Girlguiding Issue coming up Good Morning Britain

[WarmWishes]

About to be discussed 7.40am. Suzzanah Reeves & Piers Morgan

Many of those girls responding to that survey will not have had any direct experience of a transgirl to date and will just have replied with a standard discrimination is bad answer.

They will not understand the repercussions of this until they find themselves next to a penis in the shower. When they are inevitably upset about this no doubt they will be told they are bigoted.

They need informed consent from parents not the under age girls.

Even though when we asked them "do you want to be kind to everyone and include them?" we didn't actually specifically tell them that being kind to everyone and including them meant getting butt arse naked in front of a teen with a penis in the shower block.

I'd like to see their risk assessments on all of this. From a safeguarding pov; from a liability pov of withholding relevant information from parents so they can give informed consent; from a DBS pov if a leader has a GRC and name-change, etc. From a reputational pov of secretly changing from single-sex to single-gender when GG was one of the few places that knew the difference and thrived on challenging gender stereotypes.

We have developed our policy in line with legal advice and, in the case of our guidance around transgender members, organisations with experience of supporting transgender children and young people.

Which transgender members? Did they develop this policy with transboys in mind?

Who else could be a member of a girls organisation?

We have developed our policy in line with legal advice and, in the case of our guidance around transgender members, organisations with experience of supporting transgender children and young people. Contrary to claims made on social media we do not make policy based on comments from individuals or pressure groups.

Stonewall is a pressure group. It used to use pressure as a force for good. Now it uses pressure to take away rights and dignity from females.

I'd love to know who they took legal advice from. TELI? The random goady posters who pop up on here to tell us (entirely incorrectly) that misgendering/deadnaming is a crime? Random people they grabbed off the street? The bloke who brings the sandwich trolley round their office at lunchtime?

And let's be clear - the high-profile trans organisations are almost all lobby/pressure groups. They do not take into account competing interests, seem to have very little oversight, and the policies they want are increasingly crossing the line for all common sense and safeguarding principles.

This. Remember the Guides would be unable to stop Aimee Challenor from volunteering now - and they have time on their hands. But there's no problem right?

The bloke who brings the sandwich trolley round their office at lunchtime?

Don’t slander him! The average bloke on the street would give a resounding ‘no’ to ‘is it a good idea to let penises in the girl guides tent’.

Yes. I have way more confidence in sandwich trolley guy making the right call than this lot.

That's true. I offer my unreserved apologies to sandwich trolley guy!

Also, Stonewall still has our friend Aimee Challenor on the Trans Advisory Board, AAIK. Given Aimee Challenor transitioned at 16, I would guess their voice is pretty influential when it comes to speaking for CHILDREN. Despite Aimee thinking it was totally fine and normal to be involved with father David Challenor, including as election agent, despite knowing David had been arrested. David was convicted of raping and torturing a 10-year old girl. A crime which happened in the house he shared with Aimee, and that served as the Green Party Coventry HQ.
So my sincerest apologies if I think Stonewall does not really seem to keep a clean house when it comes to SAFEGUARDING, if this is the judgment displayed by one of their most prominent "trans youth experts."

I appreciated the email from GG. I felt it was well set out and clear. They are right about asking the members, they’ll be the people attending. It’s good to be reminded that being transgender does not make someone more of a risk. After all ... we are talking about children so it’s hard to justify a position that excludes anyone.

It's not just children though, it's teens.

My DS had a female schoolfriend for a sleepover recently. He's still quite obviously a kid, she's starting to go through puberty - so I asked him, her, and her mum if everyone was happy for them to be in the same room.

A couple of years from now I won't even be asking, they'll be in separate rooms. Because you don't put young teens in the same room, for the sake of their privacy, and dignity, and because you don't want any teen pregnancies on your watch.

"We asked the girls of the organization, 'Do you want to be kind to everyone and include them?' because we knew that their socialization would lead them to give a positive answer. This has given us carte blanche to completely ignore safeguarding risks because a majority of the girls told us they didn't mind if we did."

Exactly this.

"Oh, we're the girl guides, on a mission to empower girls by enforcing their female socialisation at every possible opportunity."

What a steaming pile of wank.

It is important to us that we listen to girls and young women, 86% of whom have told us, through the Girls’ Attitudes Survey, that they do not think people should be discriminated against because they are transgender.
Yes, but did you ask them if they wanted boys to join their unit? Did they want boys sleeping in their tents and using their changing rooms?

I appreciated the email from GG. I felt it was well set out and clear. They are right about asking the members, they’ll be the people attending. It’s good to be reminded that being transgender does not make someone more of a risk. After all ... we are talking about children so it’s hard to justify a position that excludes anyone.

Theirs was word salad obfuscating the issues.

The point has completely sailed over your head.

Hi Susie, what safeguarding training do you have? Do you not have any concerns about an organisation not being open and honest with parents about their policies?

I guess my view - non theoretical view - is that in a practical level I trust the GGuides with safeguarding. Otherwise I wouldn’t send my DD. That hasn’t changed. I trust they’ll do the right safeguarding around teenage trans members. If you trust them surely you still trust them to keep your DD safe, if you don’t trust them then it’s game over.

I appreciated the email from GG. I felt it was well set out and clear. They are right about asking the members, they’ll be the people attending. It’s good to be reminded that being transgender does not make someone more of a risk. After all ... we are talking about children so it’s hard to justify a position that excludes anyone.

Sorry but this is bullshit as is that email. Safeguarding best practice requires separate sleeping and bathing for the opposite sex. This is universal.

Just because they use the term transgirl doesn't change the fact these are biologically male children.

As for asking the under age girls their opinions very few, if any of them will understand what is being asked of them let alone what is safeguarding best practice in their best interests.

Parents need to be informed if their daughter is going to be put in mixed sex accommodation so they choose whether to consent. I can guarantee most will not.

The consequences of the GG policy are not risk-free, SossidgeRoll. Where are the risk assessments?

1. They are discriminating against transboys. Who are trans and female sex. They seem to have overlooked that
2. They need to be clearer. People who are not familair with the lingo will not know what this is all about. Some parents only allow their daughters to go because it is single sex. They MUST be clear that it is a mixed sex org so that children and parents can make informed decisions
3. Which I suspect is coming soon in one format or another as they say they are now a group for "young people" not girls

How do current leadership have the right to change it to mixed sex without consulting anyone apart from one set of groups who have a single agenda?

but sossidgeroll, GG understand that children over the age of 10 shouldn't share mixed sex sleeping accommodation

but if one of those children says 'i'm a girl inside', despite the fact that they're still a boy on the outside (due to being a mammal - can't change sex), suddenly they don't understand that

so no, I don't trust them

their understanding is faulty

If they've bought in to the mantra that transwomen/girls are women/girls, then the whole thing is meaningless.

Actually, transboys are the great forgotten category in all this.

We know there's been an explosion in the number of referrals to the Tavistock - what is it, 2000% + increase?

We know parents are reporting rapid-onset gender dysphoria, where girls with no previous indications of confusion about their gender suddenly decide they're boys.

These are the children we desperately need to get off social media, away from Tumblr, and into the real world, doing social activities with a broad cross-section of their peers, not a small, carefully selected subset on the internet.

Yet these are the children GG are forcing to leave.

Asking children what they think / want is all well and good.

But are GG implying underage children can consent to having safeguarding removed?

Because they can’t, surely? Children can’t consent. Surely that’s, like, a fundamental tenant of safeguarding and why it’s needed in the first place. That children are at risk not just because they are physically vulnerable but because they are emotionally vulnerable and can be groomed, etc.

It is very very easy to ask a child - even a ‘clued up teen’ - a question in a way that gets you the answer you want. We know this, right, GG? You understand your members are inherently vulnerable because of their age? Please tell me you know this?!