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

@archieannnie its an alternative agenda in the sense that Nspcc set up a Webchat for one agenda and MNs wanted a different agenda. So why don't you get some evidence together, get some publicity and set up a meeting with NSPCC? Typically if you want your agenda on the table its on you to make the move?

Incidentally has anyone posted evidence about the prevalence of abuse from trans children to non trans children? Links? Sorry have skimmed the thread to catch up.

Fwiw id expect any professional /school /institution to support any and all vulnerable children. Not pick and choose based on some hierarchy of deserving and undeserving vulnerability. I honestly don't think they have to be mutually exclusive and I have known settings where children with multiple vulnerabilities including trans
issues coexist.

I think that the answer came with (at least) two fucks tells you about the substance of the content

We're the ones with the logic and science. So yes, it's like speaking to anti-vaxxers, but not the way round you think it is.

Aaand if you'd even read the thread you'll see it was removed from active.

I did see that on the thread - shortly before he webchat was due to start.
Do you know when it was removed? I don't but not immediately, I don't expect.

Incidentally has anyone posted evidence about the prevalence of abuse from trans children to non trans children? Links? Sorry have skimmed the thread to catch up.

Times article on sexual assaults in mixed sex changing rooms upthread. You're welcome.

In fairness- the questions asked are not simple discussion questions- without some kind of research and checking, they answers wouldnt juts roll off. I can understand why they cancelled. They focus was not gender for them- although it can and should fall under the bracket of the topic- but instead it became the only topic. I'd have been more surprised if they could have been able to answer those questions off cuff.

It was in Chat ffs. Not exactly tumbleweed.

Fucking hell, you literally can't stop yourselves can you? This is about the NSPCC and their very real and very valuable PANTS campaign, which could help thousands of children across the country. This is about how a positive platform to get that message across has been completely fucking scuppered by a selfish bunch of single-issue activist, and you want me to talk to you about changing rooms?? You can fuck off.

Sorry Rat, your faux concern for these 'thousands of children' that MNetters have apparently fucked over (always a woman's fault isn't it 🙄) by asking the NSPCC some questions about safeguarding is really quite offensive.

And the PANTS campaign don't mean shit if girls are brought up to think that they can't say no to males in their spaces.

The broken times link on page 5 from the Times? I cant access the article but the link says an attack from a sex pest in a changing room. I asked for evidence about trans children attacking non trans children.
Sorry I think you and I have a different idea of what constitutes evidence, certainhalf.
I read a newspaper headline once that Freddie Starr ate a hamster, does that mean all people named Freddie are a danger to rodents? I might have to start a campaign.

without some kind of research and checking, they answers wouldnt juts roll off.

Maybe they could have gone ahead talking about PANTS, while promising a video about the trans questions? Then actually produced a video.

As it is, no video on PANTS has appeared.

A thought, Rat, maybe there were no questions about PANTS, and no video about it, because it's all been adequately explained and understood already?

How can you do that when trans people are the sex they say they are?
Plus my question is mainly about discomfort, not abuse

@knittedwoollenmouse
What do the NSPCC actually do though? genuine question

In brief: The NSPCC does research, provides resources and training, and runs some family intervention type projects with grants from a local authority. They have help and advice lines. They design campaigns and schools packs. They lobby government.

Not exactly at the sharp end, you might say. I have been at the sharp end and I've never come across an NSPCC employee.

Even before this PR disaster, I wouldn't tick a Gift Aid box for a donation to the NSPCC. I would prefer the Treasury to spend my taxes on front line services - social services, local projects, mental health services, good pastoral care in schools and police child protection units etc.

Tbh I would expect that most MNetters who are interested in the PANTS campaign already know about it and don't have any questions. It's very well known about already and is understandable by the average 3-4 so not exactly complicated. So I'm not sure how they expected any questions actually about that
Mnetters asked safeguarding questions that concerned them. NSPCC could have made a 'trans" statement to broadly answer most of the over riding concern then moved on to the other questions. But there weren't any. And also because the NSPCC knows that they haven't a fucking clue how to be woke and trans inclusive without exploding a great big hole in safeguarding.
So they ran.
Yet EVERYONE uses NSPCC advice. Even the government. They are contractors for lots of child services. And if they can't answer then we are truly fucked....

I don’t know how much of an issue the concerns raised are in practice. However, the NSPCC statement ( in particular the fact the issues weren’t even addressed) makes me inclined to be worry than I was before!

I asked for evidence about trans children attacking non trans children.

One girl a day is raped in school.

We have single sex facilities for a reason.

And you would like to see evidence of transgirls attacking girls before you will give any thought to girls privacy, dignity and safety?

What do you think safeguarding is?

What lemon said.

@Sd1978 they were not expected to answer the questions off the cuff. They asked for questions in advance of the chat.

What lemon said

Trans girls attacking non trans girls IS NOT THE ISSUE... that said I know there was an incident a few months ago about a 16 year old transgirl wanking in the girls' showers which was published in the media and how tough a young girl found it walking in on him....

I asked for evidence about trans children attacking non trans children

For one, there won't be any even if it has happened. As trans people "are" their stated gender so it would be recorded as eg girl on girl attack. Noone is allowed to do research that identifies trans juveniles in this manner.
Secondly, I doubt that there is ANY central record on ANY school based assaults that don't involve the police.
Thirdly, why is assault your threshold for saying it's a bad idea? Think about it....

spiritedlondon
You seem convinced that noone ever pretends to be trans to commit a sex offence

Is it then your opinion that every single one of the sex offenders in prison who identify as trans are in fact genuinely trans? Including Ian Huntley and Paris Green and that chap who called himself Almighty the Almighty and smeared faeces up his cell walls?

If you do indeed believe they are all genuinely trans this certainly is disturbing considering the implications it has for the criminality of genuinely trans people. Or rather, transwomen, as they are all biologically male. Any thoughts?

Or perhaps you might like to reconsider whether certain criminally disposed men declare trans status to gain easier access to their victims?

I will put money on that thread having been advertised on another GC forum as being a good opportunity for exposure. I fucking BET that's what happened, and if you're reading this and know that to be true, have a long hard look at yourselves and think about those kids you've screwed over.

What she said.

HavingALittleBabyToolshed

Get over yourself. Stop trying to silence women who don't say what you want to hear.

Why does it have to be about assault? Do women and girls not deserve privacy and dignity and spaces away from males?

Do you mean that a girl has been raped at school or that one could be? If it's the latter then maybe we could lock children in chastity belts and cctv them at all times?

Seriously is that your argument? I would be far FAR more concerned about the rapes that are happening already - 'date' rapes, blurred consent, teenagers watching porn and getting ideas - than I would about theoretically possible but hugely fucking unlikely scenarios based on some MN's screwed agendas.

Safeguarding, along with any risk assessment, is about looking at the likelihood of an incident happening along with the severity and trying to reduce that risk. In schools, it is JUST as possible that in a single sex environment, abuse could happen (less severe things like bullying, physical or emotional abuse, stealing, racist abuse... list goes on). For that reason, children aren't left unsupervised for more than a few minutes and are rarely out of earshot.

Out of interest, reading through this thread it seems 'trans' is used as short for 'trans female'. You know that gender dysphoria affects both genders, right?