To ask you to see who girl guides support.

[RedCarpetRebellion]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10235539/amp/Girlguides-launch-probe-trans-Commissioner-58-saucy-dominatrix-style-picture.html

A woman sacked for speaking up for girls safety was replaced by this person.

Girl guides are not safe for girls. AIBU?

@Helleofabore

Eggy

I think posting these images on your social media while in a position where you know full well what the GG volunteer rules on conduct and on safeguarding or leaving them up after your appointment is actually rather indicative of their intention.

We are constantly told by activists that we should accept people for who they say they are. Leaving these images on two social media platforms is 'telling us who this person is'.

Why do you think this particular person should not be named?

Very true GG needs to take responsibility, but this is a 58 year old adult.

Their actions can only be taken as deliberate or else, they simply have no concept of what is required for the safety of children and should never have been appointed to that position. I look at their decisions across TWO social media platforms and I can only draw the conclusion it was deliberate choices here. GG allowed this to happen but they are jointly responsible with this particular person .

I didn't say that I didn't think that this person shouldn't be named. I don't think there's any issue with naming them.

I just think the most important thing is Girlguiding procedures for volunteers and deciding if they're suitable, and if they were followed rather than shouting at an individual. Shouting at an individual will achieve nothing. Getting Girlguiding to hold themselves accountable (I doubt that they will), has the potential to do so much more positively.

You say that they should never have been appointed. It was Girlguiding's decision to appoint them. Hold them to account.

@Echobelly

I haven't seen the Twitter account, and can't find it so can't say whether it's soft porn or not. If it's inappropriate I would say most of all I'm in agreement with *@Eggybrains* - take your concerns to Guides, don't smear this person on speculation based on a few pictures. It just gives ammo to people who say 'Oh you're just looking for an excuse to be transphobic' - NB not saying 'Oooh be nice and kind', but certainly saying, don't mudsling on individuals who have not been proved to have done anything wrong, nor even had any allegations made against them.

I do wish sometimes there was a verb/word to say 'I am not necessarily defending a person or standpoint, but I think the argument used undermines itself with speculation/inaccuracy!' (I don't think 'devil's advocate' is the same thing, for example)

The Twitter account has now been deleted but there's plenty of screenshots out there.

Eggy

The person at the heart of this discussion needs to also be held accountable because they were in that position. They chose to do this and to not follow the clearly set rules. The code of conduct clearly states that social media posts of a sexual nature are not acceptable.

This adult had the responsibility to follow this code of conduct and has chosen not to. It is infantilising them to lay the sole blame on GG here. Both are very much in the wrong.

I take your point about targeting the issue / the Guides, rather than the individual Eggybrains. The difficulty is that the issue was dismissed by the Guides when it was raised as a general concern. Women were sacked, silenced and told to go away.
An instance like this of a remarkably senior GG (and not a naive young person) exemplifies how catastrophic that earlier decision was. So we're left with having to hammer home the message that this is what happens when you prioritise sexual politics rather than the needs of girls for a female only safe environment, free from sexual pressures that they face everywhere else.
And that's why it's such a disaster.

@Echobelly

I haven't seen the Twitter account, and can't find it so can't say whether it's soft porn or not. If it's inappropriate I would say most of all I'm in agreement with *@Eggybrains* - take your concerns to Guides, don't smear this person on speculation based on a few pictures. It just gives ammo to people who say 'Oh you're just looking for an excuse to be transphobic' - NB not saying 'Oooh be nice and kind', but certainly saying, don't mudsling on individuals who have not been proved to have done anything wrong, nor even had any allegations made against them.

I do wish sometimes there was a verb/word to say 'I am not necessarily defending a person or standpoint, but I think the argument used undermines itself with speculation/inaccuracy!' (I don't think 'devil's advocate' is the same thing, for example)

I have. I'm not basing my opinion on an article in the Daily Mail. Do you honestly think they're making this up?

Until yesterday, this person's Instagram, Facebook and Twitter were all open. I know, because I looked at them. They clearly state on their Twitter profile that they're a guide leader.

This person has no boundaries or sense of what is appropriate or inappropriate in a leadership role with children. And they are directly contravening the guides' Code of Conduct.

So either a) they don't know what it is or b) they know and don't care.

And why on earth shouldn't the press expose this kind of thing? The guides are failing in their duty of care to chidren.

Personally I care more about safeguarding than hurty feelz

And I'm afraid to say that I think that this kind of media coverage is the only way you'll get GG to have a root and branch review of how things have gone so catastrophically wrong.

@Helleofabore

Eggy

The person at the heart of this discussion needs to also be held accountable because they were in that position. They chose to do this and to not follow the clearly set rules. The code of conduct clearly states that social media posts of a sexual nature are not acceptable.

This adult had the responsibility to follow this code of conduct and has chosen not to. It is infantilising them to lay the sole blame on GG here. Both are very much in the wrong.

Yes, true. But holding her to account should be Girlguiding. The internet doesn't need to do it too. If Girlguiding fails to hold her to account that is an abhorrent failure by Girlguiding, and the more significant issue is with Girlguiding.

In many cases, Girlguiding may be made aware of failures, but it doesn't reach the Daily Wail and Sun. What's really important is that Girlguiding deals with these effectively. You and I may not be aware of many, many other Monicas in Girlguiding.

It seems on past experience, they don't deal with issues, instead they get rid of the person raising them, like Katie and Helen.

This is one person, @Helleofabore. For clarity, I'm not saying it's ok. What I'm saying is that there will be more. And what's more important is how Girlguiding, as an organisation, deals with these issues, rather than this one individual, who will probably be next week's chip paper as the saying goes (except they don't use newspapers in chip shops any more).

@Echobelly

I haven't seen the Twitter account, and can't find it so can't say whether it's soft porn or not. If it's inappropriate I would say most of all I'm in agreement with *@Eggybrains* - take your concerns to Guides, don't smear this person on speculation based on a few pictures. It just gives ammo to people who say 'Oh you're just looking for an excuse to be transphobic' - NB not saying 'Oooh be nice and kind', but certainly saying, don't mudsling on individuals who have not been proved to have done anything wrong, nor even had any allegations made against them.

I do wish sometimes there was a verb/word to say 'I am not necessarily defending a person or standpoint, but I think the argument used undermines itself with speculation/inaccuracy!' (I don't think 'devil's advocate' is the same thing, for example)

There are plenty of screen shots floating around. I personally did see their twitter account.

And frankly, the image that a person in a bathtub (because I also saw the image the profile image was taken from) that is in front of a wide screen shot of them standing with a line of small girls in tutus that showed the girls faces was just one of the inappropriate style of posts for a GG divisional commissioner I would suggest.

@MrsOvertonsWindow

I take your point about targeting the issue / the Guides, rather than the individual Eggybrains. The difficulty is that the issue was dismissed by the Guides when it was raised as a general concern. Women were sacked, silenced and told to go away. An instance like this of a remarkably senior GG (and not a naive young person) exemplifies how catastrophic that earlier decision was. So we're left with having to hammer home the message that this is what happens when you prioritise sexual politics rather than the needs of girls for a female only safe environment, free from sexual pressures that they face everywhere else. And that's why it's such a disaster.

@MrsOvertonsWindow I think we're on the same page, really. This is primarily an issue with Girlguiding, who have behave abhorrently in the past.

We now need to look to Girlguiding to perform better, but I doubt that they will.

This is what people's energy should be focused on, not Monica herself.

But holding her to account should be Girlguiding. The internet doesn't need to do it too.

It does when Girlguiding has a track record of firing those who want it held to account. Public response matters.

This is one person. For clarity, I'm not saying it's ok. What I'm saying is that there will be more. And what's more important is how Girlguiding, as an organisation, deals with these issues, rather than this one individual, who will probably be next week's chip paper as the saying goes (except they don't use newspapers in chip shops any more).

On this I totally agree. And as a parent of a very recently left guide, who was looking to start rangers, I will be continuing to contact GG myself and will take every opportunity to campaign that this does not happen again.

Unfortunately, what you say about GG is also correct and they have form for not dealing with it. Hence the need to actually raise awareness about this so that parents of Guides can respond.

@DrSbaitso

But holding her to account should be Girlguiding. The internet doesn't need to do it too.

It does when Girlguiding has a track record of firing those who want it held to account. Public response matters.

Yes - so make sure you hold Girlguiding to account. I'm absolutely not saying don't do that. Please, please do hold them to account. Just focus on Girlguiding, not Monica as an individual.

This is what people's energy should be focused on, not Monica herself.

And with the lack of trust in GG, if the full story is not being told about this person who has deliberately chosen their actions, how will parents know to then hold GG to account.

I do understand what you mean Eggy, but the reality is, people get their heads around what has happened and how it has happened, and that requires them seeing the images for themselves and reading articles about it. GG has low credibility that it will take any notice otherwise.

The fact that people had to poke around her social media to find this suggest it's probably not a major part of her life anyway.

The profile and cover photos for this person's Twitter feed was a selfie of them topless in the bath and a row of young girls (pre-teen so far as was possible to tell) in party dresses in what looked like a church hall or similar with their faces visible. You think that's an appropriate juxtaposition for someone appointed to a senior Guiding position?

What a person, be they man, woman, trans whatever, does in the privacy of their own home is their business alone (as long as it's within the law and with consenting adults of course)
No one should be hounded because they like to dress up or collect replica guns.

However- if you publish dodgy photos of yourself wearing BDSM gear, in a state of undress, brandishing weapons or making sexually suggestive comments under your own name, then want to volunteer or work with children, well you should expect your public profile to be examined.

This type of public post across multiple social media accounts would get you into trouble with almost all employers or public organisations.

The reason they are so important is they show how the failure of Girlguiding's safeguarding policy has allowed a person to access children.

This photo alone (originally published with the children's faces showing) should be enough to have the poster removed. If you think it doesn't and that including a picture of yourself semi clothed with a bunch of little girls is fine, well I wouldn't want you near my grandkids either.

oops

for people get their heads around what has happened

You are right though, they do look like party dresses and not tutus.

It’s the Emperor’s New Clothes! Surely the rational response of an organisation, upon seeing such photos of one of its members - a member in close contact with young girls and in a position of leadership - should be to say “Sorry, mate, so long” without delay.

I would be horrified if this were my dc’s primary-school teacher. Why is GG any different? Safeguarding must not be eliminated in the pursuit of “being kind” to responsible adults.

And Echobelly, if this person cannot be held responsible enough to follow the published code of conduct of a Guiding volunteer and know the minute details and nuances of safeguarding, just how the hell are they supposed to ensure that as a divisional commissioner responsible for a large group of guides and their leaders that the guides are safe and not being harmed in any way?

@Helleofabore

This is what people's energy should be focused on, not Monica herself.

And with the lack of trust in GG, if the full story is not being told about this person who has deliberately chosen their actions, how will parents know to then hold GG to account.

I do understand what you mean Eggy, but the reality is, people get their heads around what has happened and how it has happened, and that requires them seeing the images for themselves and reading articles about it. GG has low credibility that it will take any notice otherwise.

I agree with much of what you say. I believe Girlguiding can not be trusted. I also understand that to hold Girlguiding to account, you need an understanding of the situation, and this gives people some understanding of the situation, although I think this is just one small part of Girlguiding's failures.

Our energy needs to be focused on Girlguiding and their response, or lack of, to this. That is the only way things might change in Girlguiding. Saying repeatedly what an awful person Monica is will not change things in Girlguiding.

We're seen the pictures. People can make up their own minds. Now they need to hold Girlguiding to account and find out how this happened. Has anyone asked if they got a reference for Monica before she began volunteering?

The GG movement began to change a few years ago in an attempt to become "appealing" to a wider group - they ditched the reference to "God' in their promise, they changes the badges and they basically alienated many of their leaders and in doing so put off many girls. Now they have attracted a new group of individuals whom in my view are alien to the old GG movement - I feel it is a very sad state of affairs. The GG movement over the years has done a lot to encourage girls and provided a fantastic opportunity for children whom cannot afford many of other clubs/societies, it encouraged them to try new things, broadening their horizon and provided them with role models. The movement has been very badly damaged and I wonder if it can recover its old identity

Yes - so make sure you hold Girlguiding to account. I'm absolutely not saying don't do that. Please, please do hold them to account. Just focus on Girlguiding, not Monica as an individual.

How do we hold GG to account for taking on a person like Monica without explaining why Monica is an unsuitable person to be taken on by GG?

@twelly

The GG movement began to change a few years ago in an attempt to become "appealing" to a wider group - they ditched the reference to "God' in their promise, they changes the badges and they basically alienated many of their leaders and in doing so put off many girls. Now they have attracted a new group of individuals whom in my view are alien to the old GG movement - I feel it is a very sad state of affairs. The GG movement over the years has done a lot to encourage girls and provided a fantastic opportunity for children whom cannot afford many of other clubs/societies, it encouraged them to try new things, broadening their horizon and provided them with role models. The movement has been very badly damaged and I wonder if it can recover its old identity

It needs to change dramatically, quickly, if it is to survive, which is so very sad.

I am going to focus on Monica as an individual and girl guiding.

I am suspicious of the motives of a recently transitioned man with very poor boundaries choosing to join an previously single sex organisation where there are overnights with children with low adult child ratios.

I am not going to apologise for that.

Has anyone asked if they got a reference for Monica before she began volunteering?

I think in my letter to them on Monday (before this became so widely known) I did ask what process was followed. As a parent asking, I would daresay that question will be completely ignored.

And while I agree it is better to focus on moving ahead now, we still have new posters who don't read through an entire thread who are questioning the relevance of what we are discussing. This is the nature of MN, of course.

So, I suggest there will be constant backwards and forwardsing that will annoy some posters.