A trans-Identified BDSM fan/gun nut is now a senior leader at Girlguiding

I had a reply last night. I complained as a leader and family of current young members.

Looks like a standard reply to me.
Especially as the "Meet the team" page for Nottinghamshire GG is back up showing Monica as commissioner for Southwell.

Thank you for your email.

The safety and wellbeing of our members is our absolute priority. We follow rigorous recruitment and vetting procedures, have clear policies, and a volunteer code of conduct which volunteers are expected to follow to keep our members safe. We are aware of the concerns you have raised.

We are looking into this as a matter of urgency and will provide the necessary support and action in line with our compliance procedures.

Kind Regards
Complaints and Compliance

Will do.

@Helleofabore please post your response if/ when you get one!

Eggybrains

I am keenly waiting to see if they send a prewritten reply.

I did not make any mention of this leader’s sex or trans status.

My focus was purely on the sexual nature of their SM posts and the way the guns were portrayed. It was sent before the topic hit MN or the mainstream though, so maybe it has been lost in the deluge.

In a "female" organisation like the guides, "trans" specifically means violating the single-sex paradigm. It requires an organisational belief that this person is somehow different or an exception to other males.

This.

It's the sacred caste concept. Like priests, police, TV personalities. Giving an ideological pass to certain men who constituent exactly the same risk as all other men is a red flag.

Ideology isn't a protection. In this case it's a loophole.

Have people got responses to their emails? I am still waiting. Maybe I need to write again.

Also noting it's not even just the guns, the BDSM and the messages inviting discussions of a sexual nature. It's the fact of publishing this publically, under their real name, on social media. That demonstrates an astonishing lack of judgement and understanding of boundaries and what is appropriate behaviour for someone in a position like this.

I disagree, I think both points are red flags.

Being "trans" is the red flag in the sense that in this case it means "being a (probably lone) male in a 'female' organisation".

Being "trans" in a mixed-sex organisation is much, much less of a big deal. It's just another male. There are still potential issues if they insist on being treated as female, but the organisation will at least be set up to allow for being mixed-sex.

In a "female" organisation like the guides, "trans" specifically means violating the single-sex paradigm. It requires an organisational belief that this person is somehow different or an exception to other males. They're compelled to pretend they're female to justify excluding the other males. And every single safeguarding and women's rights violation follows from this.

The red flags are the guns and the BDSM- not being trans

I disagree, I think both points are red flags. The open door policy for trans women is a fantastic opportunity for some very dodgy, boundary pushing self-ID men to enter a single sexed environment not designed for them. Plus the cynic in me always wonders what the motivation is for TW to get involved in female only spaces when there are so many mixed sex organisations they could volunteer in 🤔 summed it up perfectly IMHO.

Argh Necessary I hope that isn't true because at that point really.... we just need to get the kids out of GG and let them crack on with their important work with males uninterrupted by safeguarding or principles or basic common sense or any other nasty old fashioned stuff. They can join up with the women's rape crisis service who don't serve women and are wholly dedicated to the much more important male clientele.

Debbie thank you for reading, I completely agree with you. There should be no exceptions to safeguarding based on a protected characteristic, this is a disaster for LGBT+ teachers and those in positions of trust with kids and vulnerable people. Takes #notourcrimes into the realms of #notourbloodyawfulbehaviour.

The fact is that if Monica weren't a trans identifying man, Monica wouldn't be in girl guides. Because guides is an organisation for girls.

There is the distinct possibility that the safeguarding hole is even more massive than we thought. Quote from the latest :

I mean this is kind of even more hilarious when you think about it, but I believe they head-hunted this person. I believe they said, "Will you will you be a leader?"

Now I could be wrong but I think that's what they said. I saw a social media post from this person that said, "They asked me to be a leader, I don't really want to do it," blah blah blah.

But the thing is the hilarious thing is, that opens the possibility that Girl Guiding courted this guy because they wanted to go up on the Stonewall index, you know on the Diversity Champions scheme.

That's speculation, but it's not at all far-fetched, and is something that needs to be considered in the investigation.

It is consistent with what we've seen - organisations, particularly HR departments, doing utterly daft things to meet their internal targets of "top 100 Stonewall ranking".

So if Girl Guides was looking for a "trans" - ie male in their case - there just isn't enough supply! It's likely that they latched onto the first and only, extremely unsuitable, bottom-of-the-barrel male-claiming-to-be-a-woman person orbiting their organisation.

Basically you create this problem by saying "we want a male in this position, but only one who thinks it's appropriate to pretend he's female and work in an 'all-female' organisation for children".

What sort of male do you THINK you're likely to attract? And if you're then inclined to take whatever you can find!?

Although I suppose on the flip side parents might then feel like they’re being pushed out of a place where their girls should be prioritised but there are usually a few guide/brownie packs? So surely most parents could move to another pack while making it clear why they’ve left.

Quite. This is a male who is placing their wants above the needs of girls in an organisation set up to support girls.

The red flags are the guns and the BDSM- not being trans.

I think a male person who wants to embed themselves in an institution run by women for girls is highly relevant.

Was it really a surprise that a person transgressing such boundaries had unsuitable social media photos? No, it wasn't, it was boringly predictable.

The fact is that if Monica weren't a trans identifying man, Monica wouldn't be in girl guides. Because guides is an organisation for girls.

Also, I very much suspect that if Monica were female, guides would have got rid of them quick smart.

As Debbie says, we have to have the same standards for everyone

I'm deeply disappointed and not remotely reassured by GG's response.

DebbieInBirmingham that's a reasonable response.

Maybe so, Lovely, but that is the person's sex. It seems to be the GG want to talk specifically about trans status, as if it is the subject under discussion.

The only way that the person's trans status is relevant is if it is being used as an excuse for breaking social media guidelines - as in, if it's okay to post sexualised photos and gun modelling shots if one is trans. Which would be absurd.

I disagree - the fact this individual is male is also very relevant to safeguarding.

What we must ensure is that trans people are subjected to the same safeguarding procedures as everyone else. If we lower the standards for trans people then we are going to attract people who are looking for a lower standard of safeguarding. The dangers are obvious.

This is a quite separate issue to whether male people should be treated in the same way as females. I don't think we should, and we certainly shouldn't be taking up positions that are designated for women.

It's absolutely appalling in its implications for trans people in employment with vulnerable people and children. It's why my mind went to Debbie as Debbie is a well known writer in the national press as well as a secondary school teacher, and this is something they have the platform to address if they're as concerned and outraged by this as I am. @DebbieInBirmingham you might find this of interest.

Are they implying that inappropriate sexual sharing and gun pictures are a normal part of being trans and there's a safeguarding kind of white card involved with trans volunteers for this?

Exactly. The only way that the person's trans status is relevant is if it is being used as an excuse for breaking social media guidelines - as in, if it's okay to post sexualised photos and gun modelling shots if one is trans. Which would be absurd.