Advice please - TIM teacher just arrived at DD’s school

[KnottyAuty]

DD reports that the new teacher has asked to be referred to as she/her and Ms Smith. They are obviously male. DD isn’t happy about the power imbalance of potential behaviour points and detentions for non compliance.

I’ve got no idea how to advice DD how to handle this but obviously know from reading here that using this language is a safeguarding problem. Ms Smith should follow the same rules as all the other male teachers. If everyone must use this language, then it looks like the school is unable to tolerate GC beliefs.

Suggesting that DD respectfully avoids pronouns doesn’t seem workable as using the teacher’s name will include “Miss”….

Is there a gender neutral way of referring to a teacher like “Professor”?!

What do I advise DD so she can work within her GC beliefs? And what should I write to the school to say about this?

eta clarification

Because ...

A) we don't call people by false titles in any other circumstance. If the teacher wanted to be called 'their excellency, ruler of the galaxy' no one would be entertaining that, would they?

B) it is important that children have the language to clearly identify male/female people for safeguarding reasons. I tell my children to seek out a woman for help if they get lost (just practical safeguarding). Why introduce ambiguity here? Children know the difference between men and women. It is not in any way helpful to teach them that some men actually are women because they say so.

Ah, but will he be made to though? I can't imagine why the school hired him - they are either totally oblivious to the pitfalls ahead, or they are hellbent on making some sort of stand.

Throw it back on the school. Tell the head teacher that your daughter will not be calling a male teacher "Miss" and ask the school to provide a gender-neutral alternative that can be used for every teacher in the school, regardless of sex.

"Professor" is great (with a nod to JKR) but it should be applicable to every teacher.

But of course the ambiguity you are facilitating here is going to be exploited.

Imagine how this goes ...

You can't use those toilets, they are for women, please use the men's.

But I am a woman (transwoman), you just said it yourself

No it hasn’t.

I believe that Mx is usually pronounced 'Mux'.

IMO 'Mx Surname' would be a sensible option for the OP's daughter.

The alternative to 'be kind' is to be male, isn't it?

Kindness can only come from a position of power. Otherwise it's subservience.

When I was at school I didn't know anything about the personal lives or beliefs of teachers, other than what couldn't really be helped, such as teachers being married to each other or being pregnant and going on maternity leave. In every other case I did not know whether or not they were married (nor to whom), if they were religious, if they had children, if they preferred dogs or cats, if they had any hidden disability, if they were vegan or had any dietary requirement, etc, etc.

Let's go back to that. The idea of 'bringing our whole selves to work' was nonsense to begin with, let's bin it entirely.

This person is living as a Transwoman

What does that mean if not reducing womanhood to regressive harmful sex stereotypes? And if that is their view of womanhood then they shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a classroom full of girls.

Stick with either Teacher or Excuse Me, so your child doesnt compromise her beliefs.

People are parking their brains with the inane 'be kind' response.

It is not enough to just kowtow to one individuals demands, without thinking through the wider implications a for everyone else. That's not being kind.

Be smart, be respectful (to all), be firm, be reasonable.

B) it is important that children have the language to clearly identify male/female people for safeguarding reasons. I tell my children to seek out a woman for help if they get lost (just practical safeguarding). Why introduce ambiguity here? Children know the difference between men and women. It is not in any way helpful to teach them that some men actually are women because they say so.

In terms of safeguarding, the 2021 census also showed that men who identified as women were at least five times more likely to be sex offenders than other men.

Be safe first.

Then the rest.

This.

You don't think a teacher modelling sexist ideas about what it means to be a woman and delegimitising female people's lived experience of and right to talk about sex specific social and physical risks and constraints could impact his female pupils?

Wow.

Yes. So my son expecting me to deny his observed reality and his whole history as my son and instead pretend convincingly (because anything short of that is transphobic) that he is my daughter is reasonable? Why can he not do something very low level and accept that I know him by the name we all, including him, used for many years, and that it is my habit and understanding that sex-based pronouns are the norm and not inappropriate?

I can tell you the honest answer to that is that he has been indoctrinated to see sex-based pronouns as transphobic. When he first announced a trans identity, he genuinely didn't mind. The deeper he has got into trans circles, the more he has experienced discomfort with any other worldview and expression. Now the demand is that I use his new name and feminine pronouns, with the threat of complete estrangement if I do not conform. That is nothing other than an attempt to coerce me (and others, such as DW) to do as we are told. Controlling behaviour.

In my last permanent post, staff had to share lavatories with pupils. (No, I'm not making that up - it was supposed to help stop vandalism, bullying. This was in Central Scotland.)

All teachers were unhappy about this for obvious reasons. Male teachers were very unhappy. (No urinals - just cubicles, but with no door between the toilet area and the corridor.)

Thank goodness we didn't have the added complication of TIM staff. (We did have 3 TIF pupils all at the same time. One used the disabled toilet; the other two continued to use the female facilities.)

I recall that there was a case in North America (the US, I think) where a TIM teacher insisted on using facilities which were used by pupils. I can't remember what the outcome was. Presumably, there's no such problem at the school attended by the OP's child, since England seems to be stricter about such matters?

For reassurance, @WearyAuldWumman that wouldn't happen. The toilets are separated by sex.
No member of staff, trans or otherwise is allowed to use student toilets. What a horrible idea!

This man will be teaching children as young as 11. Some of them will have learning difficulties. They won’t understand all the nuances (“You can respect pronouns but still be gender critical” ffs) that are being discussed here.

Their instincts will tell them he’s a man. He will be telling them (directly or indirectly) he’s a woman. In every lesson he will be implicitly coaching them in GI.

They will be confused. They may be encouraged (implicitly or explicitly) to think they can change sex/gender/whatever.

If they ask about it the adults will skate around on slippery words and will not be able to explain themselves. The girls will learn there is something shameful in their own instincts and perceptions.

This is horrifying.

Because they are asking the child to partake in and uphold a private and adult belief system. Teachers are called either Miss, Mrs, Ms or Mr, or Sir or Madam - according to their sex, Trying to suggest to children that men are actually women is an abuse of responsibility.

Agree. Adults should not ask this of children.

One of the interesting features of the Nurse Peggie/Dr Upton tribunal case mentioned upthread is that even the people appearing for Dr Upton's side struggled with the pronoun thing and kept slipping into "he" and "him". It really does go against the grain, even when somebody reckons to believe in it.

Yes I’d advise her to do this. Absolutely she shouldn’t have to lie.

This. It is an absolutely pernicious ideology.

There may not be anything in law about this, but really should we be ok with children possibly being forced to comply with what is essentially a religious belief (with the possibly of punishment etc)?

Should we be ok with anything like this which requires actual conscious thought to use wrong sex pronouns, conscious thought that would be better utilised for learning (the main reason for being at the school)?

Should we not be concerned by any of this for safeguarding reasons?

Why is the onus not on the adults in the school to accommodate the needs of the girls who are there to learn? Why is it left to the children to be accommodating in this situation?

So yes, not illegal, but is it right?* *I don't think so.

"Pronouns are knottier for the reasons you give".

But the "Ms" in Ms Smith is a pronoun.

So it's not just a neutral act really, it's not ok to force children to ignore the evidence of their eyes and make themselves lie, calling a man "Mx", "Ms", "Miss", or "Mrs".

And frankly I'm not sure how avoiding pronouns is going to go for Knotty's poor DD, that's a fine line to walk which again takes some thought to manage.
So I'm back to I'm not ok with asking children to do this extra contortion of thought on top of what they are actually supposed to be there for - learning!