9 yr old told off for calling non-binary teacher Sir

A child should not have to be troubled by a grown up’s ‘identity’ in the first place.
What sort of narcissist is this teacher?

Sorry but there are only two types of human in terms of sex which is what ‘Sir’ references.

It is not respectful to children and anyone who doesn’t subscribe to gender ideology to demand adherence to such illiteracies as ‘Mx’.

Academic PhDs are much older and longer established than medical ones.

I would complain to the school. The supreme court ruling states men are men and women are women. I'd complain that ideology should not be enforced in class, it has no place in schools at all.

Quite

It was Sir and Miss, it will always be Sir and Miss, It is polite. There is no space in primary school for condoning this level of woke nonsense. quite frankly if my kid got told off for this i'd be fuming and going to the head

This person is a man.

According to the SC ruling, he should be treated as a man legally in any situation where men and women are being differentated in terms of services / spaces provided.

For example, he would not be allowed to use female staff toilets in this school.

So quite what grounds anyone thinks they have to discipline a child referring to him as a man is beyond me.

What exact purpose does it serve wider society to recognise people with non medical phd's as Dr? Yet I remember the Dr's in my school. Does wider society need to know if I'm Miss or Mrs (because not too long ago people scoffed at Ms)

As it happens, I'm married and I chose Miss. No one has cared. It's just a polite way of greeting someone and it's pretty impolite to call someone by a name they don't wish to be known as.

That's all I'm getting at. I'm not arguing for or against the gender argument.

I can't believe some posters think the kid is in the wrong here. It's bonkers.

They save the most high and mighty emperor for the bedroom, not work.

I suppose given that Sadam can't really be used due to historical reasons we will have to go with Siss for the non-binary variation.

Why should this particular teacher have his 'preference and boundaries respected' at the expense of the child's common sense?

If he wanted to be referred to as 'most high and mighty emperor' should that be 'respected' too?

No, it doesn’t. At all.

it establishes what Parliament meant in the context of a particular piece of legislation. It does not, for example, mean someone with a GRC under the Gender Recognition Act is no longer legally considered a woman. It means that equalities legislation is one of the exceptions to the general position that such a person is otherwise legally considered a woman for “all purposes”.

This teacher is obviously confused if he doesn’t realise he is a man, it’s no wonder the kids are confused by it and making mistakes….or rather not making mistakes, just saying what they see in front of them.

Told off is a bit much but a gentle reminder of people's preference and boundaries is needed

So if a female teacher wore male suits every day and had a short back and sides would you consider that a fetish that the school was foistering. It’s just clothes. They just like a skirt and heels occasionally

My point above exactly. It’s right up top at paragraph 2 of the judgment: “It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word "woman" other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010. It has a more limited role which does not involve making policy”

In the list of things that never happened……

It establishes that legally people will classified as their biological sex - that should give pause to anyone trying to discipline people for doing exactly that

Agree, it’s a load of nonsense, a 9yo used a pronoun that reflected what he saw in front of him…..and the teacher gets very cross, I would make a complaint

Definitely two bollocks. It's utterly ridiculous that a child is chastised for not going along with the fantasy of a grown man. If he were my son I'd be livid

My point still stands. Nobody observed what had happened. The teacher could have simply said ‘Mikey, I’ve asked a few times now, please address me as Mx and not Sir’. A 9yo would see it as ‘telling off’ and therefore told his parent, who told their friend, who as many people on this thread leaped to conclusions that this teacher must’ve shouted, flipped the lid, and crucified this poor kid. Fine if people don’t like the Mrs and Miss analogy. What about Tommy-Josh going by TJ, or Michael Junior going by Junior? Not a crime to call them by their government name but person is still okay to correct. It’s not as outrageous as people think, it’s only because they assume there must be a hidden agenda because the teacher is non-binary.

I do wish people would actually read the Supreme Court judgement. The claims about what it says are becoming ever more inflated on MN. It does not prevent teachers from asking pupils to address them as they wish to be addressed.