Vancouver school board gender policy allows “xe” or “xem” in place of “he” or “her”
06-18-2014, 10:58 AM
Another good article from the National Post, Canada's only MSM that uses common sense and calls out bullshit.
Of course when this "trans-inclusive" policy was being debated among school board trustees they locked out the parents against such an initiative from taking part in meetings and discussions but allowed trans activists without children into the meetings to cheer this policy on.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014...he-or-her/
"British Columbia teachers have been at war with the province for more than a decade, and are set to walk out on strike just days before the end of the school year.
Normally I would question the wisdom of a strike that takes place over the summer holidays (who’s going to notice?) and is related to unreasonable pay demands. But not in this case. B.C., it is clear, does not view schools as a place in which children are taught the basic tools necessary to navigate life – math, science, geography – but as petri dishes for social experimentation in which teachers are lab technicians with unwitting children as their mice. You couldn’t pay me enough to do this stuff.
On Monday, the Vancouver School Board approved a policy change aimed at accommodating gender identity and sexual orientation. The motive is admirable enough, to prevent students being singled out, bullied or otherwise discriminated against on the basis of gender. The complexity derives from the board’s determination to allow not just for actual gender, but “perceived” gender, i.e. the gender the student identifies with, as opposed to the gender on their birth certificate. Parents who questioned the change argued, quite reasonably, that six-year-olds aren’t qualified to understand all the intricacies of identity issues. Some of them can’t even use the toilet yet, much less decide which washroom to do it in.
Nonetheless, the school board forged ahead, even deciding to adopt new pronouns for those who would rather pick no gender at all. A last-minute amendment mandated that “xe, xem and xyr” may be used in place of “he/she” or “him/her”. These are “sex-neutral third-person” terms used to repair the failure of the English language to allow for 21st century gender sensitivities. The British long ago began using the term “one” – as in “one does wish for a glass of water” — to get around this problem, but it’s viewed as a bit cold and snooty, and therefore undesirable.
Parents accused school authorities of pushing their own agenda
In addition to new pronouns, the Vancouver board also goes to considerable length to protect “privacy”, including, it would seem, keeping the student’s chosen new gender a secret from his/her or xyr parents. A provision in the policy notes that while the student’s chosen gender identity will “whenever possible” be included in class lists and timetables, “communications between school and home shall use a student’s legal name and the pronoun corresponding to the student’s gender assigned at birth” unless otherwise requested. It’s the student’s right to decide “when, with whom, and how much information to share”. They will also have the right “to dress in a manner consistent with their gender identity or gender expression,” even if that is “not consistent with societal expectations of masculinity/femininity.”
Students will be enabled to choose their preferred washroom, or “a reasonable alternative washroom” if they desire “increased privacy.” In such cases the alternative arrangement “will be provided in a way that protects the students’ ability to keep their trans status confidential.” It is not spelled out how other kids will be kept from reaching the obvious conclusion when students are seen using the “alternative washroom,” but that is one of the many difficulties that arises when school boards try to make hard and fast rules related to anything as amorphous as a young person’s self-image, particularly at a stage in development when identity issues are notoriously fraught and individuals are not at a level of maturity ideal for making such critical judgments.
B.C. teachers will presumably be the ones to add this social minefield to the other developmental issues they are already expected to shoulder on behalf of, or sometimes in spite of, parents (In this case it appears they may be expected to actively keep parents in the dark about a critical element of their child’s growth). Perhaps in recognition of the possibility teachers won’t want to go anywhere near it (many male teachers already fear the risk of inadvertently finding themselves alone in a room with a female student), the policy stipulates that schools must appoint at least one staff person to be a “Safe Contact”. If no one volunteers, a member of the administration will be stuck with it.
The policy was adopted amid much controversy, particularly from parents who accused school authorities of pushing their own agenda with inadequate consultation with parents and medical experts.
“We’re talking about meaningful conversation with parents and the medical and mental health professions. This is not meaningful conversation. This is politics of division, it’s getting people upset and angry,” an angry parent told the CBC. But board members were unmoved, treating parents as a threat to their own children.
“I didn’t realize how much opposition there was out there in our communities to keeping kids safe and included and welcome,” said board chairwoman Patti Bacchus, who declared herself “proud” of the changes.
Schools used to be relatively straightforward operations: you sent your children and they came back with an education. That hasn’t been the case for some years, but the extent to which “progressive” politics has intruded on the actual learning process can’t help but alarm many parents who would prefer to remain free of whatever social preoccupation board members feel the desire to dabble in. Perhaps there is room for a breakaway faction, offering “politics-free” learning for those who still feel they are at least as qualified as school board members to choose their child’s path to maturity."
![[Image: Cuckoo.gif]](http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Cuckoo.gif)
Of course when this "trans-inclusive" policy was being debated among school board trustees they locked out the parents against such an initiative from taking part in meetings and discussions but allowed trans activists without children into the meetings to cheer this policy on.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014...he-or-her/
"British Columbia teachers have been at war with the province for more than a decade, and are set to walk out on strike just days before the end of the school year.
Normally I would question the wisdom of a strike that takes place over the summer holidays (who’s going to notice?) and is related to unreasonable pay demands. But not in this case. B.C., it is clear, does not view schools as a place in which children are taught the basic tools necessary to navigate life – math, science, geography – but as petri dishes for social experimentation in which teachers are lab technicians with unwitting children as their mice. You couldn’t pay me enough to do this stuff.
On Monday, the Vancouver School Board approved a policy change aimed at accommodating gender identity and sexual orientation. The motive is admirable enough, to prevent students being singled out, bullied or otherwise discriminated against on the basis of gender. The complexity derives from the board’s determination to allow not just for actual gender, but “perceived” gender, i.e. the gender the student identifies with, as opposed to the gender on their birth certificate. Parents who questioned the change argued, quite reasonably, that six-year-olds aren’t qualified to understand all the intricacies of identity issues. Some of them can’t even use the toilet yet, much less decide which washroom to do it in.
Nonetheless, the school board forged ahead, even deciding to adopt new pronouns for those who would rather pick no gender at all. A last-minute amendment mandated that “xe, xem and xyr” may be used in place of “he/she” or “him/her”. These are “sex-neutral third-person” terms used to repair the failure of the English language to allow for 21st century gender sensitivities. The British long ago began using the term “one” – as in “one does wish for a glass of water” — to get around this problem, but it’s viewed as a bit cold and snooty, and therefore undesirable.
Parents accused school authorities of pushing their own agenda
In addition to new pronouns, the Vancouver board also goes to considerable length to protect “privacy”, including, it would seem, keeping the student’s chosen new gender a secret from his/her or xyr parents. A provision in the policy notes that while the student’s chosen gender identity will “whenever possible” be included in class lists and timetables, “communications between school and home shall use a student’s legal name and the pronoun corresponding to the student’s gender assigned at birth” unless otherwise requested. It’s the student’s right to decide “when, with whom, and how much information to share”. They will also have the right “to dress in a manner consistent with their gender identity or gender expression,” even if that is “not consistent with societal expectations of masculinity/femininity.”
Students will be enabled to choose their preferred washroom, or “a reasonable alternative washroom” if they desire “increased privacy.” In such cases the alternative arrangement “will be provided in a way that protects the students’ ability to keep their trans status confidential.” It is not spelled out how other kids will be kept from reaching the obvious conclusion when students are seen using the “alternative washroom,” but that is one of the many difficulties that arises when school boards try to make hard and fast rules related to anything as amorphous as a young person’s self-image, particularly at a stage in development when identity issues are notoriously fraught and individuals are not at a level of maturity ideal for making such critical judgments.
B.C. teachers will presumably be the ones to add this social minefield to the other developmental issues they are already expected to shoulder on behalf of, or sometimes in spite of, parents (In this case it appears they may be expected to actively keep parents in the dark about a critical element of their child’s growth). Perhaps in recognition of the possibility teachers won’t want to go anywhere near it (many male teachers already fear the risk of inadvertently finding themselves alone in a room with a female student), the policy stipulates that schools must appoint at least one staff person to be a “Safe Contact”. If no one volunteers, a member of the administration will be stuck with it.
The policy was adopted amid much controversy, particularly from parents who accused school authorities of pushing their own agenda with inadequate consultation with parents and medical experts.
“We’re talking about meaningful conversation with parents and the medical and mental health professions. This is not meaningful conversation. This is politics of division, it’s getting people upset and angry,” an angry parent told the CBC. But board members were unmoved, treating parents as a threat to their own children.
“I didn’t realize how much opposition there was out there in our communities to keeping kids safe and included and welcome,” said board chairwoman Patti Bacchus, who declared herself “proud” of the changes.
Schools used to be relatively straightforward operations: you sent your children and they came back with an education. That hasn’t been the case for some years, but the extent to which “progressive” politics has intruded on the actual learning process can’t help but alarm many parents who would prefer to remain free of whatever social preoccupation board members feel the desire to dabble in. Perhaps there is room for a breakaway faction, offering “politics-free” learning for those who still feel they are at least as qualified as school board members to choose their child’s path to maturity."