Girl Guides: Nottingham - senders of objection emails referred to Police

[mammajustkilledagnat]

Anyone else seen this on Twitter? I mean, what the bloody hell?

twitter.com/MDayCassandra/status/1483731590232657922

So: fetlife, fetish and fetish wear all totes tickety boo for guide leaders. Ditto guns and gun poses and offers to show Twitter more 'boobs'. Got it.

But: random man in street wearing inflatable penis costume - this is 1. the fault of women, natch, and 2. totally proves that feminists are hypocrites? I see.

thanks, barley, your posts are genuinely entertaining. This is like the lego Death Star of false equivalences you're building, here. Heath Robinson would be proud.

@barleybadminton

The liklihood of her posting sexually suggestive pictures (the boob shot and domme dress were most certainly captioned suggestively even IF you could somehow argue the content was not) is slim to non. It is simply outside the realms of behaviour most women would engage in.

Lol, I take it you've never logged into fetlife. Actually don't, the day someone from this forum logs into fetlife is the day the internet will probably finally break.

Now. For arguments sake let's say a biological woman DID post a shot hinting at a BDSM session, another offering more than the boobs on show and another toating a gun in a manner that I'm resolute on, is threatening and irresponsible.. she would be hung, drawn, quartered and sacked for the gross misconduct it is.

It is usually women who are targetted for their sexuality in this way I agree which is one reason I oppose this kind of prurient slut shaming. But even the teacher found working as a dominatrix who's online presence was infinitely more explicit and sexual than anything Tulley has posted was only suspended for a year. There have been teachers who did a naked calendar shoot for charity, and whilst it raised some controversy, none were sacked, and none faced hundreds of people writing to their employers accusing them of being a safeguarding risk. This is happening because she's trans. I'm not aware of anyone ever facing a campaign of online harassment like this aimed at their employers because of a couple of slightly risque pics on social media. And if some people have posted messages to her employer accusing her of being a predator or abuser based on such scant evidence, or who have encouraged others to do the same, then that probably could meet the legal criteria for harassment and it is understandable if Girl Guides have felt the need to involve the police. Time will tell whether that is the case.

Nope. You're doing it again. You're trying to dismiss my valid points with glib dismissal.

I've been on fetlife. Used fetlife. Anonymously and with ZERO traceability to my real life. In addition to which I'm not a safeguarding lead for a massive organisation for children.

This person posted pictures more suited to fetlife and only fans on their public social media. Curious girl guides could have searched them and found that as easily as we all did. Literally minutes and young impressionable girls would have seen their role model touting a whip, their tits and a gun no child would be able to discern from a real one.

You know you cannot justify those issues. You know its wrong and you know it has nothing to do with their being trans.

Lastly do you really think we don't see that you intentionally skip past all the points we make. Yo completely ignored the points I made about the GRA giving dangerous males the route to access vulnerable people in a similar way stopping DBS checks on teachers would allow predators into schools. I believe this is because it doesn't suit your divisive agenda that feminists don't actually hate trans people. We just won't stand for the rights of women and children being comprised. That doesn't make us hateful. Or harassers of innocent people.

The suffragettes were considered heathen criminals and tortured in barbaric ways for simply defending women's rights. Did they back down. Were they wrong?

No.

@ArabellaScott

So: fetlife, fetish and fetish wear all totes tickety boo for guide leaders. Ditto guns and gun poses and offers to show Twitter more 'boobs'. Got it.

But: random man in street wearing inflatable penis costume - this is 1. the fault of women, natch, and 2. totally proves that feminists are hypocrites? I see.

thanks, barley, your posts are genuinely entertaining. This is like the lego Death Star of false equivalences you're building, here. Heath Robinson would be proud.

He's not a random man he was at a gender critical protest and lots of gender critical people shared pics of him.

Posie and Lily Maynard are both parents I believe. If the safeguarding concerns were genuine and people who post kinky or potentially explicit images on social media are unfit to care for children then why is this acceptable? No sacred castes and all that.

Yet again barley demonstrates barley's lack of understanding of safeguarding children. Despite being shown up for this repeatedly on different threads barley wades right back in in their desperation to make women seem to be baddies.

It is always enlightening the pivots, the sparpling and the ‘Lego Death Star building’ (thanks Arabella) that people who really hate women saying ‘no’ resort to.

@Goatsaregreat

Yet again barley demonstrates barley's lack of understanding of safeguarding children. Despite being shown up for this repeatedly on different threads barley wades right back in in their desperation to make women seem to be baddies.

I understand safeguarding quite adequately thank you. Just because parents aren't covered by formal safeguarding legislation does not mean potential safeguarding risks should be ignored. If someone posting content like this on social media is a safeguarding risk - as in they represent a risk to children - then it doesn't matter wheher they are a parents, grandparents, girl guide leaders or teacher. As any safeguarding professional would tell you.

I've been on fetlife. Used fetlife. Anonymously and with ZERO traceability to my real life. In addition to which I'm not a safeguarding lead for a massive organisation for children.

Well many peoplle on the threads about this would say you are unfit to work with children then due to your apparent paraphilias. But I'm glad you agree it's not the existence of these photos which is the problem. In which case it's less a safeguarding risk then a how to use social media training issue which Girl Guides may well have addressed. They are under no obligation to inform the public of any private training or even diciplinary matters raised with volunteers.

So what are all these complaints intended to achieve? Girl Guides have been informed and said they will deal with it. How they deal with it is their business. Continuing to swamp them with emails about one volunteer looks like straight up harassment to me.

Not understanding and respecting obvious boundaries IS a safeguarding red flag.

You don't need training to not post photos of yourself in bondage gear with overtly sexual comments on social media as someone who works with children - this is obvious to anyone with normal awareness of boundaries.

"no thought at all to the families with young children, traumatised abuse survivors or people from religious communities exposed to it without their consent."

If you consider that these groups should not be exposed to an inflatablevpenis in the street, then I take it you agree that they should have to see an actual penis in a changing room, refuge, prison etc?

Should NOT have to see

And no hypocrisy here. If that man works or volunteers with children and posted that photo under his own name, I would fully expect him to be subject to the relevant rules & regulations of his work/charity etc.

@AbandonedCharacter

"no thought at all to the families with young children, traumatised abuse survivors or people from religious communities exposed to it without their consent."

If you consider that these groups should not be exposed to an inflatablevpenis in the street, then I take it you agree that they should have to see an actual penis in a changing room, refuge, prison etc?

Yes I do agree. I think trans prisoners should be given space to shower alone (which they are) and changing rooms which involve communal nudity phased out. I've yet to hear of anyone in the UK who has ever actually seen a trans woman's penis in a single sex space so it doesn't seem to be a huge problem. I imagine most trans people avoid communal changing areas.

Unfortunately I have to inform you that female prisoners in the UK have been raped by transwomen so it is quite the problem.

There have also been very unpleasant incidents in women's refuges in the UK that have been discussed on here.

And single-sex spaces are no longer single-sex when accessed by transwomen.

@AbandonedCharacter

Unfortunately I have to inform you that female prisoners in the UK have been raped by transwomen so it is quite the problem.

There have also been very unpleasant incidents in women's refuges in the UK that have been discussed on here.

And single-sex spaces are no longer single-sex when accessed by transwomen.

No female prisoner in the UK has been raped by a trans woman. There have been a very small number of sexual assaults, most of them Karen White, and none since more stringent monitoring was introduced.

Well, I could point you towards whole internet threads of penises (real ones, not novelty inflatable costumes) in women's single sex spaces, if that were helpful, barley. It seems to be quite a popular thing on certain corners of the internet.

Julie Bindel doesn't agree that there have been no sexual assaults.

@barleybadminton are you saying that Karen White is not a trans woman?

No female prisoner in the UK has been raped by a trans woman

This is not true, unless you are denying that Karen White is a transwoman. Which seems a bit transphobic to me.

I understand safeguarding quite adequately thank you. Just because parents aren't covered by formal safeguarding legislation does not mean potential safeguarding risks should be ignored. If someone posting content like this on social media is a safeguarding risk - as in they represent a risk to children - then it doesn't matter wheher they are a parents, grandparents, girl guide leaders or teacher. As any safeguarding professional would tell you.

No you really don't understand at all. Safeguarding concerns within families are dealt with by SS. There's a completely different threshold for those interventions because there is a principle in English law that families and parenting methods are varied. So something has to be demonstrably abusive to the extent that it is likely to cause serious harm for SS to be able to act. This is absolutely not the threshold for organisations.

You really shouldn't comment on things you don't have a good grasp on. It makes you look foolish.

I'm still waiting for a PG film with someone in dominatrix gear offering to show their tits too while we're here. Just when you're ready...

Are we also saying that unless a female prisoner is actually forcibly penetrated nothing bad has happened?

Any female knows from an early age, sexual assault and harassment can be extremely distressing, intimidating and harmful without involving penetration. What of this is being recorded? Because the anecdotal evidence on this escaping from female prisoners and prison guards is extremely concerning.

Rape is making forcible use of a female's body

Groping. Also making use of a non consenting female's body

Voyeurism; making use of a non consenting female's body. All so far are illegal; voyeurism doesn't require physical touch at all.

Harassment. Flashing. Now we're getting into the realms of emotional control and abuse, and wanting the body's reaction - and it is only the body, no other part of the female is of any interest to the person committing these assaults. Again, no physical contact needed; fear, alarm and distress the desired reaction to the aggressor.

Many women have experienced this kind of harassment merely from a male standing, smirking, looking, making it clear that they are larger and could assault if they so chose, and might yet, and are definitely thinking about it and wishing to cause distress and enjoy the reaction they are getting. Good luck getting even your employer to be able to pin a male colleague down on that one.

Now let's talk about wishing to be in a room where women are undressing; where those women are not all consenting, where they may be distressed and actively non consenting. Let's talk about women made to undress and shower under those circumstances with a male.

How is this different? What use is it ok to commandeer a woman's body for, against her will, causing her distress, without her consent, for a male person's benefit? Where is the line?

I'll ask again: are we fine with treating women like this so long as a male doesn't actually penetrate her?

Yes I do agree. I think trans prisoners should be given space to shower alone (which they are) and changing rooms which involve communal nudity phased out. I've yet to hear of anyone in the UK who has ever actually seen a trans woman's penis in a single sex space so it doesn't seem to be a huge problem. I imagine most trans people avoid communal changing areas.

Since there is an entire porn category devoted to transwomen accessing women only spaces, I think your imagination needs a little tweaking.

Still, it never ceases to amaze me how many times its suggested that these spaces have to be banned altogether to reduce risk. Or changed out of all recognition (and usefulness) to stop men predating. Or create a separate area within the communal space to reduce attacks and intimidation.

All because some men simply can't get their head around the answer being no.

At least one male prisoner in the UK has made a formal complaint about not being able to shower with the female prisoners and from the testimony of female inmates is also very willing to show off their penis.

I understand safeguarding quite adequately thank you. Just because parents aren't covered by formal safeguarding legislation does not mean potential safeguarding risks should be ignored. If someone posting content like this on social media is a safeguarding risk - as
in they represent a risk to children - then it doesn't matter wheher
they are a parents, grandparents, girl guide leaders or teacher. As
any safeguarding professional would tell you

You evidently have absolutely no clue about safeguarding at all.

If the man in the penis costume is a safeguarding risk then social services will get involved. It's a different threshold entirely and this of course assumes he is in fact a parent. If you meant posie is a risk because she was stood near him and had her photo taken with him then no, because if that were the case everyone everywhere could be a safeguarding risk by just being out in public. So the rainbow penis monkey would have put every person it met on the at risk register.

The massive difference between the rainbow monkey costume and the penis costume would make for a different outcome.
I do however agree that neither of those costumes should actually have been out in public. Other people would have different ideas about that. As we are not a hive mind despite what so many think.

@barleybadminton

I've been on fetlife. Used fetlife. Anonymously and with ZERO traceability to my real life. In addition to which I'm not a safeguarding lead for a massive organisation for children.

Well many peoplle on the threads about this would say you are unfit to work with children then due to your apparent paraphilias. But I'm glad you agree it's not the existence of these photos which is the problem. In which case it's less a safeguarding risk then a how to use social media training issue which Girl Guides may well have addressed. They are under no obligation to inform the public of any private training or even diciplinary matters raised with volunteers.

So what are all these complaints intended to achieve? Girl Guides have been informed and said they will deal with it. How they deal with it is their business. Continuing to swamp them with emails about one volunteer looks like straight up harassment to me.

I took the night to consider whether or not I would continue to debate this with you.

It maddens me because I genuinely believe good progress towards a workable solution that doesn't impede on the rights of women and girls could be found through clear, respectful and concise debate.

I have tried to do that, I've been respectful, open to your interpretation and how that might influence your thoughts. I have explained my point in clear and easily understood language and taken on board some of yours that have merit.

And yet you cannot afford me the same respect. You have intentionally skirted my serious questions and deliberately misinterpreted my words to suit your narrative.

You, it feels are trying to deliberately bait me and others into being nasty, aggressive and bigoted in our responses to your ill humoured ribbing.

You and People like you are the reason there is unrest, tension and lack of understanding between women and transwomen. You are deliberately gatekeeping progress because it appears, the conflict is somewhat enjoyed and most definitely encouraged.

Shame on you and shame on me for wasting my time and breath on what I see now is an obvious stirrer of the pot. On neither side of the debate just willfully going from one to the other insisting on a hateful message that is purely of your own making and rammed down our throats.

I will not engage with you further. I will also report you for trolling.

Well Barley none of my friends with risqué Instagrams post sexual photos of themselves whilst WEARING their uniform. The uniform they wear whilst working with children. They would never do that as they know what a serious safe guarding risk that would be.