Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Girl Guides are now GIRL ONLY! - Thread 2

741 replies

CohensDiamondTeeth · 03/12/2025 07:41

I hope no one minds me starting thread 2, I clicked post on my last reply but the thread had filled up.

There was some interesting discussion had, and on the last page @LostMySocks posted that she was thinking of sending a positive email to HQ, which I think sounds like a great idea. Maybe those who support this move could do the same? It would show Girl Guides that people are paying attention.

Link to the first thread here: Girl Guides are now GIRL ONLY! | Mumsnet

The first post of the thread was so good I'm just going to copy and paste it here too. Girl Guides statement is incredibly begrudging in tone.

@Iamwhoiamwhoareyou · Yesterday 14:41

Following April's supreme court ruling, the Girl Guides have FINALLY made a statement and will remain GIRLS ONLY - Finally closing the door on admitting trans members or allowing BOYS to invade female only spaces/camp (which, would be done without informing parents that their daughter would be sharing a room with a biological male!) - I have a previous post in feminism chat for anyone wanting to read the previous thread on this

EMAIL RECEIVED HOT OFF THE PRESS 5 MIN AGO -

As the parent of a young member in Girlguiding, following April’s Supreme Court decision relating to sex and gender, we wanted to give you an update. Many organisations across the country have been facing complex decisions about what it means for girls and women and for the wider communities affected, including us.

Girlguiding’s governing charity documents set out that the membership and people who benefit from our organisation are girls and women. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that girls and women are defined in the Equality Act 2010 by their biological sex at birth.
Following detailed considerations, expert legal advice and input from senior members, young members and our Council, Girlguiding’s Board of Trustees has made the difficult decision that Girlguiding must change Girlguiding must change, following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

From today, 2 December, it is with a heavy heart that we are announcing trans girls and young women will no longer be able to join Girlguiding. This is a decision we would have preferred not to make, and we know that this may be upsetting for members of our community.

There will be no immediate changes for current young members but more information will be shared next week.

Most adult roles, including unit helpers, district helpers and administrative support, are already open to all, so we are confident that no volunteers will have to leave the organisation.

Girlguiding believes strongly in our value of inclusion, and we will continue to support young people and adults in marginalised groups. Over the next few months, we'll explore opportunities to champion this value and actively support young people who need us.

You can find our full statement and updated policy on our website.

We are proud to be the UK’s largest youth organisation dedicated to girls and is focused on creating an equal world for girls and young women. For over 100 years, we have been a welcoming space for all girls to have new experiences, support their communities, build friendships and grow their confidence.

While Girlguiding may feel a little different going forward, these core aims and principles will always be the same. We remain committed to treating everyone with dignity and respect, particularly those from marginalised groups that have felt the biggest impact of this decision.

If you have any immediate questions, we have our special support team in place, to give volunteers, parents and carers the best support we can. We are asking Girlguiding HQ, trading and country/region staff to refer any volunteer or parent who has questions about this announcement. Details below.

Contact [email protected] or 020 7532 3970
All calls/emails will be confidential, and the service will be open 24hrs, 7 days a week.
Find out more, including how this team will handle personal data.

Denise Wilson (Chair of Trustees), Felicity Oswald (CEO) and Tracy Foster (Chief Guide)

https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/mango-data-privacy-policy.pdf?utm_campaign=1859632_EDI%20update%20for%20parents%202%20December%202025&utm_medium=email&utm_source=dotdigitalemails

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
Shedmistress · 04/12/2025 22:31

A child cannot consent to an absence of a full adult life which includes sex and relationships. Transitioning your child is robbing them of their full adult future. I can't believe parents are arguing for this, it is unconscionable.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:29

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:20

No it's not the place to start but it IS part of the picture when it comes to transwomen.

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

Show quote history

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

You say that, yet on this thread you are talking about how your child is affected by this guiding decision and his realisation that he is not (treated as) a girl.

Rather having introspection and realising that (your) lies have caused this harm to him you would rather blame women for not putting your male child first.

You may not think you are harming your child, you think we are because we are all big meanies. You are massively wrong.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:28

The disconnected thinking is startling.

Original poster
CohensDiamondTeeth · 04/12/2025 22:26

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:08

But it doesn't automatically raise levels of safety in every case, does it? Abusers will still come into a single sex spaces with the intent to do harm.

Show quote history

And you're circular arguing, we've been over this with you already.

Bad men will [do bad thing] anyway so why bother even putting up barriers in the first place?

And again I ask you, why bother to lock your house when you go out? Burglars will burgle you anyway!

I'm sure your bad faith discussion and blatant misogyny on these two threads have been eye opening for many people. So I guess thanks for that?

The world is finally waking up to how female rights and boundaries were being wheeched away from biological females, so your boy and all other men are just going to have to deal with it.

If your story is real and you socially transitioned a 3 year old (or younger given Helle pointed out he was in Brownies not GG), it would be easy to make a very good argument that you have abused your son. It's clear from your posts that you are encouraging him to abuse females, because that's what using girls and female single sex stuff is, an abuse. So slow hand claps for you on that front too.

I am hugely sceptical that this is real, although I do accept that these kinds of people do exist, it was the pre-verbal child bit that really sounded the alarm for me.

You socially transitioned a 3 year old, but by your own admission you basically socially transitioned a baby who couldn't even talk yet. That is utterly shocking, and yes absolutely abuse IMO.

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:26

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:20

No it's not the place to start but it IS part of the picture when it comes to transwomen.

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

Show quote history

You have bullied and personally attacked me on this thread. And not once acknowledged that you have done this.

The hypocrisy is rather blinding with this post.

Throckmorton · 04/12/2025 22:26

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:20

No it's not the place to start but it IS part of the picture when it comes to transwomen.

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

Show quote history

You have encouraged your child to believe in a lie for more than half his life, and that lie is going to make the rest of his life very challenging.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:24

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:20

No it's not the place to start but it IS part of the picture when it comes to transwomen.

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

Show quote history

Oh come on. Safeguarding males has nothing to do with safeguarding women and girls.

Sorry but males are not our problem.

They don't care that their presence causes female people to be at increased risk so WHY do you think we should be concerned about them?

Oh, scrap that, I know! MISOGYNY, we must all hail the male people, we should put them first even though it harms us.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:23

La Louvre shouldn’t bother with security, thieves will get in anyway.

There shouldn’t be any laws because they are going to be broken anyway.

I mean, should we go on?

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:20

Throckmorton · 04/12/2025 21:56

I'm sorry - the place to start the safeguarding of girls would be to prioritise the feelings of the males?!

At this point I am going to have to assume you are either trolling, or that you are having to double down on your position because the alternative would be to realise the huge amount of harm you have done to your child by inflicting your own gender stereotypes on them

Show quote history

No it's not the place to start but it IS part of the picture when it comes to transwomen.

I don't think I'm harming my child, thanks. Tho I'm getting a bit sick of the personal attacks on here. Not once have I judged any of your parenting.

HumanWrongs · 04/12/2025 22:19

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 21:23

Holy moly - she was invited to join an inclusive group after being on a waiting list. She didn't demand anything.

Also, your casual and assuming critique of my parenting is totally uncalled for.

And yes, most folk on here seem to think the opposite is the case, which is why we've been doing so many laps on this topic. But onwards...

Show quote history

Apologies, I meant you demanded access, not him. He only followed your lead, poor fella. Hence, he should have been told no, including long before that. You don't strike me as someone who likes to hear No either.

And no, the people who have a problem with your child "design" are the people who don't think your child should function the way he's already designed. I'd say those who feel that way are those who're calling a boy 'a girl'.

Some of your posts on here have been uncalled for as well. I don't think I've said anything inflammatory unlike you.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:19

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:08

But it doesn't automatically raise levels of safety in every case, does it? Abusers will still come into a single sex spaces with the intent to do harm.

Show quote history

Again. You have just again shown you do not understand the principles of safeguarding.

and you don’t even seem to be interested in gaining an understanding in it.

Do you not bother to put a seatbelt on because sometimes the seatbelt does prevent injuries?

Do you not bother locking your doors to your house because peoole who want to get in will come in anyway ?

WTAF!

Safeguarding has never been about preventing all harm! It is about minimising harm and taking steps to maximise protection.

So, because you believe that harm will happen anyway, you think society should just abandon safeguarding?

All because your son has a philosophical belief that in no way reflects material reality, but you demand that society treat him as if his belief IS everyone else’s material reality too?

This is top trolling. One by one those tropish soundbites have been posted on this thread by you.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:11

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:08

But it doesn't automatically raise levels of safety in every case, does it? Abusers will still come into a single sex spaces with the intent to do harm.

Show quote history

Locking my car doesn't automatically stop someone from breaking into it.

Thieves will just smash the windows any way.

Shall I leave my car unlocked?

Namelessnelly · 04/12/2025 22:11

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 18:01

Okay, as an example, there is much less of a threat and women are much more safe when there are cubicles. Most swimming pools now have mixed sex spaces with cubicles in them for privacy.

Toilets for both sexes also have cubicles in them, which protect modesty and improve safety. If more public toilets were designed and understood as public pool changing rooms are, in a mixed sex way, it would not be as divisive an issue.

The problem is chiefly one of public space design. Unfortunately, it seems many people here think the problem is the design of my daughter.

It is not necessarily or always a safety issue to have a male (transwoman or not) in same-sex spaces. It is simply not true.

Show quote history

But that’s easily solved. More cubicles in male spaces. Sorted. Then your son can be happy.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:10

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:05

I think you are right, especially about the second paragraph.

This mother has actively harmed her child and she is in denial about it.

Show quote history

Yes. I think several of us have realised this over the past 24 hours.

There is no actual engagement here. It is just doubling down.

At least the bullying has stopped for now

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 22:08

CohensDiamondTeeth · 04/12/2025 21:45

See reality being denied in real time folks!

Banning all males from female single sex spaces does of course automatically raise the levels of safety for the actual biological females, so I can see why that doesn't count for you.

I think this poster's extensive knowledge would be useful if she's about @KeepToiletsSafe

Show quote history

But it doesn't automatically raise levels of safety in every case, does it? Abusers will still come into a single sex spaces with the intent to do harm.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:05

Throckmorton · 04/12/2025 21:56

I'm sorry - the place to start the safeguarding of girls would be to prioritise the feelings of the males?!

At this point I am going to have to assume you are either trolling, or that you are having to double down on your position because the alternative would be to realise the huge amount of harm you have done to your child by inflicting your own gender stereotypes on them

Show quote history

I think you are right, especially about the second paragraph.

This mother has actively harmed her child and she is in denial about it.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 22:03

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 21:44

Why do you have to let all males in? That's ludicrous.

There is loads of safeguarding that could be undertaken, official and unofficial. A good start would be actually being respectful to and getting to know transwomen as friends, rather than lumping them into boxes marked "Danger - Male". Obviously I'd add in referring to them in their preferred gender, which I hope you can appreciate is incredibly wearing on this thread.

The girls are not validation props, I find that very disrespectful to my perspective. They are as much validation props for your argument as mine.

And "gender ideology" as you call it is far from misogynistic in my experience. I'm sorry that's not the case for everyone here.

Show quote history

Can I suggest you go back and read today’s posts again

Why ‘all’ male people would have to be included has been explained at least two or three times already.

“A good start would be actually being respectful to and getting to know transwomen as friends, rather than lumping them into boxes marked "Danger - Male"”

This too has been explained in depth. And that you have again posted something like this shows again your complete lack of understanding safeguarding. I suspect you followed processes in place but never understood the principles of what you were expected to apply.

“The girls are not validation props, I find that very disrespectful to my perspective. They are as much validation props for your argument as mine.”

This is incoherent.

Girls are being used by male people as validation resources regardless of yours or our arguments. This is the outcome of what has been enabled to happen.

This also has been explained in previous posts today from the perspective of what we have been directly told by male adults with transgender identities. Or should we simply ignore what their actions because you don’t believe those male trans people are relevant to your male child?

“And "gender ideology" as you call it is far from misogynistic in my experience”

Any movement that allows male people to define who is and is not female is misogynistic. Your personal experience is irrelevant to the reality of the outcomes of the movement you support.

You can deny it all you want, it doesn’t change the direct and very public evidence that male people have changed the meaning to the language that female people need to describe themselves. You have been actively contributing to this. It cannot be explained in any way other than it being an act of misogyny.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 22:01

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 21:44

Why do you have to let all males in? That's ludicrous.

There is loads of safeguarding that could be undertaken, official and unofficial. A good start would be actually being respectful to and getting to know transwomen as friends, rather than lumping them into boxes marked "Danger - Male". Obviously I'd add in referring to them in their preferred gender, which I hope you can appreciate is incredibly wearing on this thread.

The girls are not validation props, I find that very disrespectful to my perspective. They are as much validation props for your argument as mine.

And "gender ideology" as you call it is far from misogynistic in my experience. I'm sorry that's not the case for everyone here.

Show quote history

No it's not ludicrous.

If something is a single sex space, then it has to be a single sex space and exclude all Males, regardless of their gender beliefs.

If it fails to include ALL males then it discriminates against males who do not hold those gender beliefs.

The only options are to be mixed sex and include all Males or to be single sex and exclude all males.

This is because males with gender beliefs are not biological females.

Gender beliefs are inherently misogynistic and reductive. They reduce people to sex stereotypes and fail to recognise the needs of female people.

Throckmorton · 04/12/2025 21:56

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 21:44

Why do you have to let all males in? That's ludicrous.

There is loads of safeguarding that could be undertaken, official and unofficial. A good start would be actually being respectful to and getting to know transwomen as friends, rather than lumping them into boxes marked "Danger - Male". Obviously I'd add in referring to them in their preferred gender, which I hope you can appreciate is incredibly wearing on this thread.

The girls are not validation props, I find that very disrespectful to my perspective. They are as much validation props for your argument as mine.

And "gender ideology" as you call it is far from misogynistic in my experience. I'm sorry that's not the case for everyone here.

Show quote history

I'm sorry - the place to start the safeguarding of girls would be to prioritise the feelings of the males?!

At this point I am going to have to assume you are either trolling, or that you are having to double down on your position because the alternative would be to realise the huge amount of harm you have done to your child by inflicting your own gender stereotypes on them

DefinitelyNotDainty · 04/12/2025 21:45

medievalpenny · 04/12/2025 21:32

The latest email suggests they are planning to bow to that and "evolve" their offering into mixed sex. Because they are only paying attention to the anti-women mob.

Show quote history

Surely a huge number of girls - and leaders - would leave. And it would open up an opportunity for competition by a new all-girls group (probably set up by JKR!)

Original poster
CohensDiamondTeeth · 04/12/2025 21:45

SolidMam · 04/12/2025 20:07

Well at least I've broken new ground somewhere, I suppose.

Does it solve the problem though?

I am not talking about lowering safeguarding standards because bans of males do not automatically raise levels of safety.

Show quote history

See reality being denied in real time folks!

Banning all males from female single sex spaces does of course automatically raise the levels of safety for the actual biological females, so I can see why that doesn't count for you.

I think this poster's extensive knowledge would be useful if she's about @KeepToiletsSafe

OP posts:
SolidMam · 04/12/2025 21:44

TheodoreisntBeth · 04/12/2025 21:02

Yes, a blanket ban on all males is what a women's single sex space means. This is not difficult to comprehend.

And the danger of making an exception for your son (or any other male) is that if you let one male in, you have to let all males in. What is the criteria you think we can use to allow some males in and not all? How nice they seem? I've met more than one predator who seemed really nice, including one who's now serving 18 years for sexually abusing children. How they dress, or if they have changed their name? Look up Sarah Jane Baker or Katie Dolatowski to see how good a system that is. Only let them in if they say they really feel like a girl? Strangely, some people don't always tell the truth and will happily say they feel like a girls if it gets them access to girls. Some males are a danger to women and girls. And you can't tell which are and which aren't until it's too late. So all males have to stay out. Again, this is not difficult to comprehend.

Unless of course you think risking males being sad is worse than risking females being harmed. And given your posts on the thread I actually think you do think that. All the girls whose single sex provision has been taken away because your son wanted it don't feature at all for you, other then as validation props. Gender ideology is misogyny on steroids.

Show quote history

Why do you have to let all males in? That's ludicrous.

There is loads of safeguarding that could be undertaken, official and unofficial. A good start would be actually being respectful to and getting to know transwomen as friends, rather than lumping them into boxes marked "Danger - Male". Obviously I'd add in referring to them in their preferred gender, which I hope you can appreciate is incredibly wearing on this thread.

The girls are not validation props, I find that very disrespectful to my perspective. They are as much validation props for your argument as mine.

And "gender ideology" as you call it is far from misogynistic in my experience. I'm sorry that's not the case for everyone here.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 21:41

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 21:34

that will backfire.

It will not have value to trans identifying males if it becomes mixed sex as it will not validate any more.

Edited
Show quote history

If it could keep girl in the name, it would. But it cannot remain girl guides if they are not single sex. So, yes. I doubt it will be attractive then.

Helleofabore · 04/12/2025 21:39

medievalpenny · 04/12/2025 21:32

The latest email suggests they are planning to bow to that and "evolve" their offering into mixed sex. Because they are only paying attention to the anti-women mob.

Show quote history

Really?

That is remarkable. It is not in line with the polling results of the general public. I guess then it means that the silent majority need to start speaking up.

lifeturnsonadime · 04/12/2025 21:34

medievalpenny · 04/12/2025 21:32

The latest email suggests they are planning to bow to that and "evolve" their offering into mixed sex. Because they are only paying attention to the anti-women mob.

Show quote history

that will backfire.

It will not have value to trans identifying males if it becomes mixed sex as it will not validate any more.

Swipe left for the next trending thread