Victoria Derbyshire today and Girlguides

[AgnesBadenPowell]

Did anyone see Victoria Derbyshire on BBC2 this morning? Interesting discussion about transgender people and self ID. One of the speakers mentioned Girlguiding, which caught my attention as I am a Leader and I’ve had similar concerns but few people to discuss it with IRL.

You might have seen the press coverage (and threads here) about the changes to Girlguiding UK’s policy on inclusivity for transgender members

As a leader it’s my duty to implement the policy. I also have a duty of care to the girls in my unit. I’ve thought long and hard about this and in my view, GG has got it wrong.

GGUK recognises gender self identity, which is “a person’s inner sense of being a girl or a woman”. A male child who identifies as a girl can enroll as a rainbow, brownie, guide or ranger and a male who identifies as a woman can make the Guide promise and become a leader. Leadership roles have historically been women only (although men can volunteer for support roles that don’t need the promise and aren’t in charge of units).

The policy states that transgender children should use the accommodation of their acquired gender on camp. Parents of other children should not be informed - leaders are told it is neither required or best practice. Remember that Guiding also permits adult leaders (including men who identify as women) to share accommodation with children; it’s not the preferred option and at least 2 adults should always be present in the tent or guide hut but it does happen.

I have written to GGUK to outline my concerns:

1. the policy allows, for example, a 14 yo biological male Guide to share sleeping accommodation with a 10 year old female Guide.NSPCC advice is that children over 10 do not share a bedroom with the opposite sex. It’s not unreasonable for parents to expect GG to follow this advice. Why aren’t we?

1. The policy does not acknowledge the embarrassment a teen may feel when dealing with periods, washing and bathing in shared facilities with a person they may have known as a boy.

1. The policy is focused on the needs of the transchild and their preferences. As a Leader I have a duty to all children in my care and must balance each of their needs. Only in reference to changing clothes does the policy state that all children should be offered a more private place to change if desired, otherwise transchildren chose what facilities they use with no reference to their fellow guides.

1. If GG cannot guarantee truly single sex accommodation then some girls will miss out on residentials, eg girls from certain religious groups, those who have been subjected to abuse or who just don’t want to. This is against GG’s inclusive ethos

So far GG has responded with (template?) emails to say that GG has always been a single gender organisation, gender identity (as defined above) is recognised as separate from biological sex and Leaders should refer concerned parents to the higher ups.

Today’s TV show made me wonder how many people really understand the implications of the policy and have similar concerns. Leaders can't discuss other children with parents (rightIy so) but that means parents can't give informed consent to their child sharing mixed sex facilities. I'd like to gauge the feeling of parents but it's a sensitive issue and not something that I can just ask my girls’ parents. Perhaps you think I am over reacting. Perhaps you share my concerns. Either way, I’d like to know.

Finally, I should add that I’m not trying to have transgirls removed from GG. Neither do I think all men/boys are potential sex offenders. But I do owe it to the parents and children in my care to have assessed all the risks thoroughly. My point is that this policy poses a risk, which doesn't appear to be recognised by GG and Leaders aren't being advised how to manage it.

I do have to pop out for a bit now but will come back later, if anyone replies!

woman I get that the girls would miss out, but surely thats the only option leaders can take if the rule book has been completely changed against the fundamentals of what people believe. Ultimately if the rules change it will change the way the guides operates and so in a way the girls will miss out on what they had anyway? IYKWIM

pass the scouts my son attends is more girls than boys so i think they might take offence at it being called 'boy' scouts. The mix works for them but they have the same rules regardless of gender . Admittedly i don't know what they would do about trans due to the practical arrangements. At his scouts they seem to have formed sibling style relationships rather than actually having an interest in each other, its very sweet they all look out for each other rather than the willy waving and orgies you seem to be envisaging.

Cake the Scout transgender policy is above. It's similar to GG. But leaders cannot sleep in with young members in Scouting.

The Chief Guide is on Twitter - twitter.com/Chief_Guide
Probably a staff account but all the same...

It is extraordinary that gendered intelligence and mermaids have so much influence. So much that GG, the epitome of sensibleness previously, ignore their members, their volunteers and all the evidence of their own experience and common sense. How have we got here?

My 10 year old daughter is a guide. She was on her first camp a few weeks ago and shared a tent with three other guides, but no leader. She was in a separate tent.

Once again I can't even find the words to express my incredulity and anger. I'm coming to the conclusion that many, many people are just fucking stupid.

Cake No offence meant, I understand that some Scout groups have more girls than boys and some don't. Neither do I envisage 'willy waving orgies' however on longer or international trips the gender segregation rule re accommodation are reassuring to parents. The age ranges are 14-17 then and I do recognise the brotherly/sisterly vibe which is fostered - it does happen that some of the teenagers will feel more than this to each other. And in the same way I wouldn't let my 14 yr old sleep over with their girlfriend/boyfriend I wouldn't be keen for them to be sharing a tent on a guide trip.

Nobody has the backs of these teenage girls. Parents yes, but no public organisation is coming out in support of female only spaces - it’s all budge up ladies, shush, ignore your boundaries, you don’t matter*

Yes, this exactly badger
Tell me again, who are the oppressed group in this?

Not one single established institution or organisation is supporting female spaces

Do you know what I find saddest about this whole sorry mess? My 16yo DD could easily be confused about her gender/sexuality and be discussing this at SS in a safe space with friends.

Yet according to what I’ve just read on the GG website, if she IDs as binary or even trans, she’s out as it clearly says she cannot be in a role in which she makes the promise - so a SS/Ranger member is out.

So much for girls in the lead or girls first or whatever slogan we are all supposed to trumpet now.

(DD isn’t confused btw, in fact she and DS1 are as outraged as I am. Dd2 is a young Guide and DS1 is not happy with the idea that any of his mates could say they were a girl and end up in a tent with his little sister!)

Having read this thread earlier I am sooo very angry that this space is now longer a protected space for young girls. I am not involved in GG but was both a Brownie and a Guide. I loved it - and still have my uniform complete with badges. I feel very sentimental about my time there and also the wonderful freedom and sense of adventure I felt on the couple of camps I went on.

I agree with all the concerns already raised and would not be happy to send my DD away on a residential with an undisclosed TIM in attendance. It would feel like a huge betrayal of trust that other parents would/could not be told. Two other major concerns for me are minority ethnic groups and vulnerable girls. Surely a (once) female-centred organisation should be prioritising access for under-represented BAME groups for whom single-sex spaces are a requirement over biological males? I think will write to them and ask about any stats they have on this. I would like to know what they're doing on that front and also like to be reassured that they have the means to measure any impact that this policy change (once publicly known) has on those stats.

And then there are girls who may have had experienced trauma or sexual violence. Would a guide leader know if a particular child had had such difficulties personally? If the leader did not know this and then on top of that the parent or guardian did not know that a trans boy was mixing with their daughter, how can they properly protect them?

It bugs me to death that the "trans lobby" are policing language "because women talking about pregnancy and periods can be triggering" but think it's perfectly acceptable to wave a penis in front of a girl/women who may themselves be triggered by its very presence.

The fact that groups like GG and NSPCC are changing their policy without seeming to consider any of this (and seem to be taking a la, la, la, it's all fine) approach to questioning on it tell me that the Sex Matters campaign is essential and we all need to be advocates for it.

Long post, sorry, but this one rather sent me over the edge today.

That letter from the NSPCC is chilling. 'There are no safeguarding concerns'. From the NSPCC!!!!!

Luckily I hated Brownies so hadn't planned on introducing DD to it. I certainly won't now.

Mine are in Brownies and this terrified me. They're going away next week..... I'm thinking when they move to guides it would really worry me.

It's scary how all this slipped through and it's scary effects on everyday life :(

AgnesBP - have you seen the update from Jennifer James about the AWS legal challenge? I wonder if it's worth discussing with the legal firm that she has engaged to see if they would be willing to take on the GG case as well? Many of the arguments will have the same legal basis, after all

I would donate to any fundraiser that aimed to oblige the Guides to actually approach the risks involved with this policy - and, while I do accept there is a "bad man" danger, I still think the "horny kids" danger is much more likely. This is the blindingly obvious one and it also doesn't look paranoid to outsiders.

@OlennasWimple yes I have seen the update from JJ and had similar thoughts. I'm working at home tomorrow so plenty of opportunity to contact the firm she is using.

Any residential could be as story above - school etc. Up til now we had strict boy/girl separation. Teachers/leaders patrolling floors and tents. Now they just have to say they are the other sex and the others just have to agree :(

That's why my friend's dds no longer attend such groups, and why mine will never attend.

Even Mumsnet uses the term gender instead of SEX within the account details pages, it's ridiculous.

I think the other issue, as well as safeguarding is girls are allowed and deserve space just for themselves because SEXISM. Also a girl is a juvenile human female, not anyone who says they are one. Lawful exemptions allow for single sex spaces because they recognise that women need them to redress the balance of female oppression.

Without GENDER there would be no oppression, patriarchy is the ball, gender is the chain, gender is HOW women are oppressed. So yes of course this is primarily a safeguarding issue but it also about dignity and respect for females - we are not a gender, gender is imposed on us to keep us second class citizens. Paris Lees is fond of saying 'no debate' and I also feel like saying women and girls need, want and deserve their own spaces in their own right, NO DEBATE!

it's nonsensical to say to girls, gender stereotypes harm you, they aren't true or real and you can be whatever you want to be, and at the same time gaslight them and say you are girls because you 'identify' as one. HOW does one do that? Gender stereotypes!

I strongly feel that it's the single sex club issue that needs protecting. Safeguarding issues can be solved easily as with other mixed sex youth organisations.
GGA should be single sex. Without this rule all of the good work they've done to give girls confidence and support over the last 100 years is sold down the river.

@elletorro I'm very interested in seeing your arguments, thank you for offering this.

Some amazing women on this thread.

I was mildly groped on guide camp by the husband of a leader, This was in the 80s. Everyone else left the tent after putting on their wellies, he 'helped' me with mine and his hands just kept on travelling up my leg. Nothing serious, but I remember just feeling very uncomfortable and embarrassed. One of the other girls also mentioned once something jokingly about us being molested by him, so I'm wondering if I wasn't the only one....

The policy by GG shows a total disregard for the safety of girls and has put me off sending DD to Brownies.

Cakeofthepan - that’s nice. I took 10 girls (12-17) to an international jamboree and the scouts were literally all over them We went and had a nice chat with the scout leaders so we were all on the same page. No sex no drugs no rock n roll. Our gals all have to have The Talk before travelling internationally. Any intimacy and they are on the next plane home at their parents expense.
Sweet that your unit is so brotherly though.

But yes. My main objection is not relationships (I’ve also had to deal with code of conduct violations and lesbian outings) but with the loss of freedom from gendered expectations. With all girls, we can discuss the bollocks that is gender freely, openly, and crush the fuck out of it. The girls are free. I don’t think I can run a unit where at least one member is so tied into stereotypes they are attempting to literally embody one. How can I free an entire unit of girls to be who they want to be, when I have to ensure that I am also openly embracing a boy’s right to encroach on their freedoms?
It’s odd, of course. The irony is that by freeing the boy to do exactly what he wants, (which is all good and worthy), I limit the girls. I can’t teach them they have rights and can do anything. I have to teach them to give up ground and make room for men. That men get what they want, even when the girls don’t want it.
That whatever they do, they will always have to give up space for the boys.

I think the big problem is they think that no one would ever say they were the opposite gender just to take the piss or to access something they wanted. Or even because they were confused. Have they never met teenagers?

The moment you can't define man or woman, you lose all and any rights around those labels. It's absurd.

And I am appalled that NSPCC has drunk the kool-aid too. Their advice is taken almost as law. TRAs must have punched the air when they won that victory.

^^

I read a fb post about an all women’s event allowing trans women. Or anyone who identified as women.

There were disgusting comments by men saying they would ID as Male to get in and get to the women.

My main objection is not relationships (I’ve also had to deal with code of conduct violations and lesbian outings) but with the loss of freedom from gendered expectations. With all girls, we can discuss the bollocks that is gender freely, openly, and crush the fuck out of it. The girls are free. I don’t think I can run a unit where at least one member is so tied into stereotypes they are attempting to literally embody one

Excellent post terfyowl