Man threatened with Prevent for questioning transgender book at nephew's school.

I think they seem politically motivated too. If it were about teaching the children about the EA through their books then there should be similarly beautifully illustrated books about the other protected characteristics and I don’t know that there are.

They will only make sense to those 'in the know'- with the appropriate cultural and political understandings and framings. Others deserve to be able to question and seek understanding and people should not be surprised when some who are outside the 'in the know' group don't know.

Conservative religious people can easily accept and believe that men and women, & lgbt people should be treated equally within the law, have the same rights., & not be discriminated against.

That doesn't mean they can't believe that traditional gender roles are better ways to live and bring up children.

Parents chose how to dress their children, the equality act doesn't say all children can wear whatever they want boys or girls. GC believers may think that is the best approach, other people believe differently.

GC beliefs are opinions about gender. They may agree with conservative religious people that biological sex is real but have differing beliefs about gender roles and bringing up children.

I'm sure GC parents wouldn't want books about girls who love God and love to help mummy cook.

It's one thing to make children aware there are differing ways to live and to accept different families choices, but another to promote certain beliefs as if they are universally agreed as positive things.

Many families don't think boys wearing girls clothes is a positive thing, just because you or a teacher think its fine doesn't make that the right view.

Personally I think these books with boys in princess outfits etc. are politically motivated. There appears to be a battle of children's books going on that reflects the battle on sex and gender in wider society and I don't think this is appropriate (even if I broadly agree with the message in the book). Personally I think there are better ways to teach children that they should not be limited to certain roles because of their sex.

I think they seem politically motivated too. If it were about teaching the children about the EA through their books then there should be similarly beautifully illustrated books about the other protected characteristics and I don’t know that there are. Then the parents should definitely be spoken to about them, be allowed to have an opinion, and have a say in what their child reads.

This book is aimed at someone very young. They should be left alone at that age imo.

Oh I see what you mean.

Personally I think these books with boys in princess outfits etc. are politically motivated. There appears to be a battle of children's books going on that reflects the battle on sex and gender in wider society and I don't think this is appropriate (even if I broadly agree with the message in the book). Personally I think there are better ways to teach children that they should not be limited to certain roles because of their sex.

I am defending his right to freedom of expression and to holding views that are different to my own. I would defend the right of a TRA to express his views to the Head as well.

Saying that someone is allowed to hold certain views doesn't make them 'friends' or mean that they are 'forging alliances' with such people.

Being critical of gender roles is implicit in the EA, that men and women should be treated equally.

Tolerating difference of opinion is hardly "forging alliances with inappropriate bedfellows" is it?

Awful way to deal with it that simply escalated the situation instead of quelling it.

OK, I misunderstood Prevent, because I thought it was set up to deal with radicalised Muslims.

When it was set up it absolutely was. It was vile, racist and Islamaphobic.

"My enemy's enemy is my friend."

Unfortunately this line of thinking is causing GC feminists to forge alliances with (let's just say) "inappropriate" bedfellows with deeply illiberal views, thereby discrediting the GC project, and turning many people against it.

You may believe that being gender critical is not a 'correct' view, but it is in line with the EA.

What do you mean by “it is in line with the EA”?

If you work in a public-facing role like teaching, you have to work with people who have different values and views. I'm a (female) doctor and work in an ethnically diverse area. I often encounter attitudes that are contrary to my own about women's roles. I will stand up for myself/colleagues/female patients if need be, but I don't do it by threatening someone I see as sexist with Prevent. That would be eye-waveringly unprofessional.

Children from religious and conservative households where women are seen as less important than men and whose lives are restricted as a result don't need to have this reinforced in school.

You may believe that being gender critical is not a 'correct' view, but it is in line with the EA.

If you want to teach your children traditional gender roles you can't be prevented from doing this, but you can't expect schools to go against the equality act and reinforce your beliefs.

Many conservative and religious parents feel that traditional gender roles are very important for children to learn and fulfill.

Why should they have books for their children which undermine this?

Being gender critical is an one view not the correct one.

The equality act says we should not discriminate, not that everyone has to share the same views or want them promoted to your children.

Why was it not the mother of the child? Why did it need a ‘man’ to go in and deal with it?

IME there are a significant number of mums in British Muslim households who have a very low standard of spoken and written English (we know that there are many women who rely on their primary age children to interpret leaflets from their GP, and a significant percentage seem to be living in Muslim households - see the recent census debacle for an interesting tangent).

Not denying that this is rooted in sexism (eg arranged marriages that bring brides to Britain and then expect them to stay largely confined to the house/only socialise with other mums in the same situation) but a man going into school to talk to the teacher on a woman’s behalf isn’t particularly unusual.

It would normally be the dad/husband but a brother would be the next option if dad wasn’t available.

I think you make very valid points. Would your view change if he had written permission from the child's mother to 'mediate' I agree with you it puts your back up the misogyny but that doesn't mean what the child mother wants addressing should be dismissed out of hand because she herself felt unable to have a meeting herself? I don't know this man but it looks like he's not a great character but I don't think it's fair to say the mother had to come in herself. Maybe she had other children so she could not? Maybe she has English as an additional language? Maybe she is tied up with work etc etc.

GC ranting?

You're on the feminist board. Feminism is critical of the idea of gender and the stereotyping which goes with it.

If you are pro-gender stereotyping, perhaps a feminist forum isn't the right place for you.

I’m uncomfortable with this for a different reason. If I was a headteacher and a man, who was not the parent or guardian of the child in question - he’s an uncle I believe- with an attitude that he was mediating ‘between 2 women’, my back would be up (obviously I would not reveal this and would remain professional)

Why was it not the mother of the child? Why did it need a ‘man’ to go in and deal with it? Misogynist, controlling behaviour and I would have felt decidedly uncomfortable. How did he get an appointment? I’m just imagining my brother going into school to have a meeting with my child’s Headteacher on my behalf - the Headteacher would have justifiably gone ‘If there is an issue, I will talk to the child’s mother’.

If she threatened him with Prevent I’d like to know a bit more about it. Perhaps he was talking to her in a hugely imperious, patronising way. Maybe she perceived she was alone in a room with a man who saw her as second class citizen who might have been behaving a tad aggressively?

I know this is an incredibly sensitive issue and that schools are having to navigate the religious beliefs of groups who find homosexuality an abhorrence, deny women their bodily autonomy etc… but
I think we need to take a holistic view of this interaction and not just jump on the fact that this man doesn’t like a book where a boy wears a dress.

Which protected characteristic do you think this book is about?

I agree.

When my stepdaughter’s mother objected to school changing her name and sex marker on the register without making contact let alone requesting parental permission, the school, a Bronze Stonewall Champion, accused her of importing bigoted values and attitudes from her native country (a small former soviet state with an Orthodox Christian background). That her mum is an atheist who emigrated to Britain to get away from the legacy of communism and enforced right-think was ignored in favour of the school’s xenophobic narrative (school using PoMo redefined words while speaking to a woman who has English as a third, or maybe 4th, I forget, language, didn’t help at all).

The only way we got them to back the fuck off was via Baroness Nicholson’s letters re: UK law on parental responsibility and the UN Rights of the Child to family life without state interference.

So many teachers/social workers are convinced they are on the Right Side Of History on trans they have developed a bigoted automatic response to anyone who contests their view, and this particularly affects foreign born residents and citizens and people who follow conservative (largely the Abrahamic) religions.

All these books are annoying. They are so didactic and preachy.

At the moment most prevent cases are far right as are most terrorist incidents. The media isn't reflecting this.

This.