Girlguiding Brownie leader raising concerns

[AJNorthWest]

Hey all, I think I'm in the right place for this.

I have been a Brownie leader for 10 years now, since I was 18, and was a Brownie myself as a child. For the last year or so I have been more aware of the takeover of gender ideology and seen it seeping into every single-sex area you could think of.

I have recently challenged Girlguiding on their "inclusion policy" and their self-description of themselves being a "girl-only trans inclusive space". It turns out that this has been their stance since 2018. So since 2018 Girlguiding has been a mixed-sex space, without calling itself that, and leaders and parents are unaware of this.

I sent a long email to the Volunteer Support team asking for some clarification on their language, their stance, and safeguarding. They have now responded, without addressing my concerns, and asked me to answer a hypothetical scenario (presumably to prove I'm not a threat to Girlguiding and the members) within 2 weeks otherwise they will "take further action".

I'm not really sure what the point of this post is other than to seek some common sense. I'm feeling very alone in this, but I know others have the same concerns, it's just really difficult to speak out!

For anyone who would like to back me on this or add their input to my response, drop me a message - I'm gathering concerned leaders and parents together in the hope that our numbers will get the point across.

I spoke with a lawyer and he wrote a response letter for me. We haven’t heard back from them yet, but I fully expect that they’ll kick me out when they respond.

Good luck @AJNorthWest

I am dismayed by what has become of Guiding

As much as you love it I'd just f-ck it all off and walk away.

@AJNorthWest Wow. This is so shit that volunteers must pay for lawyers to protect themselves against an organisation that they volunteer for. I hope people considering volunteering for this organisation are aware of this. Do you still volunteer for them AJ? Are you aware of others who have been kicked out for daring to ask if / how they keep girls safe?

I was a Brown Owl for many years and left when the guidance was released that stated that parents could not be told that a child of the opposite sex was to be sharing rooms or tents with the other girls. I believe that parents should be aware.
It all happened to coincide with the change and dumbing down of the programme to make it more basic and prescriptive for Brownies, at least, so it was no longer for me.
I still believe that being a Brownie is a good thing, even though not as exciting as it was 10 years ago.

They're going to kick you out for asking them questions? None of this was mentioned when I did my safe space level 3 training the other week.

@tadjennyp yer, I don't think they mention these things, like other organisations you don't realise how messed up it is until you're already quite involved with it (I'm actually thinking of some uncommon religions and cults when I say this).

Raising concerns about keeping girls safe and discrimination was exactly what I did. They never investigated those concerns yet threw me out.

I dare you to ask a question about keeping girls safe. If I were a betting lady I'd bet you £1,000 within a week they'll have found a reason to throw you out. How about "I read on the internet you don't bother with criminal record checks and references for all your volunteers, as this is delegated to district commissioners who may or may not think this is something that they should bother with. Is this true?"

@tadjennyp did they mention their condom policy at safe space training too? Given the penises that might be present at camps. But no training about how to spot if a girl is actually being abused/ raped when she is having condoms handed out by her guider, aged 13.

GG got lost up their own arses with their be kind mantra. I've had children in both GG and Scouting, and Scouting is imo much safer. From what I've seen, Scouting do very much welcome girls into the group, but have very strict safeguarding procedures for camps.

Gosh didn't know about the condom policy 😔.

I was asked to leave for raising my concerns - I was a Brownie Leader and a District Commissione and I said I would not, if it ever happened, sign off a REN form if I knew there would be men/boys present and this hadn't been called out in the risk assessment.

I sometimes wonder if WAGGGS would allow a second UK organisation to be formed. The belief sex is binary & immutable is now protected in law; so forming an organisation for those who hold that belief (ie a single sex one) might be allowed. I’ve never checked what the rules are… 🤷‍♀️

Of course, Girlguiding might then discover just how unpopular their policies & Programme are. 🤔

I’m so sorry to hear this @AJNorthWest - I know they’ve lost a load of young members, but binning off volunteers with gay abandon when the need for them has been steadily increasing since the turn of the millennium is utter madness. That said, I’d not trust HQ’s current incumbents to run a sink, let alone a youth organisation. (And I do mean sink, I consider a bath too advanced for them too.)

So many volunteers being kicked out for raising safety questions! Really alarming. All these stories should be brought together in one place.

AJNorthWest does your lawyer know about the outcome of the case with Katie Alcock? GG settled with her, and made a statement of the things they had agreed to. It read like they were agreeing not to prevent guiders talking about this issue.

Musing about whether a safe space could be found for ex-GG volunteers so they could set up a new organisation just for girls. It sounds like there would be plenty of adult support and plenty of families with girls would want to join - even more if more were aware of the actuality of GG today.

I'm not a lawyer but the Equality Act protects "people undergoing gender reassignment" from discrimination. I think setting up a single-sex space like that would immediately lead to legal proceedings for discriminating against trans people.

....following on, which is sad. I fully support protecting people from harassment and violence. To me though, that is not the same as saying that any person can access provision for the opposite sex on their own say-so. And there is no way to stop it being abused!

My understanding is that you can exclude males that identify as women/girls as long as you also exclude males that admit that they are male. It would be excluding females identifying as men that would be the problem. Gender reassignment protects people from being treated differently from their actual sex, not the one they claim to be.

This is the problem. It centres the grown-ups instead of the children that they should be safeguarding. It's totally the wrong focus.

GG were perfectly legally safe in excluding boys and men, regardless of identity. Changing this was a choice based on - I suspect - a genuine, if misguided attempt to be inclusive.
I help out with a unit and enjoy doing so, but am fully aware that my personal feelings are not consistent with GG policies. I toe the line as long as it's in theory only. I will leave if the unit admits boys as Guides or men as Leaders. It's their choice as an organisation to do this, but not something I would be comfortable with.
OP - if you want to stay in Guiding be very careful what you say. The people in charge currently have doubled down and are wedded to this approach. They would rather see volunteers leave than deviate. Whilst the outcome of cases with Maya Forstater and Katie Alcock have clarified that it's fine to hold GC views in law, GG policies are very clear on whom GG welcomes now.
Their website has been updated and says that GG is a single gender organisation not single sex. The guidelines around residentials are better than they were when this was first introduced. But be under no illusions about your views being listened to.

The EA specifically allows single sex provision - including exclusion of people of the opposite sex who meet the gender reassignment criteria or have a GRC - if it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.

@waterwitch

Do you mean, as I suggested just above you, seeing if WAGGGS would permit formation of a second member organisation? Or something completely novel - or at least, stand-alone?

Setting up a new organisation would be a mammoth task (although you could drastically improve on GO).
Scouts have been mixed sex for sometime and GG was unusual in being single sex still.
Are there any single sex general activity clubs left now?

It would be a mammoth task . It might be worth pursuing but would take so much in funding to get up and running and organised. And venues. Guides already have huts and churches etc established.

What's really bad though is that parents, unless they've really looked into it, will believe girl guiding is single sex only. They'll meet the leaders, see the girls and think, ah lovely, just women and girls are here. They won't look up the policies or go on the website, they will just be happy their daughter has found a nice group to be a part of. That's until their daughter comes back home and tells them who is now in the group or running it! GG won't even ask leaders to tell parents there's a male person there or going to be there on a camp etc. Utterly shocking.

NitroNine, sadly I think it would need to be a stand alone organisation, at least to start with. I once established, it might be able to affiliate with single-sex groups in other countries.
It would be a lot of work, and galling to leave behind the existing infrastructure. However, what with the ideology and the ‘girly’ activities (that might just be my dd’s experience) there are many areas which don’t have any similar provision - it would be very worthwhile