Presidential Candidate Mimics A Sex Act
Society & Culture1 min ago
The Space Between Us.
Islamic school found guilty of sex discrimination. Will this verdict lead to better treatment of Muslim women by their misogynistic families?
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Just-Jude. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Strange decision as the Grammar school I attended segregated boys and girls, even had separate playgrounds."
That's interesting because, strictly speaking, so did mine. But they were entirely separate schools. They were closely located to each other, had similar (but not identical) names and were administered by the same trustees. But apart from that they may well have been in different cities. There was absolutely no contact, co-operation or collaboration of any sort between them. So we come to this:
"Lawyers for its chief inspector Amanda Spielman argued that the policy is unlawful and segregation leaves girls "unprepared for life in modern Britain"."
That viewpoint must suggest that schools such as ours (and there must be many of similar ilk still around) left their girls similarly unprepared (which was most certainly untrue). I think the difference is that we (and the female pupils) knew and accepted that we were being educated in a single-sex environment. It seems the pupils in the Al-Hijrah school mix until they are nine and are then segregated. I went to a mixed infants/junior school and then to a segregated establishment at age 11. So not much different really. I wonder if the ruling considers that the school is a mixed school and segregation is unlawful.
That's interesting because, strictly speaking, so did mine. But they were entirely separate schools. They were closely located to each other, had similar (but not identical) names and were administered by the same trustees. But apart from that they may well have been in different cities. There was absolutely no contact, co-operation or collaboration of any sort between them. So we come to this:
"Lawyers for its chief inspector Amanda Spielman argued that the policy is unlawful and segregation leaves girls "unprepared for life in modern Britain"."
That viewpoint must suggest that schools such as ours (and there must be many of similar ilk still around) left their girls similarly unprepared (which was most certainly untrue). I think the difference is that we (and the female pupils) knew and accepted that we were being educated in a single-sex environment. It seems the pupils in the Al-Hijrah school mix until they are nine and are then segregated. I went to a mixed infants/junior school and then to a segregated establishment at age 11. So not much different really. I wonder if the ruling considers that the school is a mixed school and segregation is unlawful.
The summary judgement which Peter kindly provided is interesting. Firstly, the background in the summary clearly states that this is not the same as considering the education that Danny and I received (which was in essentially separate schools):
“This appeal considers whether it amounts to discrimination for a mixed-sex school to have a complete segregation of male and female pupils over a certain age. Section 85 of the Equality Act 2010 (“EA 2010”) prohibits discrimination by a school against a pupil in the way it provides education for the pupil and in the way it affords the pupil access to a benefit, facility or service. Section 13 of the EA 2010 defines discrimination as including where a person is treated less favourably because of their sex than those who are not of that sex.”
The earlier rounds of the appeal process show (to me) some startling revelations in philosophies:
“Ofsted did not express any opinion that girls were receiving a different or qualitatively poorer level of education than boys but it assessed that the segregation limited the pupils’ social development and the extent to which they were prepared for interaction with the opposite sex when they left school, and in that way they suffered educationally from the segregation.”
So basically, mixing with the opposite sex is essential preparation for life after school. No comment is made on how pupils in single-sex schools obtain that essential element.
But then there’s this:
“The High Court allowed the School’s claim. Mr Justice Jay recognised that denying pupils the educational benefits which might flow from interaction with the opposite sex could be detrimental to them….As the treatment of both groups was of equivalent nature with equivalent consequences, it could not be said that one group was being treated less favourably than the other, and there was therefore no discrimination.”
So, as long as both sexes are disadvantaged to the same degree, it’s OK!
The Court of Appeal dismissed this finding (and the reasons are interesting but too lengthy to go into here). But the Court made it clear that it was not concerned about the reason why the pupils were segregated (which was, on the school’s own admission, to satisfy religious requirements). It seems it is going to take many of these costly legal procedures before it is finally accepted that Islam is not compatible with the framework of UK law and is not suited to be practised here.
“This appeal considers whether it amounts to discrimination for a mixed-sex school to have a complete segregation of male and female pupils over a certain age. Section 85 of the Equality Act 2010 (“EA 2010”) prohibits discrimination by a school against a pupil in the way it provides education for the pupil and in the way it affords the pupil access to a benefit, facility or service. Section 13 of the EA 2010 defines discrimination as including where a person is treated less favourably because of their sex than those who are not of that sex.”
The earlier rounds of the appeal process show (to me) some startling revelations in philosophies:
“Ofsted did not express any opinion that girls were receiving a different or qualitatively poorer level of education than boys but it assessed that the segregation limited the pupils’ social development and the extent to which they were prepared for interaction with the opposite sex when they left school, and in that way they suffered educationally from the segregation.”
So basically, mixing with the opposite sex is essential preparation for life after school. No comment is made on how pupils in single-sex schools obtain that essential element.
But then there’s this:
“The High Court allowed the School’s claim. Mr Justice Jay recognised that denying pupils the educational benefits which might flow from interaction with the opposite sex could be detrimental to them….As the treatment of both groups was of equivalent nature with equivalent consequences, it could not be said that one group was being treated less favourably than the other, and there was therefore no discrimination.”
So, as long as both sexes are disadvantaged to the same degree, it’s OK!
The Court of Appeal dismissed this finding (and the reasons are interesting but too lengthy to go into here). But the Court made it clear that it was not concerned about the reason why the pupils were segregated (which was, on the school’s own admission, to satisfy religious requirements). It seems it is going to take many of these costly legal procedures before it is finally accepted that Islam is not compatible with the framework of UK law and is not suited to be practised here.
"Strange decision as the Grammar school I attended segregated boys and girls,
Still goes on,
Girls
https:/
Boys
http://
Still goes on,
Girls
https:/
Boys
http://
THECORBYLOON
/// It said on the radio there are about twenty schools inclyding Christian and Jewish in a similar situation so it is not only Islamic. ///
Ah yes we mustn't just criticise Islam, must we? Not at all political correct.
This is not just about male and female segregation, but it is about Islam's general attitude towards the female sex.
Did anyone see that Muslim parent being interviewed on the TV news?
His anti Western views were unbelievable, as said many times before, why do they continue to live amongst us in the West?
They could always go and live in more sunnier climes.
/// It said on the radio there are about twenty schools inclyding Christian and Jewish in a similar situation so it is not only Islamic. ///
Ah yes we mustn't just criticise Islam, must we? Not at all political correct.
This is not just about male and female segregation, but it is about Islam's general attitude towards the female sex.
Did anyone see that Muslim parent being interviewed on the TV news?
His anti Western views were unbelievable, as said many times before, why do they continue to live amongst us in the West?
They could always go and live in more sunnier climes.
In the Court''s Press summary it says, "Ofsted did not express any opinion that girls were receiving a different or qualitatively poorer level of education than boys but it assessed that the segregation limited the pupils’ social development and the extent to which they were prepared for interaction with the opposite sex when they left school, and in that way they suffered educationally from the segregation."
Why is that reasoning not applied to single-sex schools?
Why is that reasoning not applied to single-sex schools?
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
|