Girls' school allows pupils to identify as boys

[IAmAmy]

Apologies if there's a thread on this or if this should be in an existing thread. I found out about this at a school near my own the other week: www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/19/st-pauls-girls-school-pupils-choose-gender-indentity

What do posters here think of this? I think it's quite a shame in a way, though I'd never want any pupil to feel uncomfortable. Going to a girls' school myself, I think they should be fighting against "gender" and conformity to what's expected from one or the other, this seems to be enforcing the idea certain traits mean someone should be a girl and others mean they're a boy (although I acknowledge my thinking may not be as developed as it should be on this).

Totally their business. They know much more about the pupils concerned than a bunch of people whose sole source of information is one newspaper report.

My thoughts on this are any pupil should be allowed to wear what they like (within uniform regulations). 'Sexed uniforms' should be (and i thought they were..) a thing of the past. names...whatever. My 'real' name and the name I go by are different so no reason why others shouldn't be, even if the 'sex' of the name differs.

Loos, changing areas and such remain separated by sex as they currently are. 'Gender' doesn't come into it in areas of life where we are separated by sex.

Easy enough, right?

Oh, no sexed areas in an all girls school. Doh :D

So yeah, let the kids be kids.

I went to that school and even then there were girls who dressed as boys, it just wasn't formally recognised. There's no uniform. One of the girls in my sister's year has since had gender reorientation surgery and is now fully a man.

The only problem here would surely be, if they started admitting male pupils who 'identified' as female.

BevGoldbergsSister: I have no idea whether the parents get any sex

If you mean do they get any say, again that is entirely their business and that of the school and the pupils concerned.

has since had gender reorientation surgery and is now fully a man.

Well no, they are a woman with a penis who self identifies as a man.

Odd that the head is talking about it to the Sunday Times if the school genuinely sees it as nobody else's business.

'Fully' I meant in the sense that any woman who has changed gender through surgery can ever be - ie has all the correct body parts.

It's St Paul's, they can do as they please and they'll STILL have every pushy parent in west London desperate to get their daughter in.

I think it sounds very sensible to be honest. For those who are struggling with dysphoria being able to present how they like will be a lifeline and for those who are hopping on the angsty bandwagon of being, like, SO misunderstood and totally woke, nothing will take the wind out of their sails faster than their school treating it as no big deal.

I think it sounds very sensible to be honest. For those who are struggling with dysphoria being able to present how they like will be a lifeline and for those who are hopping on the angsty bandwagon of being, like, SO misunderstood and totally woke, nothing will take the wind out of their sails faster than their school treating it as no big deal.

As long as they don't let any actual boys/transgirls into the school, I don't see a problem. But that's the question, is it? Do they really subscribe to the transnonsense, or do they just go along with what the pupils, who are actual girls and therefore actually qualify to be in that school, want?

For the girls it will be much easier to go back to normal / come to terms with being lesbians / whatever if they don't have to cope with the fact that they forfeited their place at this apparently very prestigious school for a lie and stupid fad.

So I think it is a good decision. IF the philosophy is actually that it is a school for children of the female sex, and gender identity has nothing to do with it.

Datun I concur entirely with that post.

Megatherium the newspaper report wasn't my original source, I found out about it as I know some pupils at that school.

NinonDeLanclos how does one "dress as a boy"? I thought part of the reason that school has no uniform is supposed to be to encourage freedom of expression and break away from the notion one can dress "as a girl" or "as a boy".

Not really, they got rid of the uniform because it was identified as a target factor among pupils who had been mugged. That's what they told us anyway.

It's been non-uniform for decades, so I suspect the reasons why are lost in the mists of time. They do have a set games kit though.

It was Mrs Brigstocke who oversaw the end of uniform in the mid 70s, and she who told us why she had, as above. But I think it was quite relaxed before that.

I wonder what this "dress as boy" is supposed to mean, too.

I wore trousers at school. Didn't have to apply for extra permission to "dress as boy" for that. Most girls wore jeans, it was just normal. (And I would never, ever, have consented to go to a school that forces me to wear skirts, anyway. Was horrified to find out this is still legal in the UK - if school uniform, it should be the same for everyone)

vestal

I was listening to a conversation my teenage son was having with his German friend over school uniform.

My son's position was that it made for less bullying because no one had to keep up with fashion, or a 'hierarchy' of designer labels.

His friend was very nonplussed about this. Because it simply didn't happen in his school. Clothes were not used as a marker of anything in particular.

I heard the same thing last year when my son went on a French exchange. The French teacher told the pupils, do not take all your best designer gear, this isn't how it works on the continent. It's all fairly low key and no one cares.

I've been wondering about clothes, and peoples' perception of status or value that is attached to them. Whether it is a peculiarly British thing.

I've been wondering about clothes, and peoples' perception of status or value that is attached to them. Whether it is a peculiarly British thing.

It happens here, too. Some schools tried to get it to stop by introducing a sort of uniform, even - but the same for girls and boys. Forcing girls to wear skirts would not be possible nowadays, people would just refuse.

But I personally didn't notice it, aside from people being bullied for extremely ill-fitting or weird clothes. I think it is more prevalent in the lower income families. Those who have enough money don't seem to feel a need to show that they have it. (Well. Except with cars. But those are owned by the parents, so ...)

In this context I was referring to girls who specifically styled themselves to look as if they were male because they identified as masculine.

Most teenage girls wear jeans.

Als, as a girls school would the school not be disciminating by refusing to accept trans pupils?

They'll probably be forced to accept male pupils, yes. Unless they manage to leverage class privilege.

Apparently, British nobility get out of having to give the proper titles to transmen ... though perhaps that is less to do with class and more to do with the fact that this might actually harm males - the only human beings whose wellbeing really matters.

It will be interesting to see, Bev.

I'm wondering whether the boys' school would be so accommodating of boys who want to dress as girls. They have a uniform which would make it trickier.