Gender identity ideology is the belief that someone’s biological sex may or may not match the sex that they feel that they are ‘inside’. People who claim a gender identity which does not ‘align’ with their biological sex often say they feel like they were ‘born in the wrong body’.
This feeling of one’s innate sex is called a gender identity and recently many people have come to believe that all humans have one. Some people feel that they are neither male or female inside and they call themselves non-binary.
Gender identity is not recognised in UK law. However, gender dysphoria, described as ‘an intense psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity’, is recognised as a cognitive disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).
Although there are no clear definitions, ‘feeling like’ or ‘identifying as’ a woman tends to be associated with a feeling or desire to be feminine, i.e. to dress and act in ways that are traditionally associated with females. ‘Feeling like’ or ‘identifying as’ a man tends to be associated with a feeling or desire to be masculine, i.e. to dress and act in ways that are traditionally associated with males. Some people who feel they have a gender identity which does not align with their biological sex will undertake hormonal and surgical treatments to change their bodies to mimic the sex they believe they are inside (psychologically).
Some people believe that what you feel like inside, i.e. your gender identity is more important legally and politically than the biological sex class you were born as. On this basis some schools have introduced rules which allow male children to share spaces, sports and awards with female children if those male children claim a ‘female’ gender identity (and vice versa). Some people go further and claim that sex is not binary, but is in fact a spectrum, and that there is no way to categorise accurately who is male and who is female and that therefore the category of biological sex is not useful at all.
Gender identity ideology is being taught in schools to primary age and sometimes younger children. Children are often taught gender identity using a sliding scale of ‘very feminine’ to ‘very masculine’ looking people, with femininity labelled as ‘girl’ and masculinity labelled as ‘boy’. They are told that ‘gender’ is not the same as ‘sex’ and are asked to decide where on that scale they believe they are, which is generally dependent on whether their presentation and interests relate more closely to stereotypes of femininity or masculinity.
Legally, everyone has the right to believe in gender identity and equally everyone has the right the right not to believe in it as both positions are protected in UK law. Students and staff have every right not to believe in gender identity ideology and cannot be punished or harassed for holding the belief that sex is binary (there are only two sexes) and immutable (it cannot be changed).
1. It’s unscientific
Teaching gender identity ideology as fact contradicts the established scientific fact that sex is both binary and immutable.
Science lessons in schools must accurately teach children about reproduction and the functions of the two sexes. By law, RSE lessons must also be evidence based and scientific, yet gender identity ideology taught in RSE lessons often directly contradicts science by claiming some males are really females and vice versa. Some schools teach children that everyone has a ‘gender identity’, which is an un-evidenced and unscientific claim.
In some cases it leads to Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) teachers omitting Male and Female labels from diagrams of reproductive systems because of a belief that sex is not binary, or that some females have a penis and some males have a vagina.
The conflation of sex and gender also means that whilst on some occasions gender identity is presented as being separate from sex, the reality is that people who claim a gender identity different to their sex, wish to be treated in all circumstances as if they were the other sex. This means RSE lessons in some schools do not distinguish between males and females at all, or use the term female to mean girls and also boys who believe they are girls.
This is both unscientific, and incredibly confusing for young children.
It also leads to legally protected characteristics being listed incorrectly within RSE and other school policies , with ‘gender’, ‘gender identity’ or ‘sex and transgender’ being used in place of sex.
There is no medical condition of ‘being trans’ – it is an identity not a diagnosis. Children should not be taught that social transition or gender reassignment treatments are a step to actually becoming the other sex, which is clearly unscientific and physically impossible.
2. It’s illogical
The biological commonality within sex categories as taught in science relates to the sex-based commonality of the reproductive systems of all mammals – females produce eggs and males produce sperm. There is no comparable commonality between all humans labelled as ‘woman’ and ‘man’ when the concept of gender identity is used to distinguish between humans; especially as many people do not accept the idea of gender identity at all.
No one has ever been able to answer the question ‘what is a woman’ or ‘what is a man’ when relying on gender identity ideology as the basis for categorisation. It simply isn’t possible, as the only universal biological commonality between all men and all women is the sex categories they belong to. Sometimes sex stereotypes are invoked by gender identity proponents as commonalities between ‘men’ and ‘women’, but masculinity and femininity are not universal commonalities unless we move masculine women into the ‘man’ category and feminine men into the ‘woman’ category. Far from being progressive, this goes back to old school bullying, where feminine boys are told they are really ‘girls’ and masculine girls are told they are really ‘boys’.
The fallback position for proponents of gender identity ideology is to state that ‘a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman’, but it is illogical, circular and meaningless reasoning.
We should therefore not be teaching children that gender identity can provide any kind of accurate or meaningful categorisation of humans.
3. It’s an irrational belief
The basis of gender identity ideology is irrational, even if people truly believe in it.
No one can know what it feels like to be a particular sex – it’s impossible. You would have to know what someone else feels like in order to know you felt like a ‘female’ and not a ‘male’ (or vice versa), and you would then have to compare how you feel to 3.7 billion of the opposite sex to ensure your feelings were the commonality between that whole sex class.
None of that is possible. It should therefore not be taught to children as fact.
4. It’s unfalsifiable
Science as taught in school relies on the underlying principle of falsifiability. Falsifiability is the capacity for some statement or hypothesis to be proven wrong. This capacity is an essential component of the scientific method and hypothesis testing.
Gender identity as a concept is unfalsifiable as there is no way of testing feelings about what sex you are, and how they may or may not relate to the feelings held by all members of that sex category; whether gender identity is ‘real’ in the sense that it is more than just a personal belief about the self, or whether gender identity exists objectively in any real concrete form at all.
It should therefore not be taught in schools as a scientific fact.
5. It impacts negatively on other protected characteristics
Schools have a duty to balance the rights of each protected group without elevating one over any other. Gender identity ideology, however, rides roughshod over several protected characteristics within schools as it proposes that some male students are really female and some female students are really male.
(a) Sex
Sex is a protected characteristic which, in law, relates to males and females. However, sex as a protected characteristic is often rendered meaningless in schools if leadership teams insist that in some circumstances male children are really female and vice versa. There are occasions where it is important to segregate children by sex, especially when issues of safeguarding and fairness arise i.e. sleeping arrangements on residential trips, toilet and washing facilities, talks about puberty and menstruation, and sporting competitions.
Safeguarding is compromised when decisions and arrangements are made on the basis of gender identity rather than sex. Whilst these decisions are made on the basis of being inclusive of children who identity as the opposite sex, it does not take into account the safety, feelings and beliefs of children who do not want to share intimate spaces with children of the opposite sex. Sporting fairness is obviously compromised if female children are made to compete against male children, especially once children have gone through puberty.
(b) Homosexuality
If a heterosexual student claims a female identity and is attracted to females he could claim a ‘lesbian’ identity, but lesbians are protected in law for being same sex attracted. Gender identity ideology is inherently homophobic in that lesbians would be encouraged to consider male partners if those males claim a female identity. The same applies to heterosexual female children who claim a ‘gay’ identity and the resulting impact on homosexual boys.
(c) Religion
Many religious families have strong beliefs about how and where sexes should mix, and those beliefs are protected. However, at present their beliefs about the segregation of sexes are often overridden with the implementation of gender identity ideology in schools, leading to spaces becoming mixed sex under the guise of inclusivity. This in turn leads to the self exclusion of religious children from those spaces, particularly girls.
(d) Belief
Teaching gender identity as fact fails to recognise the rights of children who do not believe in gender identity ideology. It also stigmatises those children by casting them as bigoted, hateful or transphobic and can lead to bullying.
By casting dissenting children as hateful, critical thinking is discouraged and blind acceptance of highly contentious and controversial beliefs becomes compelled. This breaches a requirement for schools to avoid all political indoctrination.
6. It negatively impacts gender non-conforming children
Gender identity ideology or being ‘trans’ is often conflated with the idea of gender non-conformity but the two concepts are poles apart.
Gender identity ideology relies on the idea that there is a way to be a man or a woman that is nothing to do with the sex you are born as. It generally boils down to a belief that it is a child’s behaviour, dress, and presentation which determine whether they are a boy or a girl, invoking regressive stereotypes of femininity or masculinity.
Gender stereotypes are not being broken down, they are being reinforced as defining whether a child is a boy or a girl. It is not fair to teach gender non-conforming girls that they might really be ‘boys’, and vice versa. Decades have been spent teaching children that males and females can act, dress and present any way they want to. It is a depressing move backwards telling children that masculine children are boys and feminine children are girls.
Celebrating gender non-conformity means supporting girls who act in stereotypically ‘masculine’ ways by celebrating the true diversity of being a girl. And vice versa for boys who appear more stereotypically ‘feminine’.
Celebrating male students as ‘girls’ because their stereotypically ‘feminine’ interests, behaviour and beliefs leads them to identify as girls, is highly offensive to many students and teaching staff, and vice versa for girls who identify as boys.
7. It leads to school overreach
Many schools have reacted to proponents of gender identity ideology by committing to affirm any child that says they believe they are the opposite sex inside, often without parental knowledge or consent. This involves changing the child’s name at school, referring to the child with different pronouns, referring to the child as the sex they believe they are, allowing the child to choose which sexed facilities at school they use, and allowing them to compete in the sexed sports category which relates to their chosen ‘gender identity’.
Without proper guidance from Ofsted or the Dept for Education (DfE) schools feel compelled to make these decisions, often without regard for the rights and protections of the other students in their care, in order to be seen as inclusive and kind.
However, socially transitioning a child at school without clinical oversight is a huge overreach by schools. Gender dysphoria is the only recognised diagnosis relating to ‘gender identity’, and as such should be made by clinicians, not teachers. Being ‘trans’ is not a clinical diagnosis. Any decisions made by schools with regard to the care of children experiencing gender dysphoria should, legally, be made in conjunction with clinicians who guide a child’s care plan. Socially ‘transitioning’ young children to the other sex is no small matter, and should not be undertaken by untrained teaching staff. ADD RE INTERIM CASS HERE
8. It breaches safeguarding regulations
One of the key issues with gender identity ideology is that it puts children in harm’s way by ignoring established safeguarding guidance and good practice. Schools have been pushed by gender identity proponents to allow any male students and staff to identify into female changing rooms, residential dorms and toilets. This absolute lack of safeguarding is wide open to abuse, and the issue is compounded because children and parents are often not made unaware of these arrangements by the school. Many school toilets have, without consultation with parents and students, been made mixed sex (under the guise of being ‘gender neutral’) leaving girls and boys with no privacy away from the opposite sex. This is done under pressure from gender proponents to ensure ‘equality’ and avoid ‘discrimination’, but it is not in line with equality law which states quite clearly that it is sometimes appropriate to provide single sex services and spaces.