Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

UK: 5-year-old boy banned from after-school club because he wears dresses

  • ChocoBetty

    There was a time when female characters on stage weren’t portrait by females… I thought we had left the middle-age by now!

  • J.

    This 5 year-old boy could be traumatised by the church banning him. How could a Christian possibly think that causing suffering to the child is acceptable, or Christian for that matter? I just hope that his loving family environment enables him to forget about the Church without lasting consequences.

    • Ra

      It is specifically
      a dictate of Christians to harm children. Indoctrinate them at the
      youngest of age and then tell them they are sinners created of sin, whom will
      be burned in hellfire fire for eternity if they are not good. Educate them in delusions of on virgins giving birth, angels impregnating girls, talking burning bushes, talking snakes, evil apple trees, turning water into wine and wine into blood, a god who polices their every thought and action, knowledge is evil, trains them to be passive followers and intellectually castrates them, some marry their young girls to favored old men, spare the rod and spoil the child … . If that is not abuse, I am Jesus returned. Well actually, it is my middle name. LOL

      • J.

        Your right. How could I forget that the very nature of religion, including Christianity, causes suffering to children. Religion is responsible for indoctrination and removal of free will and thought; child sexual and physical abuse; imposing enduring poverty; and much, much more.

        • Truth

          EXACTLY! Those who claim religion is being bullied by a ‘gay Mafia’ always omit to mention the obscene psychological bullying carried out by the religious Mafia on those too young to understand the indoctrination to which they are being subjected. Religious ‘education’ (ha) should be banned until a child reaches the age of majority.

      • David Kerlick

        Yes, being told at age 7 that there is an angry and vengeful terrorist in the sky who will throw you into hell forever if you disobey, even for eating meat on Friday…

        • GulliverUK

          Just tell the angry vengeful terrorist .. war god (originally) Yahweh (or is it Elohim ?) to come down here and say it to his face .. and see what happens. There is no god, it’s a made up concept for adults whose brains filled in the gaps in their knowledge with invented superstitious claptrap. We know where the Sun goes at night now ! :)

          Yes, it is very damaging, which is why I wouldn’t allow a young person to have any involvement with religion until they were 18, then they can decide for themselves which ones sounds best for them. Religion has to get them young and indoctrinate them before their critical thinking faculties are properly developed. It’s disgusting child abuse in my view. Don’t get the wrong impression, most Christians I’ve come across are lovely, and they don’t try to indoctrinate, but if you look at how socially Conservative Christians behave, Evangelicals, some types of Southern Baptists preachers, mainly leaders in these organisations, or C.S.S.M. (don’t know what it’s called now), and Evangelical summer (boot) camps, and the crazy way they drug young people with religion, then it’s criminal. What’s it like forcing a rabbit to smoke a cigarette in a clinical trial? It’s like ramming religion down a child’s throat and teaching them they are a sinner, must seek repentance, must convert more people to the religion, and Jesus died because of your sins (guilt trip).

      • Psychologist

        It is indeed abuse – sadly, it’s legally allowed ! Why ??????

    • J.

      I’ve been thinking that displaying a photo of the child in the article could be inappropriate. Are children not automatically entitled to privacy and not to have photographs of them published?

      It didn’t dawn on me at first, but then I realised that the boy doesn’t have any say in whether or not he would want a photo published on the internet of him wearing a dress, or any photo of him for that matter. Obviously there is not an issue in reporting the story and discussing it, but the photo of the boy is an invasion of privacy because he’s a child.

      • Jesus_Mohammed

        Good thinking, James. The caption beneath the photo suggests the photo is a picture of the child concerned. So of course that photo should not be published. As another poster has written, every child child’s path through development may end up anywhere and all children have a right to privacy during that journey. I wonder if his mother has encouraged the publication of the photo?

        • Truth

          I think the mother MUST have provided the photo. It’s highly unlikely the school did … and even more unlikely it was done by the the five year-old himself. You can’t blame the mother. If, as seems evident, she is free-thinking, she must be outraged at this display of offensive and Neanderthal attitudes by the school ….

      • ChrisMorley

        The original report was in the Daily Mail which is full of photos of the boy taken by its ‘newsteam’.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2623174/The-five-year-old-boy-banned-church-likes-wear-pretty-dresses.html

        • J.

          The Daily Mail? Doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. If the photographs were taken by its ‘newsteam’ then it must have been invited by the boy’s mother. It’s a shame she didn’t realise that the record of the Daily Mail suggests it and its readership would probably side with the school on this issue.

  • GulliverUK

    Caholic ideologues bully and blackmail a child and his mother to prevent him from being teased – how lovely of them. Who said the other children would tease him, and is it because these Catholics are afraid they won’t be able to explain tolerance, understanding, kindness, caring to the children ?

    • Leonard Woodrow

      They would be far better employed educating the children to love one another, and NOT to tease the boy for his choice of dress … but maybe that line of thinking is too rational for the religious.

      • Joeoz

        I think… rational and religious, really can’t be used in the same sentence. I can bet that this boy behaves better than any of the other boys in the group…! Perhaps it might be a good thing for young boys to explore their feminine side? Every time that I’ve seen young boys out and about who are around the age of say 3 to 7 years of age… all they seem to want to do is misbehave, kick and punch each other! Perhaps less of this macho bull s@#t is needed?

    • Psychologist

      Indeed GulliverUK – AND …. Surely even if he WAS teased or bullied, then surely it should be those who tease or bully who should be stopped from bullying, and NOT him, for simply expressing himself in that way, which harms NO ONE else ! Why can’t these people see that they have STOPPED the WRONG child !

    • ChrisMorley

      Gulliver, Catholic ideologues do many, many bad things but this time you need to blame and shame the Pentecostal protestants of Rugby who run this after-school club, not Catholics.

      Rugby Christian Fellowship is far removed from Catholic. It is a fundamentalist Elim Pentecostal protestant church. http://www.rugbyelim.org.uk/index.php/about-rcf/further-information-mission-vision-history

      You were misled because the lad attends “St Marie’s Catholic Primary School”.

  • Kelvin Beer-Jones

    That’s interesting. St Marie’s is just up the road from me. Maybe I should pay them a visit…….

  • GulliverUK

    If a boy wears a pink shirt would they not allow that also?

    Ladies’ Home Journal article in June 1918 said, “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more
    decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” Other sources said blue was flattering for blonds, pink for brunettes; or bluewas for blue-eyed babies, pink for brown-eyed babies, according to Paoletti.

    In 1927, Time magazine printed a chart showing sex-appropriate colors for girls and boys according to leading U.S. stores. In Boston, Filene’s told parents to dress boys in pink. So did Best & Co. in New York City, Halle’s in Cleveland and Marshall Field in Chicago.” http://jezebel.com/5790638/the-history-of-pink-for-girls-blue-for-boys

    • http://gentlemind.blogspot.co.uk/ gentlemind

      ..because a boy can change his pink shoes for blue ones (but cannot change his male body for a female one). He can also change his blue dress for pink trousers, but he wears the dress to play at being a girl – something he cannot actually be.

      When children can be what they pretend to be, they cannot pretend. In a world free from Gender ideology, his actions would not be a problem.

      • GulliverUK

        I’ve read your blog – you tie up the world in neat parcels that you define, then expect others to realise you, apparently, have the ultimate truth. Your tautology really is a self-reinforcing pretense of significant truth, when in fact it’s based on the uninformed opinions of people with an agenda. One thing we know, your truth doesn’t follow critical thinking, reasoning, logical argument, it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, the public aren’t stupid peasants any more, illiterate and subjugated by religion, we can read, we can reason, and we judge religion unfit for deciding real truth, and what is right and wrong. Your pro-life anti-gay rights stance has only marginal support by those desperately try to cling on to a sinking ship. Soon, like the Titanic, it will be at the bottom of the ocean – and all because religion tried to force its cultish beliefs on those it had no right to interfere with. Religion, RIP.

        • http://gentlemind.blogspot.co.uk/ gentlemind

          Bless you, Gulliver, and thank you for reading some of what I have written elsewhere. Everything written about sex, marriage, Gender and abortion on my blog is true, being derived from nothing more than the physical reality of the body made male and female – and therefore knowable through reason. It stands up to reason and logic (but not to misunderstanding).

          Gender is not what you think it is. It is a new (and therefore false) way of regarding the human person, so as to ignore the reality of their body. A theory is something that could be true. Gender is not a theory. It is an ideology.

      • Truth

        I went to see a pantomime when I was five. There was a ‘dame’ – a man dressed as a woman … and a ‘principal boy’ – a woman dressed as a man. I can’t remember being ‘confused’ – just amazed at the wonder of the sets and costumes. It was all ‘play’ … which is EXACTLY in what this kid wants to be involved. The nut-jobs running this school should be sacked and replaced with less closed-minded people.

  • Neil Rhodes

    Meh. He’ll be better off without that particular after-school club anyway.

    • Jesus_Mohammed

      I hope that that particular after-school club improves their thinking and are changed by this experienced and that the child does not have to spend his time running from one institution to another in the HOPE that he MAY be accepted. Being on the run in a world of bigotry and inequality is no way to live life.

      • Neil Rhodes

        I agree completely with what you are saying, but can you honestly see this school doing a 180 on this?

        Or maybe you can. I am a bit of a cynical old fart …

  • Mark Y

    It’s bad that the club have done this. But what has this news got to do with being LGBT?

    • Fordicus

      Because it is a policy which would prevent trans children from exploring or expressing their gender identities.

    • Jesus_Mohammed

      The relationship of this news item to being LGBT is that this child may well develop into G, B, or T, and we adults care for fellow members of our “tribe”. Good enough reason, I hope? :-)

      • VP

        If he is T and is attracted to women in later life then he could very well end up being L too…

        • Jesus_Mohammed

          Yes. Sorry, I didn’t think that far through the permutations! :-)

  • Brett Gibson

    Not that it would confuse the kids but, since when is slight confusion a bad thing?

    • Truth

      Even if there was some ‘confusion’, (which I doubt as bigotry and hate have to be learned) would that not have been a perfect opportunity for the staff to address the importance of ‘diversity’?

      • Psychologist

        Indeed TRUTH – Exactly that ! What a perfect opportunity to teach the kids real life learning – about diversity ! Instead they treat it as something to be BANNED !
        Outrageous behaviour – !

  • James Campbell

    For goodness sake. this is a PLAY group for very young children. It is not a school with regulations regarding uniform. What if he wanted to dress as spider man? After all, we can’t have children imagining they can spin out a thread like a real spider and leap off the school roof.

    As someone who works with children and young people regarding mental health issues, I know that the more freedom they have to express themselves non-aggressively, the more this reinforces their self-confidence. If the staff at this after school club do not understand this, they are in the wrong job. How a person dresses is influenced partly by the culture they grow up in, but also by a complex interplay of factors some of which are related to their personality. This little chap may grow up to be a teacher, a fashion designer, or an actor or a doctor, or gay, straight or bi. How he dresses in a play group is not an accurate predictor of anything other than what he prefers at one point in time. What he does need is anything that maximises his potential and offers him the opportunity to learn and enjoy being a child without the thought police interfering. One little boy I worked with had been referred to me because he had a passion for pink. His mum asked me if this meant he would grow up to be gay? . My answer was that we just don’t know, what we do know is that he likes pink and always may prefer pink, but in the last analysis, it does not matter. Happiness first – all else follows.

    • Jesus_Mohammed

      Very true words, James Campbell. Well stated!

    • Charlotte Renee Damone

      Well said. We need more people like you who know how to treat people and let them be themselves.

  • Lee Hobson

    Takes me back near on 50 years when I wanted to do country dancing at school with the girls instead of football and wasn’t allowed.
    Hopefully it won’t take another 50 before kids are able to follow the path that is right for them.

    • anon

      “Playing netball with the girls” was used as a punishment at my school.

      I used this as a way to escape football and rugby, but at least one of the girls would’ve loved to switch places with me.
      I wonder if this sexist bullshit still happens today.

      • anon

        Now come to think of, one boy was made to wear a skirt because he forgot his P.E kit. The thinking behind that as a punishment is wrong on so many levels.

      • J

        One of the boys at my daughter’s (Roman Catholic) school plays netball ‘with the girls’. Actually – it’s just ‘netball’.

        • anon

          What’s your point exactly? maybe you didn’t get the inference, but at my school netball was exclusively for girls, football exclusively for boys, EXCEPT as a punishment for boys.

  • anon

    Confuse? They sure don’t give kids enough credit.

    By 5 years old I had decided that god was mutually exclusive to the knowledge I’d accumulated by then.

  • Christopher Thomas Tomkinson

    Haha only in Americ… oh wait…. [sad-face]. Really disappointed in Britain.

  • Edmund

    “Buzz Children’s Club seeks to follow our usual safeguarding guidelines and we did so in this case in order to avoid any confusion or possible conflict or teasing from other children.”

    This is a ridiculous thing to say. Don’t know what this has to do with ‘safeguarding’. And the way to prevent ‘conflict and teasing’ is certainly not to force everyone to conform! That smacks of victim-blaming – i.e. you wouldn’t have been teased if you hadn’t worn the dress. What a terrible message this club is sending to the children.

    Why can’t they deal with ‘conflict and teasing’ by telling the children that anyone can wear whatever they want? Isn’t that what fifty years of feminism was for?

    I am a big burly manly man and I also love Frozen. I think wearing a dress and being a princess sounds like great fun. Good on Romeo.

    • Edmund

      Also, has there even actually been any conflict with the other five year olds? Projecting your own prejudices onto children is vile.

      • Psychologist

        Absolutely correct – and clearly what’s happening here !
        PROJECTION of the ADULT’S OWN issues ..onto the kids !

  • kescasper

    Adults bullying children. straights bullying gays. religious intolerance to homosexuality. This is the perfect example of where it all starts. Ignorance must be at the top of the list of rules never mind gender appropriate clothing. And would you really want your child going to this sort of club anyway whether that child wears dresses or not. And hasn’t the mother already bought into the ignorance by sending her child to that club and school. She also needs to ask herself that question. She must know what Catholics think of homosexuals and people who are differ from what they class as gender normal or is she just one dumb lady. She’s shouting a little too late isn’t she.

    • sugarella

      Maybe it was the only school with available spaces, or the one with the best academic record, least problems, closest……. There is many factors involved in school placements she could of had no other choice

  • Seadusk

    Children throughout the ages have enjoyed playing dress-up. The moment anyone puts limits on how they can and can’t dress up, the exploration of their imagination is stifled. Whether he will continue to want to wear dresses, who knows? I doubt the other children would care very if the club didn’t make a big deal of it.

  • Harry

    it’s his parents’ fault for being stupid enough to send the child to a catholic school.

    • Jesus_Mohammed

      Maybe, but Catholic schools these days are not like what they used to be. For example, my strict Catholic boys’ school is still going strong but there is now not a single member of a religious order on the staff. Most staff members are married, most have their own children, and staff members are no longer single-sex. And there have been reports of quite liberal things happening in some Catholic schools. So perhaps the parents of this child had a fair expectation? Of maybe his parents are fighters, who believe in changing institutions from the inside, which is the way to go.

      • Harry

        And you think that being run by lay bigots rather than religious bigots is any better? The idea that the Church of Rome’s ideas on gays are going to change in the next few centuries is laughable. I wonder if you have slight Stockholm syndrome from your parents’ attempts to indoctrinate you :-)

    • ChrisMorley

      Harry, it is his afterschool club, run by Rugby Christian Fellowship, not his Catholic school, which has banned his dresses.
      “Christian Fellowship” is a label used by the Elim Pentecostal Church, which is fundamentalist protestant.
      http://www.rugbyelim.org.uk/index.php/about-rcf/further-information-mission-vision-history

      • Harry

        Indeed. You are right. The Catholics just for once are not to blame here. The parents are to blame for sending the poor kid to an extremist Christian club.

  • Jesus_Mohammed

    I find this report heart-breaking. This young child is experiencing his first round of homophobia, the hatred of the blinkered and narrow-minded. I want to give his fine mother, and hopefully his fine father, every word of support.

    “Children must be FORCED to conform to the STEREOTYPES” is effectively what the club’s organizers are stating.

    • GulliverUK

      Especially when done by a religious cult which forces their Bishops to wear dresses. Looking back through history men seem to have worn all sorts of frilly lacy stuff, some Scottish men wear kilts, a lot of men in the Middle East, and some in Cromwell Road ( :-p ) wear what we would consider dresses, as they do in Indian culture. Some women wear trousers, even trousers and jackets ( ! ). Children like to experiment wearing clothes from different genders to understand better – it’s part of development. If a girl arrives with short hair and trousers, perhaps even a tie, would she not be allowed to participate? Have these people never seen plays, or watched ballet?

      If they are receiving any money from the public purse they must stop discrimination completely. If that club is part of the school activities funded by the tax-payer, discrimination must stop immediately. This is a breech of the Equality Act. It doesn’t come in to force when you reach 18, the Equality Act covers everyone, even children. As you say it is heart-breaking, and I hope it makes people very angry too.

    • Psychologist

      Indeed Jesus_Mohammed – It is that VERY forcing (against what the child is FEELING) which is what does the damage. It’s oppressive, and a form of bullying, and can be very damaging to the child.
      This is nothing short of abuse !

  • Cal

    Sad. A missed opportunity to teach kids about diversity. Oh well, what did we expect from Catholics. The boy’s mother, however, does seem to be a remarkable person.

  • sugarella

    I have 3 boys, the younger 2 are twins. My youngest refuses to answer to his name and likes wearing dresses. He calls himself Ellie and says he feels sad wearing boy uniform to school but knows he has to. Both at home and at school when the chance for dress up arises Ellie will put on girl clothes and likes to dance like a ballerina. Not a single childhas ever had an issue with it ever. You know why? It’s because children are not bigoted or prejudiced, adults are! Now Ellie may or may not be just a phase only boys life, and I refuse to push him one way or the other. As long as there is a smile on my child’s face, and no harm is being caused to others I fail to see what it’s got to do with anybody else. I have 3 amazing children, and I couldn’t be more proud of them!

    • Truth

      Lovely story – and yes – bigotry and hatred are learned. Sounds to me like you have some very personal and concrete knowledge that certain personality traits are present from birth and are not, as some homophobic bigots would have us believe, a ‘choice’.

      • sugarella

        I believe we are who we are, and as long as that is nothing that harms people there is nothing to be ashamed of. Nobody deserves a life full of fear, shame, self loathing, or regret. It is really very sad that the voice shouting loudest always seems to be the one shouting in hate.

    • Psychologist

      That’s such a heart- warming story. Thank you for sharing it – and well done to you for understanding that the smile on your child’s face, and their happiness, is worth FAR MORE than anything they might wear ! Or more to the point – is worth far more than gaining the approval of bigots, who may feel uncomfortable about it. If they have a problem with it, then It’s THEIR problem …. not YOURS, and certainly NOT your child’s.

      • sugarella

        My protective side is nothing compared to his twins believe me. I raise my children to be polite, respectful, mindful of others feelings, and most of all open minded. It is not hard to teach a child the concept of equality, they are born with it. My children have a heavily tattooed and pierced mommy, who’s love of all things vintage and kitsch, means they learned early on what it is like to face society’s ignorance. I taught them how to take on the world with a smile and in style lol.

        • Psychologist

          Beautifully put. What a shame all parents don’t have such an open, understanding, supportive and loving attitude to their children. Thank you. :)

  • Rob

    I’m pretty concerned about publishing this child’s full name and place of education….

    • Psychologist

      Yes, that was my concerns too !

  • Jock S.Trap

    Yet again religious adults try to destroy a children freedoms because they have the problems.

    I think wanting a child should follow a registration to make sure the parent(s) are best for the child’s interests.

  • trainee vicar

    Please note this club is clearly NOT CATHOLIC! His school is Catholic, the club is not – it’s ‘minister in training’ is female – not possible in the Catholic Church (unfortunately). It seems, to me, to be a pretty right-wing independent church – that doesn’t necessarily affect the arguments here but discussion looses it’s value if it’s il-informed or inaccurate.
    It breaks my heart that so much of the church is so backward looking and unloving, but as an openly gay trainee priest in the Church of England I know that many Christians absolutely reject any homophobia or prejudice and celebrate each step towards equality as passionately as anyone. Anyone whose message to children is not that they (and all of us) are wonderful, infinitely valuable images of our creator who delights in each of us JUST AS WE ARE has completely misunderstood the message of the Christian faith. Adult or child, you’ll always be welcome in any church where I’m the priest, whatever gender is associated with your preferred clothing by conformist society.

    • GulliverUK

      You are get tarred with the same socially Conservative wingnuttery – sorry about that. The poll data shows a majority of UK and US Catholics support marriage equality – we must never forget that. And there are many in the CoE who believe in equal rights – let down by inappropriate comments by Welby and others. The CoE has its own set of problems with splits, West and Africa, and over women priest / bishops.

      I think these are all unfortunately tumbles in progress. I an atheist but I have a belief which is that a progressive more liberal kinder behavior will follow, once people gain a greater understanding of others, through story-telling, through getting to know us, to love us and call us friends. What seems like a even more hostile opposition to our rights, even our existence in parts of Africa, is a gasping breath of dying intolerance and loss of authority / power.

      • trainee vicar

        Thank you GulliverUK, and I hope you are right about Africa, personally I’m hugely concerned about the long-term potential of the damage being done by the homophobia in places like Nigeria and Uganda, and appalled and ashamed that it is supported by Anglican bishops in those countries.

        I long to see both, more Christians positively embracing (not simply ‘tolerating’) those with non-hetro/cis sexualities and gender identities, and more positivity towards those of religious belief from among the gay/trans community. I’ve no patience with being hated or discriminated against by any group that forms such a key part of my self-identity!

        • Harry

          Your religious belief in a saviour sky-god is a lifestyle choice which we are entitled to criticise. it’s also absurdly irrational. get over the criticism.

    • Jesus_Mohammed

      Ah, that “message of the Christian faith” to which you have referred, how extraordinarily changeable it has been and continues to be! That “message of the Christian faith” is always, and has always been, entirely what those vicars, priests, bishops, cardinals, wish it to be!

      Best to flush all religious nonsense down the pan, and depend entirely on ethics free of all supernatural gobbledegook, don’t you think?

      • Psychologist

        Amen to that ! :)

      • Harry

        well said Sir. Trainee_vicar is a hypocrite.

    • ChrisMorley

      well-spotted, trainee vicar
      Rugby Christian Fellowship was the big clue – it’s the very protestant Elim Pentecostal Church
      http://www.rugbyelim.org.uk/index.php/about-rcf/further-information-mission-vision-history

  • Truth

    ” … we did so in this case in order to avoid any confusion or possible conflict or teasing from other children.”
    No. You did it because you have been brainwashed about ‘stereotypes’. If there was confusion, EXPLAIN, for F**KS SAKE! That’s why you are teachers – and supposedly unbiased about issues like this. Is it any wonder homophobic bullying is STILL such a serious problem in our schools when you have bigots running them …?

    • Psychologist

      Yes TRUTH – INDEED ! It is NOT the wearing of the dress which will damage him ! The damage caused here is from THEIR attitude towards him, banning him, so he feels EXCLUDED and Isolated ! How utterly contemptible.
      Catholic organisation – need we say more !
      As you rightly say, TRUTH – other kids DON NOT need to be confused (and probably weren’t anyway) just EXPLAIN it to them, then they will understand ! it’s the very BANNING of the child which confuses them, and send entirely the WRONG message !

  • VP

    I wonder whether these kinds of regressive attitudes toward arbitrarily-enforced gendered clothing and play might have a profound effect on children later in life.

    I can remember, as a child in the 80s and 90s, finding it odd that toys and clothes were divided along gender lines. I never really wore strongly female-coded clothing (I have never really seen clothes as much more than just things to keep you warm and covered, and have pretty much just worn the same kinds of cheap, comfortable track suits all my life), but I did often play with female-coded toys, and pretend to be female characters when I played games of pretend with my brother. Not exclusively of course – I played with male-coded toys and played male characters too – but it was definitely a big part of my imaginative life growing up.

    My twin brother, now I come to think about it, did not. His childhood play was fairly traditionally male-gendered. Which seems to have affected his tastes and behaviour in later life too. I have noticed over the years that he seems to have a real problem with fiction that features primarily female protagonists. Books where the main characters are female, video games where you play as a female character, films where the chief protagonist is a woman… he just has no interest in them and actively refuses to engage with them, even if I point out that they’re actually really good. This really stands out sometimes. For instance, there is a particular series of fantasy novels that we both like, and which he’s read all but three of – the only three where the main protagonist is female. Everything else about them is the same exciting stuff, the same world, the same writer, it’s just that when the point of view character is female he’s simply not interested. Which strikes me as very sad.

    And I think it’s outlooks like this that have such a pernicious effect on the overall representation of women (and, tangentially, LGBT people) in media. It is embarassingly apparent in the Hollywood film industry and the video game industry, where major films or games that either star women or portray them realistically are few and far between. And it surely also has an effect on heterosexual gender relations – how could being systematically trained not to imagine what it’s like to be someone else not have an effect on the way you relate to them?

  • Lisafer

    So, what? The girls who wear jeans or “boys” clothing are banned too? Where do you draw the line?

  • jjswin

    I used to play dress-up in a dress at my Church’s playgroup, 20-odd years ago! They still have it, apparently. No big deal at all, stupid religious nuts again.

  • Steve_R

    How many boys in their lifetime have worn dresses? a large majority no doubt! any one with an older sister/sisters has likely at some point given their parent’s/father a near heart attack when discovered in a dress at a children’s tea party, or when playing dress up and there were more girls clothes than boys. How many boys had their mother or father say “come let me clean of that Lippy ones sister labored to apply to his face despite protest?

    It’s a right of passage! how many brothers played with their GI Joe’s? or got roped into playing with their sisters when they played with dolls. How many brothers said they would only play dolls if they could play with Ken? it means nothing (maybe lol)

    These religious types seem to forget what they did innocently in their own childhoods, As they grew older they became prejudiced and bigoted with selective memories of what growing up as innocent children really means… because they want to deny today’s children their own innocence in the disguise of protection (prejudice)!

  • Chris in LA

    The child should learn to endure this with patience. When he is older, he will be free to become a female impersonator, should he choose and, given British tastes in that department of entertainment, he will be guaranteed a good living. In fact, some of his current detractors may even pay to see him.

  • Silly Old Bastard

    “I’d like to help you son but you’re too young to vote”

    But seriously, he’s only five. Let him be.

    My younger brother’s friend used to eat worms at that age

  • Peter

    he is just a child for gods sake

  • David H

    I wonder if they’ve told his mother that her decision to wear jeans and trainers isn’t really in-keeping with their dress code either.

    The ELM is terribly backwards. They have a section on their website calling for prayers “for all those affected by the new law on same sex marriage, including Christian registry staff” and the 1967 Abortion act.

    I wonder how many of them are UKIP voters?

  • Morgan Mpc

    Out of curiosity…..do the girls dress as pirates and cowboys at this play club? If so.. why?? Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander….
    I do hope they do not take the children to pantomine…where the lead man is a woman and the supporting female is a man in a dress….

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all