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!

It starts well, but completely misses the point! Sex is binary, gender is how society perceives you to be. This is just perpetuating the myth that gender is some fixed way of behaving; so if you aren't 'feminine' or 'masculine', you must be another gender called 'non-binary'!

Unless they make it clear that sex and gender are not the same, it is very misleading.

If the GG doesn't follow DoE guidelines, they open themselves up to almighty legal challenges, without a leg to stand on. If any 18 year old girl decides to go down the trans route and eventually surgery and then realises it's a bad idea, she will be able to track back to GG and put the blame right on their doorstep.

@BlueCatRedCat

Julie Bentley is the ex Chief exec of GGUK. She was the chief exec of Family Planning UK too, but apparently thought girls could become boys and vice versa.

And she is friends with, and has worked with Simon Blake, either a current trustee or ex trustee of stonewall. They attended a sexual health award together, judging by Google photos.

Girl Guides has been taking advice from stonewall since at least 2018. They confirmed it in a tweet at the time.

I can't understand why a girl's organisation is looking to Stonewall for activities rather than feminist groups

Something I've realised recently is that quite a few people think of things like Stonewall and Pride as being fundamentally "Diversity" organisations, in a very general way. It's like they represent a higher order of diversity (which is the one great value it seems) whereas a more specific organisation is only about a specific thing.

The other question though is why do children need to be taught this at GG?

it's not relevant.

I don't understand why orgs like GG, the gymnastics overseeing body, the swimming one, who all changed their policies ages ago, did it. I think swimming and gymnastics decided to rethink after loads of pushback.

But GG dug their heels in. Said that GG was always 'same gender'. Sacked leaders who had safeguarding concerns.

And for them it's really bonkers because the only reason they are allowed to girls only is because of same sex being allowed when it's proportionate etc.

But now they are mixed, so they have gone against their own charter. And are saying well some boys can join but not others... That's discrimination.

They should just say we've gone mixed and be done with it.

In fact. Say we are a group for feminine children who broadly align with sex stereotypes.

Because. That's what they are.

This is top down though. The actual leaders etc are lovely. And I'm guessing many have no idea what's going on.

Hyper individualist shite, based on offensive gender stereotypes. Good luck fighting it OP.

Ok, so there are no online links to this material. But please do photograph it and post here or send to Transgender Trend. This is a clear example of the kind of material that means Stonewall should not be in schools under the new DoE guidance. They are producing material that teaches Girl Guides that if they don't conform to female sex stereotypes, they may not be girls. That's specifically the kind of thing which means schools must not work with them under the guidelines.

@Jaxhog

It starts well, but completely misses the point! Sex is binary, gender is how society perceives you to be. This is just perpetuating the myth that gender is some fixed way of behaving; so if you aren't 'feminine' or 'masculine', you must be another gender called 'non-binary'!

Unless they make it clear that sex and gender are not the same, it is very misleading.

Yes! It’s always about conflating sex and gender. In this case it’s conflating sex and gender stereotypes and then throwing gender identity into the mix (when we’re told gender identity has nothing to do with either!)

How kind of GGUK to become a conduit to so many impressionable minds for Stonewall.

The Girls’ Attitudes Survey is an interesting read:

www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/research-and-campaigns/girls-attitudes-survey-2020.pdf

This is the UMA (unit meeting activity).
It starts out sort of of ok- we have done similar activities challenging gender stereotypes for years, but the message has always been along the lines of "you like heavy rock, football and science! That's great! Girls can do anything!"
But it's the second page where it goes to pot.

This is for guides, girls aged 10-14.

Wow that is nuts!

I looked on the stonewall website as recommended.

I couldn't find any resources aimed at Guides but I did find home learning kit for maths and English. Why are stonewall creating resources for English and maths? And why do they have a whole activity around Frida Kahlo for LGBT history month? She was heterosexual

Someone posted about it on twitter twitter.com/Mariel63473494/status/1309410224713981955?s=19

@Goosefoot

I can't understand why a girl's organisation is looking to Stonewall for activities rather than feminist groups

Something I've realised recently is that quite a few people think of things like Stonewall and Pride as being fundamentally "Diversity" organisations, in a very general way. It's like they represent a higher order of diversity (which is the one great value it seems) whereas a more specific organisation is only about a specific thing.

YY. There's a lot of lazy rubberstamping going on as well. It's difficult to find a diversity consultant that isn't obsessed with gender identity, and there seems to be quite a lot of overlap between SW and other UK orgs in terms of personnel.

This immediately leaps out:

"Remind them to speak up if there's a topic they don't feel comfortable about"

The new schools guidance says:

"It is generally not helpful to ask pupils to lead or chair discussions on sensitive topics as there can be a greater risk of going off-topic."

🚩🚩🚩

I don't know why people are saying 'it starts well'? It starts by asking girls to list stereotypes of what boys and girls like/wear/play with. It starts incredibly badly, well before it descends into insanity.

My dd would be going 'you can't say only boys/girls play with/wear trains/dolls/trousers/nail varnish' well before the person scribing had taken the lid off the magic marker. She's 10 and she'd see this for the regressive pile of wank it is straight away

"How do you think someone who is non binary would feel when choosing toothbrush?"

WTAF? As an adult I have no idea how to answer this question. Toothbrushes have nothing to do with sex nor gender. They are used by people who have hands and teeth, for cleaning said teeth. The aren't for cleaning ones genitals and have literally nothing to do with gender... unless girls have to have pink ones?

There could be some interesting discussions about gender from looking at things that shouldn't be gendered (ie everything) but why not focus on what this often means for women and girls - choices are often restricted by societies expectations. Why does it have to be all about enbies? If you really must, you could mention that a few people feel like they are NB (because apparently they do), but really that is a can of worms as it implies that the rest of us are happily 100% masculine or feminine, and that girls who aren't 100% feminine must be NB.

but I did find home learning kit for maths and English. Why are stonewall creating resources for English and maths? Perhaps they're hoping 2 + 2 = 5

Ah as well as telling girls if they don't conform to narrow stereotypes in every way, they are non binary

It occurs to me that as someone who noticed the way I was treated etc when I was v young and later understood that feminist was what I was at a deep level

I would now understand that I was non binary

So they are also distributing future generation of feminists

Not to mention the GNC rates amongst girls who works grow up to be lesbian

And yes it does connect because heteronormativity is a core part of gender role/ sex stereotype

Well fuck them, actually.

Distributing = destroying

Misogyny becomes more and more obvious the more you think about it

Maybe it's Stonewall -damn lies- statistics?

Thanks for the photos justanotherguider
This is crazy isn't it.

I think it starts well assuming the girls are being asked to think about how we are encouraged & expected to gender things - how often people assume this is for girls and that is for boys, and then that can be debunked. I'm guessing the leaders would interpret it that way. But it's really annoying. I hate it - it's saying there's special type of human with this specially non binary personality, who we have to think about and feel sorry for. We should stop shops pinkifying girls things because it's not fair on these special humans. If you are a girl we don't mean you.

Honestly, asking girls to write down (and reabsorb) all the fucking shitty stereotypes associated with having a vagina and xx chromosomes isn't a masterpiece of lesson design, it's a crap, damaging, pointless piece of busy work that any fucking self respecting teenager would question the value of straight away thus putting the person leading the lesson on the defensive backfoot. I can only assume that whoever came up with it has never taught a lesson to actual people.

Can we please stop saying this 'starts well'. It doesn't, it just goes rapidly downhill from a starting point of 'already fucking dreadful'