Monday, 17 September 2012

Inclusivity and invisibility

A couple of things have happened today that has made me think along the lines encapsulated in the title of this post. The UK coalition government is in the throes of making an announcement about the reform of the school examination system, effectively returning to something far more like the system that appertained when I was at school, where the qualifications a pupil gained, or failed to gain, were largely based on the ability to pass a one-off, written examination, as opposed to the more course work, continuous assessment based regime that has been in place since the late 1980's. The old system suited me admirably, because I was good at exams, but very lazy, so I could get away with doing little or no work during the year, and still end up close to, or at 'the top of the class'. For the whole of a young person's academic career, and thus their future opportunities, to hang on a handful of sessions in an examination room, though, seems to me to reopen for many the prospect of their becoming members of an educational underclass, those who might have a goodly amount of native aptitude, but through accidents of upbringing, teaching techniques or simply feeling unwell 'on the day' will have no concrete way of displaying the fact to a potential employer or further education provider. No exam system can be perfect, there will always be those who fall through the net, as well as those who can come out with perhaps more than their overall efforts deserve (and yes, I am looking at 'the man in the mirror' when I say that), but to go back to a system that seems to almost wilfully lend itself to creating a generation of second-class citizens, largely, it appears, for reasons of political expediency, to keep 'Middle England' on side with this benighted government who seem to have little or no rapport with 'ordinary people' is, for me, indefensible.
On a more personal level, the reaction to my last post has seemed to me to underline my lack of prospects of being accepted as having a valid place in 'society', whatever that cypher is taken to mean. If I can only 'fit in' by submerging and suppressing my true self, by being 'invisible', then the outlook for my life is pretty bleak. Especially as I have abided by the law over the years, but even expressing my attractions openly appears to be too much for some to countenance. How far are we from Orwellian style 'thoughtcrime' laws, where the likes of me are locked up simply for desiring the wrong thing? As I've said before, there are many, especially on the religious right, who would happily round up every boylover in the world and throw us into the gas chambers, irrespective of whether restraint has been shown or not. Few would oppose such a move, either, I suspect, until it became clear that a precedent had been set, and the gas chambers began opening their doors to those who professed the 'wrong' religion or political affiliation, were born with the 'wrong' sexual orientation, possessed the 'wrong' skin colour....

Love & best wishes to all
Sammy B

2 comments:

  1. I noted the back and forth. Didn't feel like I should chime in, knowing that you are perfectly capable of handling it.

    Anyway...to your point...I'll be posting about a similar situation shortly. Been mentally composing it almost all day.

    Peace <3
    Jay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Jay
      I don't take any pleasure in falling out with people, but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit back and take anything that's said without expressing my opinions in return. Especially when such a retrograde step, going back to the 'love that dare not speak its name' closet is implied.
      Almost as retrograde as the government's education reforms. If they'd proposed a compulsory return to flogging and roasting small boys in front of fires, a la Flashman, it could hardly have been more backward-looking. Politicians, detest them or loathe them, you can't possibly like them.

      Love & best wishes
      Sammy B

      Delete