It is pretty obvious from a lot of the posts that a lot of people who are horrified by what this man is doing see this as a fetish but if a woman walked into a classroom with a short back and sides, wearing a man's suit and brogues, it would be ok even if she were queer and clearly demonstrating that with her attire.
That's a bit of a leap. Some of the earlier posts may have suggested that the skirt has sexual/fetishistic connotations, but that is probably because of the routine conflation of sexuality, gender and sex - that sort of thing happens all the time.
There are, however, several steps that I haven't seen between that confusion (which has to be worse for 8 year olds) and people being 'horrified' at a man in a traditionally 'female's' garment but not at a lesbian dressing in a butch manner. I may have missed it, but I don't think I've seen anything that suggests that at all. Yes, the conversation was diverted into the history of women wearing trousers, but on the whole the conversation has centred on the messages in the classroom, not that female trouser-wearers are gay, or that male skirt-wearers are fetishists.
Also, if a lesbian or gay man is 'out' in the classroom, so what? the idea that this would influence children to 'become gay' went out with Section 28. Sexuality is entirely different from 'gender', and conflating the two just confuses things further.
US troops forced to act on the ground?
A drop in the ocean in the great schemes of things....but replicated by how many more


What has been edited?