Stonewall partnered Girl Guide activity on non binary identity - am I wrong to feel uneasy?

[LadyBunty]

Hello FWR. I am a Guide leader. Under a recently overhauled regime, we are required to follow a programme of prescribed activities that will allow our girls to gain badges.

We were given our latest pack of activities last week, and this includes an activity titled Binary Breakdown partnered by Stonewall . (I will type it all out below for ease of reference). My feeling when reading it is that it is all kinds of wrong, but I have to admit, I am feeling pretty jaded about Stonewall's influence in everything, and GGUK's conduct over the past few years. So perhaps I am being unfair, and I wondered what some of you might think? Parent, non binary, safeguarding etc based opinions all welcome, thank you.

BINARY BREAKDOWN

AIM OF ACTIVITY

What do the colour pink, heavy metal music, baking and engineering have in common? A person who likes them all! Become empowered to challenge anyone who tells you otherwise.

WHAT YOU'LL GET OUT OF IT

Challenge gender stereotypes; reflect on what makes you who you are.

NOTE TO LEADER

This activity involves talking about personal opinions on gender. remind Guides to be respectful of each other and speak up if there's a topic they don't feel comfortable discussing. If your Guides have any questions, you can find lots of information to support them in our Let's Talk resource, or take a look online at our partner on this activity, Stonewall.

BEFORE YOU START

Draw an outline of a person on two large sheets of paper. Label one boy and the other girl.

WHAT TO DO

1. Get into 2 teams and sit on one side of your space. One team will be team boy, the other team girl. Your leader will put down a sheet of paper on the opposite side of the space for each team and give you some sticky notes and pens.

2. When your leader says "Go!", write or draw things that represent that gender on the sticky notes. You could include sports, school subjects, emotions, music, clothes, colours or toys, for example. Once you've written one, move as quickly as you can and stick it on your person. Which person will cover their person first? You've got three minutes!

3. Times's up! Take turns reading your ideas. Assuming someone has certain characteristics just because of their gender is known as gender stereotyping . Can you think of any examples of gender stereotypes?

4. How much of a person gets missed when they're confined to a gender stereotype? In your teams, pick out any of the sticky notes which you personally relate to.

Team girl - are there things about you that these stereotypes don't capture?

Team boy - do you relate to anything that people stereotypically associate with a different gender?

Gender stereotypes are binary: this means they make us think that people only identify as male or female, and you have to look, act and dress in certain ways. But we shouldn't have to! Some people don't identify as either male or female. People who identify as non-binary might feel like they're somewhere in between or they're neither.

In a world structured around binary definitions, what do you think could be difficult for people who identify as non-binary?

5. Now get into smaller groups and look through magazines and catalogues. Are there any non gendered options? Circle them. How do you think someone who identifies as non-binary might feel choosing their clothes, toys or even toothbrushes if most things are gendered?

6. It's time to break the mould! Choose one thing that you all believe shouldn't be gendered and make your voice heard. You could write a letter to the manufacturer, make a blog or start a hashtag campaign to spread your voice far and wide.

OK, so in no particular order, this has made me feel uneasy because:

1. STONEWALL. I feel that they are a political lobbying group with a very strong anti women, anti "cis" (sorry to use that word) agenda. As such, they should not be partnering with GGUK, unless other political groups get their chance as well. (For the record, GGUK does partner with other entities, e.g., Royal Air Force, but in that case, they will focus on something like women in engineering, so politically neutral).

1. CONFLATION OF SEX AND GENDER: talking about gender, but failing to set out the difference between biological sex as a binary, and gender that is a spectrum. You can identify as anything you like, but your biological sex remains the same. I feel like this exercise is taking advantage of the euphemistic/polite use of "gender" - when what you mean is sex - in order to muddy the waters. It also assumes "non-binary" is some sort of official categorisation of human beings, requiring a human rights intervention; rather than an expression of personality and personal interests that liberal, Western society is already happy to embrace. (Please correct me if I'm wrong on that, but not being " super feminine" or "super masculine" would seem to apply to the vast majority of humans, surely we are nearly all somewhere in between?)

1. EXPERTISE AND PARENTAL BOUNDARIES: So what happens if the discussion spills into sexual relations and sexuality, periods, child-bearing? I am not trained to give quasi sex ed, nor have my parents given me consent to do so.

1. PLANTING SEEDS OF DOUBT ABOUT WHAT SOCIETY THINKS OF YOU AND VICTIM MENTALITY: I have an ethnically diverse group of Guides who do all sorts of other activities and sports and have varied interests. None has ever expressed any doubt that they can't do anything or are not good at certain subjects because they are girls. I just find the activity backwards and divisive. It doesn't feel empowering, it feels like victimhood. If your gender (which really, is just your personality, surely) says you love dresses and flower arranging, does that make you "wrong" because you are a "stereotype"? Conversely, if you like playing rugby and prefer short hair, why does that make you less of a girl? Does being the former preclude you from taking science subjects, and the latter make you unsuitable for home economics? Isn't this activity planting the seed that you don't belong, you are not one thing or another, and then tries to prove this by trawling through advertising material to prove society is against you? Surely the positive message to the supposedly gender non conforming is that, "lucky you" you are not confined, you can have both the Barbie themed toothbrush and the Saracens face flannel, and feel perfectly happy about having it all. And look, there are a gazillion products and activities that are not confined to "gender stereotypes", so don't feel down! I mean, fgs, it's not that hard to find "neutral" stuff in the Western world, is it?

1. DEPT EDUCATION GUIDANCE: I've only just become aware of this latest development. Surely this activity falls within the category of suggestion that your gender might change depending on your interests? Am I reading too much into this? I don't think the activity really holds together: It starts off with the suggestion that what you like doing is not confined to whether you are male or female; and then goes on to suggest that liking stuff from both sides is how non binary people feel - so surely that's suggesting to Guides that they too might be non-binary?

1. HANDMAIDENING OF GIRLS: To pursue a political agenda spearheaded by Stonewall. This is not about empowering girls, it is about making them responsible for the feelings of people who don't feel like girls.

Sorry for the very long post, and my lack of erudition. Like I said at the beginning, this just does not sit right with me, and I'd really like to know if you think I am overthinking it or being prejudiced because it involves Stonewall?

Thank you for reading!

I agree with others. Started off fine, then ended up reinforcing the notion that if you don't fit the stereotype, you could identify as non-binary. That's crap. You can "identify" as a woman who likes engineering without having to put yourself in another category.

Imagine how offensive this would be if it were based on racial stereotypes.

I cant see how any child could undertake the task and not conclude they are non binary?

Urgh! You are definitely not being unreasonable.

The very fact that it asks girls to stereotype at the start is all shades of wrong. You are effectively making them do something and then pulling out your trump card as if to say “ah ha! You’re wrong! And let me tell you all the ways that you are wrong!”

That in itself is damaging, unhealthy and completely unnecessary.

I am all for a discussion on stereotypes which exist, but telling the girls to perpetuate those stereotypes only to prove a point is wrong.

As for the very clear message that if you don’t fit those stereotypes (which you’ve just said shouldn’t exist), then you are non-binary - neither girl nor boy - is utterly ridiculous.

Either the stereotypes are rubbish in which case you are all girls and you can like whatever you like and be whoever you want to be and it doesn’t make you any less a girl. OR... the stereotypes are genuine markers of male and female and if you don’t fit them then you are non-binary. You can’t have it both ways - it literally doesn’t make sense.

I will say that I grew up through Brownies, Guides and then as a young leader in Brownies. All three of my DDs were Brownies and my eldest was also a Guide for 2 years. We have recently moved to a new area where GB is much bigger than girl guiding and there aren’t suitable groups on at a time we can make. I’m not sad. I mean, I’m sad that my DDs can’t be a part of guiding as it used to be, as it was designed to be, but I’m not sad that they aren’t a part of guiding as it is now. It is so sad how such an incredible organisation has been hijacked, but I’m glad to not be a part of it anymore.

Yes if we were telling white children that liking rap or whatever means they were born in the wrong body and they're actually black because of their preferences, there would be outrage and of course no one would fall for it. But it's no different??

That’s truly dreadful, for all the reasons outlined. I do fear that as these organisations are pushed out of schools with their dodgy ideology and training materials, that they will push to harder and harder to infiltrate other places where young people gather (e.g. GG).

I think they've taken an activity that they've had for years - the drawing and the labelling - and then added on the non-binary part.
The start of the activity did work well with DCs because Guides are well aware of stereotypes and of how they challenge them.
Prior to Stonewalling it, the activity reaffirmed that girls could do whatever they wanted- no activity, no look, was off-limits. Now they've tagged on the non-binary shit and blew apart all the positives that their entire organisation was built on.

@MillieEpple

I cant see how any child could undertake the task and not conclude they are non binary?

Clever isn't it?

"I cant see how any child could undertake the task and not conclude they are non binary?"

And if we're all non binary, then surely the word looses it's meaning as a way to differentiate? You might as well just stick to "we're all human", as that what it ends up conflating to.

Why ar3 they asking girls to imagine what a non binary person feels like

That should be obvious; because they are girls and are therefore responsible for being kind to these special ‘non binary’ and ensuring that their feelings are priorities above those of girls.

There is absolutely zero need for any of thos crap. If a girl has a blue toothbrush then suddenly her identity changes ffs.

No. You are the same individual female with your own tastes and personality. Free yourself of the ridiculous stereotypes but you can't escape your sex.

Why are they asking girls to imagine what a non binary person feels like

Also because more young girls will then start to 'identify' as non binary because they don't fit the pink glittery stereotype.
No longer allowed to push the short hair, hoody, no make up means you must be a boy narrative, they have simply twisted the narrative.

Feels like they are gaslighting the girls

Awful indoctrination and I'd be furious if I was a parent of a GG. Any journalists out there?

This is queer theory in action isn't it? Throw out the reality of both sex and individual personality, and build everything around "identity". That's why the regressive stereotypes get to stay - they're part of the "identity" of girl/boy.

IMO Stonewall have completely lost their way and they need to go away, out of schools, out of politics, out of youth organisations and clubs. In fact if they just went away all together that would be good.

@Aesopfable

Why ar3 they asking girls to imagine what a non binary person feels like

That should be obvious; because they are girls and are therefore responsible for being kind to these special ‘non binary’ and ensuring that their feelings are priorities above those of girls.

Well, yes, that's one half. The other half is to facilitate the awakening of a whole new generation of Non binary people for Stonewall to 'campaign' for their rights and justify it's existence.

It's not just reinforcing the stereotypes it's supposed to be exposing, it's designed to indoctrinate and recruit new members.

How do you think someone who identifies as non-binary might feel choosing their clothes, toys or even toothbrushes if most things are gendered?

I know this is beside the point but are toothbrushes really gendered? Seriously? I have been using toothbrushes for many years and somehow failed to notice this and now I'm wondering if my toothbrush is a boy toothbrush or a girl toothbrush (where do I look to check?.)

But even if toothbrushes ARE gendered I am somehow experiencing a total empathy failure at the plight of the poor put-upon nonbinary person who can't find a non-gendered toothbrush. Like just use a pink one and get on with the rest of your day. FFS.

@flowery

So they’re saying that if one doesn’t conform to gender stereotypes this is fine but it means you’re non binary? Rather than just a girl or boy who doesn’t conform to stereotypes.

This exactly. Fucking ridiculous.

I read the description of the activity you typed up. Getting them to think how we/society (wrongly) associate some things with girls & others with boys is good.

From there on the activity reinforces sexist stereotypes. It gives the impression that to reject this means to be non binary. The more liberatory message for girls to hear would be: if you are female you are free to like any of these things. Some boys like stuff associated with girls and vice versa. The message is really damaging to girls imo.

Gender stereotypes are bad for everyone. They are not only bad for peoplewho think they are nb.

There are organisations which work on gender stereotyping in schools, toys, clothes, books. It would be better if gg partnered with one of those.

Kantastic. Many toothbrushes for chiden are gendered. Same for tooth paste. Not all but many.

OK I suppose we are talking about children, in context.

But children shouldn't be encouraged to be fragile and precious like this! Or to identify as nonbinary, obviously. "Just use a pink one and get on with the rest of your day" still applies.

This activity would seem to be in direct contradiction to the new DfE guidelines:

Materials which suggest that non-conformity to gender stereotypes should be seen as synonymous with having a different gender identity should not be used and you should not work with external agencies or organisations that produce such material.

Wow thats truly shocking.

That's absolutely opposite to what I associated with guides. Its explicitly saying if you dont identify with a female stereotype you are non binary.

That would be me and a ton of more feminist and or autistic friends.

My duaghter is autistic, highly intelligent and questions performing femininity. Im proud of her. It doesnt make her jon binary ffs.

We should all be questioning geneder stereotypes not further entrenchinb them.

At guides?!?!!? I used to send my daughters to do camping and active stuff away from boys in a way they can challenge what it means to be "girl". Noway are mine going back.

We're on a scouts waiting list.

This stuff is so scary.

Just to add - if you did the activity but didn't make it about nb identities, or only mentioned that as a much smaller part of the bigger picture - everyone shld be free to like all these things without pressure - it would be a good activity. It's typical of how the Pro gender people get it nearly right but so wrong.

You'll end up with a group of girls all suddenly identifying as non binary and crusading for Stonewall. No no no. If my daughter came home proclaiming she was non binary and was off to write letters for Stonewall after such an activity I'd be raising merry hell.

The message should be that you can like anything you like. You can like cars and dinosaurs and video games, the kind of activities people think are "boy" things, and it doesn't mean you're doing "girl" wrong.

And it doesn't mean that you then need to start exploring your gender identity because you aren't 100% into glitter and barbies. What a load of crap. Capturing girls and turning them into Stonewall handmaidens It's that bloody jelly baby slide all over again.

Get to the end of point 3, then talk about how the post its can apply to everyone, girls and boys, the main point being that we are all individuals with different likes and dislikes and that is fine. Balls to the rest.