Girl Guides are now GIRL ONLY!

[Iamwhoiamwhoareyou]

Following April's supreme court ruling, the Girl Guides have FINALLY made a statement and will remain GIRLS ONLY - Finally closing the door on admitting trans members or allowing BOYS to invade female only spaces/camp (which, would be done without informing parents that their daughter would be sharing a room with a biological male!) - I have a previous post in feminism chat for anyone wanting to read the previous thread on this

EMAIL RECEIVED HOT OFF THE PRESS 5 MIN AGO -

As the parent of a young member in Girlguiding, following April’s Supreme Court decision relating to sex and gender, we wanted to give you an update. Many organisations across the country have been facing complex decisions about what it means for girls and women and for the wider communities affected, including us.

Girlguiding’s governing charity documents set out that the membership and people who benefit from our organisation are girls and women. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that girls and women are defined in the Equality Act 2010 by their biological sex at birth.
Following detailed considerations, expert legal advice and input from senior members, young members and our Council, Girlguiding’s Board of Trustees has made the difficult decision that Girlguiding must change Girlguiding must change, following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

From today, 2 December, it is with a heavy heart that we are announcing trans girls and young women will no longer be able to join Girlguiding. This is a decision we would have preferred not to make, and we know that this may be upsetting for members of our community.

There will be no immediate changes for current young members but more information will be shared next week.

Most adult roles, including unit helpers, district helpers and administrative support, are already open to all, so we are confident that no volunteers will have to leave the organisation.

Girlguiding believes strongly in our value of inclusion, and we will continue to support young people and adults in marginalised groups. Over the next few months, we'll explore opportunities to champion this value and actively support young people who need us.

You can find our full statement and updated policy on our website.

We are proud to be the UK’s largest youth organisation dedicated to girls and is focused on creating an equal world for girls and young women. For over 100 years, we have been a welcoming space for all girls to have new experiences, support their communities, build friendships and grow their confidence.

While Girlguiding may feel a little different going forward, these core aims and principles will always be the same. We remain committed to treating everyone with dignity and respect, particularly those from marginalised groups that have felt the biggest impact of this decision.

If you have any immediate questions, we have our special support team in place, to give volunteers, parents and carers the best support we can. We are asking Girlguiding HQ, trading and country/region staff to refer any volunteer or parent who has questions about this announcement. Details below.

Contact [email protected] or 020 7532 3970
All calls/emails will be confidential, and the service will be open 24hrs, 7 days a week.
Find out more, including how this team will handle personal data.

Denise Wilson (Chair of Trustees), Felicity Oswald (CEO) and Tracy Foster (Chief Guide)

The football example is entirely irrelevant, a completely different situation.

And the trans discussion affects the whole female population.

And no four year old is “trans” anyway

But it’s not just pre pubescent children is it? Girl guiding young members go right up to 18. Can you really not see the risk of putting teens of both sexes in the same tents/showers/ changing rooms?

Would you like to be the leader explaining to parents that Flossie and Flissy (who have been sharing a tent at Guide camp) have come home with one of the pregnant? Up until this ruling not only could we as leaders refuse to put them together but also we are not allowed to tell parents their daughters may be sharing with a biological girl.

In my 30 year experience as a Guider, girls relish the freedom a girl only space brings. Why should they have to give this up?

I think the point is that a 4 year old does not have the agency to make these decisions. HTH

A. Why should the female sex, the oppressed sex, be asked to be the tolerant one?
B. Explain exactly how we find out which male is abusive and which isn't? Do you genuinely believe a male in a dress is less risk than a male in a suit and tie? And if so, how can we know?

Nobody is born in the wrong body.

I object to your deliberate mischaracterisation of the views and arguments of women's rights campaigners. That is not the mark of somebody commenting in good faith and you undermine yourself by behaving that way.

Came out as what? Gay?

@ReyRey12 The difference in your football story is that the girls had nowhere to go to play football.

The boys in this situation DO have a place to go - they had no reason to dress up and pretend to be girls to access a particular activity.

Unless you're saying that girlguiding offers a specific acitivity that a boy cannot access anywhere else ???

Are you saying parents will try to sign up their boys to girl guides, even though it's against against their rules? Seems a bit far fetched to me. You could ask for a birth certificate if you suspect this is happening but most people find it easy to follow the rules.

What I don’t believe is that trans woman = abusive man, as the GC movement would have us believe.

I think you are not putting the counter argument fairly. The GC movement believes that trans woman = man and thus does not belong in a female single sex space (which apparently you passionately believe in )

Leaving aside the fact that the 'born in the wrong body' narrative has been pretty much rejected by trans activists themselves, I really don't see how you can argue on the one hand that you 'passionately believe in girl only spaces' while also arguing that 'girl' means 'any person male or female who says they are a girl', and presumably for equality's sake excludes any female child who does not 'believe themself to be a girl'. Whether they would consider themselves a boy or NB. I also wonder when people apparently define girls (or women) in that way what they believe to be the role of 'girl only' spaces. I've never really got an answer.

For the record I don't believe that 'trans woman = abusive man' just that 'transwoman = man'. I suspect that's where most people are.

@averylongtimeago But it’s not just pre pubescent children is it? Girl guiding young members go right up to 18. Can you really not see the risk of putting teens of both sexes in the same tents/showers/ changing rooms?

Agreed that putting a teenage boy in a changing room or shower with teenage girls is not a good idea as his eyes would probably pop out of his skull.

However, bear in mind that under 18s are still children, and I doubt that there is some kind of agenda, or ideology, among boys to try to invade girl's spaces. Children are not that sophisticated, and a child would certainly not go to the extreme lengths of transitioning just so they can have access to girl-only areas.

'living their authentic lives'

What the hell does this actually mean? In this specific context, how does a child pretending to be the opppsite sex suggest being 'authentic'?

Why can't boys have long hair and wear skirts? Why cant kids explore clothing, toys, activities, and, as they get older and become teens, consider which people they may eventually be attracted to, without being told they're doing it wrong?

16, 17 year old boys are not especially famous for a lack of interest in sex.

Presumably, he'll get older and want to work his way up through the organisation, possibly to Ranger Guide. It's kinder to stop that now.

The motivation of the boy is irrelevant. They are male and that is relevant for the safety, dignity and privacy of girls.

It's a bit difficult to 'passionately believe' in girl only spaces, when you're arguing at the same time that a boy's authentic self should be prioritised over this and over every girl he takes that single sex space away from. And in effect that girls should not be allowed this particular girl only space.

It's not really a coherent view. A happy boy getting what he wants at the expense of all the girls losing the benefits of a girl-only space, especially when the boy has plenty of alternatives to choose from, can only seem right if you believe that male children are of much greater importance than the female ones. And that the female children should accept this subordination. Even in the spaces created for them to have a few hours a week away from it.

It only takes one boy to destroy a girl-only space for every girl in that space, and every girl who will ever want to use that space while he is there. And again, what do you suggest for the girls who cannot access mixed sex spaces for activities like these? How do you make boys happy and able to express their authentic selves while telling those girls that their authentic selves just don't matter. Even their cultures and faiths and being part of society don't matter, not up against this boy's need to express his sense of self.

So you claim to be a feminist yet your feminism centers men. Thats pretty misogynistic.
Transwomen are 5 times more likely to be in jail for sexual offences than other males.
Men however they identify being kept out of women's spaces and services as its the best way to keep predatory men out

You speak about aggression, you you personally have made a judgement about each person on this thread with this:

”unlike most of you, give up hours of my life, unpaid, to offer it.”

You have made claims on this thread that have been proven to be wrong yet now also claim that you know better. Would you like to show the evidence that male people who have declared transgender identities have a lower risk of being abusive towards female people to prove your stance of when you say this:

“What I don’t believe is that trans woman = abusive man, as the GC movement would have us believe”

I, for one, would be very interested in the evidence that you have found to form this view. I am sure it would be of interest to many on here. Because it directly feeds into safeguarding risk assessments. And you have assured us that you are very involved in offering female people spaces where they are safe.

Only you say ‘girl only’. Are we to assume that you mean you include male children too?

This is marvellous news. Think of all those girls who can only attend if it is a single sex space. And of the many many more who need the benefits of a single sex space to thrive and blossom. This is so much more inclusive. But of girls.

No. They're being guided by their parents. 4 yr olds do not join any kind of organised social activity without the encouragement of their parents.

I do think that their parents are misguided - at best - in sending them to the Rainbows rather than the Beavers (or whatever the male equivalent is these days).

@user976534679875 What I don’t believe is that trans woman = abusive man, as the GC movement would have us believe. And excluding trans women just to keep out the abusive men, is too blunt an instrument.

But the entire premise of safeguarding is that it has to be blanket in nature. Because there's no way of telling which men are a threat and which aren't. It obviously doesn't mean all men, or all of any subgroup of men, are all abusive. Once you make exceptions, the safeguarding is gone.

I don’t agree that being supportive of trans people makes anyone a bigot or a misogynist. They are different things. I do find it quite bigoted to have an opinion on how someone else lives their life when it has no impact on you whatsoever.

The previous policies/guidance about trans individuals (which has now been taken offline) is available archived at https://archive.is/xC4Pt - it will be interesting to compare that to their new policies/guidance when it's properly published.

The harm done by their previous policy is nothing to do with being scared of men or worried that a 4yo boy poses a risk. Enormous damage is done to every girl in a troop that admits a male - because the intrinsic implication is that "being a girl" and "following feminine sterotype rules of dress and behaviour" are intrinsically linked, and if you don't do the latter, you can't properly be the former, and if you do the latter you can be the former regardless of genetics. That's harming the freedom of all young women and girls to be themselves - whether tomboy rough and tumble future member of the women's rugby team or not.

@scabz If you're having difficulty with this just wait for a few hours - the children will be able to tell you very quickly.