# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When my son was no more than three, he toddled up to a salesperson in the toy aisle of a department store and asked for a Polly Pocket. "Oh, but that's a girl's toy," she replied. My partner intervened promptly, assuring our son there was no such thing as a girl's or boy's toy, and asking to be directed to the right shelf. She recounted the story to me later with a mixture of rage and despair.

This was gender policing-when we learn to coerce one another to conform to gender norms. It begins at birth-or even before, if you throw a gender-reveal party. When I was born, a doctor held me upside-down by my feet, gave a gentle pat on the tush, inspected my genitalia, and told my mother, "Congratulations, you have a healthy baby boy. What's his name?" Shortly thereafter, an infant ID bracelet was prepared-strung with blue beads to denote my gender, and lettered beads with my surname. Before my first diaper change, I had a pronoun and a colour associated with me.

These are just examples of how little kids are confronting gender identity-and gender assumptions-long before a school curriculum might address it.

I've been an elementary school teacher and librarian for the last 18 years. Believe me: curriculum guidelines mandated by the government aren't introducing these topics to students-even the littlest kids are exploring this part of their identity already.

A little backstory: from 2015 until 2018, we taught gender identity and gender expression, as well as sexual orientation, to students in grades one to three. When Premier Doug Ford promised to repeal elements of the Ontario 2015 health and physical education curriculum, bringing us closer to the curriculum we had back in 1998, I knew it would be a terrible disservice to our kids, and worried about what his government was going to cook up.

I'm glad to see that the curriculum revisions released this week for the upcoming school year still include gender identity and gender expression, but the timing is dismaying: it won't come up (officially) in the classroom until Grade 8. (In the 2015 curriculum, it was a Grade 6 topic.) Sexual orientation won't be covered until Grade 5. And Ford's government says parents will now have a more formal way to exempt their kids from sex ed lessons, if they choose.

What message does the sex ed curriculum debate send to trans kids-and all kids?

Fae Johnstone, an Ottawa-based consultant, educator and community organizer, explains that this whole debate over what to teach, and when, has been detrimental to students.

What experts say kids need to learn in sex ed"What does that say to trans kids in those schools right now? I think the ripple effect that has on young folks, and young trans people in the classroom, is really significant," says Johnstone.

Johnstone, who is transfeminine, non-binary, and uses the pronouns "she" and "they," imagines what it would have meant if they had had access to this curriculum as a child, growing up in small communities.

"These were not discussions that were had. I didn't know that trans people even existed until I was almost out of high school," Johnstone explains. "If I had had the knowledge to explain myself and understand myself better, it would have spared me a lot of internal turmoil. And I would have had an environment where my peers were more likely to be accepting and affirming of who I was."

Carly Basian, a sexual health educator in Toronto, agrees that these topics are important for all children.

"It's not just transgender people for whom gender identity and gender expression is important-it impacts all of us. We all have gender, and it's important to have an understanding of that from a young age," says Basian.

It's also a health issue, says Nadine Thornhill, a Toronto-based sexual health educator. "Research indicates that there's a strong correlation between trans' kids mental and physical health, and the degree of acceptance they receive from their family, peers and community," she says.

All little kids explore gender in the classroom

For the past six years I've advised gay straight alliances in two different elementary schools, including kids in grades four through eight. I've worked with gender non-conforming children, and children who self-identify as transgender, as well as many kids whose sexuality is other than heterosexual. I'll never forget the little Junior Kindergarten boy who liked to wear dresses at home, and one spring day decided to wear a beautiful summer dress to school. During the period of time that I knew him, this child never said he was a girl, or voiced a desire to be a girl. He never asked us to use the pronouns she or her. Nor did he ask to be called by a different name. He led the way in his gender journey. There wasn't really any great intervention we needed to undertake as a staff-other than to respect his choices and encourage others to do the same. Clearly, his summer dress did not interfere with his, or anyone else's, ability to learn.

A few years ago, a colleague of mine overheard a Kindergartener saying, "Even though I'm a girl, I like playing with boys' toys." This prompted the teacher to undertake an inquiry with her class. She drew a Venn diagram to delineate which toys students thought were for girls, which were for boys, and which were for both.

I've tried similar activities with my students and, typically, as these exercises unfold, children tend to move more items into the both portion of the diagram. For instance, children might initially put dolls on the girls' side and trucks on the boys' side. After a period of discussion, individual kids tend to pipe up, and we find a number of boys who like dolls and girls who like trucks.

This teacher took it further. Her students then studied magazine ads and toy catalogues. They looked critically at the photos and asked some questions: Why were girls only seen with kitchen toys and taking care of babies? Why were boys shown performing a variety of other activities? The inquiry also revealed a needless gendering of toys-students found a picture in a catalogue, of boys with blue shopping carts and girls with pink. The children shrewdly observed that shopping carts are not gendered in stores in real life-they look the same.

Why are new parents still so obsessed with gender?The point is that kids are already questioning these norms. What this teacher did was create a space in which kids could voice their frustration over the ways in which their lives are gendered.

Around the corner from the library I tend to each day is the Kindergarten classroom of my co-worker John Paul Kane. A towering presence in a room full of very small children, JP is also a drag performer and one-half of Fay and Fluffy's Storytime. JP and his performance partner tour libraries, children's events and Pride festivals sharing stories with kids and their caregivers.

One heartbreaking recollection JP shares with me underscores the importance of a school environment that is open to a range of gender identity and expression. He tells me of a distraught Kindergarten student who eventually opened up to him about what was bothering him:

"I know you know me," the youngster said. "You know I look like a girl, but I know you know I am a boy in my heart." Thoughtfully, Kane asked what name and pronouns the child would like him to use. "You can call me by my name and you can also call me 'he' or 'she,' 'cause that is still who I am right now," he said.

"I was deeply touched that the child trusted me to share such a significant piece of themselves with me," says Kane. "The parents felt relieved that their child was beginning to share their true selves with others they cared about."

Getting creative

Some teachers are finding inventive ways to cover gender identity and gender policing, regardless of the timeline suggested by the government.

JP Kane engages his Kindergarten students early in the year in discussion about the learning centres they would like to have. "Last year we had a hair salon, a jewelry store, a flower shop and a bakery. We have discussions about their vision of how we can go about creating spaces that are safe and inclusive. We name the new shops, we including pricing and services available, and we ensure that we celebrate the opening day. We have talked at length about how all space in the classroom is for all students, regardless of gender."

Since 2009, Velvet LaCasse and fellow-teacher Shannon Greene have spearheaded Gender Splendour Week at The Grove Community School, a public alternative school in Toronto. Each April, the teachers plan a special week of programming that infuses activism into learning activities, including discussion of the links between gender stereotypes and homophobia.

One year, grade two and three students explored differences between t-shirts marketed to girls and boys. They then designed their own gender-neutral clothing. Later, the children wrote to a clothing company to suggest more inclusive alternatives for sorting and organizing their stores.

There are also some simple ways that teachers can avoid unnecessarily gendered language. When talking to high schoolers, Basian recommends the word "folks" over "guys." Rather than constantly addressing a group of students as "boys and girls," address them based upon the task or lesson: "OK, scientists," or "Listen up, mathematicians," or "Artists, it's time to tidy up."

I hope that parents, educators, and district school boards continue to push back on political efforts to defer-or allow families to opt out of-these discussions. Talking about gender and sexuality at school doesn't confuse our kids, it helps them ask and answer questions they already have.

Ultimately, it isn't about telling children what their gender is. It's about creating learning spaces that encompass all children, however they come to identify themselves.
Gordon Nore is a writer, activist and elementary teacher living in Tkaronto, unceded territory. (Twitter: @gordonnore)
Can you actually raise a baby free from gender?
What not to say to your kids when they see a genderqueer person on the street

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This is why young children need to explore gender identity in the classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When my son was no more than three, he toddled up to a salesperson in the toy aisle of a department store and asked for a Polly Pocket. "Oh, but that's a girl's toy," she replied. My partner intervened promptly, assuring our son there was no such thing as a girl's or boy's toy, and asking to be directed to the right shelf.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There is currently no consistent standard of sex, sexuality, gender and respectful relationships education across Australian schools. Each state and territory makes decisions about what they teach in schools. Additionally, religious schools have exemptions under anti-discrimination laws to decide how they approach these issues, and whether they include them at all.

Despite the gains made in the marriage equality debate, Australia has been unable to translate this into inclusive sex and sexuality education for young people. While countries such as England and Canada are adopting progressive, consistent sex education programs at a national level, Australia has not.

Read more: Australian sex education isn't diverse enough. Here's why we should follow England's lead

The federal Department of Education is spending A$5 million to develop resources to teach respectful relationships in Australian schools. According to one news report, these resources will not include topics on toxic masculinity, gender theory or case studies about young people's sexual activity. This project is a part of the women's safety package announced in 2015 by the Turnbull government, which seeks to educate young people about violence against women.

The federal government is quietly trying to distance these resources from Victoria's Respectful Relationships program, which has been criticised by some conservative commentators. Politics aside, there is an urgent need for these resources. Gendered violence against women and LGBTIQ people is too common in Australia.

No more federal funding for Safe Schools

Only a few years ago, Australia was very close to having a standard national resource for sex, sexuality and relationships education - the Safe Schools program. Its creators aspired to consistency across all state and territory educational jurisdictions in Australia, in line with the nationally consistent Australian Curriculum.

Safe Schools was designed as an evidence-based, educational anti-bullying program. The program had LGBTIQ inclusion at its core, and sought to create safe and inclusive environments for LGBTIQ students. Resources used to help deliver the program were developed by experts and carefully selected to ensure they were age-appropriate for the students using them.

The federal government stopped funding the program in mid-2017, following an extended public pillorying by conservative politicians and media commentators. This ranged from concern students were encouraged to cross-dress and role-play as gay teenages to false claims the program showed children how to masturbate and strap on dildos.

Read more: FactCheck: does the Safe Schools program contain 'highly explicit material'?

An inconsistent approach

Safe Schools has been replaced by an eclectic mix of programs, which vary from state to state. As a result, Australia has an inconsistent approach across state education systems.

In Victoria, the Building Respectful Relationships program was trialled in 2015 in response to recommendations Royal Commission into Family Violence and rolled out more broadly since 2016.

The program contains strong messages of healthy relationships, violence prevention and control, which young people can relate to, regardless of their situation. The program has received criticism claiming it's simply a repackaged version of the Safe Schools program. It runs concurrently with Safe Schools, which is now implemented in nearly all government secondary schools in Victoria.

Safe Schools programs are also run in one government school in the NT, 21 government schools in Tasmania and 24 government schools, 3 independent schools and 3 other educational settings in WA.

At the federal level, funding has been confirmed to make the John Howard-inspired school chaplain program permanent. The School Chaplaincy program is intended to support the social, emotional and spiritual well-being of school communities across Australia. This may include support and guidance about ethics, values, relationships and spiritual issues.

Federal discomfort with sex, sexuality and gender discussions

Scott Morrison has made a number of comments about LGBTIQ issues in his short time as Prime Minister. Morrison said schools don't need "gender whisperers", referring to an article which stated teachers were being taught how to spot potentially transgender students.

It has since been clarified teachers were being trained on how to support students if they identify as transgender, not to identify potentially transgender students.

Morrison has also brushed aside concerns about gay conversion therapy, and publicly stated he sends his children to a religious schools to avoid " skin curling " discussions about gender diversity and sexuality.

Other members of the Coalition have publicly echoed similar beliefs, including Tony Abbott and Tasmanian Liberal senator Eric Abetz who actively spoke out against voting "yes" in the same-sex marriage plebiscite for fear it would lead to a " radical sex education program for schools ".

A strong case for sexuality, gender and sex education

Gender and sexual diversity are part of the rich multicultural landscape of contemporary Australian society. But research indicates there's significant cause for concern about gender-based violence and family violence. Education about respectful relationships was identified as a key way to combat this in the Royal Commission into Family Violence.

Likewise, current research about young people and sex, sexuality and gender diversity is alarming. There are still high levels of mental health issues (such as depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicide) among LGBTIQ young people as a result of bullying, discrimination, and harassment at school and in the wider community.

The data indicate increasingly high rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among young people are also a significant concern. Rates of chlamydia and gonorrhoea diagnoses in Australia are highest amongst people aged 15-24 years.

Regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, research indicates young people need to be reliably informed about safe sex. The ramifications of not doing so are far too significant. Research shows school-based sexuality education improves sexual health outcomes for young people.

Likewise, Australia has unacceptably high rates of family, domestic and sexual violence, while gender inequality permeates most aspects of society. This can be mitigated through reliable education about healthy relationships. Family, domestic and sexual violence is not a sign of a healthy society.

Read more: Young people want sex education and religion shouldn't get in the way

Sex, sexuality, respectful relationships, and gender all need to be discussed in schools as a component of a whole-school approach. This should not only include in-class education, but it should also be addressed in school cultures, policies and procedures, and in gender equity among the staff.

This is important because we need safe, inclusive schools that celebrate diversity. It's also important to raise awareness among young people to mitigate family, domestic and sexual violence.
This article has been updated since publication to clarify that there are government schools in Victoria which run Safe Schools programs, and that the Building Respectful Relationships program is run concurrently, not as a replacement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why education about gender and sexuality does belong in the classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sex, sexuality, respectful relationships, and gender all need to be discussed in schools as a measure to combat discrimination against LGBTQ people, rising rates of STIs and violence against women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Happiness does not come solely from better marks. Shutterstock/Monkey Business Images

The usual discussions about children's schooling experiences often focus on academic achievement, personal development and school evaluation. Ask a teacher, parent or policy maker what is the most important thing a school should offer and many will say it is education: they want children to develop the knowledge and skills that will help them build a career and grow into successful adults.

Of course, they're concerned with the more personal elements of school as well. No one wants a child to be bullied or put into unsafe situations. Yet, as the emphasis on qualifications, performance, school ratings and teacher accountability increases, it's time to consider how the social elements of the schooling environment might be taken for granted, or at least overshadowed, by these educational discourses.

For the past three years, our research group at Cardiff University has been analysing the difference in boys' and girls' perceptions of their school experiences. Our study, involving approximately 1,500 pupils at 29 different primary and secondary schools across Wales has uncovered a wealth of information - not least that girls are simply less happy at school than boys.

How can this be? Traditionally, girls achieve better grades than boys at school, but why aren't they as happy as their male counterparts?

Shutterstock/racorn

We have surveyed pupils on a number of items including the learning environment of their school and the characteristics of these institutions as sites of socialisation, personal accomplishment and subjective well-being. Overall, we have uncovered several important differences in how participants feel towards their schooling, based on their gender.

Female pupils were more positive about the school as an institution than the boys, for example. They felt the school staff had high expectations of them, rewarded good marks and progress, and cared about their academic achievement. However, their responses about how they feel at school were quite different.

Nearly 25% of female pupils said they felt worried at school, compared to just 16.5% of the boys; approximately 24% of girls felt like they didn't "belong" at school, compared to only 8.8% of boys. Additionally, nearly 20% of girls disagreed that their school was a place where "my teachers know me well" compared to 12% of the boys participating. Unfortunately, our participants' responses don't improve as they progress in school. These questions were repeated in additional, annual sweeps and the negative responses were not only sustained, but in some cases, increased.

Gender and schooling

Previous studies from the American Psychological Association and UK organisation UCAS have found that, overall, girls perform better in most (or all) school subjects than boys, and that this trend has manifested in multiple countries since the early 20th century. The media often promote these findings through a type of moral panic, with advocate groups wringing their hands as they attempt to shape the discourse of a perceived threat to the development and future success of male pupils.

The "gender gap" in education is often attributed to a lack of male teachers. However, study after study has suggested that a teacher's gender has no measurable impact on pupils' academic achievement. Rather, girls seem to do better because they have positive perceptions of education, read more, study more (an American study, but our research corroborates this claim), and behave better than boys.

While boys' lower academic achievement in school is concerning, it is time to acknowledge that though girls may be performing better at school than boys, these experiences can be fraught with heightened feelings of doubt, alienation and anxiety.

Schools as social spaces

Schools are much more than places to learn, they are also sophisticated sites of social activity. The same social attitudes, practices and discourses at play outside the school exist within the crucible of these micro-social environments. It is important to remember that pupils don't shed the complexities of adolescent life when entering the halls of the school. If anything, they are intensified for some.

For the female pupils involved in our study, the realities of being a young woman in a patriarchally organised society remain explicitly and implicitly embedded in the social practices of schooling. For example, body image and social media activity are hot-topics linked to pressures that potentially increase girls' emotional problems. Reactions to these issues often focus on their impact on girls' lives without acknowledging how perceptions of women's bodies in society are constructed and reproduced, and schools serve as an apparatus in this process.

Though official attempts are being made to close the "gender gap", greater effort must be made to understand and improve pupils' (especially girls') social experience and well-being at school.

Engaging rather than retreating from concepts like gender fluidity in the daily processes of school and curricular materials can provide authentic learning opportunities to grapple with concepts of identity and gender.

Organisations like the Association of Teachers and Lecturers and the Gender and Education Association are already on the front lines, producing guidance for teachers to implement critical, transformative practices in the classroom. In addition to practical engagements with gender and identity - elements that affect the life of each pupil at school - the philosophical currents embedded in these new and emerging teaching practices have the potential to inform and invigorate a more inclusive educational ethos for schools, and a supportive and engaging environment for pupils.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Girls may perform better at school than boys - but their experience is much less happy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The usual discussions about children's schooling experiences often focus on academic achievement, personal development and school evaluation. Ask a teacher, parent or policy maker what is the most important thing a school should offer and many will say it is education: they want children to develop the knowledge and skills that will help them build a career and grow into successful adults.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the wake of the #MeToo movement, addressing gender inequality in New Zealand remains a challenge. As the first country to grant women the vote, we have a long way to go to until there's genuine equality across all genders.

Inequality spans gender-based violence (including sexual violence, intimate partner violence and family violence), women's participation in public life, women's representation in leadership roles, the continued gender pay gap, and the deteriorating position of minority and immigrant women.

Research has long indicated that gender inequality exists primarily because of the idea that there are two separate and different genders, with men and women thought to have different skills.

But gender is not biological or "naturally" tied to bodies. It is a product of culture and has varied considerably over time. I argue that we need to teach children about gender as early as possible to prevent sexism before it becomes ingrained.

Read more: Gender equity. The way things are going, we won't reach true parity until the 22nd century

Sex and gender

Since the enlightenment period, we've assumed that women and men are different but "complementary". This model is problematic because traditional masculine traits (assertiveness, rationality, aggressiveness) are more highly valued and associated with prominent social roles. Traditional feminine traits (nurture, sensitivity, intuitiveness) are associated with submissiveness and less socially valued roles.

It is now accepted that sex and gender are different things. The American Psychological Association has recently stated:

Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one's biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.

Read more: Parents can promote gender equality and help prevent violence against women. Here's how

More similar than different

Multiple reviews and meta-analyses of psychological literature have consistently found men and women are more similar than they are different when it comes to a host of psychological traits and mental functioning. These include cognitive performance, mathematical abilities, personality traits, social behaviours, emotions, aggression and leadership.

There are some biological realities such as pregnancy, child birth and lactation. But social and biological research indicates that outside of these, men and women are equally equipped for parenting and caregiving.

The focus needs to shift from being mostly on women, to changing the nature of gender relations, debunking gender polarity and promoting softer masculinity. Boys and men would also benefit from this, as it offers them more options for how they can be.

To do this, prevention strategies are needed to address the covert and overt sexisms that lead to gender inequality.

Gender equality education in schools

Gender equality education should begin when children enter the education system and continue throughout. This needs to address the history and nature of gender inequality and sexism. It also needs to provide students with the tools to dismantle rigid gender binaries (including sexism) and offer them more options for gender identification and expression.

Read more: Why education about gender and sexuality does belong in the classroom

Based on my own research, the research of others and the gender equality policies of the Swedish government, I make the following recommendations for New Zealand policy makers and educators:

gender equality education needs to start when children enter the education system and continue throughout

tenets of a gender equality approach (debunking rigid gender norms and gender polarity) need to be reflected in the school curriculum

training of teachers needs to incorporate gender theory and gender equality training

students need to be seen as more than the sum of their gender, but as complex people

each student needs to be approached as a sophisticated individual who is capable of embodying and desiring several changing gendered identities

the school curriculum needs to include lessons on the social production of gender, gender roles and gender categories

schools need to incorporate curricula on global citizenship, which includes an awareness and acceptance of diversity and the promotion of equality for all humans

schools need to include lessons on ethical sexual and relational practices towards all, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation (including in online communication)

the education system needs to identify and interrupt hetero-normative, hetero-sexist, and patriarchal practices that are part of society and, at times, part of school culture

schools need to introduce the use of gender-neutral language that challenges the boy/girl binary

school should provide gender-inclusive bathrooms for transgender and non-gender conforming students.

To address the ongoing manifestations of gender inequality in New Zealand, we need innovative thinking focused on prevention. Such an intervention would be research-based, aimed at curbing sexism and gender inequality before it occurs.

We know all violence is preventable. But preventing gender-based violence requires changing enduring norms and beliefs about the nature of gender and men's and women's roles within relationships and society. Gender equality education and teaching of ethical citizenship is a fresh direction that can redress entrenched patterns of sexism and gender inequality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beyond the binary: how teaching children about gender could help reduce sexism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the wake of the #MeToo movement, addressing gender inequality in New Zealand remains a challenge. As the first country to grant women the vote, we have a long way to go to until there's genuine equality across all genders.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's important for socialists to understand the nature of the oppression that disabled people face. There is no question that disabled people are oppressed - but our oppression has somewhat different roots to that of women or ethnic minorities.

Disabled people face discrimination every day in terms of negative attitudes and exclusion from wider society. But in the past we have faced much more extreme forms of repression.

In Germany during the 1930s, the first victims of the Nazis were 100,000 disabled people - or "inferiors", as they were called. People with physical and learning disabilities were butchered as a consequence of Hitler's ideology of "racial purity".

Their bodies didn't fit, so he got rid of them - before moving on to the Jews, Gypsies, trade unionists and so on.

So the oppression of disabled people, either historically or today, is no less than that of other oppressed groups in society such as women or black people. But it doesn't quite serve the same purpose - discrimination against disabled people arises from a slightly different economic motive.

Under capitalism, women are seen as a source of cheap labour (especially with regards to childcare) and a source for the reproduction of labour.

That is why capitalism has an interest in the continued oppression of women. It also has an interest in promoting racism as a means of weakening and dividing the working class, thereby driving down the costs of labour.

Profitability

For disabled people, the root of our oppression is the fact that capitalism sees everything in terms of profit and profitability - and this colours how capitalists view disabled workers.

Most employers see disabled employees as a "problem" - something difficult, something different, something that will cost them more to employ. That isn't to say that capitalists are incapable of realising that disabled people can be a source of cheap labour.

But the oppression starts from a different trajectory - the initial assumption is that disabled people are worthless under capitalism, rather than of great use within capitalism.

So the oppression of disabled people is a reflection of the way in which capitalism reduces everything to profit - effectively, capitalism says disabled people are surplus to requirements. This is especially true in periods of economic crisis - provision for disabled people is always one of the first things to be hit.

It's important that we understand the roots of disabled people's oppression, since that understanding also gives us clarity with regards to what we're fighting against - and why we're fighting against it.

The starting point for the disability movement is that you don't deny that impairments exist, that people have impairments. But the impairment, in and of itself, does not deny people access to employment, social integration, general wellbeing and so on. Those things are denied because society denies them.

They are denied when society fails to provide the means to overcome that exclusion, when it fails to provide access and employment to disabled people, when it chooses to segregate disabled people unnecessarily.

That is the starting point - what we call the social model of disability. And despite the huge steps forward in terms of awareness of these issues, much exclusion still exists.

Moreover, much disability exists because of the kind of society we live in. Large numbers of people across the world are disabled because of the poverty they live in - because of undernourishment, environmental pollution, a lack health and safety provision at their place of work, or because of the carelessness of capitalism.

Unemployed

Discrimination in the job market is a fact of life for people with disabilities. If you're disabled, you're three times more likely to be unemployed and six times more likely to be turned down after submitting a job application than if you're not disabled.

If you say you are disabled on your job application form, you are six times more likely not to be interviewed.

If you get an interview, you are six times more likely to be rejected for the job. And if we look at the question of wages, most disabled people are forced into poorly paid, low skilled jobs. That's the reality of life for disabled people in the job market.

One approach to dealing with this discrimination is that of organisations such as Remploy - government aided factories that employ people with disabilities. These government workshops are by and large something that's been fading out in recent years. Remploy in particular has been in the news because its factories are facing closure.

Traditionally what Remploy represented was the segregation of disabled workers - which is why large numbers of disability activists have long objected to the way Remploy is run.

Now Remploy workers are fighting to defend their jobs - but many disability charities have lined up with the government to say the factories should be closed.

While Remploy is something that socialists would want to see consigned to the past, the way to go about that is not by picking people off and forcibly throwing them into a job market that is hostile to them. We should fight for a job market where there is no longer any need for specialised workplaces to employ disabled workers.

The majority of disabled people earn lower wages, while living costs are frequently higher for disabled people. So it's not surprising that something like two thirds of disabled people live below the poverty line.

Historically the notion was that if a person was disabled, and if nobody could look after them, then they should be put into an institution of some sort. Nowadays the emphasis is on making sure that appropriate care can be provided at home - which is a real advance in terms of society's attitudes to disabled people.

More recently there have been further advances that question who controls that home care - the disabled person or the care agency.

If you're a disabled person there is no reason why you shouldn't prefer going to bed at 11pm rather than at 8pm because that suits somebody else. Your life shouldn't be lived as if you are in a hospital the whole time.

These changes are real, but there are problems. There is much fine talk from the government about liberating the care environment, giving disabled people real freedom and choice and so on. But in reality you often find the exact opposite is happening. The problem is that the funding is not there, especially at local authority level.

I work for a disability charity. We have people who ask us for more care and more support.

They'll say, "I'm on my own - I need somebody to come in at night because I need to go to the toilet at night. So I need somebody to come in for a couple of hours."

Humiliated

The response to these requests is increasingly becoming either (a) "Don't drink water before you go to sleep," or (b) "We'll provide you with incontinence pants."

So either you're totally humiliated or you're lying there thirsty. The government talks about providing "liberation" but won't provide the funds so that disabled people can make real choices.

In Camden, north London, where I live, there had been no charge for disabled home care - but this has changed recently. Anyone who has more than £30,000 in savings gets charged, as does anybody who receives disability living allowance.

So take a person whose sole income is income support and disability living allowance. Now local authorities are saying we want a big chunk of that disability living allowance back off you in order for us to provide you with care. You are effectively paying a disability tax.

I met the Tory councillor who introduced this change and he said, "This is New Labour policy - we're just doing what the government says we should do." Not many people realise you now basically have to pay for the "privilege" of being disabled.

We have to understand what is happening - and we have to understand that fighting for the rights of disabled people means fighting for a different kind of society, one where people's needs are the priority rather than profits.

This article is adapted from a meeting on The Politics Of Disablity at this year's Marxism festival. CD audio recordings of this and other Marxism meetings are available from Bookmarks " www.bookmarks.uk.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's important for socialists to understand the nature of the oppression that disabled people face. There is no question that disabled people are oppressed - but our oppression has somewhat different roots to that of women or ethnic minorities. Disabled people face discrimination every day in terms of negative attitudes and exclusion from wider society.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: Intersections of disability and race in police brutality cases

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: Intersections of disability and race in police brutality cases

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray: the toll of police violence on disabled Americans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than a third of Americans killed by police have a disability. It’s time to listen to black and disabled activists

# data[].attributes.headline
Podcast: Teaching Indigenous culture and history in our schools

# data[].attributes.subject
Podcast: Teaching Indigenous culture and history in our schools

# data[].attributes.body
Dr Melitta Hogarth & Dr Louise Zarmati discuss how the teaching of Indigenous histories and cultures has changed over time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The days when school students were taught that Captain Cook "discovered" Australia may well be over, but are we providing students and their teachers with enough cultural knowledge to understand Australia's Indigenous past and future?

We look at how the teaching of Indigenous histories and cultures has changed over time.
Guests:
Dr Melitta Hogarth, Assistant Dean (Indigenous) at the Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Dr Louise Zarmati, Lecturer in Humanities and Social Sciences at the Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teaching Indigenous culture and history in our schools - ABC listen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are we providing students and teachers with enough knowledge to understand Australia's Indigenous past, present and future?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"How Studying Privilege Systems Can Strengthen Compassion": Peggy McIntosh at TEDxTimberlaneSchools

# data[].attributes.headline
Australian Education Blog Post: The ignorance of our shared history is shocking

# data[].attributes.subject
Australian Education Blog Post: The ignorance of our shared history is shocking

# data[].attributes.body
Written by Dr Melitta Hogarth