Head teacher's 'not sexist' comment

[susannahmoodie]

We are in the process of visiting prospective schools for my 3yo ds.

When we went to one today the ht was discussing 'freeflow' in reception, saying (prefaced with 'this is not a sexist comment') that in theory the govt encourage it but in practice it would mean 'all the boys would be outside running around and all the girls would stay inside'....

In the school we visited last week we saw free flow working well with no apparent gender divide!

Is this a harmless comment or would it make you think twice about sending a ds there? I'd a good mind to give him a copy of my Cordelia Fine!!

Found a page about the case, it was the Viktor/ia one :

www.crossdreamers.com/2012/08/the-story-about-viktor-and-viktoria-and.html

He was abandoned by his parents although apparently the adoptive ones knew, but never told viktor, and tried to reinforce to him that he was in fact female.

Oh, that's awful.

I can well believe the doctors and parents were doing the best they knew how, but that just seems so cruel. Why would you push a child to act in a way they didn't like?

But I do find it annoying that article pushes it as 'inborn sex identity'. You cannot take a child whose experience of sex and gender is plainly highly unusual, and generalize from them. We should just stop pushing people into little boxes and expecting everyone to be happy with it.

How is it an unbiased case study? You know almost nothing about this situation or how the child was raised. We don't even know whether this child was female with a large clitoris or male with a small penis or intersex. For all we know, this could have been a girl who preferred to identify with male things. How would that affect your viewpoint? The parents' knowledge of the surgery and the sex ambiguity may well have affected their behaviour.

I raised the David Reimer case because it was horrific how that child was treated by Dr John Money, a pioneer of so called "gender identity". His unit was rightly closed down by his successor.

Well, it could be 'unbiased' if the person doing the study had no great interest in the outcome, but that's it.

You couldn't use a child who's had genital surgery to make conclusions about gender identity in the general population - you'd have to exclude that child from a wider survery (or include lots of similar children, I guess, alongside your main study?). But I think people often write these things up in particular ways in the media.

Not quite the same thing, but I remember a while back there was a study into male/female preferences for various objects that came out say 'uh, well, y'know ... interesting ... there's this complex situation and that one, and we were really fascinated by the other thing, and we couldn't exclude x and y ...' and the media headlines were 'OMG SCIENCE PROVES MEN ARE FROM MARS!'

Cross post.

Agree with LRD about this case seeming cruel.

it was important to strengthen "Viktoria's" identity as a girl. Because of this they raised him as a girl.

What does this mean? I'm assuming they raised him according to strict gender roles. How does this fit with your suggestion to the OP that gender roles will help children with gender dysphoria fit in?

The David Reimer case is often misreported. David was almost 2 years old when he was switched to being a girl rather than a boy. He had a twin brother who continued to be treated as a boy while David was suddenly forced to conform to gender stereotypes usually applied to girls. Not only that, but John Money made the children act out sexual role play where the twin brother played the man and David played the woman. It was an awful piece of child abuse.

Well, not that it makes it better, but it was a long time ago. The parents were probably told that their child would be happier if s/he was constantly pushed to be girly.

Even longer ago, cliterodectomy was recommended for toddler girls who touched themselves 'inappropriately' and for young women who were seen as sexually immoral.

It is all part of the same idea, that there must be rigidly defined differences between men and women, and that individuals' bodies are less important than that.

(Btw, I meant the parents in the second case. The David Reimer case is just beyond understanding. Sick and twisted.)

LRD I know you probably don't want to get into this here but I see strong parallels with medical intervention on the rise in gender dysphoric children, both in the purpose (children fitting in) and in the medicalisation of treatment (puberty blockers etc). I consider that to be a wave of child abuse that is just starting. In 20 years I think we will be horrified that this was allowed to happen.

I don't know enough about it.

I tell you what, though - there is something very wrong if someone who is an adult can be required to jump through hoops by doctors who insist they're not 'gender conformist' enough to deserve surgery, while someone who is a child can be prescribed puberty blockers.

What I do worry about is the number of children who just feel they want to do the 'boy' things (or the 'girl' things) and made to feel they're wrong at age 4. The more I'm thinking about what that headmaster said, the more fed up I am someone like that is teaching.

I also worry about that. I know a little boy who said he wanted to be a woman when he grew up. Turns out (months later) it was because men go out to work and women don't. (Lovely mum, runs her business from home, not traditionalist at all but the dad works very long hours.)

Someone like that should not be teaching, let alone running the school. It's a shame there weren't more women in the teaching profession so that more of them could be head teachers. Oh wait...

It can work the other way, too. A bloke I used to know was bullied by his (arsehole) dad and constantly told he was a 'girly-boy', and he ended up acting hyper-macho. He was on a hair trigger. I've no idea what happened to him because we lost touch, but it was horrible.

And yeah to 'oh wait' with women teachers/headteachers.

How is it an unbiased case study? You know almost nothing about this situation or how the child was raised. We don't even know whether this child was female with a large clitoris or male with a small penis or intersex. For all we know, this could have been a girl who preferred to identify with male things. How would that affect your viewpoint? The parents' knowledge of the surgery and the sex ambiguity may well have affected their behaviour.

I didn't say it was unbiased, I said it was more unbiased. The documentary said intersex, however the article I linked to states xy chromosomes and small penis, so maybe that was disingenuous. Lots of girls identify with/prefer "male" things but very few become depressed and suicidal because they want to actually be male, or did you mean something more specific? I'm quite happy to adjust my views to suit the evidence, although I was unable to find a rebuttal to hjernevask and the professional "gender researchers" on the programme were staggeringly inept when offered the chance of a rebuttal themselves, only resorting to cheap smear tactics.

Sure I don't know the day by day account of the child's life but are you suggesting such cases are ignored because it isn't possible to have a Truman show style account of the subjects life? The general thrust of the story seems fairly detrimental to the idea that gender is 100% learned, and its not an isolated case.

I don't think it's disingenous at all. We live in a society that treats characteristics like that as if they cannot possibly be accepted within a rigid gender norm. It's really damaging.

And actually, lots of girls (or 'girls' might be better), do become depressed and suicidal - either because they want to be male, or because they are desperately unhappy being female (though these two things are sometimes hard to untangle). Have you not seen stats on depression amongst people who identify as the opposite sex to what they were born with? They are very high. As indeed are stats on teenage lesbians, etc.

Putting people into narrow categories based on a rigid binary of 'male' versus 'female is a very cruel thing to do. It suits very few people perfectly, and makes many horribly unhappy.

The general thrust of that story isn't remotely detrimental to the idea that gender is 100% learned. How could it be?

Have you not seen stats on depression amongst people who identify as the opposite sex to what they were born with? They are very high. As indeed are stats on teenage lesbians, etc.

Ah, OK sorry to be tedious and pedantic about wording, but I take identify "with" and identify "as" to be significantly different, and the former is what was used. Perhaps flora can elaborate which interpretation is correct?

The general thrust of that story isn't remotely detrimental to the idea that gender is 100% learned. How could it be?

If gender is learned does it not stand to reason that a child unaware of their sex at birth could easily be reassigned to the other sex and simply learn their place as within that gender? Instances like this contradict that assertion.

My brother's best friend was a quiet boy who was bookish. His father wanted him to do traditional boys things like riding his bike and playing football. I was only a child, but I was aware of the pain this boy was in as his father tried to force him to be someone he wasn't. We need to accept children and adults in all their variety.

And I would be worried about this Headmaster as well.

Incidentally, most intersex adults are against genital surgery on intersex children. It can lead to lifelong pain and/or decreased sexual function. It should be left for an intersex adult or at least teenager, to decide whether they want surgery on their bodies or not.

Ah, I've very sorry, I didn't realize there was a difference, so didn't attach significance to the change I made.

I mean, people really do get depressed and horribly upset when they are told 'society sees you as [tiny rigid identity], therefore, you must act like this or you are abnormal'. It's a shitty thing to do to someone, and beyond shitty when we're talking about 4 year olds running around, or about a baby's nether regions.

On the second point - no, logically, this doesn't follow. If gender is learned (and bear in mind, it is quite possible that it's learned for some and innate for others?), then we would need to study a large group of children, excluding those who were unusual because their parents/carers rigidly reinforced a gender norm they knew to be different from the child's birth gender.

It would be very surprising if a child didn't pick up on the fact they were being pushed into a specific gender role. In fact, if adoptive parents had been told this child was born female and corrected to male (unlikely given medical practice), I think it is very likely s/he would have picked up on exactly the same pressures and identified as female.

Why would you think I would elaborate on which interpretation is correct?

If gender is learned does it not stand to reason that a child unaware of their sex at birth could easily be reassigned to the other sex and simply learn their place as within that gender? Instances like this contradict that assertion.

We don't know whether this would be possible or not and it would be highly unethical to carry out as an experiment. Children should not be pushed into gender roles but should be free to be themselves.

I don't agree instances like this contradict this assertion. It's simply one very unusual situation. What evidence would you like to see to adjust your views? It seems you have formed your views without any good evidence so it seems somewhat inconsistent to require evidence to change them.

I agree with the others that the headteacher's reinforcing of gender stereotypes for four year olds is outrageously stupid.

I'm also seeing something about entitlement to shared space--like at an early age, the boys are encouraged to tear about and take up space with their play, whilst the girls are encouraged to stay out of the way.

Gender is learned. But no a child could not easily be assigned to another sex. Everyone round about that child would know the real sex of that child, and it would affect how they treat them.

There have been experiments were people are given a baby to hold, and told it is a girl or a boy - even though it isnt. People treat a baby they think is a girl, very different from how they treat a baby who they think is a boy.

robertswan gender non-conforming children of either sex must struggle against how they are treated by adults from birth:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMldVZOxW64

I see your Viktor/ia case an raise you Joel/lea.

www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/news/latest-news/story-of-battle-to-change-birth-certificate-to-be-told-in-book-1-565834

I mean, people really do get depressed and horribly upset when they are told 'society sees you as [tiny rigid identity], therefore, you must act like this or you are abnormal'.

Absoloutly. Did anyone see the series where they opened an Edwardian house and had the family live as Edwardians with others living as servants?

The wife's sister was beholden to her BIL and became depressed, they took her out of the series but said in Edwardian times it was not unusual for women in her situation to have a 'malady' and be sent away for months to recuperate.

Back in present day she was a Dr driving a sports car.

Next time I see somebody on here say that transgender issues are not being used to stop women discussing the sexism of gender roles I will link to this thread. The OP never mentioned transgender issues. She was talking about the harmful effect of gender stereotyping on young children. She got five responses before somebody starting implying that not gender stereotyping was bad because, 'but trans people.'

OP, what the head said is obviously not great if there is any chance at all your child might not want to fit strictly into typical boy or girl behavior (which in my experience, most kids don't if in a school that doesn't encourage it). It is bad for girls' esteem and for boys' academic achievement and for everyone's physical safety as they get older. I think you are right to pick another school.

That school would be at the bottom of my list OP.

Yes does seem like my original question has been hijacked somewhat, although an interesting debate has been had!!

I'm definitely reconsidering the school and where we will put it on our list of choices!