Girlguiding Issue coming up Good Morning Britain

Also, Stonewall still has our friend Aimee Challenor on the Trans Advisory Board, AAIK. Given Aimee Challenor transitioned at 16, I would guess their voice is pretty influential when it comes to speaking for CHILDREN. Despite Aimee thinking it was totally fine and normal to be involved with father David Challenor, including as election agent, despite knowing David had been arrested. David was convicted of raping and torturing a 10-year old girl. A crime which happened in the house he shared with Aimee, and that served as the Green Party Coventry HQ.
So my sincerest apologies if I think Stonewall does not really seem to keep a clean house when it comes to SAFEGUARDING, if this is the judgment displayed by one of their most prominent "trans youth experts."

That's true. I offer my unreserved apologies to sandwich trolley guy!

Yes. I have way more confidence in sandwich trolley guy making the right call than this lot.

The bloke who brings the sandwich trolley round their office at lunchtime?

Don’t slander him! The average bloke on the street would give a resounding ‘no’ to ‘is it a good idea to let penises in the girl guides tent’.

And let's be clear - the high-profile trans organisations are almost all lobby/pressure groups. They do not take into account competing interests, seem to have very little oversight, and the policies they want are increasingly crossing the line for all common sense and safeguarding principles.

This. Remember the Guides would be unable to stop Aimee Challenor from volunteering now - and they have time on their hands. But there's no problem right?

I'd love to know who they took legal advice from. TELI? The random goady posters who pop up on here to tell us (entirely incorrectly) that misgendering/deadnaming is a crime? Random people they grabbed off the street? The bloke who brings the sandwich trolley round their office at lunchtime?

We have developed our policy in line with legal advice and, in the case of our guidance around transgender members, organisations with experience of supporting transgender children and young people. Contrary to claims made on social media we do not make policy based on comments from individuals or pressure groups.

Stonewall is a pressure group. It used to use pressure as a force for good. Now it uses pressure to take away rights and dignity from females.

We have developed our policy in line with legal advice and, in the case of our guidance around transgender members, organisations with experience of supporting transgender children and young people.

Which transgender members? Did they develop this policy with transboys in mind?

Who else could be a member of a girls organisation?

I'd like to see their risk assessments on all of this. From a safeguarding pov; from a liability pov of withholding relevant information from parents so they can give informed consent; from a DBS pov if a leader has a GRC and name-change, etc. From a reputational pov of secretly changing from single-sex to single-gender when GG was one of the few places that knew the difference and thrived on challenging gender stereotypes.

Even though when we asked them "do you want to be kind to everyone and include them?" we didn't actually specifically tell them that being kind to everyone and including them meant getting butt arse naked in front of a teen with a penis in the shower block.

Many of those girls responding to that survey will not have had any direct experience of a transgirl to date and will just have replied with a standard discrimination is bad answer.

They will not understand the repercussions of this until they find themselves next to a penis in the shower. When they are inevitably upset about this no doubt they will be told they are bigoted.

They need informed consent from parents not the under age girls.

"We asked the girls of the organization, 'Do you want to be kind to everyone and include them?' because we knew that their socialization would lead them to give a positive answer. This has given us carte blanche to completely ignore safeguarding risks because a majority of the girls told us they didn't mind if we did."

It is important to us that we listen to girls and young women, 86% of whom have told us, through the Girls’ Attitudes Survey, that they do not think people should be discriminated against because they are transgender.

I think you will find that if you surveyed anyone on this board they will say that they do not want transgender people discriminated against. BUT this does not mean that we pretend sex is not real or that material reality doesn't exist or are blind to the obvious safeguarding risks involved in mixing males/females.

We have developed our policy in line with legal advice and, in the case of our guidance around transgender members, organisations with experience of supporting transgender children and young people. Contrary to claims made on social media we do not make policy based on comments from individuals or pressure groups.

But not women. Not mothers or fathers. You didn't ask any experts in structural analysis of male violence against girls, otherwise known as actual feminists... You didn't think about girl's needs, boundaries or how they will feel comfortable about speaking up if they have concerns about sharing the space they are vulnerable in if it is supposed to be male-free.
And let's be clear - the high-profile trans organisations are almost all lobby/pressure groups. They do not take into account competing interests, seem to have very little oversight, and the policies they want are increasingly crossing the line for all common sense and safeguarding principles.

As an organisation we pride ourselves on caring for every individual. Simply being transgender does not make someone more of a safeguarding risk than any other person.

The deliberate and wilful misinterpretation here is infuriating. Is it more of a safeguarding risk to let male-bodied individuals share a room with females, than to have a room that's all female? This isn't about transgender people being more of a risk; it's about MALE-bodied individuals being more of a risk. But they know that, of course, and are deliberately obfuscating the issue. The lack of concern for girls is heart-breaking, especially knowing the stats on sexual assault in schools. I can't say this surprises me though.

That e-mail!

913 words (just pasted into word to check) saying nothing.

When actually what parents want is a single word answer - "yes" or "no" to the question "can you promise that children with vulvas will be separated from children with penises in overnight accommodation, changing rooms and shower facilities while in your care?"

It is not a hard question. It does not require 913 words to answer it. It just requires one word. One truthful word.

If the answer is "yes" then we can all stop worrying.

If the answer is "no" then parents can decide whether or not to vote with their feet.

They need to pushed to now describe themselves accurately in all their literature as a mixed sex organisation that doesn't separate sleeping and showering facilities whilst on camps.

Zutt, I think that's exactly what they are doing.

It is important to us that we listen to girls and young women, 86% of whom have told us, through the Girls’ Attitudes Survey, that they do not think people should be discriminated against because they are transgender.

I hope they are not using that survey as consent.

The substitution of girls and women for young people is very telling. As is their refusal to admit they are not a single-sex organisation any longer. Even if you ignore all the safeguarding concerns; and the blatant lie that confidentiality is tied to data protection (when their policy predates the GDPR legislation) they are still fudging whether they are single sex or single gender.

God they seem thick.

Maybe they should do a parents survey to get a bit of feed back on the popularity of teenage penis in their daughter's tents.

It’s not just about safeguarding. Don’t 15 year old girls have a right to choose not to share sleeping accommodation or showers with male bodied peers in a girls organisation.

And if not why not?

It is important to us that we listen to girls and young women, 86% of whom have told us, through the Girls’ Attitudes Survey, that they do not think people should be discriminated against because they are transgender.

Well i don't think people should be discriminated against for being transgender either. But saying a male can't go into a female space because they're not female is not discrimination.

Ah so we all noticed then!

What makes them distinctive if it isnt for girls any longer? Knitting and flower arranging and dresses and make up!? I wanted my girls to move away from.gender norms.

Amidst all the noise we try to remain focused on the children and young people that we support.

Interesting use of language, no mention of girls in their closing paragraph, says it all really.