Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Sarah Ditum article: Girl Guides once provided a safe space to explore being a woman – so what is its purpose now?

22 replies

ShotsFired · 28/09/2018 19:09

In 1909, 11,000 Boy Scouts gathered at Crystal Palace for Britain’s first jamboree. And among them, illicitly, was a small group of girls. Barred from membership because of their sex, they rustled up some makeshift uniforms and smuggled themselves in with the crowd.

“We were laughed at, we were whistled at, there were catcalls, but we didn’t mind,” remembered one of the girls, seven decades later. “We were there and we were part of the show.” Baden-Powell was outraged when he spotted them – but after talking, he left them with a promise to think about incorporating girls into the Scouting movement.

The result was the Girl Guides, which ran from 1910 to 2017 as a single-sex organisation. It’s been criticised for reinforcing stereotypes (certainly, I was uninspired by arranging biscuits for my Hostess Badge as a Brownie in the 1980s). And in 2007, all sections of the Scouts were finally opened to girls.

So why the need for the Guides at all?

While the Scouts is now mixed sex, it’s still male-led: there’s a glass ceiling when it comes to Scouting management. For the girls themselves, just being in a female-only organisation can be of benefit. “It is nice just being yourself and not needing to worry about boys,” said one Guide, when the girls-only policy was challenged in 2012.

The Guides has been stalwart in putting girls first, campaigning against gender stereotyping and raising awareness on girls’ mental health. But in 2017, a new policy on trans inclusion, developed with advice from the LGBTQ charity Stonewall, declared that anyone who identifies as female can take up any role within Guiding, from the Rainbows up to leadership.

Girlguiding leaders are now told to make the privacy of transwomen and transgirls a priority: “It is not a requirement – or best practice – to tell parents that a trans person, including those who are pre-operative, will be attending a residential event,” says the guidance on supporting trans members.

This means that Girlguiding has become, with one stroke, mixed sex.

Some members are, understandably, not happy with this fundamental change to the organisation. A group of parents and volunteers wrote a letter to the Sunday Times protesting that the policy “poses safeguarding risks, reinforces gender stereotypes and denies informed parental consent”. Two of the leaders who signed the letter have been expelled from the Guides – and their units closed down, since there is no one else available to run them.

Girlguiding has defended its policy, stating that “simply being transgender does not make someone more of a safeguarding risk than any other person”. This is true – but it is not the point.

Being trans does not make someone a risk, but being born male does. In 99 per cent of rapes and sexual assaults, the perpetrator is male. Turning a female-only organisation into a mixed-sex one will, by definition, introduce safeguarding risks.

Trans activists claim that being trans is so difficult and painful, no one would ever fake it. But that is simply, and obviously, untrue. To accept that should not, and does not, undermine those experiences that trans people report.

When self-identification is the standard, all you have to do to “identify” as a girl or woman is say that you are one. No physical operation, hormones or even professional psychological diagnosis is required. If that sounds like an easy system to game – well, it is.

Marie Dean, convicted as a man for burglary and voyeurism offences (breaking into teenage girls’ rooms and dressing in their clothes), identified as a woman while incarcerated and lobbied for transfer to a women’s prison. The request was denied. Rapist Karen White’s request, however, was successful: White, who retained a penis and testicles, sexually assaulted four female inmates.

Everything we know about sexual violence says we should treat males seeking access to female-only groups with extreme caution. We know that male children are a danger to female children: about a third of girls have been sexually harassed in school; about a quarter have been subjected to unwanted sexual touching. We know that abusers seek out positions of trust, which offer both alibi (they are a pillar of the community!) and access to victims. David Challenor, for example, who tortured and raped a 10-year-old girl, was a Scout leader.

As a single-sex organisation, the Guides had a defining purpose. As a mixed-sex one, it has no need to exist alongside the Scouts. It no longer offers a female-only environment where girls can thrive. It can no longer challenge stereotypes: just watch the CBBC documentary I Am Leo to see how, under the doctrine of gender identity, being a girl becomes a matter of having long hair and liking the colour pink.

Just over a century after those young girls at a Scouting jamboree refused to conform to their gender and claimed the right to a movement of their own: Girlguiding has given up on girls.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/girl-guides-trans-inclusion-policy-row-safe-place-sex-abuse-risk-feminism-a8557841.html

OP posts:
stillathing · 28/09/2018 19:18

The INDEPENDENT?!

Returns from fainting fit.
Great article! If this is the end of the guides, I wonder who stands to benifit if anyone?

Charliethefeminist · 28/09/2018 19:45

Being trans isn't the risk, it's being male

Shout it from the rooftops

Middledoggetsangry · 28/09/2018 19:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ShotsFired · 28/09/2018 19:52

Middle, yes it's available, but a new thing where you have to register to see the full article. Only the first para or two is available without (registration is free though, so I'm not breaking any paywalls, just saving time!)

OP posts:
Ereshkigal · 28/09/2018 19:52

Fantastic article from Sarah in one of the most pro TRA papers.

Littlemouseroar · 28/09/2018 19:57

Was dead chuffed today when i went to a bus stop and saw a poster about hands off our rights.

ShotsFired · 28/09/2018 20:03

Indy Voices Twitter also 99% supportive (apart from the one bloke who feels the need to specify his pronouns - and who has been ignored anyway)
twitter.com/IndyVoices/status/1045372502615232513

OP posts:
Charley50 · 28/09/2018 20:14

How could anyone disagree with the absolute common sense of that article.

MnerXX · 28/09/2018 20:22

Really well thought out, insightful article. It explains everything perfectly and logically.

I tried to register earlier but the page didn’t work so hadn’t managed to read beyond the first page.

grasspigeons · 28/09/2018 20:27

That's really positive.

PierreBezukov · 28/09/2018 20:34

Great article.

Viago · 28/09/2018 21:15

Great article Sarah Ditum.

ChattyLion · 28/09/2018 21:20

Sarah Ditum, teling the truth. Great to get this in the Indy!

Mrskeats · 28/09/2018 21:34

Brill article
Thanks for sharing

Micaela64 · 28/09/2018 22:03

The blurring of the lines started when they began allowing girls to join the Cubs/Scouts (they are also allowed to share accommodation with boys) I never liked it at the time and always thought it unfair that girls were allowed their own space to just be with the girls but boys weren't.

ShotsFired · 28/09/2018 22:27

"Unfair"?

Scouts chose to admit girls to help halt their dwindling numbers. It wasn't a "favour" to girls, it was to save themselves.

Whereas Guiding has waiting lists to join.

OP posts:
Mumoftwoyoungkids · 28/09/2018 23:18

Scouts chose to admit girls to help halt their dwindling numbers. It wasn't a "favour" to girls, it was to save themselves.

This.

When I was 14 (and the rules were changed) the town I lived in had 11 Guide companies. They all had ridiculous waiting list.

There was 2 Scout packs. One of which was down to 9 boys (my brother was one of them) and at risk of closure as it was losing money and only had a small amount of funds left.

When the rules changed every girl on the Guide waiting list was phoned and offered a Scout place. (No GDPR in those days!)

The following week there were 9 boys and 6 girls. Within a month there was 9 boys and 11 girls and a waiting list.

More than two decades later there are 12 Guide Companies and 5 Scout Packs.

Viago · 28/09/2018 23:50

Why don't boys want to do Scouts any more? Have the numbers of Beavers and Cubs declined as well?

MnerXX · 28/09/2018 23:52

The waiting lists for scouts and guides by us are both ridiculous. We have no where near enough volunteers to cater for the demand.

AngryAttackKittens · 29/09/2018 09:00

If this is the end of the guides, I wonder who stands to benifit if anyone?

The only people who benefit are those men who loathe the idea of women and girls having anything for ourselves. It's not necessarily that they want the thing for themselves, they just don't want us to have it.

TimeLady · 29/09/2018 09:44

Male-only scout packs had a some-what dodgy reputation a couple of decades ago. I have always assumed that was why they went down the mixed sex route.

NoSquirrels · 29/09/2018 09:48

That’s is an excellent article. Bravo Sarah Ditum and thank you to the Independent.

It nails the “but the Scouts are already inclusive” argument and says why that’s not the point.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread