So this came to the school I work in....

[ooherrmissus14]

I was expecting it to be promoting the transgender movement but was quite surprised it wasn't!! Interesting to see this perspective being shared with schools x

[quote herewegonumberthree]@HBGKC I'm more aware of the public sector in which the public sector equality duty means taking measures to ensure all groups are represented even in environments where those groups are a proportionate minority.

In other sectors, most places manage to at least engage in tokenism as the lowest form of participation [/quote]
The PSED does not mean you have to ensure all groups are represented. That would be an absurd notion. Every ethnicity? Every religion? Every disability? Every age? There are not enough posts in most organisations to do that.

I think a lot of people forget that the UK is overwhelmingly white - something like 85% of people, down from 93% 30 years ago. And the non-white population are not evenly spread meaning there are large parts of the UK where few non-white people live. And given you are recruiting from a professional pool that is likely to more closely represent the demography of a decade or more ago (the population when people joined the profession) It is quite likely many organisations will have all white senior management teams for reasons that are not discriminatory.

@HBGKC yes it matters to me. I don't expect an organisation to have any kind of ideological purity but I would expect any org I support to not practice oppression or hold oppressive views. There is so much homophobia, misogyny, racism etc veiled by religious dogma. I always research organisations before getting involved in any way as I've been stung too many times. Take Relate which when you look for relationship advice takes you to a catholic website that is against same sex relationships I am massively against a lot of the conservative Christian narrative because I think it is massively hypocritical and has done a lot of damage to people.

@Aesopfable you are taking me too literally. I'm using that as an example of advancing equality of opportunity. Individual orgs will assess themselves against the WRES and identify where they can improve. If they had no representation that would flag on the WRES at which point steps should be put in place to advance equality of opportunity.

@Aesopfable I worked somewhere that said the lack of representation was down to the white area we were in. Until I looked into the stats- there were plenty of people from minority groups applying but the jobs were still going to white people. Looking at it proportionately, it was totally skewed. Smokescreen to say it was down to smaller prevalence as proportionately a different story

@herewegonumberthree thank you for your answer.
" I would expect any org I support to not practice oppression or hold oppressive views."
I get that; however, I'm not asking you to support an organisation that behaves less than perfectly with regard to female representation; rather, I'm asking if you would stand next to them on a platform to campaign against prescribing puberty-blockers to children? Or would you feel that your cause was tainted by their inclusion due to their actions/views on other topics, even if you were in complete agreement on this one?

It's a good question @HBGKC no I wouldn't stand with them as motive is important to me. My reasons for being against puberty blockers is based on the wellbeing of children. I can't trust that an org would be against it for caring motives rather than out of hatred or discrimination if they held other views that appeared to be based on oppressive, outdated or discriminatory doctrine.

I managed to get Samaritan's Purse dumped from both the school I taught in, & my dc's primary, whilst in the U.K.

Oh & a dubious 'sign up to these tuition DVDs & fuck up your credit rating' bunch, again from my dc's primary.

I think the take away is that bloody hell, there are some dodgy types offering free resources or 'hey just send a letter out to your parents offering our snake oil & we will send you many freebies' characters. Busy SMT do not always do their due diligence, & frankly, they should, but it's also important that both teachers & parents are enabled to raise concerns along the line of: we are a bit worried that this organisation is dodgy AF &/or also they aren't offering free lesson plans without an agenda, so let's scrutinise that shall we?

I make no comment on the content of these materials. But external agencies offering teaching resources should generally be checked carefully.

"It's a good question @HBGKC no I wouldn't stand with them as motive is important to me. My reasons for being against puberty blockers is based on the wellbeing of children. I can't trust that an org would be against it for caring motives rather than out of hatred or discrimination if they held other views that appeared to be based on oppressive, outdated or discriminatory doctrine."

See, I reckon that many TRAs would characterise feminists' opposition to the 'transing' of children as being based in "hatred and discrimination", and "based on oppressive, outdated...discriminatory doctrine" - like the belief that humans come in male or female - and dismiss them and their arguments out of hand on that basis.

@herewegonumberthree I do think it's a shame that you choose to assume that a Christian organisation is more likely to have bad motives in this specific instance than concern for the well-being of children. I can follow your thought-process, but I think such assumptions (very common, it's not just you!) close down the societal conversation, and carries us further towards a less tolerant, less open, narrower kind of discourse (ironically all the things you suspect them of being).

@HBGKC I've spent my whole life in the church and although I don't choose to be around these types of evangelical movements anymore, I am very familiar with them. It's not an assumption, it's based on very real experiences time and time again amongst a certain branch of conservative Christianity that does not represent my beliefs. Most of my Christian friends and myself included aren't aligned to these views and I would run a mile from anyone that does. Pick any of the pastors on the leadership team for this creationist group and find me a sermon where they challenge their own prejudice, celebrate women in leadership, show openness to same sex marriage etc I mean, if Westborough Baptist Church agreed with you on an issue, would you want to be affiliated to them in any way or would you run a mile? These people destroy lives

What if your assumptions are based on personal experience though?
I don't 'choose' to know what my experiences of certain groups are like, I just do. I am happy to research and suspend my assumptions but there comes a point where, say, if I've seen 999 EDL members say racist stuff then I'm gonna assume any EDL members are likely to have a racist agenda.

I had written a long post about my life with and around certain circles of Christianity but it's too outing really. It's complex. But ultimately if you're (general you) arguing that bodies are as they are because of an Intelligent Creator then the point where I disagree with you will arrive very shortly. It's not just 'bad motives' it's a fundamentally different position directly regarding sexed bodies.

(That was to HBGKC's last post btw)

@DeaconBoo cross post, but yes

I absolutely agree that's it's complex.

I'm imagining a giant Venn diagram where people from all walks of life, or groups/organisations from all over the politico-social spectrum would overlap on some issues but not on others, and I'm wondering if, for the sake of a really important 'global' issue, it wouldn't be worth putting aside minor differences in order to achieve a greater, more important good. Two heads are better than one, two voices together are louder than just one alone, etc etc.

In a global society that is becoming more and more fragmented, splintered and atomised, my instinct is to seek out common ground and basic principles that most people can get behind, to build consensus where possible, even if it's a limited, flawed kind of one. Identity politics and other academic trends seem rather to highlight the differences and distance between people, and to polarise debates by rendering large swathes of 'normal people' persona non grata if they don't subscribe to the entire woke canon of belief.

An adjacent symptom of this is an illiberal instinct to ridicule, reject and denounce anyone with any kind of religious belief as anti-science, anti-woman, anti-equality, backwards, etc etc, even with zero knowledge of the content of their beliefs.
This happens A LOT on FWR boards.

I accept that many people may have had negative experiences of religion/people of faith in their lives, and that this shapes their reactions, but I wish for a bit more nuance, a bit more of an open mind that to the possibility that someone who believes in God could still be an ally against eg transing children.

(I have no direct experience of evangelical Christian sects, btw.)

Sorry, that was far too long!

One last question to @DeaconBoo tho. You say " But ultimately if you're (general you) arguing that bodies are as they are because of an Intelligent Creator then the point where I disagree with you will arrive very shortly. It's not just 'bad motives' it's a fundamentally different position directly regarding sexed bodies."

If we agree that men cannot become women, and vice versa, why does it matter if, for example, I ultimately base that belief on 'male & female He created them'? Why does the origin of the belief matter so much, in this particular context of safeguarding children, if the content of our belief is the same?

Would you (general you) refuse a substantial monetary donation to Kiera Bell's legal fees, for example, if it came from a Catholic church?

(I have no direct experience of evangelical Christian sects, btw.)*

Lucky you. It's a brutal world.
*
Would you (general you) refuse a substantial monetary donation to Kiera Bell's legal fees, for example, if it came from a Catholic church?*

Yes I would. It's like blood money. And as the church were happy to take my money for years whilst telling me I was going to hell I wouldn't take their money in the situation above as then I'd be as pathetically hypocritical and grabby as they are. If I needed the money the Lord would provide without me having to compromise on my morals

@herewegonumberthree I'm genuinely sorry you've been through what sounds like a very painful experience.

Whoever took your money for years whilst telling you you were going to hell was not preaching or acting according to the beliefs of the Catholic Church. Or was this an evangelical Christian sect (not the same thing at all)?

In any case, I'm very sorry that your experience has left you automatically mistrustful and suspicious of all Christians' motives. Or would you accept said donation from an individual Christian but not from 'the Church'?

Back to the dvd... I opened this as school secretary and diverted it, having checked out the website. I think it would have the potential to undermine my subtle peaking efforts, as the valid points they make could be dismissed as crankery. No regrets. Also, non-denominational primary school in Wales so no idea why targetted.

"I think it would have the potential to undermine my subtle peaking efforts, as the valid points they make could be dismissed as crankery." Fair enough.

"Also, non-denominational primary school in Wales so no idea why targetted." Maybe they're genuinely concerned about child welfare, with no hidden agenda..?! Stranger things have happened.

🤢 I hope they binned it

@HBGKC I'm not mistrustful of all Christians motives. I am a Christian. Just mistrustful of evangelical conservatives such as this bunch

Just catching up.

'My original theoretical point remains: does it matter what another group thinks about XYZ if you can agree and ally and campaign with them regarding ABC? If so, why?

(Genuine question. I'm interested in the increasingly puritanical demand for ideological purity in all sorts of areas of societal discourse.)'

I have zero interest in 'teaming up' with people who have beliefs that are to me unacceptable.

This thread is very very interesting for a variety of reasons.

I'll catch up with the rest now.

Yes this thread is really interesting.

A new angle I've not seen before.

Couple of responses.

'I would expect any org I support to not practice oppression or hold oppressive views."
I get that; however, I'm not asking you to support an organisation that behaves less than perfectly with regard to female representation; rather, I'm asking if you would stand next to them on a platform to campaign against prescribing puberty-blockers to children'

No. No way. Because the reasons for the objections are totally different.
There have been multiple threads on this.
People I disagree with on some other topics. Hmm. Maybe. A bit. Not happy.
People who are religious fundamentalists (of whatever flavour). Hard no from me.
Others may have other views.

'If we agree that men cannot become women, and vice versa, why does it matter if, for example, I ultimately base that belief on 'male & female He created them'? Why does the origin of the belief matter so much, in this particular context of safeguarding children, if the content of our belief is the same?'

Because in that case, the children and especially the girls are fucked a different way.

I've not seen this before on FWR it's fascinating.

Apparently I wouldn't say the same about other religions.

Weelll. I was raised RC. Which was nothing compared to the fundamental Christian and Jewish sects in this area. There are evangelical churches round here (growing) and for a long time there's been a fairly famous bonkers church which is v popular and has speaking in tongues etc.

Yes I live in an odd area. I haven't even got on to the spiritualists or the cult on the high street yet...

It's a nope from me. Their whole site reeks of USA creationism arguments.

These people are not feminist.

I've never seen a pro creationist on the boards before! So, hello!

'Whoever took your money for years whilst telling you you were going to hell was not preaching or acting according to the beliefs of the Catholic Church'

???

Seems like a standard RC upbringing/ schooling to me.

I remember having to make up a sin for my first holy communion I hadn't sinned but. Confession was expected. We are all sinners. Well that was my experience anyway...

I've never seen a pro creationist on the boards before! So, hello!

There is a big difference between 'God created everything' and 'God created everything in seven days 4000 years ago following the exact timings of the poem at the start of the bible'. The former position is a mainstream christian one that in no way limits the 'method' of creation (so includes big bang, evolution, quantum physics, dinosaurs etc)

Why creationists think they have any ground for sending a DVD to schools about transgender is beyond me.