A trans-Identified BDSM fan/gun nut is now a senior leader at Girlguiding

[Scraggythang]

Via Glinner’s sub stack. Sorry if this has already been posted!

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/wtf-are-girlguiding-thinking

@SocialConnection

Here's the Girl Guides policy on contraception.

For 13 year old girls.

On girls-only residential events.

Why would this be needed?

How have they got here?

To be far, that policy is not unreasonable in the general context of safeguarding of teenage girls.

As a GG in the early 90s I used to regularly go on joint guide/scout camps (they were by far the best camps we went on). The guide and scout tent areas were separated and cordoned off by a rope fence, but that didn't stop people ending up in the 'wrong' tent. I think that is fairly standard teenage behaviour across all generations.

I don't think it helps to mix up acceptable, established safeguarding measures, like access to contraception, and the gender idealogy debate, I feel it weakens our stance.

Safeguarding is about prevention. The single most effective way to prevent predators in girl guides is to make it single sex. As it removes the cohort who commit 98% of all sex crimes.

Girl guides know this, and they don't care.

Transgenderism promotes detrimental gender stereotyping. Girl guides know this too, and they don't care about that either.

This isn't about whether or not their guide leaders can have a sex life. This is about endorsing an ideology that is detrimental to girls, whilst at the same time knowing it allows any predator in the country to have access to them.

I liked Sall Grover's tweet, which I saw via Julie Bindel

Imagine @Girlguiding HQ sitting around the boardroom, fretting, “What are we going to do?! Hurt the feelings of grown males who disturbingly want to be close to little girls OR protect little girls & the legacy of a 100 yr old female-only institution?! WE DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO?!”

Even if you think the feelings of males who like to role-play as female matter, it's not Girl Guides purpose to be a middle-aged-male support organisation! Feelings of any adults, male or female, are secondary to the purpose of being a space for girls. Or should be.

The failure here is similar to Jon Haidt's thing about incompatible values in universities - social justice vs truth. They sometimes conflict and you have to have a priority. (Also fairness vs inclusion in sport, as per Ross Tucker). But here it's social justice vs female children.

Despite protestations, they're clearly favouring "social justice" over what people believed their mission was.

@FunkyBrownie @MrsFionaCharming

Imho I’d seriously be considering how this might effect your current of future employment opportunities if I were you.

GG have actively gone out of their way to spend time money and effort on policies that intentionally put girls at risk, give males access to girls in tents, showers and toilets. To have a policy that encourages GG leaders to teach children they will keep secrets for them from their parents and to encourage GG leaders to hand out condoms to 13 year old girls.

Now this is getting MSM light it will blow up even more.

I imagine that being a volunteer at GG is something most would be proud to put on their CV or talk about at interviews. However now prospective employers may look very differently on anyone who has remained loyal to GG during this. If the job you work in/are applying for involves safeguarding the employer may well consider you unsuitable if you’ve stood behind GG while they implement such anti girl and anti safeguarding policies. Even if you avoid putting it on your CV they will likely find out when they conduct a basic social media check, which all do now.

Regardless of how well you run your division and safeguard girls there it’s the institutions policy that will reflect on you.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I'm beginning to wonder if this is actually not about inclusion, but about destroying a female only space?

This had occurred to me too.

@SomepeopleareTERFSgetoverit

This photo in the Mail taken with a selfie stick beside a flimsy curtain - anyone else think it looks like a changing room? Looks like tags on the jacket and hangars behind.

The kind of behaviour that Never Happens…..

I’d say that was a bedroom. Trying on new clothes.

I don't even know what to say about this. How have these organisations learned nothing from scandals over the last few years? Who thought it was a good idea to position adult "asexuality" as a fitting subject for Girl Guide discussion?

Why are these people in GG headquarters under the impression that they have a right to present their version of PSHE to other people's children?

I think you could argue that this appointment, and other behaviours by GG HQ, contravenes the spirit of the recently updated RSE statutory guidance. Indeed, one could argue it almost tests it.

When this type of thing happens, you need to look for the trustees. Looking at the GG trustees, there are a fair few who have been rotating around the third sector working for all the other usual suspects, as well as management consultancies. And several who have clearly been brought in to “listen to millennials” on “diversity and inclusion”. It looks like they are probably fully captured by all of this, and will almost certainly be convinced if its rightness until something not so great happens. And I don’t think this will shake it. Lots of people wafting around in the third sector and corporate finance are well off and / or older, and don’t really encounter any of this apart from a bit of the “non binary” teen stuff. They fully buy in to Be Kind and haven’t got the foggiest that for large parts of this “movement” the blurring of boundaries, sexual or otherwise, is not a bug but a feature.

It will take a critical level of momentum to shift this mindset and I’m not sure they are there yet. Obviously it would be great if the trustees are currently sitting in a meeting saying “what is going on here and do we need to completely reevaluate what we are doing?” But I reckon it will be brushed off as an attack by frothing “transphobes” and after a bit of social media sanitising will be diversity-and-inclusion-business-as-usual.

@SomepeopleareTERFSgetoverit

This photo in the Mail taken with a selfie stick beside a flimsy curtain - anyone else think it looks like a changing room? Looks like tags on the jacket and hangars behind.

The kind of behaviour that Never Happens…..

No, it's a bedroom. Look at the wardrobe doors behind.

So the Sun has now covered this story but has referred to the subject throughout as she/her with no reference at all to transgender. So as far as anyone reading this is concerned this is a woman guide leader behaving completely inappropriately.

Readytoretire are there photographs with the Sun report?

Given all the 'allegedly's they missed most of it - as in "reportedly made a lead guiding commissioner" - means they missed the GG website etc.

Slow off the mark and wrong as usual!

But the tri o of pictures tell their own tale.

@readytoretire

So the Sun has now covered this story but has referred to the subject throughout as she/her with no reference at all to transgender. So as far as anyone reading this is concerned this is a woman guide leader behaving completely inappropriately.

Well if it was a woman of the XX variety, she'd be crucified. So, if TWAW, they can put up with what we have to put up with. As opposed to the inevitable claim of phobia that will be used to defend this person doing something no biological woman would get away with.

The comments on the DM article show that the majority of commenters have no idea that this is a male person.

@TurquoiseBaubles

The comments on the DM article show that the majority of commenters have no idea that this is a male person.

Huh? They have eyes, surely?

@TurquoiseBaubles

The comments on the DM article show that the majority of commenters have no idea that this is a male person.

I checked and I didn't see that! Most comments are just some variation on WTF. A few people used female pronouns but then so did the article. One comment referred to the subject of the article as a "woman" but that was from an angry TRA, and it had thousands of downvotes.

@EndoplasmicReticulum

Readytoretire are there photographs with the Sun report?

Yes there are - 5 photos the same as the ones in the DM article pretty much.

I've also just scanned The Sun Twitter page and they don't seem to have posted the article there.

@TurquoiseBaubles

The comments on the DM article show that the majority of commenters have no idea that this is a male person.

Where do you get that idea from. There is one poster who referred to "she" and one poster who said something along the lines of "let the poor woman alone"

The responses to the latter show the readers fully understand what is going on.

The rest of the comments don't refer to the person's sex. They don't need to. The Daily Mail readers aren't stupid. The article and photos are clear.

One of the responses to the "leave her alone" comment made the very valid point that a man who "identified as a man" or a woman who "identified as a woman" would get hauled over the coals for this so why defend this person?.

In one sense it doesn't actually matter what sex or gender this person is- the behaviour is unacceptable.

I can't work out the setting in those photos posted by @averylongtimeago. Is it a bathroom? A spa?

I thought the beginning of the daily Mail specified the trans identity?

@Scraggythang

I thought the beginning of the daily Mail specified the trans identity?

The headline does and the body of the article referred to "trans woman".

@KimikosNightmare I thought so. I think the majority of the commenters, if not all, knew precisely what was going.

I’m a volunteer at Brownies and I also have some knowledge about screening people’s social media footprint from an employment perspective.

Basically if you want a proper check run on someone’s social media you’d need to pay for a professional company who specifically offer this service to do it. This will cost £x per check and will only check publicly available social media on the day the check is run. GG don’t have the resources or money to do this for all their volunteers and they aren’t legally obliged to do so (unlike DBS checks).

Also DBS will only flag up crimes and relevant information held by the police. If someone hasn’t committed an offence (or they’ve never been caught) it will not return a result.

When a basic google however will turn up highly questionable pictures, it's the kind of finding any parent or service user may find looking up the person they are putting trust in. Not doing that basic check is a bit daft to put it mildly.

@Artichokeleaves

When a basic google however will turn up highly questionable pictures, it's the kind of finding any parent or service user may find looking up the person they are putting trust in. Not doing that basic check is a bit daft to put it mildly.

Because I'm that sort of parent I looked up all the leaders I didn't already know at my kids' scout group. I do my own due diligence with people who are looking after my children if they're not at school.

I found all this person's profiles in seconds, even though they're not in the name they currently use.

Incidentally, Monica features in a HuffPo article from earlier this year about women on the front line.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/survivors-women-on-covid-front-lineukk_603e5bfac5b68297150372d2

Monica was a scout leader in March and is mother to two apparently.

@TheBeardedVulture

I’m a volunteer at Brownies and I also have some knowledge about screening people’s social media footprint from an employment perspective.

Basically if you want a proper check run on someone’s social media you’d need to pay for a professional company who specifically offer this service to do it. This will cost £x per check and will only check publicly available social media on the day the check is run. GG don’t have the resources or money to do this for all their volunteers and they aren’t legally obliged to do so (unlike DBS checks).

Also DBS will only flag up crimes and relevant information held by the police. If someone hasn’t committed an offence (or they’ve never been caught) it will not return a result.

This persons social media on two platforms were public until earlier today. Many of us here have checked and found these pics almost instantly. That’s not a specialist expensive service. They also come up if the persons name is googled.

If MN posters can do this and scroll through a few old posts to find this in what way do you think GG can’t?