And how was your day at work, dear? || Swamp thing. || Stairwell situation. || Nommy-nommy-nom. || Nommy-nommy-nom 2. || Grim poll, scroll down. || Lumpy mud. || Flapping detected. || Attractive and practical. || A problem arose, a solution occurred. || A reminder to be careful who you hire. || The progressive retail experience, parts 480, 481, and 482. || “Still lots of work to be done.” || Oh come on, we’ve all had mornings like this. || Fat woman who doesn’t like walking bemoans the shortness of life. || Laser facial. || Finger check. || On recidivism. || Vibrancy and enrichment. || Modern romance. || His is bigger than yours. || His is bigger 2. || Good to know, I guess. || Odd dog. || Bad dogs. || It’s a lot to take in in fifteen seconds. || And finally, hours of fun, and inexpensive, too.

Should you be inclined, there are buttons below the fold.

Speaking of educators who say things like this:

Here’s another one for the collection. This time from Mearns Academy, a secondary school in Aberdeenshire:

I’m guessing that the chap speaking means more than two. But hey, he’s a professional educator. We must make allowances.

Because acknowledging reality will, evidently, get you kicked out of class. And then scolded by a man who’s getting remarkably upset – possibly for reasons that aren’t being fully articulated.

And this,

Which seems to translate as “Just sit there in silence while I mouth obvious lies.”

The combination of feeble arguments and peevishness – and the line, “I know what you think and I know what the authority thinks” – does rather suggest that the teacher is aware of the dishonesty in which he participates. Which, I suppose, would explain his irritability.

Update, via the comments:

It’s perhaps worth noting that, despite the drama and agitation, nothing in the video, or in subsequent reports, suggests that the pupil, Murray Allan, was actually rude or mean or gratuitously disruptive. Of the two, he seems the more emotionally restrained, and the more coherent. From what I can make out, he merely responded to the teacher’s own pointed disapproval of website forms that don’t offer umpteen imaginary ‘gender’ categories. Things of this kind.

Rafi adds,

Pretty much. Again, I don’t get the impression that the teacher is a true believer. He strikes me more as someone cornered into an absurd position. Someone who knows where the power and status lie, and the consequences of being realistic, and who doesn’t want to jeopardise his own modest position in the progressive pecking order.

Which is, of course, how petty tyrannies often work.

The dynamic seen above may also be a function of just how rapidly these pretensions have spread throughout the educational system, seemingly untested and all but unopposed. I’d imagine there’s been little time, and possibly little inclination, to devise convincing rebuttals to some obvious objections, and so the response to demurral, to any hint of realism, is to chastise and threaten. As if noticing the obvious were some moral failing, an act of wickedness.

It’s also been my experience that people whose self-image and in-group status depend on mouthing things that aren’t true, or which they suspect may be untrue, even absurd – but which are still mouthed anyway – do often react to disagreement, even polite disagreement, as if it were a personal attack, or some wanton outrage. Which, again, may help explain the farcical intolerance seen above.

Update 2:

The student, it turns out, was subsequently suspended for a month, and then expelled – ostensibly, for recording the teacher without his knowledge. The only other mentioned transgression is his reply to the teacher’s claim that a website dropdown menu with only two sexes is “old-fashioned” and “controversial” – by saying that there are two sexes. A heresy that resulted in being ordered out of the classroom and then berated.

And which may strike some readers as a pretty good reason to be recording teachers.

The school’s anti-bullying policy, by the way – and which I mention for no reason whatsoever – suggests that witnesses “speak to parents” and “record the incident.”

Further to this rather telling incident, a footnote of sorts, via the Telegraph:

Not the Moon, obviously. Just a moon, a generic moon. With a cape.

Readers of a certain age may recall pupils being sent home for wearing trainers or an inappropriate skirt. I remember overhearing a discussion regarding the selective enforcement of dress codes, and the precise shortness of skirt that would escape the disapproval of certain teachers, while resulting in the desired impression of rebellion and sluttiness. It turns out that similar issues remain, albeit with a twist:

At a distance, it is, of course, difficult to tease apart mischief and mentalism. And even up close, it’s not clear to me how a teacher, dutifully observing the Sensitivities Of The Current Year, could dismiss as mere prankery some farcical claim. As opposed to some other farcical claim.

With many secondary schools now teaching children that they “may be born in the wrong body,” with “safeguarding” policies that often exclude parents but include dozens of imaginary identity options, and which are shaped by unhinged activist groups – activist groups suggesting that teachers should “engage in conversation about… the benefits of the furry community” – then farce, and mischief, will ensue. And be difficult to untangle.

Or, “How You Identity.”

A professional educator, Mrs Donna Starkey of Rye College, East Sussex, attempts to impart her new and shiny knowledge. Two schoolgirls prove troublesome:

Threats of further ideological correction ensue. Apparently, the recorded exchange was prompted by a pupil claiming to identify as a cat, and the two girls, heard above, expressing some doubt.

Update:

Very much related.

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

She does this better than you do. || Birds and sheep. || Today’s words are bee cartridges. || Larger forces were at work. || Incongruous Dalek. || Daylight. || Those load-bearing arguments. || Compression test. || The robbery attempt did not go entirely to plan. || Plot twist. || Plot twist 2. || Today’s other word is stealth. || It’s not a sex toy, it’s a prayer robot. || “Am I gonna be in, like, a jail with, like, a lot of, like, ghetto people?” || In this case, far away is probably a good thing. || “I’m just gonna see what happens,” he said. || For those of you wondering what an Antifa admin-moderator looks like. || Cake and a shower. || Incoming. || When you hear a bothersome rattling noise. || Safe and reliable. || Some serious toe. || And finally, furtively, there’s quite a lot going on between the ladies’ legs.

Should you be inclined, there are buttons below the fold.

Because you’ll only complain otherwise, I bring you performance art:

I’m reading the catalogue and press release. Bear with me. Send sandwiches.

Needless to say, the accompanying prose is quite extensive. The words “sustainable heterotopic space of discourse” crop up, obviously, and which, as you can imagine, is an enormous help. Quite how one might “exchange ideas” with a plant is, alas, not divulged.

We are, however, offered a tantalising preview of a “sensitive, sensual performance” by Lisa Hinterreithner and her associates, in which the four ladies “lead us into a world of living vegetatability.” It is, as will become clear, a “human-plant utopia.”

Should you be tempted by the prospect of watching four women being intimate with nature, fondling straw, and tonguing moss, you can behold the full 100-minute performance at the Künstlerhaus Factory, Vienna, July 20-23, where other, equally stunning works can doubtless be savoured.

Visitors are advised to “if possible, bring socks.”

Speaking of schooling, and lifted from the comments:

A message, indeed. I’m assuming the campy paper fan is a fundamental aspect of his “full authentic self.”

Evidently, our fearless educator has determined that any gay kids in his class – or rather, kids who may turn out to be gay on hitting puberty – need aspirational role-models. Like a grown man with painted nails, wearing tinselled Deeley Boppers, and flapping a paper fan. Because hey, what else could they possibly aspire to?

See also this:

You see, authenticity requires fancy dress and elaborate accessorising. And it’s just “so important” to parade around the classroom, looking “cute,” in painted nails and make-up.

What’s that you say? A one-off, an aberration? Oh, you sweet innocent thing.

Via Nikw211 in the comments, some classroom incongruity:

Parents of kids at Edison High School in Huntington Beach, California say this video was played to their kids in math class. The kids clearly didn’t want to watch this pride video so the teacher threatened them with Saturday school to get them to watch it. pic.twitter.com/FUnB9DKYrN

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) June 11, 2023

To paraphrase, but only very slightly:

Not a good look, really. Presumably, the conceit is that any gay pupils will somehow feel affirmed – rather than, say, mortified, or made complicit in something that’s naff and contrived, a vaguely weird imposition. And note that the teacher is the one scolding the kids for being “inappropriate.”

But imagine being a gay kid in the class, possibly a gay kid not entranced by ‘progressive’ politics. Suddenly, the classroom is a world of rainbows and cringe, something the rest of the class groans at and resents having to sit through, again – and it’s all supposedly being done for your benefit. It does rather suggest an unhappy dynamic.

The video, made by other students, and apparently shown in all classes, is presented as both a sentimental review of time spent at the school and an appeal for tolerance and “acceptance” – of cuddling lesbians, glitter-adorned transsexuals, and people with imaginary genders and pronouns. “Don’t forget to love each other,” intones the narrator. It’s very much framed in ‘Pride’ terms – i.e., in terms of social and political “change.” Of “fighting,” alongside “allies,” against unspecified dark forces. As if the purpose of being at school were to become some kind of activist.

Presumably, the forces being fought against include people who think that time in a maths class could perhaps be better spent.

Several people have commented on Twitter and YouTube that the video is unobjectionable and in no way “propaganda.” Well, seen as a child, without wider context, perhaps. But it seems to me that the readiness with which the children have internalised ‘Pride’ and its rainbows and non-binary woo as something unassailably benign illustrates rather well just how effective the propaganda has been.

That the ‘Pride’ movement is intensely political, increasingly extreme – one might say unhinged – and entails rather more than “tolerance” and “acceptance,” is not acknowledged, of course. Apparently, it’s all hugs and sparkles, and being nice.

That the same banners, the same rainbows, the same compelled groupthink, are invoked and deployed to sterilise and mutilate children, and to actively deceive parents, and to make a farce of women’s sports and women’s intimate spaces – for instance – remains unmentioned. And once you’ve demonstrated your acceptance of the flag and all that it entails, what could possibly go wrong? Because it’s all just so nice.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Admit it, your mind went there. || Meet the girls. || Houseguest of note. || Turns out it could go either way. || Quite the grip. || Good to know. || Greetings, fellow women. || Sudden weight gain. || The woodpecker’s tongue. || The Great Chicken War. (h/t, Mark) || Repeat after him. || I have questions, but I hesitate to ask. || Coaster skillz. || Cloaking device. || Eurocrash. || Rainbow. || Beats and blobs, together at last. || Bold strategy. || At least she put down the baby. || The progressive dining experience, a possible series. || Incoming. || Incoming 2. || Vein viewer. || Vending issues. || This is one of these. || On being obliged to compete unfairly: “You kind of, like, smile when you’re uncomfortable.” || And finally, one of the things that dogs can’t do, at least, not terribly well.

Should you be tempted, you can follow me on Twitter.

In the comments, John draws attention to this item from Personnel Today, a publication for the inhabitants of HR departments, regarding recruitment criteria for the Royal Air Force:

I’m assuming, perhaps charitably, that the word “useless” was with reference to meeting “diversity” targets. The word in question was deployed by former head of recruitment Elizabeth Nicholl, who resigned in protest at such targets being “impossible” to achieve. But still, an unhappy phrasing.

Much of the article covers ground that may be familiar to regular readers:

Because brownness and womb-having are much more important, obviously.

At which point, I’m tempted to ask how these target percentages relate to any actual expressed interest or aptitude – say, among school-leavers – or to any tactical utility, according to which an unusually high number of women and racial minorities would somehow confer a military advantage. Or are they, as seems to be the case, entirely arbitrary?

The paragraph immediately above was posted as a comment on the Personnel Today website. It was held for moderation, then disappeared.

Update, via the comments:

TomJ notes the proliferation throughout the RAF of pointedly gender-neutral terms, along with the ensuing complications, adding: “These are but annoyances, though they no doubt absorbed a lot of admin effort that could have been better directed… It now seems somewhat indicative.” Indeed. Time and resources better spent on the actual, you know, function of the organisation. Which is not, lest we forget, race-and-sex bean-counting.

Perhaps we’re to hope that such frivolous uses of time and resources will result in mere distraction, a loss of focus, and some inadvertent comedy. As if distractedness and waste, and chasing futility, might be the best available options. As opposed to the more typical effect of such endeavours, and of the mindset they reflect, which is the active and rapid corrosion of almost anything they touch, not least in terms of realism, standards, and competence.

Update 2:

In the comments, Jeff Guinn adds,

And so, the closer the RAF comes to these modish but seemingly arbitrary demographic ratios, the more reason there will be to suppose that standards have been lowered and corners cut, and to question the competence of the supposed beneficiaries. As has been the case in just about every other sphere – from academia to firefighting – where this nudging and fudging has been done.

Needless to say, this policy of supposed fairness seems somewhat unfair to those female and minority pilots who, while few in number, are very competent indeed, and whose credentials and reputation may subsequently be called into question as a result of emerging patterns. But hey, progress.

Update 3:

Depending on mood, one might find humour in the practised dishonesties of the progressive campus, where notions of demographic ‘correction’ are commonplace. But when extended to the realm of firefighting, policing, or the military, or medicine, or pretty much any vital infrastructure, then the funny side of things becomes harder to spot. And it’s perhaps worth noting that the mandatory pretence seen in academia, and all but perfected there, has given leverage to inadequates who do not welcome, and seem unlikely to tolerate, any attempt at realism or putting things right.

Given the vigour with which such demographic targets are pursued, and given the corners that are being cut in order to pursue them, on any number of fronts and at considerable expense… then checking the basic assumptions of those pursuing such goals doesn’t strike me as improper.

And yet, as seen in the pages of Personnel Today, some basic questions are not to be asked.

Also, open thread.