Guiding - would you go back now?

Besides any other reasons for not wanting them there Rainbows waiting lists are incredibly long and every 4 year old boy on them prevents a 4 year old girl from having a place.
or did I misunderstand and you were being shocked that someone was actually treating a 4 year old boy as a girl?

I read a thread on this somewhere where a leader was relieved because it meant she could now remove A 4 YEAR OLD trans girl from her rainbows waiting list as she was struggling with the whole thing. What’s the world
coming too!

Yep.

@TheseWordsAreMine Woodcraft Folk are over there > I hear they like males who say they are females, so you should fit right in.

They want everything. The bleeding hearts on TV the last 24 hrs won’t acknowledge that there are plenty of mixed sex organisations that men and boys irrespective of ‘identity’ can join. They hate us having anything that is just for us.

Despite the canine plopper’s yesterday claims to the contrary about ignoring the EA2010 and having a choice to be single sex with added trans inclusion they want everything to be trans inclusive and us never to be able to have anything that’s single sex.

They don’t want us to have anything that is just for female humans. But the more they push the angrier I get and I know I’m not the only one. A few years ago I would have said “TWAW but we know they’re not really but it makes they feel included” I would have used preferred pronouns again to be kind or polite. But no more. The more they push the further away I move from compromise.

DARVO and Kink shaming in one post.

That is going some.

Put your big boy pants on and grow up.

if you personalise the need for safeguarding processes and policies you are proving to everyone that you don’t belong in an organisation working with young people.

Safeguarding processes are not personal. Everyone has to follow the rules.

And fuck right off with the “you want to kill me” hyberbolic bollocks.

lol.

I’m a third generation Guide whose daughter didn’t become a fourth gen Guide due to the bollock pandering that has infested Guiding during her childhood years.

I have my nan’s (1930s) mum’s (1960s) and my (1980s) metal badges displayed together in a frame on my bedroom wall and I am very sad that my daughter didn’t have the same opportunity to join an exclusively female Guides (she attends an all girls high school though, which at least means she gets a similar experience to Guides via her school facilitated Duke of Edinburgh Award activities).

I will definitely explore options locally re: volunteering with a Guide Unit or a Brownie Pack in the new year.

Obvious wind up is obvious.

Anyway, no I wouldn't.

GG waved their pompoms for parents who knowingly shoehorned their vulnerable kid into a space that wasn't theirs.

When there is a multitude of other mixed sex activities that they could have enjoyed, including scouting with a v similar ethos and super inclusive vibe, why would you set up your own kid like that?

None of this is about what's best for children.

Or you could come up with a definition of the word ?

That's what the word means and has always meant. There isn't another viable definition. (Is there one you want to suggest?)

If you want to name something else you need another word.

You might want to acquaint yourself with the concept of Tom Stoppard's cricket bat.

Bet he's from Reddit...

I think that dudes should accept when women and girls say 'no' to them.

It is an issue of recognising consent. Just like the issue of claiming words to mean what you want them to mean rather what the majority of the population using the language knows it means due to centuries of usage.

If a male person cannot recognise that female people are saying they don't consent, that is a fucking massive issue.

Men certainly aren’t women. It’s not ‘bigoted’ it’s a plain fact.

I had a friend who was a GG leader who left with frustrations about how badly it was run and that it didn’t recognise she was a volunteer with a FT job. If you don’t treat your volunteers well then as an organisation you will always have issues.

Men certainly aren’t women. It’s not ‘bigoted’ it’s a plain fact.

I had a friend who was a GG leader who left with frustrations about how badly it was run and that it didn’t recognise she was a volunteer with a FT job. If you don’t treat your volunteers well then as an organisation you will always have issues.

Men certainly aren’t women. It’s not ‘bigoted’ it’s a plain fact.

I had a friend who was a GG leader who left with frustrations about how badly it was run and that it didn’t recognise she was a volunteer with a FT job. If you don’t treat your volunteers well then as an organisation you will always have issues.

Only biological women are women.
A woman is an adult human female.

No kinks.

Anyone who thinks only a woman is an adult human female is just a bigot.

What? What else is a woman if not an adult human female?

Get rid of was a bad turn of phrase as it can be misinterpreted by those keen to do so. Although the fuller phrase of get rid of men claiming to be women in leadership positions makes it clear it’s getting rid of - ejecting or renaming - them from the leadership positions not getting rid of them per se

remove men from those spaces would have been better - I think not just leadership positions but any place which is allocated in some way for women should not be occupied by males however they identify

Is this a wind up?

Ok sorry, I over reacted there.

Oh don’t be ridiculous no one wants to kill you! All we want is to have spaces just for women and girls and it sounds like you know that you don’t come into that category.