Another Girlguiding update

[AgnesBadenPowell]

I've been a bit quiet lately. I'm under investigation, which I can't discuss in any detail, although my membership is now at risk. In the meantime, I'm still a leader and Girlguiding has not changed its stance on trans issues. The following is a bit of a stream of consciousness but I'm feeling quite troubled by it and need to let it out! I'd also be interested in what parents of rainbows think.

I took my rainbows on a sleepover this weekend. It was great! It also really bought home to me the risks posed by the trans policy. I feel quite upset and tearful about it.

We had 20 rainbows in a church hall. Three women leaders, including me, also slept in the main hall - at one end, out of the way, with our own sleeping mats and bags etc - but in the same room. The other women leaders slept in an adjoining room (more of a lobby really).

The adults used the gents toilets and the girls used the ladies and disabled facilities. Despite this some girls weren’t too bothered and just changed in the hall! One nosy rainbow followed me into the gents - luckily I was only brushing my teeth and not changing - and of course I shooed her out.

How would a set up like this (which is pretty common) work with a trans child or adult? We could look for new venues with more rooms/options but Girlguiding’s stance is that the trans child and adult should use the facilities of their chosen gender. And if parents aren’t aware of the single gender/mixed sex policy, they aren’t in a position to complain or take their children out.

On a personal note, the two other leaders in the hall are women that I don’t know very well. One of them I’ve only met once before, she’s a brownie leader who came to help so we met our ratios. My sleeping mat was right next to hers as there wasn’t much space. It was fine but I could not have done this with a self identified (ie male at birth) transwoman. I don’t know any woman who would feel safe sleeping right next to a male bodied person they had only met once before. And I should never, ever be expected to do so. For all the make up, dresses, female names, most transwomen do not have bottom surgery and retain their male genitalia. I would never be expected to share sleeping accommodation with a man I don’t know (or even ones I do - I’m not sharing a room with my male colleague on a business trip next week) so why would it be acceptable in Girlguiding, provided the male said he feels female?

It really hit home that it’s only fair and reasonable to expect people of the same sex to share spaces like this. I really don’t want to make trans people feel bad or left out - but my dignity, my girls dignity and privacy, is every bit as important as theirs.

Go Janice Turner

Janice Turner got a much quicker response than any concerned parent or leader. The GG twitter response was pretty weak but they did invite Janice to email them, which she says she's done. Let's see what happens next.

I found it interesting that there was no reference to legal advice or opinions, just feedbacks/opinions and "expert advice" from "leaders in the field" or whatever. They've turned GG upside down on the basis of lobbying/top down imposed changes that no one would agree to if put out for opinions. They'll rue the day they stuck their fingers in their ears on this. AC's input here is "problematic" to say the least.

GGUK's then CEO told me when I met her that they had taken legal advice from their external solicitors. It depends on what questions they asked, how they interpreted the answers and transposed them into policy. And the personal views of the lawyers. So much of this is unclear - I've seen arguments from lawyers take very different positions. There is no test case or precedent.

It seems that some law, policies, interpretations etc have all been made by a small group of trans rights advocates. This isn't obvious to organisations etc.
Oftentimes those advising have been those who were involved in the creation.

What lawyer/s?

That Chelvan bloke?

It seems that some law, policies, interpretations etc have all been made by a small group of trans rights advocates. This isn't obvious to organisations etc.
Oftentimes those advising have been those who were involved in the creation.

YY. We really need to have some scrutiny on this. It's a form of astroturfing.

There is a lot of discussion about lawyers/ law experts involved in TELI (Trans equality legal initiative) on the last Jess Bradley thread as well as the WEP:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325623-Jess-Bradley-a-government-advisor-on-womens-rights-suspended-by-NUS-over-indecent-blog-Part-iii
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325882-WEP-conference-questions-for-panel-of-trans-rights-advocating-barristers

It's a form of astroturfing.

What's this Eresh?

Makes it looks like grass roots when it isn't.

Makes it looks like grass roots when it isn't.
Thanks drspouse
interestingly I was just reading comments by Aimee Challenor which seems to do exactly that.

I'll c&p from thread as relevent here to 'astroturf' discussion:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3347575-Aimee-Challenors-resignation

"Re Aimee Challenor influence:

Challenge to Pride London in response to 'Get the L Out' protest.

Aimee Challenor organised petition/open letter challenging the organisers of Pride London:
(extract from PN)
"The letter is signed by more than 2,000 members and allies of the LGBT+ community, including leading trans women campaigners.

These include Sarah Brown, a member of Stonewall’s Trans Advisory Group, and Natacha Kennedy, deputy chair of Camden & Islington LGBT Forum.

It’s also signed by Owl, a non-binary trans activist and filmmaker, who wrote an opinion piece for the Guardian, rebuking the anti-trans campaigners.

Speaking to PinkNews, Challenor said: “Saturday’s transphobic protest was a horrifically exclusionary display of discrimination and Pride in London really should have known better.

“I’ve been overwhelmed by the response to the open letter to know that so many members and friends of the community all around the world have our back when standing against hate is wonderful."

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/07/13/more-than-2000-lgbt-people-sign-letter-calling-for-change-at-pride-in-london-over-anti-trans-protest/

July 8th 2018 Resignation of organising committee demanded:
Mirror
'Calls for London Pride organisers to resign after 'anti-trans' group was allowed to lead march
Aimee Challenor, 20, from Coventry, said permitting the protesters to lead the march was "horrific exclusionary behaviour"
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/calls-london-pride-organisers-resign-12879839

London Economic article:
"Speaking today, she [Challenor] said: “I started the open letter because I wanted to help make a difference so that it wouldn’t happen again, but I knew I was just one voice out a very large community, and so rather than just trying to be one small voice, I put together this open letter so that we could have a big collective voice as our community, and it’s taken off with so many supporters."

www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/over-1000-people-have-signed-an-open-letter-condemning-pride-in-london-for-letting-an-anti-trans-group-lead-the-march/09/07/

As Pink News article demonstrates there was a collective response from Stonewall's Ruth Hunt, Sarah Brown (LibDem), Natacha Kennedy, Owl etc all of whom, like Aimee Challenor are prominant TRAs.

LibDem Voices article refers to cross-party response and also additionally includes NUS LGBT+
www.libdemvoice.org/lib-dem-green-and-labour-lgbt-organisations-condemn-transphobic-protest-at-pride-57976.html

twitter.com/tempie321/status/1039150025849417728

Hello all. Here's the most recent reply to my concerns. I'm glad that the team took the time to reply to my mails, but sad that the conclusion has been that their view is that single sex orgs and discriminatory and that it's the role of the leader to work out the problem with the girl. The line that the org wouldn't want to exclude non-females pretty much lays out the stall, and I don't think I have any more to add to this. Feeling pretty flat right now.

Dear Sprouty,

Thank you for your email providing feedback on our Equality and Diversity policy.

Please be advised that Girlguiding complies with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 which makes clear that organisations providing single-sex services such as Girlguiding should treat trans people according to their acquired gender. As such, and in line with our values of inclusion, we welcome any girl or young person, whether she is cisgender or transgender.

There’s a perception that for an organisation like Girlguiding, simply using exemptions is the easy solution, but the reality is that this is a complex legal area, for example, included in the criteria for applying exemptions is that decisions must not in any way be made on the basis of discrimination. The reality on the ground is that exemptions haven’t been necessary, because in the small number of cases we’ve had of this nature, we’ve offered appropriate support to help create a suitable environment for all girls to enjoy the guiding experience.

We will continue to review our policies against emerging guidance from organisations like the Equality and Human Rights Commission who will be releasing a report on this in the coming months and, like other organisations working with children and young people, we welcome all guidance that helps us navigate this complex area. However, as a girl-only organisation Girlguiding simply does not have the legal right to exclude trans young people from guiding and nor would we wish to.

Inappropriate behaviour from any of our volunteers or young members will be taken very seriously at all times. We have the strong protection and recruitment processes in place. We have rigorous practice and processes in place throughout our activities and have a fully supported training programme that helps our volunteers recognise their role and responsibility in maintaining a safe space and to know what to do if anything should happen.

We practice safe recruitment procedures and an individual can only become a volunteer if there is an appropriate role for them. Any adult volunteer who hasn’t gone through our recruitment process will not have unsupervised access to girls. Any safeguarding concerns would be managed through our safeguarding policies and processes available here: www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/policies/girlguiding-policies/safety-and-safeguarding-policy/

I hope that this email addresses any outstanding questions you might have. However if you do still have any further concerns we kindly request that you talk them through with your unit leader or your local commissioner who will be able to provide you and your daughter with any additional support you might need.

Kind regards,

The Complaints Team
Girlguiding

17-19 Buckingham Palace Road
London
SW1W 0PT

I stopped reading at 'cisgender' sprouty.

But thanks for trying.

It may be a valid point that all staff go through the usual selection with DBS, references etc. and are only allowed if there are no concerns about their conduct (regardless of sex) but does this go far enough? If the 'female only' ethos is to be maintained it has to be reflected in recruitment. They are obviously wary of a blanket ban on anyone born male but the rules are open to so much interpretation it becomes a lose lose and they can't turn back on the road they've started.

I wonder if girls brigade have a position on this. They may see an opportunity to be the last truly female only young persons group.

Well that's a useful piece of official and written evidence to prove that the assertions about 'exemptions will do the job to protect sex based interests' doesn't work.

Basically 'there's no way around having to include' and 'if (insert desperate hope here) something goes wrong then there are systems to try and pick up pieces'.

It's a familiar refrain. It relies on women and girls accepting and going along with being collateral damage.

Even if you take the raping, sexual harassment, abuse out of mixed spaces, women and girls need our own space just to be able to learn who we are when we’re not busy taking up all our time being accountable to the patriarchy. Where we can put our hand up and ask questions without hearing the reply always come from a boy first, or having our experiences explained to us by people who don’t have a clue about what it’s like to live in a woman’s body. Where we can cry, scream, grieve, hug, comfort, support without having to act and filter through the lens of how we’re meant to be. How do you explain that to people who aren’t even aware that they’re looking through that lens?

Guiding, you were one of the last spaces that girls could learn what it is to be a woman the world could lean on, amongst sisters who showed us how to be a woman’s woman, not a man’s girl. You were part of what made me the magnificent queen that I am today. I learned what I could do in spaces where I didn’t need to moderate my language, behaviour, or filter my voice to be acceptable to a mixed sex audience. I grieve for this loss. Something died here.

RIP Girl Guiding.
My daughter won’t be joining.
.

Girlguiding simply does not have the legal right to exclude trans young people from guiding and nor would we wish to.

Are girls who say they are 'transboys' allowed to stay or are they excluded?

OldCrone they say in the letter "we welcome any girl or young person" so presumably that means anyone who's young.

Utter shambles.

so presumably that means anyone who's young.

Or who identifies as young...

Sprouty this is really sad that Girl Guiding has taken this line.

...our volunteers recognise their role and responsibility in maintaining a safe space and to know what to do if anything should happen.

^ this reads rather as though they might believe that the safeguarding responsibilty is borne by their volunteers rather than the GIrl Guiding Uk Trustees.

Now you have this written response, you could consider contacting the charity commission with your safeguarding concerns based on this reply. The Charity Commission are very hot on safeguarding at the moment at all charities in England. The GG policy around equality appears to introduce a big red flag around safeguarding.

www.gov.uk/government/news/safeguarding-is-a-key-governance-priority-for-all-charities-says-charity-regulator
www.gov.uk/government/news/charity-commission-announces-suite-of-steps-on-safeguarding
www.gov.uk/government/news/review-your-charitys-safeguarding-and-governance-arrangements-charity-commission-advises

I’ve posted about this before so apologies for repetition, but there’s an expectation set out by the Charity Commission that the Trustees of charities write to them, I think it’s by the end of 2018, to explain how their charity does safeguarding etc and to let them know of reports of any safeguarding concerns that have been raised.

So you could perhaps send your email and the response you had to the Charity commission, plus a link to the GGUK equality policy, ccing the GG Trustees who are legally responsible for safeguarding on behalf of the charity- adding any points you want to make about safeguarding being in conflict with the GG UK equality policy and clearly stating that you wish this to be considered a report of a safeguarding concern, and asking that eg the Trustees publish a statement on their website about how they have responded to the Charity Commission’s requirement in this area at the end of 2018.

Furthermore you could note that the charity’s legal aims are to benefit ‘girls and women’- and that this has never previously been taken to mean ‘femininity-confirming people of both sexes’, so the Trustees may also need to consider their legal remit and look again at whether they are potentially actively disadvantaging girls and women in their policies.

It is very very worrying that normal well established safeguarding practice that should be applied to EVERYONE, is now argued by some people to be ‘transphobic’ when applied to them. And that the public and voluntary sector appear to be buying into this line uncritically and happy to let women and girls potentially pay the price.

Jeepers I just wandered over to the BBC website and saw this :

'Sexist, unsafe' world experienced by young girls

An "alarmingly high" number of girls and young women feel unsafe outside their home, according to annual research for Girlguiding UK.
The survey of 1,903 13 to 21-year-olds in the UK found nearly two-thirds either felt unsafe, or knew someone who was fearful walking home alone.
More than half had suffered harassment, or knew someone who had, it said.
But girls are responding more robustly than before and were also more likely to call themselves feminists, it said.
The research, the tenth over as many years, found more girls claim to understand what feminism means, with almost half saying they are feminists - up from a third in 2013.
One young woman, from the 11 to 16-year-old age group, told researchers a feminist was "a person who strongly believes in gender equality and that everyone no matter their background should be treated equally."
'More sexism?'
Another, aged between 17 and 21, described feminism as "equal rights and opportunities between men and women in the workplace, education and society".
The researchers said they felt the increased understanding of gender equality and equal rights was down to recent intense media coverage of these areas.
Perhaps linked to this greater awareness was the suggestion that fewer girls expected to encounter equality in all areas of life this year than in 2009.
And more girls and young women say they are seeing or experiencing sexism across all areas of their lives.
The researchers said: "It might mean they are more aware of it in the media, online and in public - the result of campaigns like #MeToo and #TimesUp.
"However, it is also possible it may reflect an increase in the scale of sexism for girls."
Compared to three years ago, more girls aged seven to 10 think the way people treat girls and women is affected by "naked pictures of women in the media, jokes about girls and more attention given to women's clothes than actions".
But there were also very real concerns about girls' safety.
Safety fears
One young woman aged between 11 and 16, said: "One thing that would improve girls' lives would be to make it safe for girls to walk down the street alone."
Another, aged 17 to 21, said: "Girls' lives would be better if things like harassment and stalking were taken seriously and punished properly."
The survey also found that an increasing number of girls have experienced unkind, threatening and negative behaviour online compared to five years ago.
But, it added: "Girls are more likely to ignore abuse and report it more, as well as delete posts."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-45562134

The reality on the ground is that exemptions haven’t been necessary, because in the small number of cases we’ve had of this nature, we’ve offered appropriate support to help create a suitable environment for all girls to enjoy the guiding experience.

What does this mean? Have they done a proper impact assessment on the girls involved? Or found a workaround that they believe is acceptable to the girls?