Ooh step back, India Willoughby is going to penetrate the Mumsnet debate

[ALittleBitOfButter]

Just saw on twitter that IW says will do radio interview about Mumsnet. Sorry can't link as on phone.

Julia read out a statement from the Chief Executive of the Guides which didn't answer any questions, just said they offered a bespoke service if a 'trans girl' was a member of a branch and that they were being pulled into a political debate.

She should be the first held accountable on the basis that she has not taken women's concerns, current legislation or serious safeguarding issues seriously, and in fact has attempted to pooh pooh them all off. This is so scandalous she shouldn't be trusted again to work in any job that would require her to be responsible for safeguarding.

I'm a radfem. Make me feel like I have to choose between supporting other women and supporting a policy designed to appease angry hostile men who no amount of appeasement will ever satisfy anyway (points up) and that's no choice at all.

Yep. Sisters before misters, ovaries before brovaries. I won't deny women's lived reality to pander to men's pouting demands.

I mean, it's one thing to go all #nodebate if you're a blue haired teenager on Twitter, but quite another if you're a large organization.

I do still wonder - given IWs swift turnaround on self ID - if IW is deliberately playing the part of "delusional TRA" on purpose. The emphasis on being a "real woman" (literal quote), the anger at a man viewing IW as ...dammit what's the word...? The pointing of everyone in the direction of mn, the insistence that a transperson who still has their born-with penis is female...

If it is indeed all a ruse, IW deserves an Oscar!

(Best leading actress might be pushing it though )

These people aren't equipped for the role imo. If you hide your head in the sand and leave the girls in your care in danger even when their mothers and guide leaders (your customers and your employees) are coming together to appeal for you to pay attention in their hundreds, you aren't equipped to lead an organisation, and much less equipped to be put in charge of the safety and wellbeing of young women and girls.

Rosenberg Ultimately, they will lose their members. I have already decided to withdraw my daughter from the organisation. There are other clubs and groups that she can join.

Luckily none of my young relatives are currently enrolled. I'd be urging their parents to withdraw them if any were. Though not much urging would be needed once the policy was laid out for them to read.

ovaries before brovaries

That made me laugh, I've never heard that before

Idontdowindows

I agree, these fuckers have ruined it for the majoity of transwomen who just got on with it and didn't need constant validation

Gasp - yes that thread is glorious. We need more ladydicks on that thread.

If you hide your head in the sand ... you aren't equipped to lead an organisation, and much less equipped to be put in charge of the safety and wellbeing of young women and girls.

This. When you have safeguarding responsibilities towards children and somebody raises a safeguarding concern, at the very least, you respond to it. This is safeguarding 101. What are they thinking?

Such an interesting thread.

I agree there is a real line here.

One of the most basic objections to the ideology is the male socialisation that never ends.

If you can't talk about that, objections just fade away linguistically. You have to be able to name it.

A quick reply to Betsymoo re pronouns, although it's moved on a little. As far as I know, although the actual word pronoun isn't used, EHRC guidance says "...not referring to this pupil as a boy would also result in direct gender reassignment discrimination.".

... in terms of schoolchildren, which I believe applies to adults too.

It's only guidance, so not law, but if taken to court the defence would have to prove that they had a good enough reason to not follow the guidance. Most places would have to have a real mission to go against it.

But, like others have said, the entire problem has arisen because these rules, laws and guidances are not being confined to the cohort for which they were originally intended.

Making a civil law were a teen can force authority figures to call them a different name/pronoun/sex, against their better judgement is absolutely crazy.

Just take a look at what Jordan Peterson has to contend with.

The smug delight that some of those students display, interspersed with spitting rage, is infuriating to behold. And very worrying.

Likewise when bullying transactivists take gleeful satisfaction in forcing women to comply with something that shouldn't even be controversial.

I agree with what everyone has said here, but I want to be able to continue to say so without being sanctioned.

Sitting on the horns of this dilemma is really hurting my arse.

SpartacusOfEtruria

The Guides shouldnt be losing members and girl's shouldn't be losing their right to become members.
The Executive should be being held accountable, removed, and replaced with a set of people who actually give a shit about the safety and needs of the girl guides they are responsible for.
How can this be made to happen? They have no right to remain in post after hundreds and hundreds of Leaders and members (represented by their mothers in most cases) have called out this scandal.

I just feel like they are hiding in a little she'll, deflecting criticisms and questions with these vague statements, refusing to engage or be accountable. This has to be turned round - they should be apologising to the Guides and leaders, removing these guidelines, and begging to be kept in post.

Shell not she'll

It does all seem a bit top down for an org that's so dependent on volunteers.

If JHB has hit peak trans then she needs to start interviewing and grilling MPs about their views. That's the best way to end this madness.

She could start with Maria Miller, who's still pushing as hard as she can in spite of no longer having the support of her party.

Datun

Can you clarify this bit:

"...not referring to this pupil as a boy would also result in direct gender reassignment discrimination.". In this example what natal sex is the child?

It's interesting that GG statement avoided phobia, terf, bigot blah blah and instead the go to insult was politicisation. Which is an acknowledgement of where the debate now is.

Trousers: interesting. Will look out for that elsewhere.

I need to catch up on the GG stuff.

angryattack I cant quite remember the specifics of post you were spoken to about but in the middle of the night I remembered that I'm sure there was a sympathetic conversation in the CBB house about IW's anger about various things referring to them being still relatively "early on in their transition," which I'm sure related to the fact they had spent 40 odd years 'as a man' - I'm sure it was Shane. Slightly different semantics and as I say a hazy memory (Happy to be corrected) but surely similar?

Just seen your post reluctant camper. CBB did not cover up these facts. IW talked about attitudes changing towards them when they transitioned in terms of being expected to make cups of tea. I can't see how any of this is deletable.

Ekphrasis

Sorry! I forgot the link.

fairplayforwomen.com/equality-act-2010_womens-rights/

"EHRC technical guidance for schools in England says:

3.20 The way in which school facilities are provided can lead to discrimination. Example: A school fails to provide appropriate changing facilities for a transsexual pupil and insists that the pupil uses the boys’ changing room even though she is now living as a girl. This could be indirect gender reassignment discrimination unless it can be objectively justified. A suitable alternative might be to allow the pupil to use private changing facilities, such as the staff changing room or another suitable space.

3.35 A previously female pupil has started to live as a boy and has adopted a male name. Does the school have to use this name and refer to the pupil as a boy? Not using the pupil’s chosen name merely because the pupil has changed gender would be direct gender reassignment discrimination. Not referring to this pupil as a boy would also result in direct gender reassignment discrimination"

Gotcha, thanks Datun.