Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that banning teachers from being members of the BNP is outrageous!

551 replies

londonone · 23/06/2009 10:19

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8112747.stm

Now I abhor the BNP and their policies however they are a LEGAL political party and as a teacher I would find it appalling that my freedom to join legal political parties was being curtailed.

If the establishment believe the BNP to be that abhorrent then they should make them illegal. If a teacher acts in a racist, sexist, homophobic way AT WORK, then discipline them on that basis.

If BNP membership is to be banned then what about the SWP, some would say they are as extreme.

OP posts:
clemette · 24/06/2009 16:50

Yes, how dare women make conscious decisions to adopt a certain lifestyle. It would definitely be less misogynistic to force them to conform to your own individual notion of empowerment. Or maybe not.

Do you really, truly believe that all Muslim women who choose to cover their heads/bodies/both do so because they are disenfranchised and oppressed? Perhaps our experiences are very different. Many of the Muslim girls I teach are fiercly independent, politically active and believe in modesty.

How far does your argument go? Should we not accomodate any cultural difference in schools?

clemette · 24/06/2009 16:53

Skidoodle I answered you directly at 13:46 and 14:42.

moffat · 24/06/2009 16:55

I have read through this thread and have to say clemette I do applaud your attempts to bring some light into all the dark. I think your pupils are very lucky to have you as a teacher .

clemette · 24/06/2009 16:57
Blush
pingping · 24/06/2009 17:13

TBPA and The BNP are completely different from each other. The BNP is a political party which could (hopefully never) run this whole country.... TBPA are a group to support Black officers as your find even in 2009 there is still alot of racism in the Forces..... So the BNP are abusing and using TBPA to find a way around to be racist thugs...

As for the Muslim argument going on yes your find that alot of Western Muslim women choose to dress that way.... Buts it not as clear cut as that in countries such as Saudi etc its something that they must wear from when they first start there period certain body parts must be covered in the presence of any men that are not imitate family. Even though alot of Women are independent you will find women of Muslim countries do not all feel that independence.

Again read the book Princess it will open your eyes to alot of hidden horrific things

Qally · 24/06/2009 17:45

"Many of the Muslim girls I teach are fiercly independent, politically active and believe in modesty. "

A friend at uni did her dissertation on a feminist approach to Islamic law. She wasn't exactly a poster girl for oppressed womanhood, I have to say - in fact she was at one point elected women's officer for the student union. She appeared to find her feminism and her religion completey compatible; the sexist approach to Islam, she said, was sociological/cultural and independent of religion.

It's interesting - Mum teaches at Woodbrooke, the Quaker college that's affiliated to Birmingham University. They do a lot of conflict resolution workshops for people from war zones all over the world. She says that challenging your own cultural assumptions is often the hardest part - a Somali woman genuinely couldn't get her head around the concept that she needed to ask/tell someone when leaving her little boy in the building alone. She was, "but - he isn't alone. There are dozens of adults here." The notion that she was individually responsible for his care was totally alien to her. And yes, in other ways she might be oppressed - violent parts of the world are rarely kind to women - but still, quite a freedom, to grow up in a society where it's everyone's job to look after children, men and women, not solely up to the mother.

Skidoodle - the point has already, repeatedly, been made that you are asking parents of children whose lives might be at risk - never mind their civil liberties - if the BNP gained power, to accept someone who is actively funding that party being in sole charge of their kids' education and development for many hours a week - and to pay for the privilege, via their taxes. Now, of course you have a legitimate argument when saying that freedom of speech, belief and political activity are such central tenets that they cannot be overridden. I have and I do acknowledge that. But the point is that the BNP would and do cynically use and abuse the democratic process. They'll say and do whatever they think will work, to gain power. You're not dealing with a conventional political party, here. This bullshit moral indignation about how Islam treats women, from a party where an elected official says women like being raped - seriously, you can't fall for that? I agree that it's economic issues behind their increased support; nationalism always gains ground when economies are in trouble. But I also do not want my taxes to pay for my son to be taught by someone who's actively funding a party that at best wants him and my DH out of the country, and at worst wants them dead. Why should a teacher's freedom to fund racism trump my son's right to be tsught by a person who doesn't? THAT is the point - you're talking about competing rights and freedoms, here, not a no-brainer incursion into teacher's freedoms. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'll back my son's every time.

There's no curtain, no, because our pool has a sheet of wall to ceiling glass fronting on to a main road, a skate park, and a green. Horse > bolted. But I have to say, I do love swimming without the crap, and the skater boys peering in is still crap. My boobs were 32E before bf, and are currently 32F. Perve magnets.

We also had women only pilates and yoga at college. It was to help counter an awful lot of body issues women had there - very high levels of eating disorders. Some of the guys raised it at the union and tried to argue, until the (Muslim) women's officer produced the stats showing that 5/6 of the sports funding went on men-only teams for football, rugby, cricket, rowing... that was funny.

Qally · 24/06/2009 17:50

"Many of the Muslim girls I teach are fiercly independent, politically active and believe in modesty. "

A friend at uni did her dissertation on a feminist approach to Islamic law. She wasn't exactly a poster girl for oppressed womanhood, I have to say - in fact she was at one point elected women's officer for the student union. She appeared to find her feminism and her religion completey compatible; the sexist approach to Islam, she said, was sociological/cultural and independent of religion.

It's interesting - Mum teaches at Woodbrooke, the Quaker college that's affiliated to Birmingham University. They do a lot of conflict resolution workshops for people from war zones all over the world. She says that challenging your own cultural assumptions is often the hardest part - a Somali woman genuinely couldn't get her head around the concept that she needed to ask/tell someone when leaving her little boy in the building alone. She was, "but - he isn't alone. There are dozens of adults here." The notion that she was individually responsible for his care was totally alien to her. And yes, in other ways she might be oppressed - violent parts of the world are rarely kind to women - but still, quite a freedom, to grow up in a society where it's everyone's job to look after children, men and women, not solely up to the mother.

Skidoodle - the point has already, repeatedly, been made that you are asking parents of children whose lives might be at risk - never mind their civil liberties - if the BNP gained power, to accept someone who is actively funding that party being in sole charge of their kids' education and development for many hours a week - and to pay for the privilege, via their taxes. Now, of course you have a legitimate argument when saying that freedom of speech, belief and political activity are such central tenets that they cannot be overridden. I have and I do acknowledge that. But the point is that the BNP would and do cynically use and abuse the democratic process. They'll say and do whatever they think will work, to gain power. You're not dealing with a conventional political party, here. This bullshit moral indignation about how Islam treats women, from a party where an elected official says women like being raped - seriously, you can't fall for that? I agree that it's economic issues behind their increased support; nationalism always gains ground when economies are in trouble. But I also do not want my taxes to pay for my son to be taught by someone who's actively funding a party that at best wants him and my DH out of the country, and at worst wants them dead. Why should a teacher's freedom to fund racism trump my son's right to be tsught by a person who doesn't? THAT is the point - you're talking about competing rights and freedoms, here, not a no-brainer incursion into teacher's freedoms. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'll back my son's every time.

There's no curtain, no, because our pool has a sheet of wall to ceiling glass fronting on to a main road, a skate park, and a green. Horse > bolted. But I have to say, I do love swimming without the crap, and the skater boys peering in is still crap. My boobs were 32E before bf, and are currently 32F. Perve magnets.

We also had women only pilates and yoga at college. It was to help counter an awful lot of body issues women had there - very high levels of eating disorders. Some of the guys raised it at the union and tried to argue, until the (Muslim) women's officer produced the stats showing that 5/6 of the sports funding went on men-only teams for football, rugby, cricket, rowing... that was funny.

Qally · 24/06/2009 18:00

"Many of the Muslim girls I teach are fiercly independent, politically active and believe in modesty. "

A friend at uni did her dissertation on a feminist approach to Islamic law. She wasn't exactly a poster girl for oppressed womanhood, I have to say - in fact she was at one point elected women's officer for the student union. She appeared to find her feminism and her religion completey compatible; the sexist approach to Islam, she said, was sociological/cultural and independent of religion.

It's interesting - Mum teaches at Woodbrooke, the Quaker college that's affiliated to Birmingham University. They do a lot of conflict resolution workshops for people from war zones all over the world. She says that challenging your own cultural assumptions is often the hardest part - a Somali woman genuinely couldn't get her head around the concept that she needed to ask/tell someone when leaving her little boy in the building alone. She was, "but - he isn't alone. There are dozens of adults here." The notion that she was individually responsible for his care was totally alien to her. And yes, in other ways she might be oppressed - violent parts of the world are rarely kind to women - but still, quite a freedom, to grow up in a society where it's everyone's job to look after children, men and women, not solely up to the mother.

Skidoodle - the point has already, repeatedly, been made that you are asking parents of children whose lives might be at risk - never mind their civil liberties - if the BNP gained power, to accept someone who is actively funding that party being in sole charge of their kids' education and development for many hours a week - and to pay for the privilege, via their taxes. Now, of course you have a legitimate argument when saying that freedom of speech, belief and political activity are such central tenets that they cannot be overridden. I have and I do acknowledge that. But the point is that the BNP would and do cynically use and abuse the democratic process. They'll say and do whatever they think will work, to gain power. You're not dealing with a conventional political party, here. This bullshit moral indignation about how Islam treats women, from a party where an elected official says women like being raped - seriously, you can't fall for that? I agree that it's economic issues behind their increased support; nationalism always gains ground when economies are in trouble. But I also do not want my taxes to pay for my son to be taught by someone who's actively funding a party that at best wants him and my DH out of the country, and at worst wants them dead. Why should a teacher's freedom to fund racism trump my son's right to be tsught by a person who doesn't? THAT is the point - you're talking about competing rights and freedoms, here, not a no-brainer incursion into teacher's freedoms. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'll back my son's every time.

There's no curtain, no, because our pool has a sheet of wall to ceiling glass fronting on to a main road, a skate park, and a green. Horse > bolted. But I have to say, I do love swimming without the crap, and the skater boys peering in is still crap. My boobs were 32E before bf, and are currently 32F. Perve magnets.

We also had women only pilates and yoga at college. It was to help counter an awful lot of body issues women had there - very high levels of eating disorders. Some of the guys raised it at the union and tried to argue, until the (Muslim) women's officer produced the stats showing that 5/6 of the sports funding went on men-only teams for football, rugby, cricket, rowing... that was funny.

Qally · 24/06/2009 18:00

"Many of the Muslim girls I teach are fiercly independent, politically active and believe in modesty. "

A friend at uni did her dissertation on a feminist approach to Islamic law. She wasn't exactly a poster girl for oppressed womanhood, I have to say - in fact she was at one point elected women's officer for the student union. She appeared to find her feminism and her religion completey compatible; the sexist approach to Islam, she said, was sociological/cultural and independent of religion.

It's interesting - Mum teaches at Woodbrooke, the Quaker college that's affiliated to Birmingham University. They do a lot of conflict resolution workshops for people from war zones all over the world. She says that challenging your own cultural assumptions is often the hardest part - a Somali woman genuinely couldn't get her head around the concept that she needed to ask/tell someone when leaving her little boy in the building alone. She was, "but - he isn't alone. There are dozens of adults here." The notion that she was individually responsible for his care was totally alien to her. And yes, in other ways she might be oppressed - violent parts of the world are rarely kind to women - but still, quite a freedom, to grow up in a society where it's everyone's job to look after children, men and women, not solely up to the mother.

Skidoodle - the point has already, repeatedly, been made that you are asking parents of children whose lives might be at risk - never mind their civil liberties - if the BNP gained power, to accept someone who is actively funding that party being in sole charge of their kids' education and development for many hours a week - and to pay for the privilege, via their taxes. Now, of course you have a legitimate argument when saying that freedom of speech, belief and political activity are such central tenets that they cannot be overridden. I have and I do acknowledge that. But the point is that the BNP would and do cynically use and abuse the democratic process. They'll say and do whatever they think will work, to gain power. You're not dealing with a conventional political party, here. This bullshit moral indignation about how Islam treats women, from a party where an elected official says women like being raped - seriously, you can't fall for that? I agree that it's economic issues behind their increased support; nationalism always gains ground when economies are in trouble. But I also do not want my taxes to pay for my son to be taught by someone who's actively funding a party that at best wants him and my DH out of the country, and at worst wants them dead. Why should a teacher's freedom to fund racism trump my son's right to be tsught by a person who doesn't? THAT is the point - you're talking about competing rights and freedoms, here, not a no-brainer incursion into teacher's freedoms. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I'll back my son's every time.

There's no curtain, no, because our pool has a sheet of wall to ceiling glass fronting on to a main road, a skate park, and a green. Horse > bolted. But I have to say, I do love swimming without the crap, and the skater boys peering in is still crap. My boobs were 32E before bf, and are currently 32F. Perve magnets.

We also had women only pilates and yoga at college. It was to help counter an awful lot of body issues women had there - very high levels of eating disorders. Some of the guys raised it at the union and tried to argue, until the (Muslim) women's officer produced the stats showing that 5/6 of the sports funding went on men-only teams for football, rugby, cricket, rowing... that was funny.

Qally · 24/06/2009 18:02

Crap, sorry. MN crashed and I was reloading the page. I was worried the post would be lost - seems, um, not.

skidoodle · 24/06/2009 18:45

clemette my concern is not for the women who choose to embrace the symbols of female oppression in their culture, whether that be burqas and hidden swimming or lap dancing and being a man's unpaid skivvy.

My concern is for those who do not choose them but have them forced upon them.

Are you really telling me that you think there are no women in the UK who have this modesty imposed upon them?

If you could convince me that ALL the women who lived in this way chose it freely then I would concede your point. But I'm pretty sure that', and while that is the case it is unsupportable to me that we are in any way accommodating women being coerced in ways that we wouldn't accept for non-Muslim women.

Did you reply to me today about the government telling public servants what their political affiliations could be? Apologies, I didn't see that. I will go back and have a look.

Qally

My specific worry with this is the precedent it sets of a particular kind of political interference by the government in the freedoms of public service workers. If they can do this with the BNP, while they are a legal party, then I believe a door is opened for them to start making other kinds of demands of what public servants can do and say and think.

Other posters have already implied that as public servants are paid by tax payers that they have to agree with government policies and that there is a conflict in support for "extreme" parties, and we all know where that could go.

Of course I don't buy any of the BNP's bullshit and I completely understand parents not wanting their children anywhere near these people. I wouldn't want any child of mine being taught by a BNP member, and I think I would withdraw them from school if something like this came to light about this teacher.

I prefer that if an organisation is to be proscribed it should be a general ban on the organisation.

I think a ban like this sets a dangerous precendent, possibly plays into the BNP's hands, and is ultimately impossible to meaningfully enforce as membership of the BNP is not public information.

I also think we are in danger of turning teaching from a job into some kind of enclosed order that must seek permission from central government before they do anything that might be seen to be against "the needs of the children". Given how easy it is for the needs of people who cannot speak for themselves to be manipulated for political ends I think potentially puts teachers in an invidious position, and I think it should be resisted.

moondog · 24/06/2009 19:03

'But the point is that the BNP would and do cynically use and abuse the democratic process'

Yes.That's the price you pay for having a democratic process.

Oh, and you think Muslim fundamentalists don't do this despite democracy having little place in the way they choose to live thier lives?

Qally · 24/06/2009 19:21

Okay, that I can completely respect. I don't agree with your conclusion, but I do, actually, share all your concerns, especially as "for the kiddies/animals/unborn" are handily docile groups when seeking to justify all sorts of unpalatable actions, and the "War on Terror" has been used to abandon a worrying array of civil liberties. "For the greater good" is a pretty useful figleaf for depriving people of their rights. As the saying goes, when they start talking honesty, I start counting the spoons. And yet... I still think in this case it's justified.

I don't think there is any easy answer to this one, because it's a moral and ethical minefield. Funnily enough I'm more on the fence when it comes to banning them altogether, because I recoil from depriving anyone of a vote in any direction they choose, no matter how appalling, or what is the point of democracy at all. I suppose it's the fact that teachers are shaping how children think, to an extent, and that a person who has signed up to treat all their pupils equally can't begin to reconcile that with BNP membership. It just seems incompatible with the interests of all of the children in their care, and the human rights they're charged with supporting. I do, though, agree that there's a dangerous potential for this to be the thin end of the wedge, and whilst I support a ban, I'd also support the ban wording also enshrining the rights of teachers to engage in any political activity that didn't fall foul of the HRA. That way they could take the government to the ECHR if any more suspect action was contemplated.

I would have to remove him from school, too. I just couldn't bear to think that a person who chose to pay to join a Holocaust-denying racist party was responsible for teaching my son. I'd always have felt that way, as you obviously do, but clearly it's far more personal now.

londonone · 24/06/2009 19:32

clemette - The catholic church is officially actively homophobic how does that fit in with your theory about those of faiths being OK as long as they don't join up to minority sects. Of course there will be many catholics who are not homophobic but turn a blind eye to the church's official stance.

By your rationale surely no catholic teacher could ever be trusted to teach a gay child.

OP posts:
skidoodle · 24/06/2009 19:39

Well I'm not sure that I fully agree with my conclusion either, but it's where I'm sitting at the moment.

I wonder if there is a solution in the HRA wording you suggest...

If the ban could be worded in such a way that it was simultaneously non-specific to the BNP but very limited in its scope, then I would be a great deal less uncomfortable with it.

I'm not really comfortable with an outright ban on the party, for the reasons you mention. I do think it might be preferable to these attempts to make it illegal by stealth.

Qally · 24/06/2009 19:40

londonone, the Catholic Church does not exist to be homophobic. You do not have to be homophobic to be a member of the Church. the BNP does exist in order to racially discriminate, and you do need to be racist to be in active membership. The cases are not analogous on that basis.

moondog, I've repeatedly stated that Islamic fundamentalism is responsible for vile abuses of women; I pointed out that one of the problems with the BNP's forced "repatriation" is that they would be sending educated Westernised women to countries under fundamentalist rule. How is that a feminist protection against it? In finding an apologia for the abuse of women in those societies you're reading what you hope to find and not what is there.

skidoodle · 24/06/2009 19:47

Sorry, I can't buy the "primary purpose" argument.

If a gardening organisation decided to start campaigning against rights for gay people I would expect keen gardeners who weren't homophobes to find somewhere else to talk about their petunias.

I accept that it is different, and more difficult, to leave a religion you've been brought up in, but the question is valid.

If teachers must not belong to organisations that actively pursue policies that are inimical to the HRA, what does that mean for Catholic teachers and schools?

I just can't see that it shouldn't have an impact.

londonone · 24/06/2009 19:49

Qally -

"londonone, the Catholic Church does not exist to be homophobic. You do not have to be homophobic to be a member of the Church. the BNP does exist in order to racially discriminate, and you do need to be racist to be in active membership. The cases are not analogous on that basis."

In your opinion. Where is your evidence of that? Of course you do not have to be homophobic to be Catholic but by signing up to the faith you are signing up to it's stances surely or are you saying that Catholics can pick and choose which aspects of stance/policy they follow but BNP members can't? It is a nonsense.

OP posts:
HerHonesty · 24/06/2009 19:58

different religions and their various sects choose to interpret whatever religious text or teachings they use in very different ways, as do the individuals who choose to follow the religion. The bible does not say thow shalt be homophobic. but some within the catholic church have chosen to interpret it this way.

the BNP is not a religion, it is a political party and by joining them you do sign up to some core beliefs, which you propose to the electorate as those which would guide you when you are in government.

londonone · 24/06/2009 20:04

And your point is HH? When you sign up to religion you are saying that is how you think people should live their life.

OP posts:
skidoodle · 24/06/2009 20:09

Some within the Catholic Church?

What sect do you think the Pope is in then?

HerHonesty · 24/06/2009 20:17

no. MOST people sign up for a religion to say "this is how i want to live MY life".

and yes, there are many people within the catholic church who are not homophobic, who believe in contraception, that priests should not have to enter into a vow of celibacy ... NO religion is one size fits all.

londonone · 24/06/2009 20:20

Yet all people in political parties all believe the same thing???? I don't think so.

If you think that religions are only concerned with their own flock as it were then I suggest you are rather misguided. Must mention it next time a JW shows up on my doorstep.

OP posts:
HerHonesty · 24/06/2009 20:23

i did say most, and i think you will find JW are a minority.

and yes, most political parties have a core understanding of what it means to be a conservative/labour party member etc. and the seek election on that basis.

skidoodle · 24/06/2009 20:25

There may well be people within the Catholic Church who believe those things (and there are, I know many of them. Hell, in many ways and on many days, I am one of them.) but their beliefs run counter to what the Catholic Church stands for and what it does.

It is not morally consistent to be a Catholic and claim that the teachings of the church and the subjects on which it campaigns are nothing to do with you.

And it's not just individual Catholic teachers we need to be worrying about, is it? The church itself runs schools, which the BNP does not. Surely if we are concerned about children not being taught hateful things that demean other people and treat them as less than human, we should be worried about sending them to schools run by an organisation that seeks to deny women access to certain medical treatments if they are pregnant?