Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Girl Guides-safeguarding

55 replies

happydappy2 · 27/08/2018 19:22

In light of the awful revelations of David Challenor and the fact that he & Aimee Challenor advised Gov't on trans inclusive policy-might now be a good time to lobby Girl Guides regarding their stance on allowing 'men who identify as women' to be Guide leaders and stay with girls on residential trips, without informing the parents.

The safeguarding issues are too huge to ignore, & I'm sure many within the organisation feel uneasy about it but are afraid to speak out.

Perhaps now they will realise not everyone pushing for trans rights is a good person.

OP posts:
LemonJello · 28/08/2018 18:46

Fab Swift, thanks for letting me know Smile

averylongtimeago · 28/08/2018 18:58

I think you will find the scouts have similar policies regarding trans children sleeping/showering etc with their chosen gender.
members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/4228
They were advised by Mermaids

NothingOnTellyAgain · 28/08/2018 19:12

Scouts is the one where there is advice around transboys wearing binders might have difficulty joining in with some activities?

In a totally bland, factual way.

And no concern that essentially girls are once again wearing corsets so tight that it affects their ability to live life fully.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 28/08/2018 19:14

The absolute total refusal to look the "ladybrain manbrain" explanation as to why so many girls are keen to opt out of womanhood when puberty hits is baffling to me.

For so many women it is totally fucking obvious what is going on.

Anyway sorry.

VickyEadie · 28/08/2018 19:18

The absolute total refusal to look the "ladybrain manbrain" explanation as to why so many girls are keen to opt out of womanhood when puberty hits is baffling to me.

For so many women it is totally fucking obvious what is going on.

Oh yes.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 28/08/2018 19:39

Sorry should say look beyond the ladybrain etc

happydappy2 · 28/08/2018 20:27

I just think in light of what’s just happened, if as many people as possible raise their concerns directly with GG we might push them to realise they have a potential disaster on their hands-there is a clear safeguarding risk & children are being let down

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 28/08/2018 20:50

Fiarplay for Women have a number of articles and resources regarding Girl Guides:
fairplayforwomen.com/sisterstoallguides/

R0wantrees · 28/08/2018 21:01

July 2018 thread started by @AgnesBadenPowell who with others has been raising safeguarding concerns to the Girl Guides:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3314566-another-girlguiding-update

AgnesBadenPowell · 28/08/2018 22:33

The Challenor case does demand that we ask questions about who has been influencing policy making and safeguarding decisions. I'll be writing to GGHQ tomorrow.

@LemonJello that response from GG re risk assessments is just Shock. I'd be interested to know what the EHRC say. I do not understand how the presence of a protected characteristic could preclude any risk assessment. If I'm doing an activity with the girls, my risk assessment could legitimately include consideration of a girl's disability, to ensure that she can participate fully without risk of injury to herself or others. I'd likely consult with her parents. If another parent wanted to see the risk assessment for the whole activity, I'd redact any identifying information.

Interestingly I haven't seen any guidance for leaders in relation to conducting risk assessments. But then communication is generally very poor.

drspouse · 29/08/2018 09:15

I've checked with other leaders about RAs, and yes I am allowed to include the fact that there's an individual present with a protected characteristic and that this might mean extra adjustments as long as I don't name them.

drspouse · 29/08/2018 09:16

(Which obviously I never would whether that was someone needing a very restrictive diet, someone with a disability, or a trans individual).

R0wantrees · 29/08/2018 09:41

I'd be interested to know what the EHRC say.

I think some of the lawyers involved with TELI (Trans equality legal initiative) are also legal advisers to EHRC see recent threads:

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

LucretiaBourgeois · 29/08/2018 12:37

we do allow volunteers’ family members to attend residential events. Such requests are carefully considered by the local commissioner and as a part of the mandatory risk assessment or any trips. However this same process would not apply to a trans girl as this would be a breach of the Equality Act.*

They are saying that the Equality Act legally prevents them from carrying out safeguarding procedures.

There is an awful lot of confusion, -and a lot of rubbish talked- about how the Equality Act applies to this area. I'm a long term lurker on these threads and not anxious to out myself but I - erm - was close to some of the decision making around the framing of this Act and the predecessor Sex Discrimination Act and it's not that complicated.

Basically, the Act works by making it unlawful to discriminate on grounds of a protected charactistic in relation to areas including the provision of services. Two of these protected characteristics are sex (which everyone has) and gender reassignment. A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex. When the Act refers to transsexuals, that is what they mean.

There are then a number of areas set out where it is not unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of specific protected characteristics. The relevant ones are single sex services or separately provided services, which include situations where there are likely to be at least two people present and people of one sex could reasonably object to the presence of people of the opposite sex. (If you want the full description of these exceptions you have to go to Part 7 of Schedule 3 of the Act) -
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

The important thing is that in all of these situations it is also not unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of gender reassignment. So if you're allowed to exclude a male person you are also allowed to exclude a trans person. And whether or not that person has a Gender Reassignment Certificate is not relevant. A person with a GRC still has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and is not protected against discrimination in relation to single-sex services.

In my experience of working with the EHRC on aspects of their guidance, they are often inclined to steer it towards what they see as good equality practice rather than being precisely accurate about the letter of the law. If the Girl Guides are getting their advice from organisations like Stonewall or Mermaids, they will be certainly be getting some very dodgy advice about what they are and are not lawfully allowed to do. And any suggestion that they aren't even allowed to safeguard in these areas is bonkers.

ferntwist · 29/08/2018 13:16

Very interesting post Lucretia. The EA does not outlaw women-only and girls-only spaces. It appears Girlguiding has chosen to wilfully ignore the law - or twist it to fit their agenda.

R0wantrees · 29/08/2018 13:35

If the Girl Guides are getting their advice from organisations like Stonewall or Mermaids, they will be certainly be getting some very dodgy advice about what they are and are not lawfully allowed to do. And any suggestion that they aren't even allowed to safeguard in these areas is bonkers.

Its likely that a great number of policies have been written with guidance sought from trans rights organisations eg Swim England,, sporting bodies, Allsorts school policies, Social Care Toolkit and as demonstrated in Scotland once looked at there are significant issues.
cf www.heraldscotland.com/news/16311379.schools-forget-girls-in-rush-to-adopt-pro-trans-guidance-campaigners-claim-as-christian-group-threatens-legal-action/

Those who seem to be providing guidance are often mis-applying law and demonstrating that they do not understand the principles and mechanisms of Safeguarding frameworks.

DanaBarrett · 29/08/2018 14:06

I think though that the 'expert' advisors who have been 'helping' organisations such as GG have taken their own preferred slant on the EA. I have heard many times that the exemptions should only be applied in very limited circumstances and that there would need to be a 'high bar' of evidence when applying for exemptions.

This is leading to a culture of fear whereby the gender reassignment characteristic has become more powerful than any of the other characteristics because it's being wilfully misrepresented to organisations by those with a vested interest in creating a new 'normal'.

happydappy2 · 29/08/2018 14:19

Yes agree Dana but surely there are 2 issues here.
Allowing young boys who feel like they are a girl to join GG (though why not scouts is beyond me)
Allowing full grown men who identify as women to be put in safeguarding positions looking after children.
If GG would at least set an age limit of pre puberty I’d feel more comfortable (though appreciate everyone may not agree.)

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 29/08/2018 14:23

I think though that the 'expert' advisors who have been 'helping' organisations such as GG have taken their own preferred slant on the EA

James Kirkup's thread evidenced the intention and attempts to removed single-sex based exemptions from the EA:

(extract)
"Some facts about the events that preceded the Government statement here that the coming consultation on the Gender Recognition Act will be narrowly drawn and not affect the Equality Act’s single sex exemptions.
I offer these facts because some are claiming “there was never any question of removing/amending EA exceptions.” Those claims are either mistaken or dishonest.
August 2015
Stonewall submission to the Women & Equalities Select Committee says MPs should amend the EA to
“remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces” (continues)

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1004635839480164352.html?refreshed=yes

drspouse · 29/08/2018 14:32

If GG would at least set an age limit of pre puberty I’d feel more comfortable

It would reduce the safeguarding issues but younger girls need to learn to set boundaries, and are often more bothered about privacy than older girls. My DD is 4 and like a lot of older preschoolers doesn't like anyone going in the loo with her/the door being open.
(Though she will prance about naked in the changing rooms at swimming so perhaps not as private as some!)

seafret · 29/08/2018 15:00

Thank you Lucretia. It should be straight forward but TRAs/anti-female activists are deliberately muddying the waters and scaring people to serve their own agenda.

The EHRC should sick to the letter of the law, not try to make policy.

We don't have enough women in the legal profession who can/ will fight this for women so the TRAs get to set the tone. It is a structual disdvantage.

seafret · 29/08/2018 15:03

Is there one barrister/chambers you could think of who would help women and mothers take on the GGs? At a reasonable rate pro bono?

Unlike the several human right set ups that will support trans people while pushing the boundaries of the law, but yet do not have the same eagerness to take cases for other people wth protected characteristics.

seafret · 29/08/2018 15:04

*reasonable rate or pro bono?

ItIsOkItIsASecret · 29/08/2018 15:20

Whenever I read these threads, I am reminded of the words of Mr Spock.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".

R0wantrees · 29/08/2018 15:33

We don't have enough women in the legal profession who can/ will fight this for women so the TRAs get to set the tone. It is a structual disdvantage.

Recent thread discussing article for the Oxford Human Rights hub by Rosa Freedman & Rosemary Auchmuty (academics with law background)

ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/womens-rights-and-the-proposed-changes-to-the-gender-recognition-act/

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3338716-GRA-womens-rights-great-article-by-Rosa-Freedman-Rosemary-Auchmuty