To ask you to sign our letter to Girlguiding UK?

[AgnesBadenPowell]

IMPORTANT! Deadline 9pm Thursday

We (me and the awesome team at Fair Play For Women and some others) will be publishing an open letter to Girlguiding in a national newspaper this Sunday. We set out the safeguarding concerns with their trans policy that allows a male child who identifies as a girl to share sleeping, dressing and washing facilities with girls, and that parents are not allowed to know. We also highlight that Females who identify as boys are expected to leave, disproportionately impacting lesbian girls.

We are now asking for our supporters to sign the open letter. I obviously need your name - you can PM me with your name, and indicate whether you are a parent, Leader, former member, grandparent, aunty, concerned member of the public etc. OR you can complete the online form here:

fairplayforwomen.com/add-your-name/

We can’t publish the full text of the letter but all the issues are summarised in this factsheet and can be seen in more detail this report.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/FPFWGirlguidess_factsheet.pdf

https://fairplayforwomen.com/guide-leaders-call-for-halt/

Spread the word and the link and lets get as many signatures as possible. Girlguiding has made a big misstep with this policy. As a Leader, I don't do this lightly. It's not my intention to embarrass Girlguiding but they MUST listen to our concerns about this policy - concerns shared by legal and child protection experts as well as parents and leaders.

You can read about the Girlguiding policy question here (and click through to the specific guidance on residentials): www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/equality-and-diversity-policy/transgender-gender-reassignment/

Girlguiding's most recent statement on this issue can be read here: www.girlguiding.org.uk/what-we-do/our-stories-and-news/news/coverage-of-equality-diversity-policy/

The sad thing about the arguments put forward against signing the letter is that they are condescending but also minimising.

Girls today still suffer the burden of expectation from a patriarchal society. Think about how women are portrayed in the media and the overwhelmingly negative effect of accessible porn on pre-teens.

Girls need a single sex space where they can be themselves away from the expectations of male society. A space to be whatever kind of girl they want to be. If a space like that is needed for boys (and I would say it is) then it needs to be made for them.

But children socialised as male, with all the attitudes and expectations that creates, should not be taking spaces for girls. And girls who behave outside the ‘norm’ should not be shoved into male spaces either.

The whole thing smacks of gender gate keeping- not enough of a girl to be in guides.

Whilst this letter troubles me I have to state that Op has remained fairly calm and rational and has not resorted to aggression which so often happens in this threads

Seeline Currently based on either self-id or a GRC, men who ID as women can join, and leaders/members/parents are not allowed to know if there is someone in this category on the leadership team/sharing a changing room or bedroom.
Women who ID as men (either route) would also be expected to leave (or not join). If leaders they could be non-member helpers and they'd be expected to have separate sleeping and toilet facilities on camp.

@Seeline

The policy applies in a similar way to adults. Anyone who self identifies as a woman can make the promise and become a leader, or indeed take any voluntary role.

An adult who does not identify as a woman cannot make the promise but can instead take on roles where the promise is not required.

The senior section is changing this year - remained Rangers and will be up to 18 years old only. In any event, gender self ID is recognised. On SS residentials girls over 18 are not allowed to share tents with girls under 18 - which is fun when you have girls in the same year 13 who want to share but can't because one of them has turned 18.

@pieceofpurplesky

Would it change your view if it wasn't a daily fail article?

I'm very proud of how inclusive our girls are. But is it fair expect a 7 year old to make her own safeguarding decisions, as we can't tell her parents that her accommodation will be mixed sex?

There is no fear here. Just acknowledgement that while rare, child on child abuse does happen. The evidence shows that it mostly perpetrated by boys against girls (did anyone see Panorama last week on just this issue?). If we have Male and female children sharing intimate spaces we need to acknowledge the risks and manage them. We can do that in part by separating sleeping and washing spaces by sex - just as we routinely do when leaders' male children join their mothers on camp.

Or we could decide that the risk is so small that no separation need apply between the sexes, regardless of gender identity.

What we are asking for here is a review because this policy is so muddled and directly contradicts existing policies.

I also think the girls in my unit would be horrified and possibly lose trust and faith in me if I asked their friend to leave because she didn't identify as a girl. I cannot see how expecting leaders to do this is in anyway inclusive.

Females who identify as boys are expected to leave, disproportionately impacting lesbian girls.
Lesbian ≠ 'ftm transgender'. Hth.

Done. I used the link in your OP. Thanks for this

most lesbians are not female to male transgender. What kind of crack are you on?

I've read the letter and was perfectly happy to sign it.

They don't seem to have it in them to think that a boy would pretend to be a girl just so they could sexually abuse them

But that's not all that this is about though, is it?

Let's say that you are confident that Boy A, regardless of how he identifies, will not sexually abuse Girl B. Do you think that Girl B should therefore be happy to undress, shower and sleep alongside Boy A because you have judged him to be 'safe'?

Do you think that as long as Girl B is not actually being sexually abused, she should not have any boundaries or right to bodily privacy?

Do you think that Girl B's parents should not be told that their daughter will be sleeping, changing and washing alongside a boy?

Do you think that there could be a possibility that 2 opposite-sex teenagers alone in a tent could engage in consensual sexual activity? That Girl B could still get pregnant, even if Boy A calls himself Girl A?

Do you recognise that the presence of members of the opposite sex brings additional safeguarding concerns, and that this burden is placed upon unpaid volunteers?

Do you think that there may be reasons why Girl B has specifically chosen to attend a single-sex organisation rather than a very similar, mixed-sex one? Do you think that the fact that it is single-sex contributes to its resounding success? Do you think that it offers opportunities and experiences which may otherwise be closed if Girl B were, for example, restricted beyond her control by her parents' religious beliefs?

Do you think it is right that Girl B should be removed if she starts to question gender and does not identify as feminine? Do you think this is at odds with the aim to encourage girls to push beyond restrictive gender norms?

We are talking about a girls-only organisation here, therefore our concerns about changes in policy are centred on their impact on girls. Not boys.

I am another guider and I am a parent to a Girlguiding member. I am signing with my real name.

I have researched myself as well as links given on both sides of the fence.

There are too many troubling issues which are being dismissed or minimised and as I am invested in the future of my children and their peers, I owe it to them to stand up now and be counted.

I will not idly sit by while known sex offenders transition and make threats to abuse massive loopholes like the one GG is adopting.

I think most used a "not equals"sign that failed to come out properly.
But it is true that a higher proportion of lesbians than straight girls transition, so the GG policy affects them more.

Ah, ok. I thought it was some sort of mad equivalent being made. It is the kind of thing

I'm not saying that Ftm = lesbian.

I am saying that there's evidence out there (although more research is undoubtedly needed) that girls who display gender non conforming behaviours in childhood and adolescence are more likely to be lesbians than girls who do not. Most Ftm are not lesbian.

By singling out and excluding gender non conforming girls, GG is indirectly discriminating against lesbians (and sexual orientation is also a protected characteristic) because that is a group more likely not to conform to gender.

Regardless of sexual orientation, I do not believe it is ethical for a single sex organisation to exclude one group of girls if they wish to stay on or join us.

Thanks Agnes - I think that the Leadership issue is being lost in the argument. I totally support the female only environment and think it should be retained. No female should be forced to share a space with a male - leaving aside safeguarding issues.
However I think that parents not being told that their daughter would be put in such a position is completely unacceptable. surely these girls have rights too?
But the real concern is parents not being told that the Leader is actually make - that is a whole different arguement.
I regret I cannot sign with out seeing the letter, but I have signed the petition.
Thank you for taking up this cause.

Strip away all the postmodern language in this debate and it's about upholding what society has long believed is basic safeguarding for children and teenagers over the age of 8.

Regardless of what someone under 18 identifies as they remain legally their born sex until adulthood.

If any organisation dealing with children, guides, scouts, schools, boarding schools, summer camps etc... changed to mixed sex accommodation without informing parents the uproar would be off the scale. Albeit on a smaller level this is what's happening here.

It's not even a question of abuse, teenagers consensually experiment all the time. As a poster said upthread there should never be a risk, no matter how small, that a teenage girl can become pregnant when an organisation is in loco parentis.

Safeguarding 101.

Sorry, Agnes. That wasn’t aimed at you. I had an issue with someone else’s reply to your comment. But I was confused.

Have signed the petition in my own name. This is an important campaign. I hope that DD will be a guide when she’s old enough. It needs to be empowering for girls.

I’ve signed. This is about basic safeguarding in society.

AgnesBadenPowell
By singling out and excluding gender non conforming girls, GG is indirectly discriminating against lesbians (and sexual orientation is also a protected characteristic) because that is a group more likely not to conform to gender.

Where in Girlguiding policy does it suggest that gender non-conforming girls will be singled out and excluded?

@fascicle

This is from the OP’s first link:

We understand that if a young member is transitioning from female to male that they will be experiencing a great amount of change and uncertainty. Flexibility and the Leaders’ discretion in conversation with the parents must be used to determine how long the child stays within the unit.

Ive signed as a foster carer. My fosterchild attends Guides. I chose Guides instead of Scouts because of her history of severe abuse at the hands of men and her extreme vulnerability - and I thought they could keep her safe. I will have to pull her from Guiding, my own safeguarding procedures will not allow me to willingly subject her to psychological trauma and possible further abuse.

Signed!

Signed.

Suburban I had seen that but assume it isn't the basis for Agnes' comment.

Op you have put your neck on the line by speaking so publically about this issue. I have only ever seen you write compassionate, rational posts on here. You are a wonder and I take my hat off to you.

I don't want to sign for privacy reasons but if I didn't have some specific concerns around that area, I would happily sign your letter without reading it. I trust you completely. Most things I absolutely wouldn't sign without seeing. I am glad Guides have you standing up for them. They're children. They do need protecting. They might generally see the best in Trans kids and 99.5% of the time that isn't misplaced. But if something does go wrong, it will do a lot of damage.