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)

Many of us are sympathetic to this child's situation.

You’re absolutely right that it’s ‘utterly bonkers’, Co.
That’s much more polite than the way i put it, in my head!

If I said what was running through my head I'd be deleted. Utterly bonkers will have to do as a very poor substitute for what I really think.

Absolutely! 😂 I admire your diplomacy, my friend.

If that timeline is even part-way correct then that is ... chilling

Scouting has the fundamental difference, in that it recognises that there are 2 sexes on a camp. Whereas GG took the stance everyone is a female because they said they are therefore look away nothing to see here.

Because Scouts acknowledge there are 2 sexes, we can put things in place to safeguard them both. And how that will look will depend on the age of the Scouts, and the environment, and the individual kids on camp. Any good risk assessment (as I'm sure you're aware) will be specific to the event and the individuals within it.

But fundamentally, you recognise their biological sex, whilst trying to address their identity as the other.

So in the past, a transboy slept in their own tent, as they didn't want to sleep with their own biological sex, and there was no need for a single biological 15 yr old girl to go in with a group of 15 yr old biological boys. Asking for trouble. This is not as odd as it might sound - at the age I do many choose to sleep by themselves anyway. They get grumpy sharing their spaces!

And if they were in smaller tents (2 or even 3 Scouts to a tent) then never ever have mixed sex tents. Screaming for trouble! Teens are an amazing age group, full of enthusiasm and thirst for life and exploration. But they are capable of making some really really bad decisions - and it's the Leaders job to try and prevent those. Scouts sleeping 1 to 1 with a Scout of the opposite biological sex is one of those. The outcome (worst case) could be pregnancy, but there could also be various allegations of abuse made that would be very hard to prove (or disprove) and not fair on either Scout.

Occasionally they will mix - everyone is aware, and only when there is a) a good reason and b) a good ratio between boys and girls and c) plenty of room. Also separate changing and toilet areas needed, and everyone aware ahead of time.

At the younger age groups there is often mixed sleeping in larger tents, parents are made aware. Not aware of any trans kids that young, but as mixed not a big deal. As long as it is a proper mix of both sexes and not 1 girl to 5 boys (or vice versa). And there would always be separate changing facilities for both sexes - adaptions maybe needed for a trans kid.

Brownies in the UK has the age range of 7 - 10 years old

Perhaps another perspective to consider on the issue of toilets, since you asked for personal needs to be respected, is how female people use female toilet facilities and why any female person may wish to never see a male person above the age of about 8 years old in there.

Often, what also was not considered is the female toilet usage includes activities outside of the ability to lock the door. It is like there is a group of people who have never in their life needed to use a toilet facility where what they needed didn't fit neatly into a toilet cubicle with a locked door.

How great for them!

Here is that list of toilet usage this is just my own experience:

I have had to use the toilet while having a pram / pushchair jammed into the door with groceries.

I have had to have my mum use the public toilet because the disable toilet was not available and had her wheelchair jammed in the door because I couldn't leave her sit to move it and shut the door.

I have had breastmilk leaks / children's vomit / food spilled on my clothes and needed to have an unbuttoned top to dry the top under the hand drier.

I have come across other women quite regularly washing out their tops or their skirts etc and drying them enough to put back on .

I have friends who have miscarried in toilets and needed assistance and for that to be female people to make it more comfortable.

I went to the pub the other night and there was a woman dealing with a spilled wine on her top.

Toilets are not just used behind a closed cubicle door. There are quite a few aspects of female toilet usage that happen in the public space, or even now still occur with a toilet door jammed open.

So, this push for 'unisex' toilets with just locked cubicles etc also really doesn't work in practice, women still need female single sex toilet provision. Imagine waiting for a woman to dry out her top in one cubicle while there is a line forming. It just doesn't work the way people demand that it does.

The push for 'unisex' toilets also means that all cubicles will be floor to ceiling walls and doors. This is very dangerous for some people. There is a reason that there is a gap and that is to see if any person inside is in need of assistance.

For instance, they may be on the floor and in some cases, just minutes will save their life. Another instance, as per a few women who have self reported this on the feminist board, is when a female person is being attacked. Very hard to see this without the gap. With a gap, there is greater chance of noticing and hearing.

Any insistence that all toilets then be changed to unisex to suit the needs of one group of people, directly harms female people.

This is yet another example of where the rights for female people are harmed by the demands of a minority.

And it is all because rather than widening the bandwidth of how boy/ men can present, they are saying that non gender conforming boys/ men are the opposite sex.

Yet they say we are the ones who are being reductive.

It doesn't make sense.

They are reducing people in accordance with gendered stereotypes and, of course, women and girls must lose our sexed based rights as a result.

It truly is a man's world.

Yes indeed. And I know you know what I am about to say....

There is very little documented police evidence that any male person with a transgender identity has been attacked in a male toilet. Although, this has been used as an excuse for access to the female toilet.

Of course, even if there was evidence, that still never meant that those male people should be accessing female single sex spaces.

What should have happened though can still happen. There should have been and still could be a nationwide campaign where every organisation with a publicly accessed toilet or changing room supported a 'male toilet safety and inclusion programme'.

Male people should be making their single sex provisions safer for all MALE people. There should be signs up saying be welcoming of male people who are non-conforming or who are vulnerable.

Still, maybe those reading will have something else to consider.

I'm also very happy to support a campaign for third (fourth?) spaces for trans-identifying people. If these were opened to willing allies, too, they wouldn't need to be identifying. We managed it with disabled provision, and, before that, the female toilets themselves.

There was a big debate on the WI thread about what constitutes a women, with the WI stating that you had to ‘live as a woman’ (which they have never defined). Out of curiosity, was there a definition for guides as well?

Ironically, the Brownie uniform is brown, and the Guide uniform is blue. Ie, traditional male colours.

There should be signs up saying be welcoming of male people who are non-conforming or who are vulnerable.

Definitely but instead of that there have been signs up in the women's loos in universities to tell women not to question and to 'be kind' to males in those spaces who 'have the right to be there'. (paraphrasing now)

But it's only ever women who are asked to move over and to be kind. Never the men.

not to derail but I would also add to the reason of needing a female only toilets is so that you can give your small child an emergency bath in a sink of sensible size (and clean it afterwards of course)

Blue only very recently traditionally male - for the Victorians(?) it was pink. Gender as social construct!

I can't get over those signs. Utterly disgraceful, with everything we know about male-on-female sexual assault rates on campuses. Unbelievable enough in that context that they'd pressure female students to accept males in their spaces, but to explicitly seek to correct, via a poster-campaign, those problematic female spidey-senses that keep us safe? Un-fucking-believable (I reserve the rare swears for the really upsetting stuff) - and, brilliantly, another campaigning effort that abruptly catapulted me, and many others by all accounts, further towards the GC end of the spectrum in an appalled realisation of how undervalued women's safety really is (nice going, people).

Let's not forget the government sponsored messaging such as this ad from Australia.

https://www.vic.gov.au/media/977573

Here you are @SolidMam. This ad starts off with the message where women and girls are told that they should absolutely not show their distress at being in situation where they are uncomfortable.

The one also, where women and girls are told that they should accept the higher risk in their sports by including male people with physical advantages that may lead to greater numbers of and greater severity of injuries.

THESE ARE THE UNI SIGNS that we have been mentioning.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/uwe-university-transgender-toilets-bristol-2538210

another

https://archive.is/ZdfIJ

There are more. All telling young women to not question or make a fuss.

I will see if I can find the uni where it even mentions micro agressions such as 'looking' at the male person.

The messaging to female people is STFU about their distress and discomfort. The messaging that GG delivered to female children was in line with this too. And any leader who supported this is contributing to the conditioning female children to have low boundaries and to not speak out about their distress and discomfort.

I have done this too!

Hah - nearly cross-posted that video campaign, Helle. Yes.

No your son is not entitled to any gender based rights as they don't exist!
There are however sex based rights and your son has all the same rights as every other male!
What he doesn't have nor ever gets to claim are women's sex based rights because hes not and never will be a woman.
You and your son need to understand that he can dress however he wants and can get a false birth certificate if he chooses but he will never be a woman and as such will:-
Never get a period
Never be a mother (legally protected term for the female who gave birth)
Never be allowed on a women's sports team
Never be allowed in a woman's only group
Never be allowed in women's single sex facilities
Never stand for a woman's award
Never win a woman's scholarship
Basically he will never be permitted into or to take part in anything for women and girls because hes not one and never will be and actual women and girls have the rights separate from mens wants

Weren't they sinister?
All part of the male dominated attempt to reframe safeguarding as right wing bigotry. I think that was the labour peer, Lord Cashman (though he was actually talking about safeguarding children).
On this thread we've had sex based rights for girls and women being described as "incredibly outdated and reductive".

Alarming to see such regressive Victorian notions being spouted today and hard to imagine women and mothers saying this.

What a world we're creating for children

Fuck. When you start putting it all together in one thread, the safeguarding failures that are the result of organisations, governments and education institution lowering the boundaries of girls, it is fucking grim reading.

This generation of adults has knowingly and embracingly failed girls and women.

All using the tactics we have discussed on this thread. The personal attacks when language demands have been refused to be complied with, the use of obfuscating language, the dismissal of the need for sex based rights because some people cannot understand safeguarding, the repetition of unevidenced trope, the use of emotionally manipulative tactics such as misusing suicide stats...

It all leads to the silencing of a generation of female people's voices. A generation who has been conditioned that they must accept poor safeguarding decisions from those who fucking should know better all in the name of being 'kind'.

It keeps coming back to 'kindness'. What a fucking mess.

And all for a group of male people's philosophical belief about themselves that has no foundation in material reality. It is all based on absolutely fucking nothing but keeping a group of male people 'happy' based on their belief about who they wish to be perceived as, not who they materially are.

'Kindness' - Just another word that has now come to mean the very opposite of what it was intended to communicate.

And the same person (I think) saying how outdated sex based rights are, is also saying the Suffragette movement is/was similar to the Trans argument.

Sorry if attributed to the wrong person.

No you haven't.

I noticed that too.