Skip to main content

Just let him wear the dress

Of course I am referring to the story of parents Nigel and Sally Rowe who this week announced they had not only pulled their six-year-old out of the school that allowed another boy to attend wearing a dress, but were now intending to take the school to court.

The couple, who claim to be Christians, say the Church of England primary is failing to respect the rights of their son to be raised in line with biblical values.

Perhaps most worrying of all, if Mr and Mrs Rowe win their case, it would mean transgender pupils at all schools suffering.

Talking to the press this week, the couple, who live on the Isle of Wight, say their religious beliefs state boys are boys and girls are girls. They think the issue of 'gender dis-morphia' must be addressed compassionately but not at school.

It is ironic Mr and Mrs Rowe use the word compassion. Their whole stance lacks just that – not only to the six-year-old who has taken the bold step to wear the dress to school but to their own son.

Mr Rowe says his little boy came home confused because a pupil in his class would sometimes come to school dressed as a boy and sometimes as a girl.

This would be the perfect opportunity to sit down and help their son understand that not all children simply fall into one of two categories – boy or girl – but of course, the Rowes refuse to accept that is the case themselves.

They have instead withdrawn their child from the school to be home-schooled and as a result that child will be closeted away from any alternative views to his parents.

It is this kind of behaviour which goes some way to explain why we live in a world where the voices of the likes of Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg are allowed to prosper.


Popular posts from this blog

A Bake Off style icon and a feline emblem of women's emancipation

The world of British politics has been dominated by the wave of sexual allegations pouring out of Westminster this week. So much so, there has been hardly any talk of Brexit. Perhaps we have left. Has anyone noticed a lack of hummus on the shelves of Tesco? But I, rather unfeelingly, digress.
MPs across all political parties have received accusations of a sexual nature against them, ranging from inappropriate comments and misplaced hands to sexual assault and rape. Prime Minister Theresa May has pledged to unite with all other party leaders next week to discuss what must be done to clamp down on this behaviour and deal with the current allegations appropriately.
Of course there have been numerous critics - those who believe we are in some way being unfair to male MPs by bringing these sexual transgressions to the fore. That a man will never be able to chat a woman up in a bar again if we persist in allowing yet another male-dominated area of society to be exposed as misogynistic and …

Older women are missing the point when they say millennials need to 'toughen up' in the face of sexual abuse

It takes a certain type of woman to come out during what can only be seen as a revolutionary time for women's rights and complain. But that is exactly what a number of older, prominent female figures have done since the sex scandal broke at Westminster and it leaves me puzzling, in the most colloquial of terms, 'whose side are they actually on'?
The pervasive idea amongst the women I refer to is that what is going on in the House of Commons as we speak is nothing but a moral panic led by the millennials. They claim that it all comes down to the younger women, who make up much of the MP's staff, not being tough enough to fend off the comments and misplaced hands of their bosses.
They further claim this is some kind of 'millennial revenge' by younger women who carry around with them a sense of disgust towards anyone over 40. Furthermore, they say, women of their generation had a far more robust attitude to men behaving badly, compared to the 'fragile' …

MP's vote on Brexit is a 'con', Johnson's apology a sop, but Theresa May's condemnation of Russia was a triumph

It has been called a 'staggering climbdown' by some but the truth of the matter is, the Government's 11th hour decision to allow Parliament a vote on the Brexit deal is just another example of Tory trickery.
David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, announced yesterday (Monday) that the final Brexit Withdrawal Bill would be presented to the House of Commons as an Act of Parliament which could be voted on in good time before we leave the European Union.
This was initially seen as a major victory on the part of Labour MPs and Tory rebels who have been calling for several months for Parliament to have their say on the Brexit deal. Davis had previously said there would not be an opportunity for MPs to vote as they anticipated work on the deal would be going on until the last minute before exiting.
But alas the devil is always in the detail and it quickly emerged that whilst MPs will be able to vote on the deal, they will not be able to have any say in the case of a no deal Brexit – …