1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Are you in favour of primary LGBT lessons for young children?

Discussion in 'Education news' started by TES_Rosaline, Apr 11, 2019.

  1. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    sorry, my posts are getting so long! I do have one more thing to add, and that is that I also fear the peer pressure on trans-identifying people, including children to be dangerous. I am active in the LGBT community myself and have had some long converstions with transwomen who I think a generation ago would have been content and accepted being occasionally transvestite, but have been pressured to go all the way, asking for hormones, on the list for surgry, or post surgery.

    While they may well be all happy and smiley publically, I know several who feel anything but that privately.

    Two have been suffering some sort of psychotic depression since starting female hormones, which isn't really a particular surprise, when you think what female hormones can sometimes do to the female bodies which they are actually for.

    One I know is post surgery, and is "making the best of it" as the damage to their body can't be undone, but are still in state of shock at how brutalised they feel, ( their words) Like inhabiting a body that has survived a catastrophic accident ( their words).

    There are a few people prepared to voice regrets publically, but not many, and a lot of children just seem to be swept along in the idea that what ever problems they have will be solved by gender reasignement.

    Much as high suicide and attempted suicide rates are used as a reason that gender reassignment should be offered to children, the suicide and attempted suicide rates are higher after.

    You have to consider that we are allowing children to make irreversible changes to their bodies, including making themselves infertile

    I should add for balance that most of the transwomen and transmen I have spoken to on a personal level who have undergone hormones or surgery have not expressed any regret to me.
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
  2. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    So yes, I can see a lot wrong with standing up in a classroom and agreeing that a man can become a woman. I don't think its true, and I think it is against the interests of all our children to tell them it is true.
  3. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    Now I'll see if I am banned for saying this. I hope not, but I'l have to just accept it as the cost of speaking what I believe to be right if I am
    guinnesspuss, vannie and num3bers like this.
  4. num3bers

    num3bers Occasional commenter

    I agree with almost everything you are saying dunnocks.
    However, this:

    I am not at all sure that the above isnt hurting anyone. Whilst I recognize politeness and courtesy etc. but I am at odds personally in that by being polite I am actually agreeing to lies. A man, no matter how they alter themselves is at the end of the day not a woman. There I have said it.

    In agreeing to call a person by an obviously false prefix I am agreeing to lies. I am also actually affirming it. Where do we stop with this? I try to teach my children that they should not tell lies - even small ones because small ones can ( and often do) lead to big ones. I want them to be honest. Sometimes I guess honesty does hurt but surely so does lies?

    I found out a long time ago that I am not the prettiest woman in the world. I wouldnt win beauty pageants. I would love to have been beautiful and to my mum and dad I may well have been ...... and yes they may have lied in telling me I was beautiful, lovely, pretty etc. but reality struck when I was around 14 I think, when someone told me in honesty I was not beautiful. I was not pretty, I was not even striking in a not so beautiful way. In fact I had quite masculine features in some ways even though I am clearly a female. It hurt at the time but it was true and I had to face that reality.

    These people similarly have to face the reality that no matter what they do in cutting bits off, adding bits on, plastic surgery on their faces or anything else, they are not at the end of the day women because they do not have the XX chromosomes.

    And, I think it does hurt other women at the end of the day in a broader context to call someone who is not a woman , a woman or she or whatever. Its accepting a lie. Its worse, its affirming that lie.

    It has always been the case that a person can change their name by deed poll and you can call yourself whatever you want as long as you are not doing it for illegal purposes and you tell the tax office. So if a man wants to cal himself Sue or Marion and have others call him that, its OK I guess. Its like using a nick name I guess. Its no different to an actor called Marion who decided to change his name to John ....... but it is odd in most circumstances. But it is still a lie, a small one maybe but a lie. Much better to say my name is Marion but I prefer John and be honest.

    Its the honestly thing that concerns me. Where do we draw the line? If someone says they are a Doctor and they are not we get angry and feel deceived and its even a criminal offence ( even if they haven't "hurt" anyone). But surely they have hurt by lying, by deceiving. Yet If someone says they are a woman and they are not we affirm it? We agree it? We say it doesn't hurt anyone?

    Now , if that doesnt get me joining you on the banned list, I am sure agreeing with the next bit will.

    I haven't seen many myself. Maybe it is because it is harder in our perception for a woman to offend in a mans space? I did read of one case ( sometime ago now) where a trans man ( do I have this the right way round - a woman who is identifying as a man?) was using male changing rooms at a gym. (S)He was also using the showers etc. The person concerned was an entire female bodily as (s)he had only just begun transitioning. The men complained about being embarrassed at the man with female attributes being naked in their locker room and also that they had a loss of privacy. The gym acted to ban the identifying one but (s) he complained to the Police that it was illegal. The police did not act but the issue hit the papers I recall. I dont know what happened in the end. But there was a lot of banter and laughing that " Men were such wimps" because after all a naked female isn't hurting anyone is she? or is she(he)???
    BetterNow and dunnocks like this.
  5. Grandsire

    Grandsire Star commenter

    I do worry about gender reassignment being offered to such young people, especially when I think about the enormous gender bias already present in society, which blasts a stereotypical image what male and female mean from the moment they are born: boys’ clothes that say “I’m a Super-hero” or “Future Man of Steel” while the girls’ clothes (invariably pink) say “I only date heroes” or even “I hate my thighs”...! No wonder some children feel they don’t fit in with society’s apparent norms. Is it still possible to be what we used to call a ‘tom-boy’ in the face of such relentless pressure?

    Before we push an ever increasing number of young people into a drastic gender reassignment process, we need to remove these cultural restrictions and ideas about what boys and girls should do, should wear, should like and enjoy, so that children are free to follow their natural preferences, without fear of it being ‘the wrong choice’.

    My role in this, as a teacher, is surely not to promote the concept that a man can become a biological woman, or a woman a biological man, but to fight against society’s pressure on young people to conform to polarised ideas of gender, and to provide an environment where there is equality, and pupils are given the freedom to feel comfortable just being themselves, and follow their own interests.

    The first step is being aware of the bias. The fascinating video below shows some nursery workers aren’t even aware of their unconscious bias, choosing toys and modelling play for children based on what the children are wearing! It certainly makes me keep an eye on what I say and do in my own class!

    And, while we’re on the subject, I think children’s books that promote variety in family structure are a great idea.
  6. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    No doubt many only attend each in their attempts to break the lycra ceiling.

    The Girl Guides was, in a sense, one of the last bastions of traditional Englishness but with this nonsense I will not be surprised to see it fade in popularity faster than the Church of England.

    Regardless of how these people identify, these were perverted acts.

    It sounds like the illegal harassment of children. Which university was this?
    BetterNow likes this.
  7. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    'Promote': This is the issue. It is not the place of schools to promote variety in family structure.
    num3bers likes this.
  8. peter12171

    peter12171 Star commenter

    I’m sure it was Eddie Redmayne who said he’s glad transitioning wasn’t as easy when he was younger as it is now, otherwise he would now be a transwoman. I think - and your post @dunnocks reinforces this - that we ae storing up a whole load of problems for 20-30 years time.
    guinnesspuss likes this.
  9. drek

    drek Star commenter

  10. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    On the subject of education regarding alternative lifestyles comments such as this are what make it necessary.....

    You're not being asked to teach that at all. You're being asked to educate people that it's wrong to judge and look down on people who have a different family structure to your own. You're being asked to each people to be tolerant of others - a basic British value, this means that no matter what you're personal view you recognise that they're a human being with feelings and treat them with respect.

    On the subject of a man becoming a woman, etc. There are biological mechanisms which are proven to be causes of transgender identity. Some of these mechanisms are simply due to how many children the mother has - this alters the pattern of hormones to which children are exposed in the womb and thus alters the infants body/brain development for the rest of their life. The effect is most pronounced in male children - the more males a mother has the more "female" the brain scan of the male offspring become. This is also thought to lie behind the fact that as a mother has more children they're more likely to be homosexual.

    Another potential cause is cell surface receptor mutation. For the body's cells to respond to sex hormones the sex hormone needs to bind to a chemical on the surface of the cell called a receptor. Different parts of the body express different receptors (whose expression also changes with age) and random genetic variation means that sometimes these receptors lose their functionality and can no longer respond to sex hormones. This can lead to a body having the outward appearance of a male or female (i.e. having the sex organs) but an internal chemistry that is more like that of the opposite sex.

    Hence a person can have an outward appearance of one sex, i.e. having sex organs, that may not match their internal make-up. So the sex and gender of a person may be different.

    As to anything else that's mention on this thread I have no real clue and just do my best not to upset anyone!
    agathamorse likes this.
  11. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    These things have not been 'proven' as 'mechanisms'. They are correlations observed in particular data sets.

    This is nonsense.
    num3bers and dunnocks like this.
  12. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    Yes I am, and I can be sacked, or even arrested for stating that a man cannot become a woman. This is happening. You are obviously not very up to date on this situation at all

    This is EXACTLY my issue.

    Science changes, develops, moves on.
    The science you are quoting is obsolete, there is no "female" brain scan, this is now known to science, but these scientific advances are ignored, denied, suppressed, etc by political pressure groups.

    This is why I compare this to nazi race science.

    Why would I have any ax to grind about this? I have studied neuro science and genetics. I believed in the difference between male and female brains years ago, ( decades ago) when it was considered likely. I agreed with the idea that it might account for transgenderism. I have followed developments since with interest, I stopped believing there was a difference when enough science had disproved this.

    There is nothing unusual in this, science moves on. I used to not beleive in Lamarkism, but now I do, because enough modern science has shown it to genuinely happen.

    The interesting link between both these areas, among all other areas of science that have moved on, is that they are both a reflection of institutionalized mysogeny in science, as both misconceptions resulted from studying mainly males, in ignoring females.

    The difference between developments in neurological understanding and developments in understanding of other sciences is like I said, the fact that it doesn't suit a particular political pressure group, and so perfectly normal science is denied, suppressed and lied about.

    I am a science teacher. I don't do that.

    Look back at @Grandsire 's video. These differences between brains are due to childhood experiences.

    And the rest of your post is confusing intersex conditions with transgenderism. They are not in any way related. The intersex community, and many intersex individuals are at great pains to distance themselves from transgender politics, and repeatedly try and clarify that it is not in any way connected to them. Obviously, that message isn't getting across.
    num3bers, Vince_Ulam and vannie like this.
  13. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    I am also a science teacher - my degree is in Chemistry and I specialised in the Chemistry of the human body.

    1 - You're being asked to teach tolerance with examples. Nothing more.

    2 - There are male and female brain scans, the idea has been refined to more of a spectrum rather than the extremes for sure but the core idea is still good such as improved interconnectivity between hemispheres in female brains, etc. We know that when confronted with certain situations/images male and female brains respond different and that the brain itself develops differently - some of these differences are environmental, some genetic variation. A good example is that males tend to be more aggressive due to the action of testosterone in the brain - this is not environmental. If you're a science teacher you would know this.

    3 - Lamarkism was falsified over 100 years ago. Please give evidence to support your claim that doesn't suffer from confirmation bias and has been repeated by other scientists.

    4 - My post does not confuse intersex with transgenderism - I was explaining the biological mechanism behind it that is currently accepted by most scientists. It also leads to intersex as well - it causes both, intersex is caused by cell surface receptor mutation which affects the sex organs, trans identity has been shown in some cases to be caused by mutations in receptors in other regions of the body. This is not in doubt anymore - multiple receptors have been identified.

    Vince - these are proven mechanisms - go and read the latest studies on them. Also Vince - if this info on cell surface receptors is nonsense then please explain why different organs of the body respond to sex hormones at different ages and in different ways. Please do, the World is waiting for this huge leap forward in scientific knowledge.
    bexallya and agathamorse like this.
  14. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    This is exactly the idea that has been totally and completely quashed, some decades ago and while you do expect old science to linger on for a while, this is normal, in this case it is being propagated entirely for political reasons

    It would be easier for me if I did believe this, and could toe the party line with a clean conscience. But I don't. As a scientist with integrity, I simply can't teach this.

    lamarkism is real, and that has also now been known for decades with more examples being discovered every year, and the mechanisms for it being better and better understood all the time.

    I don't think you are keeping up to date. Which is fine, that is your choice, and we only need to know what the exam boards want us to teach, and that sometimes isn't up to date,

    You can be an excellent teacher, and not to up to date. its not in the job at all.

    I'm still studying though.

    As a scientist, you know as well as I, that "cutting edge" science is very often quickly disproved, or confirmed, or changed a bit. I am not talking "cutting edge" though - I am talking well established.
  15. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter


    cross dressing men allowed full access to women's and girls sports, gyms, and changing rooms in Glasgow.

    Staff instructed to follow the hate crime protocol if any woman or girl complains.

    (This took a 2 second google- which also through up hundreds of other examples - but this particular one is from this morning)

    This is where teaching that a man can be a woman gets us, woman and girls losing their safety, sports, opportunities, identity, and many other things.

    I am all for teaching respect and tolerance for transwomen. . But not for teaching that a man can be a woman. That is completely different
    guinnesspuss and agathamorse like this.
  16. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    You are wrong but, by all means, link to these studies you think support your case.

    It is called puberty. It is genetically programmed. Puberty does not cause transgender people
    num3bers likes this.
  17. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    You do realise that I was describing puberty? The biochemistry behind it!

    This has been accepted science since the 60s and if it were wrong basic drugs such as hormone blockers would not work. You can find this information in any biochemistry textbook which covers reproduction of a reproduction textbook which covers the biochemistry of it. Again if you have an alternative mechanism to the prevailing scientific view it's down to YOU to disprove it. Not me to re-prove it. Please do share these scientific papers if you can.
  18. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Puberty does not cause transgender people.

    Of course hormone blockers block hormones however they are not licensed for use on 'transgender children' nor are there any rigorous studies into outcomes following this use, although there is anecdotal evidence of significant developmental damage.

    What prevailing scientific view? Please state it and link to the supporting evidence.
  19. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    No it hasn't - I've just been re-reading and contacting friends who are still active researchers. I was correct - the basic idea has been refined and sex hormones are now thought to only affect 10-20% of the brain's behaviour not the whole brain. These regions concern personality traits, relationships, etc. and so are exactly the regions we would think that would lead to transgender identity. So yes, you're correct that I simplified my first post but the outcome is the same.

    As I said in my post - this was disproven over 100 years ago. I asked you for examples and you haven't named one. If you're saying that the current scientific view is incorrect please provide evidence.

    Please feel free to share this information which has kept you at the cutting edge by providing peer-reviewed evidence/textbooks/anything free from confirmation bias. If you're saying that my ideas are old/out of date then help me improve.

    As to criminal cases regarding one or two people out of thousands I don't intend to comment beyond this next statement on something so clearly morally wrong. Tarring a whole community because of the actions of one or two people is no different than the current media portrayal of "muslims terrorists", it's wrong to tar all muslims with that word. Bigotry is offensive no matter the victim.
  20. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    well, I am in the middle of spring cleaning, and although I do enjoy a discussion such as this, I generally don't want to waste time finding information that you could easily find yourself, when I am so busy and just stopping for a few minutes at a time.

    But I am not saying that the current scienctific view is incorrect, I am saying that the current scientific view IS correct, and that it HAS proved Lamarkism, and you can find that out very easily yourself.

    I am not tarring the whole community, by any means, if you have read my posts, I am part of the LGBT community, and have many transgender friends and acquaintances, several of whom I am very close to, including my brotherinlaw.

    Its not the actions of one or two people I am taking a stand against, it is a whole political pressure group, whose actions are harming many people ( including transpeople) and who are distinct from other transpeople in their starting point which is trying to make it illegal to state the truth, that a man cannot become a woman. Many of their other abusive acts start from this, and I am, and will continue to refuse to teach it. Even if it costs me my job, my livlihood, my home, what ever. Becasue refusing is the right thing to do

Share This Page