Extraordinary, isn't it? Especially since, according to Dally himself, he has been thumped by his own so for daring to ask if son was gay - a question that son considered reprehensible precisely because that is what Dally has instilled in said child.

So one son gets all the lectures and attitudes, but not the daughter.

Notion derived from seeing a couple of same sex individuals kissing on a TV programme when she was little. Her reaction was adverse and it has stuck since.

No, what amuses me is consideration of the PC angle on all this not the events themselves.

I thought this may engender some serious debate but obviously not.

So, I will try. Let's assume the facts are as outlined above and not more nuanced.

Given Ms D is a severe disability through no fault of her own, and always tells the truth as she sees it, there is no question of her being "homophobic" in a knowingly or malicious way, irrespective of her stated views. So, although what she apparently said could be clearly construed as homophobic if there was no malicious intent (she likes the teacher) and she probably has not got the mental capacity to understand the concept then I am not sure she could be considered to have acted in a homophobic fashion.

Given as has been stated on here homosexuality is not any form of illness / disability it seems to be either a natural state of affairs or a lifestyle choice then any disability discrimination can only have been one way - towards Ms D.

Then the question of bullying comes into it. For a responsible adult acting in loco parentis to accuse a severely disabled youngster who needs 1:1 or 2:1 care full time of being a "bully" is frankly pathetic and smacks of bullying the relatively defenceless youngster.

The other issue here is, of course, the "Gove" issue I mentioned in the OP. Why are kids with such problems being "taught" this nonsense when learning the basics of life would be more sensible? Why should someone's sexuality be a matter for schools to "teach"? It is frankly ridiculous.

I suspect that people have difficulty with your claims that your own attitudes and statements have had nothing to do with what your daughter has said.



Very few disabled people are disabled because of fault of their own.



Her comments are quite probably what she has picked up from you.



Agreed. She's simply parroting her father's oft-stated prejudice (based on what has been seen on this forum).



Whose report is this all based on?

Do you know, for instance, if the teacher was upset/offended etc – or merely trying to illustrate a point to the children about what people out in 'the big, wide world' might find unacceptable/bullying etc? This is not intended to be, in any way, unkind or accusatory about your daughter, but would she have the ability to understand such a difference?



Ah, this may well be the nub of the issue.

The facts of life are the "basics of life".

And 'why' such things are on the curriculum is illustrated superbly by you've posted here over the years, much of it 'confused' at the best. One could similarly well ask why schools should teach evolution since there are apparently quite substantial numbers of parents who would really rather it were not taught because of their own beliefs.

If your daughter is in a residential school, what do you think is the likelihood that she will ever be able to lead a normal (statistically-speaking) independent life with a job/career?

If not, why (since you appear to consider it an either/or situation) would maths be more important than something that could still have an impact on her own life and how she relates to others?

It is slightly off-topic from Dally's original point but you touch on an interesting topic here. As I think you know from my previous posts my son is Autistic. It is highly unlikely he will ever be able to lead a normal (statistically-speaking) independent life with a job/career.

He has terrible trouble with Maths to the extent I can't ever see him having the ability to make sure he isn't ripped off in shops. However he has an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of History.

The school doesn't teach History in the 6th form (which he entered this year). It does teach maths and science as well as things to try and prepare them for the world outside.

There is a balance to be struck and so IMO Dally should not bemoan discussions about sexuality because "maths is more important" but equally it's not valid to exclude such children from studying academic subjects.

As you can probably tell my son's sixth form education is not inspiring him much at all and there were no options to decide whether he wanted to study the humanities or the sciences for example. You just get what is on offer.

That was the point where you had the opportunity to explain that it's not compulsory and not wrong either.
Did you do that?
Did you?


Your amusement and your use of the term "PC angle" highlights your own prejudice, nothing else.
"PC" is always used as a pejorative, usually from a reactionary like you, I have never heard anyone claiming to be PC.


Read this back to yourself and ponder whether term "this nonsense" illustrates your own attitude and whether the missed opportunity, mentioned above, has informed/reinforced your daughter's views.

My best guess is that you have instilled/reinforced an intolerance in your daughter and the school is having to do what you didn't do and, worse, undo what you did.

Is that so, you fat ugly numbskull knut?

My own father wrote to my school complaining about us being taught the theory of evolution - he did not and will not accept we evolved from monkeys. Bizarre attitude but not un-common in 70+ year olds

Whats his "theory"?

I'm doubting most of Dally's events tbh, all to convenient.

Pesky gays.

I don't remember being taught about that at all - ma have happened but never stuck and got to give up all Cirencester at the end of my third year because I was bad at it/had absolutely no sense of it having any relevance to me or my future.

I do have vague memories of my mother storming into my primary school in London (I went to three primaries and two grammars because of moving around) and complaining about something we were being taught. I'm not 100% sure, but I think it may have been to do with sex education. Even now she believes that sex education should just be: 'tell them to say no'.

Strange parents some people have/had.
It explains a lot.

I thought that believers in evolution do not consider humans to have evolved from monkeys. Maybe your father objected to the schools sloppy teaching?

Eh? You had a knock on the noggin again?

It's a popular way of characterising evolution by those who are opposed to it.

If anything, it illustrates their lack of interest in scientific accuracy.

Dally the problem here is with the parents, you have been brainwashed by the left-leaning PC brigade for too long.

Nothing is "impossible to shift" from a child's mind because of their "condition", when I was a kid I was taught right from wrong and if I said something that was out of order I soon found out....its called discipline. You won't get it from schools these days they are too afraid to hit a kid in case they get accused of abuse.

You should have sorted her out at home with your own discipline, rather than sending her away to some institution for special kids where they molly coddle them and teach them about pointless stuff like gays, no doubt she will also learn about climate change and the EU all to prepare her for a life on benefits where the taxpayer will pay for her "condition".

What has happened to our once proud country called Great Britain I ask you.

Cold baths, cross country runs and if the child is a bit "slow" then beat them with a stick and stand them in the corner until they improve.

Worked for Martin Wareham the thick kid in our primary school class.

Oh hang on, it didn't.

Has she ever got a sum wrong? Does she now insist that 1 + 1 = 3 for example?

Another moral dilemna:

A friend of mine is a senior nursing manager. The hospital where she works employs a well known surgeon, a pioneer in his field. Many, many patients have had their lives greatly improved by his skills.

He's also a complete and utter sh*t. A bully, makes life miserable for the people who work with him. As an example, he once told my friend that he didn't want a particular nurse to work in his operating theatre because "she's just too f**king ugly".

He's committed numerous acts that would justify him being sacked. But he's a very good surgeon. So staff generally keep quiet about him. Afraid mainly of the implications for patients if they say anything. The senior management probably have an idea what he's like, but perhaps not just how bad. And perhaps aren't too keen to find out.

Would you blow the whistle on him?

I'd have a word with my union and get them to raise it with management.

It depends how ugly she really is?
Suppose she'll have a masky thing on in theatre so she shouldn't put him off his surgery surely?

Why not? If he is allowed to carry on unchecked one day something is going to snap big time and I don't mean him. If it then all comes out he's been at it for years its just like the Jimmy Saville revelations in that one particular sense in that the abuse, in this case bullying and sexism, has been allowed to go on unchecked for years because he is seen as untouchable.

A lot more people are going to be in trouble than just him if it carries on unchecked.

He'd not be sacked if he's that good a surgeon and things like bullying and sexism or whatever need to be dealt with by the HR dept (if they are up to it is another matter!). He clearly has problems and these need addressing for his own good and those turning a blind eye are just allowing him to carry on making other peoples life a misery so they are part of the problem as well.

Depends, if he was a 2@ to me I'd tend more towards dropping the nut on him rather than blowing any whistle

Allegedly bullying has been a pattern in many scandals - Maxwell, Saville, etc, etc. So,someone should say something before its too late.