That write up shows some unusual things- the charity commission granting anonymity to two leaving Trustees on ‘safety’ grounds? WTF
Why would a charity’s leaving Trustee get more of a safety problem than a staying Trustee?
I can guess the answer in one case discussed on here where there were concerns over inappropriate opinions held around child sexual abuse.But two Trustees leaving?
Why was that issue not expanded on by the reporter?
That article shows exactly what women on here are saying. Smokescreen of internal issues acting as wider safeguarding fail.

Fascinating discussion. If employees are like the Stonewall employee who can't function in a formal setting without support animal, support worker and mother present, the work culture will be .... unusual to say the least.

46,000 people helped via the phone line.

Even if we imagine that that figure usually represents a parent and child pairing, the thought that there could be 23,000-46,000 trans minors in the UK right now is a bit 😲

Oh! And as we learned from Maya’s tribunal, all this woke HR shit is imported from the US and isn’t properly compatible with UK Equalities and Employment laws anyway.

The EDI parasite has caused similar issues in several Silicon Valley tech companies - I forget the names of them, but basically, once you let it in, it eats through employee time and company resources the way the Very Hungry Caterpillar eats through fruit.

Only instead of turning into a butterfly, the company turns to uttershit, missing targets, losing clients and eventually, not really knowing what it is they go to work to do

Third Sector Magazine has a new article up - I’m surprised I can read it because a lot of their stuff isn’t viewable without an account:

www.thirdsector.co.uk/urgent-review-launched-mermaids-report-reveals-oppression-staff/governance/article/1811970

Belinda Bell needs to get a (metaphorical!) stab proof vest, she’s the white privileged academic mummy of a trans kids.
The EDI borg will come for her too. Unlike Suse, she’s not even getting paid for this.

Best come out as non binary, sharpish.

When the organisation I worked for undertook a similar program, the key message was that a review had determined that most of the workforce were not aware of the key purpose/vision/bla bla and this new program rollout would ensure all from domestic staff all the way up to the top were singing from the same sheet. It meant performance reviews had to show how our role included a number of key behaviours. It was a disaster and totally inappropriate for many roles. Lots of upset staff. The organisation later went on to declare a huge financial deficit as well as poor management and serious Safeguarding issues.

Thank you for all these excellent posts.
Sounds like they might be seeing the effects of this wider politics that alienates children from their parents.
Individual devastation of course but also a culture encouraged where the young people remake themselves in their own image (which must be superficially empowering as well as disconnecting from others) and they are encouraged to feel like they have unique reasons to feel angry and alienated from the older/parental generations.

Which means higher education and workplace life must be very difficult for them to navigate without applying a lot of critical thinking to that politics.

But that sort of thinking is likely to be very unsettling so maybe is not something they will be able to think about for many years. I do worry for these young adults and the cognitive dissonance they have to carry.
We know that discovering you’ve been seriously lied to as a child is very traumatising so hopefully a professional organisation will be set up for them so that in future there is somewhere for young adults and their parents to process all of that.

I think this is probably a very, very good summary.

The service should also be very effective at understanding and navigating the difference between the wants and needs of their very vulnerable and easily manipulated service users, who by definition are struggling to accept the material reality of their bodies.

As humans we quite often do not properly understand our own needs very well - even in good circumstances. In situations where we are vulnerable and being told that we are persecuted, we are highly unlikely to effectively advocate for ourselves or even know what we should be advocating for.

Responsible services recognise this and enable appropriate service user involvement.

It’s all a bit Dr Frankenstein and his Monster, innit?

One trans identifying adolescent in the building is plenty for me most days, imagine trying to manage a workforce made up of them?

All the made up pronouns to remember!
All the micro aggressions to avoid making!
All the deadlines missed because ‘dysphoria’!

And now they want to introduce ‘Reverse Mentoring’ on top!

😬

When you put it like that.

😳😱😵🙁😞

One of the key issues raised by staff at Mermaids was resentment at non trans people on staff and in leadership positions - as Mermaids grew from a group of parents supporting other parents.

The problem is however, when you have a lot of highly needy service users there has to be someone to provide them with services.

What I find interesting is that presumably, the service user>staff pipeline has mutated under Susie’s watch, probably due to ROGD (despite the protestations that ROGD is a terf conspiracy).

Mermaids was born as a support group for parents of extremely gender non conforming children (boys, because swishy boys were frowned on and tomboy girls were tolerated) who were ‘watching and waiting’.

Susie first made contact as one of these service users, a parent of a swishy boy, who was distressed due to being bullied at school (and according to the infamous Ted Talk, at home too).

Susie embraced the medical interventions that were happening on a small scale elsewhere, so much so that she took her swishy little boy to Norman Spack in the US, who supplied the blockers and hormones.

Susie and her tribe of the new type of gender-moms piled the pressure onto GIDS to supply these drugs at home in the UK. When GIDS were too cautious and slow in the adoption and roll out of this protocol, Susie struck up a working relationship with Webberly, and this new bigger group of NHS kids getting grey market meds piled further pressure on GIDS to take over prescribing for the sake of ‘harm reduction’.

And in that timeline the trans kids documentaries and reality shows started to roll out, and the pre teens and teens watching them on TV looked up the people in them online and found trans YouTubers, and then the big spike happened.

So the majority of Mermaids service users presumably moved from being concerned mummies of swishy boys and instead became teenagers, majority female, who had learned about trans online, many of whom had autistic traits, all of whom are thoroughly immersed in identity politics, through the phones in their pockets.

And thus the service user to staff pipeline (already established by Susie herself) meant that instead of a staff of mummies like
Suse, they now had a staff of very young, often autistic, adults who had been taught, via online conditioning, to hate their parents, and to hate ‘Karens’ and to hate ‘Boomers’ who had been instructed to run away from home and join glitter families.

Of course they were going to turn on Susie eventually.

And if we thought Susie was shit at running a charity, this load of blue haired babies are gonna be far, far worse. All we can hope is that the whole thing implodes when the safeguarding investigation reports back…

… and we don’t yet know how far the institutional capture has gotten inside the Charities Commission itself.

Unfortunately it's more like this these days

I think a lot of charities must end up with service users as staff.

But are they usually so needy? And incapable of dealing with adult life?

Me?

That’s a really psychologically realistic observation. I wonder how other charities deal with it.
I also wonder if Mermaids would have the same or different issues with staff who are the other type of service user- parents of kids/ young people who have gender dysphoria or of kids who have adopted a trans or NB identity?

Boiledbeetle · Today 14:15

Now I'm imagining you with a tin head and eyes on stalks.

I honestly think most of their staff have been service users and failed to make the jump from one to the other in their heads. They still expect the same level of pastoral support.

It was said when the wheels first came off that they'd employed those who could not differentiate between employment and being a service user. The review would appear to suggest the main priorities are serving these employee service users better rather than focusing on service delivery. Which frankly may be safer an outcome for all concerned.

Thanks @Boiledbeetle . The one with the "big cock" is definitely my favourite though

Hopefully this has been forwarded to the Charity Commission so that they can see what priorities this children's sex change charity have?

I wonder where they are going to source all their new trans poc and two spirit staff from?

Can’t imagine there are many suitable applicants within commuting distance of Yeadon?

No, I could never live up to wonders such as

For mash get Smash

Just had a really great idea for a series of the apprentice.

terfs v tras