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!

@Alexandernevermind

This is where Guides goes wrong, they aren't supposed to be a preachy extension of school. We wrongly assumed that Guides nowadays was on the same level in terms of activities as Scouts. It's nothing like. No wonder our local Scouts group is oversubscribed for boys and girls (with excellent safeguarding in place) whilst the Guides in comparison limps along.

My daughters left brownies in favour of cubs. They were fed up with crafts and cake decorating and wanted to do fun activities like bonfires, climbing, dismantling and building stuff, bike rides, night time hikes, etc. This sort of activity (minus the gender-bollocks bit which hadn’t reached their pack) is exactly what turned them away from guiding.

Dd1 has just started guides. I will be withdrawing her from
This activity

@Whatsnewpussyhat

Imagine all the money being pumped into these lobby groups instead being spent on improving mental health services for children. The wait times are ridiculous for things like cahms.

It really is astonishing. It is hard not to have contempt for the state agencies and the government who are bankrolling this pernicious BS. As whatis says, what kind of useless, fatuous exercise asks children to regurgitate stereotypes then tell them if they don't neatly fit into 1950, they are 'non binary'? Why should anyone pay to continue this farce? Why is the government not pulling the plug?

If you can convince little girls that liking things that are stereotypical ‘boys’ things, makes you non binary, or that boys that like stereotypical ‘girls’ things makes them non binary that means you shouldn’t need a female only space, as there is such a cross over.

They know they can’t get away with telling easily manipulated children that not acting or feeling like their stereotypical ‘gender’ makes them the other sex, so they’ve decided to use none binary as a way to break down their boundaries. It’s a sly and insidious way of manipulating the comments made by PM. Same old Mermaid, twisting the language, in their determination to destroy female spaces, rights and dignity.

@YoBeaches

Yes this is totally reinforcing stereotypes and is now against DofE guidelines

Pull it. Ask stonewall when they might have any updated material to reflect last weeks update....

This is why the new government advice is so effective.

You can't, you absolutely cannot describe non binary, or transgender, without resorting to stereotypes. It's impossible.

And you certainly can't do it by describing all the stereotypes and then invent a gender identity for people who don't have them. Because that's almost everybody.

So first of all it was about gender dysphoria, and how crippling it is. And now it's about a guide badge determined to send girls back to the 1950s.

What on earth is the point of this organisation? Floundering around trying to find a reason for its own existence.

Personally, I'm so glad the scrutiny spotlight is on and blinding.

I can't wait to see what other creative nonsense they come up with to describe gender, transgender, non-binary gender, without actually mentioning what gender is.

Huge thank you for all the replies!

It is all a pile of steaming horseshit, isn't it, as well as quite sinister. Thank you for confirming that I am not over-reacting.

I had discussed with my fellow leader that we could teach it our own way and leave out the non-binary bollocks. However, in terms of our obligations, we have to spend 60% of our time covering the badge regime, and to prove that, once we teach an activity, we have to log it on the central GGUK system. This activity is called a Unit Meeting Activity, and we have to do 5 hours of these for the girls to get their "Theme Award" badge in this particular area (that's on top of hours of other activities to get the theme award). This is easier said than done, especially at the moment (many units are meeting via Zoom and struggling to adapt what should be face to face activities to an online format). This particular activity is 45 precious minutes. I don't want to teach it my way, and then log it as being completed, because I can't state anywhere that I have completely ignored the non binary message; all the system will show is that my guides have completed it, and I don't want Stonewall having the satisfaction of thinking that they have sneaked in some Queer Theory teaching, or for GGUK to think they have come up with a fabulous activity that this particular leader is actually willing to teach.

So, I will write to GGUK and ask them to withdraw this and any other Stonewall backed policy or activity, following the DofE guidance. The guidance supercedes the production of this activity, so they should be able to withdraw it gracefully without feeling attacked (or expelling me).

Many, many thanks again to everyone who has posted. I have learned so much from reading this board over the last few years, thank goodness this sane corner of the internet exists.

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!
This creates a forced binary decision with competitive element to finish quickly rather than think deeply.
Instructions assume there will be different representations for different genders.
The whole exercise is based on a faulty premise because it says the bodies are male and female gender. Assuming one believes in the concept of gender, it’s not clear what the sex of the body is supposed to be. Are these both female bodies? Is one a trans boy?

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?
Translates to: ‘Times up and you are all bigots! Because you did the exercise following the instructions I gave to you. And now I can show you how wrong you are.’

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.
Translates to: ‘If you like ‘boy’ stuff as well as ‘girl’ stuff that makes you non-binary.’ This is arrant nonsense - it just means they are a normal girl.
But is grooming in queer theory and looks like a recruitment drive for NBs.

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?
Translates to: So if you prefer green toothbrushes you are definitely non-binary. If you like blue ones you are a trans boy. And if you like the pink ones, you are a girl which means you can’t like science or be an engineer.

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.
Translates to ‘Campaign for something for other people, not girls. Girls issues are boring, in fact girls don’t have any issues at all. But life is hard for gender non-confirming people who are the really interesting and speshul ones. Put all your energy into speaking up for them. That’s what girls do, help others, not themselves. Remember, girls don’t have any needs at all.’

@LadyBunty please speak up, your instincts are spot on. This is grooming in queer theory and queer politics. Totally inappropriate for kids.

so surely that's suggesting to Guides that they too might be non-binary?

Yes part of this is that they are drumming up trade. After all, the more people they can squeeze under their umbrella, the more they can extend the rails of their gravy train.

It was all going fine until it got to the word 'binary'.

And, of course, if an adult is non-binary, it means they can use the facilities of which ever sex they like, depending upon how they feel that day.

They'll be stuffed for new leaders when this generation grows up, they don't let non binary female adults be Guide leaders.

"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."

This isn't what's bad about gender stereotyping. It's bad because it restricts girls & boys by imposing unnecessary expectations based on sex.

This thing just illustrates how the theories being used here - that one's gender is a matter of self perception - is incompatible with the goal of freeing girls from patriarchal gender. It just embeds it more.

This thing just illustrates how the theories being used here - that one's gender is a matter of self perception - is incompatible with the goal of freeing girls from patriarchal gender. It just embeds it more.

Exactly.

They are playing with it. It's all about pink and blue. Not who's running the board meeting and who's making the tea

as with many of the 'teaching materials' that Stonewall type organisations create - this is muddled and doesn't seem it has been produced by someone with any background in education and is unlikely to produce any good results.

It would be interesting to get feedback from an actual teacher on this exercise because its overall message just seems to be that if you don't fit some pretty rigid gender stereotypes (generated by asking the kids to come up with a set of gender stereotypes), you may be non-binary and that could have consequences in your life.

And with the greatest respect to OP, I'm not sure that something like this (even if it did look remotely educational) should be delivered without any training in classroom education (I'm assuming OP).

As you point out, could lead to further discussions which would be inappropriate and out of the scope of parental consent but it could send a wrong message to a girl who brings up a topic if she has to be told that it can't be discussed.

Well done you for not accepting this as it is presented to you and recognising that it may not help your girl guides forward in their lives. I think children learn much better by 'doing' - so instead of a classroom style exercise, the guide group should be focusing on finding some really good empowering or physical activities.

@MoltenLasagne

So this activity encourages girls to enforce gender stereotypes and then says if they don't like them they can be non binary?

So directly contradicting DfE advice on not suggesting that your gender can change if you don't fit into 1950s stereotypes.

That's how I read it too.

It's shit, but I have a bigger problem with the way GG badges have been twisted into a bunch of weird SJ topics with very little real content. At least here in Canada.

Gone are badges where girls learn real skills and competencies from carpentry to cooking to birdwatching, with real projects or knowledge they are meant to acquire. Instead it's all this vague self development BS.

So those who accept biological sex is binary therefore also accept the gendered stereotypes, because if they didn't, they'd be asserting a non-binary identity? (And if you accept your sex, you also accept the gendered stereotypes of that sex?)

Bloody hell.

This activity makes me feel physically sick. As a teen who had a crew cut, lived in jeans & loved science/wanted to be an engineer but had fairly low self esteem (my brothers could do no wrong but I was never good enough), this activity would certainly have put me on the trans conveyor belt. Girl guides are a broken organisation & I’m glad my daughter now does scouts where kids are allowed to be themselves

@Goosefoot

It's shit, but I have a bigger problem with the way GG badges have been twisted into a bunch of weird SJ topics with very little real content. At least here in Canada.

Gone are badges where girls learn real skills and competencies from carpentry to cooking to birdwatching, with real projects or knowledge they are meant to acquire. Instead it's all this vague self development BS.

You're not the only one, Goosefoot . A lot of UK leaders find the new programme appalling. I joined as a leader shortly before they rolled out the new programme. It's not at all what I was expecting. By far, the best activities we have done have been done under special interest badges, produced by individual units as a fundraiser. They are more often than not produced by old school leaders, and include a mix of practical skills, physical activities and plenty of fun. It's a shame that 60% of what we do has to be the official GGUK programme, even though a lot of it is boring, preachy, confusing, repetitive, naval gazing and far too much like school work.

gardenbird48

And with the greatest respect to OP, I'm not sure that something like this (even if it did look remotely educational) should be delivered without any training in classroom education (I'm assuming OP).

I absolutely agree with you on this. This stuff is verging on PSHE/sex ed, and way beyond my expertise.

This exercise establishes they are human beings (who are sexed female) and not that they are non-binary, or am I missing something? If it means they are non-binary - then it strikes me Stonewall are accepting there is a binary and coming up with another binary (binary vs non-binary). So it's illogical!

I hope you get somewhere with flagging this up with HQ OP.
It's not mandatory to do all the activities on offer, but I agree that this one is problematic but at least we have some leverage to challenge it with now.
I think I skim read this one and asked for it not to be done for our unit as I thought it was way beyond the scope and ability of Leaders, potentially opened up discussions as a parent, I don't want my child having in that setting - it's not what Guides is about in my opinion.

Like many of the previous posters I thought the removal of stereotyping bit was ok, but then the leap to the non binary suggestions is too much. Although I am only guessing, I thought one of the whole reasons the girl guides was established to give girls the ability to participate in activities that were originally/traditionally considered to only be suitable for the Boy Scouts? Not to say, oh if you do like those 'traditionally male' pursuits you might be non binary or gender fluid?!?! WTAF?!?

My DD attends girl guides and I would be very unhappy if this activity was used at our group.

Not read the whole thread.

What about stereotype threat? Is it healthy to get girls to explicitly say this is for girls and this is for boys, even with the idea that after they're told that it's a load of rubbish? (Although this activity doesn't say it's rubbish. It's says the stereotypes are fine and if you don't fit in the box you're non binary).

Also how does this fit with GG statement that they are for children who identify as girls? And female children with other IDs should go to a different org?

Given that no-one in the whole world conforms to all stereotypes, all the time, then all the children will understand that they are non binary. And then they have to leave! They've not thought this through have they...

'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!'

Music? Music is gendered?

Holy fuck. Do they mean like Barry manilow for the laydeees and cradle of filth for the chap's??!!

I would totally have put the 'wrong' things on the boy/girl just to fuck with them when I was GG age.

Because it's fucking stupid.