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

ALL these problems will continue to keep coming back to this underlying conflict of interests. They will never go away if you keep putting kids identifying as trans in the same box as males in middle age who have transitioned

continuing from my deleted post, it is a fact that there is a group of males who generally retain their penises, advocating for children to unquestioningly receive treatment that renders them sexually impotent

look at what people DO

There is only one question for Mermaids.

How do you safeguard when you are simultaneously advocating and working to remove barriers which safeguard?

Instead they are replying, in answer to this fundamental question:

"stop picking on us, stop asking us questions, stop being mean"

Just because women said no. Women saying no is hate speech.

Well, Mermaids, you definitely outdid the NSPCC and Mr Rubberwankyman!

You win all the shoddy-safeguarding-prizes. Absolute champs!

'On this occasion we also placed weight on the fact his employer is a globally renowned institution that would have carried out its own checks."

Anyone else think they made things worse for themselves by this statement?

Absolutely. They don't get it.

Do they genuinely think that this man could've gone to work in a kindergarten, say, and the kindergarten claim Mermaids used him so we assumed he was ok.

They are a children's charity, and think that's how safeguarding works.

So, yes, blaming the LSE for their own failure to carry out safeguarding demonstrates that they don't know what it is.

Noting that another one of Mermaids' safeguarding leads worked previously with NSPCC.

Bloody hell.

From a safeguarding conference earlier this year:

'SAFEGUARDING CONFERENCE 2022 - KEYNOTE SPEAKER: XXXX XXXXX
Biography:

After several years working for the NSPCC delivering their safeguarding programme in primary schools, XXX joined Mermaids in 2019.'

So, presumably someone who is fairly conversant in safeguarding practise.

Then what the actual fuck were they playing at? So not some inexperienced intern slammed with safeguarding but a child protection professional! @

The presentation said person was giving at conference included:

'Look at safeguarding transgender, non-binary and gender diverse young people – is being gender diverse or non-binary a safeguarding issue?'

Only just catching up but absolutely delighted to see lottery funding has been suspended.

Remember (thanks to langcleg) that the NSPCC are the "only UK children’s charity with statutory powers, which means we can take action to safeguard children at risk of abuse."

Outside of the paedophile business it is impossible to safeguard kids AND recommend a doctor that will give them puberty blockers online &/or also send them to a clinic that will look to book them in for removal of genitals &/or also campaign to remove counselling that might help a confused gay or autistic kid work out their feelings.

That's what they should have been investigated for, we all know that. The Binders and Paedophile on the Trustee Board are part of the zero safeguarding that this organisation promotes, this isn't a bug - it is a feature as they say.

Everything they did is a safeguarding red flag.

I've got a trans policy meeting tomorrow and I'm hoping some of the pronoun brigade have been paying attention to the news. Possibly not if it's still not been covered by the Graun?

LOJ finally pipes up.

Just place marking to read later

LGBT charities under coordinated attack?

How does that work then, when the MOST attacked LGB org is being targeted by a T org?

silly Owen.

Someone has compiled a list of what looks like endorsements or likes, that kind of thing:

twitter.com/libvoice4women/status/1577948447101124609?s=46&t=AH3r9VlSP39Vl1IYCQhZiw

Just spoken with someone who has (some) knowledge of DSB issues. They say that someone who has had a DSB check can pass on a reference number to an organisation to save another such check being conducted, but agreed that the LSE's DSB clearance would not have been applicable in the case of Mermaids because of the difference in age groups affected (adults v children).

Marking for later.

"On this occasion we also placed weight on the fact his employer is a globally renowned institution that would have carried out its own checks."

I have no words

Thing is it's highly unlikely LSE would have DSB checked him - it's not a requirement for uni staff given that they're not normally alone with children.

Tra Twitter is ramping up again, responding to mermaids shutting their Chatline down with incandescent rage against the transphobes, without looking into the situation any further. There's none so blind as those will not see.

Huge love for jk Rowling, she's absolutely in the firing line. I have so much admiration for her tenacity.💕

Legal Feminist has a FOI response about the lottery grant - if I read it right:

twitter.com/legalfeminist/status/1578038840966537218?s=46&t=Hd7fm8zVgOIRLZH6QlW_iw

It's huge (800+ pages) and they're going through it. But they've screenshotted a couple of things including what looks like some kind of monitoring via "milestones"(?). It's a lot to wade through!

Good grief.
Tell me it's not Rubberwankman
Tell me it's not Munroe