Really?
The topic that is so important to you has never been mentioned by you to your daughter?
Well then, I wonder where she did get the notion.

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"?