Munroe - Childline 's first LGBT+ campaigner.

[HandsOffMyRights]

Words fail me today

Why is the NSPCC prioritising grovelling to someone they know is a safeguarding risk over firmly restating their first priority is the safety of children?

I'm starting to feel it's like Fast Food outlets 'fighting cancer' through sponsorship deals whilst promoting cancer-causing foodstuffs. The only way to ensure the survival of a charity is to ensure the continuation of the problem the charity purports to be trying to solve.

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

I am reassured that the NSPCC has remembered their core purpose.

Tips and Tricks on how to do a 'cover-up'

Concur, Pam. That was much more about reputation management than anything else.

Reading between the lines, you can see that they know it's serious. They've had to concede that MB was binned due to public statements contravening the most basic safeguarding principles but they've avoided saying anything specific about what those statements were and why they breach safeguarding.

They're hoping women and those concerned with actual child protection will accept the apology and move on.

No, NSPCC - we will not move on. The MB debacle is just the latest in a series of concerns we have about your organisation. We are watching you. Because - shocking though this is - we seem to have a better understanding of safeguarding protocols than you do. So we won't be shutting up.

What is interesting is Mr Jones seems to be saying that safeguarding children is homophobic and "transphobic".

That protecting children from paraphilic behaviours is unacceptable, as far as he is concerned.

A reminder of the list of known paraphilic behaviours:

Any organisation whose purpose is to spread awareness and understanding of child protection frameworks and whose internal processes have result in a failure of safeguarding should be:

a) specific about what the failure was
b) keen to educate the public about why such a failure matters

NSPCC's statement was neither of those things. It was vague about what the actual problem was. Not good enough.

Mr Jones and his allies have an endless list of what is transphobic and homophobic. Regrettably much on this endless list concerns the rights, safety, privacy and dignity of others - especially women and children.

the LinkedIn thing is BIZARRE! I think people like him have just lost track of all boundaries mixing with the terminally woke all day long.

"Reading between the lines, you can see that they know it's serious. They've had to concede that MB was binned due to public statements contravening the most basic safeguarding principles"

I agree - but also (again between the lines) for Bergdorf's homophobia - there was "and equalities" as well as safeguarding in the sentence about why Bergdorf had been dropped.

I'm not, at all, saying "oh it's all fine, the NSPCC have seen sense, we can all go home now". Definitely not. But, I think they do deserve a lot of credit for refusing to fold on this. Let's face it, this is the NSPCC of all people - the pressure they must have had from the full weight of the trans-lobby must have been immense. Well, we could see it was - look at the appalling BBC coverage, for a start.

I am reassured that the NSPCC has remembered their core purpose.

They've been forced to acknowledge it.

This is, as has been illustrated, currently damage limitation (which is about brand, reputation, staff & donors)

look at the appalling BBC coverage, for a start.

Indeed, one has to wonder why the BBC is placing the behaviour paraphilic men above the safeguarding of children.

🤔

Indeed LangCleg

I can't wait for the next exciting media installment of 'What Munroe did next?' with the NSPCC's statement in mind. I wonder who will follow L'Oreal, Labour and the NSPCC.

Most people with a list like that, would have their media career killed off. I do wonder what will happen here.

I don't know why, , but that dreadful BBC interview and piss poor newspaper coverage gives me the sneaking suspicion we haven't seen the last of Bergdorf.

Director of Marketing and Communications at NSPCC is Ali Jeremy, who prior to this had an 8 year career as director of communications at the BBC.

But, I think they do deserve a lot of credit for refusing to fold on this. Let's face it, this is the NSPCC of all people - the pressure they must have had from the full weight of the trans-lobby must have been immense.

They can't fold because the concerns are Safeguarding & equalities.
What they will want to do is fudge or leave it hoping people will stop asking questions.

There's long history of this
Remember the MN cancelled FB chat?

Weren't they going to come back with a statement in response to the many Safeguarding concerns?

the pubic expression of paraphilic behaviours.

Sometimes typos can be more apt than the intended word.

It’s very funny - both side are threatening to cancel donations! Hahahahaha!

But, I think they do deserve a lot of credit for refusing to fold on this. Let's face it, this is the NSPCC of all people - the pressure they must have had from the full weight of the trans-lobby must have been immense.

The folding goes back a while.

This episode, if they’re lucky, is pulling back from the brink before it’s too late.

HumberElla

How interesting is that, eh?

Director of Marketing and Communications at NSPCC is Ali Jeremy, who prior to this had an 8 year career as director of communications at the BBC.

Fancy that?
They just move around.

The BBC though is not a Children's Charity with statuatory Child Protection powers.

They can't fold because the concerns are Safeguarding & equalities.

From the Charity Commission Website describing their activity

1) TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE WRONGS OF CHILDREN AND THE CORRUPTION OF THEIR MORALS;
2) TO TAKE ACTION FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS FOR THEIR PROTECTION;
3) TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN AN ORGANISATION FOR THE ABOVE OBJECTS;
4) TO DO ALL OTHER SUCH LAWFUL THINGS AS ARE INCIDENTAL OR CONDUCIVE TO THE ATTAINMENT OF THE ABOVE OBJECTS

Source

How EXACTLY does having employees with Rubber Cubs blogs on their blog which is linked through their LinkedIn professional profile fit in with 1)?

Just y'know, asking.

Jack I thought so too. The way these senior figures at BBC, major funders, charities and lobby groups are all so interconnected.

Must be a massive coincidence?

MN thread from 2016

NSPCC have cancelled a debate on supporting trans children.....

Another NSPCC trustee is also chairman of Guardian Media Group, Neil Berkett, so I wouldn’t hold out much hope for impartial reporting there either.

It's all very cliquey, innit, HumberElla?

BBC > Guardian > NSPCC

London > Brighton