Mod- Thread title updated to reflect what has actually happened, and the op's text link has been turned into a working link
Lazy effort op, don't do it again
Threadbanned
john123470
im not particularly a fan of very new gender norms being legitimised by employer action
but im balancing that against the principle that if this family are against it, im at least willing to reconsider my position tbh
There is some merit and validity in questioning the direction of gender identity and pronoun politics in the education sphere; going about it in the manner of Mr Burke is absolutely not how to do it and proves that he is little more than unprofessional, unsuited to the teaching profession, and in the spirit of Boards.ie, (dont be a d1ck) an absolutely disingenuous d1ckhead. The potential for a good 'case' can be made by far more qualified individuals than him and his 'ilk'
The parents and the child made a request (i.e. they asked) and he refused to accommodate. So your phrase fails on that point here.
Ultimately, I hope he is sacked. He sounds like a loon as well as a bigot.
The injunction is to stop him coming to the school while suspended, it has nothing to do with the merits of the suspension itself, though you wouldn't know it from the headline.
But if it’s a request or an ask then you also need to consider that it might be denied? Unless it wasn’t either.
Such a request or ask is a formality, only. Or should be seen as such.
There was a case in the UK recently where an NHS doctor was dismissed for the same thing - refusing to refer to patients by their preferred pronouns. (eta - Dr David Mackereth)
His dismissal was upheld by a UK employment tribunal who said his claim that his "christian beliefs" were "incompatible with the fundamental rights of others".
His method of protest is the reason he got suspended. As a teacher he has a duty to act in best interests of his pupils. If he believes affirmation of the pupil will be harmful and is wrong then there is a time and a place to bring it up.
The headline doesn’t quite sum up what actually happened and is therefore quite misleading.
we all have different beliefs, i dont see why this one tiny minority of the many tiny minorities out there gets to make all of society adapt to theirs.
we can fund an educational facility to help these few such citizens and their needs. the staff can be chosen from those willing to call you whatever pronoun you want on any given day, perhaps they could even have additional training.
That way people with such personal circumstances can be educated, and at the same time we don't have to have the state telling people what to say. Everyone wins.
have your own non-binary cubicle, have your own non-binary school. on the tax payer. and let the rest of us get on with it.
and as per any other citizen if someone treats you unfairly the law will protect you. the rest is your own personal business.
But doing that defeats the purpose of inclusion, no? I'm just glad I don't have to deal with any of this!
its a ludicrous notion when you think about it.
if you can choose your own pronouns, is there anything off limits for your choice?
Well it's going to have to be one belief system that "trumps" the other in this situation. Whose should it be? The young student requesting that their preferred pronouns be used in reference to them? Which probably wouldn't crop up much anyway, seeing as it's the third person - the teacher would be addressing them in the second person mostly.
Or should this person's disagreement with same be prioritised due to his religion, when there's nothing explicitly undermining his religion, it's just a request for something small that one kid feels more comfortable with?
I'm on Team Pupil here (and I am not exactly uncritical of aspects of gender identity ideology).
Before you know you will have people choosing their own name. Slippery slope I tell you
I know... people giving their dogs and cats names.... and so on... etc
Shocking. Pronouns are going to end the world.
This is unfortunate as Burke is a really common surname around Castlebar. The Burke family in question have been well known locally for years, but really seem to have gone national in terms of their exposure in the last three or four years. They have also become a lot more visible around the town in recent years, protesting in the Mall and the Market Square, preaching and singing on the streets at Christmas etc.
It seems like they're only going to become even more well known as time goes on with all their high profile and often topical court cases. It could start to be a real issue for the many other people from the town and surrounding area with the name Burke who are completely unrelated to this family.
Honestly reading the article, it sounds like Burke needs his own cubicle and let the rest of us get on with it.
the ramifications of calling someone by the name they prefer? what are they?
But the 'belief' that a plural pronoun doesn't apply to a single person isn't an obscure religious doctrine, its what everyone believes.
The average Irish person, if they are asked to say things that aren't true, will shrug their shoulders and say "Okay, as long as its not harming anyone".
But that doesn't mean that a person considering the matter objectively and intellectually should then say that there are two sides to the story to be assessed neutrally.
Wait till we see the first case of identification as another species in schools
So...your proposed solution is to segregate transgender/non-binary/gender non-conforming children from the rest of society?
Would Ammi and Enoch be common first names in Castlebar? Am I right in thinking also, the family were home-schooled? They aren't a great advertisement for that, if so. Obviously well educated and high achieving in an intellectual sense, but in terms of social/life skills maybe lacking? Seems a terrible shame for bright young people to be going down this route. Hate the expression but it makes sense here - terrible choice of "hill to die on".
They or them aren't just plural, they are gender neutral also and the default pronouns when you do not know someones gender. Eg Joe / Jo, Francis / Frances, Alex (Alexander/ Alexandra) etc when the name does not necessarily indicate gender, especially when spoken not written.
"Growleaves, can you go meet Alex"
"I don't think I know Alex, can you tell me what they look like"
It is amazing the number of people who don't know that. They don't teach grammar properly in schools any more.
😊😊😊😊👏
Of course there are.
For the first 3 paragraphs of that, I thought you were talking about the Burkes, and other Christian fundamentals.
You were so close.
Guys it's only a singular pronoun when talking about someone you don't know.
The student wants to be *addressed* as they, which implies they are some kind of plurality. Or do they expect people to only talk about them indirectly as if they aren't standing there?
They also want to be addressed by a name that was not given at birth and this gobshite won't do that either.
The statement added the institution takes into account professional advice as well as the well-being of their student
Eg. there is a lot more going on here that a girl identifying as a cat however that are not going to discuss an individual students physiological history because a few people enjoy getting into a frothing rage. It also talks about the girl being "phenomenally bright" which at least suggests the may be a component of aspergers or similar contributing to their behaviour.
What is likely is that the school in consultation with the childs parents and medical practitioners has chosen to tolerate certain behaviour as long as it does not disrupt the operation of the school, in order to enable a child, who is going through something or other, to continue to receive an education. Would you prefer if the school revealed the child's full medical and physiological history? Would that sate the frothing rage?
Do you use she / he when someone is standing there? If it bothers people so much, just use their name when referring to them. That way one can both respect the individuals identity and retain one's avowed pronoun purity. Win win.
Also, they is a gender neutral and plural pronoun.
Can they, their, them, and themselves be used as singular pronouns?: Usage Guide
They, their, them, themselves: English lacks a common-gender third person singular pronoun that can be used to refer to indefinite pronouns (such as everyone, anyone, someone). Writers and speakers have supplied this lack by using the plural pronouns. and every one to rest themselves betake — William Shakespeare I would have everybody marry if they can do it properly — Jane Austen it is too hideous for anyone in their senses to buy — W. H. Auden The plural pronouns have also been put to use as pronouns of indefinite number to refer to singular nouns that stand for many persons. 'tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech — William Shakespeare a person can't help their birth — W. M. Thackeray no man goes to battle to be killed.—But they do get killed — G. B. Shaw The use of they, their, them, and themselves as pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number is well established in speech and writing, even in literary and formal contexts. In recent years, these pronouns have also been adopted by individuals whose gender identity is nonbinary, as illustrated in sense 3d above.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/they
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/2c24cbeac11f913da9e0b21923b8fc98.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5117ec177439400b1e5944f4d30acdda.svg)
