Michael Rosen, queering children’s literature

However it's being reclaimed as it usefully encompasses a range of nonbinary characteristics in people's identities and relationships.

What job is "nonbinary" doing here? I'm starting to see a bit of mission creep with this term. It was used on that viral Twitter thread a few days ago about kelp to mean "intersex".

If you mean "not conforming to sexist stereotypes" it's not a particularly progressive way of looking at everyone else, is it? But it seems to cover more than that. So what "binary" are we talking about?

The exclusion was attributed (by the LEA themselves in media releases) to the boy’s wider behaviour in school combined with his choice to post video secretly filmed in school and clearly identifying a member of staff on YouTube.

The video was pretty damning. So ultimately that is what he was excluded for, protesting/whistleblowing his treatment for expressing the fact-based view that there are only 2 biological sexes.

I suppose it depends what noun the verb is acting on - queering the classroom could just mean the discourse/environment, but to me it also encompasses the children within it, so it's implying affecting the children themselves. Maybe I'm being too literal.

No, I don't think you are being too literal. I think they are looking to change the narrative with the idea that if you do that, it will change the people. Something that is particularly powerful when you do it with kids because they are really not aware of other ways of thinking, they take for granted what they are told.

Education properly speaking should mean becoming aware of your own bias or narrative, so you can actually hold it in a meaningful way, or discount it, in a meaningful way. But education generally now is about teaching particular narratives as an orthodoxy - it seems to have been that way for at least 15 years. I think this is what has lead to a lot of the problems in universities and political discourse.

Or he's creating a record of tweets that can be spun as being sympathetic to gender critical views should the right side of history not turn out so right in the end.

I didn't know he worked at goldsmiths. That makes it look more like faux naivety on his part, but that's not a bad way of responding. He could easily have just ignored, or replied that everyone are just bigoted and if only people would be nice. This way it does allow some discussion of the issues on twitter etc.

Familiar with the problems with the all-women shortlist and the BBC newspeak

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09r4k4l

It's still up if anyone wants to re-listen

Ahh, of course Imnobody4. I did know about that but had forgotten. I suspect that unconscious knowledge fed into my reading of his tweets as being faux-naïve and disingenuous.

To all those saying "it's just stories about having two mums or dads", you are being woefully naive and are not paying attention. Queer Theory is a postmodern discipline which seeks to dismantle and transgress boundaries. Boundaries like safeguarding and those silly old fashioned taboos like adults not having sex with children, or incest. Shelley Charlesworth also did an an excellent analysis of the Queer Theory roots of No Outsiders: www.transgendertrend.com/no-outsiders-queering-primary-classroom/

I remember that imnobody. Was it about the language of computer gaming?

There have been some excellent threads in the past about the deeply worrying aspects of Queer Theory, particularly its promotion of paedophilia as a 'transgression of norms and taboos'. Dr EM has also written extensively about the paedophilic roots of Queer Theory, and the seriously dodgy founders of Queer Theory: uncommongroundmedia.com/the-trojan-unicorn-queer-theory-and-paedophilia-part-i-%EF%BB%BF-dr-em/

He's being totally disingenuous. He did a Word of Mouth programme on language and gender identity ages ago. Interviewing C N Lester. He is not new to this issue.

I see what you mean, Goosefoot, but that's not quite what I'm getting at. I appreciate we might 'question' or 'explore' or 'examine', but the verb implies more affecting something, it seems forcible, it implies actively and deliberately changing or turning something.

It's probably just me, getting sidetracked by a small point of language - I've only just noticed it - I have no issue with exploring or examining how things are to look at potential prejudice or normative thinking, etc.

you could say what is going on is that they are trying to substitute one narrative or construct for another,

I suppose it depends what noun the verb is acting on - queering the classroom could just mean the discourse/environment, but to me it also encompasses the children within it, so it's implying affecting the children themselves. Maybe I'm being too literal.

Unfortunately StumbledIn, I think you are very likely right.

I agree with the comment up thread that Rosen is over doing the "oh I didn't know that, what do you think". Probably as much a tactic to ensure he remains a much lauded children's author, so he is testing who he should or should not align himself with.

But if he works at Goldsmiths he must be aware of the issues, and the fact that Goldsmiths (well at least some of its academics) have been criticised for their aggressive trans agenda.

Also a bit confused about some of the comments about the word queer.

I myself have not clear idea of what it has or is meant to say. But understood that the Stonewall umbrella used Queer as a postive cover all term for the multitude of identities they now say the represent. Their definition is:

Queer is a term used by those wanting to reject specific labels of romantic orientation, sexual orientation and/or gender identity. It can also be a way of rejecting the perceived norms of the LGBT community (racism, sizeism, ableism etc). Although some LGBT people view the word as a slur, it was reclaimed in the late 80s by the queer community who have embraced it.

www.stonewall.org.uk/help-advice/glossary-terms#q

And certainly from the 80s it was the rise of queer politics in universities that spearheaded the backlash against women's liberation and women's studies.

I think the explanation given by the event organisers as to the use of the word queering is a deliberate underplay of what the intent actually is.

I am keeping my fingers crossed that it isn’t faux-naivety from Michael, and that he will take time to look at all the info provided for him to read.

a boy was expelled from school in Scotland for saying there are only 2 genders

That’s not true.

The exclusion was attributed (by the LEA themselves in media releases) to the boy’s wider behaviour in school combined with his choice to post video secretly filmed in school and clearly identifying a member of staff on YouTube.

One's sexuality shouldn't be subject to other people's persuasion, urging, argument, intervention. Consent, for me, is at the heart of healthy respect and healthy relationships. That includes respecting someone else's sexual orientation/identity, and their uncovering/discovering/growing into that, without interference.

I understand what you are getting at here, and I tend to agree to an extent.

The difficulty I have with it is that it does tend to assume that the way we think about sexuality is natural or neutral. There is some truth in saying that seems to be what we've tried to promote, or were trying to, a kind of naturalistic description of the way humans experience sexual desire. But it's not at all clear that it is free of culture or a bias of sorts. And as long as that is the case, the way we think about it will shape the way people interpret their own experience, and how they grow into that experience.

From that perspective you could say what is going on is that they are trying to substitute one narrative or construct for another, the one we think of as naturalistic.

I also note that Sarah Hagger-Holt has omitted the fact she also works for Stonewall off her bio.

Sidonie Bertrand-Shelton, graduated with a psychology degree in 2013. She has no background in education at all.

She also wrote the Not Just Pink and Blue transgender inclusion toolkit twitter.com/mforstater/status/1211335704669827074?s=21 used by many councils.

So a 28 year old woman who has gone straight from working in a student union to Stonewall is teaching our schools, our councils and our children about trans identifying children.

Regulatory capture indeed.

Or grooming, Scrimshaw

There are a lot of assumptions, and I don't think anyone has posted up the programme yet?

www.gold.ac.uk/calendar/?id=13077

Welcome from Dr Julia Hope, Head of MA Children’s Literature at Goldsmiths

Sidonie Bertrand-Shelton, Head of Education Programmes at Stonewall, exploring the start and legacy of Section 28, and what an LGBT inclusive school looks like today.

Dr Catherine Butler, lecturer and author, delivering her talk ‘Problems and Challenges in the Portrayal of Trans People in Children’s and Young Adult Literature.’

Talk by Sarah Hagger-Holt, author of debut YA novel, Nothing Ever Happens Here.

Prof Michael Rosen in conversation with past MA in Children’s Literature students, who have written related assignments and dissertations.

Spoken word/poetry performance by Dean Atta, award-winning author of The Black Flamingo and past MA Creative Writing and Education student at Goldsmiths.

• at least, it implies trying to forcibly change sexuality. I really don't like the idea of co-ercing or persuading or altering in any way when we're discussing sexuality. Especially when an event is for/about children.

One's sexuality shouldn't be subject to other people's persuasion, urging, argument, intervention. Consent, for me, is at the heart of healthy respect and healthy relationships. That includes respecting someone else's sexual orientation/identity, and their uncovering/discovering/growing into that, without interference.

I'm not sure if I'm expressing this as well as others might!

I also am a bit averse to the word 'queering' as a verb.

It implies some form of turning something to be a certain way.

I understand sexualities etc to be something that one is born with, for the most part; deeply personal and individual. The idea of someone trying to change that one way or another doesn't sit well with me.

Why 'queer' something? What would be the response to a suggestion we 'straighten' the classroom?

Appears to me to be too close to conversion.