Father starts judicial review over 'No Outsiders' programme

[ScrimshawTheSecond]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/father-says-hed-go-to-jail-over-trans-lessons-m3hhhsf5m?fbclid=IwAR0qzRTd3g_2Ql1O4seZtm1gcdj87gqTPbGR1AG5p1yKtV4dCLvKVbRas2Y

'The first parent to face prosecution after withdrawing his child from a school because it offers LGBT lessons says he is willing to go to jail.'

It's insane isn't it. Decades of work and we're right back to 'would you let your daughter marry a (insert this decade's social pariahs) Leave voter?'

As opposed to society having learned the core concept that dehumanising on the basis of any characteristic is what's wrong: not just ensuring you're dehumanising based on the current unfashionable characteristic.

These people have an issue with the whole LGBT.

Can you hear yourself with your These people?

Completely agree with you, Cuckoo

'Some people believe' is great.

'The ONLY RIGHT THING TO BELIEVE and anyone thinking or saying anything else is bad' is what I have a problem with.

Polar bears are cute as a motif on a Xmas jumper but a nature documentary of a polar bear killing a walrus or a whale soon shatters that illusion.

Reminds me of mermaids, funnily enough.

@snowblight I don’t agree with your comments normally but on this point you are right. This is at a school very near me and not only have I seen the protests in person, they are featured a lot on our local news and he’s given several interviews. The protests these parents are taking part in ARE anti-LGBT, not just T, I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

I wish one of our knowledgeable women would ring Maajid Nawaz on LBC right now as they are covering this subject and not really making a great job of it!

i can't understand how can school separate lgb and t education.

the education forced by stonewall in name of
"lgbtq education."

simply 'lgb is ok t is no.' doesn't work.

i think all ideology should be out of school.

"respect people. ok, go and play."

Now there is a mum on who sounds like she has been captured by Mermaids. Boy who liked dolls and dresses so clearly they were transgender....at age 6

The problem with this situation as I see it is that there are 2 confused issues:

1. The no outsiders program is well dodgy (technical term) clearly a far too paedophile-friendly from what I’ve seen and I would not want it anywhere near my kids (or anyone else’s for that matter)

1. Some of the parents who are vocally protesting at parkfield are homophobic and do not want their children to be taught that it’s ok to be gay.

The trans-promoting press has demonised the parents as all being homophobic bigots, and clearly some are, but I have no idea how many parents who are protesting at parkfield are against the no outsiders program but not against teaching acceptance and tolerance of homosexuality.
Does anyone know this? Have there been any vocal parent protestors who would like their children to be taught tolerance but not under the no outsiders program?

Agree @BritneyPeedOnALadybug everything I’ve read and heard about the protests is that they want no LGBT stuff taught at all. They are homophobic. It’s so frustrating yet again to see the things mumsnet predicted coming true! LGB rights will end up being trashed because of the T

There are some who think that Moffatt purposely chose to teach at a school where any opposition to the teaching of 'T' would become wrapped up with religious stereotypes.

A pp said that out of various religious groups who objected to No Outsiders, the Muslim commnity would take the 'hit'

This blog explores that concept, as well as a more detailed look at Moffatt. Transgender Trend's blog is below also:

coolnessofhind.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/andrew-moffat-and-parkfield-school-weaponizing-lgbt-against-the-muslim-minority/

www.transgendertrend.com/no-outsiders-queering-primary-classroom/

Moffatt is now in a consultancy role at the MAT and his services, in terms of promoting the No Outsiders programme to other schools in the area, are being promoted by educators on social media.

Yes, CuckooCuckooClock, it's this business that because some protesting parents have some kind of problem with homosexuality this means that the No Outsiders programme must be a good thing.

• I don't know if it's all parents, and I don't know whether their objections are necessarily homophobia. (One of the problems we've got is that in the "phobia" space words seem to have very flexible meanings these days.)

Of course you can separate lgb from t

The first group is a well understood, factual description of sexuality, a characteristic that tends not you change over a persons life

T is nothing to do with sexuality, and it's nature is not well understood. Unlike homosexuality, it seems that trans population sizes vary tremendously with time/culture/society. It is clear that gender identity can change over a persons life

@midgebabe

it's not about that i think...

"lgb is ok, but t is not."

BUT how, who can say that?
in this situation, stonewall and lots of lgbtq group and supporters
are standing with T.

"a is ok b is not."
i don't think it works.

"just let kids be kid. "
and there has to be cooling period,
and think about what's happening in school.

Don't put quotes around something I did not say.

I simply said that LGB is DIFFERENT to T

Therefore to me it makes sense that any required teaching for one is likely to be different to the other

I don't care who is standing with who. People can be wrong and just because they might have less privilege does not automatically make them right

I do care about harm to children.

The Dad has explicitly said its the teaching of transgender ideology he is against-I support him in this, as would many others. Its so important for people to understand that trans ideology is destroying the next generation of potentially gay children-it is deeply homophobic, so of course one can be against the teaching of transgender ideology but still support LGB people.
It is too easy, and incredibly racist, to claim his motives are anything other than what he says they are, just because of his religion.

@happydappy2
so of course one can be against the teaching of transgender ideology but still support LGB people.

Of course they can. But in this situation they’re not. I don’t care what the man is focusing on in interviews, I go past that school two or three times a week and whenever there are protests outside it is clearly against LGBT. I have seen what the placards say with my own eyes and have heard what they are chanting with my own ears.

Britney But he is not bringing a judicial review against the teaching of LBG is he? Its just the T. Also, reading the comments under The Times article many people support him & would do the same.

happy
Did you follow the conversation this stemmed from? snowblight said:

These people have an issue with the whole LGBT. This isn't like they're holding a protest against trans people one day and have a totally separate, unrelated campaign against gay people a couple of weeks later. It's all lumped together for them in one anti-LGBT protest. If you want to pick out the bits under those circumstances that suit your agenda then feel free.

And they got rounded upon because snowblights posts can come across as a bit antagonist on this board and they were accused of making things up and making into a racist issue. I responded and said although I don’t normally agree with snow, on this occasion they are correct because the protests ARE anti-LGBT.

the protests ARE anti-LGBT.

But according to the Times article, the judicial review is about the T.

If you want to discuss the protests, start another thread to avoid confusion of the two issues.

Part of the problem is seeing homophobia as some core value that each person does or does not hold.

A great many people won’t have it as a core value. And then their first major engagement with the topic is that it is introduced to them in this very negative way through no outsiders and they shift to a somewhat homophobic position.

Perhaps no outsiders isn’t revealing homophobia but creating it.

The whole notion that we teach children the equality act is worrying. There are very few topics where we teach children you must hold x opinion because that is the law, especially if this is their introduction to the topic.

And that is written into the content of the lesson plans, regardless of cute polar bears or however they are trying to spin it in the media.

I also find it quite easy to separate the LGB from the T. The former are sexual orientations, the latter is a gender identity. Both are named as protected characteristics separately in the Equality Act.

I am supportive of PSHE in schools - but of a strictly age appropriate nature only. I'm extremely dubious about the No Outsiders programme, and I don't agree at all with the "you can choose your gender" narrative, or the "jelly baby gender scale" or the "girls can have willies too" narrative being fed to primary age children. Or any age children, really. The latter, in particular, is highly confusing to young children, and simply NOT TRUE.

That’s always been a problem with the SJ position. They behave in a very off putting way, people then respond negatively to the cause, SJ people then say, ‘if you’re that easily put off, you weren’t really pro women/ gay people/ immigrants in the first place.’

Well exactly. Most people have no particularly strong opinion either way, until you back then into a corner.