To ask if you are OK with your daughter's subs being spent on this?

[KatieAlcock]

I've just come to update you on my case against Girlguiding, where they expelled me for raising safeguarding concerns and for asking why we had to believe in inner gender identity to be a leader.
Girlguiding have spent AT LEAST £35,000 and probably more like £100,000 of the subs you pay for your daughter to go to Rainbows, Brownies or Guides, on defending a case against me, a committed leader who wants to make sure girls are safe and leaders have freedom of expression.

Full text of my update in the next post so as not to bore you to death!

I volunteer with the scouts.
I was a guide and my mum ran Brownies

As a parent I was never happy with guiding being single sex and seeming to demonise men. My girls are Scouts. Scouts seem to be happier to take leaders views into consideration and did change their obvious affiliation to mermaids for example.

For the poster who tried to refute the subs being spent on this- for every child a sub is paid for a percentage of that goes in capitation fees to county and then HQ so yes parents money is being spent on this case. In the current climate where money is tight for so many this is very off.

Most parents and a few guide leaders I've mentioned this case too have no idea it is happening. They have no idea about the policy of gender before sex and all still believe GG is single sex.

The issue i have is the hypocrisy.
Dads, husbands and sons cannot camp with their families with GG, they have to have a separate subcamp, girls with gender confusion who wish to present as male are encouraged to leave. GG are ignoring the equality act and following self ID, they have tied themselves in knots and have stuffed safeguarding on the fire.
This is an important case. Organisations whose primary objective is to engage with children should not be working outside of the law and should not be sneaking in changes that effect those children without consultation.

There whole premise is they are for girls, most people in the real world do not believe TWAW. So it wouldn't occur to most people that there could be TW in the leadership team. Especially when fathers are discouraged from helping.- and become you start I have several real world examples where dads have been sent home even when it was their turn on the parent rota.

It's not as simplistic as that though is it. The boys are happy being boys and these are social norms.

If a child is transgender, sees themself as a girl, is told that that's fine, wants to join a girls club, and is told no.. Then the implication is clearly that the person telling them no considered them a threat.

Is it definitely wrong to consider them a threat? Apparently not. But regardless of what you believe, it doesn't mean it isn't hurtful for the child involved. Hence complicated.

Madwomen1 - I would love my DD's to join your unit..... I would love to join your unit! Exactly the debates our girls should be having.
Thank you to Katie and you for standing up for girls and women.

Sorry that was to the boys changing room eye roll comment

So it's ok for you to ignore safeguarding rules but not others?
The rules are that adults should not be alone with a girl. Two adults or two children. Read my post and you'll see that one girl was awake and I tried to wake another one but the sick girl was OK before the other girl woke up. I wasn't going to delay the first girl's help with breathing difficulties while I woke the second girl so I tried both at the same time.
I could of course have woken the second girl or an adult immediately to tell them what happened but it seemed pointless to disturb them at 2 am so I debriefed the other adults in the morning.

SeasonFinale "that trans girl with a penis is probably less likely to want to explore a sexual relationship with your daughters than some of the other girls there"

94.6% of men are heterosexual so there's a 3.4% chance that you are NOT talking out of your arse.

GG have got this totally wrong. They changed their policies quietly without announcing them to guides or parents. They hid the extent of the changes. They deliberately did not consult the leaders on the ground. They have broken their charitable aims which state that they are single sex. They have established a principle that they keep secrets from parents and from participating guides.

Scouts brought in a not dissimilar policy but then changed it as they got adverse feedback

GG need to change their policy also

Thanks to Katie for taking this case and so much hope that you will win

There’s no such thing as a girl with a penis. Women and girls have a vanishingly low rate of abusing or sexually assaulting other women, whether they are lesbian or straight. Men and boys commit 99% of sex crime. That includes males who say they are trans, they have just as high a rate of sexual offending as other males.

Is it definitely wrong to consider them a threat? Apparently not. But regardless of what you believe, it doesn't mean it isn't hurtful for the child involved

It's also right to consider the feelings and need for privacy of the female guides. If GG's policy made it clear they welcomed female children only, regardless of their trans or nb status, then the trans boy would know that they couldn't attend and wouldn't have their feelings hurt by the rejection.

Excluding males is a legal and I'd say very necessary aim. Generally, but most definitely with children and teens.

You brought a legal case against them and now you say they are being unreasonable in defending it!

If you hadn't brought the case, they would not have to spend the money.

I'm not ok with it. Thanks for taking them to task on this.

@CloudyVanilla

It's not as simplistic as that though is it. The boys are happy being boys and these are social norms.

If a child is transgender, sees themself as a girl, is told that that's fine, wants to join a girls club, and is told no.. Then the implication is clearly that the person telling them no considered them a threat.

Is it definitely wrong to consider them a threat? Apparently not. But regardless of what you believe, it doesn't mean it isn't hurtful for the child involved. Hence complicated.

no, you are mistaken that child is not seen as a threat they are seen as belonging to a group for whom the club is not intended. It does children- or anyone- no favours to affirm a mistaken belief. Individuals aren't excluded because they personally are a threat. If you think this you have completely misunderstood the whole premise of safeguarding. I work with vulnerable adults and children and have to regularly update and enhanced DBS. I do not take this personally and feel I'm being suspected of being a threat AT ALL. I'm very glad to have the check done because this helps to build a culture where we all accept that check. You know, because it helps protect people who need protecting. You shouldn't have to explain all this to a child of course because they should never have been put in the position of thinking they belonged to a group they didn't belong to.

Well, there are lots of complications. One thing that really bothers me is the impact that lack of chaperoning could have on the welfare of a transgirl (i.e. a male child who identifies as a girl).

We shouldn't just be worrying about the possibility that this child could be a threat, but about safeguarding a vulnerable trans child from being accused of sexual harassment they either didn't commit, or didn't mean to commit. Adult male doctors ask for a female member of staff to chaperone them if their female patient needs to undress or have an intimate part examined. This is a policy intended to safeguard both parties.

Teenagehood is an emotionally fraught period. Sometimes genuine misunderstandings between males and females happen. Sometimes the angry parents of girls accuse their children's boyfriends of sexual abuse because they disapprove of them. Sometimes psychologically distressed children who are being abused make allegations against the wrong person. A transgirl (i.e. a male child identifying as a girl) in a GG unit is vulnerable.to all these things if they are sharing personal sleeping spaces with natal girls.

We shouldn't just be worrying about the possibility that this child could be a threat, but about safeguarding a vulnerable trans child from being accused of sexual harassment they either didn't commit, or didn't mean to commit. Adult male doctors ask for a female member of staff to chaperone them if their female patient needs to undress or have an intimate part examined. This is a policy intended to safeguard both parties

Well yes. Safeguarding is there to protect everyone. No transchild is going to benefit from removing safe guarding to avoid either hurting their feelings or the feelings of an adult male self identifing leader.

The children need the adults around them to be adults. Adults who do the right thing even if it upsets someone. Even if they hate us for it. Sooner or later reality has to be acknowledged and where does it leave the trans child when it becomes apparent that everyone around them who they trusted lied to them. And put them at risk for a certificate

I support you @KatieAlcock. Wishing you luck.
I have until very recently volunteered with GG and stopped for another reason, but I now feel extremely conflicted about returning. I would have to keep my views silent certainly.

SarahTancredi

I just don't understand who is supposed to really benefit from this complete mash-up.

Even if I had a male child who identified as a girl and wanted to join GG, and if I was behind that decision all the way, and I wanted my child in GG, I would not want this disaster of a policy.

Parents of girls shouldn't want it. Parents of boys who identify as girls shouldn't want it!

If a "boy" wants to go to girl guides he should be allowed no fuss he is a child not a sexual predator, any inappropriate behaviour is dealt with in case by case basis like any inappropriate behaviour should be dealt with

Do you have no idea about how many girls are raped at school each year? By boys. You might want to google, it's eye-opening. Children can, unfortunately, be sexual predators.

Do you think inappropriate behaviour is effectively dealt with in mixed-sex environments like schools? What does that look like?

Disbelievers might want to refer to a study by UK Feminista and Warwick University done a few years ago about sexism in schools called 'It's Just Everywhere'. (Sorry I can't link due to tech incompetence re sharing between devices). One of the findings is that 24% of female students of mixed sex schools have been subjected to unwanted physical touching of a sexual nature while at school. That's as good of a quarter of schoolgirls being sexually assaulted at school.

I had to move my daughter to a single sex school because of this. No kindness or wokeness can tell me or her that this is ok. Her mixed sex school accused her of lying and threatened me with legal action when I challenged them about it. Despite them originally saying they agreed they had a problem with the behaviour of male students towards female students. Make of that what you will.

Gender critical people are more likely to take the scientific side. It’s TRAs and their gender ideology that are the problem with their silly ideas such as “sex is a spectrum”. NOBODY is allowed to challenge the TWAW argument or they are subjected to a pile on by all the TRA bullies. This is the same tactic used by Maoists during China’s disastrous cultural revolution.

As a coach I put safeguarding above gender ideology. A final reminder, SEX is a protected characteristic under EA2010, gender identity is NOT.

@nitsandwormsdodger

I fully support women only spaces I Fully support trans child attending girl guides

I Accept children can be sexual offenders
I Hate the idea of treating a child like a potential sex offender

Complicated issues

The problem lies (for me) that male wishes are trumping those of females. Once again, young females are being told... Tough luck, a male wants this, so roll over, keep quiet and don't complain.

The erosion of safe female spaces is worrying. Young females are being told by authorities from a very young age that the male can a d will enter female spaces, and if that now means that a female is uncomfortable, the female must leave.

I just know that once males are in groups, there will be certain discussions and conversations that will stop. There'll be a political correctness about it all...all if a sudden.... Can we talk to the group about periods? Oh erm wait, no, because what if the trans member gets upset/feels excluded? It will be gradual and people will dismiss the concerns and in ten years when females don't have those spaces... groups, schools, clubs, shelters....People will wonder why.

And the people calling for males to be allowed into Guiding groups, should also be 'fighting' to stop the closed GG units.

Those groups that restrict membership based on things like.... Them being INA boarding school.

Why is it acceptable for those groups to exclude?

Disbelievers might want to refer to a study by UK Feminista and Warwick University done a few years ago about sexism in schools called 'It's Just Everywhere'. (Sorry I can't link due to tech incompetence re sharing between devices)

That's very optimistic of you. They won't want to at all. It would be far too inconvenient.

Is this the one?

ukfeminista.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Report-Its-just-everywhere.pdf

That study has got a link to the GG survey on girls attitudes. I don't see anything in here which remotely indicates that changing the organisation from being single sex to 'single gender' is in any way helpful to addressing girls' serious issues.

www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/research-and-campaigns/girls-attitudes-survey-2015.pdf