Talk me through this - male on placement with brownies

[nevernotstruggling]

The dds have been to the same brownie unit for around 4 years (dd1 waiting to move up to guides). I know the leaders quite well and there has been one staff changeover in that time. The communication with parents has been excellent. I have felt safe letting the dds go on sleepovers knowing that I know all the adults involved. It's actually been brilliant in terms of safeguarding. No surprises or anything parents haven't been informed of. The dds love it. Dd2 is thriving there because it's a small closed group where she feels safe and familiar.

I dropped the dds off this week and a man came up to dd1 touches her shoulder and said 'you're it' I said to brown owl - who is that?? She replied oh it's Dave (not his name obvs). Me - who is Dave??? BO - he's on work placement (something about youth work) . Me - Er is he DBS checked?? BO- yes. Me- Brownies is a girls group!! BO - we have dads helping! No they don't. Not once the whole time we have attended.

Apparently Dave will be there for 4 weeks.

My reaction has been negative. I'm quite annoyed there was no warning of Dave jointing the unit. There have never been 'work placements' before. I think it was be something to do with the church though.

I think parents should have been told. They use a private Facebook group to keep in touch with parents and this works really well so I'm a bit baffled by the surprise!

Poor Dave. He's been Donald Trump, a gnu, and now he's a balloon

Sorry but that made me properly do a lol

Why do Guides risk assess men differently from women? Why have a girl only group? Surely these are all sexist? Or is it sexist that almost all abusers are male, and all rapists are male? Hmm

In what way do GG risk assess men differently? Women abuse children too, so why on earth are they risk assessed differently?

Personally, I dont agree with a girl only group, or at least having girl only groups when there are no boys only groups, so yes I think that's sexist.

Anyway, this isn't about boys going to a girls only group. It's about a man helping out, which has always been a possibility.

I'm going to write a kids book called 'Dave's Busy Day'...

Soooo the unit have now posted a statement about Dave with some other details/justification which is even more weird

You what? You sound like you've got what you've wanted, which is an explanation to what Dave was doing there, so why exactly is that weird?

As for all rapists being male, well yes, that's because of the legal definition of rape.

I'm not a psychologist, but wouldn't this provide a classic opportunity to gradually introduce the feared object/person in a safe, familiar environment Yes if she knew it was happening. I would imagine an all girls group would provide a stepping stone to independence. OP misunderstood what was likely to happen, because she based her assumption on her experience of this brownie group.

I personally DO think, as discussed up thread, that single sex activities are invaluable to young girls. I don’t think this man is particularly likely to be a threat. I don’t think groups should shut rather than resort to male volunteers. I don’t think OP was wrong to question who he was or the set up. For me “the change I want to see in the world” would include more not less differentiation and inclusion, which in this case I think means helping a little girl break out if her anxiety.

You what? You sound like you've got what you've wanted, which is an explanation to what Dave was doing there, so why exactly is that weird?

I wonder if Brown Owl is on Mumsnet, has read this thread and put 2 and 2 together?

which in this case I think means helping a little girl break out if her anxiety.

Which is the responsibility of the op. Helping her dd doesn't mean that she can run around conducting witch hunts against any man who commits the heinous crime of volunteering at a children's activity.

Asking who someone is and if they are DBS checked is NOT a witch hunt. It’s a perfectly normal question and has been asked about me in the past, by parents who wonder why I am on school trips etc.

Asking who someone is and if they are DBS checked is NOT a witch hunt. It’s a perfectly normal question and has been asked about me in the past, by parents who wonder why I am on school trips etc.

For the millionth time on this thread

If the op would have asked those questions of any new person, man or woman, then fair enough it's a perfectly reasonable question. If however, she has only asked because he's a man then that's not reasonable.

Secondly, she had asked and been answered before starting this thread. So, if it was a perfectly reasonable question about a new helper, who just happened to be a man, what is the point of the thread? Op clearly had a reason for posting and was hoping for a certain response. Given that her post centres on the fact that Dave is a man, it's obvious that her issue is only that he is a man. That's not reasonable and the fact that she expects all parents to be notified via Facebook of his presence that smacks of a witch hunt ie raising a level of suspicion about a person based solely on a protected characteristic

Me - Er is he DBS checked?? BO- yes. Me- Brownies is a girls group!! BO - we have dads helping!

The OP.

Asking who someone is and if they are DBS checked is NOT a witch hunt
It kind of is though if the only thing the poor sod has done "wrong" is being born a man.
Based on absolutely nothing but what sounds like a fear of men.
Back in the kitchens and sole responsibility for childcare, women! Men who do childcare shouldn't be as they must have dodgy intentions and everyone knows all of them are automatically a risk, cos statistics.
Which has been implied (and outright said in places too)
I mean, WTAF.

If the op would have asked those questions of any new person, man or woman, then fair enough it's a perfectly reasonable question. If however, she has only asked because he's a man then that's not reasonable.

EXACTLY!

Of course it could be the OP who has the issue with a man being in the group and the DD isn't even bothered. But if the little girl has suffered trauma then I do feel for her, but I don't think the witch hunt of Dave is fair.

When DS became a Young Leader for his Beaver group I don't think he has been formally introduced to the parents. The Beavers would obviously have been told who he is, and some of the parents will recognise him or me (when I drop him off) as we have both been involved with the scout group for a number of years. He gets mentioned in dispatches when leaders discuss activities the Beavers have been doing in the newsletter. He has been on a few camps with the Beavers, but he always sleeps separately from the Beavers and he has been given safeguarding training. He obviously can't have a DBS as he is too young. I hope there have never been any parental concerns over him being there.

I'm not sure if I've missed a huge drip feed where OP discloses her DD has a phobia of men? I've scrolled back quite far and don't see it, however it's often good to introduce good male role models. I used to run a club involved woman's aid and we used to actively recruit male play workers (we were exempt from sex discrimination act due to nature of organisation) having good male role models for children with bad experiences was invaluable

Perhaps the wording isn't clear. The unit have posted an explanation about the presence of Dave. What is contained in the explanation doesn't fit with any of the plausible mentioned here or actual routes into volunteering with brownies. Ergo the situation has become a bit more weird.

However whilst I clearly invited discussion on everything I posted in my op I'm not going to post the explanation as it's very outing for others involved and I don't think that's appropriate.

Meanwhile I haven't posted about specific reasons why I seek a single sex space for my dd. I certainly won't be now.

But glad everyone feels so well placed to opine on what should be done to counter the anxiety of abuse victims - comments about this have been horrific.

However whilst I clearly invited discussion on everything I posted in my op I'm not going to post the explanation as it's very outing

Nobody's asked you to? I don't think that's a good idea at all, definitely don't post the explanation.

Meanwhile I haven't posted about specific reasons why I seek a single sex space for my dd.
Brownies *is a single sex space though. You might get male helpers.
Does your child go to school? There's male teachers.
How do you expect to go through life not coming across males in teaching environments or in the work place etc?

Asking who someone is and if they are DBS checked is NOT a witch hunt

It is, though. As has been said, if it's a general security question asked to everybody such as "Did you pack this bag yourself?" at the airport, then that's just good safe practice. If it's the police endlessly pulling over young drivers of nice cars because they appear to be committing the supposed offence of 'driving whilst black' when similar-aged white people are never stopped - that is 100% a witch hunt.

In this case, the distinction is made on sex rather than race: female helpers = clearly blameless; male helper = must be up to no good.

But glad everyone feels so well placed to opine on what should be done to counter the anxiety of abuse victims - comments about this have been horrific.

Abuse is, of course, abominable; and anxiety can feel like your own personal prison - but it doesn't mean that the world can be put on pause to ease one person's anxiety, however debilitating.

In a club that has male and female helpers, whether or not they also allow both sexes of children, you could have the scenario where one child was sexually abused by their uncle and so is frozen with anxiety when around men and another child was brought up with a controlling and emotionally-abusive mother and therefore cannot cope around women. You can't ban ALL adult helpers and keep the club going.

Abuse victims should be given the help they need individually and the abusers, whether male or female, taken far away - it is their (the abusers') fault and they should face the consequences of their actions - it doesn't help anybody to just pass the imputed blame along to other innocent people doing a very kind thing.

Abuse victims should be given the help they need individually and the abusers, whether male or female, taken far away - it is their (the abusers') fault and they should face the consequences of their actions - it doesn't help anybody to just pass the imputed blame along to other innocent people doing a very kind thing.

This X 100.

Jesus wept. We had a dad help out yesterday eve, and if I hadn't joined this particular unit it would be the third to close in this area this year because nobody is willing to even be a helper on a regular basis, nevermind put themselves through the leadership program.

My daughter is in Guides and is gay. She and I are both enbies (but don't usually talk about it and use pronouns for what we were born with - makes it easier to avoid confrontation with judgmental pricks).

Should either of us be excluded for now being girl enough?

The whole idea of the Girlguiding movement is to provide girl only spaces so having a bloke there seems to defeat the point!

It was started because girls couldn't join scouts. Now they can. We couldn't get spaces with scouting, only in Guiding. It's working out for us and it's one of the best things I've ever done, Brownies are amazing.

It's attitudes like this which stop so many males from going into teaching, particularly in early years or nurseries.

Should either of us be excluded for now being girl enough?
Guides doesn't allow anyone to be a leader unless they hold the gender identity "woman". So you can't be a leader (neither could I and swathes of GC leaders across the country who don't think an internal essence of gender is a thing).
I do hope you've told the local leaders so they can see how ridiculous it is to regulate based on unknowable and invisible factors.
Your daughter is fine though. Non binary females can be Guides.