A Manchester charity is proposing to open a state school that will specialise in supporting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender children. There has never been a better time to announce such an initiative. Unfortunately, there has never been a worse time either.

Well, umm.

It’s OK to separate children by their sexuality during their education but not by their intelligence?

33 thoughts on “Hmm”

  1. “there’s no point in pretending that only those influenced by religion can be misogynistic homophones.”

    Hmm. I can’t think of two separate rude words for women which nevertheless sound alike. Don’t think I want to.

  2. Ha! If it ends up being any good will be funny to see middle class mummies and daddies outing their kids to get in.

  3. “Ha! If it ends up being any good will be funny to see middle class mummies and daddies outing their kids to get in.”

    Ha ha, yes.

  4. “it’s dreadful that children are still bullied and victimised because of their sexual identity (or anything else)”

    Well Debs, I can remember several articles by your spiteful fellow contributors who want to persecute them simply for being the offspring of middle class parents. So have a word with them, will you?

  5. So Much for Subtlety

    Children of racial minorities get bullied too. Does she suggest we have special schools for them too?

    Because, you know, I think we all know some people who tried this.

  6. Bloke in North Dorset

    “Children of racial minorities get bullied too. Does she suggest we have special schools for them too?

    Because, you know, I think we all know some people who tried this.”

    And would whites in certain parts of Bradford, Leicester, Birmingham etc get to have their own schools as well? Somehow I doubt it.

  7. SMFS: ‘Children of racial minorities get bullied too. Does she suggest we have special schools for them too?’

    See this morning’s ‘Mail’ article on how the progressives are up in arms about the locals opposing an extension to the ‘black Eton’…

  8. They reason thus because according to the Blank Slaters (the only acceptable opinion in Bien Pensant Land) sexuality is genetic, but intelligence is not.

    I know. Astonishing, isn’t it? Magic genes or something.

    Not sure how their argument applies to single sex schools though? That’s going to confuse them, as they’ve surely just argued for segregation on gender grounds as well.

  9. Actually, a conversation I had yesterday, makes what I previously said even more complicated.

    A Blank Slater was going on about how homosexuality is genetic: you are born gay. Period. But then later went into a rant about her daughter’s choice of ‘girly’ toys and books was disgusting because it was being forced on her by societal norms.

    So, if I read this right, sexual preference is genetic, but any other preferences related to gender are entirely environmental.

    Hmm…

  10. But wot’s “intelligence” really, and do, like, IQ tests really measure it, and sumfink else, and this an’ that?

  11. From the Guardian
    http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jan/16/school-for-lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-pupils-manchester

    ‘[Amelia] Lee, who said she hoped the school would act as a trailblazer and inspiration for other areas, said it was unlikely that it would be a free school. “The consultation has a long way to go, but free schools tend to operate at arm’s length from local government, while we are thinking more along the lines of an alternative education provider that’s networked through the local pupil referral units, who will refer children to us for whom mainstream education isn’t working,” said Lee.’

    ‘The school will be specifically designed for LGBT young people who are struggling in mainstream schools, but will be open to other children, including young carers, young parents and those with mental health problems. “It will be LGBT-inclusive, but not exclusive,” said Lee.’

    So it’s a proposed special school for those who are picked out as (potential) victims of bullying. Given that the school is for 40 kids in all of Manchester, we should conclude that the school will cater for those least able to survive in a normal school and for whom home tutoring or the like might be provided as an expensive alternative.

    A special school for bullied kids is a horrible solution to a horrible problem. It may be a necessary solution.

    We can’t change the hormones of teenagers but we pack a thousand of them in a secondary school (for “educational efficiency”), failing to comprehend the undesirable consequences. Loveable eight year olds attend schools with a few hundred others; hormone consequences aside, other people’s 16 year olds would be more loveable if they attended smaller schools.

    Amelia Lee dislikes the idea of free schools so she seeks a state solution to a state problem. I am unaware of any legal prohibitions of free schools working with pupil referral units or mutual support groups.

  12. “sexuality is genetic”

    No-one says that. The factors which determine sexuality are unknown. The reasons for non-discrimination have nothing to do with that. Even if sexuality was purely a matter of choice, it wouldn’t be anyone else’s business than that of the people choosing.

  13. So Much for Subtlety

    Dave – “Even if sexuality was purely a matter of choice, it wouldn’t be anyone else’s business than that of the people choosing.”

    Unless, of course, they want to stay at your B&B or buy a cake or something.

    Sexuality is an obvious target for government policy. It has massive consequences for the rest of us.

  14. So Much for Subtlety

    Charlieman – “So it’s a proposed special school for those who are picked out as (potential) victims of bullying. Given that the school is for 40 kids in all of Manchester, we should conclude that the school will cater for those least able to survive in a normal school and for whom home tutoring or the like might be provided as an expensive alternative.”

    Why should we conclude that? It is more likely to be a school for those the administration of their existing school doesn’t like. Bullying of Gay teens seems to happen mostly in the imagination of adults who like to think about Gay teens. A lot. So there is no reason to think that Gays will be specially picked on.

    “A special school for bullied kids is a horrible solution to a horrible problem. It may be a necessary solution.”

    Assuming that problems exists. Evidence?

    “other people’s 16 year olds would be more loveable if they attended smaller schools.”

    Well that is a problem with Comprehensives. The solution is to get rid of comprehensives.

  15. SMFS: Sexuality is an obvious target for snide comments for nomarks like you. Do you really know what Buzzcocks mean?

  16. Watching the trends -it seems that doing away with schools is inevitable. They are a source of social disquiet and turmoil.

  17. So Much for Subtlety

    Charlieman – “Sexuality is an obvious target for snide comments for nomarks like you. Do you really know what Buzzcocks mean?”

    I’ll leave the snide comments to you Charlie. I have a point.

    john malpas – “Watching the trends -it seems that doing away with schools is inevitable. They are a source of social disquiet and turmoil.”

    Instapundit says sending your child to a public school is child abuse. He is right.

  18. So Much for Subtlety

    Off topic, but another victim of “recovered” memories it seems:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914584/Pensioner-81-jailed-18-years-guilty-repeatedly-raping-three-young-girls-16-year-campaign-abuse.html

    One of the victims was repeatedly raped between the ages of three and four until the age of 10 or 11 while the abuse started at the age of eight for second girl and ended when she was 11.

    I would have thought the medical evidence from trying to have sex with a three year old, or even a ten year old, would be so gross that no one would have had to wait 40 years to press charges.

    And isn’t it nice that the victims no longer have to confront the people they are accusing anymore?

    All three victims, two via videolink from Australia, bravely spoke of the casual and perverse brutality they suffered at the hands of Paskins up until 1981.

    What a glorious time to be British.

  19. Funnily enough SMFS, you have planted irrelevant nonsense in this thread.

    How on earth could we expect such profound stupidity?

  20. @SMFS: “Bullying of Gay teens seems to happen mostly in the imagination of adults who like to think about Gay teens. A lot.”

    That doesn’t apply for me. Aren’t you the bully SMFS?

  21. So Much for Subtlety

    Charlieman – “Funnily enough SMFS, you have planted irrelevant nonsense in this thread.”

    Pearls before swine, Charlie.

    Charlieman – “That doesn’t apply for me. Aren’t you the bully SMFS?”

    Good for you. So why do you care about this topic? But that is better than your average attempt at shaming Charlie. I am almost impressed. However I still live in hope that one day you will have an actual substantive response.

  22. So Much for Subtlety

    Charlieman – “So what was the purpose of the off topic? Illuminate us all.”

    It is a crime calling out to Heaven. Does it need any other purpose?

    But if you like. Everyone is wasting their time on non-problems. There is no particular reason to think that Gay children, assuming there are such things, are bullied. The evidence from the US is that Gay teens do not actually commit suicide at a higher rate than anyone else. But we are supposed to commit money to solve these non-problems.

    Which, needless to say, is all the fault of heterosexual males.

    In the meantime, an actual injustice is being done. With an extremely old man – so old he would not have been charged had he done something trivial like murder Hungarian Jews in WW2 – going to prison for the rest of his natural life.

    The juxtaposition shows precisely what is wrong with the UK.

  23. So Much for Subtlety

    Jack C – “Are you saying that gay children may not exist?”

    I have serious doubts that many ten year olds have a clear concept of their sexuality.

  24. @Jack C: “Are you saying that gay children may not exist?”:

    That may or may not be the case. I cannot get my head around SMFS.

    “In the meantime, an actual injustice is being done. With an extremely old man – so old he would not have been charged had he done something trivial like murder Hungarian Jews in WW2 – going to prison for the rest of his natural life.”

    You know that he is making it up with sufficient element of truth. SMFS is a huge fantasist.

  25. So Much for Subtlety: “The juxtaposition shows precisely what is wrong with the UK.”

    Perhaps you should go to a doctor. As a juxtapositionary measure.

  26. So Much for Subtlety

    Charlieman – “I cannot get my head around SMFS.”

    Then perhaps Charlie the way to happiness and better mental health is not to post abusive content-free screeds on the internet. But to sit down and think what it is about what I say that so upsets you. And why.

  27. Blimey, you guys are worse than me and Ian B.

    In my experience, gay boys at school are intelligent enough not to come out and the boys who get picked on as “gay” are in fact just camp or effete or have a lisp or are bad at games. The two boys at my school who probably got the worst time for being “gay” were in fact both born-again evangelicals who’d preach to anyone who could be bothered listening (no-one) that all homosexuals were going to Hell. But they both had cissy voices, so, you know, “GAY!”

    Kids are stupid.

    Anyway, no-one else has said it, so….

    Will the school uniform be a squirrel suit?

  28. @Squander Two: “Blimey, you guys are worse than me and Ian B.”

    Perhaps. I hope that I have never been vulgar to you.

    Prepare bullets…

    @So Much for Subtlety:

    Link via SMFS: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914584/Pensioner-81-jailed-18-years-guilty-repeatedly-raping-three-young-girls-16-year-campaign-abuse.html

    That’s a story about a man allegedly sexually abusing members of his family.

    Tim Worstall’s top point was about *looking* after exposed children. Do you randomly search the internet for words related to “child” and “children”?

    Haven’t you considered the damage that yacking about child abuse causes to survivors of sex crime?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *