AIBU to tell you that Girlguiding has got this wrong? Let's support them to get it right

[AgnesBadenPowell]

Some of you will have seen my previous threads here and in FWR about Girlguiding's transgender policy. I, and many other Leaders (and parents), feel that they've got this one wrong.

Since we highlighted the issue of mixed accommodation without parental consent, and the suggestion that gender nonconforming girls get 'managed out', Girlguiding has been quietly updating the policy on the website, to try and accommodate parental concern that they didn't anticipate. This still doesn't address the underlying issues and there was no announcement of the changes; I only discovered them by comparing cached pages with the live webpage.

Fair Play For Women has put together an article comprehensively setting out the issues in black and white, asking for them to be addressed. They worked on this not just with me, but a number of other concerned Leaders and parents.

You can read a one page fact sheet that summarises our concerns here:

https://fairplayforwomen.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/FPFWGirlguidess_factsheet.pdf

If you'd like to see the full article, which discusses our concerns in detail and is fully referenced, you can do that here:

https://fairplayforwomen.com/guide-leaders-call-for-halt/

If you share our concerns and would like to support this initiative, there is a (public) Facebook group where parents and Leaders can talk about it and add their voice. If we don't speak, no one will hear us:

https://m.facebook.com/groups/902343833223644

Policies which refuse to address the safeguarding of children need to be urgently questioned and clarified. At the moment, many organisations are being given bad advice, getting ahead of the law and misinterpreting the current legislation. Because, yet again, they are only getting one side of the story.

We want all our children to benefit from Girlguiding, transgender or otherwise.

The policies need to reflect that everyone should be taken into account, without one group being prioritised to the detriment of another.

And finally, thank you to Fair Play For Women and the leaders and parents who contacted me after reading the other threads. I would never have been able to do this alone

This is from the longer FPFW article:

5.1 There is no law that stops Girlguiding informing parents.
Firstly, there is no law that says someone’s transgender status cannot be disclosed. This only applies if a person has a gender recognition certificate. The GRA 2004 Act makes it a criminal offence for a person to disclose information he has acquired in an official capacity about a person’s application for a gender recognition certificate or about the gender history of a successful applicant. Only 1% of adult transgender people have a GRC and children are not eligible for one.

Of course, if someone’s trans status was revealed for the purpose or effect of violating a trans persons dignity or to create an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment this would be harassment and in breach of the Equality Act 2010. However, this is not the purpose or effect of a guide leader sensitively disclosing to parents that a male child who identifies as a girl will be present on a residential trip so all parents can give informed consent for their daughters to attend and/or share the communal accommodation.

The chosen Girlguiding policy of not informing parents is NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT. ANY parent of a girl who expects robust safe-guarding should and would expect males and females not to be accommodated together; certainly not without parental knowledge and consent.

So, that means that all the shootings of prominent TRAs that they cannot be asked about their gender status in on official capacity for the purposes of job interviews or all female short lists or rape crisis centres or any other protected space for women, is actual bollocks.

You can ask in an official capacity but you cannot share that information to cause harm to the transgender person. Which is fair enough. But the activists consider any questioning of their right to be anywhere is literal violence.

NannyOggs

My hunch, and I might be wrong, is this will boil down to the influence of trans lobby groups, I suspect GGA have emphatically been given bad advice (I suspect they had to pay for it too). My guess is if we mapped all these individuals involved in these lobby groups out, they'd all be sitting together on advisory panels, boards of charities, writing for publications in quite a tight and closed circle. They are incredibly influential though (I will give them that).

It seems to me that organisations are terrified of bringing the wrath of the 'transphobe!' shouters down on their heads. For e.g. I've heard mutterings that the NHS are terrified of being sued, hence their happy clappy trans stuff all over their website. Ditto RCGP who use GIRES to run the 'gender variant' course and support for doctors through their training portal. It's almost like they can tick a box, hand it over, and keep their heads down.

My guess with GGA is they've only consulted one organisation and not checked it with lawyers and relied on that organisation to interpret the law for them. And once it started to get bumpy, went back to them for more advice and were reassured.

I'm only guessing though. That's just my hunch.

It reads a lot like that to me too.

I agree GirlScout but the problem with this set up is it allows abuses of power. When people are afraid to speak then the silence is just used as a cover for wrong doing.

And again, this cannot be good for the trans community in general. There needs to be some deep questioning of these self appointed trans community leaders and their motives.

Because from where I sit everything they are asking for removes protections from vulnerable groups to provide unfettered access from a very privileged group (generally white males).

NannyOggs

I agree. The problem with trans stuff is there's no case law, so it's never really been tested. So for some organisations, to end up being the test case, it could mean financial ruin, or reputational ruin or just so much hassle as to be unmanageable (think Millwall (Millwall!) saying they'd 'never seen anything like it' when it backlashed).

I feel for GGA, but someone has got to take a stand for girls. I don't see a big hoo ha about Eton staying single (male) sex only, there does seem to be this double standard where girls are always expected to budge up.

Plus if you read the other GGA threads, NSPCC have used the same or similar external consultants, so they are regurgitating the same guidance. When the mum then escalated to the Children's commissioner, they in turn sent it to the GEO, and guess what?, they'd ALSO been advised by the same people.

I do have some sympathy for the rock and hard place GGA find themselves in, either by being 'too nice' or by being pig headed.

I think the next few weeks are going to be very interesting.

Please come over to support us on our facebook page. We have 76 supporters. We need to show Girlguiding this is a concern for a lot of people.

www.facebook.com/groups/sisterstoallguides/

I agree with the poster who says this smacks of them being so afraid of the wrath of the trans-rights activists that they are throwing the girls under the bus.

Brownies and Guides was so important for me as a young girl. I moved countries while I was at Brownies and the ability to join another pack at the British Embassy in this new country gave me stability and somewhere to "be a girl" in a country where the rights of women and girls were non-existent.

I feel saddened that Brownies and Guides is no longer that safe space. Needless to say my daughter won't be joining now.

For all of those saying that you now won't let your daughters join because of this issue, please don't so this. Let them join. It is always better to fight for a cause from within, and if your daughters don't join you're letting the TRAs win.

For all of those saying that you now won't let your daughters join because of this issue, please don't so this. Let them join. It is always better to fight for a cause from within, and if your daughters don't join you're letting the TRAs win

That is all very well, but this is either a safeguarding issue or it isn't. I wouldn't take the risk. I think a girl would safer in an openly mixed set-up like the Scouts.

Coyo Scouting is also going with self-ID and parents don't have to be told there is a boy who identifies as a girl sharing in a tent that is supposed to be girl-only.

Muddling if you decide to enroll your daughter:
Ask the leaders if they know about this new policy. If you don't, write to HQ and tell them why.

DrSpouse

I definitely agree we need to make a noise and let GGA HQ know that we are unhappy about this.

I think those on twitter are tweeting the article and factsheet to @girlguiding @JulieBentley and @Chief_Guide using the hashtag #sisterstoallguides

This is particularly powerful from parents with daughters already active in GG.

drspouse
oh dear!

@drspouse , my daughter is already a guide and she loves it. No way am I taking her out, but she knows I don't agree with the current policy and, should there ever be an issue with a transgirl, I will back her every inch of the way in protest if she is expected to share facilities on a camp with them.

My daughter is just about to go into Guides, and I'm unsure how I feel about this issue. What angers me about this whole debate is unwillingness of organisations across the board (this includes political parties) to discuss the issue and consult/ listen to women. I feel that anyone who wishes to enter into the trans debate is shot down as a bigot rather than someone who genuinely has concerns or questions.

I have a question for Agnes about the factsheet you posted. It says that allowing in males who identify as girls will mean that gender non-conforming females will be excluded. Why do you think this is the case?

paper I'm not Agnes but my guess is:
Gendered Intelligence have told them that they can decide to admit in the basis of gender.
They have also told them that girls who identify as boys aren't girls any more.
So by this logic if they are a girl-only organisation and being a girl is based on a feeling, they can't take those girls.

(But when she says those girls will be excluded - that's based on GG advice, not something we're speculating about).

This is not an AIBU. It belongs on the Feminism board. If you all want to rant about trans issues all day that’s fine, but leave the rest of us out of it.

So don't read it Parrot.
Lots of posters use AIBU for traffic. Relationships, cooking,

Thanks drspouse - that's helpful. It brings up so many questions I can't believe there has been a proper consultation about this.

DS bumped my phone and it posted!
Anyway also parenting, employment, they all end up in AIBU.
This is about the Guides on a women's message board, not feminist theory. 1 in 4 8 year olds are in Brownies so that's a heck of a lot of MN DDs (and it used to be higher so that's even more MNers who are ex-Guides).

Parrothead

So you are not concerned that an adult male, who is legally male, and male bodied can take your daughter to guide camp and you have no right to know? Okie dokie.

Not in the least concered that GGA's position seems to be 'some girls have penises' and this is not a safeguarding risk so we are not going to tell you?

It's easter Sunday, why did you take time out of your day to come here and post I wonder?

@Parrothead

*It says that allowing in males who identify as girls will mean that gender non-conforming females will be excluded. Why do you think this is the case?

Take a look at this page on the Girlguiding website. It explains the trans policy in detail.
*
https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/equality-and-diversity-policy/transgender-gender-reassignmentt**/*

Scroll down until you see this:

We understand that if a young member is transitioning from female to male that they will be experiencing a great amount of change and uncertainty. Flexibility and the Leaders’ discretion in conversation with the parents must be used to determine how long the child stays within the unit.

I have written to GG to ask for confirmation that the child can stay in girlguiding until the natural end of their section or indeed until whenever they want to leave. No reply

They also say this:

"What should I do if a young member tells me they do not identify as a girl?"

The young member may prefer a different pronoun such as ‘he’ or ‘they’; this can be respected if and when the young member wishes while they remain part of the organisation. This conversation should be treated in confidence and you should:

offer reassurance

tell the young member that their confidentiality will be respected

listen and be supportive

ask the young member what their preferred pronoun might be and then use it

ask the young member how they would like to be supported or if there is any information they want or need

let them know that they can come and talk to you again, or recommend someone else whom they can speak to

at the right time, you may wish to begin to work with the young member to find another organisation that may better support their needs, for example an organisation open to all genders.

www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/programme-and-activities/letstalkaboutgender_leaders.pdf

Most girls struggling with gender identity grow up to be Lesbians, it's appalling they are asking females to leave, and centering the feelings of boys in their policy!