Expelled from Girlguiding for putting safeguarding first

[KatieAlcock]

Many of you will remember that Helen Watts and another Guider were expelled from Girlguiding last year. This was me - in Sept 2018 I had my membership of Guiding withdrawn for social media breaches (one FB post in a small private group) and refusing to follow Girlguiding policies on transgender members (saying I'd put safeguarding first, ahead of any policies).
I'm a longstanding Guider and Mumsnetter (naice ham, cancel the cheque, show us the diagram) but I'm anonymous for obvious reasons, generally. I'm coming out now to tell you this story.

I appealed and the former Chief Guide who held the appeal concluded that I had not breached social media guidelines (I should jolly well hope not given that 9 people saw my post!) but that I was still refusing to follow GG policy (I gave the same statement - safeguarding comes first).

My story is in the Mail on Sunday today (if this link doesn't work I'll put a clicky link in the next post).

Mail on Sunday link

I am taking GG to court on the grounds that they have discriminated against me because of my gender critical beliefs by investigating my actions when other Guiders who complain about things are not investigated.
I am asking them for a small amount in damages because though I have not lost any income, I have lost reputation and the investigation was stressful, as you can understand.
And I've asked to be reinstated, and for a full apology and statement that I did nothing wrong.

PS... I spent an hour with their professional photographer telling me "don't smile" and they go with the photo from camp with a big grin on my face, taken by my Guide??!

[Post edited by MNHQ]

& peer-on-peer sexual abuse is a huge issue - look at the stats on rapes & sexual assaults that take place at school, for example.

So yes, safeguarding does have to take into account that some children & young people may commit sexual offences against others.

So there's that and the horny teenagers having mutually consensual sexual experiences.

Safeguarding is important in relation to all kids, whether they identify as trans or not.

Thank you for doing this, I’ve pledged some money.

It shows a complete lack of understanding of what trans is.

The problem is not that the "trans-kids" might be predators.

The problem is the predators might self-ID as trans to facilitate their predation.

Now does "No Exceptions, No Debate" mean what it says?

@butters83
What is it then?
Does it change people's sex?
Or make all trans people unable to commit a crime?

It shows a complete lack of understanding of what trans is.

Can you say a bit more about what you mean, what do you think is being missed?

Is Butters just here to say stock phrases with no engagement in the patient responses?
I just ask so that more of you aren't goaded into repeatedly making clarifications in response to a person who is making unrelated and diversionary statements.

There’s a really insidious theme here that implies trans kids are sexual predators and that makes me uncomfortable.

Absolute ludicrous projection.

You are the one who wants to place gender questioning kids outside safeguarding frameworks. You are the one advocating that they don't deserve the protections other children do.

Under current guide rules, adult males who self ID as women will be allowed to share sleeping facilities with and do intimate care, not only for young girls but also young males who identify as transgender.

Under current guide rules, leaders cannot share information about identification with parents. What if the child discloses information related to that? Eg injuries from binding, attempts to purchase hormones illegally online?

You are advocating a dangerous environment for the children you think you're protecting. Get a fucking grip of yourself.

I live locally to you, and I'm behind you 100%. To get rid of people who insist on following safeguarding rules over other rules is ridiculous, nonsensical and disturbing. Good luck!

butters safeguarding is there to protect ALL childten, trans or otberwise. Single SEX safeguarding is different to mixed SEX, it has nothing to do with gender
A transboy in with other boys could become pregnant as a girl in with a Tg could become pregnant.

Teenagers get horny, teenagers experiment...

Trans kids deserve safeguarding too.

Couldn't agree more. Such a shame butters disagrees.

I'm going to get flamed for this. I just don't get the big deal. So what if they have a penis? As long as safeguarding is upheld. I wouldn't have any interest in knowing if the leader identified as female but was biologically male. I couldn't give two hoots! As long as my child was safe, having fun and cared for.

Under law in Uk there is no such child as a trans child so how are GGsaying there is . Are they no making the law in the Uk. ?

They are gender questioning children. No need for GG to treat them as if they are girls.
And for the GG to throw out safeguarding for this 🤦‍♀️

As someone who was sexually harassed by a guest male instructor while a GG in the 1970s, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Until that man showed up, Brownies, Guides and Guide Camps were my safe places away from creepy penis havers.

maidsamilking

Mixed sex sleeping accomodation is against safeguarding! If you are happy with that fine but i am not.

Maids, I'm not going to flame you, but I will ask - what do you think safeguarding is? You talk about it being upheld in your post, and then you dismiss any need for transparency or risk assessment, which are key parts of a culture of safeguarding.

Under what legislation are you bringing your discrimination claim?

(Just curious as I am a lawyer)

@maidsamilking well, a girl can't get another girl pregnant so there is that difference.
But also, Girlguiding is a single sex organisation by law, except it isn't.

Vanillelle Katie already has a legal team to sort that out. Im sure she appreciates your interest though.

I do the safeguarding paperwork for church and we had the very issue of transgender occur so took advice from our diocese who in turn got advice from higher up. We were told that unless the young person objects we should keep them with their sex not their desired gender but if possible and the young person requests it in a separate sleeping area - as it happens they wanted to share with female friends and as their birth sex says female we felt this was fine. Why can't gguk just take each situation on a case by case basis, it isn't a one size fits all - the handful of little kids that transition (it it's very rare) are different to a 14 year old.

I'm going to get flamed for this. I just don't get the big deal. So what if they have a penis? As long as safeguarding is upheld. I wouldn't have any interest in knowing if the leader identified as female but was biologically male. I couldn't give two hoots!

Good for you. Unfortunately lots of girls have been abused by men and boys and don't have the luxury of feeling quite so comfortable.

Vanillelle Katie already has a legal team to sort that out. Im sure she appreciates your interest though.

I wasn't intending to offer advice! Nothing annoys me more than armchair lawyers on mumsnet pretending they know enough to advise. I'm just interested.

I think it's in the article or my other page - it's on the grounds of a protected characteristic i.e. belief or religion.

Why can't gguk just take each situation on a case by case basis
For children sharing accommodation this would be great as long as:
A) we are allowed to tell people
B) parents make the decision not girls
C) we are also allowed to know who's on site not just who's in which room.

I wouldn't be comfortable with any inappropriate sexualised behaviour from either male or female members of a group.
It isn't only males that abuse.