Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to be outraged by Nativity casting as 'Innkeeper's wife'!!!

1000 replies

PIPERHELLO · 15/11/2019 09:26

Daughter (6) has been cast as 'someone's wife' in the Nativity play at school. 'Innkeeper's wife' to be precise.

Err...hello!?

This is fucking not OK! In 2019, to be identified as 'someone's wife'.

Normally I am pretty relaxed about all things school, and I certainly feel sorry for he teachers' workloads, but come on people!? This is 2019 - no woman should be identified by her relationship to a man!? SURELY!

Itching to call them out on this. Itching!

OP posts:
Anotherlongdrive · 16/11/2019 10:02

But then it starts to sound like you’re mocking a whole rake of marginalised individuals in the process. Though no doubt you think you’re smart and funny.

You did. You said my post was starting rundown the route of mocking marginalised individuals.

Language is important? But yours isnt?

lilgreen · 16/11/2019 10:09

Beware the professional mumsnetters. Only their opinion counts and those that don’t agree are bigots, misogynistic transphobic etc You don’t meet these people in real life as they no doubt don’t have one.

Bodyposiftw · 16/11/2019 10:10

Flowery I don't think people feel threatened by a change. They are just surprised that someone feels so threatened by a non-change. You really seem convinced that everyone on the thread is completely opposed to the IK's wive being given a name. That's not the case at all. They just think it's a non- issue that she hasn't got a name.

BertrandRussell · 16/11/2019 10:11

“ How am I completely wrong in thinking that on the contrary , keeping the " innkeeper's wife" and pointing out to children that this wouldn't be acceptable now is actually a perfectly valid way to bring up the topic of casual sexism?”
It is a perfectly valid way to bring up the topic of casual sexism of course. But why go to all that trouble - which, as this thread clearly illustrates- many people won’t bother with and which will add something else for teachers to do, and might be quite difficult to get across to 5 year olds when a very simple 5 second bit of editing will make it unnecessary? I suppose my question would be why would it be better to leave it in?

Obviously your answer holds for the classics- lots of interesting and surprising discussions to be had on the subject about books and TV and so on. But this is a primary school play, probably not attributed and almost certainly not of any particular literary merit and even if it was, it won’t be changed at all by adding a name. As I suggested “Reuben and Naomi- the innkeepers” Why would it be wrong to do that?

ElfAndSafetyBored · 16/11/2019 10:12

It is every day sexism.

It does have a slow long term effect.

It should be changed to just Inn keeper - for which you could have a boy and/or a girl in role

It’s like the football teams; there is often the school football team and the school girls football team. Surely now time to talk about the school boys football team and the school girls football team. Give them equal weight.

I feel sorry for any daughters of the ‘get over yourself’ brigade. They will be on the end of low expectations (either their own or others) throughout their lives.

I don’t have a daughter but if I did I’d alert her to this sort of bullshit. And I’m bringing up my son to be aware of it.

BertrandRussell · 16/11/2019 10:13

“ You did. You said my post was starting rundown the route of mocking marginalised individuals.”

I didn’t. That was another poster.

ElfAndSafetyBored · 16/11/2019 10:15

@BertrandRussell because if you call out all of the small stuff, it snowballs and we might see actual change eventually.

If you ignore the small stuff, nothing will ever change.

FOJeremy · 16/11/2019 10:15

Feminism gone even madder

ElfAndSafetyBored · 16/11/2019 10:17

@BertrandRussell I agree with you on ‘Reuben and Naomi - Innkeepers’.

It’s hardly giving teachers extra work is it, to change a character title 😀

Bodyposiftw · 16/11/2019 10:17

I don't think it would be wrong at all. It's just that I don't think it is wrong to leave it as it is and I don't get outraged.
FWIW my husband and myself are always automatically challenging these things. I am hoping it is also second nature to most teachers, with them being educators. I am a teacher too, although not primary.
Reading Mr Noisy to DS4, I got annoyed as a man being a butcher and a woman being the baker's wife, even though she was the one serving Mr Noisy. So I said so to my child.
But the book won't change for me and it is I suppose a reminder of how unfair things were not that long ago. And yes they continue to be unfair.
It is an interesting discussion though.

flowery · 16/11/2019 10:18

”I see your point of view but I will repeat myself here, which won't go down well with Flowery.” Confused

”Genuine question here, do you actually think that casting the child as Britney/Lizzie/Naomi will have more of an impact in fighting casual sexism?“ No I don’t “actually think” that. I never said that. I think cast a girl as the Innkeeper, as I’ve said several times.

”How am I completely wrong in thinking that on the contrary , keeping the " innkeeper's wife" and pointing out to children that this wouldn't be acceptable now is actually a perfectly valid way to bring up the topic of casual sexism?”

You’re not completely wrong. It’s just far less likely to happen/be effective, and isn’t the reason most people on this thread think it shouldn’t be changed, other than you.

”Although this question is more for Flowery who is the vocal one about this suggestion.” Confused

”No one necessarily has the answer, but I am genuinely asking, which of the two ( name vs IK wife with the issue pointed out) is the most effective way to address casual sexism.”

As I’ve said, several times, the most effective way is to cast a girl as the Innkeeper.

The OP has already agreed to have a word with DD which is great.

”Flowery you seem convinced that teachers won't point out the issue. What makes you so sure about this? Surely at least some of them will!”

Where are you getting that from? Most of the teachers I know and have worked with would absolutely see this type of thing as an opportunity to undermine stereotypes and not automatically stick with whatever has been done before. But there are at least a couple of teachers on this thread who clearly wouldn’t, and seems like the OP’s DD’s teacher is also on that list. I’ve no idea why you think I think most teachers wouldn’t. I’m very clearly talking about ones who wouldn’t, not assuming none will.

Good grief.

Bodyposiftw · 16/11/2019 10:20

And yes... we are none the wiser! Which of the two has a bigger impact? Hard to say indeed.

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz · 16/11/2019 10:21

Bertrand awesome post

flowery · 16/11/2019 10:23

” Flowery I don't think people feel threatened by a change. They are just surprised that someone feels so threatened by a non-change. You really seem convinced that everyone on the thread is completely opposed to the IK's wive being given a name. That's not the case at all. They just think it's a non- issue that she hasn't got a name.”

There are plenty of people clutching pearls about historical accuracy. But yes you’re right, some are just completely blind as to the negative impact of apathy and laziness in challenging everyday stereotypes. Sad.

All women and girls are “threatened” by non-change of these little stereotypes permeating through everyday life and into the minds of our children. The little things sink in and matter.

lilgreen · 16/11/2019 10:24

In my year1/2 class we had a female innkeeper last year and an innkeeper’s husband. Neither were given a name.
I think the whole issue of nativity plays is questionable so to pick out this tiny aspect and get outraged seems laughable to me. If you were suggesting we don’t have the play in the first place, I could see your point but pick your battles!

flowery · 16/11/2019 10:25

”And yes... we are none the wiser!”

About what?

Bodyposiftw · 16/11/2019 10:28

Flowery fair enough. Just reread your snarky comment about teachers all over the land not deliberately trying to use this as a learning opportunity.... although I still think that comment doesn't show a great faith in teachers, it is true that it doesn't mean that you think all teachers will ignore the issue.
And although I don't expect you to reread the whole thread, I am actually not the only one seeing the learning opportunity here.
True, we are a minority.
Anyway, thank you for answering my questions.
Thank you for your answers too BertrandRussell

BertrandRussell · 16/11/2019 10:31

“ I don't think it would be wrong at all. It's just that I don't think it is wrong to leave it as it is and I don't get outraged.”
I don’t get outraged either. I just don’t understand why “Oh yes, pass me a pen and I’ll change that”isn’t how everybody would respond. And apart from the OP who was distinctly over the top, the only people “getting worked up” swearing and throwing insults are some of the pro Innkeeper’s wife team! Which is baffling. Why would you defend it so strongly?

Devonishome1 · 16/11/2019 10:33

That’s the way it was back then you can’t change history.

flowery · 16/11/2019 10:34

Oh good lord, I have not been “snarky” about teachers “all over the land”.

I think the learning opportunity approach is good but sadly unrealistic, and less effective than just casting a girl as the Innkeeper in the first place. Most effective of all, of course, would be to do both.

As I said, most teachers I know are not the kind to roll their eyes and continue to facilitate stereotypes. But as this thread shows, some are.

flowery · 16/11/2019 10:35

” That’s the way it was back then you can’t change history.”

EBearhug · 16/11/2019 10:38

That’s the way it was back then you can’t change history.

But you can change which bits you choose to report and how. History is all about the present.

BertrandRussell · 16/11/2019 10:42

I certainly think there’s a useful learning opportunity with, say, Dear Zoo with reception kids. Lovely book, but all the animals are boys- why do you think that is? Or loads or other classic picture books if they use them. I just think expecting teachers to take on board the micro sexism of a character in the Nativity Play while also stopping the shepherds tripping up the donkey with their crooks is a bit much when it could be sorted by 2 seconds with a pencil....

Don’t know whether Dear Zoo is still a thing, by the way. Someone else mentioned it and it was a favourite in this house....

lottiegarbanzo · 16/11/2019 10:43

I am enjoying the 'authentic historic re-enactment' naivity play concept. let's not forget the fleas and lice, in their clothes and the stable. More lice! Real donkey poo!

TARSCOUT · 16/11/2019 10:44

Can't be bothered reading past first page, this stupidity is what makes a mockery of equality. How old is this fable/story/truth? Just take your child out the play and let everyone else enjoy it.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.