So it’s happened...

[Beerincomechampagnetastes]

I knew it would and I’ve been dreading how I would deal with it.
My dd has been joined in her female boarding house by a young man called George.
George up until last term was a female.
I’m concerned for George and the pupils are all lovely and he’s getting a lot of support.
But I’m confused as to why he’s in the female boarding house?
Is this normal practice for schools?

People are in agreement that this girl is housed correctly, Weetabix.
Because she's a girl.
The concern is over the impact on the other girls of staff colluding in a pretence that she's a boy, and the more profound impact of requiring the other girls to participate in that pretence, or be considered unkind.

I will go to a church service for a christening or a wedding but I refuse to bow my head, kneel, close my eyes or join in prayers or hymns and I would be outraged if compelled to do otherwise.

I spent the first ten years of married life finding ways not to refer to my in-laws as Mum and Dad.

I really don't know if I could go along with the pronoun thing; after all, you don't generally use someone's pronoun's when they are there with you and there are other options when they're not.

It's a matter of principle really, and feel for children being compelled to collude in a lie.

This is a non men thing isn't it?

Same as with prisons.

Transgirls are girls and so must be with the girls. In practice this seems to be what happens, transgirls are treated as girls and put with the girls.

Transboys are boys. And yet usually (always?) they seem to STAY with the girls. The reason for this is presumably aorund safety, physical and maybe psychological. The reasons they stay with the girls boil down to matters relating to physical sex, even though we are supposed to pretend that is irrelevant.

So,
The girls get
Girl
Transgirls
Transboys
ie
Non men

Same as prisons, I belive that transmen remain with the women while transwomen also get put with the women (even if they are convicted rapists).

The reasons for the disparity are related to SEX
Men are much more violent tha women
Men are responsible for pretty much all sex offending
Women can get pregnant
Are generally smaller and weaker
etc

I don't envy the position of the schools.

Logically this child should go with the boys, that is what trans ideology would say. They ARE boys so they have no business being with girls.

Of course this is not what they say as it's obviously bonkers so we end up with "do what's best for the trans child" (and ignore completely the impact on all the other children).

The reasons for the disparity are related to SEX

And male privilege.

Yes

It is way past time that we found a way for people, and in this case children, to be able to refuse to be compelled to pretend or lie, and still understood and accepted that they can be kind whilst refusing.

Having set children into the abominable situation where they are instructed to lie or be punished, we now need to create the acceptance that compelling a child to lie is wrong.

Children should be as free to refuse to call George 'he' as they are to refuse to pray.

Compelling their speech is compelling them to participate in a lie. Schools need to support children who don't want to lie.

Lying to a child who is confused about their sex makes one complicit in their confusion. I won't be complicit in facilitating some child's futile beliefs, especially when the outcomes are so damaging

This this this. But how, without it being reframed as "unkind"?
Why do others have to share the psychological burden?

Logically this child should go with the boys, that is what trans ideology would say. They ARE boys so they have no business being with girls.

This is the elephant in the room, isn't it?

Why isn't George insisting on being included with the boys at least for supervised school-time activities?

This reminds me of a close friend of mine who had severe anorexia (she was in an out of hospital due to her condition), who would frequently try to have me agree with her that she was fat.

I found it both horrifically sad, and emotionally abusive, she was trying to force me to collude with her in her own destruction.

I think this is similar, George is forcing the entire school community to collude with her in her lie that biological sex categories do not exist/are not relevant.

Perhaps its time we stopped colluding.

There's a reason pronouns have been made such a weapon and it's because they symbolise submission, compliance.

Equating submission with kindness is very, very dangerous, especially for girls.

It's alright not to honour a person's requested pronouns. It's not unkind to refuse to submit. It's time to start to change this conversation.

Lying and pretending isn't kind to either party.

I hope that one day the moderation team on mumsnet will review their own policy of treating truth as unkind and censoring pronouns used truthfully and without malice.

I believe they have vastly underestimated the impact forced compliance has had in making us all complicit in the eventual harm of children and adults who are expecting to extrapolate truthiness compliance to a harmful conclusion.

There's a reason pronouns have been made such a weapon and it's because they symbolise submission, compliance.

^^ this. I'd not considered that before, but you're absolutely right.

Equating submission with kindness is very, very dangerous, especially for girls.
Very true.

I hope that one day the moderation team on mumsnet will review their own policy of treating truth as unkind and censoring pronouns used truthfully and without malice.
I don't know, I've used some very grammatically incorrect English to avoid getting in trouble here and I think that sends a message too. MN don't need this aggro really, so asking them to become a bigger target just so we can talk more freely is unfair.
I think it's in the courts that the case needs to be made, pp mentioned the cake ruling but we need to build on that.
We need an established right to not play along as part of free speech.
I'd argue there also needs to be some form of protection for companies (never thought I'd say that sentence!) Because if an employee uses their free speech and flying monkeys create financial havoc for the employer, that's also unfair.
Flying monkeys insurance? I don't know. But I don't want MN to lose advertisers. And I want the right to speak out and that not affect either my own job or my employer (possibly affecting other people's jobs too).

she pronoun
ˈshē

that female one who is neither speaker nor hearer

Great discussion. I agree with most of what has been said about pronouns and that it's compelling children to lie etc. However, we have to pick our battles. Until we can shift the perception of what is happening and stop this being defined as 'unkind' or transphobic, then I fear schools will have to continue navigating this. To tell a transitioning child (and their parents) that the school will NOT acknowledge their pronouns will create division and hostility. And it places a confused and vulnerable child at the centre of a potentially hostile debate in a school and that's not on.

The thinking on FWR about this is wide ranging and well developed. Much less so elsewhere as the trans lobby groups have managed to dominate with their #nodebate .

weet

Why do you insist on using emotive language and inferring statements you make have been said by anyone in this thread?

I'd argue there also needs to be some form of protection for companies (never thought I'd say that sentence!) Because if an employee uses their free speech and flying monkeys create financial havoc for the employer, that's also unfair
I know in America there are laws protecting 3rd parties like this. Where they cannot be held responsible for what people say or sell etc. It's how children are sold on back page right under our noses. And they get away with it.

The idea we are somehow more dangerous and in need of driving away and veing limited in wbat we say and do even wheh its the truth, than sex traffickers selling children is disturbing.

GerryblewuptheER I thought the Backpage thing was about them not taking responsibility for postings?
I'm talking about working for Lloyd's Bank (for example) and having the freedom to comment about whatever beliefs you might have without Lloyd's Bank being set upon. Especially where individuals do not link to their employer anywhere on their social media - so very deliberate snooping has to be done to establish the employer link and start the monkeys up.

The trouble with compelled speech is everyone slips up eventually.

There will be a court case where a judge or lawyer or even the defendant themselves gets it wrong. Unless them.all plan on prosecuting each other....

In fact there's that video circulating where a transwomen calls themself sir by accident in the verbal rampage .

Sorry if this has been said, but I'd be having words about coerced speech and teaching children an unscientific ideology.

Until we can shift the perception of what is happening and stop this being defined as 'unkind' or transphobic, then I fear schools will have to continue navigating this.
That's just it. How do we redefine reality as not "unkind". And why have we allowed ourselves to be financially and legally compelled to be "kind"?

To tell a transitioning child (and their parents) that the school will NOT acknowledge their pronouns will create division and hostility.
Not really no. It could do, it could also allow the child some time to reflect, without setting them against their parents. We don't know.

And it places a confused and vulnerable child at the centre of a potentially hostile debate in a school and that's not on.
I agree that the child is confused and vulnerable and that their wellbeing is the most important factor. Along with the wellbeing of the other students -this child isn't more important than the others.
But we need to address how to ensure that wellbeing; playing along is assumed to be the best way and is in effect compelled to be the only way. Where's the debate about how best to deal with "social transition"? Where's the study on the psychological effects on Georges of pretending to be a whole new person? Being someone's son instead of their daughter? Changing their name? There has to be some effect.
Where are the studies on the effect this has on all the other children compelled to play along?

I think I mean compelled too.

Sorry I didn't explain myself very well. I know about the Tara wood case and the judge gaslighting Maria.

What I meant was I'm sure there will be a case soon enough where the next Tara wood slips up and refers to themself "wrong" or the judge does it.

When people get angry and don't think.befire they speak it all comes out...

Being unkind is the greatest weapon used against us, it’s used to subdue women.

If someone you knew converted to Islam and took on another name would you refuse to use it because you didn’t believe the same as them?

Would you refuse to call a friend who adopted a child the childs mother even they weren’t biologically there’s?

I absolutely agree that we need to be able to rightfully sex someone but I think it’s a bit more complicated when it comes to accepting new names and I think just blanket refusing to acknowledge someone’s new identity is transphobia.