The NSPCC aren't right about this are they?

[Macareaux]

Oh wise and knowledgeable women of Mumsnet I don't think the EA2010 does this at all does it? I'm not 100% certain so don't want to wade in.

A quick google shows massive interactions between Stonewall and the NSPCC. And guess what - they're all funded by the DfE. And at the top of the DfE are people like this:
www.stonewall.org.uk/people/senior-champion-year-2019-jonathan-slater

Guess what - this man removes sex segregated toilets and Stonewall gives hime an award for it. I wonder whether a senior civil servant like this has any influence over the millions of ££££ the government hands out to Stonewall and the NSPCC ?

The DfE (responsible for educating and safeguarding our children) gives money to Stonewall, the NSPCC , who give then give DfE employees shiny awards at expensive ceremonies and they all trot off and tell children that boys and girls must share toilets and changing rooms with each other.

The CEO of the NSPCC (Peter Wanless) used to work in the DfE.

Institutional capture in action.

Well that explains why I never got a response to my email regarding whether they were going to re think their policies in the wake of the damning verita report ont he challenor debacle.

I stressed the point about being found incompetent with regards to safe guarding

They have been warned by hundreds if not thousands of people.

They have proof in the form if an official investigation report.

Anything from now on, well I hold them equally responsible. They are officially complicit into the dismantling of safe guarding of children. And I will save this thread to prove they were warned as well. I have also kept the email I sent.

And yes Sonic - they're all bloody men!

Cross-posted with Fermats, yes definitely recommend everyone read that thread!

Their official position is the pants rule - don't let anyone touch you (not relevant to this) or force you to undress re. areas normally covered by pants, and listen if it makes you uncomfortable. Unless it's the swimming changing area and the person you're being told to undress next to has a penis but identifies as trans. Then you're not allowed to want privacy or feel uncomfortable. Your feelings (the ones we previously told you were important and could function as a useful Spidey sense) are now not important, in fact worse than that, they're transphobia.

This! I mean, how? How than they hold both those positions? It's insane. It's too insane to be genuine naivety, it's been pointed out to them too many times.

Is "Peter" still the CEO? (did I read that correctly?). If so, between his pitiful responses, willful blindness (and I am not convinced it's not more sinister than that) and a PP saying about the enormous salaries paid to a few at the NSPCC, I am going to suggest that Peter's primary motivation is not to ensure girls are kept safe.

Does the CEO have any safeguarding experience? I see why it would be politically and financially useful to appointment an ex DoE Big Lottery person to head up the charity - but it's not necessarily conductive to advancing its actual purpose of safeguarding is it? That shouldn't just be about promoting the organisation and getting more money/ power.

There is an issue with these big charities that in becoming corporate bodies, they've (somewhat) lost their core purpose

Ditto the recent women in Scotland twitter thread highlight how it's them, a small grassroots org that is holding organisations such as NSPCC to account for their misuse of Eq Law rather than the big funded women's organisations

truthisarevolutionaryact

Would you mind reposting your 08.13 post on the Regulatory Capture thread? Trying to collate where possible. Thanks!

Is "Peter" still the CEO?

Yes.

Cancelled my direct debit of over 20 years this morning. I cannot believe that those in charge of safeguarding children can totally disregard not just the law but common sense in this matter.

I hope you told them why Gerty

"Loos aren't actually mentioned in the equality act ... loos aren't covered by law. Other things are."

I just had a quick look at the legislation (Part 7 Para 26 of the Act) and it doesn't directly mention any specific services eg. toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards etc. The Act itself just references Separate Services for the Sexes.

The explanatory notes for Part 7 Para 26 do provide some examples of what the exceptions would allow and whilst single sex toilets are not mentioned in these examples I don't think their exclusion means they are not covered by the law.

Happy to be corrected.

I did! Whether they listen is another matter.

Loos aren't actually mentioned in the equality act ... loos aren't covered by law. Other things are

WPUK Bath, fascinating & important speech by Clara Greed, Professor of Inclusive Urban Planning specialist in toilet provision with particular emphasis upon women's needs includes discussion about legislation.

Definitely worth watching:
A Woman's Place is to be heard (Clara Greed, Bath, 1st November 2018)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD92aLqgtTA

Shocked at the links between NSPCC, Stonewall and the DfE.

The thread is still there, if anyone wants to take screenshots.

mobile.twitter.com/NSPCC/status/1113842458486554624

LangCleg
Added my comment to the regulatory capture thread.
I know that a while back there was a thread where people started to capture the links between those well paid individuals on the gravy train influencing the removal of sex based rights. Did the NSPCC and the DfE feature in this do you recall?

Snort.

Oh ffs

Erm.thats what everyines telling you

Just to clarify, the general public know far more than us about the law, safeguarding and even basic biology. Now that this is finally attracting widespread criticism, press interest and celebrity engagement we’re going to make the smallest of small attempts to address it. Our CEO Peter Wanless is an overpaid wanker who gets 170K a year, the important thing is that this is resolved without affecting him or his salary in any way.

I'll bet there's not a sentence to be found about this in any of the NSPCC / Mermaids / Stonewall / GIRES etc training materials currently grooming children into accepting undressing, toileting and showering in front of the opposite sex,
Maybe someone on twitter can ask the NSPCC where they mention this fact in their training advice / materials?

Is that the NSPCC doing a climb-down?

Has someone who understands safeguarding got involved?

Has anyone in the press picked this shitstorm up yet?

Is that the NSPCC doing a climb-down?

Not if they are using the terms 'girls and boys' to mean 'anyone who says they are a girl, and anyone who says they are a boy'.

Is that the NSPCC doing a climb-down?

No, they still have their misrepresentation of the EA on their twitter. They are doing the "say two different things at the same time" thing

Loos aren't actually mentioned in the equality act ... loos aren't covered by law. Other things are

Loos are covered by implication. One of the Schedules to the EqA mentions that is is legal to segregate by sex where a person might reasonably object to the presence of an opposite-sex person.

I really hope that someone has had a big bollocking this morning over that 'youve read it' tweet.

This is just unbelievable. How can the NSPCC do this?

A group of people for whom safeguarding rules do not apply? Has that happened before? Did it turn out well?

They presumably can't actually define "girl" or "boy" so their statement is completely redundant.