Pupil suspended for 3 weeks in gender row.

[GlesgaeHibby]

A school pupil in Aberdeenshire has been suspended for 3 weeks for stating that he believes there are only 2 genders.

https://twitter.com/Scottish_Women/status/1142852166069174273?s=19&fbclid=IwAR16w6NocmIMxuanUZxkXscAmvLOd9EpdpQ0eH2_H bfzD7RPmk3Tu98eH2w

I'm finding the whole discourse on gender deeply disturbing at the minute. Seems that the school preaches inclusiveness, but only if you believe what they do. Joan McAlpine took pelters for, bravely, standing up for women's rights. Glad she was successful in pausing the gender reform act subject to further consultation. I just hope that there will be a space that allows all voices to be heard, and a serious debate about what are tough issues where those on either side have genuine concerns.

[James310]

Suspended for repeating something he learnt in biology class?

[Slavers]

The totalitarian state is here now! Agree with what they say or be punished!

[nairn hibee]

Suspended for refusing to lie,utter madness

[Smartie]

........suspended for 3 weeks for stating that he believes........

This is a particularly slippery slope.

His opinion is his opinion, and it's not totally outrageous.

[Radium]

Has the pupil been suspended for their views or is it perhaps that they secretly recorded a teacher and published it with the intent of shaming the school and the teacher?

Would be interesting to know if the class discussion was about sex, gender and/or gender identity. All are current and would have different nuances.

On all accounts he is clinically wrong: the vagaries of X and Y chromosomes means that some people have genitalia that leads to them being described as intersex. Meaning there are 3 descriptions of sex.

Trying to remember the clarity that I viewed the world’s problems in my teenage years. It would be interesting, given his respect for LGBTI individuals, how he thinks we build an inclusive society that allows contradictory views to be expressed and equally respected.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Suspended for repeating something he learnt in biology class?

Gender and sex are not the same. The former is a social consttuct, the latter is what he learned in biology.

[Hibrandenburg]

Using women's rights as an argument to discriminate against people with transgender issues is misleading. It would maybe be a valid line of argumentation if all transgender people were born men who identify themselves as female or neutral. However what about those who were born female but identify themselves as male or neutral? Where do they fit in on the spectrum? Are they abusing male rights?

[matty_f]

Using women's rights as an argument to discriminate against people with transgender issues is misleading. It would maybe be a valid line of argumentation if all transgender people were born men who identify themselves as female or neutral. However what about those who were born female but identify themselves as male or neutral? Where do they fit in on the spectrum? Are they abusing male rights?

I think the issue is that there are so few instances of females identifying as males who are making the demands that trans women are.

At the moment there are trans activists who are calling lesbians who don't want to have sex with trans women transphobic, and there are issues like trans women wanting to use female toilets and changing areas etc.

This is where the impact on women's and lesbian's rights is an issue - amazingly trans-men aren't making a huge noise about using male toilets, changing areas, or competing in men's sports etc.

It's not a simple issue and there's a huge risk of being seen as un-PC or intolerant, or transphobic if you question the rights and wrongs of trans rights, but there is a significant risk to women's rights by the trans movement.

Have a look at Father Ted and The IT Crowd author @glinner on Twitter - he's very vocal about it.

[NAE NOOKIE]

In all honesty you have to be a brave human biological entity indeed to even touch this subject with a barge pole …. I'm never backwards when it comes to expressing my opinion, but in all honesty when it comes to this it seems to me you are gonna offend somebody no matter how hard you try not to.

[Fife-Hibee]

I can't help thinking that there is far more to this story than we're being told.

"Student suspended for claiming there are only 2 genders" is a great headline for selling papers though.

[neil7908]

I can't help thinking that there is far more to this story than we're being told.

"Student suspended for claiming there are only 2 genders" is a great headline for selling papers though.

Yup, would be very surprised if its as simple as that.

[Scouse Hibee]

It’s amazing what the modern world is asking us to accept, confusion reigns on this subject but not for me, I will stick with two and let everyone else debate the newly created terms.

[GlesgaeHibby]

I think the issue is that there are so few instances of females identifying as males who are making the demands that trans women are.

At the moment there are trans activists who are calling lesbians who don't want to have sex with trans women transphobic, and there are issues like trans women wanting to use female toilets and changing areas etc.

This is where the impact on women's and lesbian's rights is an issue - amazingly trans-men aren't making a huge noise about using male toilets, changing areas, or competing in men's sports etc.

It's not a simple issue and there's a huge risk of being seen as un-PC or intolerant, or transphobic if you question the rights and wrongs of trans rights, but there is a significant risk to women's rights by the trans movement.

Have a look at Father Ted and The IT Crowd author @glinner on Twitter - he's very vocal about it.

:agree: There were a lot of anti 'TERF' campaigners at Pride marches this weekend with some pretty downright threatening and offensive posters to women/lesbians.

I worry about where this all leads to.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

It’s amazing what the modern world is asking us to accept, confusion reigns on this subject but not for me, I will stick with two and let everyone else debate the newly created terms.

Likewise.

[Pretty Boy]

It could be argued he is technically incorrect though.

It's been mentioned above but sex and gender are not the same thing. Had he said 'there are only 2 sexes' he would have been accurate (discounting intersex individuals).

Gender is a social and cultural reference rather than a strictly biological one. That's not making any comment on the rights of trans/non binary etc people to use a toilet of their choosing or any other 'trans rights' issue. It's just a fact that there has been an acceptance of more than 2 genders in various cultures for centuries.

[WeeRussell]

It could be argued he is technically incorrect though.

It's been mentioned above but sex and gender are not the same thing. Had he said 'there are only 2 sexes' he would have been accurate (discounting intersex individuals).

Gender is a social and cultural reference rather than a strictly biological one. That's not making any comment on the rights of trans/non binary etc people to use a toilet of their choosing or any other 'trans rights' issue. It's just a fact that there has been an acceptance of more than 2 genders in various cultures for centuries.

You’re probably right PB though I’m sure you’ll agree being technically incorrect isn’t worth a 3 week suspension! As a few have said, I wonder how much more there was to the ‘row’.

[Pretty Boy]

You’re probably right PB though I’m sure you’ll agree being technically incorrect isn’t worth a 3 week suspension! As a few have said, I wonder how much more there was to the ‘row’.

On the face of it then definitely not.

There must be more to the story surely.

[Fife-Hibee]

Can we stop buying into the idea that he was suspended, simply for saying that? Clearly that wasn't the case here.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Can we stop buying into the idea that he was suspended, simply for saying that? Clearly that wasn't the case here.

What happened?

[Smartie]

There must be more to the case, but that isn't being mentioned anywhere.

Expressing this opinion, or the opposite opinion, is not deserving of a 3 week suspension.

[matty_f]

Can we stop buying into the idea that he was suspended, simply for saying that? Clearly that wasn't the case here.

What was he suspended for?

[Fife-Hibee]

What was he suspended for?

From what I know, he brought a camera into school to record a teacher without prior permission with the intent to damage their reputation. I'm pretty sure there are privacy laws against people recording public sector workers without permission.

As for anything else he may have been suspended for, it clearly isn't worth printing about in the papers as it wouldn't make a good controversial SNP nanny state story.

I know this much though. Students don't get suspended from school for simply holding an opinion.

[James310]

From what I know, he brought a camera into school to record a teacher without prior permission with the intent to damage their reputation. I'm pretty sure there are privacy laws against people recording public sector workers without permission.

As for anything else he may have been suspended for, it clearly isn't worth printing about in the papers as it wouldn't make a good controversial SNP nanny state story.

I know this much though. Students don't get suspended from school for simply holding an opinion.

So why did Aberdeen Council fail to mention anything about a camera and recording in their statement, surely they would keen to get that point across?

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

From what I know, he brought a camera into school to record a teacher without prior permission with the intent to damage their reputation. I'm pretty sure there are privacy laws against people recording public sector workers without permission.

As for anything else he may have been suspended for, it clearly isn't worth printing about in the papers as it wouldn't make a good controversial SNP nanny state story.

I know this much though. Students don't get suspended from school for simply holding an opinion.

Mate, you need a well deserved rest from here, I'm becoming concerned for your state of mind.

[Fife-Hibee]

So why did Aberdeen Council fail to mention anything about a camera and recording in their statement, surely they would keen to get that point across?

Eh, because it's Aberdeen Council. Why on earth would they be keen to be open and honest about the real reasons he was suspended, when simply claiming he was suspended for having an opinion makes a better SNPbad story?

[Fife-Hibee]

Mate, you need a well deserved rest from here, I'm becoming concerned for your state of mind.

My state of mind is fine. It isn't poisoned by newspaper articles.

[James310]

Eh, because it's Aberdeen Council. Why on earth would they be keen to be open and honest about the real reasons he was suspended, when simply claiming he was suspended for having an opinion makes a better SNPbad story?

So it was all lies about why he was suspended so they could create a SNP bad story, makes sense now.

[Fife-Hibee]

So it was all lies about why he was suspended so they could create a SNP bad story, makes sense now.

Do you honestly believe students get suspending in Scotland simply for holding an opinion? Parents would be suing schools to shreds.

I know you want to believe that was the only reason he was suspended. But the sense in you knows that there had to be far more to it than that.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

My state of mind is fine. It isn't poisoned by newspaper articles.

As long as you're happy, bash on.

[Bishop Hibee]

I actually felt sorry for the teacher as having viewed the clip, he obviously feels he had to uphold what he perceived to be 'policy' or he would be in big trouble.

I'm happy to put my head above the parapet and say that self-ID is ***** and if you have a dick you are a man.

[danhibees1875]

I'd tend to agree that there's got to be more to it than the video shows, you don't get suspended for having an opinion. Even a technically wrong one as discussed above.

One thing that struck me is that the student came across as a bit of a know it all and wasn't scared to be extremely disrespectful with his "your wasting my time" comments. If that's how he acted when he knew he was filming himself then I'd assume his actions in the classroom were more severe. :dunno:

[Sir David Gray]

Even if he wasn't suspended purely for stating there are only two genders and it was more to do with the fact he recorded his teacher without consent, he has still been removed from the classroom for stating an opinion and I find it troubling that a student in Scotland is removed from a classroom in such circumstances.

If there is compelling evidence to suggest that the opinion being expressed by the student is factually incorrect then surely the correct course of action that the school should take, particularly when dealing with 17 year olds who are pretty much adults, is to hold an open and honest discussion about the issue and challenge their opinions and beliefs within the confines of the classroom amongst their peers.

I'm assuming this discussion took place during a Biology lesson which is why it was brought up in the first place, rather than it being brought up randomly during a Maths or PE lesson? If it was a Biology lesson, I would have thought the teacher would have welcomed such a discussion.

Either way, I find it really concerning that school pupils in Scotland are being, at the very least, removed from the classroom for simply stating their opinion. Like with so many other issues these days, it seems like you're only allowed an opinion on topics like this if you agree with the party line which in itself is a really troubling road to go down.

[Fife-Hibee]

Even if he wasn't suspended purely for stating there are only two genders and it was more to do with the fact he recorded his teacher without consent, he has still been removed from the classroom for stating an opinion and I find it troubling that a student in Scotland is removed from a classroom in such circumstances.

If there is compelling evidence to suggest that the opinion being expressed by the student is factually incorrect then surely the correct course of action that the school should take, particularly when dealing with 17 year olds who are pretty much adults, is to hold an open and honest discussion about the issue and challenge their opinions and beliefs within the confines of the classroom amongst their peers.

I'm assuming this discussion took place during a Biology lesson which is why it was brought up in the first place, rather than it being brought up randomly during a Maths or PE lesson? If it was a Biology lesson, I would have thought the teacher would have welcomed such a discussion.

Either way, I find it really concerning that school pupils in Scotland are being, at the very least, removed from the classroom for simply stating their opinion. Like with so many other issues these days, it seems like you're only allowed an opinion on topics like this if you agree with the party line which in itself is a really troubling road to go down.

You went from saying "even if he wasn't suspended purely for stating there are only two genders" to "I find it really concerning that school pupils in Scotland are being removed from the classroom for simply stating their opinion".

Pupils are not removed from their classrooms in Scotland for simply stating their opinion. However, students are expected to conduct themselves in a certain manner. He could have made his opinion respectfully and left it at that, but he didn't.

I remember back in my own primary school days, I got into a row with a teacher over a picture of a galaxy. The teacher stated that it was a picture of our own Milkyway galaxy. When I pointed out that it was in fact Andromeda as it would be impossible for us to have a full scale image of our own galaxy. I got into an argument with the teacher which ultimately led to me being flung out of the classroom and into detention.

I was factually correct. However, I wasn't being punished for stating my opinion, I was being punished for getting mouthy with the teacher over it when I should have just left it after making my initial point.

These things happen. It's nothing new. Sometimes teachers are wrong and students are correct.

[My_Wife_Camille]

Gender and sex are not the same. The former is a social consttuct, the latter is what he learned in biology.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

[Sir David Gray]

You went from saying "even if he wasn't suspended purely for stating there are only two genders" to "I find it really concerning that school pupils in Scotland are being removed from the classroom for simply stating their opinion".

Pupils are not removed from their classrooms in Scotland for simply stating their opinion. However, students are expected to conduct themselves in a certain manner. He could have made his opinion respectfully and left it at that, but he didn't.

I remember back in my own primary school days, I got into a row with a teacher over a picture of a galaxy. The teacher stated that it was a picture of our own Milkyway galaxy. When I pointed out that it was in fact Andromeda as it would be impossible for us to have a full scale image of our own galaxy. I got into an argument with the teacher which ultimately led to me being flung out of the classroom and into detention.

I was factually correct. However, I wasn't being punished for stating my opinion, I was being punished for getting mouthy with the teacher over it when I should have just left it after making my initial point.

These things happen. It's nothing new. Sometimes teachers are wrong and students are correct.

You surely understand that the removal from the classroom and the suspension from school were two separate incidents.

He was removed from the classroom for stating his opinion, that's a fact. You only need to watch the video clip to realise that. He hadn't recorded anything at that point so he wasn't removed for that.

It's up for debate as to whether the suspension, which came afterwards, happened purely because of his opinion or because he had recorded his conversation with his teacher (or a mixture of the two).

You say that he didn't leave it at just stating his opinion respectfully. How do you know this? Were you privy to the discussion that took place in the classroom? During the recorded clip, the teacher makes no accusations about HOW the student's opinion was put across, just that it was actually made at all and how it didn't fit into the school's official position on this topic.

If the school suspended him purely for recording his teacher without permission and then posting it online then that's fine I don't actually have any issue with that. I have my doubts about that being the case though and yes I do find it troubling.

[Fife-Hibee]

You surely understand that the removal from the classroom and the suspension from school were two separate incidents.

He was removed from the classroom for stating his opinion, that's a fact. You only need to watch the video clip to realise that. He hadn't recorded anything at that point so he wasn't removed for that.

It's up for debate as to whether the suspension, which came afterwards, happened purely because of his opinion or because he had recorded his conversation with his teacher (or a mixture of the two).

You say that he didn't leave it at just stating his opinion respectfully. How do you know this? Were you privy to the discussion that took place in the classroom? During the recorded clip, the teacher makes no accusations about HOW the student's opinion was put across, just that it was actually made at all and how it didn't fit into the school's official position on this topic.

If the school suspended him purely for recording his teacher without permission and then posting it online then that's fine I don't actually have any issue with that. I have my doubts about that being the case though and yes I do find it troubling.

You said that students in Scotland were being "suspended" simply for stating their opinion. That's what you said in your previous post. That's now been changed to "removed from the classroom for stating opinion". You then follow it up by saying "fact".

How do we know that's the facts of the matter? When, as you said, he didn't have a camera at that point to record the incident. He could have been being disrespectful, or using foul language for all we know. So it's not "fact", because there's nothing to go on. We don't know exactly why he was sent out of the classroom. We do know that he brought a camera into school and started using it without prior permission, which ultimately led to the suspension. He wasn't suspended before using the camera.

[Sir David Gray]

You said that students in Scotland were being "suspended" simply for stating their opinion. That's what you said in your previous post. That's now been changed to "removed from the classroom for stating opinion". You then follow it up by saying "fact".

How do we know that's the facts of the matter? When, as you said, he didn't have a camera at that point to record the incident. He could have been being disrespectful, or using foul language for all we know. So it's not "fact", because there's nothing to go on. We don't know exactly why he was sent out of the classroom. We do know that he brought a camera into school and started using it without prior permission, which ultimately led to the suspension. He wasn't suspended before using the camera.

I'm not sure if you're misquoting me on purpose or if you are just genuinely struggling to understand what I'm saying but that is not what I have said at all.

For the avoidance of doubt, let's revisit what I have actually said so far instead of making things up;


Even if he wasn't suspended purely for stating there are only two genders and it was more to do with the fact he recorded his teacher without consent, he has still been removed from the classroom for stating an opinion and I find it troubling that a student in Scotland is removed from a classroom in such circumstances.


He was removed from the classroom for stating his opinion, that's a fact.

Again please understand that there were two things that happened here and a clear distinction has to be made between them. First he was removed from the classroom (at this point he hadn't recorded anything so he could not have been removed from the classroom over the publishing of the recording of the conversation that he had with his teacher.

After this recorded conversation had taken place, he then put it online. It was then that he received his suspension.

I have not said at any point (and will repeat this again just so there are no further misunderstandings of what I've said) that he was definitely suspended because of what he said. I have stated twice in my previous posts that he was removed from the classroom for stating his opinion, that is all. The suspension that followed is open for debate as to whether it was because of his views, because of the recording and publishing of the conversation with the teacher, without the teacher's consent or a mixture of the two.

I'm fully aware of the fact that he wasn't suspended before using the camera. You have stated that he could have been disrespectful and could have been using foul language. Of course he could have and if that's the case then the school has every right to suspend students who engage in such behaviour. However what I will say is, during the conversation that he has recorded with his teacher, the teacher makes no accusations of this nature. I would have thought that this would have been brought up by the teacher if the student had been guilty of the things you are suggesting. I would also have expected the Council to have made reference to this in their statement, which they did not do.

[Bristolhibby]

Can we stop buying into the idea that he was suspended, simply for saying that? Clearly that wasn't the case here.

Sounds like he was on exam study leave anyway. Probably told not to come in and just study at home.

That translates to three week suspension.

J