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.

There's always the injectable LARCs

I am also concerned about false accusations.

That's weird about GGUK saying no one is allowed to have sex. How exactly are leaders supposed to stop 2 18 year olds (one ranger, one ranger scout) from doing what they want on a large mixed camp?

And anyway, GG leaders are permitted to give out barrier contraceptives at mixed camps to members over 13, provided parents are informed that condoms are available and the policy is clear

https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/programme-and-activities/letstalkkcamp2014.pdf

Have I got this right?
A woman girl guide leader who identifies as a "not woman" (man?) is restricted in their responsibilities - because men are a threat? Not suitable to partake in all girl guiding activities or what?
But a man who self identifies as a woman can do everything in the girl guides - full responsibilities, supervising all aspects of residentials, share sleeping , washing accommodation etc etc because ???

I know it's hot but surely this reaches the heights of insanity - although having just read about the charming Scottish children's convenor on another thread maybe it is the heat...

When you remember that we're talking about the GG - the GG, ffs - I find it hard to believe how utterly, totally bonkers all this nonsense is.

I was not to worry because ‘trans girls are not exactly the same as cis boys’.

I wonder if they assume transgirls are gay? Because a lot of people do, and it might go some way to explaining their weird complaisance about sexual activity. Welcome to FWR, Writingbymoonlight.

Querying the assumption that trans girls are attracted to men is what got me escalated to the supervisor...

Hats off to those of you, particularly Agnes who are trying to get GG to unravel the insanity they are spouting. Even reading about it is making me want to bash my face against a wall while screaming mrrrrgggghhjhjjjjj omfg you fucking nutters how can you possibly hnnnnnrhhhdgggggghhh.

So yeah. You’re a lot more patient than me. Probably for the best I’m not personally involved because Jesus H Christ it is one of the most outrageous things I have ever seen.

Agnes I can’t imagine how frustrating and heart breaking this is for you. Have you told the parents What’s going on?

Maybe your troop can get their “protesting” badges campaigning against this shit?

the EHRC, who support the current GG policy on the basis that membership criteria can cover 2 protected characteristics - sex and gender reassignment. I'm not sure where that leaves female children with the PC of gender reassignment.

Forgive me Agnes, but I thought that to be covered by gender reassignment you had to be over 18? How can children be covered by this if they can't legally reassign their gender until 18. Surely that can't be what ECHR ruled?

I'm really confused and worried by all this. All the adults in charge seem to have gone mad!

Oops, first paragraph should be bolded. Sorry.

@enoughisenough12 interesting point about the Dundee children's convenor and councillor.

mobile.twitter.com/grogipher?lang=en

They don't like male pronouns, are a scout leader, and are arguably ?trans (it's genuinely hard to tell). I wouldn't especially want this person's fairly-aggressive swearing around children.

Agreeing with previous posters I think that many people who haven’t really been much exposed to the TRA narrative will assume quite wrongly that a person’s transgender presentation means that individual has lesbian or gay sexual orientation. This is most definitely not an assumption anyone should make.

This assumption may arise partly as an obfuscation caused by the huge expansion of the LGBT+ etc umbrella to encompass.. kind of everyone. ‘Trans’ is not a sexuality, although under that umbrella this would include autogynephilia which is a sexual fetish.

mirandayardley.com/en/what-autogynephilia-is-and-what-is-it-not-a-brief-note/

You have to be over 18 to start the GRC process:
www.gov.uk/apply-gender-recognition-certificate

Currently (thank goodness) there is no legal recognition of a child under 18 ‘changing sex’ on their legal documentation. Neither a child nor her or his parents (on the child’s behalf) can apply for this process.

Agree with previous posters about the non-possible category of the ‘trans child’.
it’s a bit like the claiming of children to be an ‘ child’ IMO.

There is so much outside influence and social contextualisation to be considered in that concept, to the extent that this label can never be an autonomous decision by the child themselves- it’s a label that they are assigned by adults with a particular interest in labelling the child in that way.

As much as I disagree with many of Richard Dawkins’ arguments - on that particular point about the labels that adults ascribe to children’s stated ‘beliefs’, (or in the face of the child’s stated lack of belief) to suit their own adult purposes, I think Dawkins is right.
www.richarddawkins.net/2015/02/dont-force-your-religious-opinions-on-your-children/

I imagine it might not be long before GRCs for kids is added to some of the TRA groups’ political aims. This group appear not to agree with legal documentation and haven’t developed their argument much beyond calling for ‘mandatory education, written & taught entirely by trans people, at all educational stages, from nursery to adulthood.’* but I wonder if other groups may be considering the logical conclusions of TRA arguments as applied to children.

• www.google.co.uk/amp/s/edinburghath.tumblr.com/post/163521055802/trans-health-manifesto/amp

I imagine it might not be long before GRCs for kids is added to some of the TRA groups’ political aims

What, like this you mean?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/plea-to-let-children-swap-gender-on-birth-certificate-2rj8b7ccq

The Scottish children's commissioner thinks children should be able to change their gender without parental approval.

ChattyLion "I imagine it might not be long before GRCs for kids is added to some of the TRA groups’ political aims"

Have you read the thread about the Stonewall briefing on completing the GRC consultation? They are recommending that respondents press for a GRC to be available to 16 and 17 yos on request, and to under 16 yo with parental consent

Apparently GG are monitoring this thread, so it might be worth directing all our best "FFS wise the fuck up about child safeguarding and stop pandering to aggressive activists who do not have little girls' best interests in mind" arguments directly to them:

twitter.com/Sweetlouise3/status/1021801262369714176?s=20

They’re monitoring this thread??

That's what this person on Twitter says. They wrote to them to tell them about it.

They wrote to them to tell them about it.

No-one likes a tell tale

GG - you've lost the plot if you think that throwing away safeguarding policies in order to accommodate male-bodied persons into the guiding movement is A-OK

In that case - GG Association, you are throwing the girls the movement was founded for under the bus in an effort to appear on trend, and pretty much any leader who follows your insane guidelines is doing so out of fear of repercussions, not a genuine agreement that there is any logic contained within whatsoever.
Oh, and shame on you. You’re a disgrace to womanhood (the old fashioned kind).

GG how can you fail to see:

A) the obvious safeguarding issues with accommodating those who have the wherewithal to impregnate alongside those who have the capacity to be impregnated. Please tell me that someone with the power of critical thought has considered in good faith whether "we don't permit intercourse" and "condoms are available" are adequate responses to this issue

B) that this reinforces unhealthy gender stereotypes

C) that this casts GNC girls adrift and sends the message that they are not good enough girls

D) that this undermines the lessons that girls must learn about respecting their own boundaries and expecting others to do the same

E) the breathtaking audacity of juxtaposing your treatment of those who have spoken out against your introduction of a new "Speaking Out" badge

I would not send my daughter to GG while this policy is in place and I will speak up to ensure that those who do send their daughters understand the full implications of this GG policy.

Wander, Olenna. Wow. I had missed that. I am horrified. What an utterly dangerous, abusive and fundamentally unethical position to advocate for.

What about the child’s right to privacy, to an open future, to knowledge of his or genetic origins- not to mention all the stuff we know from outdated practice in closed adoption and secret donor conception that you know, it really fucks up your child if you lie to them about their origins and personal history. ? Etc etc etc.

GG Association you are a disgrace and not fit to have girls entrusted into your care.

I have 3 questions.

You have very strict policies regarding the sleeping arrangements for male children of guide leaders.

1. Why do you have these in place?

2. What are the qualities manifested in “gender identity” that mean the level of safeguarding applied to male children of guide leaders is not required for a male child who identifies as female?

3. if gender identity is entirely subjective and internal, and cannot be perceived by anyone else, what is the difference between a male child and a male child who identifies as female from the perspective of a guide sharing a dorm with them?