Trans Teacher

VioletSky

I'm explaining what privilege means, why is that an issue?

I don't really single people out unless I am defending myself against them or directly answering something they asked

I'm explaining what privilege means, why is that an issue?

Maybe because it's rather presumptuous to assume we don't know what it means?

Responding to a comment someone has made is not "singling them out", it's the way social media works - it's how conversation works in real life.

Perhaps one of the reasons you so frequently appear to have to defend yourself is because you make these random observations to no one in particular, but everyone (or "some") in general, and posters pick you up on it because they are not sure if your post - appearing below another - is in response to that one, or perhaps the previous one - or even the one before that one... or no-one.

In your "explanation" about equality, you used the pronoun "you" so obviously you were addressing a particular person, telling them they "misunderstood" equality - but when I asked you who you were talking to - you said it was to whoever it applied.

Can you not see why this is irksome, not to mention a little bit conceited? This habit ends up derailing threads that you are on because you are challenging people with your comments - no one in particular, but we assume it has to be those of us you disagree with. So in this way, the threads become all about you - which of course, you then have to deny, making further recriminations on unspecified posters - "some people" - and announce that you're leaving the thread because people won't discuss the topic in the way you think they should!

Honestly, it's really simple - just follow the social media etiquette and address your comments to the person you are responding to, instead of making these scattergun observations - usually observations which are critical of views held, but which becomes a guessing game as to whom they are being directed.

... and then, when someone asks, as I did, "who are you addressing", you adopt a rather pompous attitude, suggesting that I might be looking to be offended which is something I should reconcile myself with.

What you are doing, in effect, is employing the typical passive-aggressive method in these discussions.

No I am not Dickens

That's just your perception and my intention is actually relevant

And obviously an easy way to fuel an argument to shut me down when you could have just agreed if you already understood what I was saying

Glorianny
People who want to deny others equality always have an excuse for it.

That’s what I’ve been giving you examples about, but you don’t get that by refusing to understand them, you’re providing the excuses.

VioletSky

No I am not Dickens

That's just your perception and my intention is actually relevant

And obviously an easy way to fuel an argument to shut me down when you could have just agreed if you already understood what I was saying

That's just your perception and my intention is actually relevant
Well, FWIW it's my perception too. I have been assertive (which is my preferred approach) and have more than once pointed out that 'Some People', or 'if you don't understand. . .' or Isn't it funny how. . .' is 100% passive aggressive - not just from you, Glorianny does the same.

If the person being targeted picks up on it and responds, they are accused of being touchy, or somehow arrogant, and if they don't the accuser can claim to have pointed out whatever it is and been ignored. So the aggression is in the dig, and the passivity is in the pretence that no dig has been made, and that your intention was different. I know you don't like it, but at least I have the courage of my convictions, and address you whether I disagree with you or not.

And obviously an easy way to fuel an argument to shut me down when you could have just agreed if you already understood what I was saying
I did agree with you upthread, but you still made it into an argument. Maybe I didn't agree with everything you said (I can't remember now), but I pointed out where we had agreement, and that wasn't good enough. You do seem to want an argument, even when people agree with you. The psychobabble about 'reconciling with yourself' is meaningless, but it fills a bit of a post so that it looks like you've replied, but you haven't actually said anything.

Delila

Glorianny, I’m sure most of us are aware of all that, but I don’t see it’s relevance to the scenario under discussion.

Are you suggesting that objections to the teacher wearing a skirt in a class of young children, for reasons given, will curtail the freedom of men in general to choose how to dress, and thus render them unequal to women?

I think men’s position in society is more robust than that.

No I'm suggesting that the concepts you are using to stop a teacher wearing a skirt are just as inaccurate, unfounded and irrelevant as any other excuses used to deny equality in all cases.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the possibility of that and instead choose to extend the situation into wider aspects does absolutely nothing to support or defend the ideas you are using.
I'd ask these questions.
What proof have you that. trans issues are being pushed onto children? Children live in the real world where those issues exist are talked about and may even be present in their family and friends.
How does a teacher who has limited contact with children for less than a year of their lives impact massively on their thinking? They are much more influenced by family and friends.
If a man is wearing a skirt and identifying as "he" what on earth has that to do with trans issues anyway? The fact that the OP conflates the two is irrelevant, she's simply wrong.

Men's position in society are also irrelevant. It's one teacher in a skirt not a movement.

Glorianny referring to caring teachers as opposed to caring nurses However her contact with each child will be for a limited time. She is unlikely to have years of interaction with a child, or to be responsible for trying to undo the damage some parents do to their child, for monitoring their development, trying to build self esteem, teaching values and providing counselling and advice. All this on top of teaching the required subjects.

Also Glorianny How does a teacher who has limited contact with children for less than a year of their lives impact massively on their thinking?

Glorianny, where have I raised any of the concepts you allude to in any of my posts on this thread or any other, and what are the concepts you accuse me of using “to stop a teacher from wearing a skirt”, other than suggesting it’s inappropriate in a class of 8 year-olds?

This is the second time on this thread you have accused me of saying things I haven’t said.

I'd ask these questions.
What proof have you that. trans issues are being pushed onto children? Children live in the real world where those issues exist are talked about and may even be present in their family and friends.
Isn't the fact that the PM has commented on the fact that coherent guidance is needed where it comes to affirmation of so-called 'gender change' proof that the issues are being pushed onto children? And the fact that training courses for staff are/were written by Stonewall and Mermaids?

How does a teacher who has limited contact with children for less than a year of their lives impact massively on their thinking? They are much more influenced by family and friends.
Well you are the one who brought the boy into it who might think that wearing a skirt could mean that he was 'in the wrong gender' (whatever that means) and that seeing the teacher could influence him for the better.

If a man is wearing a skirt and identifying as "he" what on earth has that to do with trans issues anyway?
Nothing, as far as I can see.

The fact that the OP conflates the two is irrelevant, she's simply wrong.
Is she? Do you have a link to the story? I haven't been able to find anything at all.

Men's position in society are also irrelevant. It's one teacher in a skirt not a movement.
Who was banging on about equality, and about how trousers were connected to it?

Doodledog

*I'd ask these questions.*
What proof have you that. trans issues are being pushed onto children? Children live in the real world where those issues exist are talked about and may even be present in their family and friends.
Isn't the fact that the PM has commented on the fact that coherent guidance is needed where it comes to affirmation of so-called 'gender change' proof that the issues are being pushed onto children? And the fact that training courses for staff are/were written by Stonewall and Mermaids?

How does a teacher who has limited contact with children for less than a year of their lives impact massively on their thinking? They are much more influenced by family and friends.
Well you are the one who brought the boy into it who might think that wearing a skirt could mean that he was 'in the wrong gender' (whatever that means) and that seeing the teacher could influence him for the better.

If a man is wearing a skirt and identifying as "he" what on earth has that to do with trans issues anyway?
Nothing, as far as I can see.

The fact that the OP conflates the two is irrelevant, she's simply wrong.
Is she? Do you have a link to the story? I haven't been able to find anything at all.

Men's position in society are also irrelevant. It's one teacher in a skirt not a movement.
Who was banging on about equality, and about how trousers were connected to it?

Training courses for teachers are generally written by groups of people who have expertise in the particular area. Some of these groups may have a particular bias, but the curriculum, long and short term planning, the ethos of the school and the perceptions of teachers and head teacher all filter the training before it influences what is taught to children. Children will witness gender questioning and gender changes. It is right that they should be prepared and understand what they see
The youngest child I know who questioned their gender was a girl who announced he was a boy as soon as he could speak and certainly way before he met a single teacher.

There is a difference between one child who is already questioning the clothes he is wearing and who is looking for an explanation, and a whole class of children somehow being inveigled into questioning their gender because their teacher has been on a training course and is wearing a skirt.

No but logically a man calling himself "Mr" cannot be trans. It's a contradiction in terms.

VioletSky

No I am not Dickens

That's just your perception and my intention is actually relevant

And obviously an easy way to fuel an argument to shut me down when you could have just agreed if you already understood what I was saying

No-one is trying to shut you down. Really, they are not. I am not.

You made a comment earlier in the day, I don't think a lot of people ever were fighting for equality... they were only fighting for themselves and a place at the top

Then continued by telling someone addressed as "you" that they misunderstood 'privilege'...

You misunderstand Privilege to mean those who have more than you when privilege is those who have better opportunities in life than you

And you should understand what privilege is and be angry about it... if you don't you are unknowlingly part of the problem

When I asked who you were addressing with this comment (addressed to "you") your response was...

I am addressing everyone it applies too

If it doesn't apply to you Dickens but you want to make it apply to you so that you can be offended, you have to reconcile that with yourself

And now you are explaining what privilege means, why is that an issue?

It's an "issue" VS because you are most definitely being Passive-Aggressive. It's there, plainly, for anyone to see. In simple language, you are being provocative and when you get a reaction, acting the injured innocent.

I am not Dickens, and nor is my wife

Is there anything else you would like to tell me about myself Dickens or are you finished now?

I'm not injured or innocent by the way but I definitely know what I mean

Thank you for your latest post Dickens.
The most noticeable features of this thread have been
Glorianny’s refusal to explain what she means by it the confusing statements that she makes e.g. about women needing to give respect . . .
And the
Passive Agressive posts by VS that you mention above.
The OP refers to a male teacher choosing to wear a skirt.
It was inappropriate, whatever excuses are produced, because it focused attention on the teacher not on the teaching.

The OP was about a "trans teacher"

So no

I really don't mind people thinking I am passive aggressive... it's still not as bad as the outright aggressive personal comments

Maybe I will figure out how to actually be passive aggressive... there must be a tutorial or something... might as well lol

Where are the outright personal comments, VS?

See, that is a perfect example of passive aggression. You're not pointing to any comments, so are making the dig (aggressive) and not being direct about what you mean (passive).

Where aren't they would be a more valid question

Remember that one thread? Pages of deleted comments, some of them were yours doodledog

Or the pages of comments we have here trying to start arguments when simply agreeing was an option

Justification is sometimes elusive

VioletSky

Is there anything else you would like to tell me about myself Dickens or are you finished now?

I'm not injured or innocent by the way but I definitely know what I mean

So who were you addressing? Who among us is "unknowingly part of the problem" - who is it who needs to understand what privilege is and be angry about it?

Just for once, be direct. Engage with the matter that you have raised. You've explained what 'equality' is - for the benefit of whom? Who do you know well enough on here to be able to determine that they don't understand the concept?

... it's one heck of an assumption.

For the benefit of anyone who doesn't understand it Dickens

Truly

Given comments I have read from you on other issues that are not trans related, and doodledog if she is interested... I genuinely never expected that comment to be an issue with either of you

But silencing different views is not healthy... it doesn't find a way forward that suits everyone. That shouldn't be the end goal in discussion... I can prove that too because over time I have listened to the needs of women and tried to accommodate them in any solutions or ideas I propose.. because I understand that while some things don't bother me, they bother others...

If I weren't more accepting of trans people than you two, we would probably get on

VioletSky

Justification is sometimes elusive

Ah, Grasshopper, your wisdom is as elusive as the logic in your justification.

As for trying to start arguments instead of agreeing- as I say, when I did agree with you you turned it into an argument . This needn’t be such hard work if you just read people’s posts.

I am sorry for that doodledog

But it wasn't very much of an argument was it, more a bit of a misunderstanding... but it's not surprising I have my defenses up a little is it really? Be honest

Also, and I mean this kindly, just saying that you mean well doesn’t ‘prove’ anything, I’m afraid. It repeats your opinion, which is not proof. You may think that you are always reasonable - most people think they are reasonable because they speak from their own point of view- but that doesn’t necessarily make it so.

Which comment did you not expect to be an issue? I’m not sure if I am supposed to be pleased about that or not. I have, as I have said repeatedly, no issue with a man wearing a skirt. I have an issue with a male teacher wearing a skirt in a primary school in this political climate.

Cross posted, sorry.

I think everyone will be feeling defensive- there are instructions to check our privilege and that we are silencing you, when I, for one, feel that the opposite is happening. It’s not an ideal way to discuss things, I agree.

I fully accept I am reactive at times doodledog it's something I work on in myself

But when I defend myself, it's because I am telling you the truth