No Outsiders: Why Equality Is a VITAL Thing To Teach Children

There are certain things we are taught at school: maths, spelling and for a lot of us here in the UK, how to play London's Burning on a recorder.  Parents everywhere must be so incredibly grateful for that one...

And then there are the things we learn without realising: how to share and take turns, that it's okay to ask a question if you're not sure about something and, crucially, that we are all different, but equally deserving of respect.

It may come as a shock to those parents protesting the new "No Outsiders" programme - which features books incorporating same-sex parent families and racially diverse characters, in an effort to teach children that differences are not a bad thing and that everyone is worthy of respect, regardless of gender, orientation or ethnicity - that equality and the celebration of differences has been fundamental to the Primary School curriculum (and Early Years, for that matter) for a very long time already.

Rightly so.

Yes, an understanding of what they have in common with their friends and what makes them different and special is a core aspect of what children are expected to have learnt by the time they complete their first year of primary education.  It has been for years.  Why?  Because it's important.  It's important for a child's sense of self that he or she can recognise things they are good at.  Things that make them unique.  It's equally important for a child's blossoming understanding of society as a whole, that they appreciate that not everyone is the same as them and that those who differ are no less special than they are.

Why is it important?  Well, think back to your school days.  Every single one of us can probably remember someone who was bullied for being different in some way.  Perhaps their family had a different set of customs and therefore stuck out.  Maybe there was a child who dressed differently or spoke with an accent unfamiliar to the rest of their classmates.  Perhaps there was one member of the class who struggled academically and fell behind everyone else.  Or maybe they just didn't look "right."

Some of you will look back and realise that that "different kid" was you.  I know that's what I remember when I look back to secondary school, in particular.  And I know what a dreadful effect it had on the rest of my life.  Bullying - which almost always stems from one child seeming to be "different" in some way - results in scars that last long after we leave the classroom.  And so, happily, modern schools have measures in place to ensure that differences, be they cultural, religious, ability-based or surrounding a family dynamic, are celebrated and discussed, so that we teach children that their version of "normal" is not necessarily the same as that of their classmates, and that that is not a problem.  We are all different.  We can all be celebrated.  We all deserve respect.

So far, so good.

The trouble over this long-standing programme of inclusion has only sprung up because it now also includes differences in sexuality as standard.  Suddenly, mothers and fathers who were perfectly happy to have little Daisy taught that some children only have one parent, are up in arms over the idea that their offspring might discover - heaven forbid - that some children have two parents of the same gender.

That's it, in a nutshell.  That's what the hoo-ha is about.

Never mind that the 2010 Equality Act already means that things such as discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, race or disability was already a thing you can't do and that we should be stamping out wherever possible, including in our schools; it took the introduction of the No Outsiders programme to convince protestors that the idea of children learning that gay people exist is  THE WORST THING EVER!!!1!!ONE!!!

And so we find ourselves in a situation in which furious parents are taking their children out of school and forming protests outside these educational establishments, chanting and holding up placards.  We find ourselves living in a world in which some school heads have suspended teaching of the No Outsiders programme, after receiving death threats.

And for any child with two parents of the same gender (or an LGBTQ+ sibling or other relative, for that matter) what is that teaching them?  That they're wrong.  That they're bad.  That they're different and unacceptable.  Is that seriously what we've sunk to?

Many of the protestors are using religion as the excuse for their blatant homophobia.  Many - laughably - are insisting that we don't call them "homophobic," as though the violent insistence that children cannot possibly be taught that LGBTQ+ people exist and are worthy of just as much respect as anyone else, is somehow something other than grotesquely homophobic.  Just as "I'm not racist, but..." almost always leads to an inherently racist sentence, this cry of "we're not homophobic, but..." falls bitterly flat, when followed by the outright denial of children being taught to respect diversity and to show tolerance to those whose lives differ to their own.

We live in a country which allows people religious freedom and goes as far as to protect that freedom.  However, we are a secular nation.  Religious beliefs do not underpin our laws or our school curriculum and nor should they.  As a non-religious person myself, I can say that the existence of God is unproven.  The existence of humans is not.  And those humans have every right to be represented, heard and respected, regardless of their sexual orientation.  There is nothing sinful about being gay, in my eyes.  And to those who believe that being gay is wrong for religious reasons, that is, again, a belief, not a provable fact.  Therefore, we as a broader society - made up of people of all religions, as as well as agnostics and atheists - cannot be held to ransom by those who have chosen to interpret their faith in a way that persecutes the LGBTQ+ community.

Grossly, as a last resort against any kind of tolerance towards the LGBTQ+ community, homophobes will sometimes tell you that if we accept love between two men or two women, we must also accept "love" between a paedophile and a child.  I shouldn't have to make the obvious statement that to conflate consensual love between two adults of the same gender, with sexual abuse between an adult and child is horrific.  I don't know any gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender person who would ever, ever condone paedophilia.  There is nothing loving about assault and to suggest as much is abhorrant.

Love between consenting adults, however, is and always has been, the most natural thing in the world.

Alongside the parents complaining for religious reasons of course, we have parents who claim to be against the teaching of the No Outsiders programme for cultural or personal ones.  These are the parents who claim that to mention gay people in schools somehow sexualises young children, or exposes them needlessly to something they shouldn't witness.  These are often the same people who disapprove of sex education full stop.  Because everyone knows, if a girl is shown how to put a condom on a banana at the age of 14, she'll be pregnant by 15.  Obviously.

And yet these are often the same people who think nothing of asking a young girl if she has a "boyfriend" at school.  Or of putting a baby boy in a "ladies man" t-shirt.  Children are subjected to an almost aggressive level of heteronormative behaviour that simply never gets questioned, because it's so ingrained in society.  It's okay to joke about two six year olds having to get married, because a boy has held a girl's hand.  But it's not alright to explain that men can marry other men.  Because that's somehow a line we can't cross.

These "you're sexualising/confusing our children" types are often the ones who genuinely believe that "boys are going to be taught that they're actually girls," or that "children are going to be encouraged to believe that they're gay when they're not."  I'd laugh, were it not for the fact that these are real arguments I've had from people who are against the No Outsiders programme and who have clearly not read about it, beyond what they've seen in The Daily Mail.

Having worked in schools, pre-schools and nurseries for 18 years, I have read the curriculum.  Everything that is taught has been adapted by year group, to ensure that it is age appropriate.  The gist of the entire programme is simply: "To teach children about the 2010 Equality Act and British Values.  To reduce vulnerability to radicalisation and extremism.  To teach children to be proud of who they are, whilst recognising difference and diversity.  To create a positive school ethos, where everyone feels they belong."   There.  I took that from the Equalities Primary website.  Note the distinct lack of "To teach boys that they are actually girls and to ensure that all children are made to doubt their own sexuality as much as possible."

And to those who believe that teaching about LGBTQ+ relationships will confuse children?  When my friend's son was around 4, he met my sister's then partner (now wife).  He wasn't remotely traumatised.  He just instantly accepted that my sister loved a woman, then went on with his day.  Children are not born judgemental.  They are taught to be that way.  

I am passionate about inclusion and diversity.  I know how vital it is, in order to stamp out extremism and prevent bullying.  I know how crucial representation is for a child who feels different, be it due to their burgeoning sexuality or their home circumstances.  To be told that you are accepted, respected and loved is a basic human right.  To deny that to anyone - at any age - is frankly revolting.  

The Early Years curriculum has the core ethos: "Every Child Matters."  This is indisputable, as far as I'm concerned.  Every child does matter.  Every child has the right to be represented.  That includes children of same-sex parents.  Children with LGBTQ+ family members.  Children who, as they grow and develop, may find themselves questioning their own sexuality or struggling with their gender identity.  Not because they've had those issues forced on them, but because not every child grows up to be straight and cisgendered.  For those children, the knowledge that their school has been stopped from teaching that everyone is equal and worthy of respect, regardless of sexual orientation, has the potential to be hugely damaging.  Why should any child suffer, just because a group of loud parents are using religion or outdated "moral values" as an excuse to be homophobic?  And what are these parents "protecting" their children from?  The knowledge that love takes many forms?  The importance of tolerance rather than judgement?

We live in a world in which - finally - same sex marriage is becoming increasingly legalised and accepted.  Yes, we still have countries in which it is simply not safe to be openly gay and that fact shames us as a species.  But we are moving forwards.  We are heading towards a world in which equality really will exist, on a universal scale.  To get there, it is vital that we teach the next generation that love is more important than hate.  That tolerance and acceptance should never be overshadowed by those who fear what they cannot - or will not - understand.

Equality is a vital thing to teach to the world's children.

In Praise of "Mr Nice Guy."

If there's one phrase I'm truly sick of hearing, it's: "All women love a bad boy."

Excuse my language, but bollocks.

Here's the thing: the stereotypical image of the "bad boy" might be attractive to some.  Heck, even I find the idea of the outspoken, outgoing guy who's not afraid to stay out all night partying pretty hot.  The trouble is, I want that same guy to be reliably at work the next day.  

Say the words "bad boy" and it conjures up all sorts of images.  The guy who constantly puts himself first.  The man who doesn't do "sensitive" or "monogamous."  The dude who never calls after a date.

A "bad boy" is meant to be a "real bloke," whatever the hell one of those is.  The trouble is, it's all bullshit.  

Is being confident sexy?  Sure it is.  But over-confidence slides into arrogance and trust me, far fewer women find that attractive.

Is putting your own needs first a good thing?  Sometimes, definitely.  But if you put yourself above others constantly, you're going to tiptoe away from "bad boy" and towards "selfish sod."

Besides, you can be confident, in control and sure of what you want out of life without being a so-called "bad boy."  The tips I've seen on how to be a bad boy in countless online articles verge on sociopathic: 

• Don't show any emotion.  If you show her none, a woman will always want more, so she'll stay interested.
• Always put yourself first.  Never put your girlfriend or friends before your own desires, regardless of how much they need you.
• Hang up on a woman mid phone call.  It'll really piss her off and keep her interested.

If you're reading any of those "tips" and thinking anything but "that's the behaviour of an arsehole," then I worry about your state of mind.  Because, people: THAT'S THE BEHAVIOUR OF AN ARSEHOLE.  Even more worrying, are the comments beneath these "how to be a bad boy" articles, which genuinely range from moaning about being "friend-zoned," to one guy actually saying he's tempted to rape someone, just to "prove" what a "bad boy" he is.  The suggested article that came after the "How To Be A Bad Boy" one was, by the way, entitled "It's OK To Cheat (Sometimes You Have To Just Be A Man And Cheat On Your Girlfriend)."  So, that tells you a lot...

We use the term "bad boy" to describe guys who don't necessarily treat women that well, so what the heck is up with the idea that that's what we all actually want?  I've been cheated on.  I've been stood up.  I've had someone I loved unconditionally take all my time and support, yet give me utterly nothing in return, because he was number one in his world and nobody else ever came first (literally...).  He liked to describe himself as a "bad boy" and it was the worst relationship of my life, yet I'm supposed to want more of the same??!!  Erm, no thanks.

On the flip side, we talk about "Mr Nice Guy" as though it's a bad thing.  Being a good guy is supposedly unmasculine and unsexy (again, bullshit).  The idea is that being nice isn't exciting enough; we need a "bad boy" to stop us from getting bored.

Really?  Are women just toddlers, now?  I know I've been single a while, but I don't remember ever getting so fed up of being treated decently that I felt the need to seek out someone who'd walk all over me, just for the "excitement" of it all...

There is nothing wrong with being nice.  Nothing.

You could offer me all the "bad boys" in the world, but I'd still pick the nice guy who regularly phones his mum.  

Women are all different, so I'm not going to say "what we all want is..." because what I want and what the rest of the female population are after could be wildly different.  But speaking from experience of having had a "bad boy" (when I was never actively looking for one, either), I can safely say that "Mr Nice Guy" is 100% the one for me.

"Nice" doesn't ever have to mean "boring."  It doesn't ever have to mean that you can't be a bloke.

All "nice" means is considering other people as well as yourself; not to the degree that you end up unhappy from putting yourself last all the time, just to the degree that you're not an inconsiderate idiot.  It means showing a bit of affection and treating the people in your life with some respect.  It means being honest, rather than playing games and trying to live up to some ridiculous stereotype.

At the end of the day, I don't want a guy who treats me like I'm unimportant any more than I want a man to put himself second all the time.  When you get down to the nitty gritty, most of us - of either sex - just want someone we can be ourselves with.  Someone we can have a laugh with, as well as talk to about the more serious things in our lives.  None of us want to end up hurt and none of us should ever really want to be the one doing the hurting.

All women want a bad boy? Don't talk rubbish.

Why IS Respect So Difficult?!

Seriously, though... Why is being respectful so hard for some people?

We're all different and that's fine.  In fact, it's more than fine; it's bloody brilliant!  Who wants to live in a world of identikit people, who all look and talk the same way?  To me, that sounds like something from a horror film, not some kind of perfect idyll.

And yet we find ourselves in a society in which different views are treated as an excuse for cruelty and ignorance.

For example, I co-run a campaign against Fifty Shades, because I believe it contributes to an already prevalent believe in stereotypical abuse myths (if you love an abuser the right way, he'll change; if he was abused as a child, he has a get-out clause for his behaviour and so on).  I also believe the author of said stories has treated those who see abuse in her books appallingly, by insulting, minimising and silencing them.  Now, I get that Fifty Shades is a ludicrously popular franchise (and I mean ludicrously; have you read the damn thing?  I've read better written till receipts).  I realise that if you speak out against something popular, you're going to infuriate the fans of that popular thing.  But why can't people "respectfully disagree," anymore?

Last night, a fan of Fifty Shades wrote on our campaign page: "You're all lunatics!"  She went on to victim-blame ("if you're in an abusive relationship, just leave!!"), which makes me think pretty badly of her, but it was that opening comment ("you're all lunatics") that really pissed me off.  Why?  Because of the utter lack of respect it showed.

It might shock you to know that I have talked at length with fans of Fifty Shades about why they like it, why they didn't recognise any abuse in it and why they have a problem with me saying there is abuse in it.  I am more than happy to exchange views with someone who is open to listening and who doesn't resort to insults purely because I believe something different to them.

A stranger doesn't agree with me!  I MUST INSULT THEM!

Of course, often, the boot is on the other foot.  I've seen people savagely rip into TV shows I like.  I've seen people slag off bands I'm a huge fan of.  And yes, I've gotten angry about it.  Yes, I've thought "that nob doesn't know what he's talking about."  But were I to actually speak to that person about their different view, I wouldn't start by saying "YOU'RE A NOB!"  Doing that would make them massively unlikely to actually bother reading anything I went on to say and even if they did read it, they'd be thinking the exact same thing about me, because I'd opened with an insult.  It's all well and good to be infuriated by someone with a view that's massively opposed to your own, but if you just toss around insults and close yourself off to the idea of actually listening to that person's reasons for their opinion, you're not protecting your own views; you're acting like a dick.

Nobody's asking you to switch opinions and suddenly hate something you once loved, or vice versa.  But responding to what you think is a "wrong" opinion with a casual insult, or a hostile attitude (particularly if the person with the "wrong" opinion hasn't actually spoken to you about it and you're literally just initiating an argument for the sake of it) doesn't make you any better than the person you think is so wrong in the first place.

It might sound like a trivial thing for me to get annoyed about.  I mean, there are much bigger things going on in our world than people accosting others whose opinions differ from their own, right?  Of course there are.

But from tiny acorns, mighty oaks grow.  Think about where the whole "you are wrong and I must scream insults at you" thing leads. 

It leads to a culture in which angry responses to differences are simply accepted as the norm.  We already live in a world in which differences can cause people to be marginalised and hurt - not only emotionally, but physically, too.  We already live in a world in which certain countries tolerate homophobia and racism.  If we're going to change the big issues, we need to start with the small ones.  If we can rightly see that "fuck you, you're gay" is wrong, why do we accept "fuck you, you're wrong and you're a prick" just because someone has a different view on a trivial subject?  If we don't stamp out that kind of response to someone merely disliking something we like, we're not displaying the kind of tolerance that all decent people want for the wider world.

And no, I'm not saying that we're going to eradicate homophobia and racism by merely showing a modicum of respect to someone who dislikes our favourite TV show.  Of course we aren't.  But if more of us make an effort - and I include myself in that, obviously - to meet different views with polite disagreement, rather than insults and closed-minds, then we're putting something better out into the world.  We're showing that we won't resort to nastiness or abuse and we're giving the other person the chance to give their side of things.

That might not change the world, but it's got to be a good starting point, right?

Hiding Behind The Screen

Last week, I wrote a blog about emotional abuse.  It was pretty personal; I detailed some of my own experiences of emotional abuse in my last relationship.  To say that writing it was difficult is an understatement and it's fair to say that on some level, putting it out there into the public domain was a little scary.

The response was largely positive and supportive and for that I am incredibly grateful.  However, one comment sent chills down my spine when I read it.  That comment suggested that I'm incapable of caring for anyone but myself.  It said I have a "cold, tiny heart."  It told me that I was only considering my needs and feelings and I had no consideration for my poor ex.

Except...  Well, if you read the blog, you'll see that whilst in the relationship, I put my ex's needs and feelings ahead of my own time and time again, to the detriment of my own well being.  I believed him, supported him and was abused in return.  My "cold, tiny heart" belonged entirely to him, unconditionally and with all the support he could have asked for.

Still, my thoughts when I read the comment (after I had stopped feeling physically sick and shaking) weren't for wanting to defend myself - after all, I have done nothing that requires defence,  Instead, there was one question in my mind:  Why?

We're all humans, with differing views.  Anything we read, watch or listen to, we are able to form an opinion on.  That opinion may be coloured by our past experiences.  That in itself is fine.  I'm certainly the last person in the world who's going to sit here and write a blog in which I suggest that having an opinion is of itself a bad thing!  I'm also absolutely not going to suggest that expressing that opinion is of itself wrong.  To do so would not only be inaccurate, but stupid - I'm writing a blog!  I express opinions all the time!

However, there is a line that I don't believe should be crossed.  

If you've got an opinion, by all means share it.  But before you do, consider who you're sharing it with and consider how you're sharing it.

The Internet is an amazing thing, connecting people from all walks of life.  But the safety of sitting behind a screen can dehumanise communication at times.  Every now and then, someone seems so intent on expressing their opinion, that they don't take the same consideration for the person they're speaking to that they might normally.  Instead of saying "I disagree and this is why," as you'd hope they would in reality, a person online might simply bash out the words: "YOU ARE FUCKING WRONG!  I HOPE SOMEONE BEATS SOME SENSE INTO YOU!"

Would we do that in reality?  Or is it just that "talking" to someone from behind a screen gets rid of all those inconvenient social niceties that prevent most of us from being cruel or inappropriate?

Or is it that in this fast-moving world, we no longer have the time to sit and consider our reaction before we hit "send?"

Whatever the reason, it's my view that words are powerful.  We can use them as tools to educate, or as weapons to destroy.  After all, sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can cut much deeper.

Having an opinion is our right.  Expressing that opinion is equally our right.  But before we furiously hammer the keys on our computer, putting our views out there in the most thoughtless way possible, perhaps we ought to remember that whilst we can't see the person on the other side of the screen, it doesn't mean they don't exist.  It doesn't mean that our words can't touch a nerve.

There is no sense in hiding behind a screen, firing off vitriol at a person we probably haven't even met (and more than likely never will), simply because we disagree with their views.  Jumping to insults is, after all, the quickest way to lose an argument.

Somewhere out there, sitting behind another screen, is a person reading your words.  Hiding behind a computer might make it very easy to metaphorically shoot that person down.  But it being easy doesn't make it right.

That's not to say that I don't approve of debate.  I love debate.  Discussion and debate is how we learn, how we move forwards and, done well, can actually be a healthy way to show respect for someone whose views we disagree with.  You're giving that person time to air their views and you're giving yourself a chance to respond.  That is brilliant and in no way am I suggesting that healthy debate should be discouraged.

But it's the all-too-frequent reliance of some people on negativity, insults and even threats that I feel needs to be stamped out.  If you disagree with someone over a trivial matter in "real life," would you respond by threatening to physically attack them?  If not (and I really hope the answer to that is a resounding "no"), why is it acceptable to respond that way online?

The answer is, simply, that it isn't.

So, be proud of your opinions and express them at will.  But remember that you're not just flinging random letters into the ether.  Debate, discuss and argue by all means.  But the second you resort to judgements, insults or threats, your point, however valid, is dismissed.  The argument - regardless of who is truly right or wrong - has been lost.

Let's not hide behind our screens, throwing hate out into the world.  Let's really read the words people are putting out there and respond with a little respect and maturity, whether we agree with them or not.