tools to recognise if they're being sexually abused at home.
So that at least is a small mercy in the new guidelines.

Although I am troubled by the section that says there's to be no ‘explicit’ conversations about sex until children are 13 - including contraception, STIs and abortion. These are things that need to be taught earlier on, as there are quite a few kids who go through puberty early.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

But then I've also advocated for a similar system to Germany when it comes to both sex education, and staggered consent laws to stop grown adults from grooming and fucking 16 year old school kids, irrespective of whether there's no "power imbalance" defined by the law.

The main issue though is that schools will not teach anything regarding gender identity, and will have to state that "gender ideology" is contested, if a student asks about it.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

This comes off the back of guidelines last year that a school should inform parents if their child wishes to be recognised as a gender not assigned at birth when they're at school.
As evil as Section 28 was, it didn't require schools to out gay kids to their parents.

Section 28 was a clause in the Local Government Act amended by the government of Margaret Thatcher. Where schools were banned from discussing homosexuality in any manner that could be interpreted as positive.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

It was during her 1987 conference speech that Thatcher laid out her prejudice and contempt for gay people, when she said that "children are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay".

It was repealed in Scotland in the year 2000, and took a bit longer in England and Wales due to the House of Lords knocking it back after it had been passed in Parliament. England and Wales would not see the end of Section 28 until 2003.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

One of those who helped the campaign to keep it in place, was the then Shadow Education Secretary. A little known politician you might have heard of called Theresa May.
She described the defeat of the Labour government's attempt to abolish it as, "a victory for commonsense".

Attempts to abolish Section 28 were also met with hostility in the tabloid press. While I've often brought up The Daily Record in Scotland backing the infamous 'Keep the Clause' campaign, they weren't alone.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

The Sun for example triumphantly ran as their front page headline after the Lords rejected the abolition, 'Blair is beaten on gays'. Of course this the same Sun newspaper who regularly ran headlines about "poofs", "filth" and "perverts" whenever they would publicly out someone as gay.
So not much of a surprise.

One journalist of note meanwhile also penned a column about how children shouldn't be "taught some rubbish about homosexual marriage being the same as normal marriage."

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

Now I know that I am stretching a bit by describing the author of this as a journalist. But to be fair, that is what he insisted on calling himself at the time.
It's someone I don't expect many people will have heard of.

The author was Boris Johnson. Yes, that one. The same one who referred to gay men as "tank-topped bum boys".

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

Lets make something clear.
Section 28 did not stop kids growing up gay. All it did was make their lives harder, while being othered and maligned, because schools were not allowed to say that there's nothing wrong with being gay.

This is what the new rules are designed to do to trans youth. Although its proponents seem to think that maligning, othering, and basically trying to bully trans youth into thinking that there's something wrong with them, is going to stop them from being themselves.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

Now those proponents of maligning trans youth may be right. Not in any moral sense. But I mean that they may be right that this will cause trans youth to basically stay in the closet until they're able to leave school and be free to be themselves.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

But by this point, it will be much harder as they'll have been denied access to gender affirming care, as the Cass Review suggests that it should be for all under the age of 25, and even then will have to undergo review for conditions such as autism to determine if they're mentally competent enough to receive treatment.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

The intention with this legislation is exactly as it was with Section 28 back in 1987. It's to try and eradicate a group from existence via the back door through cruelty. And making kids repress their true selves.

Gay children had no more control over being attracted to the same sex, as I had control over being heterosexual. It's the same for transgender youth who have no more control over their identifying as being who they are, than I had identifying as cis-gendered.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

While I've never had to grow up with any pain or torment as a result of being cis-gendered and heterosexual, I did and still witness other kids and people in wider society, being maligned for the crime of being themselves no matter which part of the LGBTQ+ spectrum they fall on.

Although maybe I'm wrong on that, and that isn't the intention at all from the "gender critical" lobby.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

Maybe the intention isn't to discourage kids from identifying and being openly trans.
Maybe it is just entirely about inflicting as much cruelty as possible on trans kids. It wouldn't surprise me.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

To put it bluntly, this is how you wind up with more victims like Brianna Ghey. Not just by effectively telling trans kids to stay hidden, under the guise of "gender ideology" is a contested matter.

But the fact that no further discussion is allowed to teach that trans people exist and that there is nothing wrong with them, then all you're doing is encouraging open season on trans kids for abuse and bullying.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

We're either going to see a bigger spike in the suicide and attempt rate by trans youth, due to the othering that this legislation will bring.

Or because kids aren't being taught that there is nothing wrong with transgender people at school, then all they're likely going to hear is the anti-trans rhetoric in the media, including that trans people are perverts, etc.

And it's going to see similar levels of violence towards trans people in schools as we're seeing in wider society.

ShredderLivesOn, 23 days ago

The one positive (although that's a stretch) is that Section 28 created a generation of rights activists who fought to have it repealed, and hold accountable the politicians who allowed it to happen and supported it.

Given that I've named two recent former Prime Ministers who were open supporters of it, you can be the judge for yourselves how successful they really were.

ShredderLivesOn, 29 days ago

@Thebratdragon I think you may have misread.

Jess Philips was appalled by the news of her defection. On the grounds that Elphicke engaged in victim blaming towards the people who had been assaulted by her ex-husband.

Philips is apparently prepared to give her a chance to convince her that she actually is genuinely sorry for that.

I'm more cynical, and feel that this "apology" only happened because people were bringing it up in protest at Elphicke's defection.
Most appear to not be buying it.