10,000 Dresses

The thing about it is that liking sparkly dresses makes Bailey a 'she'? Why can't 'he' like sparkly dresses? Or is that just too outrageous to even contemplate?

This is what I find most problematic. The kid never even says 'I'm a girl' - and yet, it is 'she' throughout the book, apparently.

As for 'looking for support elsewhere' I am torn. I understand that in safeguarding social workers will always try to work with parents and trying to cut parents and family out is a warning sign for grooming.
But, what if for a kids the parents are really these unapproachable figures (I guess in former decades that happened more frequently than today, but still...), shouldn't the kid connect to others? I once read that having a net of people who care (including outside immediate family, like neighbours or so) makes kids more resilient. So shouldn't that be encoraged?
Of course, the book can also be read as mission creep and the child abusing paedophiles who defend their actions because they were kid's only friend and nobody else cared are legion, too. So, yeah, I don't know about that one.

What do the items for the protected characteristics of sex and sexual orientation look like?

Girls can do anything! As long as they wear sparkly dresses while they do it >> and to be honest massive sparkly dresses are incompatible with a range of jobs so if a girl wants to wear trousers or be an astronaut then she must be a boy.
Boys can fancy other boys! But must NOT like anything that is coded girl or that makes them not gay boys but actually girls.

Heterosexuality is at the absolute core of gender role, it is what most of it is about. It's not surprising so many gay kids are GNC. Are they advised that they are not gay but the opposite sex? Or are the materials entirely contradictory.

Can a girl wear trousers or not?
Can a boy like "girls stuff" or not?

Scaring GNC kids by advising them that parents are likely to entirely reject them if they do not adhere to retrograde stereotypical behaviours is a fucking APPALLING message to give kids, what the FUCK are they thinking?

The thing about it is that liking sparkly dresses makes Bailey a 'she'? Why can't 'he' like sparkly dresses? Or is that just too outrageous to even contemplate?

Yes, intentionally so, parents are bad, new mummies and daddies on tumblr are much better. The parents and brother are drawn faceless, huge and looming.

Yes, this is such a common theme isn't it and really quite worrying.

I would hit the roof if this was used as teaching material for one of my kids. I spend so much time fighting against gender stereotypes with my sons, that they can wear what they want and do what they want as boys and men. This message and calling Bailey "she" and the messages from the parents in the book would completely undermine that.

I saw a picture book aimed at little kids called "I am Jazz" for sale at We The Curious in Bristol this summer - it's a science museum, ffs. I didn't have the time to complain about it but it was really shocking to see it there.

What age-group is getting this story in schools?
I'm sure I would have been massively confused if I'd been given this sort of lesson, at any stage of primary school.

That lesson plan says "At no point in the story does Bailey identify as a boy or a girl".
Yet the story identifies Bailey as "she" and the plan is all about being trans.

It would be a far better story if it called out the rigid attitudes of Bailey's horrible relatives and let him be a happy boy who likes dresses.

This is what worries me. All it takes is a teacher who is completely gung-ho about the whole thing to slip in a few extra-curricular story times and worksheets.

Andrew Moffat has created an entire scheme of work for teaching the EA act through stories. Which is great, some lovely stories and lesson ideas (though if I'm honest I think they're a bit slap dash) but they soups this one in.

Plus one in ks1 I'm a bit over.

I don't think DJ really considered the wider implications of that story, not how it's being used. He was booked for an lgbt event to read a story. he said he dealt with similar issues growing up however he clearly didn't transition.

Just to reiterate; this book is in a programme that schools follow to teach the EA through stories.

The rest of it is good from what I've seen but ik not keen on the trans materials nor what Andrew Moffat teaches in lesson plans that teachers will follow.

Certainly has delivered training throughout my local education authority, my son's school's head told me.

If I had more time and energy at the moment I'd directly approach the author and challenge him over the lesson plans and inclusion of this book.

equalitiesplans.blogspot.com/2016/10/transgender-awareness-ks2-3-10000.html

I sent my concerns about the books in the no outsiders teaching resources book to transgender trend but I never heard back from them.

Op. Have you thought of approaching this from a quasi legal route?
Ask for clarification about how many occasions the book has been used in the classroom and how much time spent on follow up (for your records).
Then ask for details of who the school uses for its public liability insurance? Let the Head know that you will be considering making a claim against the school if there is evidence that the school are stepping outside their learning role and promoting regressive stereotypes with your child in a way that confuses, unsettles and misleads them and may in the long harm cause them emotional harm. Just a thought.

By the time I got to that bit of the story, I was suspicious of the kindly, older stranger.

What a horrible way to depict boys and fathers.
What a horrible way to depict mothers.

Who was the big footed Laurel friend?

A dangerous and very inappropriate book.

Don't particularly want to buy a copy, but if I did, I am rather tempted to write:
'This book can be found at a school near you'.
Highlight the incorrect pronouns with a sharpie, and leave it in a public place where parents might find it interesting.

Thanks OP for highlighting this.
Thanks to Neuro for allowing us to have that book read to us by Derek jacobi.

This is doing us all a favour.

We now have to trawl through the school reading lists to bring books like these into plain sight.
Without social media and MN we might not have found out.

The book is disgusting and it's depressing that parents seem not to be interested.

I cannot believe they are teaching little kids in the UK in state schools that

All girls love sparkly dresses
Boys cannot wear dresses

Fucking disgusting retrograde sexist homophobic bullshit of the first order.

I'm genuinely angry.

Depressing, isn't it.

OP, sounds like you're dealing really well with it so far!

What the actual fuck is this total shit?

Girls like pink and sparkles and dresses?
Boys can't wear dresses?

Regressive codswallop FFS

but I suppose there could be other things I don’t know about.

This is what worries me. All it takes is a teacher who is completely gung-ho about the whole thing to slip in a few extra-curricular story times and worksheets.