Delivery man tells young boy to stop dressing as a fairy.

First topic message reminder :

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-furious-after-son-wearing-8975210?ICID=FB_mirror_main


"Wendy, who also has a two-year-old daughter, Felicity, said she couldn't believe her ears.
She said: "If he had said it's unusual to be a fairy, we wouldn't have have thought too much of it but saying someone should take Isaac to one side implies he was doing something wrong.
"I feel disappointed that there are still people in this world that ask questions like that and and think it is their right to tell other people what they can and cannot wear.
"My son has been more reluctant to wear his fairy dress since, he has only worn it once or twice whereas he used to wear it all the time."



Obviously the delivery driver should have minded his own business, but should a 4 year old boy be encouraged to dress up as a fairy?

Tommy Monk wrote:The mother should never have given it to him as a choice to wear in the first place!

True...his sister was younger so it obviously wasn't hers.

If, as some have said no young boy  should be stopped from wearing a dress if he wants too, presumably he would be allowed out in it, after all it's nothing to be ashamed of if that's the parents view, it's normal and natural.   .
Throw in a bow and pink shoes....let him walk out like that.
Cruelty springs to mind....but as long as the parent is happy.

Maybe if he liked lady gaga he should be allowed out in a dress made of meat...?


Or if he liked reggae music he should be allowed out dressed up in a dreadlock wig and black face paint...?

Tommy Monk wrote:Maybe if he liked lady gaga he should be allowed out in a dress made of meat...?


Or if he liked reggae music he should be allowed out dressed up in a dreadlock wig and black face paint...?

Well where would it stop if parents allowed young kids free reign?

Eilzel wrote:Only to demonstrate how you cannot answer a simple question. Which goes to prove your reason does not come from reason, only societal conformity- where a kid can't even wear a particular costume without busy bodies tearing their hair out in objection.

I'll just remind you who brought it to the attention of the public - the boy's mother. If she doesn't like people commenting, perhaps she should have kept her mouth shut.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:The mother should never have given it to him as a choice to wear in the first place!

True...his sister was younger so it obviously wasn't hers.

If, as some have said no young boy  should be stopped from wearing a dress if he wants too, presumably he would be allowed out in it, after all it's nothing to be ashamed of if that's the parents view, it's normal and natural.   .
Throw in a bow and pink shoes....let him walk out like that.
Cruelty springs to mind....but as long as the parent is happy.

Ridiculous to suggest cruelty.

So you are saying its ok for society to be cruely judgemental and we should make no effort to amend that- instead we should tell children that wearing certain clothes is wrong 'because it is...'? Do I have that right?

And how then do you propose to stop that same child becoming equally judgemental in the future? Particularly if he sees, in the admittedly rare event, a trans person and the first thing he says is, 'look mummy that man is bad because he's wearing a dress!'

If clothes have no gender based significance... then why do some (gender confused/trans) men think that wearing dresses makes them appear feminine...?


And butch lesbos think putting on a shirt/dungarees etc makes them more macho...?


Obviously clothing has a much deeper significance than you are pretending to claim otherwise...



Children should be given clear guidance during their early years on what's considered right/wrong and normal/abnormal and appropriate/inappropriate and acceptable/unacceptable etc...



They should be given the guidance towards being what is the best possible things for them... as nature intended...


Not spoon-fed a load of contrived leftie 'right on' happy clappy faux utopian 'equalities' drivel...

'Nature' didn't really intend us to wear clothes- they are a pretty 'unnatural' human invention at root, tommy- or is your version of normal/abnormal as abritrary as ypu decide?

Your tone towards anyone different to you is repulsive, as is obvious in that post.

It isn't inappropriate/abnormal/unacceptable for anyone to wear whatever they choose because it is THEIR choice. Not yours, not mine, nor anyone elses. If a child boy ends up growing up preferring to wear dresses then so what- what harm does he cause? In this case it's just for fun anyway. Ironically, it is you getting your nickers in a twist over it

It is unnatural though. Same as wearing ANY clothes is 'technically' unnatural. We should ALL walk around NAKED as NATURE intended right tommy? My fellow clothes wearing unnatural freak

Tommy you deride Muslims for teaching people to believe in this and that and for following "orders" yet you are the epitome of a brainwashed robot.

@Les, brilliant points. But I think we are wasting our breath.

"I'm sorry you were tormented all day at school son and I'm sorry you had seven shades of shit kicked out of you. Never mind, your dress looks lovely and remember, it's your right to dress how you wish. It makes mummy so happy.

So in other words, don't do anything about bullying; just capitulate to bullies and bigotry and possibly instil prejudice in the child too, who will forever believe a man wearing a dress is a bad person. Is that what you'd prefer miffs?

Major wrote:We are discussing the life of a baby, to much frivolity now.

Back on topic.

I think this is more about this awful trend of putting every little incident out there on social media, going to the press with trivial incidents in order to humiliate someone and to seek a bit of fame, and generally seeking attention for no good reason. If the woman objected so much, she should have got out of bed and said something to the delivery man when he was there - end of story. All these attempts to get the public on her side have backfired.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Major wrote:We are discussing the life of a baby, to much frivolity now.

Back on topic.

I think this is more about this awful trend of putting every little incident out there on social media, going to the press with trivial incidents in order to humiliate someone and to seek a bit of fame, and generally seeking attention for no good reason. If the woman objected so much, she should have got out of bed and said something to the delivery man when he was there - end of story. All these attempts to get the public on her side have backfired.

That's just about spot on.

Eilzel wrote:So in other words, don't do anything about bullying; just capitulate to bullies and bigotry and possibly instil prejudice in the child too, who will forever believe a man wearing a dress is a bad person. Is that what you'd prefer miffs?

My thoughts exactly. If you can bully someone over a triviality such as dress code, then where's the limit? We should all be more tolerant.

Eilzel wrote:So in other words, don't do anything about bullying; just capitulate to bullies and bigotry and possibly instil prejudice in the child too, who will forever believe a man wearing a dress is a bad person. Is that what you'd prefer miffs?

I have to agree with this generally. Giving in to bullies is never the right answer. I don't really think this is about what the kid was wearing anyway.

WHY would any decent right minded human being insist/want a baby boy to dress like a girl and cause him grief for the rest of his life.????

I cant work out why so many people are using the word bully to describe people who would look at this poor kid and feel it's odd that his mother has had her 5 minutes by telling the world about his penchant for fairy frocks.

She is the bully for dragging a delivery man, the store he works for....but more importantly her innocent son al over the bloody papers.

And I agree with Tommy, of course clothes are important....ask any youngster, older teenager and most adults....including yourselves.

I don't think the delivery man was being nasty, and she had no business talking about him all over the internet and the press, even though she didn't actually name him. She wants him to be "retrained" FFS.

Why did the press feel the need to print a very large photo of her anyway?

I don't agree with her splashing the story everywhere tbh but that wasn't ever the talking point of the thread IMO.

eddie wrote:I don't agree with her splashing the story everywhere tbh but that wasn't ever the talking point of the thread IMO.

It's the point for me. It's usually the point re this kind of story - it happens too often.

Why not? If anything good is to come from this story it may be that a few other arrogant people keep their prejudiced views to themselves in future.

This woman has got what she wants....her face in the papers, she has used her son to get it there.

If the delivery man DID say this in the way she has said, she should have dealt with it privately there and then....if she had not been satisfied with his response she could have contacted his boss privately and complained.

I wouldn't be surprised if she wasn't hankering after free groceries as well as her 5 minutes of fame.

Eilzel wrote:'Nature' didn't really intend us to wear clothes- they are a pretty 'unnatural' human invention at root, tommy- or is your version of normal/abnormal as abritrary as ypu decide?

Your tone towards anyone different to you is repulsive, as is obvious in that post.

It isn't inappropriate/abnormal/unacceptable for anyone to wear whatever they choose because it is THEIR choice. Not yours, not mine, nor anyone elses. If a child boy ends up growing up preferring to wear dresses then so what- what harm does he cause? In this case it's just for fun anyway. Ironically, it is you getting your nickers in a twist over it

It is unnatural though. Same as wearing ANY clothes is 'technically' unnatural. We should ALL walk around NAKED as NATURE intended right tommy? My fellow clothes wearing unnatural freak

So not only do you want your see little boys wearing dresses... but you would prefer to see them running around naked... you sick fuck!!!

eddie wrote:Tommy you deride Muslims for teaching people to believe in this and that and for following "orders" yet you are the epitome of a brainwashed robot.

@Les, brilliant points.  But I think we are wasting our breath.

When you say 'this and that'... you are bring totally disingenuous... I am concerned about the religious orders to violence and forcing their unnatural rules onto everyone else...


Saying boys shouldnt wear fairy dresses is just stating the obvious...

Syl wrote:I cant work out why so many people are using the word bully to describe people who would look at this poor kid and feel it's odd that his mother has had her 5 minutes by telling the world about his penchant for fairy frocks.

She is the bully for dragging a delivery man, the store he works for....but more importantly her innocent son al over the bloody papers.

And I agree with Tommy, of course clothes are important....ask any youngster, older teenager and most adults....including yourselves.  

Thanks!

Syl wrote:I cant work out why so many people are using the word bully to describe people who would look at this poor kid and feel it's odd that his mother has had her 5 minutes by telling the world about his penchant for fairy frocks.

She is the bully for dragging a delivery man, the store he works for....but more importantly her innocent son al over the bloody papers.

And I agree with Tommy, of course clothes are important....ask any youngster, older teenager and most adults....including yourselves.  

Thanks!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Eilzel wrote:'Nature' didn't really intend us to wear clothes- they are a pretty 'unnatural' human invention at root, tommy- or is your version of normal/abnormal as abritrary as ypu decide?

Your tone towards anyone different to you is repulsive, as is obvious in that post.

It isn't inappropriate/abnormal/unacceptable for anyone to wear whatever they choose because it is THEIR choice. Not yours, not mine, nor anyone elses. If a child boy ends up growing up preferring to wear dresses then so what- what harm does he cause? In this case it's just for fun anyway. Ironically, it is you getting your nickers in a twist over it

It is unnatural though. Same as wearing ANY clothes is 'technically' unnatural. We should ALL walk around NAKED as NATURE intended right tommy? My fellow clothes wearing unnatural freak

So not only do you want your see little boys wearing dresses... but you would prefer to see them running around naked... you sick fuck!!!

Awww did I touch a nerve? Or are you just too thick to understand simple arguments? Your total lack of inability to forward actual reasons for your views is the only reason you get so upset and hideously insulting. Grow up, silly little knobhead.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:I cant work out why so many people are using the word bully to describe people who would look at this poor kid and feel it's odd that his mother has had her 5 minutes by telling the world about his penchant for fairy frocks.

She is the bully for dragging a delivery man, the store he works for....but more importantly her innocent son al over the bloody papers.

And I agree with Tommy, of course clothes are important....ask any youngster, older teenager and most adults....including yourselves.  

Thanks!

You are welcome, it's true.

I don't get why some are saying you don't give reasons to back up your views....you have given several valid reasons why in your opinion little lads should not be wearing fairy costumes on a regular basis.

Sometimes people only see what they want to see

Eilzel wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


So not only do you want your see little boys wearing dresses... but you would prefer to see them running around naked... you sick fuck!!!

Awww did I touch a nerve? Or are you just too thick to understand simple arguments? Your total lack of inability to forward actual reasons for your views is the only reason you get so upset and hideously insulting. Grow up, silly little knobhead.

I've given reasons... you have the inability to acknowledge them...


You have just admitted you want to see little boys running around naked!!!

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:





Thanks!

You are welcome, it's true.

I don't get why some are saying you don't give reasons to back up  your views....you have given several valid reasons why in your opinion  little lads should not be wearing fairy costumes on a regular basis.

Sometimes people only see what they want to see

I give reasons that some find difficult to argue against so they do the easy option of denial that I've given any reasons...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Awww did I touch a nerve? Or are you just too thick to understand simple arguments? Your total lack of inability to forward actual reasons for your views is the only reason you get so upset and hideously insulting. Grow up, silly little knobhead.

I've given reasons... you have the inability to acknowledge them...


You have just admitted you want to see little boys running around naked!!!

Are you incapable of reading, fuckwit?

If anything, since it's you opposed to everything 'unnatural', you must oppose clothing. So it would be you wanting to see everyone naked. Only you don't understand that- because you are thick- don't worry, being thick is natural for some people, I won't hold it against you.

Now you just carry on showing yourself up for tha true bigot you are.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Syl wrote:

You are welcome, it's true.

I don't get why some are saying you don't give reasons to back up  your views....you have given several valid reasons why in your opinion  little lads should not be wearing fairy costumes on a regular basis.

Sometimes people only see what they want to see

I give reasons that some find difficult to argue against so they do the easy option of denial that I've given any reasons...

I think sound reasoning and valid points have been put across on both sides....I still think the mother is wrong in not distracting her son away from the fairy costume, which would be very easy and save the poor kid confusion in the future, not to mention the indignity of having him splashed across the papers for her own ego boost.

Obviously others don't agree....that's their choice.

Eilzel wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



I've given reasons... you have the inability to acknowledge them...


You have just admitted you want to see little boys running around naked!!!

Are you incapable of reading, fuckwit?

If anything, since it's you opposed to everything 'unnatural', you must oppose clothing. So it would be you wanting to see everyone naked. Only you don't understand that- because you are thick- don't worry, being thick is natural for some people, I won't hold it against you.

Now you just carry on showing yourself up for tha true bigot you are.

I'm not opposed to clothing... we'd all be dead without it in winter...


We have clothes... some are for men/boys and some are for women/girls...


Dresses are for girls... not boys...!


It's you who was just arguing for little boys to be running around naked!!!

Show me exactly how I argued for that, moron.

Do you have a problem with boys wearing pink clothes?

Boys who wear girls clothes after about the age of 5 will have the piss taken out of them by other children, That is a no brainer.

Maybe we should ditch gender specific clothes, with many futuristic films etc this seems to be the future. Clothes should be practical as well as attractive and nice to wear. How anyone (well women) can stand to wear some of the creations of so called designers is beyond me, especially the dresses they nearly wear, it must be a pain trying not to have your dress fall off or have a major wardrobe malfunction, besides looking fairly daft and being a bit 'trying too hard' to attract publicty. Strange, well no its not really strange how women are expected to reveal so much yet men's fashion doesn't really expect this, which is perhaps a good thing. For too many years and still in some cultures people have/are told what they can and can't wear, wear what you feel comfortable in, with the exception perhaps of a black tent and face coverings. The child may well sort himself into what is still regarded as appropriate clothing for a male. Orthodox Jewish women aren't allowed to wear trousers which are seen as male clothing yet everyone seemed to wear robes in historic Israel - so surely the guys shouldn't wear trousers either and why do Muslim men need huge bushy beards to emphasis their masculinity -is it just a hairy gene thing?

nicko wrote:Boys who wear girls clothes after about the age of 5 will have the piss taken out of them by other children,   That is a no brainer.

Can I just point out that nobody has suggested this kid is dressing like this around his friends or classmates? He's doing it at home, where he presumably feels comfortable enough to do things that he may well realize don't go over as well in public.

Can I also point out that there's no law against cross-dressing? And that if there were, it would be unjust? And that a lot of cross dressers aren't gay? And that if they are gay, that's fine too?

You busy-bodies seem to think this boy turning out to be gay would be such a horrible thing -- I'm sure you could find plenty of like minds within the ranks of ISIS or the Taleban.

Well said, Ben. Some people want to stop people doing what they enjoy even in their homes, a sad state.

Ben Reilly wrote:

nicko wrote:Boys who wear girls clothes after about the age of 5 will have the piss taken out of them by other children,   That is a no brainer.

Can I just point out that nobody has suggested this kid is dressing like this around his friends or classmates? He's doing it at home, where he presumably feels comfortable enough to do things that he may well realize don't go over as well in public.

Can I also point out that there's no law against cross-dressing? And that if there were, it would be unjust? And that a lot of cross dressers aren't gay? And that if they are gay, that's fine too?

You busy-bodies seem to think this boy turning out to be gay would be such a horrible thing -- I'm sure you could find plenty of like minds within the ranks of ISIS or the Taleban.

Great post.

I never said a thing about him becoming gay, I only said as he became older children would take the piss. If you disagree with that opinion it shows that you have no experience of real life, but then you have lead a very sheltered life haven't you?

nicko wrote:I never said a thing about him becoming gay,   I only said as he became older children would take the piss.   If you disagree with that opinion it shows that you have no experience of real life, but then you have lead a very sheltered life haven't you?

There is a large amount of forumuz who misquote, do it on purpose IMHO to get someone else 'going', it has and duz happun to myself countless timez, it duz not matter whether or not you reply or the answer you give ,they are just content with haranguing you.

The mutha iz totally irresponsible az said b4, she certainly is not encouraging the baby to lead a normal existence, hence pushing him towards homosexuality and not normality.

I hope she is reported to the child care authority.

nicko wrote:I never said a thing about him becoming gay,   I only said as he became older children would take the piss.   If you disagree with that opinion it shows that you have no experience of real life, but then you have lead a very sheltered life haven't you?

Have a for pointing that out Nicko.
I think the vast majority of argument against the mother allowing the boy to continuously dress as a fairy was NOT because it would or could change his sexuality, but because it would confuse him and make life more difficult for him....and who wants their 4 year old child to face difficulties he need not IF she had guided him with a bit more care.

Ben Reilly wrote:

nicko wrote:Boys who wear girls clothes after about the age of 5 will have the piss taken out of them by other children,   That is a no brainer.

Can I just point out that nobody has suggested this kid is dressing like this around his friends or classmates? He's doing it at home, where he presumably feels comfortable enough to do things that he may well realize don't go over as well in public.

Can I also point out that there's no law against cross-dressing? And that if there were, it would be unjust? And that a lot of cross dressers aren't gay? And that if they are gay, that's fine too?

You busy-bodies seem to think this boy turning out to be gay would be such a horrible thing -- I'm sure you could find plenty of like minds within the ranks of ISIS or the Taleban.

My argument is absolutely nothing to do with the boy "turning out to be gay"

I asked Eddie if when the lad starts school, if he still wanted to wear the fairy dress with a matching tiara would she allow that, the answer was 'Yes' if it was that important to him.

Which actually makes more sense than yours. You would presumably allow it but only behind closed doors....so instead of explaining to a child there is different dress for different genders, you would not discourage the fairy dress....but only if it's kept hidden.

There haz been and still iz violence towardz homosexualz, why would a 'loving' mutha not STEAR her baby son AWAY from such a possibility?

Major wrote:There haz been and still iz violence towardz  homosexualz, why would a 'loving' mutha not STEAR her baby son AWAY from such a possibility?

Well I don't think a mother can change the outcome of her childs sexuality Major, but I think she can explain gender differences as and when the questions crop up so to  avoid confusion in a childs mind..

Since we were born there have been vast changes in most peoples attitudes to gay, lesbians, transgender people...and thank God for that.
For one thing to actually be a practicing homosexual could get you shoved in jail and snubbed by society....thankfully that all began to change in the late 60's.
Before that I believe loving parents WOULD wish for their kids to be straight.....more for the way society treated them than for anything else.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Major wrote:We are discussing the life of a baby, to much frivolity now.

Back on topic.

I think this is more about this awful trend of putting every little incident out there on social media, going to the press with trivial incidents in order to humiliate someone and to seek a bit of fame, and generally seeking attention for no good reason. If the woman objected so much, she should have got out of bed and said something to the delivery man when he was there - end of story. All these attempts to get the public on her side have backfired.

Absolutely spot on

Major wrote:There haz been and still iz violence towardz  homosexualz, why would a 'loving' mutha not STEAR her baby son AWAY from such a possibility?

Nobody 'becomes gay' gay because they dress as a fairy.

And violence against gay people is falling. Even so, we should be stopping bullying school full stop- not excusing them.

Of course you probably condone attacks on gay people.

PS: being gay is totally normal- hating on gay people is not.

Eilzel wrote:So in other words, don't do anything about bullying; just capitulate to bullies and bigotry and possibly instil prejudice in the child too, who will forever believe a man wearing a dress is a bad person. Is that what you'd prefer miffs?

God yes, I'd prefer anything that kept him safe. I see a lot of hostility and anger from you, strange as you are the one always preaching inclusivity and tolerance, or is that only for those that you agree with?

It is the paramount responsibility for parents to give their baby the best chance in life possibul with careful considud upbringing.
In this case she is opting her baby into something obnoxious IMHO without his weighed consent, she should be steering him towardz normality, not encouraging perversion, when he is older and fully aware of life he can make his own decisionz.


IMHO the mutha is corrupting this baby.

Eilzel, do you wear a dress, in private of course?