Email from Girl Guides

[purplebutterflybiscuits]

I have finally had a reply from my complaint to girl guides. I was wondering if anyone could help me in how to respond. There are two parts that I am particularly unhappy about.

1. "The Equality Act 2010 says that organisations like Girlguiding which provide single-sex services should treat trans people according to the gender they identify with."

Sex or gender, which is it? And is this really what the equality act says??

2)"In reality, we’ve found this comes up very rarely. When it has, we’ve worked WITH EVERYONE, including parents when appropriate, to balance needs and make sure every girl feels comfortable. This has included organising separate facilities for anyone who wants or needs them. We support anyone who asks for alternate accommodation or facilities, not just trans young people" But then goes on to say "Data protection law means we have to protect the privacy of every member’s personal information, and keep it safe. It is illegal to share personal or sensitive data about an individual without their permission, and this includes sharing that a trans person is trans."

How are girls or their parents supposed to ask for separate accommodation from male bodied people if they aren't being told about it? This seems contradictory to me.

Any help most appreciated.

Well, if I was the parent of girl who wanted to join the Guides, I would only permit her to join if she never went on any trips with them. So sad as that is the best bit.

How on earth can such addle-headed people have charge of the care of youngsters?

If they are using ‘data protection’ to help their cause by fudging the answer then maybe use it too...

‘So, in the interests of maintaining data protection while also actively safeguarding guides, if you are unable to disclose to parents that there is a male child that identifies as a girl on an individual basis, surely you need to be collecting this information on any form where it involves an activity that involves individuals needing to use toilets, get changed or sleep - along the lines of ‘i do/ do not give my permission for my child to share washing/toilet/changing facilities with —boys/men-/ guides/guiders who identify as female but still have a penis*’.

*not sure how best to phrase this bit so that it provides enough information to be completely clear as to what they are agreeing to without incurring the wrath of TRAs/stonewall etc

But if they had to have a sentence like that on all their forms (a bit like the standard blurb that schools and clubs have these days about being photographed) it could be incredibly powerful because of the questions it would raise straight away (would be needed on joining form for general everyday stuff like sharing loos at meetings) and then again for every trip...

And they can’t argue about just having it when it’s needed as that would mean sending forms out if someone joins who is trans which would put them so it needs to be there all the time... and after all if they do not see it as a big issue and are happy to provide alternative arrangements (can’t remember their precise phrase) then what issues can they have with doing this in order to properly safeguard the girls in their care?

The downside for them (and upside for good sense) is that they will probably discover that people do care, do start talking about it having been none the wiser before and they do need to find a lot of ‘alternative’ accommodation they were anticipating hVing to...

Girlguiding will at least need a general form where parents indicate, whether they are ok with girls sleeping in accommodations together with transgirls or being cared for by transwomen guides and then implementing this accordingly so they can follow their own policies of allowing girls and their families to make this choice while protecting data.

Thanks Girl Guides for taking away the right of teenage girls to say no to dicks in their private spaces.

This exactly. I'm not sure my DD would say anything in this situation because she wants to be nice. Adults have the responsibility to set boundaries for kids and help kids enforce their own boundaries. This is basically unbelievable.

Whether it’s on its own form or incorporated into other forms, used just once when guides join or additionally for big events and camps, point is that they need to have standard way of asking the question.

They on the other hand are probably hoping that the op and others have not noticed the disconnect that the op raised - that if they can’t tell people then how will people know to ask...

Which is why if the op replies to them (or if others raise it with them) it’s important to raise this suggestion so they can only answer yes we are going to implement that (in which case they will need to send it out to the parents of all guides, which is going to mean that a lot of people are potentially going to be peak transed when they look into it) or they are going to answer no - in which case the follow up answer is ‘well how exactly are you going to implement the policy if you can’t tell people so they know to say anything and you haven’t asked them what their choice would be?’ As a minimum there are some groups of girls whose parents will not want them mixing with males because of their religion so they know they will need to ask them for starters - how do they propose doing that? And why not extend that to all parents instead of discriminating between the two groups?

Whatever the answer is - it’s important. If it’s yes - then a fuss needs to be kicked up if the forms aren’t available soon and there need to be some unbiased info sheets from reliable sources like Transgender Trend and WEP etc so when parents go hunting for info they find it.

Or if the answer is no, then people need to be complaining that it shows they are saying one thing and doing another.

If the answer is ‘we’re still thinking about it’ that’s basically a no and a hope that you’ll forget...

Hope that makes sense as to why it’s important to put the question to them!

I also included some wording in my reply along the lines of implementation, basically assuming that from here on in separate sleeping and changing facilities will be provided at events & activities, no questions asked, whether there are transgender members & leaders or not. I also raised the point of the extra demand this will place on activities & venues & volunteer numbers.
It was a bit tongue in cheek but then I went on to say basically you can't be expecting members to come to you and 'request' this provision on a case-by-case basis, because we've all seen how women are treated when they raise a need for sex segregated spaces from transgender people, so I assume you will be providing it all the time as a matter of course; or you won't be sufficiently protecting your guides and you will be placing volunteers, leaders and guides in very awkward embarrassing and exposed positions if they feel they need something which other people might deem transphobic or exclusionary.

As a minimum there are some groups of girls whose parents will not want them mixing with males because of their religion so they know they will need to ask them for starters - how do they propose doing that? And why not extend that to all parents instead of discriminating between the two groups?

A PP on a previous thread pointed out that she was fostering a vulnerable girl who could not be accommodated in mixed sex accommodation for own protection (a condition imposed by social services) & that she’d have to withdraw her from GG. That’s the reality of this shoddy policy. It sucks and GG deserve all the heat they are getting over this.

An idea...

I was recently talking to someone who is a matron at a boys boarding school. She said that "issues" were not unknown, including men seeking employment in order to be close to boys. Constant vigilance was required. (And actually I would not be certain that boarders were any less safe than kids living at home where parents were less alert to the possibility of grooming.)

Boarding schools have some sort of dedicated welfare inspections which look closely at safeguarding etc. Would this sort of established inspection system be a better starting point for groups offering residential services than Stonewall and panels involving Pips Bunce.