have I got this right? (girl guides again)

Thanks for putting it more eloquently than I could Mary!

That link from YetAnotherSparticus is incredible. GG have asked, and had answered, some very important questions. A few I have selected at random (though I could quote any of their figures, it's a good survey):

67% of young women agree that popular culture tells boys that they are entitled to coerce or abuse their girlfriends.

Which is why having a boy-free space is good for many girls.

25% of 11-16-year-olds say worry over potential sexual harassment makes them consider whether or not to speak out in class

So guides should be a safe space to speak

64% of girls aged 11-16 say that teachers or staff, sometimes or always tell girls to ignore incidents of sexual harassment.

Girls should presumably also ignore any feelings of discomfort they may have at having to change in front of and sleep with boys.

One of their conclusions in "Girlguiding’s Girls Matter campaign" demands that schools "take a zero tolerance approach to sexual bullying and harassment." and yet they are happy to effectively force girls to accept boys in their spaces; their teaching on consent is a waste of time if girls are not allowed to NOT consent.

I want to know what the safe guarding issues are that require males to be provided with separate sleeping and bathroom provision. And why don't these safeguarding issues apply to those males' who believe themselves to be women or girls?

Because if they believe themselves to be women/girls then they are actually women/girls. Literally. And therefore there is no problem. Because they believe it so must we. No matter what we see or feel.

Of course there should be sensitive supportive policies for everyone, including the small number of children suffering from gender dysphoria who feel as though they would like to live as the opposite sex.

Those policies need to consider everyone's needs and rights. Biological males do NOT have the right to undress and sleep with biological females without the females consent. Policies and the law MUST reflect this. In our schools, public areas, prisons, care homes, swimming pools, youth organisations. Everywhere.

The guides are all for teaching boundaries, appropriate relationships etc. (see the link above) and then they put girls in a situation where it is very difficult for them to say 'no' to people with penises in their spaces.

The issue goes way beyond guides, too.

This same advice that has led to this type of ridiculous and inappropriate guidance has been and is being given out to organisations across Britain.

It is gobsmacking that the GG can produce this

www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/research-and-campaigns/sexual-harassment-in-schools-inquiry---girlguiding-response-may2016.pdf

and at the same time spout that rubbish about trans.

The 'advice' in dealing with trans members just completely overlooks the feelings and perspectives of women.

The guides are all for teaching boundaries, appropriate relationships etc. (see the link above) and then they put girls in a situation where it is very difficult for them to say 'no' to people with penises in their spaces.

It's bonkers.

that even if someone tells her it is a female penis, it can still cause infection or pregnancy.

Absolutely!

I am telling my dd that just because she likes things that are "non girly" does not mean that she is not a girl. I have told her that she can like all sorts of different things like reading and science and not wearing pink or makeup and still be a girl. I have warned her that some people might tell her that she is not a girl because she like science.

I will add that all penisis have potential to cause pregnancy, and that even if someone tells her it is a female penis, it can still cause infection or pregnancy.

Safeguarding is not organisations deliberately facilitating underage sex when in loco parentis. Safeguarding is not said organisations providing condoms so that the sex they have facilitated does not result in pregnancy.

Yes this this this!^

I hope Lang doesn't mind me posting it a 3rd time, as I think it is v important for those 'hard of understanding' to read it again and again until they finally get it.

I would have thought that, if what the judge said in the case where a child was placed in his father's care after his mother fell heavily into affirmation is any guide, the most appropriate place for a male child that is non gender conforming would be the scouts, where there is the opportunity to work with both boys and girls and the child does not close off the option of socialising as a boy.

Encouraging the GGs to change their policy is about society affirming the identity of transgender male to female persons, and is therefore the political act that the GGs were scornful of in their statement this morning to the Julia Hartley-Brewer programme.

Safeguarding is not organisations deliberately facilitating underage sex when in loco parentis. Safeguarding is not said organisations providing condoms so that the sex they have facilitated does not result in pregnancy.

That the muddying of language and lobby group interests means we even have to say this to the GUIDES for FFS is the most significant safeguarding issue of all.

Someone who thinks this Guide stuff is all fine and dandy will probably come along and waffle about Gillick competence/Fraser guidelines in a minute! I'd better clarify:

Yes, kids who are already sexually active and meet the Fraser guidelines vis a vis competence can get contraception sans parental approval. This is the law around contested medical care for minors.

Safeguarding is not organisations deliberately facilitating underage sex when in loco parentis. Safeguarding is not said organisations providing condoms so that the sex they have facilitated does not result in pregnancy.

And if anyone actually believes issuing condoms to 11-15 year-olds without the knowledge of their parents is safeguarding, I think they need to do some serious self reflection, stat.

Abso-bloody-LUTELY.

That the muddying of language and lobby group interests means we even have to say this to the GUIDES for FFS is the most significant safeguarding issue of all.

it doesn't matter what we tell our dc. We are old fogies, past our sell-by date. We're bigoted 20th century wrinklies. Unless it's spouted by a beautiful young thing on YouTube, preferably with a good backing track and cool graphics, it is meaningless.

Add that to the fact that we've brought up our dc to be compassionate to disadvantaged people and to stand up for the victims of bullying...

Giles - my DD is a bit younger (8) but remarkably forthright on how babies are made and the need for a man and a woman to be involved. (It helps that we regularly see animals procreating, as well as un-neutered dogs and lactating bitches wandering around...) I'm hoping that she doesn't sway from what she has already learnt as she gets exposed to other stuff

DS (13) thinks that everything sex related is all disgusting and hates to talk about it. But he also knows about the real birds and the bees and happily corrected DD when she got confused about what a lesbian is.

So I guess it's about talking about facts when the opportunity presents itself

Girls used to say, "But they said I couldn't get pregnant if we did it standing up!" If we're not careful they'll be saying, "But they said I couldn't get pregnant if they were a lesbian!"

Can I just ask here..wtf is everyone here telling their kids in particularly their Dds.

My oldest is 11 and wabt to send her to school next year well equipped with actual facts however if I mention any of this and she's oblivious then I'm going to confuse and embarrass her. If I don't then I really dont want her thinking lesbians cant get pregnant when one has a lady dick.

How do we do this ?

my own 15 year old asked me, after seeing a youtube video, whether a transwoman's chromosomes are still male or whether they become female

Such is the level of disinformation our young people are being bombarded with.

Girls used to say, "But they said I couldn't get pregnant if we did it standing up!" If we're not careful they'll be saying, "But they said I couldn't get pregnant if they were a lesbian!"

And if anyone actually believes issuing condoms to 11-15 year-olds without the knowledge of their parents is safeguarding, I think they need to do some serious self reflection, stat.

Every time I read one of these threads I keep thinking isn't this really simple. Willy = male. No willy = female.

Not quite. It's actually: Willy = male. Vulva = female.

But yes, it really is that simple.

There is no way no this earth that my parents would have let me go on a residential trip where the safeguarding policy rested on the free availability of condoms

I find it very hard to believe that guide leaders provide condoms to youth members on camp .

And certainly not to under 16s - who can now share mixed sleeping quarters, apparently.

I'm also asking the question - if it's ok for some boys to sleep with the girls, does that now mean that no school trips/camps/youth club weekends away etc etc will have segregated sleeping quarters? Are all the kids just going to sleep (aged from 5 to 18) wherever they like?

If not, why not? And if so, will parents be happy with this?

I would think teenagers would be more likely to be generally confused about gender given all the 'information' there is flying around these days, especially on the internet. No need for them to be dysphoric or AGP, just growing up and trying to sort out their views.

Someone (The internet) tells them that if they like e.g. pink sparkly unicorns they must be gay (uncool) or trans (cool) they might now be more likely to plump for trans, where as actually they happen to be a standard heterosexual male who happens to like pink sparkly unicorns. You now just have to hope they won't realise the truth whilst sharing a tent on a girl guides trip...

None as she is still the same sex as the girls. The risk is not from someone being trans. It is from deciding mixed sex accommodation is ok because a male says he feels female.

Yes exactly, but the only way for the GGs policy to make sense is if they say that biological sex is irrelevant and the safe guarding risk comes from your identity.

Why should teenagers now be more likely to be gender dysphoric than AGP...I think the opposite is true. Choosing your own gender is a trend and is being pushed on tumblr, reddit and youtube.

*lancelottie I said there is already a small risk, this won't increase that risk because leaders already plan for the possibility of that happening and provide measures that members can access to protect themselves.

The risk has been assessed*

Seriously? You are saying that the guides decided to allow cases of mixed sex showers and sleeping for minors with a deliberate policy of not telling parents or possibly even the girls involved. And the risk assessment was that it's ok because we'll give them condoms?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

I would love to see the paperwork for that one.