Enoch Burke turns up to school again despite sacking - read OP before posting

And what exactly has that got to do with an ex-teacher protesting his sacking for verbal abuse?

Solid sand maybe

They could do a rerun of the old TV series OZ with Burke as a character in it.

First lines states negative attitudes towards transgender people. I don't have a negative attitude nor bear any transgender person any ill will. Simply by logically saying that to get all 99.97% of the population to sincerely believe the transgender viewpoint even just whole new lexicon of language. Is a logical fallacy IMO.

That is where I think it goes wrong. Surely another way has to be found where to be transgender is not very dependant on others affirmation for your own identity. I can't think of another minority where this exists.

Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Disabled, minority races, travellers etc all can exist in their own identity and sense of self, without the need for affirmation of their sense of self from those outside those communities.

Because at best it a majority (the world) is pretending one thing while saying another to be nice to transgender people. Example thinking "oh I better call him/her - 'they'". Etc. Or that TG person will be offended. Because that is how the majority of people outside the small bubble will think, in reality. It takes concentration and self correction.

How can you change that thought process of the majority? It is virtually impossible. I am not on about negatively attacking someone. But if even if the good intentioned using the new invented pronouns while thinking the traditional ones. How does a community survive?

If there simply is no sincerity in those outside the transgender bubble, and people are saying pronouns for the sake of it just be nice.

Just being nice for the sake of it is not a negative as per the definition below.

But in my eyes it is unintentionally patronising, which is worse than negativity in my view.

I am not even talking about been outwardly or internally negative towards trans people and so on on as this line implies - from wikipedia that you linked.

'Transphobia is a collection of ideas and phenomena that encompass a range of negative attitudes, feelings, or actions towards transgender people or transness in general'

--

That definition above broad as it is, does not even cover my nuanced point, about the practicalities and thought process of even the well intentioned beyond the Enoch Burke's of this world.

Especially when the thought process of most individuals uses day to day language. Where up to recently were just descriptors people learn as children.

How is that thought process going to changed for the average person on the the street? Beyond Burke.

Or is it enough just to try and be nice to the TG community instead?

Forgetting all the rules, words and invented formulas which would make it difficult for many to converse in their normal free flowing manner. My elderly father wouldn't have a hope for example - in a conversation where he was given the new TG lexicon.

And there is no badness in the auld fella. But the way some would frame it. He would be a bigot, without him even understanding why.

Sorry about I am trying to explain my viewpoint fully and clearly, but the CCCC GAA appeals system looks less convoluted.

It basically becomes 'Enoch Burke - A Case Study in Human endurance'. Sort of like a reality TV show that puts 'Big Brother' and 'I'm a celebrity' etc in the ha'penny place.

Didn't the Japanese do a show called Endurance once? I remember it being on the Clive James show...

They/Them in the context of a person who does identify under the trans umbrella has nothing to do with any of that.

They/Them in the context of those people is about affirming (social acceptance) that one is not the gender one perceives them, is neither male nor female but some other gender, flips between the two (gender fluid) or has no gender at all.

Re your legal costs comment, that is pure speculation on your part….”very likely”…….”I’d bet”…”knowing someone by reputation”

Enoch Burke was already in prison and was let out by the judge without the need to discharge his contempt that landed him in there in the first place. We wouldn’t have this daily charade if he was still in prison.

And the matter is far from concluded, just the school is no longer paying him…..so we are unable to deduct the fines from his salary as he hasn’t got one.

How the school managed to incur a 50k legal bill so quickly, will make this case an isolated one, in the manner it has unfolded.

If he hadn't been released we would have a different charade. Since they couldn't hold the disciplinary hearing with him in jail he would still be employed and so the school would have to continue paying him. So he would be saving his entire salary while the state fully supported him. This is exactly the situation that the judge wished to avoid, which is why he was released when the school went on winter break. Now instead of his financial situation improving with every passing day he has no job and is accumulating large fines every day.

We'll see what the judge decides tomorrow.

what have the prisoners done to deserve that?

Why was the state paying him while in prison last year ?. Private schools get state money to pay their teachers, so the state should have suspended payments as he wasn’t available and had no good reason for his absence.

If an unemployed person ends up in prison, they lose the payment as they fail one big criteria …..being available for work. Not aware of any private sector jobs that would continue to pay an employee for 108 days while he is in prison on a crusade.

The fines quickly become a side issue as at 700 a day plus initial 50k legal costs…..if he owes 100k or 130k, don’t be surprised if he heads down the bankruptcy route. As he has made himself unemployable, attachment orders to future income are unlikely to be in play.

Let’s hope he returns to prison tomorrow as fines don’t phase him and 108 days in prison didn’t seem to bother him either.

Out of sight, out of mind