Change of CEO at mermaids…

80k, eh? Wonder what's the reason for the increase?

Looks like desperate window dressing, particularly as it's spiced up with the "culture change piece" management speak BS

That's interesting cos my deletion was swift. All I had done, was quoted text from the Telegraph which was about WPATH and the e-word (won't say it in case that's not allowed either) Maybe watchers were quick on the draw?

But the article was a proper one and the word was used in the right context.

twitter.com/RedMags60/status/1597979190313115648?s=20&t=jqGQbmxO_mdcp2X3namMSg

D'oh - late catching up with the thread and all my comments have ended up together at the bottom.

That should be: "I really hope that is what is going to happen in the centres that replace the Tavistock".

Yes, that jumped out for me, too. Where was the tweet seen?

Rather like the Tavistock, I suspect it will not be possible to adapt and repair, and the answer is to begin again, however with strong boundaries to prevent those with views and beliefs incompatible with safeguarding, regulation and law from simply recreating the problem.

I really that is what is going to happen in the centres that replace the Tavistock.

Re: bucket of sick - maybe that's the point.

A realisation that they need to clear the decks of all the people SG attracted to the charity.

If they choose to go then that's a win.

This absolutely smells ferrety to me....

'Piece' implies PR/image.
Mention of people management is interesting and suggestive
And anyone actually hot on EDI as in all nine characteristics and actual law, would go down like a bucket of cold sick with the staff.

They don't just need someone 'fantastic', they need Mary Flipping Poppins.

Ah yes that makes a lot more sense.

It’ll still be an uphill battle I should think. They can’t change too significantly or they will just be written off as TERFs. I foresee a mass exodus of tantruming non-binary staff.

Anna SheHer doesn't mention trans at all. Or children/ young people.

I suspect that, in the wake of the Breslow and Mew revelations, MM was forced to review the background checks that had been conducted on staff and volunteers, especially given that their headcount had increased considerably around a year ago.

Who knows what else was uncovered? Might explain the very swift shutdown of MM helplines as well as the sudden departure of SG.

I am not at all surprised if it turns out that under SG no care at all was taken to safeguard that procedures, processes, sytems, management… conformed to any standards.

The essence of SG was always to ‚know better‘ and therefore ignore and circumvent any controls and regulations. That was her whole message.

I read as change of culture within the organisation itself rather than cultural perceptions of society. Which could be a fantastic move if they mean what I think they do, but do they have enough self awareness to realise that's what they desperately need?

I think so. If we remove the pointless word "piece", then they're looking for someone who can "lead a culture change". And that surely means a culture change within the organisation.

I agree with the people who responded to my comment by saying that it is going to be very hard to find someone competent and sensible who wants the job. Though I imagine the £80k salary will be an incentive.

I’d more read it as a reverse-ferret: we need to change the culture of pushing transition on children, into something more defensible and more in line with where NHS thinking is going

Very interesting.

Looks like an acknowledgment that wholesale change is needed to me.

Also if you look at the requirements it's pretty damning of SG that a wholesale review is needed of operational processes/systems/procedures/management - upshot is it's hard to think of any aspect of an organisation that falls outside of those remits.

It's a big red flag that such sweeping interventions are required.

Also. What's a 'culture change piece'?

I’m suspicious it means changing the culture of people believing it is wrong to block puberty and give synthetic hormones to children. SG failed to do this. They can really only succeed in their quest if they can get society to accept the narrative of the “trans child”.

I’m probably way off though!

Seen on Twitter. Looks like we were wrong about the Office Angels ad!

Also. What's a 'culture change piece'?

Lots of dodgy types will want that job but they’ll probably not give it to an obvious AGP. I reckon probably they’ll end up with a woke bloke or handmaiden from some suspect little fringe charity. Perhaps one that promotes queer theory influenced sex education or similar. The “anti-bullying” ”CEO” who objected to women being allowed privacy during breast screenings is the ur-example of the type I mean.

From a question in site stuff. Reply below;

YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet · 26/11/2022 10:39

Hi @GrabbyGabby thanks for posting. In the past, we received reports about the term 'castration' when used to describe gender reassignment surgery and it became clear that transgender people would struggle to engage in a discussion where the word was used. We also found it's clear that using pronouns about a transperson that they have consciously rejected will have the same effect. As our guidelines say, we don't want Mumsnet to be a place that feels inherently hostile to any group here in good faith. We're not here to stifle debate and we do think it's possible to have a discussion about all aspects of sex and gender within our guidelines, as most threads in Feminism have shown.

We should be clear there is no blanket ban on the term but we do look at things in the wider context of the discussion.

That is what would make it salvageable, potentially, yes.

However I suspect someone with experience in any of that, trying to raise awareness and change practice to any of that, is going to be called transphobic in the first two minutes.

This is one of the organisations that have systematically chased out and avoided contact with anyone not absolutely on message, and unfortunately in the eyes of such organisations, safeguarding children is not compatible with desired practice.

Of course this means that desired practice is not tenable, as they are finding. Rather like the Tavistock, I suspect it will not be possible to adapt and repair, and the answer is to begin again, however with strong boundaries to prevent those with views and beliefs incompatible with safeguarding, regulation and law from simply recreating the problem.

Apparently Eunuchs are quite fond of the language of castration and are reclaiming it to refer to the surgical removal of their gonads. So it might eventually make a comeback.

Corgi, the trouble is...what sensible and experienced professional would want the job.

You would almost be starting from scratch, and the likelihood is that the funding will dry up. I doubt that Children in Need, say, will touch it in the future. Also if you start looking at wider competencies, rather than a simple enthusiasm for Mermaids current and apparent aims and objectives, you might end up with a bit of a cull of staff and hence lose the woke wonga coming from the US or people like that Hbomberguy or whatever his name was.

Think of how long it took Stonewall to find someone. They are far more established.

There is a lot happening in terms of NHS and other policy and there is a role for a charity that can support and provide a voice for the parents of children with gender dysphoria, some of whom will carry that dysphoria on through to adulthood. However the tunnel vision exhibited by Susie and Helen should rule Mermaids out of the conversation. Affirmation only is not the answer, and indeed will be dangerous for many children.

If I were Mermaids, I'd be looking to recruit an experienced professional from the charity sector, ideally with expertise in one or more of the following: cleaning up messes; reputation management; safeguarding; data protection. Ideally all four.