Mermaids being investigated by the Charity Commission - thread 2

[ResisterRex]

The first thread, towards the end of which there was a discussion about having a second thread but it wasn't added:

Mermaids being investigated by the charity commission
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4644323-mermaids-being-investigated-by-the-charity-commissionn_

There's been a new development so maybe a second thread would be useful:

Lottery pauses trans charity cash during investigation

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c959a286-44e4-11ed-8885-043c27446b97?shareToken=6d482edb1a386656502f33453da5c230

Again, (and again preaching to the converted) why the effing jeffing is there so much chat about sex work and links to porn and fetish surrounding a children's charity which focuses on healthy childrens bodies and seeks to change / control them.

Objectively speaking, Mermaids is a charity which advocate for the physical control and alterations of healthy childrens' bodies.

To make them life long medically reliant.

To alter their genitals.

Why are so many groups who appear to advocate for "sex work" and porn and sexuality so very bothered by such a charity being scrutinised for safeguarding issues?

Not just walking but wanking.

Not just wanking, but wanking over child porn AND working towards a PhD at the same time.

Indeed. The bloody movement is, er, stiff, with pervy weirdos.

Holy moly.

I don't see how any organisation that is staffed by sex workers, adult entertainers, 'sex positive content creators' etc can possibly be supporting children.

Is that the member of staff who innocently plastered pictures of their beautiful queer anus and penis all over the public domain?

Yes, that is seedy and shameful. A queer anus is no different to anyone other anus and it is always inappropriate to flash it around. Most people know this stuff.

Yes, nils.

The TRA account claims the Panoply of Penises image was 'originally published with explicit consent in appropriate 18+ spaces', which is baldly untrue; it was on Twitter for anyone to see, not even flagged as adult content or anything. We all saw it, Darren.

Note how they are centring staff. Not one word about the children. Not one.

Yes, Red! Priorities!

Mermaids is a validation project. Children are just the fuel.

Given kids who use Mermaids are using the Internet often without parental supervision and are being guided by Mermaids volunteers to Discord (17+) we are talking about kids who are regularly accessing shit which is age inappropriate and encouraged by staff.

Its almost as if they do not understand the Internet and kids ....

This comment 😱😱😱
"We know that there is a huge intersection between the LGBTQIA+ community and sex work, adult entertainment and sex positive art and content creation.
Such a huge charity failing to take a strong stance on this matter risks alienating that very community that they exist to serve, people whose previous (or even current) work in adult industries is no indication of their ability to perform and succeed in more mainstream lines of work".

Talking about a charity for children .....

do you know what pisses me off about safe guarding? it's common sense, it's not frigging complicated. why have so many people been persuaded that it is?

The term sex positive covers a multitude of sins.

Why are so many groups who appear to advocate for "sex work" and porn and sexuality so very bothered by such a charity being scrutinised for safeguarding issues?

Yes, why would that be?

What's ridiculous is the vast bureaucracy involved in safeguarding, double checking that boring middle aged women don't have a hidden past as a predator, and that Jimmy's grandad isn't infiltrating the school for nefarious purposes when he reads with children. That people ferrying children on school trips are legitimate... all that to make sure ordinary boring people are reasonably safe.

Meanwhile in other circles- bring your whole self to work, create and publish pornography, indulge in childplay. That's fine, for Children's charity workers.

under NHS protocols, "safeguarding teams" are made up of representatives of the police, medical and social services professionals who are responsible for ensuring a child's safety and well-being.

woohoo! Reuters have spelled out what safeguarding actually is (spoiler, it doesn’t mean whatever fluffy crap TeamTra want it to mean)

article link in a new thread

exactly @picklemewalnuts

we have the 'bring your whole self to work' drive

I haven't really realised why it made me uncomfortable before

I'll be honest, I wasn't expecting the TRA fightback to be: circulating these images without their creators' consent is revenge porn

twitter.com/MxAshleighLoeb/status/1580271163711770624?s=20&t=rmkBfcSGNDiZ-O8dSJp6WA

What idiots they are.

Perish the thought that the idea of keeping children safe gets in the way of the needs of adults to create and share their versions of porn.

Sharing an image put in the public domain is what Twitter and all social media platforms do - if you put up a picture there it's with full knowledge that it will be shared as far as it happens to run. Unless you choose of course to put your picture up on a private account within privacy settings, to prevent that being able to happen. Which is a pretty good idea when you're sharing very private pictures that you don't want seen far and wide, or don't want to reflect on you badly if they're seen by people for example who relate to you in your workplace and role.

If you share a picture and it goes viral and that reflects badly on you and your job and your workplace? Well you made a bad decision. You can't wail that you can't be held responsible because it was shared in ways you for some reason hadn't managed to foresee. You'd think the massive fail of the TW who posted pictures of themselves in a Brownie leader uniform carrying guns might have clued others in on basic things like this.

And there's such a thing as public interest. Serious public interest. Like the behaviour, ethics and boundaries/safeguarding awareness of those working in top roles in a children's charity.

So I do hope this one goes to court. I'm sure Maya would be more than happy to put across the reasons above and more, and I'm sure Ben is warming up the support wren.

Mew could’ve used a pseudonym for the artporn activities, at least there would’ve been a fighting chance of not having your day job connected to your risqué hobby.

But that doesn’t work in this brave new world of bringing your whole self, smut and all, to work, and of children’s charities hiring fashionable identities rather than suitably qualified individuals.

some of the things Mermaids are tagged in on Instagram are clearly not all appropriate for their primary service user group. I can’t believe they done have it set so tags have to be approved before showing on the profile, and I can’t believe that no one has noticed and deleted the ones that are already there.

there is a huge intersection between the LGBTQIA+ community and sex work, adult entertainment and sex positive art and content creation.
Such a huge charity failing to take a strong stance on this matter risks alienating that very community that they exist to serve

The charity exists to serve children, surely? Are they suggesting the children are somehow part of the 'sex work, adult entertainment and sex positive art and content creation'?

some of the things Mermaids are tagged in on Instagram are clearly not all appropriate for their primary service user group. I can’t believe they done have it set so tags have to be approved before showing on the profile, and I can’t believe that no one has noticed and deleted the ones that are already there.

OMG any teenager knows to set it so you approve tags first! It's so absurdly lax and careless ...

Gioing by their comments, it seems that's precisely what they're suggesting.

When someone shows you who they are the first time - believe them .