Girl Guiding latest

[IsitM]

"We want to update on a recent investigation into a breach of our Code of Conduct by a volunteer that received public attention. Girlguiding operates a thorough complaints procedure and takes all concerns raised very seriously.
In this case, the volunteer cooperated fully and the investigation has concluded. The volunteer made the decision to leave and is no longer a volunteer at Girlguiding."

twitter.com/Girlguiding/status/1493948407446224901?s=20&t=bupSPqZjpcdRV0VlXs7QpQ

Maybe grass roots orgs could be set up for girls which replace GG as it is. Which apply safeguarding for the girls with exemptions provided for in the equality act as a founding principle.

As women are the volunteers for GG anyway, they could divert their time and energy for the org which elevates the wellbeing of their girls.

Obviously the sexualised or violent nature of some of the social media posts were worthy of investigation and I think that it was right that they left the organisation, whether they jumped or were pushed.

I do wonder, though, if natal female leaders are subject to the same degree of investigation by the general public? Or did people go trawling because this was a trans woman? Does anyone know if any other leaders have left because of complaints about their social media content, or if anyone spends time looking through other guide leader's social media looking for such material?

How many of the people who contacted GGUK about this person were in that area or had daughters in her division that they were concerned for, or was it a pile on from afar due to internet-led outrage ?

Let me be clear: the public posts were unacceptable and a significant lapse on judgement. It is the correct decision in my view that she is no longer involved with GGUK, but can we really say that the same level of outrage or action from outside the organisation would have been seen if this were a natal woman? I suspect not.

It's a bit rich given tone of their responses to even the most politely worded email.

Sulley is only the symptom, in any case. GG's handling of this whole affair is the real issue.

Indeed DomesticatedZombie. And it should never have required the safeguarding protocols to be called into question in the first place.

@ODFOx

Obviously the sexualised or violent nature of some of the social media posts were worthy of investigation and I think that it was right that they left the organisation, whether they jumped or were pushed.

I do wonder, though, if natal female leaders are subject to the same degree of investigation by the general public? Or did people go trawling because this was a trans woman? Does anyone know if any other leaders have left because of complaints about their social media content, or if anyone spends time looking through other guide leader's social media looking for such material?

How many of the people who contacted GGUK about this person were in that area or had daughters in her division that they were concerned for, or was it a pile on from afar due to internet-led outrage ?

Let me be clear: the public posts were unacceptable and a significant lapse on judgement. It is the correct decision in my view that she is no longer involved with GGUK, but can we really say that the same level of outrage or action from outside the organisation would have been seen if this were a natal woman? I suspect not.

We call for respect and kindness.

If I see or hear one more person or organisation appealing to female socialisation by calling on women for kindness I swear I'm going to repeatedly scream fuck off at the top of my lungs for a week.

Yes, I'm sure the outrage would have been less if they'd been a female gun toting bondage mistress @ODFOx. It's the fact that they are a male gun toting bondage mistress.

In what is supposed to be a single sex organisation.

That said, I would have been unimpressed if anyone - of either sex - with such dodgy social media was considered a suitable guide leader. But let's face it, a woman wouldn't have been appointed in the first place.

It's trans washing.

We call for respect and kindness.

I call for basic competence and a sense of responsibility.

Considering the pouting, stamping, foot dragging response to this extreme case of unsuitability wtaf is going on under the radar that the general public aren't aware of to drag into the sunlight and force them to engage their brains about?

I do wonder, though, if natal female leaders are subject to the same degree of investigation by the general public?

I do think your user name is quite appropriate in this instance.

As a volunteer with this particular organisation and as a parent of a Guide, I absolutely fucking make sure that I know at least the leader and their next level up.

And yes, if I found any female who was posting the same social media posts as this person was, I would also send the exact same complaint in. To the letter.

I know damn well that I would not have to change a word of it.

@FOJN

We call for respect and kindness.

If I see or hear one more person or organisation appealing to female socialisation by calling on women for kindness I swear I'm going to repeatedly scream fuck off at the top of my lungs for a week.

I'll join you. Maybe parliament square? With cake? It'll be so very therapeutic. We can all scream in unison.

@Clymene

Yes, I'm sure the outrage would have been less if they'd been a female gun toting bondage mistress *@ODFOx*. It's the fact that they are a male gun toting bondage mistress.

In what is supposed to be a single sex organisation.

That said, I would have been unimpressed if anyone - of either sex - with such dodgy social media was considered a suitable guide leader. But let's face it, a woman wouldn't have been appointed in the first place.

It's trans washing.

She was a local Commissioner: women are appointed to these volunteer positions all over the country. I completely concur with her being removed from the position and the organisation. I would hope that a natal woman leader with similar pictures in the public domain would also be similarly censured. Though I suspect not. My point is that a woman would not have been nationally vilified. Someone would have approached another leader in the organisation who would have reported it to the County Commissioner who would have contacted GGUK for the investigation to be triggered. It would not have made the press and it is very unlikely that anyone outside the immediate Division would even be aware.

I signed my daughter up to scouts instead. I'd prefer a single sex organisation, so important for girls to have a female only space, but safegaurding has gone completely out the window. Such a shame.

I'll join you. Maybe parliament square? With cake? It'll be so very therapeutic. We can all scream in unison.

How can you scream while eating cake? We might have to take turns.

@PizzaToasties

I signed my daughter up to scouts instead. I'd prefer a single sex organisation, so important for girls to have a female only space, but safegaurding has gone completely out the window. Such a shame.

Sulley also volunteers with the Scouts.

@Helleofabore I was a leader too. I quit because I couldn't reconcile the guidance with my understanding of safeguarding.

Are you aware of any natal female leaders having gone through this level of public vilification? After 30 years as a leader I know of several cases where people were encouraged to find other volunteering opportunities for behavioural and image reasons, but they were discovered at the local level, as you say, you check out your leader. In this case she was thoroughly searched by randoms on the internet because she is trans.

I don't agree, I suspect any woman would have reached the national papers behaving like that in such a position of responsibility with children and supposedly responsibility and training in safeguarding. Massive, massive failure and an outrageous failure by GG. You cannot apparently get the concept of safeguarding while taking pictures of yourself posturing with guns in uniform, and sharing your sex life inappropriately all over the place where anyone can google you, and claim you don't get what the problem is.

It is inevitably compounded by GG conducting a massive experiment, with other agencies, in that male people can identify as women, take jobs exclusively appointing women, and there will be no downsides, no lowering of standards, no issues to consider in permitting male people to identify into such posts. Obviously in this case, this individual did absolutely nothing whatsoever to help prove that a TW taking this position of high responsibility as a woman would be wholly trustworthy and would act beyond reproach. And yes, that is absolutely relevant, and it's been another massive fail by GG and by the individual in question. Because there's no escaping that we are talking about male people, that male people are not employed in these positions by GG for clear reason, and male people have different offending rates, and that there are very, very questionable aspects to making exceptions to safeguarding process based on a male person's self identification.

And I'd also remind of the GG leaders who were disposed of, and who have been in the papers and have been national news, having been dismissed simply for raising safeguarding concerns that GG didn't want to hear.

[quote ODFOx]@Helleofabore I was a leader too. I quit because I couldn't reconcile the guidance with my understanding of safeguarding.

Are you aware of any natal female leaders having gone through this level of public vilification? After 30 years as a leader I know of several cases where people were encouraged to find other volunteering opportunities for behavioural and image reasons, but they were discovered at the local level, as you say, you check out your leader. In this case she was thoroughly searched by randoms on the internet because she is trans. [/quote]
Are you saying that people were mean for looking and bringing this to GG's attention, and this behaviour should have been allowed to just rock on in peace?

That safeguarding is mean if a TQ+ person is involved? Seriously?

@ODFOx you hypothetical fetishist female commissioner posing with guns is a straw man.

this person was male. The trans bit is not the problem. Their sex, and apparent deviant sexual behaviour (which they put in plain sight on the internet) is the problem.

In plain sight is the fucking problem.

@PizzaToasties

I signed my daughter up to scouts instead. I'd prefer a single sex organisation, so important for girls to have a female only space, but safegaurding has gone completely out the window. Such a shame.

Has Scouts better safeguarding towards girls that GG?

can we really say that the same level of outrage or action from outside the organisation would have been seen if this were a natal woman?

Could I take a wild guess that female 'mistresses' with a penchant for guns are fairly unlikely to join Girl Guides?

[quote ODFOx]@Helleofabore I was a leader too. I quit because I couldn't reconcile the guidance with my understanding of safeguarding.

Are you aware of any natal female leaders having gone through this level of public vilification? After 30 years as a leader I know of several cases where people were encouraged to find other volunteering opportunities for behavioural and image reasons, but they were discovered at the local level, as you say, you check out your leader. In this case she was thoroughly searched by randoms on the internet because she is trans. [/quote]
Are you suggesting that posing with guns, publicly celebrating a fetish etc are things that should pass without comment?

Or that in this case alone they should have?

Safeguarding is the responsibilty if everyone. There is no 'walk on by'.

Has Scouts better safeguarding towards girls that GG?

Yes. They begin from the understanding that they are a mixed sex organisation and work from there.

GG did not. They used the 'logic' that transwomen are women and trans girls are girls. So they remained single sex. They even ousted transboys, because those females were now male.

Because of that feat of logic they didn't have to change any safeguarding to accommodate any males within the organisation.

Which is why so many women raised the issue with them.

Scouts are more transparent.
They know they are mixed sex.
Parental and the consent of all children involved has to be granted if mixed sex sleeping is unavoidable or would put one child at more risk.
Separate changing facilities need to be available if mixed sex sleeping.

No organisation is perfect
Predictors will always find A way.

Scouts are very aware of that and they do not allow adults to share sleeping areas with children unlike the guides.

They are however still captured and suggest mermaids and stonewall as good sources for information, they promote pride events dispute them not being suitable for children.

They both run on volunteers, people who give up vast amounts of their own time to train and run events and activities for other people's children.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

can we really say that the same level of outrage or action from outside the organisation would have been seen if this were a natal woman?

Could I take a wild guess that female 'mistresses' with a penchant for guns are fairly unlikely to join Girl Guides?

It's not even female mistresses that is the whole problem.

It's someone taking pictures of themself in fetish gear.
Posting the photograph on Twitter.
Having their Twitter public.
Girlguiding denying an issue.
Girlguiding reporting those raising the issue to the fucking police.
Girlguiding then issuing this half arsed, vague passive aggressive statement insisting that they are the victims.

What a shitshow.

The statement is meaningless, the safeguarding and compliance policy statement awful. GG are not admitting any safeguarding concerns and are blaming the concerned public. This is madness.