Line Manager just "come out" as Non-binary

Banana
Thank I.

R0wantrees, just having a peripheral eyeroll at Stonewall for suggesting the use of YouTube stories in classrooms. I don't know a single school where YouTube isn't behind a firewall...

I confidently await the classful of Y11 students - or younger - who, after reading a Stonewall-approved school policy, all simultaneously decide they're gender fluid and sit down together to invent 20 or more different pronoun sets for staff to learn and use. They can change their preferred names, too, of course. And then sit back, wait, and complain every single time a staff member slips up. And being 'fluid' their names and pronouns can of course change on a whim, even during a lesson.

"You've just dead-named me, Mrs Bloggs! That's a hate crime. You called me (name I preferred 15 minutes ago) but my name is (name I just thought of). You're a bigot and I'm reporting you.

The moment some brave principal steps into the room and tells them they're being very silly girls and boys gender fluid individuals and the game is over, O.V.A.H. over, is the day the house of cards comes crashing down. If everyone's special, no-one's special. Wise teachers will get in first.

Cultural revolution, anyone?

Did IBanana
Yes I did, see my copy paste below 👍

BananabixfloofSat 08-Feb-20 09:19:07

@Eckhart
Ok your trying to prove that you can remember to be nice and call the correct people by the correct pronouns
So for future references my pronouns on this board anywhere;- I, me mine
So if you see me anywhere on

May 2019 thread about judiciary 'Bench Book' instructions:
(extract)
"New guidelines state that ‘self-definition is the most important criteria’ and courts should respect a person’s gender identity by using appropriate names and pronouns.

The rules, published in a new edition of the Equal Treatment Bench Book, say courts should not reveal a defendant’s birth gender and that in ‘rare’ cases where disclosing a previous sex is necessary, judges should take the court into secret session or impose reporting restrictions."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3591213-Mail-article-Judges-are-ordered-to-allow-transgender-defendants-to-be-addressed-as-the-gender-of-their-choice-during-court-appearances

You see I have learnt not just to do something just because I am told to "just out of respect"

Respect in my mind has to be earned and if someone is making a thing about gender, I find that quite hurtful and offensive. So since they are asking me to do something that hurts me, I think, hum, they don't deserve that respect

See I spent years battling gender , being bullied and belittled because of gender , so any emphasis of gender, any suggestion that I need to fit into some or other gender category I find distressing

Goady again, old crone.

Pointing out that you haven't answered any of my questions is goady?

I'm sorry you feel so got at. That must be really uncomfortable. But your own intellectual insecurities are your issues to deal with, I'm afraid, and petulant swipes at people here doesn't assist your cause. It just makes you look yet more foolish.

There is something called 'a chilling effect'. When people can't act as they want or say what they feel for fear of consequence. If you don't recognise that women have been fired simply for expressing these views on their own time, and have had no recourse, and you don't recognise why and how this could scare others, then I'm afraid yes, you are hard of thinking.

If you have any factually based arguments to make, then do share them. So far, your statements have either been provably untrue, or based on feelings. One side's feelings - the other side's apparently not mattering at all.

A judge told Maria McLachlan to refer to her attacker as she. That’s as close to compelled expression of something you don’t believe as you can get.

Goady again, old crone.

Well behaved, thanks for the essay. The fact that you respond to all my immature jibes would indicate that we're probably on roughly the same level, there, despite your clearly elevated view of yourself.

My 'belief system' or viewpoint, as I'd prefer it, is that if someone asks me to refer to them in a particular way, then I'll try to respect that, and hope that if I make mistakes, they will respect the fact that language change is hard to make. Mutual respect. The op has not been sacked, reprimanded, reported, disciplined, frowned upon, talked about, negatively viewed etc, as far as we know. She has been reminded. I had to remind a few people a few times when I changed my own name by deed poll. I even got it wrong myself once or twice.
All the talk on this thread about compelled language and the politics of gender is hyperbolic in the op's situation. If she'd got threatened with the sack, I'd be dead against that.

So. There's your petty swipe, your re-iteration of my point, as requested, and now, I go. I think I've done all of the options you offered me rather than choosing just one.

Stonewall Primary School curriculum guidance.

(apologies for duplicate post, Im not sure what happened)

Stonewall Primary School curriculum guidance.

Did I Banana?

You know, you're yet to make an argument here at all. Your gibes don't evidence anything but immaturity - ironically, given.

Either you have a solidly founded rebuttal, to explain why women should defer to a belief system which fundamentally harms their interests, and increases their oppression, or you don't. And I'm afraid it looks to me rather as if you are so used to your own echo chamber that you're used to your claims being taken as gospel.

So here's the thing. Gender identity beliefs don't make you a minority, or oppressed. They make you a super special snowflake, in fact. Women are, on the contrary, actually oppressed. Plenty of data to hand, which hasn't been massaged, manipulated or invented, to prove it.

Again: This is not a minority. It's a belief system. One not everyone shares.

Some believe that everyone has an innate gender identity, which may not match their sex (if they believe in sex at all, of course) or an absence thereof. They believe that this belief should remove all rights others have which contradict it.

Others believe that women are oppressed because of their sex, and gender is how they are oppressed. Therefore elevating gender to some supreme importance in this way is to entrench women's oppression, and support it. It is misogynist.

Those are directly colliding beliefs, and to insist only yours has merit or value is discriminatory. Especially as the feminist belief tends to be held by women, and the argument is that genderism contributes to their oppression. So it's not just seeking to enforce a belief system in a manner that discriminates against a protected group - it's demanding that that protected group support you in enforcing it.

Now, are you going to continue to make petty swipes, in which case we'll have to assume that you have no actual arguments? Or are you going to leave, as you've repeatedly said you would, despite those repeated posts proving a rather shaky grip on material reality? Or are you going to genuinely try to explain why your belief system is in any way based on fact, and in any way something that can be reconciled with the needs, rights and protection of women as a biological sex class? Personally, I'd welcome the last. But the choice is, of course, your own.

That post was made before you said anything about pronouns
I said yesterday what my pronouns are.

Echo chamber.
If this becomes an echo chamber, it's because people like you are unwilling to engage and answer questions. It's not because we are unwilling to discuss.

Sorry but eckhart was in fact talking to me, the prefix banana made that clear

That post was made before you said anything about pronouns.

Maybe when I grow up I could be just like you!

And that's all anyone can ask.

I did. Started off where you are, in fact. Look where I ended up. ;)

Will do.

If we are at a point in history where the bare facts are hyperbolic, perhaps you need to sit down and have a little think?

Just an idea.

I didn't say it was factually inaccurate. I said it was hyperbolic here.
Echo chamber. Off.

I've answered loads of questions

But not mine.

Goady, old crone. I've answered loads of questions, I'm not averse to it.

That'll be the hyperbole

@Eckhart please tell me what is factually inaccurate about any of my post? Which part is not wholly supported by data?

Believe me, I would never be so pleased to be wrong in my life, if you can rebut a single, solitary point with facts.