Teacher suspended for mis-pronouning child

No child under 18 can get a gender recognition certificate.
Therefore they are not legally “transgender” (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Therefore there is surely no legal requirement for a teacher to address them by the wrong sex pronoun?
Compelling people to speak lies is very different to banning them from speaking hate speech.
Of course I should be banned from using the n word, for example. But I should not be compelled to pretend that a healthy person is disabled, or an adult man is a toddler. Or that a child can change sex.

It is so bad for children to have this kind of power over adults.

Whilst I really hope Vlaming wins, I have an awful feeling of dread that he might not. It’s crazy, I may believe I’m beautiful and wish to have other people confirm that belief....I have no powers legally to do that though. Why should a girl who believes herself to be a boy have any legal right to compel others speech? Vlaming knew this child previously as a girl FFS

Update: Vlaming is suing for damages and to regain his position:

amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/10/02/us/virginia-teacher-says-wrongfully-fired-student-wrong-pronouns-trnd/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

All of this does seem to be heating up in the US at the moment.

I hope he can find another job where he can be happy.

Second story frames the "backlash" as mostly frothing religious right. Not sure that's the case when students walked out in support of Vlaming...

www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/the-school-board-in-a-small-virginia-town-defended-a/article_4a5ba969-fe6e-5ff8-9c69-a67f3460a6c2.html

Update: school district has fired Vlaming.

www.richmond.com/news/virginia/virginia-high-school-teacher-fired-for-refusing-to-use-transgender/article_65be1826-50b2-5d38-be58-47d9b9480917.html

The video with Philip and Holly is so disturbing. At the end Philip describes the fact that the two Christians believe people are born male and female as “medieval”. He also reads out a story where a three year old asks his parents if he can wear a dress as if that is supposed to be where they can trace his transgender self-identity, at three! So he is operating completely out of stereotypes.

I just can’t believe things have got so bad that an adult acknowledging biological truth gets them suspended and everyone in the school is supposed to go along uncritically with this ideology. The math teacher says that many of his students struggle and feel confused and then Holly and Philip dive in saying he should be the one teaching them how to respond, but clearly not in a gender critical way.

Holly and Phil are not neutral they have clearly chosen a side and they are not listening to gender critical arguments.

But after an incident where the student was wearing virtual reality goggles and almost ran into a wall in the hallway and Vlaming shouted “don’t let her run into the wall,” the parents said it was unhealthy for their child to remain in Vlaming’s class, according to school division’s attorney Stacy Haney."

Seriously? This is hilarious.

They think their child would be safer with a teacher who thinks for five minutes on which gender the child was again before calling out a warning?

Well, if they think their child needs to be hit on the head to come back to its senses ...

Either we’re all being trolled or that’s the most hilarious real life analogy ever. '

Indeed.

The problem with cases like this is that the emotion obscures the principle behind it.

It appears that he’s being an arse to make a point and that’s not great where kids are concerned. But the principle behind the case is can you be legally compelled to say something against your beliefs?

It’s a bit like that case with the bakery that refused to ice something on a cake for a couple. They were being homophobic and so the instant reaction is, this is wrong. But when you look at what the principle being tested in court was it was again, can you be compelled to say something against your beliefs?

In the bakery case, the judge ruled that the bakery was not discriminating - they had baked the cake just as they would for any people and provided them materials to ice the message on, but they should not be compelled to ice that message if they disagreed with it due to their beliefs.

And I think the judge was right. I disagree with the bajery’s Stance on homosexuality and I think they’re bigoted. BUT I also think that they should not be compelled to say something that they disagree with.

So I think we should be looking behind the emotional ‘immediate reaction’ here and looking at what’s really being tested. Because what’s actually being tested is someone being forced to say people can change sex.

I would use the pronouns a colleague wanted to be used out of politeness.
I would be seriously worried for our democracy if I was compelled to do so under law.

The problem with cases like this is that the emotion obscures the principle behind it.

It appears that he’s being an arse to make a point and that’s not great where kids are concerned. But the principle behind the case is can you be legally compelled to say something against your beliefs?

It’s a bit like that case with the bakery that refused to ice something on a cake for a couple. They were being homophobic and so the instant reaction is, this is wrong. But when you look at what the principle being tested in court was it was again, can you be compelled to say something against your beliefs?

In the bakery case, the judge ruled that the bakery was not discriminating - they had baked the cake just as they would for any people and provided them materials to ice the message on, but they should not be compelled to ice that message if they disagreed with it due to their beliefs.

And I think the judge was right. I disagree with the bajery’s Stance on homosexuality and I think they’re bigoted. BUT I also think that they should not be compelled to say something that they disagree with.

So I think we should be looking behind the emotional ‘immediate reaction’ here and looking at what’s really being tested. Because what’s actually being tested is someone being forced to say people can change sex.

I would use the pronouns a colleague wanted to be used out of politeness.
I would be seriously worried for our democracy if I was compelled to do so under law.

Native English speakers really have no idea how integrated gender is into language for someone who has French as mothertongue. All latin based languages gender EVERYTHING not just pronouns. Verbs, adjectives, prepositions even counting can be gendered and you can not shake that off, it's a reflex. It sounds like he has quickly shouted 'don't let her run into the wall' out of reflex to me.

I know a person who has gone through at least 3 names and pronouns combinations in the span of a year. In my classes you were lucky if a teacher would know your name after two years of being in that class.

Lie when your boss tells you to or get fired.
Sadly probably is pretty common, yes, but that doesn't make it right.

Do what you are asked by your boss or get fired. Pretty normal practice isn't it?

I can’t think of a time when I call a pupil - who is with me - by a pronoun.

Woah.

I’m shocked by how many people are saying that what he did was a good thing.
I don’t buy into the trans ideology at all but how was he helping?
He’s a teacher, surely his first priority should be to protecting the child. I doubt very much that the child is going to say ‘oh wait my French teacher won’t call me by my new pronouns I mustn’t be trans after all’
No they are going to think the teacher is bullying them.

It’s a different conversation when we’re talking about adults but we have to tred carefully with children.

The policy here for primary schools is for teachers to use the registered name that parents supply and they use the pronoun based on registration. As secondary school pupils can inform the school of what they wish to be called - usually this is a typical shortening but a number of students give quite different names and gender neutral ones, when requested teachers are asked to use the pronouns the young person requests or use their name to avoid the need to use them when uncomfortable. 4 students have transitioned (14-18 school) in past 2 years. I don't personally agree with any treatment under 18, mostly due to the fact that a fifth student and close friend of my DD's changed her mind and is back to she.

“But after an incident where the student was wearing virtual reality goggles and almost ran into a wall in the hallway”
If that was in a film or novel it’d be a clunky metaphor but either we’re all being trolled or that’s the most hilarious real life analogy ever.

No I think this is different. To NOT use a racial slur is different from being forced to say something you think isnt true.

Indeed.

It was, until recently, universally accepted that lying is bad.

Yet now, it is deemed acceptable to force Christians to act against their faith by forcing them to lie.

Don't get me wrong, forcing anyone to lie is cruel and gaslighting, but I would have thought that at least religious freedom was valued in the US.
Seems it isn't.

Seems everyone must now believe in the religion of Genderism, or be persecuted.

We've regarded it as legal and indeed desirable to compel speech at least since the Race Relations Act 1965, and indeed considerably before that in relation to the laws of slander etc.

No I think this is different. To NOT use a racial slur is different from being forced to say something you think isnt true.

Take religious hatred: it’s unacceptable to use a slur to describe a person following a religion. If I call a follower of the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster a pastabastard then I’m engaged in religious hatred. But NOT calling them that doesn’t COMPEL me in any way. I can get creative and say ‘I personally don’t believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and I find aspects of pastafarianism quite beastly.’ Etc. I’m not being forced to say something I don’t believe. People who are racist are not forced to say they believe things. They can say they believe one race is superior to another - that’s not illegal. They will face criticism but it’s not illegal. The illegality is targeting that into incitement etc.

The equivalent here would be me being COMPELLED to say I believed in the FSM.

It’s different because it’s effectively equivalent to criminalising blasphemy. I can blaspheme all I like, the laws againstvhate crimes are to protect the people holding that religion, not the religion itself.

Gofundme link:

www.gofundme.com/peter-vlaming-family-fund?fbclid=IwAR1TAQNZqughtZnjXNX9Ytem8rTwCHO26aXSj6miMHtzOhI6quqcVvTjOQ8

The teacher in this case has now been fired. I assume lawsuit(s) to come.

www.wavy.com/news/virginia/west-point-hs-teacher-terminated-following-transgender-controversy/1644967678

"I changed the world" oh goodness.

Did they stop 1 child from dying? Did they cure cancer? Did they cure a cold? Did they stop someone dying of hunger? No, they insisted an overworked teacher use pronouns opposite to their birth sex.

With such poverty of aspiration amongst youngsters, this is not the time to be complaining about otherwise-capable teachers.