Boys in Guides is wrong - letter in Sunday Times today

[CapnHaddock]

Fabulous! Thanks to Agnes and DrNic: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/allowing-boys-to-be-guides-is-wrong-v0dngnvjp?shareToken=a17a43f649f1ebc0c60077f356240fd0

CapnHaddock

that's so sad. so the guides are saying we only support children who identify with some stereotypical notion of "being a girl".

How interesting that you've chosen to omit the wording that very much implies girls that identify as boys don't belong in guides.

I'm sure aargh is capable of drawing her own conclusions by reading the PDF.

Actually, I think that bit is a bit woolly and is not anywhere near as explicit as the bits about including boys who identify as girls.

"Girl’ is defined based on gender identity. This means that any child who self-identifies as a girl should feel safe and welcome in our girl-only space regardless of the sex that they were assigned at birth."

Nothing about safety of the girls who are actually girls. It is not a safeguarding concern.

I couldn't sign with my real name due to my professional role. I fully support this letter though.

I think it's a very confused document - on the one hand they're saying that they encourage girls to explore activities that are not stereotypically aimed at girls but in the next breath they're flexibility managing any girls who say they want to change their name from Anna to Andy out and that they will probably feel more comfortable in the scouts.

I hadn't read this doc for a while but it strikes me that it really isn't the role of Brown Owl to be pushing this GIRES and Mermaids developed propaganda. I wonder how many parents happily wave their little girls off to Rainbows knowing that they're being 'educated' by this lot?

@aaarrrggghhhh here you are

I signed the letter - because my DD's right to privacy and dignity matters to me, and her too. She's been part of this organisation for 8 years, and according to TRAs, would be labelled a bigot or transphobic if she was to express any discomfort at being told she had to share facilities with a male born child. She's neither a bigot nor transphobic to feel uncomfortable about having to undress alongside a male born child irrespective of how they identify. And while there is recognition that a trans identifying child may feel uncomfortable and can request privacy for that reason, my child can't without being labelled bigot. That's unacceptable.

How is it fair that female transgender people in the GG are not allowed but male transgender people are? On what planet did that make sense to anyone?

And presumably this goes for adult leaders also? So all transgender role models will be male. Girls' experiences of transgender people will be exclusively male in GG.

If GG had intended to set themselves up to be sued by the most groups of people possible, I genuinely didn't think they could have gone about it more successfully.

the entire womens_rights forum has been radicalised and whipped up into an anti trans echo chamber.

How patronising. Radicalised? It would certainly suit some interest groups for women to be kept in ignorance of the threats to their identity and their safe spaces.

I believe it's still possible to add your name to the letter at fairplayforwomen.

It is, ancient. DrW gave the link upthread, I think :)

the entire womens_rights forum has been radicalised and whipped up into an anti trans echo chamber.

What nonsense. First, a forum cannot be radicalised. Or a person or a group of people can be radicalised. And the FWR folder is hardly an "anti-trans echo chamber".

Typical TRA ideology post: if you aren't a bootlicking handmaiden then you are anti-trans, MN is anti-trans, MN is radicalising women, etc etc.

That's an excellent letter.

That should say "Only" not "Or".

'Radicalised' - that's the inane talk of the Lib Dem LGBT twitter feed that the Lib Dem Party is trying to disassociate itself from.

Excellent letter - succinct, factual.

the entire womens_rights forum has been radicalised and whipped up into an anti trans echo chamber.

Not anti-trans AT ALL, as a proper reading of any thread will tell you. Centring women. Centring girls.

There is a significant difference.

AgnesBadenPowell and DrW

Thanks for your courage and hard work in leading this.

Archived link is here;
archive.is/Hr097

Lots of disingenuous comments and propaganda on the first page. To reiterate the main points;

• Boys who identify as girls are treated as girls by the Guides, and parents are not informed that sleeping and showering arrangements will be mixed biological sex.

• Girls who identify as boys are expected to leave. that is not trans inclusive or trans friendly.

• Scouts is already unisex. Boys who identify as girls can already join the Scouts.

• This GG policy will also exclude all girls from strict cultures.

for AgnesBadenPowell DrW and everyone concerned.

I was musing on this the other day. How can an organisation be 'single gender'? A quick Google of how many genders there are comes up with numbers of 3, 63, 71, 112, right through to a spectrum. So if guides is single gender (e.g. feminine) then presumably it is also excluding pangender, agender, androgyne, bigender, genderqueer, gender fluid and many others? How would it work? Or by 'single gender' do they mean 'any gender except masculine'? Or are they assuming just 2 genders?

My mind can't get round the logistics of it.

As the MAJORITY of children identifying as trans are now girls, this letter shows the importance of inclusivity. Guides had rather stupidly adopted a policy which meant that every girl who questioned her identity was booted out. The overwhelming majority of gender questioning children desist transitioning after puberty if supported and not treated as pathologically in need of 'fixing' and grow up to be healthy (and often same sex attracted) adults.
There are far more girls questioning their identities than boys, and instantly booting girls out of their own support networks whilst they are working out who they are is brutal and cruel.

If Guides reverse their daft policy it will involve the inclusion of MORE trans children. They will be female - and that is who guides are for.

Agree:

flowers for AgnesBadenPowell DrW and everyone concerned.

And a lot of these girls who are maybe teens now may have been in Guides for half of their lives.

Not fair to encourage them to leave, purely because they identify as a boy.

What happens if a girl identifies as a boy and then later as non-binary? Will she be allowed back in? Presumably not as it is a single gender organisation?

I note that non-binary adults are allowed though? "If an adult member identifies as non-binary they are still a valued and appreciated member of Girl Guiding. They are able to take any role that does not require them to take the Promise."

Non-binary kids out.

Non-binary adults in.

It is a holy mess.

Hang in - I'd missed that!
If non-binary is specifically allowed, how is guides "single gender"?

(Even if it's just the adults)

It is a holy mess

Agreed. Stick with sex, everyone knows what it means. Gender is too woolly and controversial a concept for anyone to attempt to make rules about. Let girls and boys express themselves however they like. If they are diagnosed with gender dysphoria, which is more clearly defined, let's find a way to make them feel good about themselves and express themselves however they like, without trying to pretend that anyone can actually change their biological sex.