ScotPAG Blog Part 3 Letter no 3
The Scottish Government’s response to concerns raised by politicians, regarding gender ideology in schools
Our brief series so far about how the Scottish Government is engaging with its constituents has shown that it is neither listening nor engaging when constituents raise concerns about the continuing existence of gender ideology in our schools and the associated ramifications regarding its impact on children. So far we have covered how the Scottish Government is treating parents and professionals in its responses. In this blog we are focussing on how politicians raising concerns about gender ideology in schools are being treated.
Recently, Fergus Ewing MSP asked questions in Parliament highlighting his concerns. Due to space limitations, we will limit our comment to the fact that Jenny Gilruth’s (JG) response was remarkably ill-informed and impecunious with the truth. We will leave you, dear readers, to examine the transcripts for yourselves and embellish our overview as you see fit!
Mr Ewing also wrote to Ms Gilruth so we will focus this blog on picking up a few beauties from her response to him. Download and read the letter here:
So, for example, the following statement from Ms Gilruth is notably naive, if not perversely stupid,
JG: ‘Our education system must support everyone to reach their full potential and it is vital the curriculum is as diverse as the young people who learn in our schools. That is why the Scottish Government has no plans to withdraw the Supporting Transgender Young People in Schools guidance as it supports schools to deliver a safe, supportive environment for all pupils.’
ScotPAG: What possible evidence is there for stating that the ‘trans’ guidance helps all pupils reach their full potential? What evidence is there that the guidance delivers, ‘a safe supportive environment for all pupils’? There are, by contrast, increasing reports, from parents that their children are telling them that they feel confused and anxious in the ‘gender infused’ environment that exists in many schools. There is significant evidence highlighted by Cass, SEGM, Sex Matters, and Transgender Trend that gender ideology is potentially harmful to the healthy psychological development of children and young adults. The Cass Report describes gender ideology as a contested belief for which there is no evidence of its existence, not to mention decades of child development research over the past 70 years which runs counter to the unproven claims made by gender ideology activists.
Ms Gilruth also states in her letter,
JG: ‘The guidance is clear that schools should support all young people, including those who are considering their identity.’ Correct: the development of individual identity is part of the process for all children growing up. What has that got to do with inflicting spurious, misleading and ill-informed guidance on staff teaching children?
She also claims,
JG: ‘Research tells us Scotland's transgender young people have poorer experiences at school than other pupils.’
ScotPAG: Hmmm….a quick examination of the research referred to in the guidance demonstrates that the studies referred to, fall at the first hurdle of credible, rigorous, peer reviewed studies. They conflate LGB data with TQ, and they are entirely based on self-reporting which is of course highly subjective and unreliable.
So over our three part series, we have to ask: how are our government Ministers doing? Sad to say, ‘Could do better’ just doesn’t cut it, does it?
Our Scottish Government is not even trying to improve. And it is making no attempt to learn or listen to those with expertise or who, after all, know a thing or two about children’s development, how they learn, and what safeguards children require. It really, really is not anywhere near good enough. What might our Ministers say in response to our conclusions?
Erm….., ‘The dog ate my homework?’
Commenti