Dr Nic FairPlay For Women on Victoria Derbyshire 10.15

GulagMilkMonitor - This kid was 7 when they started identifying as trans. The BBC has been following them. Social transitioning of young children should be done carefully, in case the child later changes their mind

How does a child of 7 say “hang on I don’t want to transition anymore” when followed for 3 years by a camera crew?

Yes this.

These activists talk about social transition as if it's nothing. As if no harm is done and the child can just revert to their old name and habits without any problems if they desist.

There aren't any balloons or cake or parties or school assemblies or fucking penguins for children who change their mind (the vast majority). Support is withdrawn because all the funding is for 'trans kids' and this child is no longer 'trans'.

Nobody knows what to say to a child who had a trans identity and now desists -it doesn't fit the narrative. Nobody's bothered writing the guidance to keep these children safe and well. The people who write the guidance wish these children would just go away permanently or at least STFU and get out of the way of the lovely sparkly story they want to sell.

We're leaving extremely vulnerable children to cope with this on their own, without support, because there is no support unless you carry on along the railroad track.

This is what's happening to ordinary children and everybody who has any sort of influence or power in this area now has a duty to speak out. It's not OK to let volunteers or front-line low paid workers take the rap.

Those children who are 'followed' by the BBC (or who are otherwise made a cause celebre) have it so much worse. How does the BBC's decision to 'follow' this child affect their wellbeing? How is this not detrimental?

The BBC must be held accountable for the effect they have had on this child's wellbeing and the effect they have had on this debate as a whole.

Safeguarding applies to everyone.

I am astonished that the BBC are so aggressively cavalier with safeguarding issues raised by women on behalf of ourselves and our children, given their history over the last couple of decades.

You'd think they'd have learned.

Brownie Guide promise c1970 - I promise that I will do my best, to do my duty to God, to serve the Queen and help other people and keep the Brownie Guide law.

Law: A Brownie Guide thinks of others before herself and does a good turn every day.

Motto: lend a hand.

I did the laundry one which was good coz I got to use the iron at 8. Also cooking - sharp knives and electric mixer. Hostess- total pants.

Still from 1:24

Yes, Lend a Hand. We promised "to serve God and the Queen, and to help other people...." I quite liked the Brownies, we were more physically active in ours than most packs (and our wartime-era Brown Owl was a force to be reckoned with) but I'm finding it hard to reconcile the drippy Guides organisation I knew in the 80s with it now being supposed to be a bastion of go-gettery and female equality. In my day it still had a very 50s feel and the role of girls being designated as "Guides" makes me cringe to this day.

That GG statement on Lucy Bannerman's tweet says that girls will not be managed out if they identify as boys. So are the GG now acknowledging that they are still girls, no matter how they identify? If so, they will have to acknowledge that boys are still boys, no matter how they identify.

When I was in Brownies briefly in the late 80s, the motto was ‘lend a hand.’ Even my seven year old self felt it was a bit lame and unfulfilling. For one of the badges we had to wash a pair of socks, and for another we had to learn to lay the table. I binned it off after a year or so because I didn’t want to do housework or sewing or gardening, I wanted to play football and make fires, and don’t even get me started on the horrible brown dress and bobble hat. I was jealous because I wanted to join the Cubs.

Lucy Bannerman Times journalist:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0eba70ea-c1da-11e8-a932-84839f5183a4

"Spot the difference between @ Girlguiding guidelines on girls who self-ID, issued today, (in red); and the guidelines and statement given to me yesterday.

The story is accurate.
Good news they seem to have taken on board members’ concerns, but why not acknowledge it publicly?"

twitter.com/TimesLucy/status/1045251761227943936

Brownie anthem: should be Greatest Love of All.
I'm sure there will be better ones!

That’s not the Guide law.

The first Guide law is
“A Guide is honest, reliable and can be trusted”.

The Organisation’s law is clearly “Do as I say, not as I do”.

"Think of others before yourself and do a good turn everyday"

They need to change this to: "A Brownie Guide learns to look after herself, because she ain't no use helping everyone else if she does not understand her own needs"

Maybe not so catchy, but I was brought up with this mentality (and was in Brownies) where children are thought to be selfish and mean and need to be civilised. It took me until having twins to deal with to realise this (thanks to TAMBA)

Mermaid's parent wrote in April:
growinguptransgender.com/2018/04/14/girl-guides-how-to-radicalise-hate-against-trans-children-in-10-easy-steps/

But still, how many of Joe public are going to be convinced by but they identify as? Not very many I would’ve thought. People still aren’t stupid, no matter how biased the interview.

Regarding the empty chairing: I wonder if the Tara Hudson debacle influenced that decision? That really didn’t come across well, and it will have been noticed.
Also the fact that GG refused to participate in an interview on BBC television won’t have gone unnoticed either. It’s not some tinpot sky channel, it’s the BBC.
The transgender is am sand castle is falling apart and the tide is coming in. The BBC might hang about till the bitter end but it won’t last for ever. There will come a point where they ditch the bucket and spade and retreat, and maybe this morning saw the first tentative steps towards that.

Thanks Piper.

I've seen it all over twitter these last view days, watching the people who have blocked us all. They are enraged that two sides are being heard, even when it's still weighted against feminists. For example, the VD item would, if any of those organisations had taken part, have been incredibly unbalanced. As it was, Nic balanced the film. But people are furious at not getting phone calls, as if the BBC had to make a hundred million requests and hold the item until someone said ye.

No, they don't. On Girl guiding Nic has previously been stood down by the BBC due to the refusal of AWA to engage. No more.

Bang on Bird. Anti-woman activists will be reflecting very bitterly on the fact that the BBC's great bastion of pro trans propaganda, the Victoria Derbyshire programme, is prepared to say 'fine, we will do it without you' .

I think people should still complain at the shocking hostility of the interview and the appealing bias throughout, including that awful exploitative film, though.

That was Roy Hattersley on HIGNFY. Or not on it, to be more accurate.

Good point about the empty chairing, hopefully it means things are changing.

It's reminded me of HIGNFY and the guest who didn't show up so they put a tub of lard on in his place. Who was the guest, does anyone remember?

Charlie, interesting about the empty chairing, and I think you are right. The mistake I think they have made is thinking that they can escalate it and still do #nodebate simultaneously forever. Eventually if they kick up enough of a stink, ordinary people will be engaged enough that they will hear the other side, and guess which side people actually agree with?

I agree and this is the main thrust of it for me, rather than the sexual assault thing. I know for a fact that as a 13 year old I would have been uncomfortable changing in front of a male bodied person. The thought that I could have been called 'bigoted' for having those feelings is really upsetting.

It's the secrecy aspect too. That it's something that shouldn't be discussed or that parents don't need to know.

I'm not happy with leaders encouraging children to keep secrets from their patents, or saying to girls that they can't express their discomfort.

More influential than their numbers.

Well don't the BBC have a disproportionately high number of TG people working for them?

Just over 2%, so although not a high number, it's significantly higher than the often quoted 0.5% of the population. Of course, we don't know how senior or influential these individuals are.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905129/amp/BBC-chief-stunned-secret-staff-sex-survey-reveals-417-workers-transgender.html

Thank you for articulating that so well. Yes, when the possible rape aspect is alluded to on tv/twitter, it's so very easy for the TRAs to launch on that and wrongly accuse us of deeming all transwomen rapists.
It's worth pulling it back a bit and saying it's enough that a girl will, at the very least feel horribly embarrassed undressing in front of a transgirl-

I agree and this is the main thrust of it for me, rather than the sexual assault thing. I know for a fact that as a 13 year old I would have been uncomfortable changing in front of a male bodied person. The thought that I could have been called 'bigoted' for having those feelings is really upsetting.

It should be enough that some girls just don't want to be in that sort of intimate space with a trans girl. And they should not be the ones having 'special arrangements' made if they are uncomfortable with it.

There is certainly a trans BBC researcher who is retweeting mermaids, taking a very obvious public stance, responding to people like Jane Fae etc when they complain, talking about media hatred bigotry, and generally pursuing an extremely unbalanced social media path, which to my understanding is a breach of the BBC rules.

This was an important moment for Victoria Derbyshire, an unapologetically pro trans programme. It is the first time they have 'emptychaired' (Google it) a pro trans organisation, several of them. That's no doubt why VD (or whoever the presenter was) acted as their mouthpiece. I doubt they will be a mouthpiece in the same way next time. It was a soft landing for them into unknown territory. The nodebate tactic always needed calling out, and it's a signal that this is now permitted, and could be repeated. Pro trans organisations are now faced with the knowledge that if they pull out or refuse, an interview can go ahead with a feminist organisation. It's not a massive step but it is defin itely a step forward, almost regardless of what was said.

A pp said the NSPCC refused to debate a children's safeguarding issue and that stands out. It is phenomenally shocking.

Is there a key member of staff with the Victoria Derbyshire show though who is invested in trans-rights?