'Inclusive education is non-negotiable'

[Gone2far]

A tweet from Jess Phillips (retweeted by my mp)
As soon as Westminster resumes I'll be calling on Department for Education to make clear to parents and to change their guidance that inclusive education is non negotiable. The fudge has allowed this crisis and without firm action it will spread. This must end next week.
I assume this is a reaction to what's happening to schools in her area, where parents are objecting to LGBT 'education'.
While I believe it's wrong that the government have made this the responsibility of individual schools, I strongly dislike her attitude of 'we know better than parents' in this and I'd be interested to hear what others think.

I just wish lesbian and gay rights didn't get lumped in with gender identity stuff.

Schools should encourage people to be respectful to all.
But parents should be respected too.
Especially about something with a poor evidence base like gender identity.

I’m reading it as it won’t be set in stone.

Maybe she's talking about being able to opt of religious education too?

I think it's been very clever and deliberate to combine the Lesbian and Gay with TG, so you can't object to the latter without being seen as homophobic. Fwiw I don't read it as even slightly suggesting that it wouln'the be set in stone

Are the parents objecting to being inclusive? Or to schools actually giving kids the idea that they can change sex and encouraging it.

I think that’s where the waters have been muddied. If you disagree with one part you are set up as disagreeing with the whole chebang.

Some families are different - yup
Respect everyone - absolutely
Some families have 2 mums or dads - well yes
Some people are ‘different’ to the ‘norm’ -that’s the truth
Some boys like dollies and some girls like football - well that’s just common sense!
You can change sex! - wait, what?

There is often only a very muddy question of what "inclusive" means.

What it comes down to is this - unless they are complete libertarians, they mean, we want to teach the kids to accept, maybe even embrace, all the things we think are ok. Of course we don't want them to accept the things that are not ok, that's Beyond The Pale, and we won't teach about those things in a positive way.

It's disingenuous and intellectually bankrupt.

I should have said a very muddy sense, not question!

As always the ProfFekko nailed it. This is exactly how I feel and I'll be making that clear as soon as the opportunity arises.

Transgenderism is a religion and should be taught that way if at all. There would be hell to pay if schools were force feeding creationism but christianity can be taught alongside critical thinking.

The fact that transgenderism is inherently homophobic needs to be made general knowledge, it doesn't belong with the LG because it is anti-LG. It doesn't belong with feminism because it is anti-women. The contradictions are maddening,

I don't know what she means.

I wonder if it's still possible for politicians to express themselves without stupid catchphrases.

Hands up who wants exclusive education?
No-one?
Looks like we solved the nonexistent problem then.

Next.

Another tweet from jp.
How about I don't want my kids learning nonsense phonics words that mean nothing, I hated Beowolf so I don't want them reading that and as for Ox bow lakes and onion skin rock formation teach them nothing about Birmingham so I'm pulling them out of that.
So utterly stupid that she can't see the difference between geographical features and telling a child that they can be born into the wrong body (with the consequent life of medical intervention).

There are a lot of people who are really convinced that the scientific facts on transgenderism are wholly established and uncontroversial. It doesn't surprise me that she might make a comparison like that.

I think a lot of people don’t understand what is actually going on. Transvestites trying to turn sex and biology on its head and take the piss. Why involve children in their circus - because like a nasty kid pulling the wings off a fly, just because they can, with a smile on their face and think that no one can stop them.

I think a lot of people don’t understand what is actually going on.

Exactly this.

All achieved by cloaking the T in liberalism, LG and feminism. The language is designed to confuse, it says the very opposite of what it does and until a person stumbles across that fact and starts digging it all seems very irrelevant.

There is often only a very muddy question of what "inclusive" means.

Let's put it this way. Who would want the Peter Tatchell style of "inclusive" in their school? (If they knew all of what it might involve.)

Oh bollocks Jess. Parents of kids with additional needs are pulling them out of schools right and left to home educate because schools are not inclusive and are not meeting their needs. Largely because they can't afford to.

What you mean is schools will teach trans propaganda. No, not without a lot of other kids coming out of education because the general public don't agree with this political position and ethos, and it is emphatically not inclusive. You mean by 'inclusion' allowing boys to identify into personal spaces with girls while preventing girls escaping them. This not only is wrong and harmful to the girls, it excludes girls with periods who can't handle dealing with them in front of boys, girls with disabilities who can't handle the anxiety and the cognitive dissonance to lie and prioritise a boy's feelings over reality and their perceptions, girls of faith and religion and culture that prevents them sharing spaces with males regardless of how those males want to name themselves, girls who have been sexually abused and assaulted and traumatised and who have experienced domestic violence and are anxious around males, and girls who plain want privacy from boys and don't agree with this batshit pretence.

If you want 'inclusive' schools, teach facts not a political partisan and very questionable ideology because politics have no space in schools; provide third spaces and protect everybody, not just trans kids while you misogynistically exclude and oppress the girls; respect the freaking laws of this country including the Code of Practice, the Equality Act and the Convention on the Rights of the Child instead of skipping the bits you don't like, and fund schools properly for kids with SEND.

FFS.

Inclusion should mean that children with additional needs (not wants) are included and receive a good education. Not pander to a tiny minority of loud and aggressive invested adults who don’t really give a monkeys about children.

Sighs. I thought JP appeared more GC at the recent parliamentary committee hearing.

She's right about homophobia, but it's so disappointing to see someone with her background in DV so keen to wave a white flag to the menz.

She has chosen her words very poorly. Aggressively doubling down on parents with objections (well founded or otherwise) will backfire.
You can’t, in a free society, ram these things through without consensus. As I understand it the bulk of this content is concerned with encouraging children to behave decently and respectfully to those from different backgrounds, so consensus should certainly be achievable. Silly MPs gobbing off won’t help,

Phillips may think that the nebulous word 'inclusive' has the same meaning for everyone.

Now, when I see the word 'inclusive' I am on high alert and suspicious. I'm even more worried when I see that it's linked with no debate and no negotiation.

For me, 'inclusive' is associated with removing women's and children's protections as well as disregarding safeguarding principles.

I would expect nothing less from a member of the Women's Select Committee who recommended self i/d, TWAW, no debate.

It would help if this 'inclusive' attitude wasn't just a green light for exclusive LBGT lobby groups to claim a monopoly on the curriculum.

Two facts for Jess.

1. Human beings can't change sex.

1. Many of the resources about TG issues available for schools are riddled with very basic factual errors.

Inclusion should mean that children with additional needs (not wants) are included and receive a good education.

Another example of words changing meaning.

I don't think JP sees beyond the homophobia. I doubt she has listened or understands lots of the concerns.