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

To think that TW are literally women without being able to define what a woman actually is is to demonstrate that your thinking is, at the very best, muddled.

You may as well be saying TW are xazes.

Nothing wrong with that, most people have some inconsistent or changeable beliefs, but it's generally good to own it.

There are also people (myself included) who think transwomen are women

I respect that you hold this sincere belief, I'm all for tolerance and diversity so long as it's mutual and my sincere beliefs are equally respected.

and that adults have the right to a private life outside of their professional life.

.... no. Sorry. You've missed the point there. It has nothing to do with a private life, I have no idea whether my local Guide Commissioner likes being beaten on the bottom with the woman's weekly or getting her other half to swing from the lampshades with wet celery and an egg whisk. Because she and every other responsible adult keeps their sex life private and gets the concept of safeguarding and boundaries, and is very careful to keep their private life private and their private social media very carefully managed, while also being aware that being a position of trust means managing your public image and public trust. Many such jobs forbid having a social media account or profile at all for this reason.

The safeguarding fail had nothing to do with the person's private life. It had to do with a person who had been safeguarding trained (apparently) had a responsibility for safeguarding leadership, and yet was absolutely oblivious to the inappropriacy of their multiple actions in multiple ways. Their judgement was evidenced as very significantly impaired for someone in such a position of trust. That was the issue. Plus that someone with such lack of boundaries or judgement is all by themselves a significant safeguarding risk. That was the issue GG had to face. Compounded by this being a male person who was engaging in very familiar male behaviour and being oblivious to the implications of it while having identified into a woman's post on the grounds that this would be no different to employing a female.

Massive failure all round. Much damage done to a reputable institution who handled this extremely badly.

There are also people (myself included) who think transwomen are women and that adults have the right to a private life outside of their professional life

a) in what way are transwomen women? Can you explain? Do they have periods, can they have babies, do they have breasts (ie not artificial ones), etc etc.......
Men can alter their bodies surgically and medically as much as they want. But if I paint my face black and curl my hair, that doesn't make me a black woman, so having silicone implants inserted and a vagina made out of a penis doesn't make man a woman. It just makes them look like a woman.

b) Adults do indeed have a right to a private live, Guide Leaders included, but the person in question's private life wasn't exposed by anyone - they plastered it all over social media.

It just makes them look like a woman

I was a Guide Leader, a District Commissioner, and most recently a Division Commissioner.

I resigned too, because I didn't want to be in a position where I was either organising, or signing off/approving an event where male bodied people were sleeping and showering literally alongside girls and women (in some cases helping girls to get dressed, go to the toilet, change night nappies etc), and where I couldn't call that out on a risk assessment, nor share that information with parents, other adults at the event, or my superiors in Guiding.

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

It just makes them look like a woman

Is your point that they don't always "look like a woman"?

@Justkeeppedaling

I was a Guide Leader, a District Commissioner, and most recently a Division Commissioner.

I resigned too, because I didn't want to be in a position where I was either organising, or signing off/approving an event where male bodied people were sleeping and showering literally alongside girls and women (in some cases helping girls to get dressed, go to the toilet, change night nappies etc), and where I couldn't call that out on a risk assessment, nor share that information with parents, other adults at the event, or my superiors in Guiding.

I'm sorry, for you and your girls

To be honest, you would have to question the capacity and practice of someone who would do all those things without very significant concern, and awareness of what would happen if the three wishes fairy of it'll all be fiiiiiiiine (safeguarding is for boring people) is off duty.

@Artichokeleaves

There are also people (myself included) who think transwomen are women

I respect that you hold this sincere belief, I'm all for tolerance and diversity so long as it's mutual and my sincere beliefs are equally respected.

and that adults have the right to a private life outside of their professional life.

.... no. Sorry. You've missed the point there. It has nothing to do with a private life, I have no idea whether my local Guide Commissioner likes being beaten on the bottom with the woman's weekly or getting her other half to swing from the lampshades with wet celery and an egg whisk. Because she and every other responsible adult keeps their sex life private and gets the concept of safeguarding and boundaries, and is very careful to keep their private life private and their private social media very carefully managed, while also being aware that being a position of trust means managing your public image and public trust. Many such jobs forbid having a social media account or profile at all for this reason.

The safeguarding fail had nothing to do with the person's private life. It had to do with a person who had been safeguarding trained (apparently) had a responsibility for safeguarding leadership, and yet was absolutely oblivious to the inappropriacy of their multiple actions in multiple ways. Their judgement was evidenced as very significantly impaired for someone in such a position of trust. That was the issue. Plus that someone with such lack of boundaries or judgement is all by themselves a significant safeguarding risk. That was the issue GG had to face. Compounded by this being a male person who was engaging in very familiar male behaviour and being oblivious to the implications of it while having identified into a woman's post on the grounds that this would be no different to employing a female.

Massive failure all round. Much damage done to a reputable institution who handled this extremely badly.

Excellent post Artichokeleaves

Quoting it to keep it near the end for when MargaritaPie comes back. If there are any counterarguments to your points I'd be very interested to hear them.

Thanks Artichoke - I'm sorry too. I think I was a good Leader - we certainly had a longer waiting list than all the other close by, alternative Brownie units.

It's such a bloody shame what's happening in Guiding at the moment. I was always so proud of the organisation, and bigged it up to anyone with daughters - or anyone really. It's fantastic that an organisation exclusively for women and girls still exists in this day and age - I know from experience how some girls, and women, benefited from being members.

t's fantastic that an organisation exclusively for women and girls still exists in this day and age - alas, I can no longer say that really - I so wish I could.

I think from past experience we will get no answers from that particular poster. It is a drive by admonishing and virtue signaling that they continue to remain entrenched that there is a special group of people who should have special exemptions in safeguarding protocols.

@Helleofabore

I think from past experience we will get no answers from that particular poster. It is a drive by admonishing and virtue signaling that they continue to remain entrenched that there is a special group of people who should have special exemptions in safeguarding protocols.

And when it all goes horribly wrong and female people are harmed, we get the shrugs and the...

that didn't happen
if it did, it wasn't that bad
if it was, then it didn't matter
if it did then it wasn't my/male people's fault
and if it was, you/other female people deserved it.

Which is why I have no remaining good will over this. There is zero reciprocity of care or interest, this is not based on any morals or values, it's just purely about male people getting to do whatever they choose without boundaries.

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

It just makes them look like a woman

🤣

@Helleofabore

I think from past experience we will get no answers from that particular poster. It is a drive by admonishing and virtue signaling that they continue to remain entrenched that there is a special group of people who should have special exemptions in safeguarding protocols.

The drive by admonishments are very effective, although not in the way the admonishers think.

Hundreds of women on these boards every day, patiently explaining, setting out facts clearly and carefully, articulately exposing the risks and the loopholes and the inequality and the glaring red flags. And someone swans in to wave an airy hand and say, silly women, there's nothing to see here, when the millions of people visiting these boards, reading these threads, can read the evidence for themselves.

The drive by admonisher only proves the point that women are making, about being dismissed, drowned out and spoken over by entitled voices with no argument. No evidence. Nothing but their own sense of authority over women.

Always ready to be proved wrong and surprised by an impressive argument as yet unrevealed, however...

"Paraphilias overwhelmingly affect men.
Paraphilias include, not limited to: exhibitionism, voyeurism, cross dressing, engaging in non-consensual sexual activity, sexual interest in inanimate objects.
Victims of men's paraphilias are overwhelmingly women and children.
Men who have one paraphilia will usually have another."

This is a lot of generalisation and speculation. You can't say she's going to "pose a threat to women and children" just because there's a photo of her in a leather corset. Millions of adult men and women like to dress up in leather outfits in their own time. Lots of adults like to have fun with whips and crops too, it's a form of BDSM.

"including the pistols and the sword shots fine too? Or just the other weapon that doesn’t shoot bullets."

I think I mentioned above that it's a legal Airsoft gun. It's air-powered and fires little plastic balls.

I agree that Pie's posts are useful. They cannot be unaware just how it spurs others to look further into it.

I mean, if I was new to this debate and I saw post after post repeating the safeguarding issues, pointing out that it is inappropriate whether this person identified as anything (despite snide asides that it is all about prejudice), repeating exactly what was being posted without any deviation, I would be seeing posters continuing to downplay this.

And I mean. We keep posting almost word for word the same interpretation of the posts and describing the posts. Describing the language we all used in our complaints. We are not deviating what are the issues.

It is a sure sign that none of us are making anything up, we are not 'virtue signalling' with flimsy assertions. And we are not the ones resorting to snark rhetoric and mantras.

How wonderful for you Pie that you fully believe that a male can become a woman in every way. Kudos for your steadfastness.

The rest of us will live in reality and keep our children safe from the mess that safeguarding has become because people insist that the word denies the reality, that males cannot become females. That the very same statistics that shape the safeguarding decisions for all males remain robust in light of the prison statistics and crime statistics.

But posters can feel safe that they came by and 'had a go' at those mean mummies and daddies and told them off. And deny those statistics exist.

You can't say she's going to "pose a threat to women and children" just because there's a photo of her in a leather corset.

You can continue to deny all the other posts pie. Maybe you have not seen them. We have.

And way to ignore a history of posting by focusing just on one.

"Paraphilias include, not limited to: exhibitionism, voyeurism, cross dressing, engaging in non-consensual sexual activity, sexual interest in inanimate objects"

The issue I take with this statement is that you are lumping cross-dressing in with sex-crimes such as non-consensual sex/voyeurism/exhibitionism. As if you are trying to vilify cross-dressing as some sort of sex offence when it's something that can be done safely amongst consenting adults.

it's something that can be done safely amongst consenting adults.

And around photographs of children, @MargaritaPie?

Come on Marg

All of those things AND years of working with kids?

When will you start acknowledging even the most basic rules of safeguarding?

It matters not whether a person is known to be guilty or not. It is every adult's responsibility to report any possible infraction of safeguarding to someone they know is better qualified to deal with it.

It is not good enough to walk on by and assume someone else will do it. That's the basic principle of safeguarding.

MargaritaPie, you've obviously read Helleofabore's post above, as you've quoted from it. But you've just repeated your handwaving away of the issues ('it's an Airsoft gun, it only shoots plastic pellets') without answering the questions.

So, I'll repost a few them so we can get some clarity.

Was the showing of a line up of small girl’s faces in their profile header behind the ‘in the bath shot’ ok?

Were all the weapons poses, including the pistols and the sword shots fine too?

And posting sexually suggestive captions and images… where do you draw the line there? What poses and captions would be not appropriate for a code of conduct that states clearly that posts of any sexual nature are not appropriate for a GG leader.

And it is a sexual act. And it should not be posted on social media of anyone who has a safeguarding responsibility involving children.

You can keep trying to ignore it but the fact is, posting on social media while in a volunteer role with the Girl Guides means you need to follow their code of conduct.

Posting content with a sexual nature is in direct conflict with their code of conduct. As was posting a line up of small girls with their faces shown on an account with posts of a sexual nature. Including a post of the person in the bath appearing imposed over the top of those girls.

Please, do keep going pie. I think we have answered just about every iteration of these claims over a couple of threads. But I for one, am happy to just keep going.

Marg is missing the point.
Of course a guide leader can have whatever type of sex life she likes- as long as it's with a consenting adult in private!
Living in a rural area I know guiders who are familiar with guns and go shooting (although it is mostly a male dominated sport here).

However: Girlguiding rules are very strict about social media use and guns. Those social media posts would have lead to any other leader being in trouble and probably dismissed.
And while guides can go shooting- it's strictly controlled, targets only, no animal or human shaped targets. Even laser quest and paint balling is banned!

And there were pistols and there was a sword.

But it doesn't matter that it was an air gun. It is still actually a weapon or a replica of a weapon and all that represents. Being posed in the lounge room without suitable protective gear or any acknowledgment of how to safely use it.

fires little plastic balls which are actually fucking dangerous to eyes and small people. Please, do crack on with your minimisation.

And Marg, I come from a farming family with wide spread use of guns. I know from experience just which ammunition is considered 'safe' and 'dangerous' and I assure you, that "little plastic balls" being fired from an air weapon can be harmful.

And by the way, please do tell us how a teenager or child coming across this content is supposed to know the difference? And I mean, please, be very specific how a child or teenager would know.