I haven't read the most recent comments here, but I've read the first ten pages. I have been following the debate on trans issues here, and the Girl Guides threads.
The Spartacus women have been admirably clear and articulate in carefully, patiently making their point over the last year or so. I have learned a lot from them about how to communicate.
However (and forgive me if this point has been made in the last few pages), I do think that they have not approached this issue in the best way to sway the minds of new readers.
It is difficult to talk of issues such as these that involve individual, vulnerable children who are going through terrible mental turmoil. Obviously you are going to get people reasonably pointing out that these children need our sympathy and it is over the top to reject them from Girl Guides. There have been insinuations about how they might behave badly, which have a very small likelihood of happening (as the poster who discussed her DSD's groper classmate transitioning then getting access to girls' spaces). There are instances such as Lila Perry with the visible penis through the skirt complaining vociferously to the media about prejudice when it's pretty clear that Lila enjoys intimidating the girls in their spaces.
However it is easy for posters to dismiss these instances as terribly unlikely. Particularly in a controlled Girl Guide environment.
I think it would be better to approach the argument by talking about this not as the individual effect on our girls who may encounter a trans child, which is alienating to some as transphobic, particularly for those not up to date with the new anti-biology self-identity ideology.
The argument should be that this move by GG is part of a systemic problem where overwhelmingly likely gay children are being funnelled towards a life as trans people. They are being sold a myth that they will be happy if they change sex. They are having the effects of lifelong medication and surgery minimised. Their parents are being lied to about suicide risks to force them down the path.
Not one mainstream, public trans proponents seem to be saying they might be gay or lesbians. It seems to be forbidden.
The other problem, combined with this, is the regressive notions of gender, which is actually a set of stereotypes. I have read many articles about trans children, and accounts online by trans people of their childhood. I'm afraid that ALL OF THEM mention the preference for dolls/Barbies/pink or pirates/trucks/getting dirty that the child showed. I'm trying, trying to find one where the child's identity doesn't rest on their toys. Of course, it is said that there are other factors but the toys are always the main thing.
To me this reinforces the problem that children are being pigeon holed by the trans lobby by damaging stereotypes, particularly where they might be ordinary gay or lesbian children.
For parents like Fish who describe their child as not adhering to gender stereotypes and preferences, where there is genuine body dysmorphia, these parents keep their heads down. They don't want to use their child as cheap publicity.
And of course there are so many women posters on here who say that they'dhave been transed as children because they preferred the stereotyped boys' toys and activities. How heartbreaking that the next generation of these clever, thoughtful mothers are being sterilised.
So the real issue is that this move by an organisation that proudly rejected stereotypes about girls, now wholeheartedly accepts these stereotypes. This makes it harder to oppose the transing of children. Of gay children and children whose personalities lead them to prefer the other sex's stereotype of toys.
Trans ideology is homophobic and it's sexist.