Girl Guides are now GIRL ONLY! - Thread 2

[CohensDiamondTeeth]

I hope no one minds me starting thread 2, I clicked post on my last reply but the thread had filled up.

There was some interesting discussion had, and on the last page @LostMySocks posted that she was thinking of sending a positive email to HQ, which I think sounds like a great idea. Maybe those who support this move could do the same? It would show Girl Guides that people are paying attention.

Link to the first thread here: Girl Guides are now GIRL ONLY! | Mumsnet

The first post of the thread was so good I'm just going to copy and paste it here too. Girl Guides statement is incredibly begrudging in tone.

@Iamwhoiamwhoareyou · Yesterday 14:41

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)

Well that child is right. You are not going to be able to override that child's recognition of basic biology.

Children will always ask questions. We teach them to enquire, to research and to tell the difference between reality and fantasy. We're doing a great disservice to children (and adults) by insisting that some lies are sacrosanct. That some untruths must never be challenged while it's virtuous to call out others.

This whole approach has massive implications for safeguarding. When children are told that they must accept the behaviour of certain people because they're from a "sacred caste" who must never be challenged while the same behaviour from others raises red flags and is challenged. It's incoherent and dangerous for children.

There's a parent on here desperately trying to challenge a school that forces teenage girls to undress for PE in front of teenage boys (who claim to be girls). The message these girls are getting is that their legal rights to privacy, safety and dignity don't matter. The school are potentially decriminalising voyeurism & indecent exposure and the girls know that they are unable to complain because of the sacred caste belief. This is the reality for girls today.

And, do they get along fine, or has the little girl who clocked the emperor had no clothes been told to “be nice, be kind”

Rather than tell him there was no wrong way for him to be (as a boy) you have told him that his behaviours meet the sterotypes of girl gender (whatever that is) and he therefore is entitled to be treated as a female person. You have set him up to fail as this is something he can never be.

If I am wrong and this has nothing to do with him preferring stereotypically girly things then please explain as I can't see what else 'girl gender' can possibly be.
I have a daughter who does not confirm with female stereotypes. She therefore has nothing in common with your son (other that them both being human and both being gender (sex stereotype ) non- conforming) . She has conversely got something significant (her sex) in common with every other female child on the planet what ever her likes or dislikes/ personality.

@SolidMam Still waiting for your definition of gender which makes you believe that your son is a girl and for you to tell me what characteristics your son shares with my daughter (other than both being human and both being gender non confiming) which makes them BOTH girls?

@SolidMam another question that you should consider and read up on, is what would you do in a medical setting if your child needed serious medical care, ignore that pesky regressive biological reality?

Are you aware that sex also really matters in healthcare, and that it can be fatal to receive wrong sex care?

Ok, I know I said I'd step back, but I can't let this one lie. It's disingenuous to say the least: in the same post as you thank me, you also implicitly call me phobic and lacking in empathy.

Please think about what you mean by "transphobia" - really think about it.

You've defined our acknowledging your child is male as suggesting the disadvantages to them (exemplified by what you're currently experiencing with GG!) of seeking to deny this (ie. concern for the wellbeing oy your child) as phobic.

You refer to the above "putting up barriers", whereas we would actually argue that it's tearing them down, and rather condescendingly reduce it to "learned behaviour" that goes against the purer, more natural instincts of children. Yes, it's "learned" - but, rather, in the sense that it's informed by reading, analysis, and meaningful debate etc. (in a way that your views honestly don't really seem to be).

When I tell a child it's time to stop being a unicorn for today and come in, because it's 10pm, well past their bedtime and they have school tomorrow, and their playmates all chorus, "Noooo! Twinkles can use her magic to fly all night long!" that's not showing that they have some deep-seated instinct for the truth and their friend's best interests, any more than I'm being unicorn-phobic in needing them to recognise what's best for their health, safety and future well-being.

And people with the protected status of gender reassignment also have extra rights.

So SolidMam wants for her boy child: Men's rights, women's rights, and trans rights. She just wants all the rights.

Thank you for the clarification.

Can you now explain with some depth why a minority group's demands should have priority over another group's basic human rights?

I will explain this so that you can be clear what I mean by this..

A basic human right is that each sex has access to single sex provisions such as toilets, changing rooms etc for their sex. Not their gender. Their sex.

As I explained up thread, public provisions that are single sex were always designated to fulfil this human right obligation.

A male person who rejects their own single sex provision, and wishes to access female single sex provision is demanding an additional privilege. It is not a 'right' at all in that respect. It is a privilege.

A male person who reject their own single sex provision may choose instead to access a mixed sex provision. This is the solution that does not involve demanding an additional privilege.

A male person who demands access to female single sex provisions is doing so at the expense of those female people's sexed based rights. Their access automatically and logically makes that provision mixed sex. This was even explained by the Supreme Court.

There is no way to deny this unless you use destablised science and language to do so.

Can you explain why a minority group's demands should be allowed to negatively impact another group's human rights?

Solid has also said that one potential way of determining whether a child is a boy or a girl is asking when they are happy and whether they feel anything doesn't feel right.

I've done this but can't see any guidance on which gender this means they are.

You can see how this is utterly unworkable in policy and law, as it's been like pulling teeth to even get to that point of "how does someone know if they are a boy or a girl"?

And highlights how various ND kids (and adults) are completely left behind if they need concrete, consistent answers to make sense of the world.

And that’s just greedy.

Particularly so because not only does she want the rights that her child is entitled to, which no one begrudges at all, but she also wants to actively take away another groups rights to give to her child, leaving them with no rights at all.

Women... girls... females... people of the biological sex which was formally known as female, aren't even allowed their own words with which to describe themselves as a group.

Its all just a bit... not very kind really is it?

I thought the same. They had the option of going mixed sex, and openly admitting boys (and girls), or go single sex. Wonder why they chose the latter? I’m guessing it was a much debated decision, (‘heavy hearts’) but the final vote (if they had one) went in favour of girls only.

I have a child who used to have melt downs at being told no. It is fucking soul destroying to say no in the face of repeated claims that go on for years and years. I have faced this challenge and been to the depths of my soul to work out what the best approach was.

I understand.

However, I always relied on science and logic and unbiased information. I read very widely on that particular topic, especially reading material that I didn't agree with but I needed to see what I might be missing.

@SolidMam "I would say that currently the patriarchy is a bigger problem for transwoman than most female women."

How can you possibly think that? How many trans people have been killed because they were trans, versus how many women are killed for being female? Are you utterly unaware of the sex-based violence again women and girls that is rife in society?

It has been a point that has been mentioned many a time.

In fact, I noticed that on a thread in FWR we have a female person with a transgender identity making it perfectly clear that she fully needs 'sex based rights'. She is very clear on this and has been for a while. We have had numerous others drop by and say the same thing.

We even had a couple of male posters with transgender identities who also were very clear that female people needed provisions that excluded them. They supported sex based rights.

The posters who tend to use the terms 'sex based rights are reductive and outdated' do tend to be either activist posters themselves, male posters attempting circumnavigate female people's boundaries and consent, or family members of male people who are attempting to circumnavigate female people's boundaries and consent. There are some others who fully believe that they are the most progressive people in the world but don't have a fucking Scooby as to what they are even talking about.

It's like this thread is running along two separate train tracks, and never the twain shall meet.

Solid, to try to cut across to your side as far as I possibly can afford to, my feelings are thus:

1. Gender dysphoric children who will persist into adulthood exist, and need societal recognition and accommodations for an exceptionally challenging existence at that.

2. However, they are extraordinarily rare.

3. In fact, evidence increasingly suggests that the current ideology (by extending "trans" to mean a deep-seated feeling of being the opposite sex, and "gender identity" to be something everyone has) has compromised the rights and well-being of a large number of groups, including such children and your child. This is because:

a) "Trans" has swept up large numbers of gay, lesbian, autistic and other impressionable children who have subsequently detransitioned or, evidence increasingly suggests, been locked into a trans identity by premature and overly reductive social transition and under-researched hormonal interventions.

b) "Trans" has, with your support, demanded that sex-based rights are removed, along with women's very right and ability to advocate for these (just read half the posts in this thread for evidence and examples).

c) Not only the above, but, to add insult to injury, "trans" also includes fetishistic cross-dressers (Stonewall explicitly included them under its transumbrella until very recently) and male rapists (see multiple examples, and the BBC!)

4. In this context, my feelings, far from being phobic are:

a) Concern for your son in the event that he may in future desist, or wish to do so but feel unable.

b) Concern for your son in the even that he belongs to the pathologically dysphoric minority, to whom I'd like to offer more support than the movement currently permits (forcing me, as it is as you are - to defend my own rights first).

c) Concern for the rights of women and girls.

5. What are the solutions? I don't know, but certainly, as a first step:

a) NOT to read most posters on this thread, reductively and unjustifiably, as unthinking, traditionalist phobics!

b) To read, read read 🦜 to see that they do, rather, have some good points.

c) For us to, similarly, show sympathy, respect and understanding to you.

6. What I'd like?

a) Single-sex spaces to be retained (FFS, 98% of sex crimes are committed by males, including, prison stats across a variety of nations show, trans-identifying males, who are proportionately more likely to be offenders of this type - probably, due to 3c, above).

b) Mixed-sex spaces to be provided, to accommodate your the people in 1 so they're not "outed" while also not removing sex-based rights from women and girl wholesale - a compromise, but a necessary one in a society in which one girl (our kind!) is raped by a boy (our kind!) in a UK school every day.

c) Transideology to be recognised for what it is - a gross distortion of the reality of binary sex, disorders or sexual development and gender dysphoria, that is harming all these groups, thereby leading to...

d) Far greater societal understanding and acceptance of your child.

What Solid is telling her son is that the rest of society who are worthy and good will maintain the lie.

The rest of us are 'irrational', 'cruel', and a whole list of sins and we are to be ignored, and our female needs are to be pushed aside to make way for her male son. I get where Solid is coming from, but at some point perhaps the fact that nothing that Solid is saying holds up under reasonable scrutiny might sink in.

However, the current issue is that cyclical action of 'anyone who disagrees that my son is my daughter is not someone who should be considered reasonable'.

Categorising other's views as unreasonable, cruel and irrational is the first step to feeling righteous about dismissing those views. The pattern is unmistakable.

I am reasonably good at reading budgies, Catiette. But they don't tell me much about this topic unless someone has taught them phrases to parrot back.

What is the emoji you used though?

(I think you have encapsulated many of my thoughts here)

What I want to know is why Solid's child, who is preteen by the sound of it, is so convinced they are a girl. Given that you can be a boy and can (eg) have long hair, wear dresses, and call yourself Emma, I am not seeing what the issue is. Unless of course Solid is telling her child that boys can't do those things and if you want to do those things you must be a girl...

The girl who told her "she couldn't play because she's not a real girl" did make a transphobic comment - but they moved past it and they get along fine now.

The little girl should have been told 'anyone can play that game' not 'that little boy is a real girl'.

Gawd we are sterilising kids because they want to play the wrong games or wave around pictures of the opposite sex when they are toddlers.

Darnit, it is a budgie? It came up as a parrot when I searched (to acknowledge that I'm parrotting on a bit re: the reading recommendation)! MN's emojis are shamefully short on cute animals.

It's not contradictory - the 'social transition' came later, when she was more comfortable and secure and we were as sure as we could be that it was more than a phase.

I'm not going into the detail you ask for, it's a lot of personal information - maybe one day I'll write a book and you can read all about it there.

I notice there's an ask for my personal experience quite often here to justify my position. So can I ask:

What personal experience have people had here of a transwoman or transgirl in a single sex space that has had detrimental results?

Obviously if there is trauma attached to any of these experiences, please look after yourself and feel no pressure to answer. I'm just conscious that I'm bringing lived experience as a parent to this debate - and I'm not convinced that many people on this thread actually engage with trans people or children day to day - although there's a lot of advice to me about how to raise my child.

Women... girls... females... people of the biological sex which was formally known as female, aren't even allowed their own words with which to describe themselves as a group.

This is exactly the point about this destablisation of language. When we have male people, even under oath, even in committee meetings with policy makers, saying very clearly with no limitations that they are 'FEMALE', you have to realise that there is no words left to uniquely describe female people.

At all.

There is nothing left.

Yet, self proclaimed feminists declare righteously (all over the internet) that there is no need for sex based rights.

That entire group of people who support the destabilisation of language in this way, has somehow missed that they are at cross purposes.

Male inclusive feminists - " there is no need for single sex provisions!"
Male people with transgender identities - 'I am FEMALE, and I want to be included in FEMALE single sex provisions'.

The contradictions are very clear once you see it. It is just one more incoherent argument though in what really is a philosophical belief that has no basis in material reality. And because it has no basis in material reality, it crumbles apart under scrutiny. Whereas something that is grounded in established science and is logical doesn't crumble and holds together from any angle that is also based in material reality.

Gender Ideology at its extreme end is inherently abusive. It is abusive to women and girls obviously, gay and lesbian people, autistic people, and even towards the people within it's own community.

Those trans identifying males who support and understand the need for female sex based rights that @Helleofabore was talking about earlier have been horribly abused by other trans identifying men.

@SolidMam might like to look at how detransitioners are treated by the trans community in particular, she might find it hard to get any information from trans ideologists, but if she looks here, and elsewhere there is a wealth of information that evidences the abuse and erasure they have received from that oh-supportive lot.

Added into the Cass Report on social transition making detransition harder, your son is going to be really up against it if his gender distress resolves. The deck is stacked against him from "your" side.

And speaking of desisting, you have said yourself that you understand that this is a possibility, and yet you have not explained why, if you know that, you persisted in putting in a girl's group specifically instead of a mixed sex one?

Would it not have been better with the possibility of desistance on the future horizon for everyone concerned, your son included, to have waited until he was (much) older?

Especially since everyone going along with "getting ahead of the law" and being "progressive" in regards to gender identity superseding biological sex was so new. Did you never think with all the fuss around women's rights that the law being clarified as meaning biological sex was a possibility?

🐧🐣🐢🐞Actually, maybe a bit harsh - but not enough birds, certainly.

And why are they all filed under a leaf symbol when there are far more animals in that section than plants?

(Hm. That last is pretty applicable to this whole debate, actually. I mean, given that I feel mildly aggrieved on behalf of the animal emojis and how much harder it makes it to find what I need there, no bloody wonder I'm upset on behalf of women and girls wanting single-sex facilities IRL!)