Eton

I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments. I appreciate that many people on this forum will disagree with Mr Knowland, but do you really agree that it should be okay to terminate someone's employment because they argue that gender is not socially constructed? One of the first thing that the despicable Nazis did when they gained power was to prevent Jewish people from working in certain jobs. Access to a chosen career is a key freedom. Of course the difference between Eton and the Nazis is that the latter were in control of the government. I appreciate that this makes a difference but it still seems to me that the hurdle ought to be very high for an employer to terminate someone's employment based on an opinion they've expressed (it is certainly not liberal to do so).

Link to story here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT7eDqaI1Zo
«1345678

Comments

  • Wow, you godwinned yourself right out of the starting gate.
  • Should Eton be required to retain Holocaust deniers? Who are just expressing their opinion?
  • Also, I'll think you'll find that Eton is in charge of the government.
  • Is this right wing bingo?
  • I tried the YouTube link but immediately saw Nigel Farage ... more than enough for me to close the tab immediately.
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments. I appreciate that many people on this forum will disagree with Mr Knowland, but do you really agree that it should be okay to terminate someone's employment because they argue that gender is not socially constructed?

    I believe in stronger employment protection, do you ?
  • I thought Knowland said half of rape accusations are fake?
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments. I appreciate that many people on this forum will disagree with Mr Knowland, but do you really agree that it should be okay to terminate someone's employment because they argue that gender is not socially constructed?

    The facts appear to be these:

    1. Mr Knowland sought permission from his employers to present his claims about gender to the pupils.
    2. He was refused permission
    3. He published the claims as a lecture on youtube, identifying himself as a teacher at Eton
    4. A barrister hired by the school claimed that the lecture, when presented by a school teacher in an educational context, was in breach of the law.
    4. He refused multiple times to remove the video
    5. He was fired.

    I'm somewhat intrigued by the idea, as expressed by Mr Knowland, that orthodoxy can be radical.
  • I'm intrigued by the idea that a school has no control over its curriculum, but that it's set by individual teachers who are not answerable to management.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    The BBC has at least a legal requirement to present facts in a balanced way even if that usually ends up in practice tilting towards balanced in the eyes of the government of the day, with some leaning towards the Conservatives. (Studies have shown this to be the case.)
    YouTube has not.

    I don't generally treat YouTube as reliable information on any topic more contentious than funny things cute kittens did. (I reserve judgement on whether they're staged.)

    A teacher or other person in charge of children should not express any views more contentious than it is good to listen supportively and without judgement, and refer to a trained and accredited counselor if appropriate.
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments. I appreciate that many people on this forum will disagree with Mr Knowland, but do you really agree that it should be okay to terminate someone's employment because they argue that gender is not socially constructed?

    I believe in stronger employment protection, do you ?

    Yes. I believe that two years to bring an unfair dismissal claim is too long and that legal aid should be expanded to cover more employment tribunal claims.
  • I tried the YouTube link but immediately saw Nigel Farage ... more than enough for me to close the tab immediately.

    What source would you engage with? I've put a link to the Metro:

    https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/30/eton-defends-sacking-teacher-over-sexist-lecture-as-pupils-call-for-his-return-13675338/

    Apologies I couldn't find a Guardian article but I guess this is a sensitive, lose-lose topic for them.
  • Dave W wrote: »
    Should Eton be required to retain Holocaust deniers? Who are just expressing their opinion?

    No, because there is no credible evidence in favour of the belief that the holocaust did not occur. There is credible evidence in favour of the view that gender is not entirely socially constructed. I'm sorry of that offends you but I believe its a reasonable point of view.
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I tried the YouTube link but immediately saw Nigel Farage ... more than enough for me to close the tab immediately.

    What source would you engage with? I've put a link to the Metro:

    https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/30/eton-defends-sacking-teacher-over-sexist-lecture-as-pupils-call-for-his-return-13675338/

    Apologies I couldn't find a Guardian article but I guess this is a sensitive, lose-lose topic for them.

    Please. The Guardian hosts TERFs, FFS.

    If I or one of my colleague did what this pillock did we'd be risking our professional registration with the GTCS nevermind our employment. If you feel so strongly about affirming sexist, deterministic narratives about gender that you have to speak you can publish your views anonymously. You don't get to try and use the prestige of your employer to give credence to your nonsense while complaining about the consequences of doing so.

  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I tried the YouTube link but immediately saw Nigel Farage ... more than enough for me to close the tab immediately.

    What source would you engage with? I've put a link to the Metro:

    https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/30/eton-defends-sacking-teacher-over-sexist-lecture-as-pupils-call-for-his-return-13675338/

    Apologies I couldn't find a Guardian article but I guess this is a sensitive, lose-lose topic for them.

    Please. The Guardian hosts TERFs, FFS.

    If I or one of my colleague did what this pillock did we'd be risking our professional registration with the GTCS nevermind our employment. If you feel so strongly about affirming sexist, deterministic narratives about gender that you have to speak you can publish your views anonymously. You don't get to try and use the prestige of your employer to give credence to your nonsense while complaining about the consequences of doing so.

    What is it that you find sexist about what he said?
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    What is it that you find sexist about what he said?

    Answering on my own behalf and just going off the Metro article you linked to:
    The lecture was called the Patriarchy Parody and was made to make pupils aware of the ‘different point of view to the current radical feminist orthodoxy.’

    It argues that ‘patriarchy is, rather and being constructed, partly based on biology’ and makes the case that patriarchy is not about the ‘male domination of women’ but is beneficial to women, families and society.

    Claiming that there's a biological necessity to have men running everything and that women should shut up and like it seems pretty sexist to me.

    Just out of curiosity, what do you consider to be the "credible evidence" for male superiority when it comes to leadership?
  • It should also be noted that, despite protestations to the contrary, educational institutions actually have some of the most severe and most well known restrictions on free speech of any large public institution. For example, you're not allowed to falsify your data (academic fraud). You're not allowed to simply make up a quote and attribute it to some famous person (academic fraud again). You're not allowed to take someone else's writing and pass it off as your own (plagiarism). If you're quoting someone else's work you'd damn well better have a footnote or an endnote. You're not allowed to teach a course on Ancient Greek Dramaturgy when the university assigned you to teach (and your students showed up to learn) Introduction to Mathematics. In a lot of other professions and social settings there are a lot fewer rules and penalties about lying, intellectual theft, and changing the subject than there are in academia.
  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    I haven't seen the whole of his YouTube video, but the first bit seemed very poor quality. If I was thinking of spending a lot of money sending a child to Eton, I would be put off by this. I'd hope that money would provide a higher calibre of teaching.
    That video is not a good advert for Eton.
  • Gender, by definition, is socially constructed. Now if you want to debate "sex"...
  • One of the assertions in the YouTube video is that married women live longer than unmarried women, which is factually incorrect. He claims that married women have lower rates of depression, are less likely to commit suicide, and are less likely to be the victims of domestic abuse. He states that the children of married heterosexual parents are physically healthier than the children of unmarried heterosexual parents - I'd put money on that being a gross over simplification.

  • Makepeace wrote: »
    Dave W wrote: »
    Should Eton be required to retain Holocaust deniers? Who are just expressing their opinion?

    No, because there is no credible evidence in favour of the belief that the holocaust did not occur. There is credible evidence in favour of the view that gender is not entirely socially constructed. I'm sorry of that offends you but I believe its a reasonable point of view.
    Credible evidence as determined by whom? You?
  • As to social construction of gender (I wish that I had my full library out of storage for this, because I can't give precise reference at the moment) in a southwestern US tribe (using American terminology, and I apologise for not having the reference at hand) men who identified as women would go so far as to induce constipation (ingesting a certain type of bean) to mimic birth pains. This was viewed as quite normal. I'd say that that's social construction.

    Yet again, the game of the moving goal posts: There is credible evidence in favour of the view that gender is not entirely socially constructed.
  • The couvade has been described quite widely, but I don't know if it still exists, kind of male imitation of pregnancy.
  • Makepeace wrote: »
    I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments.
    But that wasn't really the issue, was it? At least not according to Eton as cited in your Metro article:
    Lord Waldegrave, a former Tory minister and chairman of the school’s governing body, denied accusations that the school censored debate over the topic and said the issue was over ‘internal discipline’. He told the Daily Mail that Mr Knowland refused six times to take the video down while they found a solution and was dismissed for gross misconduct.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    So it looks as though he's been sacked for insubordination, not for his opinions.

  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Originally posted by Makepeace:
    I'm concerned about the fact that an employee can be dismissed by their employer for putting forward reasonable and credible arguments. I appreciate that many people on this forum will disagree with Mr Knowland, but do you really agree that it should be okay to terminate someone's employment because they argue that gender is not socially constructed?

    From what I've seen of the video the problem is that he isn't putting forward "reasonable and credible" arguments, but the extremely poor quality of the arguments he is putting forward.

    I haven't watched it all. However, one section (starting at 30:30) gives Andrew Dworkin as an example of a feminist who promotes paedophilia. He then adds
    It is worth noting here that Simone de Beauvoir , author of "The Second Sex" and founder of modern feminism, signed a petition calling for paedophilia to be decriminalized. By contrast the core of masculinity, the protector role, makes it the antithesis of paedophilia. This is why, in prison. child abusers are the most despised offenders."

    Where to start? The petition that de Beauvoir signed in 1977 was also signed by many men, including Sartre, Foucault, Derrida, Barthes. To use this document, without mentioning any of the male signatories, to claim that feminists in 2020 support paedophilia suggests a total lack of ability to use primary sources critically.

    Furthermore the prison comment is odd too - it is true that in prisons child abusers are despised - but is he suggesting that's only in male prisons? They are despised in female prisons, too. "Despising child abusers" isn't a gender-specific or sex-specific attribute, even if Knowland wants to imply that it is.

    Why not include some statistics about which sex commits most sexual offences against children? - presumably because that would blow his "feminists are in favour of paedophilia, but men fight to protect children from it" argument right out of the water.

    His use of primary source material is very, very poor. If I was marking this as an essay by an 18 year old, it would have comments all over it about use of primary sources. I'd be giving this a "C"

    I would not want my child taught by someone who uses primary sources without understanding them. I definitely wouldn't want to pay hard cash for them to be taught by this man.
  • I have just noted that my tab heading when looking at this is "Eton - Ship of Fools". Makes me think "yes, it is".

    Should a teacher have been sacked for - as @Leorning Cniht explains - disobeying a ruling from his superiors and misrepresenting them publically? Well yes, as in any other field of employment.

    If I were to produce a video saying that my employer was not working to the highest ethical standards, I would be fired. If I produced a video identifying myself as an employee of the business and spouting rubbish, I would - at the very least - expect to be asked to remove it and face disciplinary action if I refused.

    I would expect no less from an educational organisation that is seen as one of the top schools in the country, where costs to attend are astronomical. They have a reputation to hide.
  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    I'm taking one for the team and watching the video

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTHgMxQEoPI

    Here's another doozy: Witchcraft - (starting at 10.50)
    Most accusers were women; Mary enacted the Scottish witchcraft laws and persecution reached its apex under Elizabeth, who re-instated all the (can't make out this word) against witchcraft that Edward VI, sixteen years earlier, had repealed, acting on the advice of his all-male entourage. Furthermore, the fewer women involved in the trials, the fairer the treatment the witches were likely to receive.

    Firstly, this is factually incorrect; the persecution of witches reached its apex under James VI and I, who was famously obsessed with witches. (Knowland, as an English teacher, should know this as Shakespeare 's inclusion of the witches in Macbeth pandered to the king's interests.)

    Secondly, what does the remark that Edward VI repealed witchcraft laws on the advice of his "all male" entourage mean? Is he suggesting that if Edward had had female advisors they would have suggested differently? Pretty much all royal advisors were male in the C16th and C17th. Do we blame men for every bad decision made in the C16th and C17th, or do we only draw attention to the sex of those behind "good" decisions?

    And what does "the fewer women involved in the trials, the fairer the treatment the witches were likely to receive" mean? Women weren't involved in trials as judges or jurors - their only role was either as accused or witness. Is he suggesting that if women weren't involved as the accused, but the accused was a male witch, the trial was likely to be fairer? Or that judges and jurors took the evidence of male witnesses more seriously than female witnesses - or what?
  • So, basically he's outed himself as an ill-informed person who can't analyse evidence, and produces a low quality video to communicate his ideas .... all of which would suggest he'd be a not very good teacher. An inability to teach children would seem to be a fair reason for a school to decide to not employ him.

    Though if that's representative of the quality of teachers at Eton it would explain a lot when it comes to the performance of politicians educated at Eton.
  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    The short section on witchcraft is accompanied by a photo of four teenage girls, three of whom are laughing behind the fourth's back. On this photo (you can see it at 11.12) he has drawn a speech bubble from the three girls saying "witch!" and he has written written "Most accusers were women" and "Female relational aggression" in the margins.

    If one of my students used a recent photo of four girls wearing jeans to illustrate a point about C16th witchcraft trials I would be baffled by the choice. It's not clear what "female relational aggression" has to do with the topic. The claim that most accusers were women is true - one alleged witch would be arrested and tortured to give up more names, and they in turn would give up more names. Describing this as "female relational aggression" is akin to saying that Guy Fawkes exhibited "male relational aggression" when, under torture, he named his co-conspirators.
  • I'm taking one for the team and watching the video

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTHgMxQEoPI

    Here's another doozy: Witchcraft - (starting at 10.50)
    Most accusers were women; Mary enacted the Scottish witchcraft laws and persecution reached its apex under Elizabeth, who re-instated all the (can't make out this word) against witchcraft that Edward VI, sixteen years earlier, had repealed, acting on the advice of his all-male entourage. Furthermore, the fewer women involved in the trials, the fairer the treatment the witches were likely to receive.

    Firstly, this is factually incorrect; the persecution of witches reached its apex under James VI and I, who was famously obsessed with witches. (Knowland, as an English teacher, should know this as Shakespeare 's inclusion of the witches in Macbeth pandered to the king's interests.)

    Is he really suggesting that Bloody Mary and Mary Queen of Scots were the same person (and, incidentally, that England and Scotland were ruled by her), or merely guilty of incoherence? (Or both?)

    Further proof, if any were needed, that Eton should be in special measures. And would be, if it were an inner-city comprehensive.
  • I assume by "Mary" he means Mary, Queen of Scots. The Scottish witchcraft Act of 1563 states that it was enacted by the "Quenis Majestie and the Thre Estatis in the present Parliament" Given that the Scottish Parliament was entirely male, it seems odd that Knowland stresses that the advisors for the repeal of the English acts under Edward were "all-male" but doesn't mention that all-maleness of those enacting the witchcraft acts.

    Edward was a man, with male advisors, but Mary, Queen of Scots was a lone capricious woman enacting bad laws apparently.
  • Jane R wrote: »
    I'm taking one for the team and watching the video

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTHgMxQEoPI

    Here's another doozy: Witchcraft - (starting at 10.50)
    Most accusers were women; Mary enacted the Scottish witchcraft laws and persecution reached its apex under Elizabeth, who re-instated all the (can't make out this word) against witchcraft that Edward VI, sixteen years earlier, had repealed, acting on the advice of his all-male entourage. Furthermore, the fewer women involved in the trials, the fairer the treatment the witches were likely to receive.

    Firstly, this is factually incorrect; the persecution of witches reached its apex under James VI and I, who was famously obsessed with witches. (Knowland, as an English teacher, should know this as Shakespeare 's inclusion of the witches in Macbeth pandered to the king's interests.)

    Is he really suggesting that Bloody Mary and Mary Queen of Scots were the same person (and, incidentally, that England and Scotland were ruled by her), or merely guilty of incoherence? (Or both?)

    Further proof, if any were needed, that Eton should be in special measures. And would be, if it were an inner-city comprehensive.

    The worst horror stories of awful teaching I've heard of or witnessed have been in private or selective schools. When I was doing work experience prior to teacher training I happened to observe a Divinity lesson in a prestigious state grammar where the teacher chose to highlight to a year 7 class that Moses would have known he wasn't Egyptian growing up because of his "Jewish characteristics". Being 21 and a visitor to the school I decided not to enquire what characteristics these might be. :neutral:
  • Oh, and I wouldn't put too much store in the fact that his pupils like him. He's a complete fruitcake whose obsession plays into their prejudices (of course a bunch of upper-class teenage boys are going to think the patriarchy is a Good Thing. It is, for them). He's probably not a particularly good teacher either, if he wastes his time fulminating about the "feminarchy" instead of teaching his subject, but I daresay he's entertaining to watch, and probably forgets to set prep if they get him wound up enough. Of course they like him.
  • Apparently women complaining about not having the vote is spurious because (11.57) only 4% of the men had the vote in Ancient Athens.

    He's done a nice graph (you can see it at 11.59), showing a timeline from 1600-2000 which illustrates that the section of time in which some men but no women had the vote was quite small, from the Reform Act of 1832 to 1918. He could have started the graph at 1500, and reduced the section still further!
  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Lastly, rape is not a unique claim for male oppression of women because male on male rape in gaols dwarfs male-on-female rape outside them (at 12.20)

    Well, that's ok then! What are female rape victims whinging about?? They should be counting their blessing that they aren't a man in prison.

  • @Makepeace , have you watched the video?

    Do you really think that in this video he is putting forward "reasonable and credible arguments." ?
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    male on male rape in gaols
    Idle questions: how does he know? What figures is he using? Is he comparing like with like?

    Not that I want to know the answer, not badly enough to ask anyone to watch the video again.

  • Lastly, rape is not a unique claim for male oppression of women because male on male rape in gaols dwarfs male-on-female rape outside them (at 12.20)

    Well, that's ok then! What are female rape victims whinging about?? They should be counting their blessing that they aren't a man in prison.

    That claim makes absolutely no logical, psychological or sociological sense - also it is objectively untrue.
  • Furtive GanderFurtive Gander Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    I'm not going to watch it (thanks NEQ very useful) but he sounds either quite dim or his judgement and critical faculties have been clouded by his obsession and prejudice.
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    male on male rape in gaols
    Idle questions: how does he know? What figures is he using? Is he comparing like with like?

    Not that I want to know the answer, not badly enough to ask anyone to watch the video again.

    Frankly I wouldn't expect too much from someone who appears to be unaware that England and Scotland were governed by different people in the 16th century. I gather he has also ignored the persecution of witches during the Commonwealth. Of course he has, the Witchfinder General was just as male as James VI and I, so mentioning that would destroy his argument.
  • I'm not going to watch it (thanks NEQ very useful) but he sounds either quite dim or his judgement and critical faculties have been clouded by his obsession and prejudice.

    I assume it's the latter, because presumably he has a degree and a teaching qualification.

    If I was marking that video I'd give it a "C" if it was submitted by a first year, but by second year of uni that would be a fail. From this I deduce that he is capable of producing better work, but has become obsessed and gone down a rabbit hole.
  • In procreating, providing and protecting men can fail in a way that women can't. In procreation they can fail in a very visual and humiliating way by being impotent. On the island of Truk women laugh at a man's sexual failure, telling him to "take the breast like a baby" In providing, they can fail to kill the animal. Unlike roots and berries traditionally gathered by women, large and dangerous animals fight back or run away. (17:27 on)

    Well, that's useful. Young men in Eton now know to avoid holidaying in the Island of Truk.

    I'm not sure that I understand the bit about failure to procreate though. Is he suggesting that women can't fail to procreate and infertility isn't a thing for us, or that female failure to procreate is less of an issue for women because it's less "visual"

    Or does he need to look up "procreate" in a dictionary to see that it involves reproduction, and not just sexual intercourse?
  • Well, he also needs to take notice of the roots and berries traditionally gathered by women, as though they are small, they can also be dangerous.
  • Penny S wrote: »
    Well, he also needs to take notice of the roots and berries traditionally gathered by women, as though they are small, they can also be dangerous.

    Plus the fact that the gendered hunter/gatherer division is nowhere near as absolute as he pretends.
  • And the hunters often return empty handed.
    I would hazard that not only should this guy not be employed at Eton, he should also go on that list of teachers not to teach anywhere.
  • I'm not going to watch it (thanks NEQ very useful) but he sounds either quite dim or his judgement and critical faculties have been clouded by his obsession and prejudice.

    I assume it's the latter, because presumably he has a degree and a teaching qualification.

    If I was marking that video I'd give it a "C" if it was submitted by a first year, but by second year of uni that would be a fail. From this I deduce that he is capable of producing better work, but has become obsessed and gone down a rabbit hole.

    Teaching qualifications are optional in private schools.

    From what you've said about the content of this video, a C grade is more generous than I would be, even to a first year. They're supposed to know about checking sources and verifying facts by GCSE level nowadays. Certainly by A-level (Highers) they should know.
  • North East QuineNorth East Quine Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Dafyd wrote: »
    male on male rape in gaols
    Idle questions: how does he know? What figures is he using? Is he comparing like with like?

    Not that I want to know the answer, not badly enough to ask anyone to watch the video again.

    He provides this as his source:
    https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=139657

    It refers to American prisons and states in the abstract there are no precise, objective data on the incidence of sexual assault in U.S. prisons, anecdotal and suggestive data indicate that it is a serious problem of inmate security and safety.

    The fact that the abstract states there are no precise, objective data seems to be used by him as an opportunity to create his own data. Alternatively he might be comparing figures from America (population 331 million) with figures from the UK (pop 68 million) But who knows? Interpreting data doesn't appear to be his strong point.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    If he has a degree and a teaching qualification, and is now functioning like this - I do wonder if he has become mentally unwell. I do not say this because of the nature of his views, but because of the obsession and incoherence - it can happen with an untreated emerging paranoia and some forms of delusional disorder.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    The fact that the abstract states there are no precise, objective data seems to be used by him as an opportunity to create his own data.
    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that he doesn't think that there's a big problem with under reporting of "male-on-female" rape or with under prosecution of rape that is reported.

Sign In or Register to comment.