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!

NiceGerbil what happens then. "Girls you have said you like action, leadership, science, blue, short hair and football. That is wrong. Girls don't like those things"

Stonewall in my org recently.

The questionnaire was about how much do you know about LGBTQ+people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ people of colour and etc.

The boss also recently said in the news that they were looking to do more around intersex.

So essentially they're looking to hook into loads of other stuff to keep that gravy train rolling.

Bastards.

I'm not non binary. I'm a heterosexual woman who never stopped being a "tomboy". Don't put me in any fucking category unless you are talking about sex differences.
Why is that so hard to understand for Stonewall?

Who could have imagined a time when saying 'Girls can be, wear, do anything they like, same as boys can' would be considered a regressive statement, and be replaced with 'girls are like this, boys are like that, and if you don't fit those stereotypes, you are neither a boy or girl!'?

I can't help a feeling that I (and others my age) would have immediately set out to subvert this nonsense if it had ever been given to us to do.

Things like claiming that liking the music of Beethoven was gendered female, yellow was male, fish were female, tapestry wall-hangings were male, string was female, fur hats were male... such fun producing support for these assertions.

I do wish that we'd been offered it to play with, because it would have been a complete gas.

Snap, NiceGerbil!

My daughter is a rainbow just now. I will not be putting her into Brownies or Guides if they're pushing this nonsense. I will be writing to say so, too.

Even if the messaging of it wasn't fundamentally wrong, it's very poor quality, amateurish training in terms of badly thought through activities, incoherent messaging, no pathway of what is supposed to be understood and achieved by it - it's more like a couple of activities written by people who have seen other people do it.

The DfE guidance reminds of the legal duty for due diligence.

What are the qualifications of the writers, what educational training have they got to be designing these packs?
If they represent only a political lobby group, why is this information being shared with children in the first place, and should it be sourced from a political lobby group? Is it a balanced perspective or a partisan one? Is this group's messaging compatible with law/safeguarding/policy? (And has that been independently checked?)

And yes, bloody obviously, what is the point of enforcing girls to stereotype to boys and girls, and then tell them you can do things outside of the girl stereotypes but this makes you either a boy or N/B.

Fuck that. You're a girl, who can do anything at all, like anything at all, stereotypes are other people's problem. And I keep thinking longingly of my childhood guide troop where we hiked all over the place, camped, played a lot of rough sports, built fires and a lot of other things, and were completely free of either males or adults wanting to make use of us and take up our time with their personal agendas.

NiceGerbil

Also how does this fit with GG statement that they are for children who identify as girls?

That would be male bodied children who identify as trans, since girls don’t identify as girls, they ARE girls. It would also include male bodied adults who identify as trans, who want to be leaders. So your daughter will not be guaranteed a female only group.

And female children with other IDs should go to a different org?

They’ve already said that female bodied children who identify as trans, should be encouraged to leave.

I would have had great fun with the stereotypes, since I was racing my brothers on motorcycles, driving tractors and climbing trees, amongst other things, as a child.

Most of the rainbows activities so far have consisted of being kind and eating sweets, tbh.

I wonder if the scouts are doing a binary identity badge or is it just the GG?

Rather than withdraw your girls, do write in with your concerns. It's harder to persuade there's is a problem if people don't voice their concerns.
Guides should be a great place for girls.

@FloralBunting

Who could have imagined a time when saying 'Girls can be, wear, do anything they like, same as boys can' would be considered a regressive statement, and be replaced with 'girls are like this, boys are like that, and if you don't fit those stereotypes, you are neither a boy or girl!'?

It's fucking madness isn't it, but one that needs to keep going cos Stonewall need the funding.

Scouts have an LGBT+ awareness badge
scoutadelic.com/new_site/shop/lgbt-awareness-badge/
annnd yes of course they have trans washed Marsha P Johnson. FFS!

in Marshas own words

from someone who was there twitter.com/FredSargeant/status/1272952368607506433?s=20

It started so well, until the non-binary came up as the shiny way to identify out of stereotypes.

What's wrong with:

1. Let's explore gender stereotypes
2. Good news, they're just stereotypes and thankfully there's so much more to being a girl or boy than silly stereotypes
3. Let's celebrate all the great things girls can do when we stop thinking that girls have to fit a certain mould.

Guides have backtracked a while ago about managing out girls who identify as boys. However, my understanding is that Leaders who identify as male are demoted and cannot lead a unit but can still be involved.

Arabella that's a positive approach I could really get behind. Particularly the sweets bit.

@Beamur

Guides have backtracked a while ago about managing out girls who identify as boys. However, my understanding is that Leaders who identify as male are demoted and cannot lead a unit but can still be involved.

And what about male bodied people who identify as trans? Are they permitted to take up leadership roles, that female bodied people have been demoted from?

It wuld seem so DEliciously

"Some Girlguiding roles are only held by women - such as unit leader. These roles are open to all women, including trans women and non-binary members who were recorded as female at birth, who can make their Girlguiding Promise.

Any volunteer wishing to take up one of these roles is expected to be a positive role model for girls and should have the skills and behaviours expected of a leadership role. These things are evaluated during the recruitment process and in conversation with the local commissioner.

When enquiring about volunteering with Girlguiding, all new volunteers will be asked simple personal information questions by our online membership system, GO. You should not ask if a volunteer is trans and it may be unlawful to do so"

so women only roles are also open to men who say they're women - hope that's clear

www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/running-your-unit/including-all/supporting-trans-members/supporting-trans-volunteers/

so women only roles are also open to men who say they're women - hope that's clear

Well, we wouldn’t want to hurt their feelings, would we. The female bodied people who identify as trans obviously aren’t as delicate as the male bodied people.

Deliciously Female
I'm not 100% sure on that. But I suspect that could be the case.

In order to have 'non-binary' identities, you have to believe that the default is binary. Its so contradictory to say that if you don't subscribe to the stereotypes associated with your sex you are 'non-binary' - that is just reinforcing the binary?! Why can't you just be a boy who likes those things?

It's like 'challenge gender stereotypes, but if you do it means you are non-binary'?

Shocking activity. I’m a leader and I think this might be the end for me ☹️.
It also seems to assume that there are no non-binary people doing the activity, which is not very inclusive. It others people who don’t fit stereotypes rather than saying that stereotypes are stupid. 😡

I've been involved in guiding since I was 7, right through from brownies, young leader to leader. There are 4 generations of guides in my family.
I am appalled by the way Girlguiding has been changed in recent years, and this UMA is the final straw.
Guiding has always challenged stereotypes- the first guides lived in a time when simply running and playing sports, let alone camping were almost unthinkable. My pre-war badge book has the "airwoman " badge.
And now gghq has put out this piece of regressive nonsense- it is a real betrayal.