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!

Good idea-I will press them on that point and let you know. It won't be fast though - any question takes at least a week for an answer!

We are tying oyrselves in knots but its actually simple. Gender reassignment IS a protected chatacteristic. So the EA protects a TIM from being excluded from a group for being trans-gender. So if they wanted to join a mixed group or a male only group, they could invoke ttthe EA2010 if they were prevented on account of being transgender

HOWEVER we seek to exclude them from GGs because of their sex, not because they are transgender. Sex is the relevant protected characteristic here and the EA2010 allows the protection of female only spaces and the exclusion of males. I am sure that would be upheld in court

The problem is that GGs are saying that it is a SINGLE GENDER organisation and using self-identification as the criteria

I think that 'single gender organisation' vs 'single sex organisation' is a separate conversation to sex segregated accomodation/facilities and same sex chaperones

The first point is a conversation about the ethos and purpose of GG...and the definition of gender and stereotypes

The second point is a safeguarding issue

These diacussions are really difficult to have because the people that have written these policies really believe that self identification changes your sex

Agreed.

But GGA are saying TWO things, they say the ARE invoking the single sex exemption to keep GGA 'girl and woman only'

BUT they are also saying that they are NOT invoking it as they are required by law (they're not) to treat someone as their 'acquired gender'

They can't have it both ways, that's a contradiction.

By invoking the sex exemption they can lawfully exclude legal males (trans girls and a TiM without a GRC) PLUS they can also exclude legal females (TIMs WITH a GRC). Kids are too young to have a GRC so their legal sex is their birth sex.

So they in some places on their website that they are a single gender organisation (and even say that 'gender' is a protected characteristic, it's not, sex is) and in others that they are 'single sex'

They also conflate the meaning of the word female. The biological definition of which is "Of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes."

The LAW defines a woman as a 'female of any age'.

In short, they are in a contradictory mess, as they've listened to a tin pot trans organisation.

Here's a copy of my post from yesterday 7th march at 18.09:

"Girlguiding complies with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 which makes clear that organisations providing single-sex services such as Girlguiding should treat people according to their acquired gender. As such, and in line with our values of inclusion, we welcome any young person who self-identifies as a girl or young woman."
www.girlguiding.org.uk/what-we-do/our-stories-and-news/news/equality-and-diversity-policy/

Here they are calling the protected characteristic of sex, 'gender'!!!!
"Girlguiding's approach to inclusion
Girlguiding is open to all girls and young women between the ages of 5-25 (4 in Ulster). Girlguiding provides resources and support for adult volunteers to enable them to include all girls and young women and give them a great guiding experience.

Further information about how Girlguiding supports the inclusion of individuals with legally protected characteristics can be found in the following supporting information.

Gender.
Age.
Disability.
Transgender and gender reassignment.
Marriage and civil partnership.
Race and ethnicity.
Religion or belief.
Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) members. "
www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/equality-and-diversity-policy/

Plus ""In addition to providing a ‘girl only’ space for our young members, we are committed to ensuring our young members have female role models in leadership within Girlguiding. In order to support this, roles such as Unit Leader, can only be undertaken by female members.

Whilst some roles are restricted to only being held by women, adult males (18+) are welcome to join the charity in a variety of other volunteer roles.

Further information can be found in our Membership and Recruitment policy."

"Girlguiding is a single-sex organisation in accordance with the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. Girlguiding believes that the needs of girls and young women are best met through an organisation catering specifically for girls and led by women.
Our policies
Girlguiding’s policies and related statements provide a structure in which guiding can take place safely, consistently and in accordance with legislation.

Policies must be followed by Girlguiding’s members and by recognised volunteers involved in delivering or supporting guiding. These policy statements are supported by further information and resources to ensure that our members put the policies into practice."
www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/membership-and-recruitment-policy/

They seem on the one hand to be saying they are invoking exemptions to keep it girl only, but on the other that any one who identifies as a girl is a girl or 'female' (they conflate that word a lot). Their safeguarding and membership also talks about informed consent (how does that gel with parents not being being told?) and also not doing or being discriminatory in order to discourage anyone from joining (inc religion) so that also contradicts 'you are free to go elsewhere if you don't like it'.

The Girl Guides clearly need a reboot so that they can stick to their original aim of benefiting girls.

I think we need to establish an Organization for the Defence of Female Only Divisions.

@Elletorro

Found one section and one set of explanatory notes that I missed out yesterday:

s14. sets out the legislation around combined discrimination: dual characteristics

and the explanatory notes for the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment - Explanatory Notes -> Commentary on Sections -> Part 2 -> Chapter 1 -> Section 7

oh jesus GIRLSCOUT...its actually a total mess isnt it???

girlscout in your post at 10:36:08 yesterday; where is that screen shot from?

It's from the Equality act explanatory notes.

Sema

It's a complete mess. They have literally cut and paste bits of gendered intelligence briefing into their website.

They can of course choose not to invoke exemptions, but what they ARE saying is contradictory.

Fairplay for women have done some really good write ups on the law, both EA2010 and GRA 2004

fairplayforwomen.com/legal-rights-transgender-people-biological-women/

GirlScout72
In short, they are in a contradictory mess, as they've listened to a tin pot trans organisation.
This. They cut corners and listened to a pressure group instead of getting proper legal advice on how to set up their equality and diversity policy.

HaruNoSakura
The explanatory notes for combined discrimination show (I think) that the law could be used so that girls who identify as boys are treated the same as other girls (so that they are not discriminated against on the grounds of gender reassignment), while excluding all boys on the grounds of sex, using the exemption. But I am not a lawyer.

Link here to explanatory notes
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/2/2

Sorry Sema, I realise I misread my own timestamp. Which post are you referring to? I can't find a post I made at 10:36:08?

Sorry Sema, 10.36 08 is from TODAY, it's from the Equality Act explanatory notes, hidden away, I can find the exact reference if you want

I think we need to establish an Organization for the Defence of Female Only Divisions

dodo now you mention it, there are a few of us who have been tossing this idea around. I will start a new thread as a kind of 'expression of interest'....see if its a goer and get some ideas about what the priorities should be...I post a link in a minute

Protection of Female Spaces Group;

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3188420-Single-Issue-Political-Party-The-Protection-of-Female-Only-Spaces?watched=1

Ooh Sema, that sounds interesting, I've been thinking this for a while. yes do, post the link here, I'd defo be interested in hearing more about that.

As far as I can see we've got
Tories - Self ID is a really great idea
Greens and their 'non men'
Labour - Lily Madigan, AWD and frankly terrifying misogyny
SNP - totally gaga for self ID
LibDems - drunk the KoolAid

100 years of the vote and no bugger to vote for.

And who could forget the WEP

'We're the party for women's equality, particularly if that woman is a man'

dodo, I get it!

(Side note, you’re not Dido are you?)

@OldCrone

So this post is going to be different from most of my others. This is solely how I'm trying to interpret the legislation, the explanatory notes, and the issued guidance from EHCR, and trying to get it all too match up, and then applying that reasoning to what's happening re:single sex service provision.

Going from the EHCR guidance re:single sex organisations and access for the purposes of Gender Reassignment it looks like it's the other way around. Notably the explanatory notes for s7. use the following language:

• A person who was born physically male decides to spend the rest of his life living as a woman. He declares his intention to his manager at work, who makes appropriate arrangements, and she then starts life at work and home as a woman...

• A person who was born physically female decides to spend the rest of her life as a man. He starts and continues to live as a man...

Coupling that with the wording in s7.ss1 itself:

• A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment . . . for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

and I'm beginning to see why EHCR wording is the way that it is around the inclusion of somebody with the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment.

So the logic behind EHCR reasoning seems to be:

• At the moment somebody gains the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment they are to be considered the sex of the acquired gender for the purposes of the interpretation of EA2010, except where exception has been made, or where exemption may be applied
.
• Therefore, for the purposes of the use of facilities and accessing single sex spaces and services, the person with the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment is to be treated as having protected characteristic of Sex in their acquired gender, not their gender at birth, except where exception has been made in law, or where an EA2010 exemption has been lawfully applied
.
• Therefore denying somebody access to single sex spaces or services on the basis of their acquired gender amounts to a breach of the provisions of EA2010, except where exception is made in law, or where an EA2010 exemption has been lawfully applied.

Except, that chain seems incomplete to me. It feels like there should be case law somewhere informing or reinforcing EHCR guidelines, but I can't find it. I've just spent the morning looking through relevant ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) cases, and not finding anything, and nothing's jumping out from Supreme Court decisions either. I'm wondering if I'm looking in the wrong direction, and there might have been a Tribunal or County Court case decision that hasn't been reported on well enough for me to find using a cursory search.

But anyway, in regards to the Guides it looks like:

• A girl can join the Guides because they are determined to be a woman for the purposes of having the protected characteristic of Sex and therefore are legally eligible to join.

• A boy cannot join the Guides because they are determined to be a man for the purposes of having the protected characteristic of Sex, and therefore have no legal recourse to join.

• A child who has the acquired gender of a girl can join because they have the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment and therefore should be considered as having the the protected characteristic of a woman for the purposes of the interpretation of EA2010 in this regard.

• A child who has the acquired gender of a boy cannot join because they have the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment and therefore should be considered having the protected characteristic of a man for the purposes of the interpretation of EA2010 in this regard.

• A girl who joins the Guides and then obtains the acquired gender of a boy via the mechanism laid out in s7.ss1.EA2010 is no longer considered to have the protected characteristic of a woman and instead has the protected characteristic of a man for the purposes of the interpretation of EA2010 in this regard, but it is reasonable within the interpretation of the law to allow that child to remain in the Guides for an adjustment period until that child is ready to leave (one argument could be that the child is exploring of the option of acquiring the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment, but has not made the commitment to obtaining that protected characteristic until such time as they leave the Guides, another could be that the Guides are exercising discretion of the strict interpretation of EA2010 in the best interest of the child and this therefore can be considered to be acting in the public interest in a limited way).

*WomanHuman.

No, I'm not Dido. I'm a former Girl Guide, though, hence (in part) the name I use on here.

@HaruNoSakura

Thanks for your detailed reply. It does seem that the EA2010 is set up in such a way as to favour men who identify as women over actual women. From your interpretation (and you clearly have a much better understanding of this than I do), it seems to me that from the moment a woman or girl decides she has a trans identity, she loses all the protections based on her sex.

In your view, would it be possible for the guides to apply an exemption to the EA2010, and by doing so, favour the protected characteristic of Sex over Gender Reassignment and keep girl guides for biological females only? I have no idea how exemptions come into being, though, so maybe this is not possible.

In short, they are in a contradictory mess, as they've listened to a tin pot trans organisation.

Who aren't exactly known for their consistency, logic, or proximity to the truth.

But what does 'live life as a woman mean' haru?; 'woman' is defined as 'a female of any age in the EA2010