Munroe - Childline 's first LGBT+ campaigner.

[HandsOffMyRights]

Words fail me today

I do not want kink normalised.

New (I think?) statement:

www.nspcc.org.uk/what-we-do/news-opinion/munroe-bergdorf

Excerpt:

The driving force of the decision the Board took was concern around the lack of process that our organisation used when deciding to work with Munroe. This is not Munroe's doing but is much more a failure of our systems and processes than anything Munroe has done while engaged with us, and something we have to learn from.

When appointing an ambassador we are required to consider whether the relationship supports our ability to safeguard children and be influential in safeguarding children. The board decided an ongoing relationship with Munroe was inappropriate because of her statements on the public record, which we felt would mean that she was in breach of our own risk assessments and undermine what we are here to do. These statements are specific to safeguarding and equality.

The Board of Trustees has commissioned an immediate and thorough review of our process for establishing a relationship with supporters of all kinds, and our management of these relationships. This examination will be rigorous and consult across the organisation, and will report back the findings and recommendations to our staff and volunteers when we have concluded the process. This work is commissioned by trustees and will report to the Nominations and Governance Committee.

That’s a great statement.

JessicaWakefieldSV It's mind-boggling that some people see nothing wrong with the words 'kink' and 'children' in the same sentence.

In addition, as an organisation we are committed to creating an internal culture and working and volunteering environment in which all our people feel included, equal, respected and valued. This is regardless of their ethnicity, creed, sexual orientation, age, religion, marital status or gender identity.

Missed one...

That’s a great statement

It's not that great. Those are the three good paras. The rest is apologising to Munroe and allies for the hurt caused, and how they are working to re-educate themselves.

I think that statement was only written on the back of comments made in the media/on social media. It just didn’t occur to them and I hope they are having a little word with the staff who signed the ‘wahhhhh, you meanies!’ Letter.

no one doubts that those who initiated contact with her were acting with the best of intentions and the error is in our process and not with individuals.

Don’t agree with this.

It would be good to know how the figure of 6,000 children (who contacted them last year, worried about their gender or sexuality) breaks down, and how it compares to ten years ago.

Sorry -( not sorry ) to the right people

Didn’t NSPCC cancel a webchat with Mumsnet? Did we get a grovelling apology?

" Don’t agree with this"

that's because it makes no sense

Basically that is acknowledging that they should never have hired Bergdorf in the first place. What a crap lack of due diligence and oversight from the top. I ope heads roll over this.

Reading between the lines, Wanless is saying the people who recruited MB were out of line, out of control and don't have a clue about due dilligence or safeguarding.

Perhaps Deputy Heads Will Roll?

1. What communication was given to Munroe about the decision to dismiss her?

Unfortunately, we didn't manage to speak directly to Munroe on Friday. However, Munroe's publicist was sent a draft of our intended statement, and following feedback received, we incorporated some of the publicist's comments into the final statement we published on Friday evening.

So when was the BBC interview recorded because from memory Munroe Bergdorf claims otherwise?

Its mealy mouthed but we expected that, the bottom line is Monroe has gone and ain't coming back.

I would expect some serious journalistic scrutiny of the NSPCC, they have made very bad decisions. It's a charity that deals in child protection but forgot the basics, waffle about systems and procedures does not hide that basic failure.

That's some 'shit we fucked up bigtime' statement.

I note it ultimately says as part of it, Berdorf has essentially failed a safeguarding test not because they are trans but because they are a bloody liability who has acted in a dubious fashion in the past.

And the NSPCCs poor handling and lack of due diligence has now effectively resulted in the public spectacle of a trans person failing a safeguarding check which damages the rest of the community.

So the NSPCC has damaged LGBT people and relations through this, but only cos they didn't do the safeguarding they should have done in the first fucking place. The magic trans cloak has backfired here.

I think the take home is the public point that if you are trans you can fail safeguarding and more agencies should be doing their homework.

It still doesnt get the NSPCC off the hook in my book. But its a step in the right direction in which safeguarding should be seen as the most important issue.

That's a damaging blow to Berdorfs media image.

This seems like an infuential group:

Pride in NSPCC Colleagues and Children (PINCC)

I do not want kink normalised.

What these men do in private is their business.

I will always "kink-shame" public displays of such behaviour. Everyone should boycott all Pride parades and reject the concept of Pride Month for any inclusion of paraphilic behaviours in public.

Accusations of 'kink shaming' on Twitter...

Oh, for fucks sake.
We aren’t kink shaming, we are poor boundary shaming.

If you work with kids or vulnerable adults or in a role that directly or indirectly affects kids and vulnerable adults, then a bunch of middle aged mums on the internet shouldn’t be able to find your fetish by following links from your work CV.

We aren’t kink shaming, we are poor boundary shaming.

You forgot poor judgment shaming.

Whenever you see
"me, me, me, it's all about me"
the alarms should be ringing, red flags waving.
It isn't that difficult.
I volunteered for a charity years ago. One of this type of person was on the board. They got way with appropriating hundreds of thousands of pounds. It was entirely predictable.

It's interesting that the short version of the statement as tweeted doesn't say why MB was got rid of and almost implies they made a mistake in doing so.

I think the reasons will get no media coverage.

I think the reasons will get no media coverage

Will be all about the apology

The reasons why are only alluded to but this is the most significant aspect given the work done by NSPCC & Childline:

"The board decided an ongoing relationship with Munroe was inappropriate because of her statements on the public record, which we felt would mean that she was in breach of our own risk assessments and undermine what we are here to do. These statements are specific to safeguarding and equality."