Taxpayer-funded children's show with 'trans voices' branded tasteless

[IwantToRetire]

Scheduled shows at the Southbank include queer cabaret and 'tour around the human body' with trans, non-binary doctor

Upcoming events at the London arts centre will also include a show titled “The Faggots and Their Friends Between Revolutions”, an “unforgettable celebration of queer activism”, and another about dancer who wants to translate their moves into “renewable energy”, according to dance company Marlborough Productions.

The Centre, which receives £16,828,042 in annual funding from Arts Council England, will play host to “Pxssy Liquor’s Office Christmas Party”, “a cabaret collective for queer gals and nb [non-binary] pals” that provides an “antidote to the male-gaze saturated cabaret scene”.

As part of its “Imagine Children’s Festival” in 2024, the Centre has an event taking place called “Little Big Sing with Trans Voices”, marketed for 5+.

The organisers said: “After witnessing the growing <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/11Y4B/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/21/trans-prejudice-doubles-three-years-jk-rowling-cancel/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">anti-trans rhetoric specifically aimed at children, both artists felt an urgent need to effect change and create a provision for mental wellness.”

Other events include “a tour around the human body with trans non-binary emergency doctor Dr Ronx”, an “inspiring, interactive writing session for children, with social justice at its heart” and an author discussing his debut novel, Pity, “a lament for a lost way of life”, about two brothers from a mining town, one with a “side hustle in sex work” and “weekly drag gigs”.

Full article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/16/southbank-hosts-childrens-show-with-trans-voices/

Can also be read here https://archive.ph/11Y4B

I think Dr Ronx should be nowhere near kids.

Also, teachers who say they are non binary should be nowhere near kids.

It's like you read words and then mix them up into nonsense, which leads me to believe that you are caught up in this lie and are just trying to confuse people.

£16 MILLION??? That has to be a joke surely?

If Dr Ronx is doing a show for small children about the human body are we sure she doesn't talking about the usual gender nonsense? It's hard to see how it can be avoided.

Is she flogging a kids book that indulges this tripe? Will she be flogging that at the venue?

If the good Doctor doesn't delve into genderwoo in front of her impressionable audience, I don't see a problem. Although, by her beliefs she'd be being a bit terfy.

Much the same with teachers who identify as nonbinary, furries, swingers, whatever, they keep it out of the school, there should not be a problem.

If Dr Ronx is doing a talk as a doctor, I think that's OK for kids. If Dr Ronx is doing a talk as a non binary doctor, my kid wouldn't be going near it. The big problem is that these oddballs tend to be evangelical about their bizarre beliefs and there's no guarantee that they won't try to introduce them. If a non binary person is giving a talk about human bodies, how do you guarantee that they're not going to promote the idea that some bodies don't have a sex?

Why does the doctor (or anyone else who is non binary for that matter) need to announce it. I am agnostic. This has no bearing on my job. I would never mention it. It’s the self obsessed performative nature of it all that is so tedious. Honestly? You’re non binary? No-one cares. It’s not remotely interesting, nor is being trans. Try developing a personality, or doing something useful or helpful without announcing your ‘identity’.

Which brings me back to my question.

What should happen to teachers who are non-binary? Sacked?

What about teachers who are trans generally?

Come on people. Twitter is awaiting someone to answer Planet's question to Planet's satisfaction. Your current child centred, nuanced responses aren't making Planet happy.

You keep asking this question. It's been answered several times.

I mean it's interesting enough for pages and pages of frothing at the mouth and for at least some posters to declare that they should be no where near children.

I'm asking the poster who said non-binary (and I assume, but the poster hasn't confirmed) trans teachers should be nowhere near children.

I'm asking them to confirm that they think that simply being trans or non-binary should be enough to bar someone from working with children.

You mention "the fact of being non-binary" twice in this post. What does this mean? How is "being non-binary" a "fact"?

In earlier posts you talked about people who "identify as non-binary", now you're talking about "being non-binary" as a fact. Is it just something people identify as or is it a fact? What makes a person non-binary apart from their announcement that they identify as non-binary? What are the relevant facts about being non-binary?

Dr Ronx's self-idenfication as non-binary seems to stem from her being a lesbian who felt she had some attributes which are stereotypically described as "masculine". In what way is she different from any other lesbian who has some attributes which are stereotypically described as "masculine"?

The only thing relevant to this discussion is whether they should be 'nowhere near children'.

Do you think the mere fact of someone being - or identifying as - non-binary means they should be barred or sacked from any role in working with children?

A medical doctor who believes that she doesn't have a sex shouldn't be teaching children about the human body, because she's obviously very confused about it herself. If she's really that confused about her own sex, then perhaps she shouldn't be practising medicine either.

If she's not genuinely confused, why is she pretending that she is?

In order to answer your question, I need to know what you mean by non-binary. What do you think non-binary means?

Ugh. OK let's make this absolutely clear for those who only see black and white.

The requirement for religious ideologues I.e Christians, Buddhist, Muslims etc to work with children is that they do not share any iota of their belief with the children.

The only places where this is not adhered to is where the school is based on that very belief.

As long as trans, non-binary, whatever thr belief cannot separate their belief from their work with children: they should not work with children.

And in the current climate of belief in the "trans kid" - the answer is a vehement no, they should not work with children. Grow up and realise the belief is an adult one to be exposed in an adult sphere and there'll be no issue with whatever it is they believe in and the work with children.

I.e. it isn't because the doctor is trans. It's because they're happy to share an unproven belief with children.

Loads of people have answered this already.

Are you just trying to provoke people into saying things you can report in the hope of getting them banned?

A non binary person is someone who believes that men are people who conform to masculine stereotypes and women are people who conform to feminine stereotypes and because they do not believe they wholly conform to either set of stereotypes, this makes them neither a woman nor a man.

Not a great example to be setting for children, is it?

Doesn't that mean that nearly everyone is non-binary?

Not in the sense that nearly everyone shares this belief system, no.

In the sense that almost no one conforms to a particular set of stereotypes, yes.

And in the current climate of belief in the "trans kid" - the answer is a vehement no, they should not work with children. Grow up and realise the belief is an adult one to be exposed in an adult sphere and there'll be no issue with whatever it is they believe in and the work with children.

If someone had told me 10 years ago that in 2023 a large proportion of the population, including some doctors, teachers and governments would believe in transsexual children, I wouldn't have believed them. But here we are.

It seemed, to me and other posters, your question was just repeatedly being put out there. If you want a specific poster to answer, then ask them....specifically.

I'm trying to get people to acknowledge that the logical implications of their position is that any non-binary or trans teacher should be sacked.

Which of course is an uncomfortably extreme position.

I can't see people saying they should be sacked (apart from you Planet). People are pointing out that teachers are appointed for their professional attributes and not their personal beliefs about what sex they are. They're saying very clearly that schools are not venues for adults confused about their sex to share their confusion or beliefs with children.
Here's a copy of the Teachers' Standards which you might find educational?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a750668ed915d3c7d529cad/Teachers_standard_information.pdf

We’ll let you in on a secret. It’s not the logical position. You’re literally the only one who thinks it is the logical position. your transparent attempts to provoke someone into saying they should be just so you can say “seeeee I said you were alll transphobic bigots!!!” is frankly tragic

deary deary me, I mean really have a word with yourself!