I am a teacher and I keep getting told that I have to step into the Real Life Test and come out at my place of employment as fully transitioning.

Maybe now those who like to poke the needle of arrogance might pull their head in and accept that others just might have more insight and a greater feel for the recklessness of some decisions which can simply end in tragedy.

Notwithstanding, I shall continue to insist that the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care has some attributable fault and that there are elements in it such as The Real Life Test which is already archaic, anachronistic, atrocious and blatantly irresponsible.

Regards

Chalice

This post was edited by Former Member at March 22, 2013 1:25 PM GMT

After reading this artical a couple of times. I`m at a loss as to how littlejohn, can be termed, anti trans or a hater. He was voicing an opinion. Which the last time I looked. Was a basic right in a democratic society. As Cristine pointed out. His concern seemed to be on young & impressionable primery school children. between the ages of 7-11 years old. While he wasn`t exactly complimentery towards Lucy Meadows. He didn`t have a problem with her transitioning. I certainly wouldn`t say that this artical represents hounding a person to death. Ms Meadows obviously had more personal issues, & to suggest this artical was the cause. Is certainly short sighted. The parents of the children went to the press before he had heard anything about it. They did so for reasons based on concern for their children, & a basic ignorence of the Transgender community. As a hetrosexual transvestite, I have experienced the lose of family members. Who`s understanding of my illness as it was described. Should result in me seeking therapy to cure it, & I certainly shouldn`t be allowed near any children in my family. This isn`t an isolated experience, many have suffered the same fate. due to a lack of awareness & education on the subject. So i do have a slight empathey to Ms Meadows. Many people fear what they don`t understand, many fear anything which isn`t part of the universal doctrine. Being a man or woman in the wrong body. Has for decades been perscribed as a mental illness. So it in many ways it is understandable the response of the parents. The fact that Littlejohn felt it may have been a better option to start at a new school as Ms Meadows. Wasn`t a hate fill attack on her. Maybe just a solution to a problem, that affected not Just Lucy Meadows. I may fall foul to some here, for my take on this. That would be a shame, but i actually wonder how many have actually read the Littlejohn artical, with an open mind. Which in the end. Isn`t that what the Transgender community is seeker for ourselves?

Thanks Crissie, I just hope others take the time to actually read the artical instead of jumping on the hate wagon....

How is it not hate speech I have to ask???
Why the constant mis-gendering and slurs about her character??
Why did he ignore the many comments from other children's parents that he interviewed and were happy with what was happening??
Why were comments from parents who gave positive comments about her after the article was published never published in the comments section??
Why were the Headteacher and other staff not interviewed?? (they were actually, but their comments never appeared)
Why did the Daily Mail and other tabloid newspapers park outside her door and the school for months afterwards?? (she had to leave her home by the back door at the crack of dawn and stay at school til late to avoid the press)
Why were other parents of children at the school offered money to obtain photographs of her??
How would any transitioned trans person feel if they were treated like this??

Littlejohn constantly berates and outs trans people whenever he possibly can, never refers to them by their correct pronouns and seeks to belittle on all occasions.  Why was an old article about Jimmy Saville, a known paedophie placed alongside it in the same piece??  Guilt by association - yes, the Mail uses every dirty trick in the book to tar us as paedophiles who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near children.  He thinks it is child abuse to give children puberty blockers when they are 12 or 13 - whose effects if he had done the slightest research would know that these are instantly reversible if stopped being taken.  Surely the child abuse is to not give them when the child has constantly said they have the wrong body and may even have been happily transitioned for a number of years and then forced to go through a puberty which will result in painful and costly treatments afterwards (facial hair removal, FFS and other body surgery)

Transitioning is a highly emotional stage of your life - you are scared, frightened yes and elated - and then this happens to you - READ IT AGAIN in that light, how would you feel??

Yes, I am angry, I am damned angry.

Crissie, if you had researched it instead of glib comments you would have known that the school and its governors had given their blessing for her to do this - she had their and all the other teachers support in this.

As for the children - please read the following article which was written by a non trans teacher:-
https://fromthechalkface.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/unable-to-cope-with-difference/

There is tons more stuff out there on the internet if you are prepared to do a little research and find out the truth.  Jane Fae (a well known trans writer and columnist) has done just that (read her blogs) and TMW are well aware of the truth behind this (go and visit their Facebook page).
Have a read of this blog for example
http://image-not-available.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-death-of-lucy-meadows.html
Also well worth a read is the following article in yesterday's 'Scotland on Sunday' newspaper:[
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/opinion/comment/lucy-meadows-story-not-in-the-public-interest-1-2854438

This post was edited by Former Member at March 25, 2013 7:28 PM GMT

Glib - because these facts have come to light about how the school governors and the other teachers felt a while back Chrissie.

If he had done the slightest amount of research he would have found out about how children react to such things (read that article written by a teacher) - he would have easily had access to such knowledge/

I didn't say "Whre was it reported that children were offered money for photographs,........."

What I actually said was "Why were other parents of children at the school offered money to obtain photographs of her??"

And as to being fair, was Littlejohn's article fair??  Balanced??

If the powerful press can be unfair and we have to be absolutely fair in any thoughts and comments about their treatment of trans people, then it is a pretty one sided battle.

This post was edited by Former Member at March 25, 2013 6:00 PM GMT

You haven't been following people then that have spoken to the headteacher Crissie - Lucy did have their full support in this.

Also worth readikng is this piece in the Guardian newspaper:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/22/lucy-meadows-press-harassment

So that day when you appear in court with your duty to defend (or prosecute) a certain individual you will be totally fair - surely it is your duty to defend your client by all legitimate means possible??  You will be giving as much spin to getting your client off, or a reduced sentence as best you can??

This post was edited by Former Member at March 25, 2013 6:22 PM GMT

This was the initial article which appeared in the Accrington Observer, which was then picked up by Littlejohn.  The original article contains quotes from the headmistress clearly showing her and her colleagues support for Lucy Meadows:-
http://www.accringtonobserver.co.uk/news/local-news/accrington-schools-letter-parents-tells-1273948

Another interesting article here:-
http://dan-waddell.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/here-there-be-monstering.html

Sheez!

If what someone is doing makes you uncomfortable, that's harassament.

Harrassment in this Country is illegal.

 

Does anyone making comments here understand behaviour, ie. what people do and why they do it?

There are antecedents to behaviour and the antecedents in the Lucy Meadows debarkle are clear.

It is quite demonstrable that her relationship with the school was both harmonious and productive. Mr Northice (article) make a sound argument about the resilence of young children. The first duty of educators is their duty of care to their charges. Obviously, Lucy Meadows posed no risk to the children under her care.

Parents are not teachers, they can object and complain but ultimately the laws and regulations of schooling are beyound the authority of most parents. In other words, schools have an authority above parents in many regards.

 

Lucy Meadows' transition really was nobdy's business but her own and by all accounts she was coping well with it within the parameters available to her. You know my argument, if she did not feel under pressure to begin the Real Life Experience then this whole matter could have been avoided.

The Real Life Experience is archaic, and anachronistic.

 

Regards

Chalice.  

 

No Chalice, she wasn't under pressure from doing her RLE - far from it. She had good support from her head, the school governors and from the rest of her colleagues. She was also loved by all her pupils by most accounts of what I have read.

Yes, she had had ideation of suicide in the past - I think most of us have been there before transition, the thought that we might have to fight this thing for ever, to always live a lie. However, the pressure escalated after the Daily Mail mocked her existence (by the incessant use of wrong names and wrong pronouns they delighted in rubbing that salt into the wounds, by inferring that she was not fit to teach young children, that she would be a danger to them - and, like I have said before, by publishing the Jimmy Saville piece within the same article). She was then weakened and exhausted after 3 months of dodging the press parked outside her house and the school and the information as to what the press was doing was being relayed to her.

People when they are exhausted can do silly things (like leave a gas fire on unlit, or something on the stove can spill over whilst she slept from exhaustion, extinguished the light and the gas still keeps poring out) Or, it could be that in the end she had simply had enough and took her own life as the only means of peace that she thought she could find.

I know at least three teachers of primary school aged children and two secondary school teachers who have transitioned at their schools and did not have a problem whatsoever, but they were not outed to the media in such a savage way and did not have the gutter press parked on their doorstep for months on end.

It was not the RLE that caused this, she could have coped with that as she had support all around her. It was something far more malicious that either caused an accidental death or made her so exhausted that she did, indeed, take her own life.

This post was edited by Former Member at March 26, 2013 1:00 AM GMT

A wonderful piece of journalism by Juliet Jacques in today's 'New Statesman' clearly analyses why the press seeks to hound us and monster those who cannot answer back and why every trans person should be angry at this:-
http://www.newstatesman.com/juliet-jacques/2013/03/trans-people-and-media-compromise-neither-desirable-nor-possible

Cristine, Shye (GS Admin) said:

 I still cannot accept, that Littlejohns article was soley responsible for the death of Lucy. So far we have only had Trans peoples opinions, ..............

Littlejohn's abusive article was the powder that led to the keg - it was after his article that the other rags (Daily Mirror, Sun, et al) joined the crusade and resultant witch hunt.  If the Daily Mail does not accept culpability why did they subsequently pull the story from their web site??  If they were so proud of what they had done in alerting the public to the  (alleged) menace that she posed to the children in her care and the overall tone of the exposure, why pull it??

............ and no, there are many other writers out there who have been disgusted with that article and who have both written about it and appeared on radio and television to condemn it, it is not just trans people who are writing about this - so please don't try and spin that this is solely a trans opinion.

Read this detailed post on the leading media law blog INFORRM on the death of Lucy Meadows for instance:-
http://inforrm.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/privacy-monstering-and-the-press-the-case-of-lucy-meadows/
Also listen to David Allen Green speaking about it on BBC Radio 4 a few nights ago (starts at 25mins 20secs into the program if you want to miss the other topics dicussed in the program
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01r9sw8
Have a read of this article:-
http://explorationalsituations.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/being-out-in-schools-a-tribute-to-lucy-meadows/

A great resource page for you to read all about this is contained in a blog here:-
http://jackofkent.com/resource-pages/lucy-meadows/
showing many of the articles were written by cis people

Crissie, I have now provided many links to the harm that this had caused to Lucy Meadows - you are still arguing that there was no harm done - where is your evidence to support your claims??

This post was edited by Former Member at March 26, 2013 1:41 PM GMT

I note the comment you make about attitudes. 

You can make laws, you cannot legislate for attitudes and I am sceptical about the 100% acceptance by the school and the parents.

Indeed, I like to say that you cannot legislate for Saintliness.

 

However, I find your tenacious pursuit of the school and your zeal to implicate them in this fiasco extremely concerning. You are repeating Mr Littlejohn's error.

I have had cause to use the Law Courts too frequently over the past few years. But what I have noticed is that my Barrister takes instructions from me and then advises on points of law. Lucy Meadows is hardly in a position to give instructions to Council. So who is there to sue for justice and what is/are the issue/s?

Its all well and good to make hypotheticals, and you caution against implicating the main actors in slander and libel, yet the whole stinking saga is one great hell raising scandal. On the other hand, you have dismissed my view in total disregard for the similarities in my position and that of Lucy Meadows.  I stated unequivocally that the school's relationship with Lucy was understandably harmonious and productive. This was stated from my experience of current school politics. I also proferred the view of someone who is also becoming unconcealable as a trangendered person in a school environment.

 

I suggest Mr Northice's article has been the most illuminating and recommend that it is read several times. After all, we are the ones who are at the coal face where you level your criticism. We are the ones given the trust and confidence from the community to put the best interests of the children ahead of our own whims and fancies.

 

There are alternative ways of transitioning and we need to discard those that prove to be too dangerous.

 

In deapest respect.

Chalice       

 

       

To me, 'coming out' is the issue and the way that it is dictated to us and we are driven to distraction from the truth of our own reality. There are less brutal ways of becoming a full and complete person, even gg's become women gradually without the shock and damage that the RLE can cause. I am also a Theologian of sorts so my focus is far from bigots and 'nuckle dragging troglodytes.' lol. I prefer to focus and surround myself with those I love and who love me. To this end, I believe I am in good company here. *^_^*

This post was edited by Former Member at March 26, 2013 2:06 PM GMT

Crissie in your opening statement:- you said

"We don't know if the ''support'' of the school, board of governors was genuine, a church school.? and whether or not that was the major contributing factor in her death.

I think that by now, if you have read all the source material that I have mentioned, I would have to think that you, as a reasoning person, would agree that she was supported by her head and the school governors and the other members of the staff - however I see that you are resolutely sticking to your assumption (not proof) that there are knuckedraggers amongst the staff and governors.  I am sure that if the tabloids could have found a dissenter then they would have had a field day quoting that person (and the press are very good at sniffing out dissenters - take the lone voice of angry father Wayne Kelly as an example.  Why were there no other angry parents being quoted??)

You are basing your defence of the tabloid press on circumstantial evidence and personal assumptions.  There is definite prooof that Lucy Meadows was upset and depressed at the way she was being hounded by the press (emails that she sent to friends etc).  You appear to be acting as some sort of defence attorney for the press at the moment???  I really would have thought that you would have been on the side of the victim of press harassment here, having experienced some of the trauma of being trans and how it can affect your life.  Instead you are supporting that harassment by condoning statements that the press attacks on her weren't all that bad or vicious.

Do you really think that Littlejohn and the rest of the tabloid press that subsequently jumped onto that bandwagon were not aware of the affect that such damning and vitriolic articles can have on a person who is in a vulnerable state and who doesn't have the resources to fight back??  The fact that this was done and in such a way as to give the neanderthals in our society more reason for hate and also to line the coffers of those newspapers is despicable and surely not worth defending.

This post was edited by Former Member at March 26, 2013 4:10 PM GMT

And now parliamentary questions are being raised (by a cis male - just in case you wondered) about the conduct of the press leading up to Lucy Meadow's death:-
http://hhgrahamjones.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/in-memory-of-lucy-meadows-and-all-those.html

Your statement just now just goes to show that you haven't read a thing or link that I have posted Crissie. There was one person who leaked the school letter to parents about the appointment - Mr. Wayne Kelly

So having read all the comments & almost all the links published here, & having reread the Littlejohn column again. I`ll agree he`s not exactly a shrinking violot in his opinions. He does take a swipe at the school boards political correctness. He certainly isn`t supportive of Lucy`s decision to remain teaching at the same school. He did pay lip service to the difficulties of living in the wrong body, & the right to transition on the NHS as Transexuals are tax payers too. He also pointed out that "HE" thought the children there were a little young to have to comprehend the complex issue of Transexualism, & this he was his concern. He pointed out quite unkindly, that Lucy was placing her own selfish needs above others. So it wasn`t a pro-Lucy Meadows column. That was "HIS OPINION" He also commented on in the same Column The Monster previously known as Jimmy Savile,(my opinion!) & on the the fact that the head of public prosicutions. Had said the threatening people on the internet wouldn`t be prosicuted if they were drunk. So it was a diverse column to say the least. In my opinion, & I say this again, In my opinion, I don`t believe these have any baring on the artical on Lucy Meadows. Which again I don`t believe was hate filled or anti Transgender.....

This post was edited by Former Member at March 26, 2013 7:10 PM GMT

Oh Crissie, that is a standard media ploy when they haven't got any juicy quotes - just make something up and attribute it to "several people/parents expressed concern". It is a well known trick that is employed by the media to convey to their readers that people were up in arms about it when they only have one attributable quote that they can get from one person.

As I have said previously, Littlejohn is renown for his treatment of trans people, Lucy was just another one of his many victims. Quite often his tack is something like "I don't have a problem with people having sex changes but .............." then goes on to ridicule his victim.

I think the anger in the wider trans community at Littlejohn is because of his relentless bullying of people in vulnerable positions who do not have the power and platform that he has.

Another well reasoned article by Paris Lees has just been published on the Guardian's web site:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/26/lucy-meadows-death-not-in-vain

I liked the clarity of Juliet Jacques article, which exposes the motivations behind articles like Richard Littlejohns. Yes many start with "I am not against Transexuals ..BUT.go on to construe a twisted moralising Logic based on suggestive fear that Judges any Trans existence as "problematic" (but they use plenty of other expressions).I am just left saddened after reading Paris Lee s last paragraph

Yes, that was the real tragedy of it Donna - very moving words and thoughts from Paris.

Now i will add my bit, a different opinion to Crissies, break the bastards legs for furthering and adding to a long tirade of  malicous and gutter utterings.

 

But I do note Carol you use the  positive supportive comments from the Accrington paper, but neglect the same piece spoke of reservations with several parents. a rather selective  point of view, terming them just media misinformation,  this is a forum, where everyone is entitled to their opinions,   The point as far as I can  Crissies is not defending or supporting The writer, but trying to establish that there are more underlying issues to contend with.   Its no good believing one thing and ignoring the other issues at stake here. trying to browbeat Crissie round to your opinion that this whole mess is the Daily Mails writers fault. is not going to work, one thing is sure though she will keep at this and if anything can be done legally she will get it done.

 

One thing is an obvious fact, her comment

 

''Ergo, can the blame be laid at one persons door for a whole trail of blunders and ineptitude.''

 

Cassandra Whitehead

When will we finally realize that the media does not serve as a benefit to human beings any longer.

This post was edited by Doanna Highland at March 27, 2013 2:47 AM GMT

Wow, this thread is just like the way things used to be, good dialog, agree to disagree, luv it. 

 

Sooo right Donna, the foundation of any democratic society is a press that gives facts with true and honest journalism.

 

Tammy

This post was edited by Tammy Brianne at March 27, 2013 2:58 AM GMT

I read this article on Huffpost, and talked about it on my show last Sunday, 3/24 ( The Jackie Oooo Show, an internet TV show on the website: FenMark.net.....the show is now in "archives" on that same website ).

My observations are 1.) all news commentators and reporters can subliminally insert their feelings or opinions very easily into their news stories without too many people catching it, and in this case I would say that this reporter was certainly less than pro-LGBT, even though he tried to to make it appear he had no opinion regarding Ms. Meadow's career as a transgender. Also, let us always remember the media appetite for making more about, or sensationalizing, the news beyond the truth in many cases, and the press can definitely be pushy to the point of harassment.

2.) It seems the school was acceptng of Ms. Meadows as were the children and the parents, from what we were told in interviews with various administrators, other teachers, parents and children....but did we hear from those that weren't supportive, and did they play a role in Ms. Meadows feelings of doubts and hoplessness

I remember a year or so ago where the Canadien government sent a directive to their school administrators to teach high school students about LGBT's in their sex education classes in order to educate the upcoming generations more about LGBT's. It took less than a week before the Canadien government rescinded the directive due to only a "few" parents objecting to the teachings. One mother said she objected because "her daughter complained of being confused by the information"....probably because her daughter may have had questions about her gender identity anyway!

3.) It is very difficult for many transgenders to ever get rid of their depression totally, especially if they have lost a relationship with a spouse, child, sibling, parent or other family members or friends.

As said earlier in the discussion, it may not be the fault of any one person, or circumstance....and usually isn't, but when the hill becomes a mountain, and too high to climb, many simply give up rather than to seek help.

Cristine, Shye (GS Admin) said:
I am now informed that the initial article naming Lucy was in a local paper Accrinton Observer. if anyone can find this article please give me a link, I am still waiting for a legal opinion on the releasing of names, as far as I understand the law, each person who releases the prior names and adopted names of a person in transition could face criminal charges. lets see where where we go from here.

It is in the links that I put up earlier Crissie

Is it not the case that a person revealing someones trans history is only breaking the law if they are acting in an official capacity?
The school would have been doing it with Lucy's permission, ie the announcement that she is changing gender, so no crime there surely?
Some parent whos kid is at the school would not have been acting in an official capacity and also wouldnt have been disclosing something that up until then had been secret.
The press likewise can claim the information was already public.
I hope you succeed in establishing that the press acted criminally Cris but I'm not holding my breath.
My own opinion is that we should bring the likes of littlejohn down by whatever means are available, fair or otherwise.

Cristine, Shye (GS Admin) said:

Ergo, can the blame be laid at one persons door for a whole trail of blunders and ineptitude.

Well you certainly wanted that statement to scream out boldly and unequivocally Crissie.

No, there were a whole number of people involved, from Stuart Pike who first wrote about in in the Accrington Observer through to the journalists and photographers who were camped outside her door and the school for almost 3 weeks.  You will note though that The Accrington Observer's piece was fairly neutral and didn't misgender Lucy Meadows (although the quoye from Wayne Cowey did).

However, it was Littlejohn's demeaning and dehumanising article in the Daily Mail that started the witch hunt by the other tabloids - so if you are say prosecuting a whole mass of people for say a riot, who do you prosecute first - the leaders or the pack that follows in their wake??  Who do you balme the most???

You also say "plunders and ineptitude" - really????  I am honestly completely staggered by that description.  Here is a man who has risen to the top of his profession (writing), who knows full well what can be achieved by the choice of words and language, what emotions he can instill into his readers, who has been written to by TMW in the past as to the detrimental effect that outing a person in the way that he delights in doing can have on a person who is transitioning.  But - hey, ho - you call them plunders and ineptitude - I would suggest "cold, calculated and callous (unkind, cruel, and without sympathy or feeling for other people) would be a far better description.

This post was edited by Former Member at March 27, 2013 4:39 PM GMT

As she was at the start of her transition, she would not have been eligible to apply for or receive her Gender Recognition Certificate Layla, therefore none of the rules of disclosure apply to Lucy

Some breaking news just in is that the inquest into her death has commenced today in Blackburn, but has been adjourned for 2 more months until 28th May

Coroner Michael Singleton told the short hearing:

“I understand there have been previous attempts to commit suicide. I don’t know if they are relevant or not.”

Thisislancashire.co.uk reports Mr Singleton asked for various reports to be completed to establish a cause of death, before the inquest is resumed on 28 May.

 

Cass, there was only one negative comment, the one by Wayne Cowie.  The reporter could not give any more parents expressing disapproval so to add substance to the story probably just invented the others as unattributable vague "other parent expressed concern". If the reporter had received such comments, he would have delighted in expressing them in full.  The aim here was to create a 'situation' as then it was far more likely that the nationals would pick it up - and what better to have a load of parents concerned than just one lone voice.

Despite the press pack descending on the village en force after the Daily Mail's article was published, the only negative comment that has appeared in any of the stories is that one from Wayne Cowey (and that one has constantly been taken from the original story).  No other parent has ever mentioned anything negative about Lucy Meadows in all the time that the press pack was parked outside the school, doesn't that seem strange to you, not one single other attributable bad comment??

This post was edited by Former Member at March 27, 2013 8:38 PM GMT

yes and i agree wholeheartedly cris, im sure we are all on the same side.

my comments were intended to express my lack of faith in the establishment to do the right thing.

certainly not intended to work against us.

    Jackie,

    A couple of things regarding what you said below,
 1)It was not the Canadian Government that tried this - it was the provincial Government of Ontario ...a Province in Canada.
 Further, that particular Provincial Government tried to introduce, at a very early age, the concept of 6 genders in the primary (JK to gr 8)and secondary (gr 9 to g 12)school system. Not only did it try to discourage the children from identifying themselves as a particular gender - but it also tried to encourage (and instruct) these young children to consider such things as the "pleasures of anal sex" ... and so on..
 This policy naturally enraged the parents - but also stood to greatly confuse the young children concerned..

2) I think it was incorrect of you to naturally assume that her daughter "may have had questions about her gender identity anyway!". When we make assumptions like that, based on our own position, situation, or preference .... we run the risk of losing our own credibility.

Hugs!

Doanna

"Jackie McKethen said:
 I remember a year or so ago where the Canadien government sent a directive to their school administrators to teach high school students about LGBT's in their sex education classes in order to educate the upcoming generations more about LGBT's. It took less than a week before the Canadien government rescinded the directive due to only a "few" parents objecting to the teachings. One mother said she objected because "her daughter complained of being confused by the information"....probably because her daughter may have had questions about her gender identity anyway!

This post was edited by Doanna Highland at March 28, 2013 7:10 AM GMT

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/03/27/lucy-meadows-death-could-set-transgender-community-free