London Schools: Brace Yourselves for another round of Oftsed Discrimination under the guise of “Extremism”
Brace yourselves for round two of forced assimilation in schools, twists, lies and distortions to maintain the fear-mongering around the most dreaded of all people, Islam and Muslims.
This time a Church of England school has been placed into measures because there was inadequate protection from “Islamist extremism” due to lack of oversight of an Islamic Society run by Muslim students.
The school has many accolades, including rapid improvement, outstanding performance and a committed team leading the school. However, the neocon-compromised and biased, agenda-driven Ofsted felt it necessary to place it in special measures for some rather conspicuous reasons which are familiar to the Muslim minority.
One of the issues raised was the allowing of separations between boys and girls in the playground. One report noted,
Local education sources have accused Ofsted of over-reacting – saying it was “taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut”… Defenders of the school point out that the playgrounds were also segregated at the time of previous Ofsted reports which proclaimed the school “outstanding”.
And so the new (anti-Muslim, neocon PREVENT-inspired) standards are now taking effect further afield. The underlying issue is that the pupils being segregated are Muslim, and this was perfectly exemplified in the fact that one school had been praised for being “innovative” for separating boys and girls in a class. The difference here was the school was not Muslim-majority.
Another key issue according to reports revolves around the activities of Facebook site setup by the Islamic Society which contained links to hard-line “Islamist preachers”.
Sky News, in whipping up the hysteria struggled to find anything extreme which would be deemed questionable on the YouTube channel, it seems. The report has been playing an excerpt from a video on the YouTube channel. I need to break this part of the report down because frankly, this is ridiculous and possibly even defamatory.
Sky News reports that,
The Facebook page appears to have been taken down, but in a video still visible on the society’s YouTube channel, a preacher suggests Muslims should tell men who are “a bit feminine” to “be a real man”. The preacher is not thought to have been addressing the Islamic society at the school.
Now, just before this, the context is set that the Islamic Society’s Facebook page had links to “hard-line Islamist” speakers. I would like to know how Sky News’ interpretation of statements made in a video (to which I will turn to in a moment) are “hard-line” and “Islamist”. Substantiation of this would go a long way – it would help Muslims to attune their behaviour in concordance with the neocon, white elite’s wishes, and give a little guidance to schools to ensure the “right” type of Muslim is carved.
Would Sky News, and perhaps Ofsted have any problems if a school in a white, non-Muslim area had a student society which had linked to an article on Ask Men, and which declares that the traits of a real man include him staying away from gossip and defending himself? Would this be regarded as white, liberal extremism? The absurdity of highlighting this clip is self-evident and would be enough to render the report as ridiculous except that the insinuation made by report is not found in the actual lecture. It is not ridiculous. It is an outright lie.
Beneath the above-quoted statement is a clip of the actual words, said in humour, which have been transcripted below,
“You have a guy who is a bit epicene, a bit feminine, you know he’s a [laughs], and you say to him, and you say to this brother, bro, be a man, what do you mean be a man, he’s already a man, so what are you saying to him, you are saying be a real man, and this is what Allah says in the Quran, O you who believe, believe. Be true believers.”
Seriously, is this journalism?! Concocting misleading “suggestions”?! Perhaps the concept of analogy has not dawned upon Sky News. How can an analogy to emphasise a point about being committed to faith suggest, “Muslims should tell men who are “a bit feminine” to “be a real man”. The message is clear for anyone with an ounce of intelligence to muster.
In another report by the Daily Mail, Shaykh Omar Sulieman is targeted for not saying anything extremist in the Islamic Society’s YouTube channel. Yes. According to the report the video makes references to easing grief and yet the school has been marked down for inadequate safeguarding. The problem is the Shaykh’s views posted elsewhere which were not referenced by or presented by the students. In other words the school is being punished for students linking videos to a conservative scholar who does not agree with homosexuality. A mere association with a conservative Islamic position has resulted in the school being placed into special measures. This preposterously ridiculous position is simply bigoted in its targeting of Islam. One wonders what the take would be if a Christian society had links to anti-gay Bishops and priest – would the Catholic Church schools be deemed extremist because the Catholic synod rejected proposals for wider acceptance of gay people? Why have not the “narrow” curriculums of Orthodox Jewish schools be brought into the discourse of “extremism”? And, as the poet and writer Michael Rosen Tweeted highlighting the duplicitous standards of neocon Michael Gove, will the links between state-funded Lubavitch schools and illegal West Banks settlements be investigated for “extremism”?
The “extremism” card-dropping has become the discriminatory practice by which right-wing racists and neocons in the government hide their prejudice against Islam and Muslims.
There is no need to hide behind convoluted words: the counter-extremism agenda has become a counter-Islam and Muslims agenda. From the blatantly anti-Muslim behaviour of the Ofsted inspectors as highlighted in earlier blogs, to the bandying of labels of extremism upon Muslim speakers to fulfil a neocon political objective. The Claystone report on charities highlighted some key issues which highlighted the problematic nature of the definition of extremism, and the shadowy method which is being used to apply it. The same problems and incoherence is afflicting a biased Ofsted.
Article originally posted here
I am 56 years old and I went to a single sex grammar school and it was beneficial to me as a young woman as I was protected from gender stereotypes so I spent my teens believing I could be anything I wanted to be. I hate religious intolerance and am personally very critical of the way Palestinians are treated by Israel and the world does nothing. I hate islamophobia.
Whilst I also hate the overt sexualised media and its portrayal and objectification of women it is my belief that conservative women’s dress also objectifies women. Both extremes are equally wrong the former displays women’s bodies as comodities for sale, the latter reserves women’s bodies as a possession of her male relatives which to me as a feminist who believes in equality between the sexes is alsoobjectifying women. When I grew up in the West Midlands in the 1970’s my Muslim girl friends didn’t cover their heads they looked just like everyone else. Perhaps if those who practice Islam fought for equal rights for women then there would be more understanding. I have similar objections to what Orthodox Judaism does to women, but that is not an argument for here but I include it so that you can believe that my argument is not snit Islamic but pro female.
Samy Merchant, regrettably, your mind appears to be a colonised one. Why are you so insistent on blaming Muslims who choose to wear certain attire – the irony of course in doing so is that it is you who comes across as being rigid, inflexible and dictatorial. When Westerners travel abroad, take ex-pats for example, do they wear the local customary clothing of the land they reside in, I think you will find that the answer is No. In fact, you will find that they live in their own compounds and enclaves, not even mixing with the local people. Please free your mind from such bigoted views.
It is AGAINST the sunnah to wear a thowb or shalwar khamis in Britain to show your Muslim identity. Let Dr. Haitham Al-Haddad and all the other British “Salafis” at islam21c listen to this lecture by Shaykh Yasir Qadhi:
“Islamic Reform – Destruction, Progress or Necessity? ~ Dr. Yasir Qadhi | 9th November 2014”
I am “rigid, inflexible and dictatorial” because when it came to dress, Prophet Muhammad (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) was “rigid, inflexible and dictatorial.” He wore the dress of the pagan Arabs (Abu Jahal, Abu Lahab etc) and refused to change this pagan dress style, even after he became a prophet. So you MUST follow Prophet Muhammad (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) and wear the dress of the pagan British and refuse to change it.
But perhaps the biggest reason why British Muslims will get extinct is because they just don’t get involved. They want to live segregated. And they are scared chicken to voice their opinions. Just look at this website. Thousands of hits, but just see how many people comment. You can count them on your fingers!
You seem quite certain of “British Muslims” being “extinct”. Do you support the “final solution” echoed by some neocons and the far-right in the US?
Of course, I don’t support it. But fools who wear a thowb or shalwar khamis in Britain, thinking they are looking Muslim and following Islam, have no one but themselves to blame if they end up like the dinosaurs in your Natural History museum in London.
…under the “DESI PARENTS WITH SALAFI CHILDREN” exhibit.
Oh really?? If we do not conform to societies norms we are branded as extremists etc. When we try and make our voices heard then we become too demanding. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t!!
S. Merchant “And they are scared chicken…..” Oh please!!! Prehaps some people are too busy living LIFE to get involved in petty tit-for-tat with antagonists, like yourself. After all some of us have friends that we would discuss issues with rather than have faceless dialogue with strangers. I think you are on the wrong site mate, this suits you better. In more ways than one!
The reason why British Muslims may one day be exterminated is because they made Islam inflexible. They made it rigid,”…you cannot trim your beard below a fist, your pants must be cut above your ankles, celebrating birthdays and anniversaries is an innovation, you should wear a kufi, a shalwar khamis or a thowb, you should look different…” They made Islam puritan, they made it “Salafi”. They failed to realize that Islam is flexible and adaptable. They failed to see the difference between religion and culture. They failed to see that Allah made our religion adaptable in His wisdom because He knew that one day we would live in the West.
The British Muslims become rigid like the Bani Israel-like the Jewish passengers who refused to sit next to women on an El-Al flight from Tel Aviv to New York, so they stood the entire 11 hours in the isle!!! Or the Jew who wrapped himself in a giant plastic bag while sitting in an airplane next to a woman!!! Like the Tableeghi Jamaat passaengers who blocked the isles in an airliner, while praying. Like the “Salafi” teacher who refused to show an educational video to his engineering students in college, because it had non-Muslim women without hijaab!!!
It amazes me that a British Muslim, born and raised in Britain, wears a thowb or Shalwar khamis and a cap! It amazes may that a British Muslimah, born and raised in Britain, wears a black niqaab! But what amazes me even more is when a Muslim scholar, LIVING IN BRITAIN, does this!
Why do you keep banging on about this? You clearly have not understood the difference between religious injunctions and incidental, cultural phenomena. This is why you lump together beards, niqabs and curry. What difference is there therefore between the depth of your analysis and that of the Daily Mail?
Long beards are cultural (believe it or not!), black niqabs are cultural, and curry, especailly with “National” masala, is cultural. Many “religious injunctions” practiced by British Muslims are just foreign culture with NO reward from Allah!
And probably they are punishable as they cause offense.
Again keep your reductionist neocon narrative which seeks to equate a perceived rigidity to “extermination” thus clandestinely giving an excuse for Muslim ethnic cleansing.
It amazes me that a person lecturing about integration fails to recognise the secular liberal paradigm which purportedly guarantees freedom of conscious and belief and makes discrimination based on this illegal. It smacks of ignorance of the values which are paraded in the media as “British” but enforced only against the Muslim minority through labels of extremism. It also highlights your lack of knowledge of international law on minorities, legal instruments like the ICCPR, which ensures the unique expression of religions and races. Your comment, if anything, smacks of bigotry using the standards which are employed IN BRITAIN and purportedly adhered to.
The Muslims faced the “extermination” of the Crusaders and Tartars, dont expect Muslims to give up their Islamic identity just because bigots find particular manifestations distasteful.
Ofsted inspections of independent – as opposed to state – schools are fraught with controversy because it is a case of the government interfering with a private enterprise and measuring it by its own yardstick and set of standards designed for use with state schools. Summerhill school has been a classic case of a complicated situation with Ofsted because of its highly non-standard curriculum and methods of teaching. Therefore it always gets bad Ofsted reports not because it is poor quality but because it is so non-standard.
The fact of the matter is that Ofsted will flag up ANY school for extremist views and radicalisation if it does not promote liberal social values such as gay rights or feminism. This applies even if the children are 100% white and British and the school is run under Christian values. At the moment the attention is on Islam so secular and Christian schools which flout liberal social values are likely to receive a ‘slap on the wrist’ treatment and very little media coverage compared with Islamic schools.
The only people that are enjoying life in the UK are the Jews. They live in communities, have their own ambulances, schools, universities and remain unchallenged in this. While they use their influence to make sure that other communities don’t achieve the same. If other communities strive to prosper they use the media to portray a take over, a plot a conspiracy.
Please be careful. So much negativity on a website might cause an otherwise normal Muslim youngster to start hating the West and turn to terrorism! You absolutely MUST have some articles about some good things Western governments have done for Muslims, just to balance things out.
Samy Merchant, instead of asking Muslims to bury their head in the sand against legitimate grievances how about commenting on the article itself. Do you have a view on the topic rather than lecture us on how to behave?
Article is excellent; Why pick on Muslims only?
My problem is that it is not healthy too bombard our Muslim minds with all these negative articles. There should be a mix. Of course, Muslims should not bury their head in the sand. But the middle path…please
You analysis seems awfully similar to neocons and the far-right. Knowledge of Western hypocrisy, double standards and ideologically motivated violence will turn to terrorism. Is this analysis based on the hate, smears, stereotypes and conflation of Islam with crime by the media, blogs (by neocons who incidentally also run think-tanks which advise government on counter-extremism policy) and politicians which leads to the common far-right thug unable to articulate himself in the English language as well as the victim he is attacking?
Advise the majority before dictating your colonialism to a minority.
The general feeling in England towards Muslims is one of disgust and fear. This feeling is growing and is present at all levels of society. As extremist harm more people in the world Muslims in the UK will face more discrimination and hostility.
This is a lot because British Muslims insist on looking different. They think that they are religiously obligated to look different. But they are only obligated not to imitate the RELIGIOUS dress and customs of others. British Muslims fail to distinguish between religion and culture. When you look different, eat different, talk different, smell different, guess what’s going to happen; People will begin to hate you! It’s only natural. But Islam is a flexible religion. It can adapt to ANY culture. Allah has made it so, so as to make living in non-Muslim countries easy for us.
PS I am amazed at the man who wears a thowb or Shalwar Khamees in the West. And I am amazed at the woman who wears a black niqaab in the West. And I am even more amazed when a Muslim scholar does this!
“When you look different, eat different, talk different, smell different, guess what’s going to happen; People will begin to hate you! It’s only natural.”
Going by the above statement, it is perfectly logical for a black person to hate a white person, or a man to hate a woman, or a vegan to hate a meat eater all because they might look, smell, talk or eat differently – what an absurd statement!
Where is your intelligence, Mr. Shrafner? The varibles in my paragraph are NOT inherited. They are practiced by choice-bad choice. Your variables, being black, white, man or woman, you were born with. Please use some intelligence next time. Thank you.
Please Mr. Shrafner, if a person wants he or she can smell nice!
What gives OFSTED the right, or indeed any Brits, to preach to minority groups about how they should live their lives. This is a cosmopolitan country, the Muslim community have the right to educate their children how they choose. What has being British got to do with your religious belief? In Britain there are Hindus Sikhs pagans Jewish Buddhists atheist Zoroastrians Rasta’s and many more should they all change there religious beliefs because they are British? Studying the Qur’an will certainly help towards these children becoming fully integrated citizens of the UK.
Ofsted should be an advisory body – full of experts who are able to support and guide schools into a better service for our young people. Instead, figures are massaged, teachers bullied, children get a raw deal and all because there are ‘standards’ to be reached or else the brown stuff hits the fan. The standards seem to me to be all wrong; my children’s first school had a motto ‘learning with love and loving to learn’. From what I have seen in primary schools throughout my 20 years (I have just thrown in the towel) is a continual drive to get children to higher standards quicker than ever which tends to overlook the fact that they are children and need time to explore and assimilate their learning. Child-centred learning should be top of the agenda with Ofsted helping to achieve the goals. We get what we pay for and currently we have a system which berates rather than supports.
Ofsted had to abandon an inspection of a private primary school after pupils as young as nine were questioned about their attitudes to homosexuality. Parents were concerned after children told them inspectors had spoken privately to a group of nine and ten-year-olds at the Muslim school, asking them: ‘What does the word gay mean?’ and ‘Is it used in a bad way at school?’It is claimed the children were also asked about terrorism and whether it was discussed. Ofsted was forced to cut short its visit to Olive Tree Primary School in Luton after parents threatened to withdraw their children. Glulam Shah, 40, said his ten-year-old son came home complaining about being asked ‘scary and weird questions’. He said the inspector told his son not to be offended, adding: ‘It’s just a part of the law we have to ask you.’ Ofsted apologised for upsetting parents, but a spokesman said: ‘As part of any school inspection, inspectors will ask pupils about the effectiveness of the school’s actions to prevent and tackle discriminatory and derogatory language – including homophobic language’ This is outrageous….trying to open a conversation about homosexuality or indeed any kind of sexuality with a 9 year old…..without parental consent…and without the parents being present…heads must roll…that inspector must be sacked…. Aren’t Ofsted aware that the attitude towards same sex relationships is not exactly wonderful in Catholic and Church of England schools? Some gay and lesbian teachers have found it so difficult working in Christian faith schools that they have either left or had breakdowns. If the OFSTED inspectors had put the same question to the parents, I wonder how they might have responded?
These Ofsted inspectors should resign for frightening young children with their sexual views. Ultimately, it is parents, not teachers, who are responsible for their children’s moral teaching and guidance. And in this case in Luton, the parents exercised their parental responsibilities, fully. These questions you raise are of sexual and moral matters, that certainly should not be put to young children without the presence or consent of their parents, who have exercised their parental rights by threatening to remove their children from the school in Luton if Ofsted inspectors were allowed to continue their cross examination of young children about their views on homosexuality. OFSTED, failed teachers, failed pupils. Muslim schools should be inspected by Muslim members of the Ofsted who understand their needs and demands. Non-Muslim inspectors and teachers are not in a position to inspect and teach in Muslim schools. Ofsted should concentrate on the standard of education in core subjects like English, Math and Sciences. Ofsted reports on 4 areas for every school, Teaching and learning, Management, Pupil behaviour and Achievement. It is very difficult to work out which of these groups would cover the questioning highlighted in this article. Sounds like Ofsted making things up as they go along.
Who can blame these parents? What kind of person asks questions like those to a 9 year old? Ofsted is out of control. This country is being turned upside down by some ideological approach which has nothing to do with ‘good parenting’. Children, note CHILDREN do not need these sorts of questions. By all means teach them about tolerance and respect for the law, but let children be children. A subject? Why homosexuality and not pornography then? What other attitudes should be checked off the list? How many attitudes should be checked? Or are some attitudes less ‘acceptable’ to the thought police than others? This is unadulterated political correctness gone nuts. The problem as it was expressed at the beginning of the article is not primarily with the question per se, but with the fact that the children were left alone with an adult they didn’t know and then asked these questions. That is surely utterly inappropriate. Indeed, if I were an Ofsted inspector I would refuse to see a child without an accompanying adult because of the danger of molestation accusations. Ofsted’s inquisitorial style and political correctness have both gone crazy. There are ways of finding out about children’s attitudes by simply listening on the playground and listening and observing in class. Honestly, I think this country is going mad… It is no ones business what your attitude is to homosexuality, let alone expecting a nine year old to even have an opinion. What are they going to do if they reply that “its a bit weird” Ask them about their bikes or roller skates or favourite pets. They are children for God’s sake!!
This is really a story about the very very variable quality of inspection teams. It’s a well known fact in education, and it damages the integrity of Ofsted as an inspectorate. The people who run Ofsted should be held accountable. There are some good teams, and some very poor ones. Who quality controls them? Those people should be made accountable. The problem with Ofsted, I think, is its leader. One who’s more interested in appearing in the media and playing “philosopher king” off his territory than ensuring his organisation is run properly. It seems ridiculous to me that he went straight from being a head teacher to running the inspectorate. Don’t think he’d ever run an organisation at all.If someone officially pulled rank on me (similar to Ofsted inspectors); and demanded to know my sexual views, I would tell them to sod off, and go and get a life. Unfortunately, the children in question, did not have the years of experience to do this when confronted by Ofsted inspectors, who should be more concerned about the education in Luton, from personal experience of living there and looking after 3 small children, it is not so good. Many people who are followers of some religions are uneasy about homosexuality, indeed it is proscribed by them, and whatever the more liberal demand their belief is unlikely to change. What is the response going to be from Ofsted if a child states that practising homosexuality is wrong and against their religion’s teaching, that of course being what they are taught at home ? It is not the school that is teaching this it is in all their religious teachings and books- e.g. the Bible.
If 8 out of 10 schools are getting good or outstanding why is that not a headline? That would be positive & when the next Pisa comes out & shows no improvement the government would be made to look stupid because the 8 out of 10 schools are good or outstanding is BS just like much of what Ofsted say. Ofsted are a political tool used to show progress to the electorate & win votes. Their comments, inspections & judgements are utterly, utterly worthless. Wilshaw was just on radio 4 and he seemed to reject the proposal that parents have any responsibility for their children’s attitude to learning and behaviour, preferring to point out that Head teachers ‘have tremendous powers to set the culture’. This wilful blindness is what has hindered the progress of too many students in mainstream state schools for too long.
One of the most remarkable things about this whole through-the-looking-glass “debate” is that the media still treat OFSTED as anything other than a bad joke. OFSTED are corrupt, incompetent, self-serving and redundant parasites. There are plenty of cases which demonstrate that an OFSTED “judgement” has slightly less value than wet toilet paper, and Michael Wilshaw is an oafish buffoon so lacking in intelligence that he finds it absolutely impossible to imagine that there might be any other way of teaching than the one he used himself thirty years ago. Yet when he opens his bowels and ***** out his latest attack on teachers, the media treat it as if it’s the bloody word of God. Incredible. Whether Ofsted’s reports are accurate is a perfect example of luck.
Look at the way Ofsted subcontracts the inspection work. Do we have any actual Ofsted employees working consistently together to improve schools. Many inspectors are retired teachers, lead inspectors have full-time posts in schools. The teams are ad hoc and only visit schools for two days before walking away without any responsibility for their judgements, which are increasingly meaningless to students, parents and teachers.Ofsted is a fraud. What’s the difference between a plastic surgeon and an Ofsted Inspector? A plastic surgeon tucks up features. Actually, a good Ofsted report can often be down to luck. Take a look at the Secret Teacher’s posting in the Guardian on Saturday 10 November 2012. The article is entitled: ‘Dear Ofsted inspector, I am giving you notice to improve’. Can we be brave enough to do away with Ofsted altogether and instead bring about a revolution by investing in good teachers?
Ofsted don’t know their **** from their elbow, who on earth would work for such a miserable organisation? Always so negative, positives are only ever begrudgingly given. Miserable, miserable bastards. Quite honestly I’m bored to tears hearing about Ofsted and the latest pronouncement from Wilshaw on what is wrong with state education. Maybe just maybe people don’t give a **** anymore given all the BS politicians, ‘experts’ and prates like Wilshaw keep giving us. Out of curiosity, I read the Ofsted Inspector’s Manual recently. One might expect a manual to contain instructions. This particular manual was 148 pages but, if you removed the waffle, it could have been summarised in a single page. Apart from a dozen repetitions of the need to reduce stress on those being inspected (without saying how that would be achieved) it contained no instruction whatever. It was certainly not a manual by any normal definition of the word. I did wonder if it was conceived and authored by early products of its own creation. The abolition of Ofsted is long overdue. An inspector speaks. OFSTED are an obstacle, a hindrance an irrelevance to a good education. It is their raison d’etre.
The questioning about homosexuality is badly handled but probably comes from good intentions. The more worrying line of questioning is mentioned near the end of the article: ‘The inspectors also asked the children if they had seen anything on the news about terrorism that they had discussed in class.’ What concerns do they have about Muslim pupils’ knowledge of terrorism? The article doesn’t elaborate but if I was a parent at this school I’d be furious about this. It’s actually quite chilling. There is absolutely no need to talk to children sex. Homophobic or not. I wouldn’t be bloody happy about pseudopod talk to a child. It’s not right you sick people. Whatever happened to pubescent sex education ???? WHY OH WHY CAN’T WE ALLOW CHILDREN THEIR INNOCENCE? If I was a nine year old boy, alone in a room with a strange man, and that man started asking me those sorts of questions, I would be worried that he was going to sexually abuse me. Leave them alone to grow up. The majority are not homophobic, racist or sexist in a playground. They are picking bullying for whatever reason. They are kids. The snap out of it during secondary school. Usually rebelling against whatever they were taught to hate. Leave them alone.
The problem is the Islamification of schools through the sheer weight of numbers of Muslims in them. Attitudes to gays and terrorism may be some kind of litmus test for such Islamification but Ofsted seem to have approached this in a clumsy and insensitive way. The elephant in the room is that if you have a school full of Muslims then it is always going to be an Islamist school. It’s too late to avoid that now. Islam outlaws homosexuality. It’s perfectly reasonable to ensure children forced into a religion and a religious school by their parents are educated and accepting, and generally set up to become good citizens. It’s also reasonable to suspect a Muslim school, wouldn’t encourage acceptance of homosexuality, or discourage playground negativity towards it.
The parent(s) of children being asked seemingly rather directly about “gays” might have reported this directly to the Police and demanded an investigation. There could have been accusations of ‘grooming’, surely there should have been two people in the room when such a question is put? Should the Ofsted inspector concerned have turned out to be homosexual, perhaps a question that some of the parents might have posed, then there could have been repercussions. Certainly it would have been used by the ‘Tabloids’. If the matter is accurately reported then Ofsted are behaving in a really insensitive and probably incompetent manner. Religions may variously accommodate homosexuality but their adherents may certainly resist attacks on their beliefs and therefore their freedom. Hinduism outlaws homosexuality. So does Sikhism, Buddhism, Judaism and Christianity! I have been a Governor of a Muslim school and I would have been up in arms if I found out such questions were asked to small kids and no mention was made in any Governors training regarding school inspections that this kind of question were asked. Faith schools do not condone same sex relationships, this is true of Catholic and C-o-E schools – so does seem unfair to focus on an Islamic school. Ofsted needs to be put into special ensures as it is clearly not fit for the purpose. Let’s hope this is the final nail. Get a grip OFSTED and stop trying to find pathetic ways to demonise the Muslim faith schools! Ofsted is behaving like the Stasi used to do in East Germany. There is no place for this kind of surveillance in a free society.