Non-binary teacher?

[Thompson198]

Name change.
I’ve got a 5 year old daughter due to go into year 2 in September. We’ve just been told that the teacher for next year is a non-binary/‘non-gender-conforming’ man who wants to be referred to by ‘Mx’ (pronounced mix) and they/them pronouns.
Quite a few of the parents have already complained and started looking for other places at local schools because of this.
what do you think?
My daughter has SEN and is one of the youngest in her class, I worry how she’s going to be able to keep up with the pronouns and understand this without us having to teach her about gender ideology at her age. My husband is extremely against teaching her gender ideology, especially so young, I’m not the most positive about it either but don’t feel as strongly as him. He also doesn’t want her being at the school in September but they have been very supportive for her so far and I’m concerned it might not be the same elsewhere.
Thoughts? How would you feel if this was your child’s teacher?

That's a good question. The short answer I suppose, is that I view people who don't believe in vaccinations as harmful. As in, their decisions could potentially harm my child. So I teach that those beliefs can adversely affect others and I dearly hope that my children don't end up holding them in the future.

Flat earthers are a little more of a grey area for me because while I think they're utterly ridiculous, and I do laugh at them, I'm not sure they're harmful? So in that instance, I teach my children the science. I will perhaps share that I think they're a bit silly, but not particularly offensive or dangerous.

To me science is a fact. I don't disagree with the fact that people are born male or female. But I haven't yet been convinced (on this thread or otherwise) that allowing someone to be addressed as Mx or explaining that some people live differently is inherently dangerous.

Well, you get called brave and stunning and perhaps go on the radio and TV to complain about how marginalised you are, while getting your jollies annoying, inconveniencing and intimidating women and girls. What’s not to like?

It's inherently dangerous when they think that living as the opposite sex or non-binary means they can access the wrong single sex spaces.

And when they convince children, they can do the same.

Does she require people to refer to her as 'they/them'? I would have an issue with that, yes. I don't care what she looks like, how she dresses/presents or about her pronouns, though, as they're both gender neutral.

The new teacher of course has every right to feel more Martha than Arthur (although by my best reading of the term 'non-binary' I'd argue that he doesn't feel like either). That doesn't mean it's OK for the school to pre-announce how he requires people to refer to him.
As for his interest or otherwise in sexual relations, I don't know why you raise that/how it relates to this discussion.

Just for clarity, your daughter’s title is ‘Mx’ - that’s not a pronoun, nor is Doctor. Out of interest does she ask the kids to call her Doctor?

I’m intrigued - how does she dress ‘like a man’? Is the length of her hair and nail polish relevant here?

Im not sure what you mean by Arthur or Martha - everyone is definitely male or female even if they don’t conform to sex stereotypes like you say your DD doesn’t.

lot of NB people are not interested in sexual relations - I do wish teachers would keep their sex lives out of the classroom - we didn’t even know if our teachers were married in my day and we were all the better for it.

Which is another title based in reality.

Have you noticed here that you use the general 'trans'?

Female people with transgender identities are not considered to have the same risk of being a sexual predator as male people in the general population. As a group, female people with transgender identities are considered to be including the the general female population for looking at risk profile for safeguarding

See how this works? And how precise language is important?

There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case here.

This.

Whether they are trans or not is irrelevant.

What matters is what biological sex they are.

No, I know that. The conversation has moved on since then, and it was one of the things the OP's husband was potentially worried about. I agree, we don't know either way what this particular teacher will be like, but based on past experience...

Similar to the gains from becoming a teacher or scout leader or priest or TV entertainer or a husband (all of which are considerably harder to achieve than a change of gender id btw): a special status and a greatly increased access to the target group in a state of vulnerability.

But I haven't yet been convinced (on this thread or otherwise) that allowing someone to be addressed as Mx or explaining that some people live differently is inherently dangerous.

Fair enough. That act on its own is not inherently dangerous but it’s the doors it opens.

If you introduce the basic idea to children that some people are born in the wrong body and that an obviously male person is not actually male and must be treated differently to other men (even if it just starts with pronouns).

PPs on this thread have explained that this concept was introduced to their vulnerable kids and they have actually suffered harm as it sets them on a pathway that can quickly escalate to medication and parental estrangement. The trans activists are very cult-like in the way they promote parental estrangement- discussed in more detail on several FWR threads.

Sometimes I wonder if as adults we are so secure in knowing basic facts about the world that we can’t imagine how children feel in having those basic facts undermined and lied about.

They don't have to go to any effort at all. All they have to do is say they are a woman. It's easy! That's the advantage.

I'm very sorry about your daughter.

A man in the womens facilities - people will question.
A cross dressing man pretending to be a woman in womens faciities - people are afraid to question.
The culture has bred the perfect storm.

And there is evidence.

The evidence has been posted, in fact. It's just been brushed over by certain posters who would like us to believe transwomen are the most vulnerable.

This. Men gloss over this all the time when they defend each other. Bro code to the end, even when they pretend to be women.

I hope the school does have such a policy

In its April decision the Supreme Court was very clear that the protected status of nonbinary persons under the 2010 Equalities Act remains, even as the assignment of people to loos, changing spaces, etc reverts to a basis in sex only.

It would be illegal for the school to discriminate against a nonbinary job candidate (or anyone else with protected status) and proper to have a written policy on this.

Equally, of course, no one should preach ideology in the classroom. But I very much doubt that requesting the title ‘Mx’ would be considered by most reasonable people, or an employment tribunal, to rise to this level.

My late, beloved MIL used to have us doubled over in horrified laughter with her memories of how rageful people, particularly married middle aged women, used to get about the title ‘Ms’. Sone of the reaction here feels very similar

But that’s just one man. There are many instances of men who say they are non binary demanding to use women’s spaces for *reasons.

Sometimes they are allowed for no other reason than they say they are non binary.

This is the danger of gender ideology - it means what the trans activists say it means at any given time. So this particular man may not demand yo use women’s spaces but others do so teaching children about nb opens that for so to speak.

I thought non-binary had no legal status in the UK?

@BundleBoogie thank you for answering.
No my DD isnt a Dr yet and most of the time just answers to miss. Most children call her by her first name. She fully agrees with most of the Cass findings.
She is doing research and is not a teacher. She's asked me not to say what she does so I'll respect that.
Her appearance to me is neutral but she thinks its masculine vis a vis 'love island' dressing. Fwiw I wear jeans and a t-shirt when I'm not working so I don't see a lot of difference.
I mentioned sexuality in non binary people as my daughters nb friends are not interested and that appears across the board. Both uni and home friends she's known since 11. The last twenty years have ment putting labels on people. I had uncle who didn't marry but he certainly wasn't gay. My sil also. However my sil gets asked constantly.

They don’t have to go to any effort at all yet they regularly do, putting in the years to become priests, teachers, scout leaders, all the places where men have placed themselves to have access to children.
Let’s not ignore the lengths some men will go to get their rocks off.

Great post

I do hear you but I also take a lot of this with a pinch of salt. People will always use the most extreme examples they can think of to get their point across.

The reality is that statistically it's extremely unlikely that trans-activists will grab hold of children and convince them to get surgeries.

There are exceptions to every rule, of course. Terrible, tragic exceptions that I wouldn't wish on everyone. But we can't (or at least, I won't) go through life expecting the absolute most catastrophic outcome in every scenario. If I did that, I'd never let my children join clubs, go on playdays, go to school, be alone in a shop aisle for two minutes...

All this to say that I have my own opinions around biological sex and the rights of all manner of groups in society. I taught my own values to my children when they were young enough to need that guidance, but I will always respect their ability to think for themselves. What I won't allow is hate, intolerance, or willful ignorance in my home. For me, part of that is choosing to respect other people's choices even if I don't necessarily agree with them, with the usual caveat around danger etc.

The potential for that tolerance to lead somewhere catastrophic is, to me, minute. Frankly, I just do not believe that people are salivating over mutilating the genitals of impressionable children, or that a man will have massive, life-altering surgeries just so he can perv on women in the bathroom. Just like I don't believe that every man becomes a priest/swim coach/scout leader so he can molest children.

We mitigate the risks for everything as best we can when we're parents.

I don't think using they/them is a risk.

It is a protected characteristic under the 2010 act. It is not a legal status. I think this pre-dates the Supreme Court decision, but I am not positive.

Some disabilities, eg ADHD, intrinsically hold the same dual characterisation.