Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Victoria Derbyshire today and Girlguides

608 replies

AgnesBadenPowell · 05/03/2018 19:29

Did anyone see Victoria Derbyshire on BBC2 this morning? Interesting discussion about transgender people and self ID. One of the speakers mentioned Girlguiding, which caught my attention as I am a Leader and I’ve had similar concerns but few people to discuss it with IRL.

You might have seen the press coverage (and threads here) about the changes to Girlguiding UK’s policy on inclusivity for transgender members

As a leader it’s my duty to implement the policy. I also have a duty of care to the girls in my unit. I’ve thought long and hard about this and in my view, GG has got it wrong.

GGUK recognises gender self identity, which is “a person’s inner sense of being a girl or a woman”. A male child who identifies as a girl can enroll as a rainbow, brownie, guide or ranger and a male who identifies as a woman can make the Guide promise and become a leader. Leadership roles have historically been women only (although men can volunteer for support roles that don’t need the promise and aren’t in charge of units).

The policy states that transgender children should use the accommodation of their acquired gender on camp. Parents of other children should not be informed - leaders are told it is neither required or best practice. Remember that Guiding also permits adult leaders (including men who identify as women) to share accommodation with children; it’s not the preferred option and at least 2 adults should always be present in the tent or guide hut but it does happen.

I have written to GGUK to outline my concerns:

  1. the policy allows, for example, a 14 yo biological male Guide to share sleeping accommodation with a 10 year old female Guide.NSPCC advice is that children over 10 do not share a bedroom with the opposite sex. It’s not unreasonable for parents to expect GG to follow this advice. Why aren’t we?
  1. The policy does not acknowledge the embarrassment a teen may feel when dealing with periods, washing and bathing in shared facilities with a person they may have known as a boy.
  1. The policy is focused on the needs of the transchild and their preferences. As a Leader I have a duty to all children in my care and must balance each of their needs. Only in reference to changing clothes does the policy state that all children should be offered a more private place to change if desired, otherwise transchildren chose what facilities they use with no reference to their fellow guides.
  1. If GG cannot guarantee truly single sex accommodation then some girls will miss out on residentials, eg girls from certain religious groups, those who have been subjected to abuse or who just don’t want to. This is against GG’s inclusive ethos

So far GG has responded with (template?) emails to say that GG has always been a single gender organisation, gender identity (as defined above) is recognised as separate from biological sex and Leaders should refer concerned parents to the higher ups.

Today’s TV show made me wonder how many people really understand the implications of the policy and have similar concerns. Leaders can't discuss other children with parents (rightIy so) but that means parents can't give informed consent to their child sharing mixed sex facilities. I'd like to gauge the feeling of parents but it's a sensitive issue and not something that I can just ask my girls’ parents. Perhaps you think I am over reacting. Perhaps you share my concerns. Either way, I’d like to know.

Finally, I should add that I’m not trying to have transgirls removed from GG. Neither do I think all men/boys are potential sex offenders. But I do owe it to the parents and children in my care to have assessed all the risks thoroughly. My point is that this policy poses a risk, which doesn't appear to be recognised by GG and Leaders aren't being advised how to manage it.

I do have to pop out for a bit now but will come back later, if anyone replies!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
19
Elletorro · 07/03/2018 09:53

Also the NSPCC response looks very strange.

I cannot believe that it would be referring to outdated law.

I have a colleague at another large charity and her comments about the lack of legal oversight into decisions makes me think the NSPCC may well also be penny pinching on getting proper advice.

Again it’s a case of finding the pressure points in the organisation.

I would copy the email you received into a letter to the executive board. Cc in every board member by name: Peter Wanless, Sherry Malik, Philip Noyes and Kate Stanley jump out as being most relevant.

Ask if they have taken legal advice regarding the Equality Act and the specific exemptions. Ask who will be responsible for the safeguarding failure and who will be legally liable as currently as far as you can see they are personally responsible for the current policy.

Actus · 07/03/2018 09:45

They've got it wrong anyway the act provides for specific sex exemptions which the GG have clearly decided to ignore also I'm not sure it was ever meant to cover self id children. Adults yes but not kids.

Datun · 07/03/2018 09:40

TerfyOwl

That is a heartbreaking post.

One of the things Stephanie Davis Arai says (Transgendertrend website for parents of trans-children), is that when a boy who identifies as a girl comes to school, he is usually presenting as very feminine.

She says that the effect on girls can be profound. They look at this boy, being very feminine, being feted and celebrated precisely for his femininity, and then they look at themselves and feel rather shattered. If that's what a a girl is, or is supposed to be, then what am I? A boy?

You're absolutely right. It is confirmed to girls, at an incredibly impressionable age, that they are defined by stereotypes.

Personally, I think in single sex organisations like the guides, trans-girls should be excluded. They are for girls.

But, if they do have to be included, the narrative needs to be changed.

The focus should be less on celebration, and more on say compassion. The belief that that boy has should not be taken as real.

GirlScout72

Strewth. They have the law, they know what it is, and they are trying, furiously, to cobble something together that also reflects the nonsense from trans pressure groups.

And of course, it's contradictory!

No wonder they are confused and coming across as clueless.

Elletorro · 07/03/2018 09:39

If any guide leaders are here I would recommend pressuring GG to take independent professional legal advice from a reputable firm of solicitors and probably get an expert opinion from leading counsel in the field regarding the Equality act 2010 and the sex exemptions. It looks like they are winging it.

I would also want to see an explanation of how safeguarding operates at grass roots level. Who has responsibility? Which organisation regulates safeguarding at local level? Is it the local authority?

Who has ultimate responsibility if something goes wrong?

These are your pressure points and once you have the names then you know who to lobby

namechangedasimaguider · 07/03/2018 09:36

Sorry, posted questions on a couple of gg fb groups, missed that out!

namechangedasimaguider · 07/03/2018 09:35

I have a bit of spare time in the next couple of weeks so am going to do some letter writing- hq, region, any one I can think of.
All debate seems to have been shut down on this. Yesterday a couple of people posted questions about the Victoria Derbyshire interview - although the mods did allow the posts, they turned off comments and just posted a link to gga website guidelines.

If they don't like it, they can sack me. After 25 years as a leader they can fuck off if they think I am allowing the girls and young women in my care loose the girl only space they have now. Which incidentally they have many times told me they want to continue

GirlScout72 · 07/03/2018 09:18

I have just been on the GGA website, I find legal stuff really confusing, so perhaps someone with more of a grip could have a look too, but I can't see how any responsible leader could implement these policies as they contradict each other. For example:

"Girlguiding complies with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 which makes clear that organisations providing single-sex services such as Girlguiding should treat people according to their acquired gender. As such, and in line with our values of inclusion, we welcome any young person who self-identifies as a girl or young woman."
www.girlguiding.org.uk/what-we-do/our-stories-and-news/news/equality-and-diversity-policy/

Here they are calling the protected characteristic of sex, 'gender'!!!!
"Girlguiding's approach to inclusion
Girlguiding is open to all girls and young women between the ages of 5-25 (4 in Ulster). Girlguiding provides resources and support for adult volunteers to enable them to include all girls and young women and give them a great guiding experience.

Further information about how Girlguiding supports the inclusion of individuals with legally protected characteristics can be found in the following supporting information.

Gender.
Age.
Disability.
Transgender and gender reassignment.
Marriage and civil partnership.
Race and ethnicity.
Religion or belief.
Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) members. "
www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/equality-and-diversity-policy/

Plus ""In addition to providing a ‘girl only’ space for our young members, we are committed to ensuring our young members have female role models in leadership within Girlguiding. In order to support this, roles such as Unit Leader, can only be undertaken by female members.

Whilst some roles are restricted to only being held by women, adult males (18+) are welcome to join the charity in a variety of other volunteer roles.

Further information can be found in our Membership and Recruitment policy."

"Girlguiding is a single-sex organisation in accordance with the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. Girlguiding believes that the needs of girls and young women are best met through an organisation catering specifically for girls and led by women.
Our policies
Girlguiding’s policies and related statements provide a structure in which guiding can take place safely, consistently and in accordance with legislation.

Policies must be followed by Girlguiding’s members and by recognised volunteers involved in delivering or supporting guiding. These policy statements are supported by further information and resources to ensure that our members put the policies into practice."
www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/membership-and-recruitment-policy/

They seem on the one hand to be saying they are invoking exemptions to keep it girl only, but on the other that any one who identifies as a girl is a girl or 'female' (they conflate that word a lot). Their safeguarding and membership also talks about informed consent (how does that gel with parents not being being told?) and also not doing or being discriminatory in order to discourage anyone from joining (inc religion) so that also contradicts 'you are free to go elsewhere if you don't like it'.

I can't see how any leader, in good faith, could implement this without falling foul of contradictory policies. I'm not sure where that'd then leave them in terms of liability.

Also, attached a little gem from EA2010

Victoria Derbyshire today and Girlguides
ImAGuiderToo · 07/03/2018 08:08

TerfyOwl that is it put perfectly.

I have Brownies so haven’t got the concerns about peer to peer sexual relationships that are relevant to older groups.

But it is massively important that the girls in my care have the ability to talk and behave freely. I appreciate that they should be able to do this anywhere but that’s not reality.

I am struggling to succinctly explain my objection to GGUK’s stance. Small steps but I raised this with my DisCom last night - I think many of us had the email and ignored it not appreciating the implications.

This should be being talked about at grass roots level as we are the ones who are going to have to deal with this in a practical level. If we embrace this guidance, I fear we are open to attack from parents of girls. If we object, we are open to attack from parents of trans children and the very vocal (and initimidating) trans lobby.

SemaMjinga · 07/03/2018 07:16

My main objection is not relationships (I’ve also had to deal with code of conduct violations and lesbian outings) but with the loss of freedom from gendered expectations. With all girls, we can discuss the bollocks that is gender freely, openly, and crush the fuck out of it. The girls are free. I don’t think I can run a unit where at least one member is so tied into stereotypes they are attempting to literally embody one

Excellent post terfyowl

Fishfingersandwichnocheese · 07/03/2018 06:45

^^

I read a fb post about an all women’s event allowing trans women. Or anyone who identified as women.

There were disgusting comments by men saying they would ID as Male to get in and get to the women. Sad

Frankiestidor · 07/03/2018 06:05

I think the big problem is they think that no one would ever say they were the opposite gender just to take the piss or to access something they wanted. Or even because they were confused. Have they never met teenagers?

The moment you can't define man or woman, you lose all and any rights around those labels. It's absurd.

And I am appalled that NSPCC has drunk the kool-aid too. Their advice is taken almost as law. TRAs must have punched the air when they won that victory.

TerfyOwl · 07/03/2018 05:35

But yes. My main objection is not relationships (I’ve also had to deal with code of conduct violations and lesbian outings) but with the loss of freedom from gendered expectations. With all girls, we can discuss the bollocks that is gender freely, openly, and crush the fuck out of it. The girls are free. I don’t think I can run a unit where at least one member is so tied into stereotypes they are attempting to literally embody one. How can I free an entire unit of girls to be who they want to be, when I have to ensure that I am also openly embracing a boy’s right to encroach on their freedoms?
It’s odd, of course. The irony is that by freeing the boy to do exactly what he wants, (which is all good and worthy), I limit the girls. I can’t teach them they have rights and can do anything. I have to teach them to give up ground and make room for men. That men get what they want, even when the girls don’t want it.
That whatever they do, they will always have to give up space for the boys.

TerfyOwl · 07/03/2018 05:20

Cakeofthepan - that’s nice. I took 10 girls (12-17) to an international jamboree and the scouts were literally all over them Grin We went and had a nice chat with the scout leaders so we were all on the same page. No sex no drugs no rock n roll. Our gals all have to have The Talk before travelling internationally. Any intimacy and they are on the next plane home at their parents expense.
Sweet that your unit is so brotherly though.

CorbynTrouserPress · 07/03/2018 04:09

I was mildly groped on guide camp by the husband of a leader, This was in the 80s. Everyone else left the tent after putting on their wellies, he 'helped' me with mine and his hands just kept on travelling up my leg. Nothing serious, but I remember just feeling very uncomfortable and embarrassed. One of the other girls also mentioned once something jokingly about us being molested by him, so I'm wondering if I wasn't the only one....

The policy by GG shows a total disregard for the safety of girls and has put me off sending DD to Brownies.

LineysInTheSnow · 07/03/2018 02:05

@elletorro I'm very interested in seeing your arguments, thank you for offering this.

Some amazing women on this thread.

GrimDamnFanjo · 07/03/2018 00:09

I strongly feel that it's the single sex club issue that needs protecting. Safeguarding issues can be solved easily as with other mixed sex youth organisations.
GGA should be single sex. Without this rule all of the good work they've done to give girls confidence and support over the last 100 years is sold down the river.

GirlScout72 · 06/03/2018 22:53

I think the other issue, as well as safeguarding is girls are allowed and deserve space just for themselves because SEXISM. Also a girl is a juvenile human female, not anyone who says they are one. Lawful exemptions allow for single sex spaces because they recognise that women need them to redress the balance of female oppression.

Without GENDER there would be no oppression, patriarchy is the ball, gender is the chain, gender is HOW women are oppressed. So yes of course this is primarily a safeguarding issue but it also about dignity and respect for females - we are not a gender, gender is imposed on us to keep us second class citizens. Paris Lees is fond of saying 'no debate' and I also feel like saying women and girls need, want and deserve their own spaces in their own right, NO DEBATE!

it's nonsensical to say to girls, gender stereotypes harm you, they aren't true or real and you can be whatever you want to be, and at the same time gaslight them and say you are girls because you 'identify' as one. HOW does one do that? Gender stereotypes!

ScienceIsTruth · 06/03/2018 22:50

That's why my friend's dds no longer attend such groups, and why mine will never attend.

Even Mumsnet uses the term gender instead of SEX within the account details pages, it's ridiculous.

StickStickStickStick · 06/03/2018 22:44

Any residential could be as story above - school etc. Up til now we had strict boy/girl separation. Teachers/leaders patrolling floors and tents. Now they just have to say they are the other sex and the others just have to agree :(

AgnesBadenPowell · 06/03/2018 22:38

@OlennasWimple yes I have seen the update from JJ and had similar thoughts. I'm working at home tomorrow so plenty of opportunity to contact the firm she is using.

OP posts:
LangCleg · 06/03/2018 22:31

I would donate to any fundraiser that aimed to oblige the Guides to actually approach the risks involved with this policy - and, while I do accept there is a "bad man" danger, I still think the "horny kids" danger is much more likely. This is the blindingly obvious one and it also doesn't look paranoid to outsiders.

OlennasWimple · 06/03/2018 22:18

AgnesBP - have you seen the update from Jennifer James about the AWS legal challenge? I wonder if it's worth discussing with the legal firm that she has engaged to see if they would be willing to take on the GG case as well? Many of the arguments will have the same legal basis, after all

StickStickStickStick · 06/03/2018 22:09

Mine are in Brownies and this terrified me. They're going away next week..... I'm thinking when they move to guides it would really worry me.

It's scary how all this slipped through and it's scary effects on everyday life :(

qumquat · 06/03/2018 21:56

That letter from the NSPCC is chilling. 'There are no safeguarding concerns'. From the NSPCC!!!!!

Luckily I hated Brownies so hadn't planned on introducing DD to it. I certainly won't now.

LaundryLaundryMoreFingLaundry · 06/03/2018 21:28

Having read this thread earlier I am sooo very angry that this space is now longer a protected space for young girls. I am not involved in GG but was both a Brownie and a Guide. I loved it - and still have my uniform complete with badges. I feel very sentimental about my time there and also the wonderful freedom and sense of adventure I felt on the couple of camps I went on.

I agree with all the concerns already raised and would not be happy to send my DD away on a residential with an undisclosed TIM in attendance. It would feel like a huge betrayal of trust that other parents would/could not be told. Two other major concerns for me are minority ethnic groups and vulnerable girls. Surely a (once) female-centred organisation should be prioritising access for under-represented BAME groups for whom single-sex spaces are a requirement over biological males? I think will write to them and ask about any stats they have on this. I would like to know what they're doing on that front and also like to be reassured that they have the means to measure any impact that this policy change (once publicly known) has on those stats.

And then there are girls who may have had experienced trauma or sexual violence. Would a guide leader know if a particular child had had such difficulties personally? If the leader did not know this and then on top of that the parent or guardian did not know that a trans boy was mixing with their daughter, how can they properly protect them?

It bugs me to death that the "trans lobby" are policing language "because women talking about pregnancy and periods can be triggering" but think it's perfectly acceptable to wave a penis in front of a girl/women who may themselves be triggered by its very presence.

The fact that groups like GG and NSPCC are changing their policy without seeming to consider any of this (and seem to be taking a la, la, la, it's all fine) approach to questioning on it tell me that the Sex Matters campaign is essential and we all need to be advocates for it.

Long post, sorry, but this one rather sent me over the edge today.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.