Greystones school - gender neutral uniforms to be introduced.

Cyrus

more virtue signalling nonsense, and changing of practices for the less than 1% of the population that would actually be impacted.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

This is one problem in the system at the moment, too limp-wristed around bullying.

wow hatespeech

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

beejee wrote: »

Theres just no way im going to believe that at face value.

Boys, of entirely their own volition, spontaneously just decided that they wanted to be able to wear skirts and made a big enough deal of it through a school council, that it was allowed to happen?

Really?!

If anyone believes that's what actually happened, as opposed to one or two internet no-hopers jumping on a bandwagon and using their position to ram it through is living in the twilight zone.

It was more the girls wanting the option to wear trousers (and considering they were forced to wear a pinafore beforehand, it;s very believable they wanted a change) - I don't think the boys care one way or the other.

"It all started when four girls in one of the senior classes approached Principal Marie Costello with the idea because they were concerned that one child in the school was uncomfortable with the current uniform policy.

"Ms Costello asked them to develop the idea and do some research on it, which they did. She was hugely impressed with their work and brought it before the Board of Management.

"We decided to ask parents for their opinion on the school email system, and we did not receive any negative responses.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/weve-had-a-few-negative-calls-wicklow-school-on-decision-to-introduce-genderneutral-uniform-policy-38238725.html

Interesting that the negative calls came from "anonymous" citizens, but this line sums up the complaints

"I think every situation on trans issues brings negative comments, especially when young people are involved ... But the negativity often comes from a lack of information and understanding"

Ultimately, it's about flexibility and student comfort. And if you have a problem with that, then so be it. But come out and say it.

Kate2293

suicide_circus wrote: »

In 1998 David Beckham wore a sarong and we were told all us young hip metrosexual lads were going to be in skirts by the end of the month. didnt happen.

Can say the same for women wearing trousers. Didn't happen overnight.

beejee

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

It was more the girls wanting the option to wear trousers (and considering they were forced to wear a pinafore beforehand, it;s very believable they wanted a change) - I don't think the boys care one way or the other.



https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/weve-had-a-few-negative-calls-wicklow-school-on-decision-to-introduce-genderneutral-uniform-policy-38238725.html

Interesting that the negative calls came from "anonymous" citizens, but this line sums up the complaints



Ultimately, it's about flexibility and student comfort. And if you have a problem with that, then so be it. But come out and say it.

To sum up, 4 girls had a problem, and that results in a policy change for the entre school?

Maybe a 1 or 2% of the student population had a problem, and the other 98% were pulled along for the ride, ably abetted by complete apathy. Sounds about trendy.

And I would still have large doubts that this idea originated from one of the students anyway.

Hamsterchops

Call me old-fashioned, bit what a load of old crap!

Boys in pink skirts, playing with unicorns & dollies while sporting ponytails and mascara, while girls wear boys trousers, spitting and wrestling on the floor at break time!

Girls are girls & boys are boys. Boys toilets with urinals for boys, separate girls toilets for girls, with extra mirrors & hairdryers.

PS; I know my views are dated, but them so am I

RobbieTheRobber

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Call me old-fashioned, bit what a load of old crap!

Boys in pink skirts, playing with unicorns & dollies while sporting ponytails and mascara, while girls wear boys trousers, spitting and wrestling on the floor at break time!

Girls are girls and boys are boys. Boys toilets with urinals for boys, separate girls toilets for girls.

PS; I know my views are dated, but them so am I

Except your not old fashioned enough because if you were really old fashioned then you would want your boys in pink and wearing dresses like well proper little boys.
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/10/pink-used-common-color-boys-blue-girls/

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

beejee wrote: »

To sum up, 4 girls had a problem, and that results in a policy change for the entre school?

Maybe a 1 or 2% of the student population had a problem, and the other 98% were pulled along for the ride, ably abetted by complete apathy. Sounds about trendy.

That's pretty much how all ideas start. As long as it's well researched and presented and there are no objections, then so be it.

And I would still have large doubts that this idea originated from one of the students anyway.

I'd be curious to know what your doubts are based on.

I've met plenty of kids in the age group who are very socially-aware of what's going on in the world and well capable of forming such an idea.

MrFresh

beejee wrote: »

To sum up, 4 girls had a problem, and that results in a policy change for the entre school?

Maybe a 1 or 2% of the student population had a problem, and the other 98% were pulled along for the ride, ably abetted by complete apathy. Sounds about trendy.

And I would still have large doubts that this idea originated from one of the students anyway.

What's the issue? Helps the 1-2% and doesn't effect the other 98%? Who's losing out?

weldoninhio

Lux23 wrote: »

They haven't in my experience. Plus, isn't this a Primary School?

The LGBT at school booklet that I quoted from is being sent to all schools, primary and secondary.

weldoninhio

Lux23 wrote: »

The kids ask for it through their Student Council.

4 girls, actually.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Except your not old fashioned enough because if you were really old fashioned then you would want your boys in pink and wearing dresses like well proper little boys.
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/10/pink-used-common-color-boys-blue-girls/

That article would be more convincing in colour.

RobbieTheRobber

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

That article would be more convincing in colour.

You want me to produce colour pictures from the 1800's?

How about the wikipedia page on pink with examples of paintings from history of boys in pink including the pictures of the christ child
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink

beejee

beejee wrote: »

To sum up, 4 girls had a problem, and that results in a policy change for the entre school?

Maybe a 1 or 2% of the student population had a problem, and the other 98% were pulled along for the ride, ably abetted by complete apathy. Sounds about trendy.

And I would still have large doubts that this idea originated from one of the students anyway.

four girls had a problem *on behalf of someone else*

i mean

.....pull the other leg, its got pants on

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

four girls had a problem *on behalf of someone else*

i mean

.....pull the other leg, its got pants on

yeah imagine children caring about somebody else. absolutely ridiculous. You'd have to be a numpty to believe that

beejee

MrFresh wrote: »

What's the issue? Helps the 1-2% and doesn't effect the other 98%? Who's losing out?

While a fair point on the surface (which will suffice for most people because they don't really care about anything), there is no such thing as population changes having only selected effects in isolation. (doubly so when standards are changed to suit minute minorities from standards that were created by the vast majority for, usually, great periods of time)

It affects everything and everyone around it. How those effects take shape, we'll see eventually.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah imagine children caring about somebody else. absolutely ridiculous. You'd have to be a numpty to believe that

oh imagination is involved, certainly

ohnonotgmail

beejee wrote: »

While a fair point on the surface (which will suffice for most people because they don't really care about anything), there is no such thing as population changes having only selected effects in isolation. (doubly so when standards are changed to suit minute minorities from standards that were created by the vast majority for, usually, great periods of time)

It affects everything and everyone around it. How those effects take shape, we'll see eventually.

what possible effects can you foresee from a boy wearing a skirt?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

oh imagination is involved, certainly

yeah children are all unfeeling brutes who couldn't give a toss about anybody else.

beejee

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah children are all unfeeling brutes who couldn't give a toss about anybody else.

Its rather that children are easily manipulated.

beejee

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what possible effects can you foresee from a boy wearing a skirt?

Oh I couldn't think of any, not a one. Same as you.

ohnonotgmail

beejee wrote: »

Its rather that children are easily manipulated.

you do know it was not the children who actually made the decision, right?

ohnonotgmail

beejee wrote: »

Oh I couldn't think of any, not a one. Same as you.

i'm sure you can think of one. enlighten us.

beejee

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you do know it was not the children who actually made the decision, right?

That adds to my point.

I also contend, and its impossible to prove of course, that the idea did not originate with children either.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

You want me to produce colour pictures from the 1800's?

Would be more convincing. Or paintings.

How about the wikipedia page on pink with examples of paintings from history of boys in pink including the pictures of the christ child
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink

Not really convincing.

ohnonotgmail

beejee wrote: »

That adds to my point.

I also contend, and its impossible to prove of course, that the idea did not originate with children either.

what does it matter where it originated assuming you dont believe what the teachers said. what is your issue with the change?

beejee

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i'm sure you can think of one. enlighten us.

Theres very little enlightenment to be gained on the internet. Quite the opposite.

Generally speaking, I am quite wary of "new ideas" that seek to impose on a societal level, for the simple reason that these "new ideas" just so happened to materialise with the rise of the internet.

The internet is a pretty terrible place. It allows anyone to voice their opinion. Sounds good. But there many people who were shunned from society because their "ideas" were judged to be detrimental to a functioning, healthy society. Not all of those ideas were bad, of course, but many were/are bad ideas.

To that end, there is a defence position on everything on the internet. Everything, you name it.

The earth is flat? Of course it is, and from a concentrated effort of some very strange people being able to group together via the internet, they have constructed such elaborate, complex systems of belief...they have an answer for everything. Its amazingly impressive. They truly believe it all, and have all the answers to any possible question that can be thrown at them.

It wont wash with a thoughtful, conscientious person. But most people are too busy to trudge through shoite and just accept them with a roll of the eyes.

Take that example and multiply it across all these "new ideas".

Theres a chasm between a "good idea" and a "new idea". The moon is made of purple jelly, and I have all the answers to any disbelieving question you have.

That gender everything is a huge push, by very few people, originated on the internet, propagated by the internet and amplified by those who accept such convincingly put together answers...you don't need me to enlighten you to good ideas versus new ideas.

Do you?

ohnonotgmail

beejee wrote: »

Theres very little enlightenment to be gained on the internet. Quite the opposite.

Generally speaking, I am quite wary of "new ideas" that seek to impose on a societal level, for the simple reason that these "new ideas" just so happened to materialise with the rise of the internet.

The internet is a pretty terrible place. It allows anyone to voice their opinion. Sounds good. But there many people who were shunned from society because their "ideas" were judged to be detrimental to a functioning, healthy society. Not all of those ideas were bad, of course, but many were/are bad ideas.

To that end, there is a defence position on everything on the internet. Everything, you name it.

The earth is flat? Of course it is, and from a concentrated effort of some very strange people being able to group together via the internet, they have constructed such elaborate, complex systems of belief...they have an answer for everything. Its amazingly impressive. They truly believe it all, and have all the answers to any possible question that can be thrown at them.

It wont wash with a thoughtful, conscientious person. But most people are too busy to trudge through shoite and just accept them with a roll of the eyes.

Take that example and multiply it across all these "new ideas".

Theres a chasm between a "good idea" and a "new idea". The moon is made of purple jelly, and I have all the answers to any disbelieving question you have.

That gender everything is a huge push, by very few people, originated on the internet, propagated by the internet and amplified by those who accept such convincingly put together answers...you don't need me to enlighten you to good ideas versus new ideas.

Do you?

there is nothing being imposed here. this is about offering additonal choices. no obligations are being placed on anybody.

Rubberchikken

i have in the past few days witnessed three different afult males dressed in pink shorts(really short) with matching pale t shirts, fake tan and styled hair.
if adult makes think this looks good then maybe secondary lads in skirts is the next step.

who really cares*sigh*

Vincent van Gogh

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Call me old-fashioned, bit what a load of old crap!

Boys in pink skirts, playing with unicorns & dollies while sporting ponytails and mascara, while girls wear boys trousers, spitting and wrestling on the floor at break time!

Girls are girls & boys are boys. Boys toilets with urinals for boys, separate girls toilets for girls, with extra mirrors & hairdryers.

PS; I know my views are dated, but them so am I

If you go back far enough it was generally accepted that pink was for boys and blue for girls. That's why this whole thing is stupid. It's all predicated on preconceived notions that aren't objective but subjective. The only reason why you might feel like this is the time you were born.

Live and let live.