Safeguarding girls and protecting women post Jimmy Saville & #metoo

[SpareRibFem]

I don't understand, there was a lot of hand wringing after the revelations about Jimmy Saville became widely accepted. #metoo there was more handwringing about the need to listen to women when they are telling you something that makes you uncomfortable.

Saville was allowed to get away with what he didn't because he created an aura of fear and people would afraid of the backlash if they spoke up. Those that did suffered.

We were promised something like that could never happen again...

And yet now despite many women and girls saying they feel afraid and uncomfortable sharing single sex spaces with someone with a penis weren't told we're bigoted and verbally abused for saying that. Our employers are contacted and told we're bigots, we're doxxed.

And organisations like girl guides are going still further in saying it must be kept a secret when girls are being forced to sleep and change with a male bodied teen with a penis (& teen levels of hormones) and I'm not even allowed to identify what sex that male bodied teen with a penis is on a public forum

Girl Guides are taking that approach despite the knowledge that abusers use secrecy and shame to their advantage.

Just like with Saville anyone who excesses concerns is shouted down and accused of being the person in the wrong by the powerful. There is a culture of fear now. Celebrity voices in particular (thinking people like Munroe Bergdorf, Stephen Fry and long list of others) are given more weight to shout down women's concerns. Male bodied people feelings are paramount despite almost all sexual abusers being male bodied (and most of the tiny tiny number of female bodied sexual abusers working with and being in thrall to a male bodied abuser)

Did we as a society learn nothing from Saville & the multitude of other abuse scandals that women and children/girls should be listened to, that celebrities voices help hide abusers, that telling girls to keep secrets from their parents about the presence of penises in their bedrooms and changing rooms and showing them they will be blamed and abused if they transgress and tell someone creates an environment where abuse can flourish.

I think we need to tell govt exactly what we want in the responses to the consultation- not just object - they are not to be trusted with coming up with anything workable nor reflective of our concerns - they seem too stoned to critically think.

so i've looked at the scouts policy, as there are lots of girls in scouting. I know parents don't send girls to scouts expecting no boys or male leaders as they do with Guides, but scouting has had a lot of safeguarding scandals and I was interested if they had a different stance as a lot of their safeguarding has improved.

There policy has the mermaids logo on it.

The things that struck me were that apparently scouts doesn't have a policy of sex segregation of sleeping arrangements anyway - leaders carry out their own risk assessments.

There policy has the mermaids logo on it.

Whose? The Scouts? How do you mean?

but scouting has had a lot of safeguarding scandals interesting, I didn't know this.

The things that struck me were that apparently scouts doesn't have a policy of sex segregation of sleeping arrangements anyway - leaders carry out their own risk assessments.

Ah the case by case appproach. Sounds familiar.

Being on 'the wrong side of history' tends to mean you were a victim of tyranny, rather than an oppressor. Thus you should perhaps be suspicious of those who us the term rather than see them as great progressives cos its not got a brilliant precident to fall back on. History is written by those who live, not those who die.

In this context, it becomes much clearer that its a concealed threat rather than a declaration of being a moral guardian to be on 'the right side of history'.

Thank you Red. I felt it but could not figure out how to say it.

I've raised the safeguarding points I've made here so many times and been screamed down by transactivists - You vicious bigot! You think all trans people are paedos! - because they can't conceive that I'm talking about anyone else but them.

It doesn't matter how many times I say FFS, you useless idiot. I'm trying to protect the trans children from paedos - they can't hear me. Because if I'm talking, it can't be about anything but them.

Yep. It's so frustrating - they genuinely can't see that the whole point of safeguards is to protect the group being safeguarded. The feelings of the other people being screened and filtered don't matter at all, because it's not about them, and if a person gets angry or offended about being screened for the protection of children then that's a massive red flag in itself.

Also for safeguards to work they have to be applied universally. The moment a group is singled out for exemption you've created a loophole through which predators can and will slip, and this is the case regardless of which group is being exempted.

Also for safeguards to work they have to be applied universally. The moment a group is singled out for exemption you've created a loophole through which predators can and will slip, and this is the case regardless of which group is being exempted.

This is so important.

Also for safeguards to work they have to be applied universally. The moment a group is singled out for exemption you've created a loophole through which predators can and will slip, and this is the case regardless of which group is being exempted.

Exactly.

Yes, the Allsorts and Mermaids guidance has a wholesale disregard for the interests of girls. This is a feminist issue and a rights issue and their guidance needs challenging on that. I get it that they object because they're totalitarians who want trans centred uber alles. I understand at least why they object.

But the confidential disclosures and rejection of multi-agency working put all children at risk and especially the trans children. It's absolutely insane.

You might as well paint a target on the trans child's back.

Look! These ones are the easiest to exploit! You can keep their secrets and not involve any other agencies! Quick! Get 'em!

The idea of actively encouraging certain children to expect unrelated adults to keep secrets from their parents as a matter of course is so terrible that I can't figure out if it's cluelessly misguided or actively malicious.

This screenshot pretty much sums up a lot basically a 23 year old is identifying as 13 to be with a 14 year old.
I'm guessing it's probably fake, but it's so easy to twist the whole nature of identifying as something.

Also for safeguards to work they have to be applied universally. The moment a group is singled out for exemption you've created a loophole through which predators can and will slip, and this is the case regardless of which group is being exempted.

And the frustrating thing is that everyone knows this.

I've had different types of security vetting and worked in various secure buildings over the years, and no-one but no-one is exempt from the checks that get carried out periodically , or from good practice protocols (no "tail gating" - everyone has to use their own ID to swipe into the building; ask to see ID if someone doesn't have it on display; everyone goes through the metal detectors in certain buildings; only share confidential information if you have seen evidence that someone has the required vetting etc etc)

Because it applies equally to everyone, it's not offensive because it's not personal. And anyone who suggested that the rules might be relaxed "because we know X is OK" would get shouted down immediately.

These practices, like safeguarding practices, have been developed over many years. Be wary of anyone who wants to throw out policies and procedures designed to keep us all safe.

(As an aside, this is one of the things I'm struggling with re the GRC consultation. I've got a different thread to try to understand exactly why the process is so onerous, so humiliating, so unreasonable, but I'm yet to hear any particularly compelling arguments)

You might as well paint a target on the trans child's back.

Looking on twitter at some accounts, you'd be forgiven for thinking that, that was the deliberate, conscious and intended end goal. There is behaviour which is highly questionable that no one is blinking at.

Remember a cult isolates its target from its support network in order to abuse and exploit them in some way; either psychologically, financially or psychically for the benefit of the group leadership, rather than the benefit of the group as a whole and its individual members.

In this context, you should be very wary of anyone, actively going out to 'help identify' someone as trans as this in itself, by its very definition, IS part of a targeting process.

Its not neutral in the sense that its just there to offer support, if someone comes looking for it. Its going out to find those individuals.

Educating people to understand the concept of someone who is trans and encouraging tolerance is very different. Where is the line between education and doing something more than that? How much is too much? Are groups crossing that line?

I'll park that thought there with a little reminder of the signs of a cult:
Source

Social aspects of cult-like behavior
For a group to be a cult in the social sense, many of the following characteristics would have to be present. For a group to be a cult in the doctrinal sense, essentials (in this case of the Christian faith) would have to be violated. Some of the characteristics are listed below.

1) Submission:
1 - Complete, almost unquestioned trust in the leadership.
2 - Leaders are often seen as prophets, apostles, or special individuals with unusual connections to God. This helps a person give themselves over psychologically to trusting someone else for their spiritual welfare.
3 - Increased submission to the leadership is rewarded with additional responsibilities and/or roles, and/or praises, increasing the importance of the person within the group.

2) Exclusivity
1 - Their group is the only true religious system, or one of the few true remnants of God's people.

3) Persecution complex
^1 - Us against them mentality. Therefore, when someone (inside or outside of the group) corrects the group in doctrine and/or behavior, it is interpreted as persecution, which then is interpreted as validation.

4) Control
1 - Control of members' actions and thinking through repeated indoctrination and/or threats of loss of salvation, or a place to live, or receiving curses from God, etc.

5) Isolation
1 - Minimizing contact of church members with those outside the group. This facilitates a further control over the thinking and practices of the members by the leadership.

6) Love Bombing
1 - Showing great attention and love to a person in the group by others in the group, to help transfer emotional dependence to the group.

7) Special Knowledge
1 - Instructions and/or knowledge are sometimes said to be received by a leader(s) from God. This leader then informs the members.
2 - The Special Knowledge can be received through visions, dreams, or new interpretations of sacred scriptures such as the Bible.

8) Indoctrination
1 - The teachings of the group are repeatedly drilled into the members, but the indoctrination usually occurs around Special Knowledge.

9) Salvation
1 - Salvation from the judgment of God is maintained through association and/or submission with the group, its authority, and/or its Special Knowledge.

10) Group Think
1 - The group's coherence is maintained by the observance to policies handed down from those in authority.
2 - There is an internal enforcement of policies by members who reward "proper" behavior, and those who perform properly are rewarded with further inclusion and acceptance by the group.

11) Cognitive Dissonance
1 - Avoidance of critical thinking and/or maintaining logically impossible beliefs and/or beliefs that are inconsistent with other beliefs held by the group.
2 - Avoidance of and/or denial of any facts that might contradict the group's belief system.

12) Shunning
1 - Those who do not keep in step with group policies are shunned and/or expelled.

13) Gender Roles
1 - Control of gender roles and definitions.
2 - Severe control of gender roles sometimes leads to sexual exploitation.

14) Appearance Standards
1 - Often a common appearance is required and maintained. For instance, women might wear prairie dresses, and/or their hair in buns, and/or no makeup, and/or the men might all wear white short-sleeved shirts, and/or without beards, or all wear beards.

It is easy to go through each of these and come up with something which fits very neatly.

familiesagainstcultteachings.org/Cult-Education/Cult-Warning-Signs/
Also go through this one too - as it talks about signs of a 'safe' group.

The 'safe group' signs are particularly telling tbh.

Thats what every parent should look for and expect. And resist anything that doesn't reflect those.

Hmm this one is interesting

www.abuseandrelationships.org/Content/Communal%20Abuse/communal_abuse.html

It gives this as a definition.
Abusive communities are often called cults.

The parallels between cults like Scientology and those who think they can change sex are clear. I know a lot about cults having researched them extensively. SM replicates the cultic dynamics hence why it is so dangerous when abused by those with a vested and malign interest in targeting vulnerable people under the guise of "offering friendship and companionship in a time of need."

Those links are so telling RedToothBrush. It's great this is being discussed in such detail. My WTF radar is off the scale at the moment.

So many attempts to isolate trans children from the protection of the adults - in families and schools. They are apparently 'so special that only a tiny group of those with the right "qualifications" should deal with them'. And what is the qualification required ? Being Trans.

Theres some very good information here;
cultinformation.org.uk/question_what-is-mind-control.html

Peer Group Pressure
Suppressing doubt and resistance to new ideas by exploiting the need to belong.

Rejection of Old Values
Accelerating acceptance of new life style by constantly denouncing former values and beliefs.

Confusing Doctrine
Encouraging blind acceptance and rejection of logic through complex lectures on an incomprehensible doctrine.

Removal of Privacy
Achieving loss of ability to evaluate logically by preventing private contemplation.

Dress Codes
Removing individuality by demanding conformity to the group dress code.

Chanting and Singing
Eliminating non-cult ideas through prolonged group repetition of mind-narrowing chants or phrases.

Financial Commitment
Achieving increased dependence on the group by burning bridges to the past, through the donation of assets.

Finger Pointing
Creating a false sense of righteousness by pointing to the shortcomings of the outside world and other cults.

Isolation
Inducing loss of reality by physical separation from family, friends, society and rational references.

Controlled (conditional) Approval
Maintaining vulnerability and confusion by alternately rewarding and punishing similar actions.

No Questions
Accomplishing automatic acceptance of beliefs by discouraging questions.

Guilt
Reinforcing the need for salvation by exaggerating the sins of the former lifestyles.

Fear
Maintaining loyalty and obedience to the group by threatening soul, life or limb for the slightest negative thought, word or deed.

Replacement of Relationships
Destroying pre-cult families by arranging cult marriages and families.

www.wikihow.com/Recognize-and-Avoid-Brainwashing

One form of reward is giving the victim a new name. This is commonly associated with cults, but the SLA also did this with Patty Hearst when they gave her the name “Tania.”

This is one I didn't know.

This is one I didn't know.

Many cults allocate new names to members as a way of changing their identity to that of the group - eg ISIS, TM, guru type groups, a lot of religious sects etc It also occurs in intimate partner violence when the abuser will use a "pet name".

All of these things - safeguarding children, the anatomy of cults - we already know and the huge body of knowledge we have has been built up in the wake of a succession of abuse crises and crimes.

So how has it come to pass that it is all being ignored? Because it's not to the benefit of children who question their gender. At all.

All of these things - safeguarding children, the anatomy of cults - we already know and the huge body of knowledge we have has been built up in the wake of a succession of abuse crises and crimes.

I concur but who has that knowledge? Has it been assimilated into organisational and societal learning? Obviously not. The problem is the model we have for governance in our society doesn't lend itself to continuous learning (plus the problem of many of the elected officials at all levels haven't the competencies to manage safeguarding, or anything else for that matter, effectively.

That's why I think we need to think bigger than just the GRA - there needs to be an evolution of our systems of governance - we need a bigger vision.

I think I concur with Lisa Muggeridge on this one - all that can happen is that we wait until the inevitable crisis occurs and there is institutional redefinition.