Trans Teacher

Glorianny

Doodledog

not having men peering up your skirt from below, for the second.
This was the reason my daughter wore trousers at secondary school. Boys used to stand under the open-tread stairs and look up the skirts of the girls.

So do we think the girls will be standing under the stairs looking up a man teacher's skirt?

So do we think the girls will be standing under the stairs looking up a man teacher's skirt?

Only the girls? The boys might think it a bit of a laugh too.

Glorianny, where did I question this teacher’s professional ability?

Looking up men's skirts?
From what I hear about a local secondary school, most definitely yes, followed by ribald comments!

Doodledog

Delila

Children in school are a captive audience, aren’t they, and it seems unworthy, and rather tacky, for a teacher to take advantage of that situation to promote some sort of personal agenda, whatever that may be.

Save it for an audience which is able to appreciate the gesture (for it undoubtedly is one), or get up and walk out, question it, object to it - whatever. Not a class of 8 year-olds.

Exactly.

Sorry what a teacher wears has nothing to do with their professional ability. I've seen punk teachers, teachers with dreadlocks and teachers in suits. Their dress was no indication of how well they did the job, quite the reverse.

Goodness knows. I guess it depends on the design of the stairs. All the more reason not to wear one if so, though.

Doodledog

*not having men peering up your skirt from below, for the second.*
This was the reason my daughter wore trousers at secondary school. Boys used to stand under the open-tread stairs and look up the skirts of the girls.

So do we think the girls will be standing under the stairs looking up a man teacher's skirt?

Delila

Children in school are a captive audience, aren’t they, and it seems unworthy, and rather tacky, for a teacher to take advantage of that situation to promote some sort of personal agenda, whatever that may be.

Save it for an audience which is able to appreciate the gesture (for it undoubtedly is one), or get up and walk out, question it, object to it - whatever. Not a class of 8 year-olds.

Exactly.

Doodledog I am not going to list the people (I might miss one out)so just stop pushing for it. You know if it applies to you. If the cap fits wear it!

Classic gaslighting.

Children in school are a captive audience, aren’t they, and it seems unworthy, and rather tacky, for a teacher to take advantage of that situation to promote some sort of personal agenda, whatever that may be.

Save it for an audience which is able to appreciate the gesture (for it undoubtedly is one), or get up and walk out, question it, object to it - whatever. Not a class of 8 year-olds.

Smileless2012

I was thinking the same thing Dickens. Women began wearing trousers for practical reasons, not to make a statement.

I wasn't wearing trousers for practical reasons all the time. My jeans, my imitation Courreges and my hipsters were very much fashion statements.

Dickens

Bellanonna

If trousers are gender-neutral Doodledog it is because women made them so. So let's stop being a dog in a manger about this and let men do the same for the skirt.

Women have worn trousers for years. Land girls during the war, for example, and when I was a child female bus conductors wore them for climbing up and down stairs. When I was young nobody would have looked twice at women in trousers.

But a man in a skirt?

The examples you quote - both indicate rational and logical reasons why wearing trousers is more appropriate than wearing a skirt.

For practical reasons in the first, and for the sake of modesty, ie not having men peering up your skirt from below, for the second.

What's the logic of a man wearing a skirt in school, other than making a point?

Sometimes I wore skirts when teaching, sometimes I wore trousers. It depended on my mood, the weather, the activity I was involved in and other factors. Sometimes I just liked a particular outfit. I can see no reason why a man shouldn't have exactly the same rights. In hot weather a skirt and sandals were much cooler.
Logically men have exactly the same ideas and reasons as women for wearing what they do. Who knows? some of them might like showing off their legs, some women do. Or maybe a man just likes skirts. Is there a reason they aren't allowed to? or something in their nature that means they can't?
Trousers may be practical but who on earth wants to be practical all the time? If that were the case women would never wear skirts.

Doodledog

*But I do realise that actually offering choices to anyone is a real difficulty for those who simply want everyone to conform to their expectations and beliefs, and see scary Stonewall and Transpeople behind everything.*

You are doing it again! 'Those who simply want. . .' is akin to 'Some People'. It is still a personal dig, even though you seem to think it is cunningly disguised as a general comment .

It is also (as usual) a false accusation. I don't simply want everyone to conform to my expectations and beliefs', and have explained my position on the skirt to the point of tedium. I am not going to repeat my reasonings for you to ignore again in favour of virtue signalling about how you were brave enough to wear trousers and changed things for everyone, but anyone who is still reading this thread will have seen them, and also see that you are not addressing the context of the skirt at all.

Doodledog I am not going to list the people (I might miss one out)so just stop pushing for it. You know if it applies to you. If the cap fits wear it!

I knew it wasn't acceptable to wear trousers when I started teaching in 1967 although I don't think it was explicit. We did wear them during the 'winter of discontent' when there were energy strikes and the schools were unheated, and gradually they became acceptable, but I never felt particularly comfortable in them when teaching, don't know why. Perhaps because I thought of them as casual wear.

As for wearing nail varnish, teachers are not subject to school rules, although I do remember a Governor mounting a campaign to make teachers wear a form of uniform including the school sweatshirt. She did not succeed.

not having men peering up your skirt from below, for the second.
This was the reason my daughter wore trousers at secondary school. Boys used to stand under the open-tread stairs and look up the skirts of the girls.

I was thinking the same thing Dickens. Women began wearing trousers for practical reasons, not to make a statement.

Bellanonna

*If trousers are gender-neutral Doodledog it is because women made them so. So let's stop being a dog in a manger about this and let men do the same for the skirt.*

Women have worn trousers for years. Land girls during the war, for example, and when I was a child female bus conductors wore them for climbing up and down stairs. When I was young nobody would have looked twice at women in trousers.

But a man in a skirt?

The examples you quote - both indicate rational and logical reasons why wearing trousers is more appropriate than wearing a skirt.

For practical reasons in the first, and for the sake of modesty, ie not having men peering up your skirt from below, for the second.

What's the logic of a man wearing a skirt in school, other than making a point?

I know, Bellanonna. It is a diversion to bang on about trousers. As far as I am concerned men can wear skirts or dresses if they like. But in the current climate it is not equivalent to women wearing trousers. Maybe one day it will be, but until then, when children have so many mixed messages about so-called 'gender' wearing one in a primary school is not a neutral act. It it was a hot day, shorts would have been more appropriate.

Glorianny

Dickens

Glorianny

Dickens

Glorianny

The other points on this thread seem to be -men teachers shouldn't wear skirts because schools aren't places for fashion statements or being revolutionary.
Sorry that ship sailed long ago witness David Bowie etc. And just about every other stag party I see in our city.

I have to comment on this part of your post Glorianny.

Do you think teachers should be making fashion statements when pupils are expected to follow a uniform code - some are quite strict too about jewellery or nail varnish, hair styles, etc? And for fairly obvious reasons.

As for being revolutionary - I'd prefer them to take a 'revolutionary' stance about the crumbling state of some of the schools, the lack of equipment - even books. Not to mention the league tables which are not really the best way to measure the achievements of the students.

Making a comparison with the way people dress for stag and hen nights... I'm puzzled about the connection and cannot see how the two environments can be compared?

Skirts are not "revolutionary " for men. Bowie wore them, Beckham's worn them, designers have featured them- that's the revolutionary bit. That's been and gone.
So they are simply something men could wear if they wanted. Not surprisingly they don't. But then a lot of women don't.

Why should a uniform have gendered requirements? Nothing to do with nail varnish, jewellery or anything else. Although I think most women teachers would object if the no varnish and no make up rules were applied to them as well as the pupils.

No reason why a man in a skirt couldn't be just as revolutionary as any other teacher about the things you mention. Although I suspect one reason teachers are less bolshie than they used to be is because they are so buried by the amount of work piled onto them, that they scarcely have time to breathe, never mind demonstrate.

It's been said men could wear skirts socially- just pointing out that they already do, so wearing them to work is the next step.

I think, Glorianny, with respect - you are rather missing the point of what I am saying - or attempting to say... maybe I'm not making a very good case.

For clarity and brevity - I personally believe that men and women should wear what the heck they please (within reasonable boundaries - for example, I don't think an individual driving a van or lorry should wear a tutu in case the layers of material obstruct his / her ability to manoeuvre the vehicle... etc).

The 'world' which Bowie inhabited and Beckham still does is not mainstream, the Arts have always been light years ahead in terms of fashion and culture. So I don't think those comparisons are particularly valid or useful when we are debating the humdrum world of work for the ordinary man or woman. Rocking up to a 'celebrity' event in the rarefied atmosphere of the entertainment / fashion world is not the same as a doctor sitting in his surgery faced with elderly patients with complex medical problems or mothers with febrile toddlers. Societal 'norms' take much longer to break down. And when your job involves interfacing professionally with the general public who've largely been conditioned to these norms, I don't think it's principled to make your job all about you and your needs / wants and beliefs.

Getting back to the OP, and a 'case' about which we know little because there's not much context - if male teachers are going to start wearing skirts, then the Head should have sent out a letter informing the parents that in the interests of equality, that was going to be school policy in the future. There are then no 'shocks' or surprises to disrupt the smooth functioning of the children's education and parents are given the opportunity to explain the situation to their children. Of course, that is purely my opinion, but I do believe that bringing about change in society has to be done rationally and logically if it's to be absorbed and accepted because that, hopefully, prevents the over-reaction which occurs when something like this is just foisted on them (the general public) without any prior information or consultation.

Taking the OP's case at face-value, that is why I think the teacher was in the wrong - not for wanting to wear a skirt, but because he is a professional and behaved unprofessionally - his job is as an educator and his focus should have been entirely on his pupils, not on his own agenda.

As for the gendered requirements of the school uniform - I think it should ultimately be abolished. But at the moment, it isn't and the reason I pointed it out is that the naturally rebellious nature of school children will presumably question why teachers are allowed to 'get away with' breaking rules that are strictly applied to them. And part of those rules is the prohibition of nail varnish and jewellery which is just more rules imposed on pupils. When I was at school back in the early 50s before the 'rebellious' 60s era, we girls questioned even then why our English teacher was allowed to sport dark red nails when we were not even allowed clear nail varnish. Children notice these things. Rules have to make sense and kids will not necessarily respect the demarcation line between them and their teachers. Boys will not automatically want to wear a skirt because their teacher does but they might question why he can when rules set for them are so stringently enforced.

But exactly that was what the HT in the '70s was arguing about me wearing trousers in school Dickens "It's not the place for them". Change has to start somewhere. Men in the arts and media have tackled the issue, men are frequently seen in bars in my city in dresses. Time for schools to catch up

Should the head of every school in the UK have sent out a notice saying "my women teachers will be wearing trousers". Of course not. And anyway most of them didn't know you were going to until you turned up in them.

As for uniforms being gendered I have posted about the boys wearing dresses and yes it was their last day, but no one complained about them, the staff and the rest of the school just accepted them. Uniform doesn't have to be gendered
.
Read Mollygo on nail varnish and teachers and argue with her it's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

The only objection as far as I can see to a man wearing a skirt in school is that it somehow connects with trans issues, which is weird, because the same people who have argued this have argued many times that a transwoman is just a man in a dress. Apparently though a man who remains a man can't wear a skirt. Which is just controlling.

Teachers are people and they bring that into the classroom. If you want uniformity use robots.

Teachers are people and they bring that into the classroom. If you want uniformity use robots.

At this precise time, it might be less disruptive if they did use robots.

If trousers are gender-neutral Doodledog it is because women made them so. So let's stop being a dog in a manger about this and let men do the same for the skirt.

Women have worn trousers for years. Land girls during the war, for example, and when I was a child female bus conductors wore them for climbing up and down stairs. When I was young nobody would have looked twice at women in trousers.

But a man in a skirt?

But I do realise that actually offering choices to anyone is a real difficulty for those who simply want everyone to conform to their expectations and beliefs, and see scary Stonewall and Transpeople behind everything.

You are doing it again! 'Those who simply want. . .' is akin to 'Some People'. It is still a personal dig, even though you seem to think it is cunningly disguised as a general comment .

It is also (as usual) a false accusation. I don't simply want everyone to conform to my expectations and beliefs', and have explained my position on the skirt to the point of tedium. I am not going to repeat my reasonings for you to ignore again in favour of virtue signalling about how you were brave enough to wear trousers and changed things for everyone, but anyone who is still reading this thread will have seen them, and also see that you are not addressing the context of the skirt at all.

If women want to be treated as equals then they should also treat others as equals

I really wish you could explain where that applies and who are the people who are treating women as equals - Sport? Top jobs? Politics? TRA?
Who are the people you feel women are not treating as equals without a detrimental impact on women?

The irrelevancy of I support the underdog was introduced by you Glorianny.

If you introduce an irrelevancy then it’s likely that you will be questioned on it. It’s also likely that you won’t be able to explain it. QED
The man in the skirt wasn’t an underdog.

He chose to draw attention to himself instead of focusing on the children.
Are you supporting him focusing attention on himself. . . because you/women did/didn’t wear trousers over half a century ago?
🤔

Doodledog

*The only objection as far as I can see to a man wearing a skirt in school is that it somehow connects with trans issues, which is weird, because the same people who have argued this have argued many times that a transwoman is just a man in a dress. Apparently though a man who remains a man can't wear a skirt. Which is just controlling.*

No, there are many objections in my last post (which I have made repeatedly throughout this thread) - not saying that the skirt is 'somehow connected to trans issues', but that it had to be viewed in the context of trans issues being endemic in primary schools.

Would you please address that (the post is just one page back - no trawling required) instead of banging on about women wearing trousers, which are mainstream and gender-neutral garments?

If trousers are gender-neutral Doodledog it is because women made them so. So let's stop being a dog in a manger about this and let men do the same for the skirt.

I have GCs in primary school. I know people who work in primary schools Trans issues are not "endemic". But even if they were, that is nothing to do with a man in a skirt, which as I have said might make some boy who is questioning the clothes he is being given to wear, and worrying about his gender (and children live in the real world where such things are discussed) think more seriously about those things and wear what he wants.

But I do realise that actually offering choices to anyone is a real difficulty for those who simply want everyone to conform to their expectations and beliefs, and see scary Stonewall and Transpeople behind everything.

The only objection as far as I can see to a man wearing a skirt in school is that it somehow connects with trans issues, which is weird, because the same people who have argued this have argued many times that a transwoman is just a man in a dress. Apparently though a man who remains a man can't wear a skirt. Which is just controlling.

No, there are many objections in my last post (which I have made repeatedly throughout this thread) - not saying that the skirt is 'somehow connected to trans issues', but that it had to be viewed in the context of trans issues being endemic in primary schools.

Would you please address that (the post is just one page back - no trawling required) instead of banging on about women wearing trousers, which are mainstream and gender-neutral garments?

Dickens

Glorianny

Dickens

Glorianny

The other points on this thread seem to be -men teachers shouldn't wear skirts because schools aren't places for fashion statements or being revolutionary.
Sorry that ship sailed long ago witness David Bowie etc. And just about every other stag party I see in our city.

I have to comment on this part of your post Glorianny.

Do you think teachers should be making fashion statements when pupils are expected to follow a uniform code - some are quite strict too about jewellery or nail varnish, hair styles, etc? And for fairly obvious reasons.

As for being revolutionary - I'd prefer them to take a 'revolutionary' stance about the crumbling state of some of the schools, the lack of equipment - even books. Not to mention the league tables which are not really the best way to measure the achievements of the students.

Making a comparison with the way people dress for stag and hen nights... I'm puzzled about the connection and cannot see how the two environments can be compared?

Skirts are not "revolutionary " for men. Bowie wore them, Beckham's worn them, designers have featured them- that's the revolutionary bit. That's been and gone.
So they are simply something men could wear if they wanted. Not surprisingly they don't. But then a lot of women don't.

Why should a uniform have gendered requirements? Nothing to do with nail varnish, jewellery or anything else. Although I think most women teachers would object if the no varnish and no make up rules were applied to them as well as the pupils.

No reason why a man in a skirt couldn't be just as revolutionary as any other teacher about the things you mention. Although I suspect one reason teachers are less bolshie than they used to be is because they are so buried by the amount of work piled onto them, that they scarcely have time to breathe, never mind demonstrate.

It's been said men could wear skirts socially- just pointing out that they already do, so wearing them to work is the next step.

I think, Glorianny, with respect - you are rather missing the point of what I am saying - or attempting to say... maybe I'm not making a very good case.

For clarity and brevity - I personally believe that men and women should wear what the heck they please (within reasonable boundaries - for example, I don't think an individual driving a van or lorry should wear a tutu in case the layers of material obstruct his / her ability to manoeuvre the vehicle... etc).

The 'world' which Bowie inhabited and Beckham still does is not mainstream, the Arts have always been light years ahead in terms of fashion and culture. So I don't think those comparisons are particularly valid or useful when we are debating the humdrum world of work for the ordinary man or woman. Rocking up to a 'celebrity' event in the rarefied atmosphere of the entertainment / fashion world is not the same as a doctor sitting in his surgery faced with elderly patients with complex medical problems or mothers with febrile toddlers. Societal 'norms' take much longer to break down. And when your job involves interfacing professionally with the general public who've largely been conditioned to these norms, I don't think it's principled to make your job all about you and your needs / wants and beliefs.

Getting back to the OP, and a 'case' about which we know little because there's not much context - if male teachers are going to start wearing skirts, then the Head should have sent out a letter informing the parents that in the interests of equality, that was going to be school policy in the future. There are then no 'shocks' or surprises to disrupt the smooth functioning of the children's education and parents are given the opportunity to explain the situation to their children. Of course, that is purely my opinion, but I do believe that bringing about change in society has to be done rationally and logically if it's to be absorbed and accepted because that, hopefully, prevents the over-reaction which occurs when something like this is just foisted on them (the general public) without any prior information or consultation.

Taking the OP's case at face-value, that is why I think the teacher was in the wrong - not for wanting to wear a skirt, but because he is a professional and behaved unprofessionally - his job is as an educator and his focus should have been entirely on his pupils, not on his own agenda.

As for the gendered requirements of the school uniform - I think it should ultimately be abolished. But at the moment, it isn't and the reason I pointed it out is that the naturally rebellious nature of school children will presumably question why teachers are allowed to 'get away with' breaking rules that are strictly applied to them. And part of those rules is the prohibition of nail varnish and jewellery which is just more rules imposed on pupils. When I was at school back in the early 50s before the 'rebellious' 60s era, we girls questioned even then why our English teacher was allowed to sport dark red nails when we were not even allowed clear nail varnish. Children notice these things. Rules have to make sense and kids will not necessarily respect the demarcation line between them and their teachers. Boys will not automatically want to wear a skirt because their teacher does but they might question why he can when rules set for them are so stringently enforced.

But exactly that was what the HT in the '70s was arguing about me wearing trousers in school Dickens "It's not the place for them". Change has to start somewhere. Men in the arts and media have tackled the issue, men are frequently seen in bars in my city in dresses. Time for schools to catch up

Should the head of every school in the UK have sent out a notice saying "my women teachers will be wearing trousers". Of course not. And anyway most of them didn't know you were going to until you turned up in them.

As for uniforms being gendered I have posted about the boys wearing dresses and yes it was their last day, but no one complained about them, the staff and the rest of the school just accepted them. Uniform doesn't have to be gendered
.
Read Mollygo on nail varnish and teachers and argue with her it's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

The only objection as far as I can see to a man wearing a skirt in school is that it somehow connects with trans issues, which is weird, because the same people who have argued this have argued many times that a transwoman is just a man in a dress. Apparently though a man who remains a man can't wear a skirt. Which is just controlling.

Teachers are people and they bring that into the classroom. If you want uniformity use robots.

Glorianny

I'm talking about one man wanting to wear a skirt to school Mollygo stop trying to bring in complete irrelevancies. In this case (and I prefer to judge on a case by case basis rather than subscribe to any philosophy that says "all A is bad and all B is good") a man not being allowed to wear a skirt is just as sexist as telling a woman she can't wear trousers.
Your rant is irrelevant in this case, but does show an unhealthy obsession with Trans issues.

If women want to be treated as equals then they should also treat others as equals

The irrelevancy of I support the underdog was introduced by you Glorianny.

If you introduce an irrelevancy then it’s likely that you will be questioned on it. It’s also likely that you won’t be able to explain it. QED.