Esther Ghey, school phone ban

[Davros]

I heard her on R4’s Today programme this morning. I thought she was great, really impressive. I wonder how far down the rabbit hole Brianna would have gone if this campaign had been around then.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgng2l7d36o.amp

That male, who was a child, and the victim of a henious cold blooded calculated and planned murder and left to bleed out and die in pain on a concrete step

Enough with the emotional manipulation and hyperbole.

presented themselves as a "transgirl" with the name "Brianna".

I don't care how the male presented himself.

That child's mother referred to the male child as Brianna and "my daughter".

I really don't care how the mother referred to their child. That's not relevant to me.

Adoption is completely different from using correct pronouns, don't even go there.

This isn't the time or place for purposeful disrespect towards a child victim and their mother.

Using correct pronouns is not being disrespectful. Trying to bully and scold and harass through emotional manipulation is you being disrespectful towards me. I will not call a male person - whether alive or deceased - she/her pronouns. Doing so would be disrespectful to me.

I said no. I will not submit to your bullying and harassment. Please stop. Leave me alone.

This - the ban needs to go further - ie. Ban not just while at school but also to and fro from school and schools and companies at large should stop making reliance on apps or the internet or smart phones essential for some things or cheaper than the offline alternatives (concert tickets/parking/bus timetables etc)
I hope the day will come soon when there is a smart phone/social media ban for all under 16s,

My last reply to you as this thread is being derailed too much. I will ignore any further attempts by you to goad and harass me, and won't reply.

It's irrelevant how the mother referred to their child. Doesn't mean we should willfully call that male child "she", "her", or "her daughter". Trying to use victimhood and death to emotionally manipulate someone into saying something they are not comfortable with is low and is not on. No. That's a full sentence. I respect your right to change how you use pronouns based on whether someone is a victim or not or alive or lot. I respect your right. But for me, I will use the same pronouns regardless of being a victim or not a victim or whether alive or not. All I ask is that you respect my right even if you disagree.

I am not being willfully spiteful, these are very personal and deeply held beliefs of mine. And all I ask is that you respect that and please leave me alone. Thank you.

I do see how annoying you’re being if that helps? Can you just accept some people refer to males as males whatever their gender presentation and move on. You’re totally derailing the thread and it’s actually quite boring now. Either contribute to the topic or move on.

Yes, of course. It was from 'The Trial' series by Liz Hull and Caroline Cheatham. The former is a Mail journalist, but despite that paper's reputation this is a very full and comprehensive series and, I think, ethically responsible. They simply report, word-for-word, a far fuller account of what the jury hears than the sensationalist accounts enabled in the space of a newspaper column. They cover a lot of the bigger cases and sometimes involve the contexts behind the (alleged) crime as space-fillers once verdicts are returned.

The content is listed under each podcast with a brief synopsis of each episode. The one about the technology came after the original verdict, so fairly late in the series. If you run a search for 'The Trial Podcast' it brings up the various places where you can find it.

I will say I got subjected to some quite unpleasant harassment here at the time for using they/them and respectfully referring to Brianna as “a/the child”, because I refused point blank to she/her a biological male.

Yes, I listened to this and second the recommendation.

Yes, the capitulation has to be absolute. 150%. Deviate even one step from the received, expected line and it's no matter whether you're viewed as an ally or a four-letter-acronym-beginning-with-T. The censure will be complete.

How quickly they forgot their virtue-vigils in memory of Brianna Ghey, when they felt it was making some point in support of the crusade to erase women, or to support the imaginary statistics (lies, damned lies) of the risk in the UK of being murdered for being trans.

That a grieving mother can be exploited in this way should come as no surprise given this movement has a seasoned track-record of making a beeline for rape victims. The minute Esther Ghey showed a capacity to think for herself, then opened her mouth and uttered one line that didn't fit with their approved, slogan-chanting dogma, they're gunning for her.

I don't think I can recall to mind a more loathesome political movement in the recent history of the UK.

Only since it happened

This is my major fear about AI in particular. It stands to reason, if you constantly cede over your thinking to a machine, that eventually you'll lose the capacity to think for yourself.

It seems this is already happening. A few months ago a colleague shared some research on consistent AI use and traumatic brain injury. It's brain-rot in every accurate sense of that word.

I work in a university. Across the past decade I've witnessed first-hand the rollout of both gender ideology and the growth of AI. Both have had insidious, disastrous consequences and seem to have eroded people's capacity for independent thought. My institution is up to its nuts in GI, to the extent that one minor misstep could land staff in a disciplinary. As for AI, the universities are scratching their heads over what to do about the abundance of dishonest essays turned in for submission. In a discipline in which course work is essential to enable a deep engagement with the subject, this is a huge problem.

If I'd known when I first graduated what I know now, I'd have gone into conservation instead. Am I expected to use my 20 years' expertise to mark and give detailed feedback on the efforts of ChatGPT? Some universities won't even allow assessment briefs to be entered into the program to see what results it delivers - meaning they're quite happy to accept cheating with impunity.

UK HE is dying on its feet and IMO, it deserves to. I've (almost) completely lost faith. If Degree by Bot is becoming an increasing, sometimes even accepted norm, just what the hell am I doing here?

This has become a big thing in the USA. Several states have banned phones during school hours unless there is a medical need (eg CGM app for diabetes). It has to be in your locker or in a pouch. I agree with this, phones are very distracting in class.

But schools can't control what children do after the bell rings.

Judiciary.uk has the judges remarks. Plenty of detail there. Also uses “she”.

You’d expect the judge to, so doesn’t really have any bearing on the issue.

But by not having one in school where all the peers are congregated, it might help take the pressure off having one at all even when a child is out of school - especially if a no phone friendship group can be encouraged.

The organisation ‘Smart Phone Free Childhood’ is trying to spread the resistance like this.

If schools can request the same at home re this it means the "we cant do anything because the bullying is happening off school grounds" will be harder to use as an excuse

@JenniferBooth Any school that says they cannot do anything about bullying between pupils off site is lying. They do have the legal powers to deal with it. The attached is from the Government web site. Parents accept what schools say far too readily and do not hold schools to account.

Update: Just got an email from my kids' school to say that they have banned phones from the premises! Let's see if they actually implement it.

I actually agree with this take more than I expected. A phone lock box during school hours feels like a practical middle ground — kids aren’t cut off completely, but the constant distraction and social pressure is. It might help schools focus on learning and wellbeing instead of policing phones all day.

My oldest has just changed schools. The previous school banned phones from the premises. They said it meant that students concentrated in lessons better and it reduced things like bullying.

The new school almost encourages phones and even uses them during lessons. It's a different type of school and much smaller so it's not fair to compare it to the previous one.

They say it teaches students how to use them responsibly and it's daft to ban them because it makes it more difficult to monitor if they are "contriband". The downside of this, is that during breaks all the students sit messing about with their phones instead of chatting/playing with their friends.

Since changing schools, my daughter has significantly upped her phone usage at home. Not so much using the Internet but there are constant pings from messages and she seems incapable of sitting quietly and doing nothing. She always has to be doing something and/or listening to music.

I wish her new school would ban phones.

It’s a shame my kids school didn’t listen to parents a few years ago. Many of us were trying to keep our kids off their phones while the school was making it far harder by merrily transferring everything from the paper homework/timetable organisers to online.

All timetables, detentions, homework etc were put online to be accessed by their phone (we couldn’t afford an additional device like a laptop for all our children at the time).

Now they have banned them but haven’t reinstated the paper alternative. Utterly ridiculous.

This is a silly analogy. If you adopt a child then they are legally 'your child' so you are their mum. You might not be their biological mum but you are their mum.

There are other other types of mum too ie step mum. There are not types of women or girls, you either are one or you aren't.

I fully support the ban of phones in schools and if the ban in Australia on SM works then i think we should be following suit.