Girls referred to as "chicks", "birds" and "old biddies" in Y6 production

[ImNotChangingMyUsernameAgain]

I was . I don't think it is ok for 11 year old boys to be taught to talk this way about girls or for 11 year old girls to be expected to accept it.

The plot of the play - written by the headmaster who I feel should know better - was St Trinians type girls school meets Eton type boys school and chaos ensues. It was set in the 1950s.

AIBU to think this is unacceptable or does the context of the play justify the use of pejorative language?

I can't get over Flirty and Basher.

OP is that serious?

What is the head like? Is he a bastion of progressive inclusive thinking? Or, not?

The Head has really let himself down here.

The Headmistress should have been sent away for having a bastard child and one of the boarders could have had a golliwog for comfort.

As long as it's historically accurate who cares about how offensive the language is to people today.

Yes, those were the names.

Great performance by the DC it's just the head has shown himself to be an old dinosaur!

I would be seriously boggled at this.

And possibly quite pissed off.

Did any of the female characters have any redeeming qualities? They all sound horrible.

Still not getting over the names.

Sounds a bit like Grease in places. With the pretending not to know stuff.

Were all the parents sitting there like this

Wow.

Sounds completely inappropriate and also totally unnecessary when there are plenty of topics for plays that would be more appropriate. Indeed there are plenty of already written plays that could be used.

Also this nonsense about it being appropriate for the time is IRRELEVANT because there are literally thousands of alternatives to the whole premise for the play in the first place.

Flirty and Basher? I mean WTAF is that about? Year 6 won't even get the context or references that might have made it more understandable. Head has done something very ill advised.

Terminology aside it sounds like a dreadful production.

I think if an older, existing play was being done, then it's fine as that's how it was when it was written (and provide an opportunity for discussion on how far we've come etc)

But a new play? No, not on. Or at the very least, if words used in that era are used for context/authenticity then it needs to be shown somehow in the play that subsequently those words were wring to be used. If that makes sense?

Yanbu,it's another example of everyday sexism.

The play sounds terrible, what was he thinking!

Flirty and Basher? So girls are sex objects who are just asking for it, and boys are violent thugs? Wow, those are great aspirations for 11 year olds to endorse in front of the whole school!

Was there a black kid called Sweep, and a gay kid called Faggot? That is worse than I thought from your first description.

but it was a play not real life, and Y6 do know the difference!

Really? Mumsnet evidently didn't know the difference. Have you seen the section of The Mumsnet Rules entitled "Ignore unsolicited parenting advice from old biddies on buses"?

In fairness to MNHQ, they have agreed to change this if it is ever reprinted.

And what kickass just said.

To quote from older American legal standards, this production seems to be completely devoid of any "redeeming social value" and in fact is harmful in its sexism.

They have an ISI inspection next week so it will be interesting to see what the inspectors make of it.