Trans Teacher

I LOVE ROBERT WINSTON WHO SAID ON QUESTION TIME "IT'S NOT POSSIBLE (to change sex)IT IS IN EVERY CELL OF YOUR BODY".

Gossamerbeynon1945

I LOVE ROBERT WINSTON WHO SAID ON QUESTION TIME "IT'S NOT POSSIBLE (to change sex)IT IS IN EVERY CELL OF YOUR BODY".

Yes, definitely.

He knows what he is talking about.

I agree with Doodledog's most recent post. School is no place for adults to be making statements about themselves, and that is what this is.

We should all dress appropriately for the accepted conventions of the job we are in or choose another job.

GrannyGravy13

I agree with Doodledog’s posts on this subject.

A primary school is not an appropriate place to push gender issues.

Bu Primary schools are the places where gender roles are unnecessarily introduced and embodied. There was a programme about a gender neutral school, and it was a Primary school.
Interesting facts emerged, like the fact that although there is little physical difference between boys and girls until after puberty, girls (perhaps because of the gender norms of adults) believed they were not as physically able as boys.

Learning about gender stereotypes begins in the primary school neu.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-04/Boys%20things%20and%20girls%20things.pdf

Showing people can dress differently is part of that. Just as me wearing trousers in the 1970s was.

FarNorth

Many countries have no school uniforms. Where I live, in the UK, the local primary & secondary schools also have no uniform day-to-day although they do have sweatshirts, in various colours & with a logo, that can be worn when representing the school.
I don't know if the pupils are less good citizens because of this.

I agree, and I have very mixed feelings about uniforms, but again, that is just one aspect of a broader issue.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202309/medium-575849-screenshot-2023-09-11-at-17-11-36.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202309/medium-581492-screenshot-2023-09-11-at-17-12-04.png https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202309/medium-457051-screenshot-2023-09-11-at-17-13-11.png

It is because gender is learnt in primary that it is dangerous for teachers to get involved in this 'debate' (or No Debate), though. As I keep saying, if not for all the other things - the anal sex on the curriculum, the bondage gear in library books, the drag queens reading stories, the 100 'genders', the affirmation of children 'changing gender' (still wondering what that means) then a man in a skirt would not be worthy of note. But these things do not happen in isolation.

As for you breaking ground by wearing trousers in the 1970s, maybe it depends on where you lived and the background you are from. Here are some pictures of women wearing trousers a whole decade earlier. Google '1960s women in trousers' to find pages and pages of other images, including links to sewing patterns to make your own, which suggests that they were very mainstream. I think these all have centre zips, too.

No one sensible is going to take concerns seriously if the discussion becomes so extreme it wanders into wobbly conspiracy theory territory

It is just a skirt

Next people will be saying boys can't play with dolls or like pink because it's a sign of the destruction of humanity or some nonsense

Next people will be saying boys can't play with dolls or like pink because it's a sign of the destruction of humanity or some nonsense
No, it is more likely that someone will be saying that if they play with dolls or like pink they are 'in the wrong body' and should take hormones.

It is the gender stereotyping that you describe that biological feminists want to erase, and as long as people tell children that so-called 'gender' (which is all about stereotypes) can trump sex, (which is part of our DNA) then 'sensible' people will try to protect them.

I was just about to type exactly the same Doodledog that 'some' people think little boys liking pink and playing with dolls indicates they need to change 'gender' and receive gender affirming care.
I only had sons so no sisters to borrow teasets, doll's prams etc from so I bought all those 'girly' things for them when they showed an interest. To us they were toys, not 'gender' indicators.

Surely if the man does not want to change gender means that actually this is a good role model. You can dress in pink, dress in a skirt, play with traditionally girls toys and it doesn't mean you have to change gender. You just enjoy the clothes some women like.

So the question is: is cross-dressing appropriate wear for someone in a professional career involving teaching young children?

I don't mean outside school in a social setting, of course.

Google '1960s women in trousers' to find pages and pages of other images, including links to sewing patterns to make your own, which suggests that they were very mainstream. I think these all have centre zips, too.

Trousers for women weren't acceptable in most jobs, as far as I remember, in the 70s and in some not until a couple of decades after that.

Of course, those of us supporting the guy in the skirt (including me) might be being hoodwinked and he's using it as part of getting pupils used to seeing him dressed like that and aiming to start the next school year as Ms Teacher.

But it would be considered intrusive for anyone to ask him that.

If that is his aim, it's the ridiculous legislative situation we are now in that is the problem, not this individual.

Yes indeed GrannyGravy and I also agree with every word Doodledog has written.

VioletSky

No one sensible is going to take concerns seriously if the discussion becomes so extreme it wanders into wobbly conspiracy theory territory

It is just a skirt

Next people will be saying boys can't play with dolls or like pink because it's a sign of the destruction of humanity or some nonsense

Not really. My soon to be six year old grandson has asked me for ‘some Ken dolls and a tennis racquet’ for his birthday. He’s coming from New Zealand at the end of the month, with his mum and siblings, and he will celebrate his birthday whilst he is here ( I can’t wait) and so he has three Ken dolls and clothes for them, and we’ll get the racquet too, for his birthday (note to self, get them wrapped up ready.) The point is normal family just buy the toys the children want. By the way, he wears his sister’s old pink pyjamas too, but his mother doesn’t allow him to go to school in her old school dresses.
So your assertion doesn’t stand up I’m afraid!

Doodledog

It is because gender is learnt in primary that it is dangerous for teachers to get involved in this 'debate' (or No Debate), though. As I keep saying, if not for all the other things - the anal sex on the curriculum, the bondage gear in library books, the drag queens reading stories, the 100 'genders', the affirmation of children 'changing gender' (still wondering what that means) then a man in a skirt would not be worthy of note. But these things do not happen in isolation.

As for you breaking ground by wearing trousers in the 1970s, maybe it depends on where you lived and the background you are from. Here are some pictures of women wearing trousers a whole decade earlier. Google '1960s women in trousers' to find pages and pages of other images, including links to sewing patterns to make your own, which suggests that they were very mainstream. I think these all have centre zips, too.

Thanks for the photos Doodledog they brought back so many memories. The trousers with the splits up the front are Courreges. Shown on the catwalk in 1964. I made some similar ones. The thing I really wanted were his boots.
I was a trendy art student and could wear whatever I wanted. Trousers were casual wear for most women.
I got my first front zip trousers that summer. Grey, low slung hipsters. I thought I was so cool!

Zip front trousers are fine when one's stomach is still flat.

FarNorth

^Google '1960s women in trousers' to find pages and pages of other images, including links to sewing patterns to make your own, which suggests that they were very mainstream. I think these all have centre zips, too.^

Trousers for women weren't acceptable in most jobs, as far as I remember, in the 70s and in some not until a couple of decades after that.

No, but they weren't prohibited by law, and they weren't groundbreaking in the 1970's, which were the arguments used to demolish any idea that a man wearing a skirt is not a neutral act in the current climate (50 years later). I was a child in the 60's, but remember my mum wearing trousers, and she won't mind me saying she wasn't a 'fashion plate' to use a 60's term .

I was a teen in the 70s, when 'gender bending' began (in popular culture, at least) and whilst 'the establishment' grumped and grotted, it quickly became mainstream for a lot of young people, but not in the workplace unless you were a fancy hairdresser or worked in the sort of places I could only dream of - ad agencies and the like. I was briefly a civil servant in the mid-70s, and remember being told that women could wear trousers in the office. It hadn't occurred to me that we might not have been, as everyone I knew wore them a lot then; but obviously they must have been forbidden until soon beforehand. A boy or young man turning up dressed like David Bowie on the cover of Hunky Dory would not have been accepted though, although I very much doubt there was anything in the contract to forbid it. Here's a gratuitous picture of the lovely David on the cover of The Man Who Sold The World, as it shows his dress more clearly (this is the one I own, fact fans - I was in the car when I posted earlier and got them mixed up). He wears a dress on both, I believe, not that it matters.

As ever, though, the diversion has become the main topic. What happened in the 70s is irrelevant - I fall for it every time .

To return to the skirt-wearing teacher - in my opinion (others' may vary)

*Man wears skirt = not an issue

*Man wears skirt to teach primary children = okay(ish), but don't expect them to conform to uniform rules in secondary.

*Man wears skirt to teach primary children in an atmosphere where 'gender' issues are being pushed at them in various ways, and they are told that 'gender' can change, regardless of sex = Not Fine At All.

FarNorth

Of course, those of us supporting the guy in the skirt (including me) might be being hoodwinked and he's using it as part of getting pupils used to seeing him dressed like that and aiming to start the next school year as Ms Teacher.

But it would be considered intrusive for anyone to ask him that.

If that is his aim, it's the ridiculous legislative situation we are now in that is the problem, not this individual.

If this Mr were turning up to the office or factory floor (if we still have factories?), it would be a whole other 'event' and one which we could to a large extent say, 'well, why not?', especially in this current heat-wave when many women are going to work in what could be deemed 'holiday wear'. Should men be so tightly restricted in what they are allowed to wear?

But Doodledog is right, it's the context which she has articulated so well.

If you are in a professional role where you have a duty-of-care towards others, should you be allowed to pursue your own agenda (whatever it might be) and however laudable it might be?

This man knows he's going against convention, whatever his aim is and it seems like he's putting his own needs or wants above the welfare of the children. And I don't mean that he's unsafe around them - simply that he is prioritising himself. He knows he will attract attention and that he's being controversial - it shouldn't be like that, but it is... and the last thing children need what with lockdown and the disruption caused by crumbling concrete - is any more disruption.

Of course, he can't be questioned on his motives, you are right, it would be considered intrusive, and he probably knows that, too.

So whatever they are (his motives) - he is plainly being selfish and making his role in the classroom all about him - when it should be the children that are the focus.

Totally agree Doodledog and Dickens.
Context is everything and a primary school at this time is simply not the right place for this.

I started teaching in 1974.
I wore trousers from day one.
I made them myself. They were very smart and totally professional.
My wearing of trousers was never questioned by any of the headteachers I worked for at that time, nor indeed, since.

I left school in 1973, girls were allowed to wear trousers as part of their uniform from 4th year upwards.

I worked in London from 1974, trouser suits for women were the norm.

A few years ago, one of my g.children (a boy 10/ 11 years asked if he could wear a skirt. Why? it was summer, and he felt it would be cooler, but he particularly liked the idea of being able to turn round and round and have the skirt fly out around him. So, he got a couple of circular skirts, wore them with shorts underneath and enjoyed wearing them. Then he found some circular skirts with build in shorts - and for the about a year wore these. None of his school friends were at all put out, neither boys or girls.
As with all other fads, he grew out of this and has not wanted a skirt for a good eighteen months now.

VioletSky

No one sensible is going to take concerns seriously if the discussion becomes so extreme it wanders into wobbly conspiracy theory territory

It is just a skirt

Next people will be saying boys can't play with dolls or like pink because it's a sign of the destruction of humanity or some nonsense

It is just a skirt

One day, it will be.

At the moment, it isn't. It may not be right - but that is the reality. And Mr Teacher knows that.

If you want to be a trail-blazer in bringing about the end of stereotypes, you have to choose your battle-ground. School is not the right one. He knows that he will court controversy, but is still prepared to possibly disrupt the children's schooling to make his point.

So it's more than "just a skirt" - it's a man's ego and his self-centredness. And that is the problem rather more than the skirt.

Yes Dickens 👏

I’ve been away, so catching up. As ever, thanks to Doodle and Dickens for your posts
My work with children and families involved conventional clothing for formal meetings/Court etc. less formal for direct work with families or children.
The key thing was understanding it was about them, not about me. I had spikey hair, multiple ear rings, ‘ unconventional’ clothing out of work. During work hours, it wasn’t for me to draw attention to me - I was at work, being paid to work as a professional. That’s what teachers are paid to do. It’s not for them to become the focus