Father starts judicial review over 'No Outsiders' programme

theflushedzebra - easily done!

Very well said, Michelleoftheresistance

The Muslims I know deal with the prohibition of homosexuality as being for them personally, not as something they should impose on other people.

Schools should work towards increasing tolerance of other people's differences, but deliberately teaching children that the beliefs of their parents are wrong is a step too far.

Good luck to this man. I hope he wins.

I’ve never understood why the trans issue is lumped with feminism anyway. If self-id and so forth goes ahead, it will affect EVERYONE negatively (not just feminists).

Just to correct you there theflushedzebra - gender identity is not a protected characteristic. Gender reassignment is.

You are absolutely correct, Clymene - slip of the keyboard on my part, but it's a very important distinction.

That was back in July-he has since decided to focus on the teaching of trans ideology which he feels is harmful to children-I would support him in that view.

Anything else is a distraction.

"We are not against anyone expressing their sexuality or being homosexual if that's what they want. We have no issue if Mr Moffat wants to put on a dress, or dance around like a ballet dancer, or put on a skirt, we have no issue. We have an issue with teaching that nonsense to our kids."

has more in it than simply that Hussain is homophobic.

This kind of issue needs more nuance than: inclusive vs homophobic.

That would not open for me, Turkey. But if what you are proving is that there is LGB hate, well yes there is. But I don't have to agree with every view he holds to feel he is right about the T. And my point is proven if people believe that his whole argument is invalidated because he does not approve of the LGB as well. The T has piggy-backed well.

Don’t need to take anyone’s word for it he’s quoted in the Birmingham Mail. They discussed him on LBC today as well.

www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/protest-parents-back-parkfield-school-16554048

So does anyone else feel that the homophobia that has (reportedly, I ain't checked but am taking the the other posters word for it) been expressed openly by the father may be used against him and distract from the question ( as it did here !)

That's the plan. In his description of the Dentons document and its advice, James Kirkup said: This is an issue that is ‘difficult to win public support for’ and best hidden behind the ‘veil of protection’ provided by a popular issue such as gay rights. In the same way, any argument against the T specifically, used by this parent, can be obfuscated and turned into LGB hate instead. Therefore his argument is invalidated.

We used to do a lot of equal ops promotion and the strap lines we chose were always inclusive e.g. Everybody here., All Together, Everybody's different. I think it's significant that this programme emphasises a negative.
No Outsiders.
I was always taught that cognitively negatives confirmed e.g. don't think of an elephant.
This programme is bad because it's agenda is not tolerance but indoctrination. No Outsiders deliberately excludes, the unsubtle message is not affirmation but the threat that you will only be included If you conform. It could equally be called No Dissent.

Knowing how the TAs like to twist the narrative - this week we saw the misguided student on GMB liken the subject of gender ID to racism - then it will be used against him.

If they stick to the issue of gender ideology being taught as fact, then I would like to see the counter arguments.

Is it any different to religious indoctrination?
www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/couple-who-sent-children-church-3557974

So does anyone else feel that the homophobia that has ( reportedly, I ain't checked but am taking the the other posters word for it) been expressed openly by the father may be used against him and distract from the question ( as it did here !)

This father has voiced objections to teaching about the existence of gay relationships and the existence of trans. But the focus of the coverage changes depending on the news source.

Just to correct you there theflushedzebra - gender identity is not a protected characteristic. Gender reassignment is.

I was just sticking up for the other poster who was being called a liar and accused of being racist.

It was patiently explained to the other poster that this thread is discussing the article in the Times about the judicial review, not the protests.

The other poster was called racist for assuming that all Muslims ("these people", in their words) are homophobic.

If you want to discuss the protests, start another thread to avoid confusion of the two issues.

I don’t want to, I was just sticking up for the other poster who was being called a liar and accused of being racist.

That’s always been a problem with the SJ position. They behave in a very off putting way, people then respond negatively to the cause, SJ people then say, ‘if you’re that easily put off, you weren’t really pro women/ gay people/ immigrants in the first place.’

Well exactly. Most people have no particularly strong opinion either way, until you back then into a corner.

I also find it quite easy to separate the LGB from the T. The former are sexual orientations, the latter is a gender identity. Both are named as protected characteristics separately in the Equality Act.

I am supportive of PSHE in schools - but of a strictly age appropriate nature only. I'm extremely dubious about the No Outsiders programme, and I don't agree at all with the "you can choose your gender" narrative, or the "jelly baby gender scale" or the "girls can have willies too" narrative being fed to primary age children. Or any age children, really. The latter, in particular, is highly confusing to young children, and simply NOT TRUE.

Part of the problem is seeing homophobia as some core value that each person does or does not hold.

A great many people won’t have it as a core value. And then their first major engagement with the topic is that it is introduced to them in this very negative way through no outsiders and they shift to a somewhat homophobic position.

Perhaps no outsiders isn’t revealing homophobia but creating it.

The whole notion that we teach children the equality act is worrying. There are very few topics where we teach children you must hold x opinion because that is the law, especially if this is their introduction to the topic.

And that is written into the content of the lesson plans, regardless of cute polar bears or however they are trying to spin it in the media.

the protests ARE anti-LGBT.

But according to the Times article, the judicial review is about the T.

If you want to discuss the protests, start another thread to avoid confusion of the two issues.

happy
Did you follow the conversation this stemmed from? snowblight said:

These people have an issue with the whole LGBT. This isn't like they're holding a protest against trans people one day and have a totally separate, unrelated campaign against gay people a couple of weeks later. It's all lumped together for them in one anti-LGBT protest. If you want to pick out the bits under those circumstances that suit your agenda then feel free.

And they got rounded upon because snowblights posts can come across as a bit antagonist on this board and they were accused of making things up and making into a racist issue. I responded and said although I don’t normally agree with snow, on this occasion they are correct because the protests ARE anti-LGBT.

Britney But he is not bringing a judicial review against the teaching of LBG is he? Its just the T. Also, reading the comments under The Times article many people support him & would do the same.

@happydappy2
so of course one can be against the teaching of transgender ideology but still support LGB people.

Of course they can. But in this situation they’re not. I don’t care what the man is focusing on in interviews, I go past that school two or three times a week and whenever there are protests outside it is clearly against LGBT. I have seen what the placards say with my own eyes and have heard what they are chanting with my own ears.

The Dad has explicitly said its the teaching of transgender ideology he is against-I support him in this, as would many others. Its so important for people to understand that trans ideology is destroying the next generation of potentially gay children-it is deeply homophobic, so of course one can be against the teaching of transgender ideology but still support LGB people.
It is too easy, and incredibly racist, to claim his motives are anything other than what he says they are, just because of his religion.

I don't care who is standing with who. People can be wrong and just because they might have less privilege does not automatically make them right

I do care about harm to children.