10,000 Dresses

[NotZenEnough]

This book is about a little boy called Bailey. He dreams of dresses, so is referred to as 'she' throughout the book. His parents are obviously complete gits because they think he's a boy. All the characters in the book are stereotypically male or female. Basically it's a bag of shit, and us being read in my son's primary school.
He had it read to him in Y2 and Y4. I know it has also been read in a Y2 assembly.

The SRE teacher is very bright and sensible, and I think generally understands the GC argument. Deputy head bit more 'woke' & doesn't really understand.
I've been in to the school to ask them to stop teaching it, and have tried to raise awareness on the school Facebook page.
Just thought I'd share because I had no idea that this was being taught to children in our primary school.

I don't think DJ really considered the wider implications of that story, not how it's being used. He was booked for an lgbt event to read a story. he said he dealt with similar issues growing up however he clearly didn't transition.

This is what worries me. All it takes is a teacher who is completely gung-ho about the whole thing to slip in a few extra-curricular story times and worksheets.

Andrew Moffat has created an entire scheme of work for teaching the EA act through stories. Which is great, some lovely stories and lesson ideas (though if I'm honest I think they're a bit slap dash) but they soups this one in.

Plus one in ks1 I'm a bit over.

That lesson plan says "At no point in the story does Bailey identify as a boy or a girl".
Yet the story identifies Bailey as "she" and the plan is all about being trans.

It would be a far better story if it called out the rigid attitudes of Bailey's horrible relatives and let him be a happy boy who likes dresses.

What age-group is getting this story in schools?
I'm sure I would have been massively confused if I'd been given this sort of lesson, at any stage of primary school.

I would hit the roof if this was used as teaching material for one of my kids. I spend so much time fighting against gender stereotypes with my sons, that they can wear what they want and do what they want as boys and men. This message and calling Bailey "she" and the messages from the parents in the book would completely undermine that.

I saw a picture book aimed at little kids called "I am Jazz" for sale at We The Curious in Bristol this summer - it's a science museum, ffs. I didn't have the time to complain about it but it was really shocking to see it there.

The thing about it is that liking sparkly dresses makes Bailey a 'she'? Why can't 'he' like sparkly dresses? Or is that just too outrageous to even contemplate?

Yes, intentionally so, parents are bad, new mummies and daddies on tumblr are much better. The parents and brother are drawn faceless, huge and looming.

Yes, this is such a common theme isn't it and really quite worrying.

What do the items for the protected characteristics of sex and sexual orientation look like?

Girls can do anything! As long as they wear sparkly dresses while they do it >> and to be honest massive sparkly dresses are incompatible with a range of jobs so if a girl wants to wear trousers or be an astronaut then she must be a boy.
Boys can fancy other boys! But must NOT like anything that is coded girl or that makes them not gay boys but actually girls.

Heterosexuality is at the absolute core of gender role, it is what most of it is about. It's not surprising so many gay kids are GNC. Are they advised that they are not gay but the opposite sex? Or are the materials entirely contradictory.

Can a girl wear trousers or not?
Can a boy like "girls stuff" or not?

Scaring GNC kids by advising them that parents are likely to entirely reject them if they do not adhere to retrograde stereotypical behaviours is a fucking APPALLING message to give kids, what the FUCK are they thinking?

The thing about it is that liking sparkly dresses makes Bailey a 'she'? Why can't 'he' like sparkly dresses? Or is that just too outrageous to even contemplate?

This is what I find most problematic. The kid never even says 'I'm a girl' - and yet, it is 'she' throughout the book, apparently.

As for 'looking for support elsewhere' I am torn. I understand that in safeguarding social workers will always try to work with parents and trying to cut parents and family out is a warning sign for grooming.
But, what if for a kids the parents are really these unapproachable figures (I guess in former decades that happened more frequently than today, but still...), shouldn't the kid connect to others? I once read that having a net of people who care (including outside immediate family, like neighbours or so) makes kids more resilient. So shouldn't that be encoraged?
Of course, the book can also be read as mission creep and the child abusing paedophiles who defend their actions because they were kid's only friend and nobody else cared are legion, too. So, yeah, I don't know about that one.

Dear god. My dad had a handbag in the 70s. He got it in France where men often have - well, little handbags. He said it was very useful when you didn’t have pockets and we were absolutely mortified and took the mickey (a lot).

How could we have been so blind? Dad was obviously a woman. As are most French men. Good luck with explaining that to the French embassy.

Dear god. My dad had a handbag in the 70s. He got it in France where men often have - well, little handbags. He said it was very useful when you didn’t have pockets and we were absolutely mortified and took the mickey (a lot).
Funny that, I was thinking about a school French teacher in the '80's who was gifted a handbag by a French friend. He though it was hilarious. Had the class in fits of laughter as he did impressions of an effeminate man with a handbag.
Bless your gnc dad!

Posting this is two parts as I think it's too big for one post.

This is what I sent to school after the meeting. Long and boring I'm afraid but if anyone is dealing with the same thing pls feel free to copy and paste.
I wish I had written that the regressive stereotypes in the book seem even more ridiculous if you flip the sex of the main character. If it was a biological girl that liked wearing trousers would she be a boy?!

Dear •••
Having had a few days to think about our meeting, I feel compelled to communicate further about the book ’10,000 Dresses’.
The fundamental message of the book is that a child can be born in the wrong body. This is an appalling message to give to a child, it is untrue and dangerous. As adults we have a responsibility to protect children from destructive ideas and untruths like this. Children are born in their body and that is the only body they will ever have. There is no scientific basis for the idea that a person can be born in the wrong body, or that there are male and female brains. Furthermore, if a child genuinely believes that they are born in the wrong body, subjecting that healthy body to dangerous, untested and damaging medication and surgical interventions will not result in that body becoming the right body. A child suffering from gender dysphoria needs support and help. Not unchecked affirmation as demanded by the well funded Transgender Rights Lobby; groups like ‘Mermaids’, ‘Gires’, ‘Allsorts’ and ‘Gendered Intelligence’.

Adult sufferers of gender dysphoria do sometimes decide that surgical or medical interventions are their preferred treatment, and some remain happy with this in the long run, but it is entirely inappropriate for children to be expected to make life changing decisions like this. Gender dysphoria is a frightening and destructive condition and ’10,000 Dresses’ is part of a movement which actually induces gender dysphoria in children. We would not be reading a book which promoted the idea of anorexia to young children.
‘10,000 Dresses’ also raises issues of safeguarding and makes a direct recommendation to a child that if their parents do not affirm their belief that they are born in the wrong body, then they should seek support outside their family. Many children seek support from web platforms and social media such as tumblr, and it is easy to find evidence of adults on these platforms encouraging children to transition and telling them that if their parents do not accept their new gender identity, their parents do not care about them. These unidentified adults can be seen offering to become a confused child’s ‘new daddy’ or ‘new mummy’. The risks are obvious. I know this is a worst case scenario, but it is happening.
Of course, there are times where it is entirely appropriate and desirable for a child to seek support from a trusted teacher, and of course this should not be discouraged, but the message in this book is more sinister, and leaves children vulnerable. The Transgender Rights Lobby (which this book is a part of) routinely advises schools that best practise is for a teacher or other adult to be able to have confidential conversations with a gender questioning child with no obligation to inform parents or anyone else. This is a clear breach of safeguarding guidelines.
’10,000 dresses’ also presents archaic and regressive gender stereotypes. It suggests that if a boy likes dresses or doesn’t like football then he must be a girl. The idea that a gender non-conforming boy is turned in to a gender conforming girl is homophobic.
I am well aware that this is only one of many books which are read to the children at •••school, and I know that plenty of other books have very positive ways of addressing outdated gender stereotypes, and will go some way to counteracting the negative effects of this book. However, I absolutely maintain that there is no place in a school for literature which reinforces outdated and corrosive gender stereotypes, undermines safeguarding and suggests that a child may be born in the wrong body.
I would like to reiterate a point that I made in our meeting that I celebrate and encourage diversity in children, and their right to self-expression. I would fight hard for any child that does identify as transgender to be treated with respect and tolerance, and that bullying of any type for any reason is unacceptable. I do however think that the •••school ethos is strong enough for that message of tolerance and kindness to be strong enough in the children without them actually having to be read a book of this nature on this specific topic.
I have spoken to •••teacher and asked that she ensure that this book is not read to •••son again. I would like to extend that request and ask that no other transgender propaganda is read to him. •••son has agreed to be removed from any lesson or assembly where the book is being read and is happy to explain to anyone who asks that it is because of his annoying mother.
I hope you understand,

That is unbelievably awful

My son loves sparkly dresses. Especially Elsa's. Because he's a young kid and likes sparkly stuff and to dress up. I would hit the roof if the school told him he's no longer a boy and should be called 'she'. Fuck off.

Have you discussed with the governors?

Have one gov on side I think, or at least understanding. Chair of govs knows a family with a trans kid and I think may be harder to get on side.
Am going to write to each individually.

My son loves sparkly dresses. Especially Elsa's. Because he's a young kid and likes sparkly stuff and to dress up. I would hit the roof if the school told him he's no longer a boy and should be called 'she'. Fuck off.

Exactly. This is an awful message to send to young kids. Peers may even feel justified droning on about why he is not really a boy if he likes sparkly stuff. It is nuts.

Telling a boy he can’t wear a dress because he’s a boy is abusive behaviour. Calling a boy ‘she’ because he’s wearing a dress is also abusive behaviour.

Both behaviours reinforce gender stereotyping which schools are supposed to challenge not try and embed toxic masculinity into their students!

Anybody who encounters this book in their child’s school can and should challenge it on the basis of it being a thoroughly shit and regressive book without even needing to get onto the trans issue!

OP - what’s your MP like? Worth a letter to them? If not go to DfE?

It’s always dresses isn’t it. What about a doll. Where do these people draw the lines

So bloody flimsy. Boys enjoy the whole range as do girls.

The book is insulting to good thinking in so many ways, how the hell did it get published? Or written? By people who spot a trend and dangerously lack rigour.

Boy ‘I want a sparkly dress’
Mum and dad ‘fine, son - here you go’
Boy ‘yippee’
Mum and dad ‘just don’t wear it when great Aunty Maude comes around’
Boy ‘ok!’
Mum and dad ‘thanks, son’

Fast forward a few years
Boy ‘mum, dad, I’m think I’m gay!’
Mum and dad ‘well we kind of guessed, son’

And they all lived - ever after.

FIN

Just seen school notice that ferret and vole (or whatever they are called) spoke at DS school. I really wished I’d known beforehand.

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD

I hope you’re complaining about that to school, MP and DfE? There really needs to be some accountability over who is being let near our children and exactly what their motives are.

I am childishly snorting at ‘ferret and vole’

They are secondary kids - so thank god not little kids. I ask you. I’m trying to find out which teacher organised this. Hrrr, hedgehog and otter indeed.

Do you know how they were received by the kids?

Don’t know - this is just news to me!