Parents gather outside Birmingham school to protest against gay teacher

[tim]

yes it it. "you did not demonstrate an appropriate understanding of the school’s requirement to respect and tolerate the views of others"

We do not know all the evidence against her, just what the christian legal centre press release says.

We do know all the evidence against her it is her statements on social media about the primary curriculum. The academy she works makes this quite clear. They sacked her because they feared these could have damaged their reputation, even though there was no evidence it had

Two months after the complaint was made, a disciplinary panel found Higgs guilty of gross misconduct, citing the potential for the school’s reputation to be harmed, though the panel admitted “there was no actual evidence” that had happened.

 

[Don Troooomp]

Mob?

I've looked at photos and vids of the "Mob", only seeing a demonstration by parents with signs promoting family values, child innocence, and parents' rights.
A mob implies a bunch of angry and violent people attacking something, but was there a mob in London to protest against the idiocy of withdrawing from the EU, or was it a demo consisting people people with an opinion legally and reasonably putting forward their point of view?
Then we find out 600 kids (80%) of the school has been withdrawn, a pretty solid democracy at work there. On the other side of the coin, I don't believe religion in the form of lessons has a place in school either - any religion, but as many religious festivals as possible should be honoured in an attempt to show all what others believe. Peace and love come from understanding, but child innocence and age appropriateness have to be considered as well.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well, this is rather the crux of the issue isn't it? Where are the boundaries between pedagogy and child-rearing. Clumsily handled agendas, raised by competing interests usually ends with children being isolated from their peers (witness the rise in home-schooling in the US). Much depends on the perceptions of authority and the powers it assumes...but simply dismissing the anxieties of a parent as irrelevant in the face of an educational establishment frequently at war with itself is not really a guarantee that children's interests and well-being is the ultimate priority here either.

I agree with this. And those objecting would be on less dodgy grounds if they stuck to the point that they don't want any sex/sexuality education at primary school level of any kind, arguing that the children are too young. But if the objection is to the teaching of a diversity of sexuality rather than merely sexuality per se, it is dodgy as fuck.

 

[redsquirrel]

Was this person sacked because she damaged the reputation of her employer or because she was pushing views that directly conflicted with parts of her job?

According to the Guardian's report it's at least partly due to repetitional damage.

Two months after the complaint was made, a disciplinary panel found Higgs guilty of gross misconduct, citing the potential for the school’s reputation to be harmed, though the panel admitted “there was no actual evidence” that had happened.

 

[tim]

Yes, I had wondered what 'evidence' was being offered to justify a sacking and had the impression we were really only still hearing a partial story.

If you'd read the Guardian article and the justification given by the school, you'd know that the story is about institutional reputation, not about her performance at work. Still, not doing so is clearly more fun, as it gives you carte blanche to insinuate.

 

[Don Troooomp]

Except the gay parents. There are quite a lot of us about

I fully support your right to live as you want, but not to stop others living as they want.
If your kids get stick at school because of your relationship, that's a different story and the offending kids have to be educated about hate and stupidity, but really young kids just don't need to know - fine for older kids.
If my kids ever asks me about gay or whatever relationships, I'll explain in a matter of fact sort of way, hopefully my measured and reasonable explanation forwarding the idea whatever sort of relationship is perfectly acceptable, thus won't promote hate or prejudice in them.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

According to the Guardian's report it's at least partly due to repetitional damage.

Still lots we don't know, mind you. Eg, was the person who reported her a parent at the school? That would make a big difference, but is not something that would be disclosed.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Not really

If my daughter had been told anything about sex or sexual relationships when she was six, I would have had serious words with her school. I've looked at the book in question and, even though it's pretty subtle, it still shows people in bed together.
She's eleven now, and I would be perfectly happy for her to be told about all aspects (with care) of human relationships, more so when she gets older and able to understand better.
I've just blocked an app from her phone (Tiktok) as it's being used for gathering data about children by the Chinese owners, and being used in India to spread porn - Am I a dodgy cunt for protecting my kid from that?

My objection is the age, not the content.

You might very well think teaching that stuff to little kids is fine, but I do not and, further, would consider anyone doing so, or supporting it, to be dodgy cunts.
I fully expect someone to tell me kids see their mums and dads in bed so it's fine, but a gay or whatever couple's kids see their mums/dads in bed, so that's already looked after for the appropriate percentage of the population. If such families have kids in any given school and the subject comes up for any reason, especially bullying, then a carefully measured bit of social inclusiveness instruction is perfectly reasonable.

Then we come to the rights of given groups, and who should be oppressed in favour of whom. I don't think it's right to oppress anyone, Muslims, Jews, LGBT, parents, whoever, so a very careful line has to be considered. In a school with no such families, why bother until the kids are able to understand basic relationships?

Anyway, in response to your accusation I'm a "dodgy cunt", I believe I'm a good dad for protecting her from learning about the wrong things too young, but teaching her all people, regardless of race, skin colour, sexual preferences, or anything else, are perfectly normal and acceptable and, most importantly, regardless of differences, we're all the same.

You don't seriously expect me to read all that do you?

 

[campanula]

If you'd read the Guardian article and the justification given by the school, you'd know that the story is about institutional reputation, not about her performance at work. Still, not doing so is clearly more fun, as it gives you carte blanche to insinuate.

Not really sure what you are implying here Tim. I have not definitively taken any sides in this debate as it is basically an illustration of conflicting views...where I have en element of sympathy on all sides. Furthermore, of course we speculate and insinuate (this is Urban ffs) but IRL, it is totally obvious to me that these conflicts are never solved by shouty opinions but with a long, considered and often generational dialogue.

 

[newbie]

We do know all the evidence against her it is her statements on social media about the primary curriculum. The academy she works makes this quite clear. They sacked her because they feared these could have damaged their reputation, even though there was no evidence it had

No. "We do not know all the evidence against her". What we can establish is that all of the reports have appeared within the last 24 hours, they're all written in the same form, as though they come from a single source, and they all mention the christian legal centre. The local paper is reasonably straightforward: "A mum claims..." and "According to her representatives...". So I smell a press release.

She is taking this to a tribunal. They will get all the evidence, we won't.

 

[scifisam]

Mob?

I've looked at photos and vids of the "Mob", only seeing a demonstration by parents with signs promoting family values, child innocence, and parents' rights.
A mob implies a bunch of angry and violent people attacking something, but was there a mob in London to protest against the idiocy of withdrawing from the EU, or was it a demo consisting people people with an opinion legally and reasonably putting forward their point of view?
Then we find out 600 kids (80%) of the school has been withdrawn, a pretty solid democracy at work there. On the other side of the coin, I don't believe religion in the form of lessons has a place in school either - any religion, but as many religious festivals as possible should be honoured in an attempt to show all what others believe. Peace and love come from understanding, but child innocence and age appropriateness have to be considered as well.

I live in an area where most of the primary school kids are Muslim and their parents have managed to not do this sort of thing because they're not arseholes. But if they did I would think it was an instance of bigotry, and would feel very, very unsafe sending my child to that school or going there to pick her up.

 

[tim]

My daughter applied for a pastoral role model post where it was made crystal clear that her role was, in fact, to endorse and support the school above all other considerations...although nothing explicitly was said about posting on social media, daughter got the distinct impression that this was a massive no-no. Since this post was for a rather posh and exclusive all girls academy, daughter declined the offer.

Name and shame

 

[scifisam]

I fully support your right to live as you want, but not to stop others living as they want.
If your kids get stick at school because of your relationship, that's a different story and the offending kids have to be educated about hate and stupidity, but really young kids just don't need to know - fine for older kids.
If my kids ever asks me about gay or whatever relationships, I'll explain in a matter of fact sort of way, hopefully my measured and reasonable explanation forwarding the idea whatever sort of relationship is perfectly acceptable, thus won't promote hate or prejudice in them.

So if my kid gets stick at school when they're "really young," their bullies should be left to carry on thinking that way? What?

Also how would I be stopping other people from living how they want if I think it's OK for schools to acknowledge gay parents? I'm not forcing women to leave their husbands and shack up with a woman against their will. (Religion sometimes does that with the genders changed, though).

At what age is it appropriate to tell kids that it doesn't matter what gender your partner is, in your opinion? It's really not a difficult thing for little kids to understand. I mean I'm glad you would say it's OK but the thing is there's no big explanation needed.

 

[campanula]

Name and shame

Will have to ask her for the full name of the academy...but it was in one of the posher parts of Norwich. The interviews were eye-openers - a whole day of attitudinal testing where daughter, as a wc statutory children's services worker had A LOT to say. Whilst I implied she declined the post, it is fairer to say she wasn't offered one (despite being enormously qualified and experienced in safeguarding, child protection and so on).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

So if my kid gets stick at school when they're "really young," their bullies should be left to carry on thinking that way? What?

At what age is it appropriate to tell kids that it doesn't matter what gender your partner is, in your opinion? It's really not a difficult thing for little kids to understand. I mean I'm glad you would say it's OK but the thing is there's no big explanation needed.

Yeah, there's a very very very nasty undercurrent to all this that is basically just a great big Section28-style lie - that kids are being taught anything other than that there exist different kinds of relationships that are all just as ok as each other, and are somehow being instructed in how to be gay.

 

[campanula]

So if my kid gets stick at school when they're "really young," their bullies should be left to carry on thinking that way? What?

Sam, I think it is fair to say that many parents have little awareness of the wider privileges of heterosexuality, (a bit like the 'colour blind' excuse for racism). Far from pushing a scary agenda onto unwilling children, the current attempts at raising sexuality and such, even for primary children, is an attempt to diminish the absolute 'normality' of the 'traditional nuclear family' which is represented cheerfully and completely, even at nursery school level. Its a shit deal, being even slightly seen as 'outsider'. Sympathy.

 

[campanula]

Ah, this is obviously a completely different issue...but it is notable that academies appear to have a lot of freedom to push their own ideologies (some of which really are exclusionary and regressive).

 

[tim]

Still lots we don't know, mind you. Eg, was the person who reported her a parent at the school? That would make a big difference, but is not something that would be disclosed.

How would the complainant being a parent make any difference at all?

 

[Don Troooomp]

So if my kid gets stick at school when they're "really young," their bullies should be left to carry on thinking that way? What?

If your kids get stick at school because of your relationship, that's a different story and the offending kids have to be educated about hate and stupidity,

Are you drunk or just trying to cause an argument like a drunk?

 

[tim]

the main teaching union thinks that extending sex & relationship teaching to all age groups is appropriate. I don't know if you've got more than one child, but it's hard to believe one parent has a better understanding of the issues involved than the expressed view of the teaching profession.

The stupidity of her opinions are irrelevant, she still has as much right to express her views on those issues as any union.

If she is a member of my union I would expect them to support her in her claim against managment.

 

[scifisam]

Are you drunk or just trying to cause an argument like a drunk?

You also said "really young kids just don't need to know - fine for older kids." So at what age should the bullying stop, then?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Are you drunk or just trying to cause an argument like a drunk?

Ok, so you're running a primary school. You judge that kids that age are unaware of sexuality and should be left to enjoy their innocence. Then you find that a kid is suffering from homophobic bullying. The bullies may not have a sophisticated understanding of sexuality, but they've picked this thing up from somewhere. How do you deal with that without calling all the kids together and talking to them on very general, non-explicit terms about the different kinds of relationships that exist in the world?

 

[newbie]

The stupidity of her opinions are irrelevant, she still has as much right to express her views on those issues as any union.

She does, but if her views, her campaigning, conflicts with the central tenet of her job she must expect some sort of scrutiny. In her job she may be asked to provide pastoral guidance to a child who is gay, who questions their gender, who has gay or tg parents or friends and so on. She'll also possibly be asked to deal with those who bully, taunt or hector them, including those with a religious perspective.

Someone who can write this must expect their suitability for a pastoral care job to be questioned.



When someone complained some sort of process took place after which she was told "you did not demonstrate an appropriate understanding of the school’s requirement to respect and tolerate the views of others".

There's more to that statement than a facebook post.

At some point a tribunal will decide whether that process fairly dealt with her.

If she is a member of my union I would expect them to support her in her claim against managment.

sure. So would I but she turned to the christian legal centre, not a union.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

She does, but if her views, her campaigning, conflicts with the central tenet of her job she must expect some sort of scrutiny. In her job she may be asked to provide pastoral guidance to a child who is gay, who questions their gender, who has gay or tg parents or friends and so on. She'll also possibly be asked to deal with those who bully, taunt or hector them, including those with a religious perspective.

Someone who can write this must expect their suitability for a pastoral care job to be questioned.

View attachment 168061

When someone complained some sort of process took place after which she was told "you did not demonstrate an appropriate understanding of the school’s requirement to respect and tolerate the views of others".

There's more to that statement than a facebook post.

At some point a tribunal will decide whether that process fairly dealt with her.


sure. So would I but she turned to the christian legal centre, not a union.

I'm amazed anyone is defending her, tbh. Those scare quotes around 'normal' say it all.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

How would the complainant being a parent make any difference at all?

I don't have a child at that school. If I did, I might not be happy about my child being taught/mentored by someone who is actively involved in homophobic campaigning.

 

[newbie]

The bullies may not have a sophisticated understanding of sexuality, but they've picked this thing up from somewhere.

it's not just what my mum says it's what god says

 

[newbie]

I don't have a child at that school. If I did, I might not be happy about my child being taught/mentored by someone who is actively involved in homophobic campaigning.

... and, after a complaint, the school allowed to continue.

Because that is the implication of the posts about her losing her job.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I agree with this. And those objecting would be on less dodgy grounds if they stuck to the point that they don't want any sex/sexuality education at primary school level of any kind, arguing that the children are too young. But if the objection is to the teaching of a diversity of sexuality rather than merely sexuality per se, it is dodgy as fuck.

Which is exactly what it is.

 

[Sasaferrato]

No. "We do not know all the evidence against her". What we can establish is that all of the reports have appeared within the last 24 hours, they're all written in the same form, as though they come from a single source, and they all mention the christian legal centre. The local paper is reasonably straightforward: "A mum claims..." and "According to her representatives...". So I smell a press release.

She is taking this to a tribunal. They will get all the evidence, we won't.

By tribunal I assume you mean an employment tribunal? They are in open court, anyone may attend.

How Public are Employment Tribunals?

 

[Sasaferrato]

I'm amazed anyone is defending her, tbh. Those scare quotes around 'normal' say it all.

Indeed.