Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" Fucking ridiculous! Next question?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts? Fucking ridiculous! Next question? "But boys have to wear shirts and girls have to wear blouses.....where's the gender neutral in that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx" 
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?"That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women. Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender. Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. "So they are identifying everyone as boys by making them wear trousers? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. "
So I was completely missing the point then
I'm very simple minded. I just think people should wear the clothes they want. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers.
So I was completely missing the point then
I'm very simple minded. I just think people should wear the clothes they want."Me too. I think gender stereotypes are oppressive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. "But these are primary schools ( according to the OP) . At that age they shouldn't even be thinking about that . I can kinda understand it in a secondary school , but a 6 year old should be learning to spell and read properly , not be confused by bizarre rules. Sorry if anyone disagrees it just my opinion . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers.
So they are identifying everyone as boys by making them wear trousers? "No because it is considered gender appropriate for females to wear trousers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. But these are primary schools ( according to the OP) . At that age they shouldn't even be thinking about that . I can kinda understand it in a secondary school , but a 6 year old should be learning to spell and read properly , not be confused by bizarre rules. Sorry if anyone disagrees it just my opinion ."There's a strong movement to introduce kids to Trans issues at a very young age. I don't agree with it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" How is that Gender Neutral? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" There's a strong movement to introduce kids to Trans issues at a very young age. I don't agree with it. " It's a very bad idea to try and regulate for every conceivable circumstance. Basically the school doesn't have the balls to tell parents not to send boys to school in a skirt so they are creating draconian rules to pass the buck. It's also a move supported by people who think skirts aren't modest  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. But these are primary schools ( according to the OP) . At that age they shouldn't even be thinking about that . I can kinda understand it in a secondary school , but a 6 year old should be learning to spell and read properly , not be confused by bizarre rules. Sorry if anyone disagrees it just my opinion .
There's a strong movement to introduce kids to Trans issues at a very young age. I don't agree with it. "Nor do I | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers. But these are primary schools ( according to the OP) . At that age they shouldn't even be thinking about that . I can kinda understand it in a secondary school , but a 6 year old should be learning to spell and read properly , not be confused by bizarre rules. Sorry if anyone disagrees it just my opinion .
There's a strong movement to introduce kids to Trans issues at a very young age. I don't agree with it. Nor do I "make skirts the only option. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts? How is that Gender Neutral?" The schools seem to think that is all it takes.....but as I said in a post above girl still have to wear blouses and boys shirts...so it kind of makes a mockery of it all imo.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it?" The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. " I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. " Then why not make all wear shirts? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts? Fucking ridiculous! Next question?
But boys have to wear shirts and girls have to wear blouses.....where's the gender neutral in that "It's all pointless tinkering, modern society falling over itself trying to be modern. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. " When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. " Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. " Yeah my daughter wears tie,shirt and blazer. Now it may look smart ,but I'd prefer the kid's to be comfortable in polo shirts and jumpers whilst they're sat at a desk all day learning. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Then why not make all wear shirts?" I’m not sure , but I’m guessing a blouse is made to accommodate breasts ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Can't bloody win. My daughter was told her school trousers were too well fitted on her bottom and to wear baggier one's. What the fuck is that about,for her to wear baggier one's she's have to go to school looking like a bag of spuds. " It's absolute madness I tell you ......madness  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Then why not make all wear shirts? I’m not sure , but I’m guessing a blouse is made to accommodate breasts ? " We are talking primary school here....but yeah I kinda get you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards." What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. " A shame that kids of primary school age have to be involved in such issues, what will happen with the next generation I wonder.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Then why not make all wear shirts? I’m not sure , but I’m guessing a blouse is made to accommodate breasts ? We are talking primary school here....but yeah I kinda get you "Ah I must have missed the bit about primary school . My mistake , in that case it’s a bit daft . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" It's ballox at least let the Cds wear one  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. A shame that kids of primary school age have to be involved in such issues, what will happen with the next generation I wonder.." More than likely change it to skirts only | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. Yeah my daughter wears tie,shirt and blazer. Now it may look smart ,but I'd prefer the kid's to be comfortable in polo shirts and jumpers whilst they're sat at a desk all day learning." I would have hated working in a tie. I don't know how men do it in offices all day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. Yeah my daughter wears tie,shirt and blazer. Now it may look smart ,but I'd prefer the kid's to be comfortable in polo shirts and jumpers whilst they're sat at a desk all day learning." In preparation for a lifetime's drudgery sat behind a desk having to wear a suit every day. Why not give them only four weeks annual holiday while we're at it.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. Yeah my daughter wears tie,shirt and blazer. Now it may look smart ,but I'd prefer the kid's to be comfortable in polo shirts and jumpers whilst they're sat at a desk all day learning. In preparation for a lifetime's drudgery sat behind a desk having to wear a suit every day. Why not give them only four weeks annual holiday while we're at it. "That’s actually a bloody good idea . They are so more able to cope with that than we are . I week off every three months . It would us make life a damn site easier for working parents too . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? " I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. " I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield "What was their logic? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It makes a lot of sense. I think all schools at all age levels will become trousers only within the next few years - possibly for staff too! It makes sense right across society. " Why? Where is the freedom of choice? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic? "Poor parents can't afford to buy uniforms and everyday clothes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? " I think it's getting a ballence of common sense in relation to uniform. For most of the globe gender identification is a core aspect of human self image. Altgough I understand that some people may take their following of a sub culture to also be key aspect of their identity. A deep seated and personal identification as part of a sub culture is how ever less prevalent and tends to be more fluid than gender indentification which affects most people. Anyway there are other ways to express such intensities such as hair style, pin badges etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic? "Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? I think it's getting a ballence of common sense in relation to uniform. For most of the globe gender identification is a core aspect of human self image. Altgough I understand that some people may take their following of a sub culture to also be key aspect of their identity. A deep seated and personal identification as part of a sub culture is how ever less prevalent and tends to be more fluid than gender indentification which affects most people. Anyway there are other ways to express such intensities such as hair style, pin badges etc. " I disagree about gender self image. A large proportion of kids who identify as trans at school don't keep it up in later life | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish "I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? I think it's getting a ballence of common sense in relation to uniform. For most of the globe gender identification is a core aspect of human self image. Altgough I understand that some people may take their following of a sub culture to also be key aspect of their identity. A deep seated and personal identification as part of a sub culture is how ever less prevalent and tends to be more fluid than gender indentification which affects most people. Anyway there are other ways to express such intensities such as hair style, pin badges etc. I disagree about gender self image. A large proportion of kids who identify as trans at school don't keep it up in later life " For me that has little sway in terms of the fundamental importance of gender identification v sub cultural identification to most everydat people. After all for example gender identification is prevalent in terms of the fashions across sub cultures. I think it is a more core human aspect across global societies than you give it credit for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat."Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? I think it's getting a ballence of common sense in relation to uniform. For most of the globe gender identification is a core aspect of human self image. Altgough I understand that some people may take their following of a sub culture to also be key aspect of their identity. A deep seated and personal identification as part of a sub culture is how ever less prevalent and tends to be more fluid than gender indentification which affects most people. Anyway there are other ways to express such intensities such as hair style, pin badges etc. I disagree about gender self image. A large proportion of kids who identify as trans at school don't keep it up in later life For me that has little sway in terms of the fundamental importance of gender identification v sub cultural identification to most everydat people. After all for example gender identification is prevalent in terms of the fashions across sub cultures. I think it is a more core human aspect across global societies than you give it credit for." But even if, for the sake or argument, I accept what you say, should we privilege someone who has a deep seated gender identity as somehow deserving of respect more than other strong identities. I mean, I have never had any gender identity but have always strongly identified as a Sheffield United supporter. Why is my strongly felt identity less worthy of respect? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers. "It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers.
It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that. "Yes because the mainly working class local state school educated councillors who sent their children to local state schools would have no idea what it was like in local state schools. Life was very different in the outside London Labour Party 35 years ago. It was a strongly working class organisation. Anyway, at school you could tell the averagely working class kids from the really poor kids even when they had uniforms.. They brought in the no uniforms policy in my last compulsory year. In relation to literally no one did I say. "fucking hell I never knew their family was poor" That's often put forward as a justification for uniforms but it doesn't stand up as ten minutes in any school playground would tell you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It makes a lot of sense. I think all schools at all age levels will become trousers only within the next few years - possibly for staff too! It makes sense right across society. " Thats turning us into a proper nanny state imo... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers.
It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that.
Yes because the mainly working class local state school educated councillors who sent their children to local state schools would have no idea what it was like in local state schools. Life was very different in the outside London Labour Party 35 years ago. It was a strongly working class organisation.
Anyway, at school you could tell the averagely working class kids from the really poor kids even when they had uniforms.. They brought in the no uniforms policy in my last compulsory year. In relation to literally no one did I say. "fucking hell I never knew their family was poor"
That's often put forward as a justification for uniforms but it doesn't stand up as ten minutes in any school playground would tell you. "It fooled me sometimes because I'd look at some of the girls through rose tinted glasses. Then you see them out of school and it sort of clicked... oh. It did make me laugh that a school banned pencil cases because the poor kids had crap ones. As if it was the pencil cases that gave it away! If we take away the pencil cases then nobody will know that tyler and Charlene are poor kids! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers.
It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that.
Yes because the mainly working class local state school educated councillors who sent their children to local state schools would have no idea what it was like in local state schools. Life was very different in the outside London Labour Party 35 years ago. It was a strongly working class organisation.
Anyway, at school you could tell the averagely working class kids from the really poor kids even when they had uniforms.. They brought in the no uniforms policy in my last compulsory year. In relation to literally no one did I say. "fucking hell I never knew their family was poor"
That's often put forward as a justification for uniforms but it doesn't stand up as ten minutes in any school playground would tell you. "I can't imagine a world where members of the Labour party actually sent their kids to state schools! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers.
It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that.
Yes because the mainly working class local state school educated councillors who sent their children to local state schools would have no idea what it was like in local state schools. Life was very different in the outside London Labour Party 35 years ago. It was a strongly working class organisation.
Anyway, at school you could tell the averagely working class kids from the really poor kids even when they had uniforms.. They brought in the no uniforms policy in my last compulsory year. In relation to literally no one did I say. "fucking hell I never knew their family was poor"
That's often put forward as a justification for uniforms but it doesn't stand up as ten minutes in any school playground would tell you.
I can't imagine a world where members of the Labour party actually sent their kids to state schools! "Shows how little you know about the Labour Party. It's pretty much taboo in the party to send your kids to private schools, which is why Diane Abbott got so much flack when she did. You'd be harsh pushed to find any other Labour MP who doesn't use the state system. Every Labour leader in your lifetime used the state systen and Corbyn famously split up with his second wife as she wanted to send their kids to a (state) grammar school | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? I don't see what that has to do with gender identity? Surely here your talking about history period identify (if there is such an idenitys) or the absured 'but what if I identify as a helicopter' argument. It's daft. What I am talking about is just a common sense approch regarding people's ability to express gender the way they want to within the confines of the uniform. For example a uniform that has the option of trousers or skirts for all. I am wondering why you are privileging subjective gender identity against any other form of deeply felt personal identity. Many young people deeply identify as punks, goths, emos or whatever. Can they wear clothes appropriate to that identity? I think it's getting a ballence of common sense in relation to uniform. For most of the globe gender identification is a core aspect of human self image. Altgough I understand that some people may take their following of a sub culture to also be key aspect of their identity. A deep seated and personal identification as part of a sub culture is how ever less prevalent and tends to be more fluid than gender indentification which affects most people. Anyway there are other ways to express such intensities such as hair style, pin badges etc. I disagree about gender self image. A large proportion of kids who identify as trans at school don't keep it up in later life For me that has little sway in terms of the fundamental importance of gender identification v sub cultural identification to most everydat people. After all for example gender identification is prevalent in terms of the fashions across sub cultures. I think it is a more core human aspect across global societies than you give it credit for. But even if, for the sake or argument, I accept what you say, should we privilege someone who has a deep seated gender identity as somehow deserving of respect more than other strong identities. I mean, I have never had any gender identity but have always strongly identified as a Sheffield United supporter. Why is my strongly felt identity less worthy of respect? " Of course my original point was where is progress in telling people they can not wear skirts to school? Gender identity (including not identifying as a gender) is something that affects pretty much everyone. So simply why ban skirts and further restrict uniform choices? As to whether to cater for the multitude of others ways people see them self in terms of school uniform, a goth, a man u supporter and helicopter etc this far more complicated. Especially if like me you believe in school uniform. I'm not sure if can fully cater for every niche identification and still maintain a uniform. The sensible half way house for me would be to give kids total freedom in terms of hair style and footwear (providing it's practical for school). Then say you identify deeply and whole hearted as a man u supporter you can by all means dye your hair red and come to school in uniform in trousers or skirt. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. I've never liked the idea of school uniform, especially not the blazer, shirt and tie ones. Some schools Fred Perry style tops with their blazers, some have them without blazers. When I was 15 they abolished uniforms in socialist Sheffield
What was their logic?
Freedom for Kids from bourgeois sensibilities. They also abolished corporal punishment at the same time, four years before it was abolished nationally in state schools . After that you had to pay to have your kids beaten by their teachers until it was abolished in all schools 1998 ish
I would have thought school uniforms helped the proletariat.
Nah, we hated them. Often behind the bike sheds we debated the hegemonic implications (in the Gramscian sense) of ties and blazers.
It makes it harder to spot the low class kids in the school if you stop them wearing tracksuit bottoms, I can understand that they wouldn't appreciate the importance of that.
Yes because the mainly working class local state school educated councillors who sent their children to local state schools would have no idea what it was like in local state schools. Life was very different in the outside London Labour Party 35 years ago. It was a strongly working class organisation.
Anyway, at school you could tell the averagely working class kids from the really poor kids even when they had uniforms.. They brought in the no uniforms policy in my last compulsory year. In relation to literally no one did I say. "fucking hell I never knew their family was poor"
That's often put forward as a justification for uniforms but it doesn't stand up as ten minutes in any school playground would tell you.
I can't imagine a world where members of the Labour party actually sent their kids to state schools!
Shows how little you know about the Labour Party. It's pretty much taboo in the party to send your kids to private schools, which is why Diane Abbott got so much flack when she did.
You'd be harsh pushed to find any other Labour MP who doesn't use the state system. Every Labour leader in your lifetime used the state systen and Corbyn famously split up with his second wife as she wanted to send their kids to a (state) grammar school "Which they ended up going to anyway. It just makes him look like an idiot that he got a woman pregnant without having the foresight to discuss an issue that was clearly important to him. You'd also he hard pressed to find a Labour front bencher who hasn't had a divorce. Labour have special state schools, like the one Blairs kids went to that "broke admission rules in 105 ways" to "discriminate against those from working class backgrounds". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. " There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. " Seems a apt comment on a sex site  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If all the kids are in trousers it might stop the pervy guys who think it's fine to beep their horns and leer at young girls in their uniform. " That doesn't happen to my kids. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If all the kids are in trousers it might stop the pervy guys who think it's fine to beep their horns and leer at young girls in their uniform. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. " Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers.
So they are identifying everyone as boys by making them wear trousers? "There has been a few stories about boys not being allowed to wear shorts, so they started wearing a skirt to school. Could be the powers that be, think the boys are taking the piss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! " You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. " And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system!" We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. " It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. " Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? " You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? " There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. " Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. " Lolol on a swingers site, too!
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. " Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx" . I'm not  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. Lolol on a swingers site, too!
"Don't swingers have morals? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" worlds gone mad!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. " Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women." This whole idea about people being the gender they " feel " is confusing to me in the sense that, if I "feel" like I want to kill my neighbour because the nugget has let his dog shit on my lawn for the hundredth time, does that automatically make me a murderer? Biologically, if you have the parts, that's the gender you are, if you want to change it, have an operation, and then you are a different gender... that makes sense to me. A guy who feels like they are a different gender one day, but then swaps back the next day, that I find difficult to understand, it's like he has two personalities , must be difficult to live like that. So, who said that this "ideology" is correct, who gets to decide? I just treat people as people, I don't take into account race, religion, gender etc, so long as they respect me as a person, I show them the same respect, surely that's how it should be?" Without getting into it too deeply, there's a distinction between sex and gender. Sex is the physical stuff like penises and vaginas that make us male or female. Gender is the outward signs usually associated with certain sexes, clothing, hair styles, ways of behaviour etc I think gender is a bad thing as it stereotypes behaviour. The trans ideology essentially says that gendered presentation and behaviour is somehow innate and it is that that signifies whether you are a man or a woman, not what genitals you have. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women." This whole idea about people being the gender they " feel " is confusing to me in the sense that, if I "feel" like I want to kill my neighbour because the nugget has let his dog shit on my lawn for the hundredth time, does that automatically make me a murderer? Biologically, if you have the parts, that's the gender you are, if you want to change it, have an operation, and then you are a different gender... that makes sense to me. A guy who feels like they are a different gender one day, but then swaps back the next day, that I find difficult to understand, it's like he has two personalities , must be difficult to live like that. So, who said that this "ideology" is correct, who gets to decide? I just treat people as people, I don't take into account race, religion, gender etc, so long as they respect me as a person, I show them the same respect, surely that's how it should be? Without getting into it too deeply, there's a distinction between sex and gender. Sex is the physical stuff like penises and vaginas that make us male or female. Gender is the outward signs usually associated with certain sexes, clothing, hair styles, ways of behaviour etc I think gender is a bad thing as it stereotypes behaviour. The trans ideology essentially says that gendered presentation and behaviour is somehow innate and it is that that signifies whether you are a man or a woman, not what genitals you have. " What's wrong with stereotypes? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. " A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers.
So they are identifying everyone as boys by making them wear trousers?
No because it is considered gender appropriate for females to wear trousers. "who says it's not gender appropriate for boys to wear a skirt? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think everyone has missed the point of why they're doing this. It's to stop the whole "girls can wear skirts why can't boys wear shorts" arguements in the summer. Rather than allowing boys to wear shorts, which would be the sensible thing, they've gone "ok then. No one can wear skirts" It's really not as deep as so many of you have gone. Also the subject of shirt/blouse. Most primary school uniforms are polo shirts, or they are in my area. " Of course you are correct and the usual suspects go off on a tangent of their own making. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think everyone has missed the point of why they're doing this. It's to stop the whole "girls can wear skirts why can't boys wear shorts" arguements in the summer. Rather than allowing boys to wear shorts, which would be the sensible thing, they've gone "ok then. No one can wear skirts" It's really not as deep as so many of you have gone. Also the subject of shirt/blouse. Most primary school uniforms are polo shirts, or they are in my area. Of course you are correct and the usual suspects go off on a tangent of their own making. "Do we need to wait until the thread fills with 178 replies of "Yes girls should be allowed to wear skirts" before going on some tangents? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's a clue in the word ,"Uniform ". It's not a choice of clothing it's a uniform "Only in 2018 did it become contraversial to have a boys uniform and a girls uniform. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"With any luck he’ll abolish all the universities too as engines of the middle class bourgeoisie and turn them all into proper working class polytechnics. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"With any luck he’ll abolish all the universities too as engines of the middle class bourgeoisie and turn them all into proper working class polytechnics. "and abolish porn sites too hopefully, give our kids a chance | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There's a clue in the word ,"Uniform ". It's not a choice of clothing it's a uniform
Only in 2018 did it become contraversial to have a boys uniform and a girls uniform. "Its was 2 uniforms and now it will be one .Untwist your panties.Its now "uniform". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"With any luck he’ll abolish all the universities too as engines of the middle class bourgeoisie and turn them all into proper working class polytechnics. and abolish porn sites too hopefully, give our kids a chance "No, that’s a fascist idea. I’m a red Commie! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"With any luck he’ll abolish all the universities too as engines of the middle class bourgeoisie and turn them all into proper working class polytechnics. "Sorry if you don’t like it but if you really like propping up the ruling oppressive classes, maybe it suits you! It doesn’t suit some 98% of normal, ordinary, hard-working people! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. " Segregation breeds mistrust, fear and hatred. The history of the world is littered with such crap. Your assumption that children grow up to be carbon copies of their parents probably says everything. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For me it is a bit of a step too far in limiting students freedom or choice/expression. Although I do understand the need for a degree of uniformity. I think for most people the choice of certain items of clothing such as to wear a skirt or trousers is key to expressing their identity. How can we value differce if we are not allowed to express it? The whole point of school uniforms is to suppress personal identity and make everyone look the same. You're arguing against uniforms per se. Not pre se, I agree with having school uniforms. But suppressing people expression of gender is a step too far. Reaches to far into people's person identities and is a step backwards. What if I have a strong personal identity as an Elizabethan courtier. Can I turn up in doublet and hose? " You're allegedly an adult, do as you fucking please. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. " Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. Segregation breeds mistrust, fear and hatred. The history of the world is littered with such crap. Your assumption that children grow up to be carbon copies of their parents probably says everything. " That’s exactly why we need an education system in which every kid is FORCED to attend a state comprehensive. It is the ONLY way in which to educate the next generation to be useful, atheist, members of society! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think everyone has missed the point of why they're doing this. It's to stop the whole "girls can wear skirts why can't boys wear shorts" arguements in the summer. Rather than allowing boys to wear shorts, which would be the sensible thing, they've gone "ok then. No one can wear skirts" It's really not as deep as so many of you have gone. Also the subject of shirt/blouse. Most primary school uniforms are polo shirts, or they are in my area. " . No most of us got it straight away, it was just the bourgeoisie bunch that got to argue about deep intellectual crap | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense!" Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. " Really? Well, you may call it liberty, I call it educational apartheid! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. Really? Well, you may call it liberty, I call it educational apartheid! " Because you don't believe in the fundamental principles of liberty, which frankly makes you unfit to live in Britain in my opinion. There's no fundamental difference between people like you and people who want to throw gay people off buildings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. Really? Well, you may call it liberty, I call it educational apartheid! Because you don't believe in the fundamental principles of liberty, which frankly makes you unfit to live in Britain in my opinion. There's no fundamental difference between people like you and people who want to throw gay people off buildings. " Funny, for someone who claims to be a liberal, you have a funny way of showing it! Well, I suppose the old adage still holds - there’s no-one more illiberal than a liberal!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. Really? Well, you may call it liberty, I call it educational apartheid! Because you don't believe in the fundamental principles of liberty, which frankly makes you unfit to live in Britain in my opinion. There's no fundamental difference between people like you and people who want to throw gay people off buildings. Funny, for someone who claims to be a liberal, you have a funny way of showing it! Well, I suppose the old adage still holds - there’s no-one more illiberal than a liberal!!!" Only because you don't understand the difference between liberal and amoral | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If all the kids are in trousers it might stop the pervy guys who think it's fine to beep their horns and leer at young girls in their uniform. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" Freedom of choice, freedom of expression that doesn't harm those around you is clearly not important to this school. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The world need to except were all different they should have uniform and Any one can wear any part of it girls in pants and boys in skirts of that what they want to instead of trying to force a world to conform.....xx
This. Surely accepting the principle of gender neutrality means accepting that clothes have no gender significance so basically we should all wear what we like regardless of sex? Or am I missing the point?
That's basically the complete opposite of trans ideology. The ideology says that gender is not anything to do with your physical biology so the only thing that signifies gender is things we traditionally associate with men and women.
Thus someone with a penis who feels they are female should be allowed to wear a skirt as that correlates with their. "real" gender.
Kids being kids, no doubt some boys are taking the piss by claiming they are girls and coming to school in skirts. Hence the school is getting round that by saying everyone wears trousers.
So they are identifying everyone as boys by making them wear trousers?
There has been a few stories about boys not being allowed to wear shorts, so they started wearing a skirt to school. Could be the powers that be, think the boys are taking the piss."I remember those. Kids should be allowed to wear what they like as long as it's within the uniform rules. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So a school in Manchester is to ban all sex's wearing skirts and all pupils will have to wear trousers on the issue of gender neutral. Your thoughts?" I think it’s ridiculous. We wasn’t allowed to wear trousers when I was at school even in the snow. An in this heat, I think kids should be able to wear skirts an shorts. So long as it’s in the correct colours of uniform an smart . Let the kids decide if they want to wear shorts, skirt or trousers. Simple | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why would anyone want their children to go anywhere but to a solid comprehensive school where they learn to be street-wise and where they learn the true meaning of respect and society. No other type of school should even be allowed to exist. There's no benefit to people of different value systems mixing. The one with the lower moral standards will drag the other down. Sorry, I really don‘t understand your point on any level! You want everyone to go to the same type of school. I'm explaining to you why I don't. And I’m telling you it’s immoral that anyone is allowed to go to any other type of school than a state comprehensive. At least when Corbyn gets into number 10 he will enforce this and abolish every other type of school in Britain, bringing sense and uniformity to our ridiculous class-ridden education system! We have different value systems which is why we could never agree on what immoral means. Which is why i would never want my children to mix with you because no benefit could ever come from mixing with people of different value systems, only a lowering of our moral standards. It's interesting that you assume that your moral standards are automatically superior. I've mixed with lots of people whose ethical beliefs are fundamentally different from my own. I've learned a lot thereby and modified some of my beliefs. I can't conceive of being the type of person who thinks I can learn nothing from people who think differently to me. Did you really not understand what i said or are you strawmanning me deliberately? You appear to be saying there's no benefit in people who have different moral standards mixing. Are you not saying that? There's no benefit to children from different value systems mixing because the result would be one of them lowering their moral standards. Blimey. I think it would be terrible for any child to only mix with people who think exactly like their parents. They're going to get a bit of a shock when they leave school. Again, strawman. Not everyone within a value system will have the same ideas. It just means they agree on enough of the fundamentals for mutually beneficial cooperation. Well you seemed to think that a belief or non belief in comprehensive education was a sufficiently wide disparity to mean that kids with different views on that issue shouldn't mix. Would you think children of atheist parents and children of Christian parents shouldn't mix. They are fundamentally different value systems after all. A hattrick of strawmans. For someone who is sometimes suggested as one of the most intelligent people on the forum, you put in a poor display on this issue. Quite the reverse - you appear deeply bigoted against those like me who insist state comprehensives offer the only perfect education and the only one fit for our society. It’s common sense! Yes i am totally bigoted against people who don't agree on the shared values of person liberty. Hence I'd never let me kids near someone with your toxic ideology. Really? Well, you may call it liberty, I call it educational apartheid! Because you don't believe in the fundamental principles of liberty, which frankly makes you unfit to live in Britain in my opinion. There's no fundamental difference between people like you and people who want to throw gay people off buildings. Funny, for someone who claims to be a liberal, you have a funny way of showing it! Well, I suppose the old adage still holds - there’s no-one more illiberal than a liberal!!! Only because you don't understand the difference between liberal and amoral " I understand the distinction between the two terms extremely well. I’d like to see you try to defend educational apartheid as a moral good. It may be the brainchild of liberalism but it’s morally indefensible. Unfortunately, your sort of liberal finds it very hard to understand you do not always own the moral high ground! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There was a school in Exeter last year that wouldn’t let the lads wear shorts in the summer, while the girls could still wear skirts. So the lads went to the school wearing skirts, they soon changed the rules ! " Well done boys but I would have to wear skirts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
