AIBU to be shocked that the NSPCC cancelled their Facebook Live session with Mumsnetters, because they didn't like the questions? That they can't explain why they aren't putting children in danger?

[loveyouradvice]

I am reeling from this - Mumsnet promoted a Facebook Live for Thursday 12.30... to talk about keeping Kids safe from Abuse, and to publicise their PANTS and SpeakOut StaySafe campaigns.

NSPCC just didn't turn up - and only 4 hours later published a brief statement that said nothing!!!! So lots of people waiting for a no show.

It is fine for them to have the policies they have - IF THEY CAN EXPLAIN that they really are in all children's best interests and that they aren't putting girls at risk..... They haven't even tried to do that... Just ignored us and run. Ignored MUMSNET - which is full of people who raise or give money to the NSPCC, and who use it.

HOW??? I am bewildered beyond words.....

Oh ... and hopefully clicky link here of the questions Mumsnetters asked - really thoughtful cogent ones!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_facebook_live/a3343961-Facebook-Live-about-talking-to-kids-about-staying-safe-from-abuse-with-NSPCC

The risk assessment process is both influenced and constrained by policy and legislation.

For example, MofJ 2016 guidelines (extract)
'Risk and risk assessment
"Any assessment of a transgender offender’s risk of reoffending should be based on valid, evidenced factors that relate to that individual, as for any other offender. We have seen no
evidence that being transgender is in itself linked to risk. Risk assessments must be free from assumptions or stereotyping'

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/566829/transgender-review-findings-print.PDF

the offender profiles of males and females are well-established to have significant differences. There are however specific increased risks which may be ascribed to being male. Does the risk assessment process allow for consideration of risk of a transgender individual prisoner who is male? Are the crimes of those who identify as women comparable with female prisoners?

Oh, you missed my second post. No bother, I'll say it again; I didn't read your post properly. Sorry. God strike me down with lightening, this never happens to anyone ever. I must be a dunce.

I see it now. Apology accepted.

There are 14,000 men in prison for sex offences. And about 110 women.

There are only 5000 women in prison at all.

Anyone of those 14,000 man can identify as a woman. And if they have a GRC, which will be quite simple if self identification goes through, they can all demand to be housed in the female estate. And can then legitimately claim discrimination if not accommodated.

For the last time, this isn't merely about being trans. It's around the law and protocols that are emerging under the trans ideology.

We must pour our boiling incandescent rage at a charity which has protected and aided children for decades because our niche issue cannot let go.

In fairness it's looking like it's your niche issue just as much as anyone else's.

topcat if you read the thread you'll find it's only the last few posts that have mentioned prisons. That's the thing with a conversation, it moves.

Regardless, the thread as a whole was about the NSPCC's rather cowardly no-show, and their adoption of policies which may be harmful to girls.

What percentage of the population of the Uk are trans?

Impossible to say for sure but it's believed to be around 1%.

I am absolutely delighted to hear I have cronies, Heartsease. I will be exploiting this fact in the future. I will be demanding they bring me cake in bed for breakfast and going out and doing my shopping for me.

Who resorts to hurling about 'you and your cronies' in an online debate about child safety? Facts are the things which win the day, for future reference. No mumsnetter has the power to shut down any debate just by asking questions. Your posts are sounding absurd.

between 0.2 and 0.5 % of the UK population are trans according to the data.

Oh and yes, I am dismissing it, because it fills acres and acres of pages here, all with the boiling froth that goes with it; " Won't somebody please think of the children" bollocks.

And you know its bollocks because the same people who post continually about it here have used it to derail a thread by a children's charity offering a campaign to help children avoid the far, far more prevalent types of abuse.

Its an agenda, which is driven by a core group, and it preaches fear of a certain group of people, just like the same way that people used to say the same things about gay people in the past.

Gay people never tried to make everyone else believe in a lie.

Gay people having rights does not impact on anyone else what so ever

Any word on the video yet @MNHQ?

We provide evidenced answers to questions and you call it ‘bollocks’?

This is how breches in safeguarding happen - because people refuse to believe the evidence in front of them.

Oh my god, 0.05% of the prison population are trans sex offenders!

So common we must derail a conversations about protecting children from the far more prevalent types of sex offenders.

A lot of women have put a lot of time and effort into trying to explain that the issue we have with this debate isn't necessarily with trans people. Our issue is with predatory men who will be very manipulative about exploiting the societal and legal changes happening to appease the trans community. Some of those individuals will be 'trans' (whatever trans is - it's a broad definition these days) and many won't be. The number of actual trans prisoners doesn't really have a huge amount of relevance, as a result, except in those instances where a prisoner is campaigning hard to be housed in a female prison with a view to having easy access to vulnerable women.

The issue is predatory men. There are blinking thousands of them. Many won't even ever be caught or charged with anything, even, despite having many victims.

And you know its bollocks because the same people who post continually about it here have used it to derail a thread by a children's charity offering a campaign to help children avoid the far, far more prevalent types of abuse.

Again, the thread sat empty for a week. Anyone was free to post on it. No one did. Look at any webchat and you will find a variety of questions on different topics. It's ok to ask different things.

*ThatDoctorEM Thu 02-Aug-18 10:25:36

Hi, Paedophilia is something I deal a lot with.

What concerns me is that 'trans' seems to be using the process/normalising the process which paedophiles have used for eons. Endorsing the idea that parents/guardians just don't understand and fracturing that line of communication is a red flag for me.

Whether it is online grooming, the boyfriend model or incest they all follow a procedure.

1. Contact

1. Create a secret between abuser & child (Pornography is often used here - showing the child porn), with trans the secret can be the transgender status

3.Break the lines of communication between parent/guardian & child (In accounts one often hears how the abused was made to believe that their parents/guardian just didn't understand them, or maybe didn't want them to be happy)

1. Isolation

(from friends or anyone who could intervene) Often the child is told that friends and family would be ashamed of them.

1. Threat

(CSA imagery is often produced and there will be a threat that this will be shown to parents or posted online), threats of violence to family members if the abused tells.

I have included screen grabs of Jessica Eaton's important tweets. Eaton is an expert in CSA and works with victims of abuse. She is raising the alamer over gender identity and firstly how it prevents her and others from addressing the trauma which victims of CSA have.*

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3324391-Paedophile-expert-warns-of-transitioning-as-a-ploy#prettyPhoto

The issue is predatory men

So why don't we pick on them instead of derailing trans rights?

Doing some updating - does anyone have links to the school allowing trans pupil to use tenderness toilets then being pressured to allow them into the girls? I want to make sure it's clear.

Sorry I can't remember who posted.

Opps obviously the bold didn't work.

twitter.com/Jessicae13Eaton

This is her twitter thread.

You provide evidence of very exceptional cases, where the rate of the occurrence does not suggest that the majority of trans people are any more of a threat than others.

Yet you have a thread a week or more, filled up with the bile and hatred causing fear about a vulnerable minority group. Which is exactly what they are. The evidence that people become trans to exploit the situation to be sex offenders is scant, yet you make it a major issue, every week, for months on end.

"Gay people never tried to make everyone else believe in a lie."

Yet you are trying to make people believe a lie that trans people pose an unprecedented overwhelming risk to women and girls, and that the occurrence of trans people in society is far larger than it is.

between 0.2 and 0.5 % of the UK population are trans according to the data

Then why are we changing laws and protocols to accommodate people who are a minuscule number, but would actually allow a far greater proportion of predators access to women and girls?

People like Travis Alabanza, who doesn't even identify as a woman. But demands access to the girls' changing room at top shop, despite being told that there were teenage girls undressing in there. Whose best friend calls children kinky and deviant.

Why can you not see the safeguarding issues, in allowing people like Alabanza access to teenage girls for the sake of 0.2% of the population?

And please stop invoking gay rights. It's unutterably homophobic.

Gay people were not asking for anything that affected anyone else's rights.

And whilst we're at it, perhaps you'd like to define 'gay people'. Because according to Stonewall, it's no longer same sex attraction.

Gay rights are being rolled back at a rate of knots.

And you know its bollocks because the same people who post continually about it here have used it to derail a thread by a children's charity offering a campaign to help children avoid the far, far more prevalent types of abuse.

Eh up.

You know that you were just as free to post your own questions.

That you failed to do so, is not the problem of the people that did post questions.

That is how forums work.

No we are saying that trans people retain the male pattern or offending.

We are saying that they retain their male bodies

And we are saying that with no gate keeping biys and men will exploit the loop hole that allows a trans person access to the changing spaces of members of the opposite sex.

I'll ask a question that's yet to have been Answered.

What rights don't trans people have besides unfettered access to half naked women and girls.

Yet you have a thread a week or more, filled up with the bile and hatred causing fear about a vulnerable minority group.

topcat, seriously. Give me the solution then. How do you accommodate trans rights and not allow them to be exploited by predators. How do you accommodate a transgirl's preference, without allowing girls to be made uncomfortable?

What rights don't trans people have besides unfettered access to half naked women and girls

You disgust me. Your lack of empathy, lack of understanding, and apparent belief that trans people are sexual predators is foul.

@MipMipMip
The school that changed policy after pressure from Transpire:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-43462823

thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3199413-interesting-school-toilets-story

Facts are not hatred.

I don’t hate trans people, I probably have more trans in my social circle than you do.

They don’t support demedicalisation/self ID either (they’d just like it to be cheaper, faster and a bit more dignified - similar complaints to other kinds of paperwork the government requires, the process for indefinite leave to remain, for example).

Self ID creates loopholes in safeguarding (see the girlguides) and in some cases seeks to outright circumvent them (using a different identity to conceal crimes committed under ‘deadnames’).

To bring this thread to a full circle, teaching teen girls that no penis should be anywhere near them without their express consent, UNLESS it’s in the gym changing area and belongs to a person who says they are a girl, in which case, suck it up, buttercup, is completely muddled thinking.

I’m not trans exclusionary, I’m penis exclusionary.