Is there a non homophobic definition of the word bent that me & Ds may be unaware of before I complain to school?

[Balletgirlmum]

Not very happy. Having various problems at school. Ds displays clear traits of asd but not being given reasonable adjustments. Also bullying happening.

Today in PE he was straitening the long jump measuring tape. Teacher asked what hecwas doing.

I'm straitening the tape cause it's bent.

Teacher replied - the only bent thing here is you.

Ds is not gay (he's only 12) but we have several family friends who are & older dd has lots of classmates at another schools who identify as lgbt.

AIBU to think that this isn't on?

Inappropriate of the teacher - saying somebody is 'bent,' in any context, is never meant as a compliment.
I would handle it as a phone call. Try to keep calm, tell them what was said and ask what was meant by it. I wouldn't think it would happen again after that, but if it does ask for a meeting with the Head of Year / Key Stage.
I am a secondary school teacher.

Unpleasant and cowardly? Well, excuse me for having a life! I've had a very busy day dancing the fandango with Justine Greening, and have only just sat down with a cup of tea and Mumsnet.

I'm not really sure what or how to explain, as I think our exchange is pretty easy to understand. But in a nutshell, here it is: it's been a long thread with many posters minimising homophobia, urging OP not to take action on behalf of her child, and bristling with outrage that anyone dare suggest that a teacher could behave inappropriately. Then you pop up at the end and suggest that this thread is motivated by and about teacher-bashing, while completely ignoring how this kid was treated and how that is now being used to bully him further.

You can now tell me that you said nothing of the kind and start demanding that I prove that your words have the exact and literal meaning I have ascribed to them. And I will feel that that is rather akin to insisting that this teacher MUST have been referring to the child's doubled-over posture.

You can now tell me that you said nothing of the kind

That's correct. I really didn't say anything of the kind. And, yes, I do expect - entirely reasonably I think - that you show how you ascribed those very specific views to me. As far as I can see you have simply decided you can read my mind.

casual What was the intention of your one and only substantive post?

It added nothing to the actual point raised- namely what had the teacher intended by his remark. I don't agree with the somewhat fanciful interpretations some posters were giving as to what it might mean, but they were at least pertinent to the debate.

My objection is the way this thread became a way - unintentionally perhaps - for many posters to denigrate teachers and the work they do. This happens a lot on Mumsnet.

For the record, if that matters, I consider the teacher in this case to be completely at fault. Any benign interpretation of his remarks is utterly fanciful. His parents should be encouraged to complain and the teacher deserves censure - in my view a formal written warning recorded in his staff record would be appropriate. I was a teacher for 40 years and fought against homophobia long before that term existed, often to my own personal and professional disadvantage.

I'm a solicitor. We come in for a fair bit of criticism too on MN

I suppose on a thread bashing solicitors I could say

"what a pity this thread is drawing to a close. There must be a few more posters who want to share their personal experiences of utterly shit, incompetent, arrogant and bent solicitors"

Or I could say (assuming the complaint was justified)

"You are right to complain. Your solicitor's conduct fell well below the standards I and our professional regulators expect of our profession"

Wot Lass said.

I'm glad you have acknowledged - by very clear implication - that this is a teacher-bashing thread. I'm entitled to object strongly to that - if you want to ignore solicitor-bashing that's up to you.

Also, I have said, unequivocally, that I deplore this teacher's conduct. You asked for that clarification and having given it are now discounting it as something I should have said all along.

I didn't acknowledge this was a teacher bashing thread. You think it is. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I was trying to view it from your starting point.

You asked for that clarification and having given it are now discounting it as something I should have said all along

I am discounting it because you should have said it in the first place. Clear and unambiguous communication is vital in teaching and the law. Your first post, given the need for your explanation, was neither.

I would have said, if I thought my profession were being unjustly attacked in general.

"You are right to complain. Your solicitor's conduct fell well below the standards I and our professional regulators expect of our profession. However the vast majority of us take our responsibilities very seriously. Please do not tar us all because of the acts of a few rotten apples"^

What utterly dishonest, condescending and nonsensical answers.

You are free to think my posts are condescending and nonsensical.

You are not free to say they are dishonest. In saying that you are implying I am (a) lying about how I interpreted your post and (b) about how I would seek to defend my own profession. I am not lying about either and I find your suggestion I am extremely offensive.

Whether or not my answers are nonsensical it does not alter the fact several posters , including me, simply did not take from your post what you apparently meant it to say.

It was only when pressed for an explanation that you chose to comment on this individual teacher's behaviour.

You did acknowledge - by completely unambiguous implication - that this is a teacher-bashing thread. I do not believe your subsequent retraction.

As for (b) I have made it crystal clear that how you respond to solicitor-bashing is entirely your own affair.

Finally, the claim that I was "pressed" for an answer is completely false. I was asked once for an explanation. By you. And, as we have established, you deemed it inadmissible in any case on the grounds that I didn't give it earlier.

I did not acknowledge the thread was teacher bashing. If you have misinterpreted it , then my post was unclear and poorly worded. You clearly think it was teacher bashing but that is not what I took from it.

If you skim back you will see you were demanding posters clarify their interpretation of your post. You ignored any possibility of different interpretations.

I was and still am puzzled why you posted in the way you did. It was possible to defend teachers in general without adopting such an aggressive and dismissive attitude and without ignoring ,as you did, the real point of the thread- namely unacceptable behaviour by one teacher.

Acasualobserver- it was not a teacher bashing thread. It was mostly a thread of bizarre support for an individual teacher in the face of overwhelming evidence that he behaved hugely unprofessionally.

It's not teacher bashing, it's "bashing" (criticising) the unprofessional behaviour of one teacher

If I, as a TA overheard this, I'd report it.

If you skim back you will see you were demanding posters clarify their interpretation of your post. You ignored any possibility of different interpretations.

No, that is incorrect. I was ascribed some very specific views by two pps, views that I do not, in fact, hold. I might have had to accept their interpretation of my original post if they had been willing, or able, to show how my words could mean what they said they meant. They declined to do that or, indeed, ask for any clarification. You then asked for an explanation of my original post; it was given and, as you will remember, immediately discounted.

I'm sorry you find me dismissive and aggressive.

Ouch! My 'homophobic' quip was clearly completely ironic as I've been completely slating the homophobia on here as anyone following the conversation can see!

Spookyrachel - you know it was ironic right?

Do we need a sarcastic face?

Although actually it's fucking great to have proof positive from MN that, here at least, 'bent' is homophobic. I assume no-one thought I was suggesting that rachel and Tara were leaning over horizontally at Pride on Saturday? Or indulging in dodgy dealings?

@MypocketsarelikeNarnia

Ouch! My 'homophobic' quip was clearly completely ironic as I've been completely slating the homophobia on here as anyone following the conversation can see!

Spookyrachel - you know it was ironic right?

Do we need a sarcastic face?

Possibly - at the moment, we are dealing with a fair amount of pretty grim posts on all fronts - and we're pretty busy, so we have lost our sense of humour a bit tbh.

MypocketsarelikeNarnia

I didn't think there was any doubt your comment was meant to be ironic.

They declined to do that or, indeed, ask for any clarification

Really. I thought I was quite clear. I've also suggested you rephrase your point in light of this apparent misunderstanding not once, but twice.

Funny how you're all over any "implication" in Lass's post, but you decline to take responsibility for your own implications.

Aw thanks Lassi and Olivia.

I would fucking hate for anyone to think I was a homophobe. They are cunts.

That said I think I need to remember that when you can't hear my sparkling delivery and see my warm inclusive body language I might not be as dryly hilarious as I am in the flesh. And apologies to anyone who thought I meant it.

Sorry you're having a shit week Olivia. We all think you're fab.

I thought you were being ironic too, pockets.