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

Given all the 'allegedly's they missed most of it - as in "reportedly made a lead guiding commissioner" - means they missed the GG website etc.

Slow off the mark and wrong as usual!

But the tri o of pictures tell their own tale.

Readytoretire are there photographs with the Sun report?

So the Sun has now covered this story but has referred to the subject throughout as she/her with no reference at all to transgender. So as far as anyone reading this is concerned this is a woman guide leader behaving completely inappropriately.

When this type of thing happens, you need to look for the trustees. Looking at the GG trustees, there are a fair few who have been rotating around the third sector working for all the other usual suspects, as well as management consultancies. And several who have clearly been brought in to “listen to millennials” on “diversity and inclusion”. It looks like they are probably fully captured by all of this, and will almost certainly be convinced if its rightness until something not so great happens. And I don’t think this will shake it. Lots of people wafting around in the third sector and corporate finance are well off and / or older, and don’t really encounter any of this apart from a bit of the “non binary” teen stuff. They fully buy in to Be Kind and haven’t got the foggiest that for large parts of this “movement” the blurring of boundaries, sexual or otherwise, is not a bug but a feature.

It will take a critical level of momentum to shift this mindset and I’m not sure they are there yet. Obviously it would be great if the trustees are currently sitting in a meeting saying “what is going on here and do we need to completely reevaluate what we are doing?” But I reckon it will be brushed off as an attack by frothing “transphobes” and after a bit of social media sanitising will be diversity-and-inclusion-business-as-usual.

I don't even know what to say about this. How have these organisations learned nothing from scandals over the last few years? Who thought it was a good idea to position adult "asexuality" as a fitting subject for Girl Guide discussion?

Why are these people in GG headquarters under the impression that they have a right to present their version of PSHE to other people's children?

I think you could argue that this appointment, and other behaviours by GG HQ, contravenes the spirit of the recently updated RSE statutory guidance. Indeed, one could argue it almost tests it.

@FunkyBrownie @MrsFionaCharming

Imho I’d seriously be considering how this might effect your current of future employment opportunities if I were you.

GG have actively gone out of their way to spend time money and effort on policies that intentionally put girls at risk, give males access to girls in tents, showers and toilets. To have a policy that encourages GG leaders to teach children they will keep secrets for them from their parents and to encourage GG leaders to hand out condoms to 13 year old girls.

Now this is getting MSM light it will blow up even more.

I imagine that being a volunteer at GG is something most would be proud to put on their CV or talk about at interviews. However now prospective employers may look very differently on anyone who has remained loyal to GG during this. If the job you work in/are applying for involves safeguarding the employer may well consider you unsuitable if you’ve stood behind GG while they implement such anti girl and anti safeguarding policies. Even if you avoid putting it on your CV they will likely find out when they conduct a basic social media check, which all do now.

Regardless of how well you run your division and safeguard girls there it’s the institutions policy that will reflect on you.

Safeguarding is about prevention. The single most effective way to prevent predators in girl guides is to make it single sex. As it removes the cohort who commit 98% of all sex crimes.

Girl guides know this, and they don't care.

Transgenderism promotes detrimental gender stereotyping. Girl guides know this too, and they don't care about that either.

This isn't about whether or not their guide leaders can have a sex life. This is about endorsing an ideology that is detrimental to girls, whilst at the same time knowing it allows any predator in the country to have access to them.

I liked Sall Grover's tweet, which I saw via Julie Bindel

Imagine @Girlguiding HQ sitting around the boardroom, fretting, “What are we going to do?! Hurt the feelings of grown males who disturbingly want to be close to little girls OR protect little girls & the legacy of a 100 yr old female-only institution?! WE DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO?!”

Even if you think the feelings of males who like to role-play as female matter, it's not Girl Guides purpose to be a middle-aged-male support organisation! Feelings of any adults, male or female, are secondary to the purpose of being a space for girls. Or should be.

The failure here is similar to Jon Haidt's thing about incompatible values in universities - social justice vs truth. They sometimes conflict and you have to have a priority. (Also fairness vs inclusion in sport, as per Ross Tucker). But here it's social justice vs female children.

Despite protestations, they're clearly favouring "social justice" over what people believed their mission was.

As a GG in the early 90s I used to regularly go on joint guide/scout camps (they were by far the best camps we went on). The guide and scout tent areas were separated and cordoned off by a rope fence, but that didn't stop people ending up in the 'wrong' tent. I think that is fairly standard teenage behaviour across all generations.

I don't think it helps to mix up acceptable, established safeguarding measures, like access to contraception, and the gender idealogy debate, I feel it weakens our stance.

Here's the Girl Guides policy on contraception.

For 13 year old girls.

On girls-only residential events.

Why would this be needed?

How have they got here?

You know, if this was really ok and to the benefit of young women and girls, then you would think someone would robustly defend their position.

Or indeed justify why they wanted to surround themselves with young women and girls when they know not what it is to be one.

Instead they make accounts private or delete them.

Why? What do they think is so troublesome that they need to hide it from people?

Daily Mail joins in - yes, I know, but worth a read

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10235539/Girlguides-launch-probe-trans-Commissioner-58-saucy-dominatrix-style-picture.html

David challenor was an assistant Scout leader

Yes. It does bear repeating that a DBS wouldn't have found this. This would have been due diligence by the GG, and scouts!. Both of whome appear to have either missed or accepted it all!

As @ANewCreation says so clearly,m aking it a safeguarding framework issue. Their procedures were not robust enough to find what any number of women found in no time at all!

All that history as an organisation just ruined and overturnned by individuals with an agenda. We want GG back!!

Its so at odds with the organisation on the ground. GG is being destroyed by those paid to run it.

How does this happen?! Why arent thise runninh GG women who have worked uo the ranks rather than expensive board members with an agenda. Its supposed to be the one place that supports girls 😭

An enhanced level of check shows full details of a criminal record. This includes cautions, warnings, reprimands, spent and unspent convictions. It must also search the children and vulnerable adults 'barred list' to see if the applicant is prohibited from working with these groups.

Still only those who have been caught.

Even though MS openly says they are trans on their social media, presumably they would have gone down the 'top secret' sensitive DBS route to have their claimed 5 DBSs (3 of them enhanced ie working with Scouts, Guides and one other organisation with children/vulnerable adults) specially designed for males no longer using their birth name/sex.

What the DBS doesn't (and literally can't do) is check on social media, so won't pick up 'gun toting in a Scout uniform/BDSM mistress with whip/photos of identifiable children/'do you think I might bust out of this top' type, line blurring, boundary pushing, safeguarding nightmare crap.

That was the job of GG's supposedly 'rigorous' vetting procedure.

Even though there are enough 🚩🚩🚩🚩 for a jamboree, they failed.

There are 2 options here; both reflect very badly on GGs.

Either they didn't check MS' social media output, in which case vetting was not even basic, let alone rigorous.

Or they did check MS' social media output and found nothing concerning there.

It’s hard to know which one is worse. And as you say, scully, if vetting failed for this individual, how many others are there?

Either way, this is a safeguarding framework failure and means that Girl Guides are currently unable to carry out their duty to safeguard girls in their care.

The lack of judgment and understanding of safeguarding is quite chilling. This is not the organisation I loved.