NSPCC Again

[SunsetBeetch]

"Head of ‘child safety’ at the NSPCC. More parts of a terrible jigsaw now falling into place. Can you see what it is yet? t.co/nJKd5nYt1B "

"Bizarre and concerning response of NSPCC to those worried about the antics of one of its employees maybe not so much a mystery now t.co/N0KNloLCxl "

What on earth did I say to get deleted no email either. Sigh.

Is there any point in submitting an FOI request about how they came up with the Speak Out Stay Safe guidance on sexual abuse? Does anyone have a link to a previous version of the guidance so that a change in wording can be clearly demonstrated?

NSPCC aren't subject to FOI but they are included on whatdotheyknow because of their statutory powers. I guess they could refuse to answer or dissemble but their refusal would at least be public. www.whatdotheyknow.com/new/nspcc

I also note that the Speak Out Stay Safe programme is being evaluated for the NSPCC by several different universities, which are subject to FOI. Is there any chance that an FOI request about the evaluation criteria could tell us anything useful?

The parallels with the NCCL and the PIE just keep on coming. There, there was a legitimate concern for the rights of gay young men who could not have sexual relations below the age of 21, could be prosecuted for not locking the door or smiling at a police officer etc.

A similar concern for young people today with a confusion about their sexual identity is again being exploited.

When this story finally breaks, it is going to be huge.

In her recent Twitter post a former volunteer of Mermaids worker (at the centre of Flora Gate and whose case against Miranda Yardley was thrown out of court by a judge) claims we only want to report the NSPCC because it supports trans kids - oh and that we are all derranged...🤔

Not apropos of anything you said BigCoat, it does seem like participating in the trans movement is an easy way for spectacularly dim people to lap up social attention and approval on a large scale.

I'm by no means thinking of just one person here, and it holds true for both male and female trans activists, including several dedicated stalkers of these boards. You don't have to be clever or interesting or skilled to get social status in those circles, just sufficiently committed, and sufficiently vicious towards your enemies.

And the people competing for status in those circles are exactly how you'd predict them to be, from a comparative advantage perspective.

Apparently we are obsessing over the employee because he spoke out against the LGB Alliance.

It’s the queer theory idea of getting between children and parents, that parents are not generally the people best placed to safeguard their children. That somehow institutions will do a better job. It’s dangerous bullshit

This is truly frightening. It seems to be another step towards totalitarianism, on top of the outlawing of women’s speech and compelled speech.

One of the most horrific things about neoliberalism, is that it constitutes a peculiar mix of individualism, e.g replacing structural, class based analysis with individual identification AND top down totalitariancontrol. It is using the languageof ‘freedom’to push’ top down totalitarian control.

We truly are living in dangerous times.

Women on here are not obsessing over the employee because he spoke out against the LGB Alliance. We protest because we understand the importance of protecting children from adults who push parental alienation, who have no boundaries about porn and children and who are redefining the definition of sexual abuse to place the responsibility on the child to object rather than it clearly being an adult responsibility.

*Ifnot" said that her teen knows not to expect privacy on the Internet because it isn't private for anyone. It's the most basic starting point for safeguarding kids online. Kids should expect privacy in various areas of their real life but privacy online is an unrealistic expectation that should not be encouraged.

I would expect The NSPCC to produce a TON of evidence to the contrary before teaching kids otherwise.

I was blissfully unaware the NSPCC employee in question had expressed an opinion on the much needed same sex attracted support group LGB Alliance.

I do, however, have a professional responsibility to report safe guarding concerns so as with the previous NSPCC employee who has been sacked for his inappropriate behaviour I have passed on my concerns to my MP, who was very helpful, and alarmed, last time.

Children's safety and well being is much more important than the whining of non-entities on Twitter.

Thank you Materiality
I was deleted, hopefully not for saying that!

Why do these TRAs keep stating safeguarding concerns or concerns about sexualisation of children is anti-trans? 🤔

I can't say what goes through the minds of trans privilege activists but my experience is that the only people who get huffy when others raise safe guarding concerns are those who have a vested interest in undermining safe guarding. Such people should always be treated with suspicion.

And here is the response that addresses all the red flags and puts our minds at resr:

'The Supporter Care team has contacted appropriate team who manage queries of this nature. We have been advised that the NSPCC has a social media policy which sets out the clear expectations we have of our people in how they conduct themselves online; both in a professional and personal capacity. This policy has been applied in this circumstance. Equally, as I’m sure you will appreciate, we are opposed to online bullying and discriminatory behaviour in respect of our people, employees and volunteers.

As the discussions on social media were associated with transgender issues, I’d also like to share that our policy statement emphasises that we are committed to be there for all children, protecting and supporting all children regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. We are committed to ensuring that trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming children feel safe and supported. We are proud to be an organisation that is allied to the LGBTQ+ community.'

Well that's reassuring

Time to call for an investigation?

Even without all the trans stuff I would feel seriously creeped out working with a senior manager who posts about pregnant horny women. Do they not want women to work there?

Misogyny appears to be very prevalent in the NSPCC given what we're discovering about some of the men who work there.

Ohholy I'll re-read the thread to see of this can be escalated (Charities Commission? Ministerial).

Not good enough, NSPCC. Not good enough. This was about inappropriate comments around children/safeguarding and nothing to do with (to quote NSPCC) "transgender issues". Why did they add a phrase that's irrelevant to my concerns over wholly inappropriate comments by a senior employee who works for a children's charity and in online safety?

Very telling that the NSPCC felt it just had to add that last paragraph. Passive agressive tactics may work to silence organisations and stores that want woke points and are scared of the very mention of a phrase like "transgender issues", but such a decoy from the main issues regarding child safeguarding and protection, concerning ALL children (regardless of sex, sexuality, race, disability, religion or gender identity to name just a few 'categories' if NSPCC is categorising) does not wash with concerned parents.

So a response to concerns raised about children’s safeguarding, that centres protecting their own staff from people who raise concerns and calls those concerned members of the public ‘bullies’?

Shut up. Be quiet. Nobody questions us or we close ranks.

The sheer arrogance that this charity is beyond reproach makes me even more determined to pursue this, both with regulatory bodies and with safeguarding leads in schools.

Didn't they learn from the last time they did this?

So once again people raising legitimate concerns about the inappropriate behaviour of NSPCC staff are 'bullies'.

How convenient to cast aspersions on the whistle blowers rather than review the policies that allow a culture of inappropriate behaviour amongst NSPCC staff.

Yes it just shows how meaningless policies about whistle blowing actually are in practice. Highlighting inappropriate behaviour results in being labelled bullies and in years to come when the tide turns, they will wring their hands and say lessons will be learnt.
They are silencing groomed kids with their current definition of sexual abuse and attempting to silence the adults who speak out too. This is not how a national charity with statutory powers should behave.

we are opposed to online bullying and discriminatory behaviour in respect of our people, employees and volunteers

This was their first response to rubbish-fetish-being-filmed-in-nspcc-toilets-and-posted-online. Rather that think first ‘how on earth has this culture developed’ the culture is so ingrained that their first thought is to protect staff being questioned on hugely inappropriate behaviour.