Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Potential Systemic Safeguarding failures in NSPCC / Childline illustrated by appointment & ending of relationship with Munroe Bergdorf Thread 2

476 replies

R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 13:05

link to previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3605120-Munroe-Childline-s-first-LGBT-campaigner

NSPCC statement by CEO Peter Wanless
www.nspcc.org.uk/what-we-do/news-opinion/munroe-bergdorf

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3609218-Hi-from-Safe-Schools-Alliance-UK

OP posts:
Thread gallery
32
R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 19:18

RedToothBrush Is there any chance of a clearer screen shot of the NSPCC SM guidance please?

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 19:20

Check @Lesleysemmens on twitter R0wantrees.

I'm on my photo atm and she's sharing it.

FermatsTheorem · 13/06/2019 19:21

I said this on the previous thread, but you'd think someone at the NSPCC, just one person, would look at what's happened to Oxfam this week (deadline leading to huge financial sanctions if they don't clean up their act) and say "you know, as a charity whose central mission is child safeguarding, a mission which cannot be carried out without an understanding of how to maintain appropriate boundaries between one's private, adult sexual behaviour and the public sphere, this really isn't a good look."

But no, apparently not a single person in any position of authority within the organisation sees a problem with this.

It's like they've never heard the phrase "reputational damage."

It's like none of them actually understands what their mission as a charity is.

R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 19:27

H/t Lesleysemmens

The LinkedIn makes the point that volunteers should be 'sensible' about what else they link to alongside their role with NSPCC to protect the reputation of the charity.

(these are guidelines for volunteers & its possible/likely that paid employees have additional requirements)

Potential Systemic Safeguarding failures in NSPCC / Childline illustrated by appointment & ending of relationship with Munroe Bergdorf Thread 2
Potential Systemic Safeguarding failures in NSPCC / Childline illustrated by appointment & ending of relationship with Munroe Bergdorf Thread 2
OP posts:
FannyCann · 13/06/2019 19:28

Nicely put Fermats

Datun · 13/06/2019 19:31

RedToothBrush

Your screenshots are a bit blurry. Does that say that wanking in a toilet to which the public has access is illegal ?

Does it have to be designated a public toilet, or a toilet to which other members of the public have access? Like colleagues?

RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 19:33

So how many laws or protocols or policies that might be relevant to working at the NSPCC has this fella broken?

And the official line from the NSPCC is bullying and priority looking after staff?

Whilst the media wails about a 'witch hunt' or 'homophobia'.

Interesting isn't it?

R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 19:35

From the Daily Mail article:

(extract)
"Even the charity's own staff were said to be left feeling 'embarrassed and ashamed', with 150 putting their names to a letter seen by the Guardian.

The employees wrote: 'We are concerned at the NSPCC’s decision to replicate the experience that many trans children and adults experience in being subjected to abuse and ridicule and subsequently abandoned.' (continues)

Explaining the reason behind ending the relationship, Mr Wanless said: 'The board decided an ongoing relationship with Munroe was inappropriate because of her statements on the public record.'

This is believed to allude to comments Ms Bergdorf made in the wake of racist violence in Charlottesville that white people should acknowledge that their 'existence, privilege and success as a race is built on the backs, blood and death of people of colour'. The comments led to her being dropped from a L'Oreal campaign.

The current saga kicked off last Wednesday when Munroe excitedly announced her role on Twitter, writing: 'Proud to be announced as @ childline's first LGBT+ campaigner.

'The wellbeing and empowerment of LGBTQIA+ identifying children and young people is something that I have been passionate about throughout my career as an activist.'

The announcement was met by a backlash on social media, with some users launching what Munroe described as a 'transphobic hate campaign' on Twitter.

The NSPCC came under fire over the decision, with some calling Ms Bergdof an 'inappropriate' role model and accusing her of being a 'porn model' because she appeared in Playboy

The BBC reported that NSPCC trustees had also received transphoic letters" (continues)

This article has been stitched together from half truths, unsubstatiated claims, propaganda, manipulation & spin

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 19:38

Datun the relevant section of the act here is:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/71

It says
he is in a lavatory to which the public or a section of the public has or is permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise,

Which suggests potentially a workplace.

Even if its not, this is getting so close to being a breech of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 that it REALLY a massive problem for the NSPCC especially because it was posted publicly online without thought to privacy settings.

It's a MASSIVE no no.

RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 19:43

R0wantrees the mail publish a lot which is written by people they don't employ directly. Often its Press Association stuff or someone just lifts it from another newspaper (they regularly plagiarise without reference to original source)

The mail has a lot of staff who are therefore not journalists but merely employed to copy text and not fact check themselves. It's the only way they can generate enough content at low cost.

I think it's worth noting how the Mail online works for this reason. In this case, I think how far they are behind the breaking of the story emphasises what's happened.

KatvonHostileExtremist · 13/06/2019 20:08

According to the bro's at Penis News LGBT people don't have rights any more because it's homophobic to complain about men wanking and pissing themselves at work, and it's transphobic to demand safeguarding.

www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/06/13/15-rights-lgbt-uk-still-dont-have-pride/

Potential Systemic Safeguarding failures in NSPCC / Childline illustrated by appointment & ending of relationship with Munroe Bergdorf Thread 2
R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 20:10

I think it's worth noting how the Mail online works for this reason. In this case, I think how far they are behind the breaking of the story emphasises what's happened.

YY absolutely

At the moment, the coverage seems to be bias puff interviews (BBC), Bias vitriol opinion pieces (Guardian Owen Jones) & blog pieces stitched together like this from MailOnline.

I am waiting for the actual investigative journalists to report! Smile

OP posts:
R0wantrees · 13/06/2019 20:11

& of course had missed the propaganda machine that is Pink News!

OP posts:
JackyHolyoake · 13/06/2019 20:14

& of course had missed the propaganda machine that is Pink News!

Perhaps we mean Paraphilia News Wink

GColdtimer · 13/06/2019 20:30

In answer to a question on the previous thread (I couldn't contribute as had to name change) the papers are all aware of this and have been since last Saturday, although not the toilet bit that is new. They have the lot.

For reasons unknown to the freelance journalist pitching this story, none of the papers will touch it. She does not understand why.

GColdtimer · 13/06/2019 20:35

It has been pitched to the Mail, the Mail on Sunday, the Telegraph, the Times and the Sun. The Sun has everything that was in the public domain on Saturday including a transcript of the video.

Make of that what you will.

MockerstheFeManist · 13/06/2019 20:35

Yehbutnbutyehbut...

You can't prove it's them, and you can't prove that really is the workplace lavs.

It's just like I was a teacher and I blogged about fucking the kids in my class when I actually didn't, or if I did then you still couldn't prove it. There would be nothing wrong with that.

(errrrrrrrrrrr.........)

ScrimshawTheSecond · 13/06/2019 20:46

NSPCC Social media guidelines are here: www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/volunteering/helping-spread-word-nspcc-social-media-guidelines.pdf

EmpressLesbianInChair · 13/06/2019 20:55

has been pitched to the Mail, the Mail on Sunday, the Telegraph, the Times and the Sun. The Sun has everything that was in the public domain on Saturday including a transcript of the video. Make of that what you will.

Has she tried Private Eye?

FreeFreesia · 13/06/2019 20:55

Don't know if has been covered in the current threads but NSPCC have fallen down this hole before. They invited Kelly Maloney to participate in a debate they were hosting regardless of their history of DV. Maloney had the sense to cancel.

Datun · 13/06/2019 20:57

You can't prove it's them, and you can't prove that really is the workplace lavs.

They could always ask him. They have nothing to lose.

RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 21:03

Don't know if has been covered in the current threads but NSPCC have fallen down this hole before. They invited Kelly Maloney to participate in a debate they were hosting regardless of their history of DV. Maloney had the sense to cancel.

facepalm

twitter.com/kelliefmaloney/status/786249351454683136

So they knew the issue about background checking on this subject. But didn't.

BRILLIANT.

HumberElla · 13/06/2019 21:04

Make of that what you will.

I honestly don’t know what to make of that. Are we seriously in an era when the press either cannot or will not report on sexual misconduct and safeguarding failures in the country’s biggest children’s charity?

RedToothBrush · 13/06/2019 21:08

And here's penis news on the Maloney Story.

www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/10/12/nspcc-invites-anti-trans-campaigner-to-debate-transgender-children/
NSPCC invites ‘anti-trans’ campaigner to debate transgender children

An NSPCC spokesperson told PinkNews: “The NSPCC regularly hosts events as part of the ‘Dare to Debate’ series, which have looked at the sexualisation of children, childhood obesity and online safety.

“The debate is not discussing trans as an identity, but asking what society should be doing for trans children and young people.

Online safety and an inability to use google. Great combination. Still not resolved.

Swipe left for the next trending thread