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. scotty_dog

    scotty_dog New commenter

    im sorry ( not really) but I am getting totally fed up of being told what to think and what to say. I know that there are only 2 sexes - with a vanishing small number of people being born with both genetalia. Let's encourage inclusivility and empathy in and out of schools but there is a completely distorted amount of time/ energy being devoted to this. I really want to know who is driving this agenda... I am quite relieved to be approaching retirement age and I simply refuse to be part of the redefinition of what constitutes our society. No one feels able to express what we really think and feel.
     
    vannie, alex_teccy, drvs and 2 others like this.
  2. drvs

    drvs Star commenter

    Vocal minorities supported by the law.
     
    alex_teccy likes this.
  3. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    Or perhaps open-minded people willing to listen and not repress?
     
    LunaBlue123 and ridleyrumpus like this.
  4. drvs

    drvs Star commenter

    Potato potato.
     
  5. ridleyrumpus

    ridleyrumpus Lead commenter

    Much as you may not like it there is a spectrum for gender, if you do not believe this then I suggest you have not looked around you.

    The problem with saying/teaching that the there is only two sexes (when in truth any teaching would be talking about gender which is more nuanced.) Is that anyone not absolutely Masculine or not absolutely Feminine may feel that there is something wrong with them but worse they are not encouraged to talk about it and so go through life miserably.

    It is a very similar problem to the old days when we had Section 28 and we could not say that relationships outside of that between a man and a woman existed.

    Perhaps you would be happy with a rewrite of Section 28 but this time with trans-gendered people being the target?

    Firstly do not mix up sex with gender* but even so this sentence seems odd. You state that there are only 2 sexes but then add a caveat, does the latter part change the former?

    *Do I need to point out that there is a world of difference between someone being transgendered and someone being a hermaphrodite?
     
    averagedan likes this.
  6. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Established commenter

    There is no “spectrum of gender” unless you are conflate fashion with gender. Gender and sex cannot be decoupled, unless you want to make an argument against evolution.
     
    Vince_Ulam likes this.
  7. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    I think talking about a "spectrum of gender" is artificial and restrictive. There is no such "classification" of what masculine means and what feminine means, and there is DEFINITELY no such linear line from one to the other.

    A man can have as many "feminine" and "masculine" attributes as he wants, or has by nature, and is still a man. He doesn't have to be fitted on some imaginary line somewhere, because there is no such 2 dimensional line in reality. The set of "men" is huge, and varied in thousands and thousands of ways, but is still a distinct set of men.

    I am a woman. I wear male clothes, I don't wear make up or style my hair or paint my nails. I rarely wear a dress. I don't shave body hair. I am pretty handy with a screw driver. None of this takes me out of the catagory of being a woman, or moves me down an imaginary line towards being male.
     
    alex_teccy likes this.
  8. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    This is what makes me a woman:

    Primarily that I will, potentially might have, or have had these experiences in my life

    periods
    ovulation
    pregnancy
    childbirth
    spontaneous lactation
    menopause
    being physically significantly weaker and shorter than half my friends

    secondarily
    I need to wear a bra
    I have a higher voice
    I have feet shaped for female sports shoes, not male
    I have female sized hands
    I have a body shaped such that successfully urinating whilst fully clothed in trousers is unlikley.

    I have a generally female experience of life, in that I have put motherhood above career, and have generally had less expected of me, have tolerated being of sexual interest to men in day to day life, was banned from several career options due to being a woman, and have been emotionally dominated by men quite regularly, and physically dominated occasionally.

    I would also add that it is the experience of the majority of women to by physically attracted to men.

    somebody with a Y chromosome putting on a dress and taking hormones and having cosmetic alterations to their body does not become this! not even close.

    What they become is a transwoman. A man who wants to have a female name, get called "she" and wear woman's clothes, have their body reshaped, put artificial chemicals into themselves, can do all that, as long as they are not hurting anybody, but they are a transwoman, a subset of men. They are more than a million miles away from actually being a woman.
     
    vannie and peter12171 like this.
  9. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    The parents of girls & boys who do not conform to gender stereotypes, and these children themselves, are being wrongly convinced by activists that they are transgender.
     
    vannie likes this.
  10. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    On the base question of should be teach this in primary school I honestly have no opinion but the level of ignorance and fear displayed here is quite surprising in what's supposed to be a well educated set of people.

    Whenever I see threads like this it just reminds me of the people who argued against equality for women, gays, ethnic minorities and the like. It's quite often insecure men who cling to what their "idea" of society SHOULD be irrelevant of how other people feel.

    If we look back in time you can find many pictures like the ones below:

    [​IMG]

    Pro-racism marches were commonplace once upon a time and now it seems ludicrous to suggest that racism is a good idea. Over time people realised how naïve/ignorant/fearful their views were and their ideas dropped by the wayside. And this is what will happen here, increased visibility and contact will combat the old prejudices and people will become more accepting - society takes time to grow.

    Question is - do you want to be the one looking back thinking "how silly was I to paint that sign?".
     
    LunaBlue123 and ridleyrumpus like this.
  11. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Some of the loudest voices against the normalisation of these disputed issues via our institutions come from women, understandably so.

    Straw man fallacy.
     
  12. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    Oh Vince, you do seem to protest a little too much...…
     
    ridleyrumpus likes this.
  13. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    I find it extemely ironic that you are equating people who won't says that a transwoman is a woman with people who argued against equality for women.

    It is the total opposite, it is EXACTLY those who value the hard won rights and freedoms and equalities that women have fought for for so long, and are are still fighting for, that are continuing this fight by resisting the trans political agenda to erase the biological catagory of "female" from our laws and culture.

    And to carry your analogy further, how would you feel about a white British man, who for example, broke into a Black Kenyan Swhili speaking local government office in Kenya, painted his face black, insisted he was identifying as a black Kenyan, despite never having lived in Kenya,( and only having arrived on holiday two days ago), demanding the right to vote and stand for office immediately, trying to take the position of the mayor, demanding all paperwork and communications from that point on are done in English, for "inclusivity" and then making the local government ignore all local needs and opinions and interact and trade exclusively with Margate in the UK.

    Compare that ludicrous scenario to a White british man who moves to Kenya, learns the language, learns the culture, participates in the community, maybe even becomes legally Kenyan, while never denying he is a white British man, and will be for his whole life.

    And if you can see that the white Brit painting his face black and insisting that he is now identifying s a black Kenyan, and insisting all the Kenyans now have to speak English for inclusivity is completely ludicrous, why can't you see that the trans political agenda is stark staring bonkers too?

    what does that mean? just a phrase to make you feel clever and put someone else down? no meaning at all, and of no contribution to the discussion
     
    vannie, peter12171 and Vince_Ulam like this.
  14. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    Coming up with ludicrous examples/hyperbole/using a few outliers to justify your views isn't worth wasting time on.

    It's a well known phrase and it's clear what it means. Have a good day.
     
    ridleyrumpus likes this.
  15. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    Deleted - will repost....
     
  16. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

    ridleyrumpus likes this.
  17. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    I am using a ludicrous example to compare to what you are saying is not ludicrous, to show that both are ludicrous! What is more hyperbole about my Kenyan example than what is actually happening here? And certainly not by a "few" outliers either.

    But you are using it like namecalling, because you think that if you use a phrase meant to imply that someone else's view can be dismissed out of hand, than they are dismissed out of hand.

    but actually they are not, because a purely empty phrase, with no relevance to the discussion, cannot do that. Even if you feel like you are playing some sort of verbal top trump with it
     
    vannie likes this.
  18. averagedan

    averagedan Occasional commenter

  19. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    no. I am not critisising or belittling, I am picking up on something that is so fundementally wrong that I wonder if it is part of the problem this teacher is having, as I explained on that thread, where it was relevant, rather than here, where it is not.

    Why are you bringing this across from another thread? If you want to discuss the problem of being forced to teach that a man can become a woman, then please do so. You are going all over the place with your verbal top trumps, and attempts at mud slinging, and appear to have nothing to say about this actual issue.

    If you have a view point about the actuall matter in hand, then lets hear it. It just seems all you want to do is get personal about people who's opinion you disagree with
     
  20. dunnocks

    dunnocks Star commenter

    well, you are wrong, and I am having a very nice day, and I am a very happy person, so if this is an example of how wildly far out your judgement is, then you are of no loss to this conversation!
     
    vannie likes this.

Share This Page