Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Girlguiding - an update

418 replies

AgnesBadenPowell · 19/05/2018 21:23

Firstly, apologies for being offline for a while. It's been a busy few weeks, I went on holiday and started a new job. But back on it now!

You'll know that an article was published in the Sunday Times in March and a couple of weeks later the open letter went in: the final tally was 927 signatures (some of these collected after publication).

Since then I met the CEO, deputy CEO and chief guide. Prior to that, I was warned in emails to use the internal procedures for complaints and to not make things public (I did, and was ignored). I was also "reminded" of the social media policy and told that the campaign would not change the trans policy.

It's probably not appropriate to share my full notes from that meeting here. But I will say that Girlguiding was defensive and prickly. The fact that I have publicly discussed the trans policy on social media in particular irritated Julie Bentley (CEO). I don't know why; the policy is a public document available on the website.

Girlguiding stressed to me that the legal advice they received confirmed that they HAVE to treat trans members (including those who self identify, not just with a GRC) as the opposite sex) as the gender they identify as.

We did agree that in the absence of a test case, there is no legal precedent. It was left that we would await the updated EHRC guidance expected next month before any review is conducted (if they chose to review it).

We did discuss the inconsistencies that the trans policy brings about, eg GG has strict rules that accompanying male children on leaders must have separate sleeping and washing facilities. Even boys as young as 4. But if that boy identified as a girl, then no such rules apply, despite there being no physical, material difference between the two groups of males. Girlguiding referred back to their legal advice that have to treat trans members as the gender they identify as. This includes males who identify as females providing personal care to girls on residentials, a role which is strictly for female leaders only according to GG's safeguarding policy.

We also discussed gender non confirming girls. There was an agreement that the language in the policy was rather clinical, and it could be interpreted as a strict instruction for a GNC girl to be removed from their unit. It was agreed that the policy language would be reviewed. This is particularly important as most trans issues within GG are, as you might expect, around girls who are transitioning.

One of the key issues for me is that girlguiding now offers single gender but mixed sex accommodation. I accept that the number of trans girls joining guides will be small compared to our overall membership - but it would only take one incident to cause huge harm to the children involved, their families and girlguiding. I suggested that GG might want to make the single gender / mixed sex aspect clearer, perhaps by adapting the standard consent form to advise parents that we don't guarantee single sex accommodation. Yet again, I was accused of wanting "out" individuals. That is not my intention at all.

I've heard nothing from girlguiding since. I will be following up on the action points. We will have a new CEO in June and updated EHRC guidance which will hopefully give all children equal rights to bodily privacy and autonomy, not just the trans kids.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Mamaryllis · 07/09/2018 20:08

Dang. Lemon are you active on Twitter?
I am heartened. A wee kindling of hope that the EHRC is starting to see sense.

SturdyEarmuffs · 07/09/2018 20:01

I'll be using all this to frame my discussion with my DDS guide captain when she starts back in a few weeks. Thanks to all the great work you've done, lemon & Agnes, I feel a lot more confident in the arguments so huge thanks from me 🙏

Datun · 07/09/2018 19:58

LemonJello

Bloody well done.

And still she persisted

Datun · 07/09/2018 19:56

I've got loads of letter writing to do this weekend. I'm sure you all know that Gendered Intelligence advises GG on trans policy (they are referred to and linked all over the GG website) and its GI's CEO (Jay Stewart) who advises the prison service on trans policy - the same policy that put a male rapist on remand into a women's prison, where he admitted to carrying out four sexual assaults. Gendered Intelligence is not a fit and proper organisation to be advising on safeguarding issues.

He was also behind the science museum's unscientific and Mediaeval do you have a girl brain, or boy brain installation.

Which the museum removed after outrage from parents.

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 07/09/2018 19:46

Women like you give me hope, AgnesBadenPowell. Your Guides are lucky to have you. Star

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:41

No it wasn’t marked confidential.

I’d be happy to share it with you Agnes if you want to PM me an email address?

InflagranteDelicto · 07/09/2018 19:40

I have to go out, so will read later. Thank you, Lemonjello for contacting echr

AgnesBadenPowell · 07/09/2018 19:35

Don't apologise, I'm glad you did! Just an interesting phrase - like summoning some sort of Girlguiding spirit Grin

This is the problem, not engaging. You are not the only one by any means. Fortunately, I can be persistent. We can't just let this go.

Can you share the EHRC response with a guider who could take it up with GG? I'd be happy to, although was the EHRC replied marked confidential?

OP posts:
LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:35

On it Wink

tiredandweary · 07/09/2018 19:34

Well done LemonJello.
That's really important and a classic example of how trans organisations are advising about matters way outside their expertise (no doubt deliberately). Now to get them to back off gaslighting schools into suspending safeguarding procedures for trans identified children, promoting parental alienation and insisting on mixed sex toilets, showers and changing rooms.

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:32

It is so great to hear you are on the case with this Smile

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:32

Sorry for invoking you Agnes! 🙈

I have not sent this to GG yet because after 3 emails they told me they would not be responding to me any more Hmm so I imagine they will just ignore me Sad

AgnesBadenPowell · 07/09/2018 19:28

@LemonJello you invoked me?! Grin

Thanks very much for alerting me to this. Interestingly, I'm aware of some similar correspondence from the EHRC which wasn't quite the same as this. I need to do a proper comparison which I can't right now.

This is what I, Fair play for women, and countless others have been saying all along. There is a legal right to enforce same sex accommodation and a trans girl is not a girl in law.

While I have no wish to cause distress to an already distressed young person, I'm not prepared to throw other girls under the bus. It's not fair.

Lemon, did you send GGHQ the response from EHRC?

I've got loads of letter writing to do this weekend. I'm sure you all know that Gendered Intelligence advises GG on trans policy (they are referred to and linked all over the GG website) and its GI's CEO (Jay Stewart) who advises the prison service on trans policy - the same policy that put a male rapist on remand into a women's prison, where he admitted to carrying out four sexual assaults. Gendered Intelligence is not a fit and proper organisation to be advising on safeguarding issues.

OP posts:
LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:27

Yep. The EHRC is demonstrating exactly how this could have been handled.

Be mindful of the risks of sex discrimination when implementing a trans inclusive policy.

Trans inclusive policies are ok so long as they are consistent with the rights of others.

In each particular scenario, the rights of ALL children must be considered.

OldCrone · 07/09/2018 19:26

I wonder if they’ve been advised by lawyers or just some lobby group like Allsorts.

Gendered Intelligence according to this page

Datun · 07/09/2018 19:21

It's such a piece of piss. All they have to do is write that into their effing policy. That's it.

They could soooo easily have been neutral about all this.

Why weren't they? Why did they double down on no, no, no?

CertainHalfDesertedStreets · 07/09/2018 19:11

It's one thing to know something. It's another to have it in writing from the EHRC Grin

And that's unequivocal I would say. They can choose to exclude, either from the organisation or from accommodation.

I love that we can invoke Agnes too Grin

MsBeee · 07/09/2018 19:09

I"m so angry at this. Girls need privacy.

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 19:06

That’s what we need to find out. Why and how were they led to believe this? And now that they know they are mistaken what are they going to do about it?

hackmum · 07/09/2018 19:01

Well, of course they’re wrong. We knew this all along. I wonder if they’ve been advised by lawyers or just some lobby group like Allsorts.

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 18:44

It’s written by lawyers Grin

I’m just going to invoke Agnes as this may be useful for her.

@AgnesBadenPowell

Datun · 07/09/2018 18:44

To clarify my post. The girl guides are wrong!

They have been erroneously advised.

Datun · 07/09/2018 18:30

LemonJello

A) so they're wrong.

B) do people think that using 25 words where one will makes them sound smart.

silentcrow · 07/09/2018 18:25

Grin No worries. Even more reason to get behind her, then!

LemonJello · 07/09/2018 18:25

This is going to be a long one.

A quick reminder: I have been in contact with Girl Guiding UK about their safeguarding procedures. They have very strict protocols in place regarding the sleeping arrangements for male children of guide leaders on residential trips, but do not follow these same protocols if the child in question identifies as a girl. In this case the child is permitted to sleep in a dorm with female children without the informed consent of these children’s parents.

When I questioned this with Girl Guiding UK, they sent me this in response.

“[W]e do allow volunteers’ family members to attend residential events. Such requests are carefully considered by the local commissioner and as a part of the mandatory risk assessment or any trips. However this same process would not apply to a trans girl as this would be a breach of the Equality Act.”

I then wrote to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who are the organisation in charge of overseeing and upholding by the Equality Act 2010, to ask them if risk assessments and other safeguarding procedures were indeed prohibited by the EA. This is the response I got from them today.

We note your concern regarding the potential impact of trans inclusive policies of Girl Guiding UK upon other members, and you ask us if they are correct in stating that the Equality Act 2010 (the EA 2010) prohibits the use of risk assessments and other safeguarding procedures.

The exclusion of trans people from membership of organisations and access to benefits and services that they provide would normally constitute unlawful gender reassignment discrimination, unless this is expressly permitted and justifiable by reference to exceptions from the non-discrimination principle. The most relevant here being membership of associations (schedule 16 EA 2010) and the provision of communal accommodation (schedule 23 EA 2010).

As a single-characteristic association for the purposes of schedule 16 of the EA 2010, Girl Guiding UK can choose to refuse membership to trans girls, or choose to admit trans girls as members.

As a provider of communal accommodation for the purposes of schedule 23, paragraph 3, Girl Guiding UK can also choose to exclude or include trans girls. Operating trans inclusive policies is permissible, provided that this is consistent with the rights of others and justifiable. The risk of sex discrimination against other members can be a relevant consideration in this context.

These matters must be approached carefully and sensitively, without prejudice, stereotypes or unwarranted assumptions. We consider that a case-by-case approach to the operation of any exception, including the question of whether reliance on any exception can be objectively justified, will be appropriate and necessary. Where organisations decide to adopt trans inclusive policies and practices, the needs of all members or service users have to be considered in any particular case.

The EA 2010 does not prohibit the use of risk assessments and other safeguarding procedures where warranted in individual cases. Occasionally, it may be necessary to carry out risk assessment and use safeguarding procedures, but whether that is necessary and what form that takes depends on the precise circumstances of each situation.

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.