Teacher struck for posting online 'Where I teach the trans kids are untouchable'

[IwantToRetire]

A teacher has been struck off after ridiculing her school's gender identity policy and posting transphobic comments online.

Camilla Hannan, 54, posted offensive remarks including 'where I teach the trans kids are untouchable' while working at the school in Manchester.

The teacher, who had been employed at the school since 2001, also wrote of trans students: 'They get everything they ask for and everyone, staff and other students alike, is petrified of upsetting them. They don't seem oppressed to me more like oppressors tbh.'

Hannan admitted all the allegations against her and accepted they amounted to unacceptable professional conduct.

A Teaching Regulation Agency misconduct hearing said the behaviour demonstrated a lack of tolerance and respect for the rights and beliefs of others.

More at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13988139/Teacher-struck-school-gender-identity-trans.html

What has someone's sense of themself got to do with everyone else? That is a private matter We live in a social world and the sorts of identities you refer to necessitate that everyone else must centre and prioritise that individual's feelings - regardless of how outlandish, nonsensical and plain false they might be - above the consensus of common reality. Nurturing such an unhealthy narcissism, and such an expectation of others, is not 'being kind'. Instead it is promoting a deep fragility.

Another thank you for this link @BonfireLady . It's such a thoughtful piece that deconstructs the intolerance at the heart of all this as well as pointing out why transactivists are so desperate to directly target the young - with far too many adults standing by watching .
Which of course takes us back to the heart of the OP. That this teacher was dismissed for failing to abide by a school's social media policies while being completely accurate about the truth of what's happening to children.

We all have identities. Identities are not just individual. They also are relational.

We first have our selves.
Then we have our immediate family.
Then we have our cultural heritage and background.
Then we have our chosen relationships - friendships or community groups.
Then we have our regular acquaintance relationships - people we have regular contact with like colleagues and classmates
Finally there is passing one time relationships where we make judgements about how we relate to a stranger we have a social interaction with. This can include first impressions and feelings of prejudice.

My point being that identity is hugely complex, layered and wide ranging. It is not purely personal.

'Changing' your identity causes ripples and disruption to the identities of others. It is not a neutral act.

Disruptions to identity are known to have psychological impact - the best example being the adopted child. And there is a huge desire to understand ourselves from understanding where we came from from understanding where our ancestors came from (from doing a lot of family history you start to see how cultural background is passed through multiple generations and how the mesh together and how single events of misfortune can affect two or three generations after).

The idea that identity is exclusive to those with a gender identity and trumps all others and their sense of identity demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of identity and the process of identity formation.

We know that there is also a crucial key time for this, where parental influence is particularly critical. There are definitely wrong ways to parent which can damage a child during this period.

This is why the conflation of gender with sex or even the replacement of sex with gender in school age environments is deeply problematic. A child who thinks they can deny sex through medicalisation is being misleading and at some point there will always be a conflict point because they will inevitably have to accept this reality at some point - their identity cannot change this. This might be in seeking a relationship, having children or needing medical attention - no one avoids these things completely in life (even the absence of a relationship or children is reflective of this).

I think in the rush to affirm and centre we do these children a massive disservice. And we do a disserve to the children around them.

When you start to actually ask what identity is, the very notion of 'right to express your true authentic self' starts to collapse when you realise this only applies in practice to a select minority.

Identity requires the realisation that there are certain things that are unavoidable. It's literally your DNA and history to the point of your creation - you can not escape who your biological parents are, you can run away from where you come from. And you can't change sex.

People have historically tried to deny their parents and their heritage but the effort to do that ultimately collapses at some point - and it applies to even being raised by someone who isn't biologically related to because medical vulnerabilities are frequently inherited. You need to accept what you ARE not what you identify as AT SOME POINT.

We all have identities. Identities are not just individual. They also are relational.

We first have our selves.
Then we have our immediate family.
Then we have our cultural heritage and background.
Then we have our chosen relationships - friendships or community groups.
Then we have our regular acquaintance relationships - people we have regular contact with like colleagues and classmates
Finally there is passing one time relationships where we make judgements about how we relate to a stranger we have a social interaction with. This can include first impressions and feelings of prejudice.

My point being that identity is hugely complex, layered and wide ranging. It is not purely personal.

'Changing' your identity causes ripples and disruption to the identities of others. It is not a neutral act.

Very well put. This, that identity is formed in relationship and affected by relationship, is something I have come to realise through my relationships with trans people (both broken and unbroken relationships at the moment).

The closer I feel to a trans person, the more difficult I find it to use "gender-based" pronouns about them, for example. It isn't psychologically difficult for me to use "preferred" pronouns with someone I have only just met; it then becomes a matter of habit; if the relationship becomes closer, it starts to feel uncomfortable, and I begin to feel that I am lying to them and about them. With my son, the cognitive dissonance is so huge that it severely disrupts my communication, and I lose track of what I am trying to say. So if I am talking about my son with someone who disapproves of sex-based pronouns, I am constantly in turmoil about whose language I should be using, and it's also painful when they use their language about my son. Instead of communicating, I end up analysing my words, and worrying about who I am offending: there is a straight choice between offending the person I'm speaking to, or offending me!

Its difficult isn't it?

I dont think people get the whole shared history thing within families and relational identities and communication with third parties.

I've said this frequently on here, but it needs repeating over and over again:

When someone askes me if I have any brothers or sisters, what are they doing? They are looking to find common experiences not merely enquire about your siblings and birth order.

They want to know if you have had the experience of being the eldest
Example: "Hey it sucks being the eldest an having extra responsibilities doesn't it?"
They want to know if you grew up with a sister
Example: "Yeah it sucked. Did yours constantly argue and compare herself with you?"
Etc etc.

If you try and fudge this and say you had a sister when you in fact had a brother it means you aren't able to communicate with them through those type of shared experiences. You simply haven't had that lived experience.

Nor do you really want to go down the 'its complicated' route either because again its the loss of those shared experiences and you open up a can of worms.

I have friends who have a son who has recently transitioned as a young adult, and tbh I'm avoiding talking about him most of the time as its particularly awkward for me for obvious reasons.

We knew this lad as hes grown. Our friends are clearly struggling with it and I have made the point that it is ok to use the sex based pronouns for their own needs and sense of self but not really said much more. I have no intention whatsoever of going down the prefered pronouns route with him though. I know his history and have a fair idea where and why this has popped up from. I find it hard seeing them struggle with pronouns and notice acutely when they us He, She or They and to whom precisely because I know the whole deal inside out. Others won't necessarily pick up on it but I do and I find it revealling.

He's just changed his name. Again. To a second adopted name. This has created yet another issue as having got their heads around the first name change his parents now are being asked by well meaning friends how X is. They have a choice about whether answer the friend about how he is or go through the whole process of explaining how he's changed his name again. Which again shows this whole point of relational identity and disruption to identity affecting the relationships with others.

I think the Dad is particularly pissed off and losing patience with it. Personally I think hes going through the process of trying to cut himself off from his parents; he's trying to push buttons to get a rise, get a reaction and to start an argument. I've thought from the start he will eventually go low or no contact with them for various reasons but have been unable to say that to them (I've warned mutual friends to watch out for it and support if it happens). I probably do need to say a couple of things because things have progressed but I also need to tread lightly because I'm not sure how ready they are to have conversations either.

All of which shows how having a trans relative doesn't necessarily mean that you can have that as a shared experience with others about that either because of the taboos and pitfuls around the subject.

You can't just switch that off overnight without it affecting you on some level.

What a difficult situation for your friends 😞

One of the reasons I stayed for such a long time in a parenting group of trans-identifying children (some of whom were adult age) is because it really helped me to get my head around why some parents do affirm. Not every parent is a raving Susie Green and it's clear, from the group, that not every parent just goes along with it right from the start.

But loving your child unconditionally is a natural instinct and if you can see your child pulling away from you because you won't "accept" them, I can see why settling on affirmation could happen. I don't think my daughter will now go on to transition, although I could be wrong (she's still considering a double mastectomy in the future though as she hates her breasts... I'm hoping she'll feel differently as she gets older) but if she did, I imagine my approach would be similar to StillTish, who I first came across on Graham Linehan's substack and then on X. She talks about how much she loves her gay son but doesn't use his preferred (female) pronouns and hopes he continues to accept that he shouldn't use women's changing rooms etc.

@kiterunning @MrsOvertonsWindow I'm glad you liked the article. I've got a few mega busy days at work so would be more than happy for someone to start a thread with it.

I acknowledge that there may be risks to children but I also recognise that many children who identify as transgender do not view their bodies as flawed but rather seek affirmation of their identity.

@Inauthentic if you're open-minded to the idea that there are some risks to children, would you also accept that those children might have come in to those risks because of their quest for affirmation of their identity? Yes, everyone wants to feel like they know who they are. Adolesence is an utterly bonkers time. I don't think I felt like me, or knew who my "people" were until I was in my second year of uni. I felt very lost and I was always searching. Any "affirmation" I got along the way made me feel better - I distinctly remember loving the attention my Levellers t-shirts got at college (even though the cool people were in to dance music) and also feeling sad that only the geeks like me wore Red Dwarf t-shirts. I felt even more lost in the first year of uni when I realised I quite liked some of the dance music that was out at the time... I didn't dare tell the new people I'd met at uni in case I got the opposite of affirmation. (Thankfully by the 3rd year I was more comfortable in my own skin... and enjoyed all sorts, including late night singing of Spice Girls songs with my housemates).
It's a long read but the article I posted from the GL substack, written by Arty Morty is well worth it IMO. The key point being that people's "identities" are their evolving personalities, that these change over time until you eventually figure out your place in the world... and that most "identities" don't require a journey towards medical assistance.

It's a long read but the article I posted from the GL substack, written by Arty Morty is well worth it IMO. The key point being that people's "identities" are their evolving personalities, that these change over time until you eventually figure out your place in the world... and that most "identities" don't require a journey towards medical assistance.

Human are not like butterflies - our life cycle is much more complex. We don't just start as babies (caterpillars), become teens (chrysalis) and then adults (butterflies).

I think it would be useful to teach kids about life stages and shifts in identity during each period. I believe the concept is well understood within Chinese traditional medicine which says that women have 7 year stages in life (8 years for men). An alternative version which perhaps is more westernised in our understanding is in the picture.

What I find particularly compelling about the Chinese theory is how it is linked to stages in human fertility, particularly for women. It's ancient and yet I think is one of those ideas that lasts because it has this foundation in material reality that can not be avoided.

This deeply contrasts with the gender theory of your 'one true authentic self' in which you become something of a fixed persona or identity like butterflies. This is linked to justification for medicalisation because otherwise life altering treatments become exceptionally controversial due to the possibility of regret through shifting senses of identity. The trouble is the data perhaps has signs that regret is a real thing and that has consequences which are alarming.

If teens are given the idea of a fixed persona it puts a different level of pressure to find out 'who you are' as a teen. The idea of transience of identity and inescapable life stages almost gives the freedom to be who you want in a different way - multiple times. The idea of reinvention is much more liberating than a singular transition.

Much of transition in psychological terms is almost 'trying to run away' from yourself or where you come from. It's disassociative with reality. That's why it's so problematic. I think there are other ways young adults in particular, try and do this; drug use or even the motivation for a gap year.

This is my ultimate problem with identity politics generally. Whilst you can't escape what you are, the idea that you are then totally restricted by that is regressive and stereotyped. There are certain things which are inescapable to your life experience, but apply too much rigidity and you also act against the own interests of that group too.

For example women can not escape their biology and how their sex makes them more vulnerable. But decide that women are only good for making babies and staying safely cocooned from the dangers of the outside world by restricting them to the role of carer and homemaker is regressive. Equally deciding that biological is irrelevant, doesn't affect our life cycle and can be completely ignored is regressive in its own way too.

Identity formation as a singular life time event which is totally individual and one dimensional just doesn't reflect the human experience. Why have children been taught differently? Surely knowing that a life stage will eventually pass isn't a bad thing for those with poor mental health?

Maybe teach them about those, and get them to do Myers Briggs, and tell them about horoscopes both 'western' and Chinese, and talk about stereotypes - racial, national, sex-based, and let them see how complex it all is, and how lucky they are to have their lives in front of them and years to work out where they might end up.

Of course when you're very young you probably want easy answers, not nuance.

Human are not like butterflies - our life cycle is much more complex. We don't just start as babies (caterpillars), become teens (chrysalis) and then adults (butterflies).

This is a really good point (as is your whole post) and I realise that I had accidentally implied that when we "find our place in the world" after teenage angst is over, we're somehow "there". One of the brilliant things I've discovered about myself during what has been (and remains) a difficult personal journey, to support my daughter re gender identity, is just how much I wasn't learning because I only ever sought information that I felt comfortable with... because I already agreed with it. I started my journey of learning on this subject from an "LGBT network" perspective, because it felt important to understand things from someone's point of view who really got it. I still value all of that learning I did and what I got from many people along the way. I still have an empathy for some of the difficult situations that they have been through, including as parents of gender questioning children. However, I'm bloody glad I finally dared to click on Daily Mail links and Graham Linehan's substack - to name but two things that I avoided for a very long time. I haven't changed who I fundamentally am - my identity/personality - but I'm evolving and growing. I hope I keep doing so throughout the whole of my life.

On my way in to the office today I was listening to Radio 4. There was a lovely section in the Today programme about music from the 12th century being reimagined by a modern composer. I'm not religious but I loved the music (choral, medieval... echoing around a church) and really loved what the composer said: as human beings we're always reaching for something that haunts us. Something that we can't quite grasp. I fully agree. Whether that's religion itself, learning new facts (I'm definitely going to do U3A when I retire).... or, sadly, the idea that we might be born in the wrong body and need to alter the physical to match the feeling.

One of the features of trans militancy is how it is so ageist.

The concept of growth and wisdom after age 25 is pretty much derided as heretical.

The idea that you can learn and grow seems to be something they believe belongs solely to youth.

posted offensive remarks including 'where I teach the trans kids are untouchable

Is that offensive? 🤔

The teacher, who had been employed at the school since 2001, also wrote of trans students: 'They get everything they ask for and everyone, staff and other students alike, is petrified of upsetting them. They don't seem oppressed to me more like oppressors tbh.'
Hannan admitted all the allegations against her and accepted they amounted to unacceptable professional conduct.
A Teaching Regulation Agency misconduct hearing said the behaviour demonstrated a lack of tolerance and respect for the rights and beliefs of others.

Seriously. How is any of that a lack of tolerance or respect? Stating your own observations without any judgment.

Saying you think they are oppressors is judgy. Quite possibly true, but judgy.

I mean it is an interpretation. But judgment? In terms of right/wrong of the people involved as opposed to the situation.

demonstrated a lack of tolerance and respect for the rights and beliefs of others.

It is none of these things.
If anything, this ruling is pure irony in that the ruling itself isn't showing any tolerance or respect (towards the observations and beliefs of the teacher).