Parents gather outside Birmingham school to protest against gay teacher

[newbie]

You've been called a transphobe for the opinions you've posted on here.
There are those that maintain that promoting BDS and/or the one state solution is anti-Semitic. I guess you/they aren't fit to teach either?

A lot of unnecessary insults are thrown around.
It's a pastoral care role, not teaching. That's a sensitive position, anyone in that sort of job who posts nakedly bigoted clarion calls on SM should not be surprised if it comes back and bites them. If a complaint is made... well it's eventually up to an employment tribunal to decide if the process and outcome are fair. A decision to involve some pressure group like the Christian Legal Centre rather than a union will up the political ante, generate column inches and maybe is not the best idea if keeping the job is top priority.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You've been called a transphobe for the opinions you've posted on here.
There are those that maintain that promoting BDS and/or the one state solution is anti-Semitic. I guess you/they aren't fit to teach either?

Wow. You went there. I'm assuming this is aimed at me and not newbie.

Let's get some things clear. Are you accusing me of being a transphobe? If so, please explain, with reference to my arguments, naturally. I've also advocated the one-state solution to Palestine/Israel on here in the past. You can explain to me why my arguments are anti-Semitic, with references to those arguments, naturally.

But who gives a fuck about me? More to the point, I'd like you to explain how this teaching assistant is not homophobic, with reference to what she has said. I'd like you to explain how she is not promoting homophobia through her social media activity. And yes, I use 'promoting homophobia' as a phrase intentionally - that is what she is doing, in a way that those accused of 'promoting homosexuality' never, ever did.

Surprised at you redsquirrel. I would have thought that you would have realised that you were wrong to be supporting the positions of tim and andysays on this thread. But clearly I was wrong. You have joined them in the team of useful idiots to the homophobic Christian brigade.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

A lot of unnecessary insults are thrown around.
It's a pastoral care role, not teaching. That's a sensitive position, anyone in that sort of job who posts nakedly bigoted clarion calls on SM should not be surprised if it comes back and bites them. If a complaint is made... well it's eventually up to an employment tribunal to decide if the process and outcome are fair. A decision to involve some pressure group like the Christian Legal Centre rather than a union will up the political ante, generate column inches and maybe is not the best idea if keeping the job is top priority.

Wouldn't surprise me if the union had told her to go away, tbh. You're a homophobe who got caught promoting homophobia on the internet. Not going to help you, sorry.

 

[redsquirrel]

It's a pastoral care role, not teaching. That's a sensitive position, anyone in that sort of job who posts nakedly bigoted clarion calls on SM should not be surprised if it comes back and bites them. If a complaint is made... well it's eventually up to an employment tribunal to decide if the process and outcome are fair.

If someone attacks their employer they probably shouldn't be surprised that if it comes back to bite them, doesn't mean that it is ok or should not be opposed. And as for employment tribunals they are no less political than any other part of the law. Sometimes workers win, sometimes they lose but let's not pretend that ETs are some neutral, impartial body.

Let's get some things clear. Are you accusing me of being a transphobe? If so, please explain, with reference to my arguments, naturally. I've also advocated the one-state solution to Palestine/Israel on here in the past. You can explain to me why my arguments are anti-Semitic, with references to those arguments, naturally.
...
Surprised at you redsquirrel. I would have thought that you would have realised that you were wrong to be supporting the positions of tim and andysays on this thread. But clearly I was wrong. You have joined them in the team of useful idiots to the homophobic Christian brigade.

Well for a start you might do better if you actually responded to things posted. I did not claim that I believed you to be either transphobic or anti-Semitic. However, other board members have certainly accused you of posting transphobic stuff.

I don't support the position of tim, which is based around rights. As I've repeatedly said I don't give a shit about this woman's rights (I don't agree with the philosophy of human rights in general). I do give a shit about employers attacking employee's. There are already cases of workers been hit by the bosses for stuff posted on social media (I gave one example already), there are plenty of cases of workers being attacked by employers for their political opinions. At the present time being a communist is probably not going to do more than raise a chuckle but it wasn't that long ago that that wasn't the case.

Anyone who calls themselves a socialist, a communist or an anarchist should be aware of the danger of allowing employers dictate political opinions and actions. If I'm a useful idiot for the homophobic Christian brigade you're a useful idiot for the bosses/state.

Should this woman's politics be opposed, of course it should, but they should be confronted politically, rather than retreating behind a legal opposition. A no platform imposed by a community is not the same as the state/bosses excluding people with political opinions they don't like.

 

[Don Troooomp]

You dishonest little shit. It's obvious Sam was responding to the part you deliberately omitted from your post:

If you don't think younger kids will bully kids over this (usually prompted by their bigot parents) you're even drafter than I thought.

That part of the post was about kids and sexuality, not the twist you're putting on it.

 

[Don Troooomp]

I do find it a little odd how one group is allowed to push their ideals on another, but the attacked group doesn't seem to be allowed their beliefs within their own community. The teacher concerned was attacking the values held within a given community, pushing his own thoughts without consideration for their opinions or objections.
These things always have two sides so, in my opinion, I believe we have to hold a balanced view, realising there are going to be clashes of interest but, as the parents concerned have no in any way attacked the gay community, just the fact this rogue teacher has attacked their values, I believe he was in the wrong.

 

[scifisam]

That part of the post was about kids and sexuality, not the twist you're putting on it.

What twist? You're talking about young kids and sexuality. So is he. So was I. Where's the twist?

But you seriously believe the parents protesting this are the ones being attacked so you've clearly had a blow to the head or something and should probably be down the hospital rather than posting on here.

 

[Don Troooomp]

But you seriously believe the parents protesting this are the ones being attacked .

Yes, they are the victims.
80% of the school's parents object to their kids being given these lessons, and no one asked their permission to do it.
The lessons intrude on their belief system, but there has been no evidence to suggest they have in any way had a go at the gay community. You could easily prove the teacher is the victim by showing how these parents have done something wrong, and explaining why their rights are lesser than another group's.
Bigotry, oppression, and hate are bad news, and it doesn't matter which group they come from, or who the target is.
If these parents went around demonstrating against LGBT groups that would be another story, but they're only complaining about an attack on their way of life.

 

[scifisam]

They're objecting to kids being taught that gay families exist. How you can possibly not understand that as an attack on the gay community is beyond me. The belief they're fighting for is that being gay is bad. That's literally what those of them who've spoken to the press say (they're quoted in this thread, so there is evidence).

And you want to me explain why their rights are "lesser" than other groups? Well, you're the one saying the rights of gay parents and kids are lesser, so why don't you back up your opinion first then?

 

[mojo pixy]

The lessons intrude on their belief system,

So what?

Let the parents teach the kids, let school teach the kids, then let the kids make up their own minds. If the parents' views are really valid the kids will get there in their own time. If not, oh well nothing is lost.

 

[SpineyNorman]

I do find it a little odd how one group is allowed to push their ideals on another, but the attacked group doesn't seem to be allowed their beliefs within their own community. The teacher concerned was attacking the values held within a given community, pushing his own thoughts without consideration for their opinions or objections.
These things always have two sides so, in my opinion, I believe we have to hold a balanced view, realising there are going to be clashes of interest but, as the parents concerned have no in any way attacked the gay community, just the fact this rogue teacher has attacked their values, I believe he was in the wrong.

Who is the attacked community, who is attacking them and what form do these attacks take?

 

[Serge Forward]

So, if the majority of parents want their kids to be less tolerant of others or (if any of their kids are gay) totally repressed, then that's all right? Fucking hell Don Toooomp, what is the matter with you? All the school is doing is teaching it's no big deal if some kids have two mams or two dads. That's basically it. But from the way the nuttier parents carry on (with the help of a lot of religious shit stirrers from outside the school) you'd think the school was giving lessons in fist fucking.

 

[newbie]

If someone attacks their employer they probably shouldn't be surprised that if it comes back to bite them, doesn't mean that it is ok or should not be opposed. And as for employment tribunals they are no less political than any other part of the law. Sometimes workers win, sometimes they lose but let's not pretend that ETs are some neutral, impartial body.

This wasn't an attack on her employer.

It's a pastoral carer shouting BRAINWASHING who has shown herself to be unwilling to accept that same sex relationships could be 'normal' (her quotes) and thereby throwing into question her personal ability to deal evenly with all children.

Nor is it a classic example of downtrodden worker being shafted by capital. Painting it as such ignore the most salient point. The school has a safeguarding responsibility for children exhibiting social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Your stance undervalues their needs in favour of her values and understanding of relationships.

Had she not made homophobic posts she wouldn't have dug her hole. She's quoted as saying "I am determined to fight this case and to stand for Christians and all parents across the country who are being silenced for sharing and holding these views." The politics are of her choosing.

Should this woman's politics be opposed, of course it should, but they should be confronted politically, rather than retreating behind a legal opposition. A no platform imposed by a community is not the same as the state/bosses excluding people with political opinions they don't like.

A complaint of homophobia was made. If the school allowed her to continue to provide pastoral care they'd be seen locally as condoning her views.

This thread started with a community attempting to no platform a school (analogy, not precise). This woman & CLC are trolling hers, also on religious grounds. Are you really sure that turning schools up and down the country into religious battlegrounds is a good idea? Whose interests would it serve? Whose would it not?

 

[8ball]

She's quoted as saying "I am determined to fight this case and to stand for Christians and all parents across the country who are being silenced for sharing and holding these views."

I expect a good many Christians will be unimpressed with the assumption that they share her homophobia.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

This wasn't an attack on her employer.

It's a pastoral carer shouting BRAINWASHING who has shown herself to be unwilling to accept that same sex relationships could be 'normal' (her quotes) and thereby throwing into question her personal ability to deal evenly with all children.

Nor is it a classic example of downtrodden worker being shafted by capital. Painting it as such ignore the most salient point. The school has a safeguarding responsibility for children exhibiting social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Your stance undervalues their needs in favour of her values and understanding of relationships.

Had she not made homophobic posts she wouldn't have dug her hole. She's quoted as saying "I am determined to fight this case and to stand for Christians and all parents across the country who are being silenced for sharing and holding these views." The politics are of her choosing.



A complaint of homophobia was made. If the school allowed her to continue to provide pastoral care they'd be seen locally as condoning her views.

This thread started with a community attempting to no platform a school (analogy, not precise). This woman & CLC are trolling hers, also on religious grounds. Are you really sure that turning schools up and down the country into religious battlegrounds is a good idea? Whose interests would it serve? Whose would it not?

Yep, basically this. It's a very specific, targetted and public attack on the idea of inclusive teaching. If she was indeed sacked primarily for 'reputational damage', I'd say those were the wrong grounds, but not that the sacking was necessarily the wrong decision. I certainly don't think hers is a case to be defended. And I would also dispute the idea that this is a case of her being penalised for her political views. She's being penalised for her discriminatory views, which she and others wrap up in a cloak of religion.

This school has said that it is not ok to give pastoral care at their school and at the same time to engage in a homophobic campaign on social media. Substitute 'racist' or 'sexist' for 'homophobic', and what conclusions do you reach? If your conclusions are different, I would then ask why you think homophobia is less of thing to be opposed than racism or sexism.

 

[Don Troooomp]

Who is the attacked community, who is attacking them and what form do these attacks take?

Well, I'll type slowly in the hope you'll understand

Their community doesn't want their kids to grow up knowing much about relationships until they're older - Gay relationships in this case.
The teacher is putting aside their culture in favour of his own
The parents didn't like their cultural norms being attacked, so asked him to stop
He didn't.

Try turning it around.
Imagine those same parents going into gay community gathering places, bars, or other hangouts distributing leaflets that attacked your way of life.
Would you ask them to fuck off and keep their noses out?

In other words, they have the right to their own way of life, even if others (including myself) don't much like it.
I don't understand why people would want to live that way, in exactly the same way I have little clue about what a gay relationship is like, but my lack of understanding is no reason to hate anyone or try to force my values on others because they have a different way of life to mine.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Are people really arguing that a homophobic teacher who is openly homophobic online will be able to keep their homophobia from seeping into the way they work and the way they interact with ideas and values at work?

Thing is, as I remember, racist teachers just couldn't stop their bigotry seeping into the way they interacted with students and the ideas they promoted.

 

[Don Troooomp]

So, if the majority of parents want their kids to be less tolerant of others or (if any of their kids are gay) totally repressed, then that's all right? Fucking hell Don Toooomp, what is the matter with you? All the school is doing is teaching it's no big deal if some kids have two mams or two dads. That's basically it. But from the way the nuttier parents carry on (with the help of a lot of religious shit stirrers from outside the school) you'd think the school was giving lessons in fist fucking.

For me, I really don't care if the parents are same sex or otherwise. I fell in love with and married a lady that isn't white, and I got stick for it, so I'm fucked if I'm going to knock anyone else for their love, but that isn't the same as trying to disassemble someone's culture and beliefs, and that's what's happening here.
We may not agree with them, but we should understand their culture is old and what they believe, so we have to respect their opinions regarding what age sexuality should be discussed. As it happens, I agree with the parents on that issues - sexuality should be avoided until the kids are of an age they can understand. Once there, I don't have the slightest problem with my kids learning gay love is just as valid as anyone else's version.

 

[8ball]

As it happens, I agree with the parents on that issues - sexuality should be avoided until the kids are of an age they can understand.

Which particular things are you talking about, in terms of kids being exposed to things they are too young to understand?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Are people really arguing that a homophobic teacher who is openly homophobic online will be able to keep her homophobia from seeping into the way they work and the way they interact with ideas and values at work?

Thing is, as I remember, racist teachers just couldn't stop their bigotry seeping into the way they interacted with students and the ideas they promoted.

If this teacher had been reported for posting white supremacist shit on the internet, I guarantee that zero people here would be arguing that her sacking was wrong. Somehow gay equality is a little way down the list in terms of importance.

 

[Serge Forward]

You've got it arse sideways. Surely it's the conservative parents and their religious allies who are trying to force their opinions on the whole school.

And when you say teach sexuality, do you really think it's wrong to say to kids it's okay if one your schoolmates has two mams or two dads?

 

[Dogsauce]

For me, I really don't care if the parents are same sex or otherwise. I fell in love with and married a lady that isn't white, and I got stick for it, so I'm fucked if I'm going to knock anyone else for their love, but that isn't the same as trying to disassemble someone's culture and beliefs, and that's what's happening here.
We may not agree with them, but we should understand their culture is old and what they believe, so we have to respect their opinions regarding what age sexuality should be discussed. As it happens, I agree with the parents on that issues - sexuality should be avoided until the kids are of an age they can understand. Once there, I don't have the slightest problem with my kids learning gay love is just as valid as anyone else's version.

Presumably to be consistent you’ll avoid exposing your offspring to any examples of ‘straight’ sexuality like a man and a women living together and sleeping in the same bed? Or is this about something else?

 

[Serge Forward]

"Mam, Dad... how are babies born?"
"Get thee behind me Satan!"

 

[mojo pixy]

In general, parents' views are just that, some people's views, and obviously the world is full to bursting with views on this, that and the ten thousand things. Kids are going to hear things from everywhere, all the time. If parents have so little faith in the ideas they're teaching that they have to actually censor other ideas from being passed to their kids (as opposed to, say, discussing any and all ideas openly with their kids) then their views are not really worthy of any respect.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Well, I'll type slowly in the hope you'll understand

Their community doesn't want their kids to grow up knowing much about relationships until they're older - Gay relationships in this case.
The teacher is putting aside their culture in favour of his own
The parents didn't like their cultural norms being attacked, so asked him to stop
He didn't.

Try turning it around.
Imagine those same parents going into gay community gathering places, bars, or other hangouts distributing leaflets that attacked your way of life.
Would you ask them to fuck off and keep their noses out?

In other words, they have the right to their own way of life, even if others (including myself) don't much like it.
I don't understand why people would want to live that way, in exactly the same way I have little clue about what a gay relationship is like, but my lack of understanding is no reason to hate anyone or try to force my values on others because they have a different way of life to mine.

It's pointless writing out long posts like this to me. My time is limited so I read selectively. Since I'd get more out of a debate over quantum theory with the dog than I'd get out of an exchange with you I choose not to bother.
What I have skimmed is moral relativism at its worse. Have a word with yourself.

No idea where the stuff about them going into gay bars and attacking my way of life comes from either.I doubt they would have a problem with my way of life, you see you don't have to be gay to support gay rights.

It's simple. Not all views are equal, some are not legitimate. Like theirs. They can tell their kids what they want but, in order that they understand the society they live in and function in it comfortably they will be told the truth at school.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

In general, parents' views are just that, some people's views, and obviously the world is full to bursting with views on this, that and the ten thousand things. Kids are going to hear things from everywhere, all the time. If parents have so little faith in the ideas they're teaching that they have to actually censor other ideas from being passed to their kids (as opposed to, say, discussing any and all ideas openly with their kids) then their views are not really worthy of any respect.

Very good point. And ironic, given that the views in this instance are supposedly based on faith.

 

[Pickman's model]

"Mam, Dad... how are babies born?"
"Get thee behind me Satan!"

That'd confuse the fuck out of children, potentially messing them up for years

 

[RainbowTown]

In general, parents' views are just that, some people's views, and obviously the world is full to bursting with views on this, that and the ten thousand things. Kids are going to hear things from everywhere, all the time. If parents have so little faith in the ideas they're teaching that they have to actually censor other ideas from being passed to their kids (as opposed to, say, discussing any and all ideas openly with their kids) then their views are not really worthy of any respect.

Totally concur. Some may want to dress this up as they like in order to appear fair and all-inclusive etc (all fake of course), but at the end of the day the underlying meaning to what this really is about is as clear as daylight: intolerance and prejudice, and based solely on the belief that homosexuality is abnormal and shameful and sinful. Let's not pretend otherwise.

 

[SpineyNorman]

What if these parents were complaining about kids being taught evolution in science and insisted they taught creationism instead?

Wouldn't surprise me at all if that was the next step.

 

[alex_]

What if these parents were complaining about kids being taught evolution in science and insisted they taught creationism instead?

Wouldn't surprise me at all if that was the next step.

One of the quotes from the lady says that children are “created”