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

I don't think you're right there. On what grounds? Not the equality act anyway.

Oh I’m not saying the 9yo is. This all stemmed from the poster who insists on saying that wanting to be addressed as Mx is sinister amongst all other things and they have no right to be called anything other than a man, so I’m trying to reiterate that the teacher can title themselves whatever they want, despite what the poster thinks or feels.

One would be forgiven for thinking they just make it up to suit whatever privilege they decide to claim.

Like the ‘non binary’ guy who decided to join the girls queue to be searched by the lady security guard outside a nightclub and kicked up a fuss when he was told to join the mens queue.

Or the non binary guy who decided that wearing nail polish and done interesting clothing entitled him to join the women’s exercise class at university.

It’s odd isn’t it?

The ET case was brought because though the employee sometimes/latterly identified as non binary the discrimination was due to his feminine style of dress and everyone thinking he was trying to present as a woman. Which (I'd say especially in an adult office environment) was the whole point
If a shop floor mechanic or a primary school teacher tried to wear pencil skirts and high heels, or a theatre nurse was wearing stilettos and makeup, it's management's job to have a word. Whether they were male OR female.

I had a young assistant, and a colleague had another young assistant who both showed their pants over low slung trousers (it was the early 2000s). Mine was female and my colleague's was male. If we'd only spoken to one it would be sexist and if anyone ogled my assistant it would be harassment. But a general word about visibility of underwear in the office environment was had.

This nine year old does not 'think' the teacher is in the process of gender reassignment. In fact, the nine year old knows he isn't.

But the discrimination in question references things like employment/housing. The nine year old has no power to discriminate on anything the EA covers.

I'm not mocking you and I think you know that.

You may have mentioned sex in other posts. But when we come back to the question of biological essence versus social construct - which is the basis of the article you linked to demonstrate why identifying as a sex isn't the same as identifying as a race - You refuse to engage with the sex question.

So, to reiterate, I agree that gender is a social construct. But I disagree that sex is. In fact, sex is much more strongly and clearly based on biology than race is.

So either ...

You disagree with me there - do you?

Or you need another argument about why 'identifying' as a sex you are not is different to 'identifying' as a race you are not.

I got called ‘Mum’ a lot. I’m not a mother and never want to be, but it didn’t offend me. I just used to laugh and say “I’m fairly sure I’m not your mum”

Kids get their words muddled up. It happens.

It literally says:

The Equality Act says that you must not be directly discriminated against because:

• someone thinks you have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. For example, because you occasionally cross-dress or do not conform to gender stereotypes (this is known as discrimination by perception).

In an employment tribunal it was ruled that non-binary also qualified and this was published on the home office website. I mean discrimination wouldn’t come in to it unless this kept notoriously happening but they have the right to have whatever title, just as much you have the right to whatever title you want.

I don't think it does. EHRC definition here

No, he’s 9.

You have just contradicted yourself in that gender reassignment is the protected characteristic.

and that is where things get woolly.

The protected characteristic means they can't be discriminated against in employment, education etc. I don't think it means they get to force people to call them 'Mx'. The fact belief that sex is binary and immutable is a protected belief.

I think it needs to be a physical 'transition' to be covered in the equality act, not just interesting fashion choices.

The teacher isn’t transitioning from M to F. They just want to be called neither. You can disagree with that all you want but it is a protected characteristic under the equality act and therefore it’s their right for their title to be respected.

Complain about this OP. This social engineering and denial of science that there are only two sexes has gone far enough. It needs to be dealt with:

As someone who taught for over 30 years in a secondary school I absolutely maintain that that teacher should not be teaching. He would last all of 10 mins in a secondary school.

@Nowherecitizen

What type of school are they teaching at where they teach both 9yr olds and "older children"?

Wow - well I disagree for reasons already posted on this thread.

You think anyone who has a diagnosed mental health issue should be permanently barred from teaching? I hate to break it to you, but I work in a school and half the Teachers I know are on medication for Depression and/or Anxiety.

The one thing that makes me think that his motives are not innocent is that he's been teaching for a while, so is probably middle-aged, and yet he sometimes wears high heels to work.

Believe you me, if you're teaching nowadays you don't do it by sitting behind your desk - you might be standing at the front for a while, but you're constantly moving around the classroom. I can't imagine anyone willingly doing that in high heels all day at that age.

I was in middle management for around 20 years. Apart from the first few months when I was wearing 3 inch heels in order to boost my height (that's another story), unless I was going to be in a meeting with Education Officers etc, I wore the comfiest shoes that I could find.

It's not complex. The teacher is a liar, pretending he's not a man when he is. And he's teaching kids to submit to the authority of lying adults and forcing them to say things that they know aren't true.

Didn't say it would, I'm pointing out there's a clear difference in female and male motivations.

Not a fetish for Perry, no siree...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4916999-has-anyone-read-this-interview-with-philippa-perry