A teacher, fired for not going along with an eight year-old girl’s wish to be treated as a boy, is speaking up in an employment tribunal about her worries for the child’s welfare. The Mail has the story.
She was ordered by the headteacher before the start of term to go along with the wishes of the pupil to ‘socially transition’ under the guidance of controversial LGBT charity Stonewall.
It meant calling her by a boy’s name and using male pronouns, and also involved an ultimately futile attempt to keep her gender change a secret from classmates.
She added that children are being supported by teachers and schools to believe that they are in the “wrong body”. She is bringing a case against the primary school and Nottinghamshire County Council, claiming she was victimised for whistleblowing and unfairly dismissed in 2022. …
She said her sacking, for wanting to protect vulnerable children from harm, has torn her life apart and left her with the prospect of never being able to teach again. …
In 2021, the school adopted training methods devised by Stonewall, which urges teachers to “remove any unnecessarily gendered language” from the classroom.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
We should be crystal clear about this: what sits behind this mutilation of children is plain evil. Pure and simple.
The teaching profession has been complicit in frankly the abuse of children over the past 4 years, from what they did to them during Covid, to the sexualisation of them from Kindergarten,to now the active support of mutilation and abusing their young immature bodies and brains with drugs to support a cults magical thinking.
Who would trust their child to any of these people, I am sure they are not all the same but their are precious few like this woman who have the morals and courage to take a stand.
Whilst dreadful, routine abortion in the UK is the most pressing child safety issue in the UK. Trans is just the latest escalation against reproductive rights.
An unborn baby is not a child.
Anything that the expectant mother does with her body is her business.
The rights of an eight year old living girl are literally INFINITELY greater than an unborn baby.
Just my opinion, obviously.
For once, I couldn’t possibly disagree with you more. An expectant mother holds three lives in her hands, not one. She has the power to literally destroy one life and metaphorically destroy two others. While I believe there are exceptional circumstances that should allow an abortion, I believe societies current attitude towards the termination of life is one of a sick society. We do it – as we do most things – under the banner of female empowerment. Nothing could be further from the truth; abortion is encouraged for a number of reasons, but deliberately diminishing the bond of family, and ensuring the system milks the woman for as much work and cash as possible, are two such reasons.
I’m sure I can’t change your mind, but please do listen to the following podcast as food for thought.
https://podcast24.co.uk/episodes/the-current-thing/dr-calum-miller-the-case-for-pro-life-4eL_fPy70
I, like you, am dead against the encouraging of abortion. That is the sign of a sick society.
I am not, however, against abortion.
That is encouraging abortion. It is the go-to statement of all those on the pro-abortion side of the argument, but doesn’t stand up to the flimsiest of scrutiny. It encourages abortion by trivialising the act so that it is akin to the choice of eating junk food. It dilutes the incredibly complicated to something incredibly simple – “my body, my choice”. But terminating a life that two people have created, and have the chance to nurture, is not the same as ordering a pizza. The brainwashing relies on good people to believe something that is not true – that only the woman matters, and that the woman will be better for making the decision. It’s a lie.
Last post on this. I strongly disagree with you on this, but nothing more than that.
The real heffalump in the room that no one is mentioning is that even before it was legal it went on. Usually in less than sterile surroundings and with less than adequate care and attention. Backstreet abortions were dangerous for the patient. I don’t agree with abortion on demand or using it as late contraception, but do we really want to go back to the old ways? Whichever way we go there will be problems. Social and psychological prices to pay.
We should not be sidetracked by the abortion debate. That is not what this article is about.
And where is it law that a women must be held responsible for another human being for the rest of her life? Who has any moral right to force that on anyone?
BINGO. Well-said.
Cheers TSAP
I have never been able to make up my mind on this issue. I suppose I never will now.
One thing I would say is that an unborn baby could be equated to a human that had been born (of any age) in an apparently vegetative state. I think it’s one thing to say that the mother has the right to choose while it’s in her body, but another to say an unborn baby has fewer rights because it’s not apparent sentient yet – but that is possibly not a point you were making.
When I was younger I shared that view. Over the last 2 decades I have learned enough about multiple facets of this issue, spirital, societal and biological, that I have moved towards the position eloquently explained by Free Lemming below.
I do not believe that abortion should be illegal. I do however believe there should be time limits. 12 weeks seems not unreasonable.
To say an unborn baby is not a child is like saying they are not a baby. Or not a human.
‘My body my choice’ is a slogan used to justify murder. A pregnant woman is NOT one body or one life or one person – she is *two*.
I am torn in this subject, because I don’t think The State should tell people what they can or cannot do with their own bodies. The State, however, should make clear that an unborn baby, developed beyond a certain point, AT LATEST at the point it could survive outside of the womb, is a person, a human being, who should be allowed to keep their life. Frankly, I’d ideally say not beyond the point it develops a heartbeat.
Abortion is what it is: the killing of an unborn human being, an unborn baby. Quite why people think that’s a good thing is beyond me.
I start with the assumption that no woman wants to “kill” the potential new life she is carrying.
Of course abortion is not a good thing. It’s awful, mainly awful for the woman. Sometimes, however, the woman believes it is necessary. That is all we need to say.
No woman “wants to kill”…
That’s *exactly* what they want to do. It’s in the title – ‘Abortion’.
I’d further say that the young life being sliced up and vacuumed out of the womb goes through something pretty unpleasant. How is that less awful than what the woman goes through?
I don’t know, I am not the “young life” nor the woman who would be responsible for caring for it.
And I will never condemn a woman for choosing abortion.
Every sperm is not sacred.
Honestly mate, I don’t know where the difficulty lies in knowing which is the worse fate – having an abortion or being the one aborted (by being sliced up and vacuumed out of the womb)
I will absolutely condemn anyone, whether it be a woman or the one performing the abortion, for doing so after the point that the baby could survive outside of the womb.
If one baby was born at 20 weeks, and the baby survived, why should it be okay or allowed to slice up and kill another baby at 20 weeks that was still inside the womb? Notwithstanding the law, if the woman who gave birth at 20 weeks suddenly changed her mind, would it be okay to take a scalpel to the newborn 20-week-old baby?
Let’s apply reductio ad absurdum here…
On this basis, because modern science allows us to keep the foetus alive outside of the womb immediately after the moment of conception, abortion would never be allowed in your world.
Absurd.
I fail to understand why an arbitrary 20 weeks thing is better than the totally non-arbitrary moment of birth, the moment the baby takes its first breath and uses its own lungs and heart for the first time in its life.
English law says that a foetus is not a person until it is born.
There is a huge difference between abortions at very early stages of pregnancy and those later, over time law has developed on this issue.
As someone who is implacably opposed to religion of all types I do not consider that religious arguments should be able to overrule the decision of non-believers.
I’m not in favour of encouraging abortion but I do believe that it should be available and be the choice of the person or persons closest to the situation. Anything else is either barbarism or religious oppression.
I recall being on a train and there were two teenage girls in the seats in front of me. Being young they did not have the brains to keep their voices down, and since they were talking about sex and gender and other stuff they had clearly been subjected to at school I could not help thinking that the education system has a great deal to answer for that they have distorted the brains of young people with the unadulterated garbage that I heard coming from the mouths of these two unfortunate girls blinded and misinformed by ideologues that are suppose to be teaching our children HOW to think, but are teaching them WHAT to think instead.
So they were trying to keep the girl’s gender change a secret from everyone else… by ordering the teacher to use he/him and to call her by a name of the opposite gender??
Unfortunately the comments have drifted off this most important of topics facing our society today. Another principled teacher is likely to lose her job, and possibly be removed from the teaching register because she, quite rightly, refuses to accept an eight year old girl can ‘change’ into a boy. That is simply impossible and for the child’s parents to be pandering to their own child’s mental confusion is criminal, a duty of care to a child does not mean agreeing to anything they want…what if that child wanted to jump off a cliff, or walk in front of a bus..would the stupid parents go along with that?