Page 18 | Trans Swimming sessions

DaveDave · 2023-01-01T09:49:42+00:00

Just saw the below event advertised at my local pool. How come this is ok but we can't have biologically female only swimming sessions? I'm annoyed, not because of the event, but because it seems impossible to have female only swimming without being accused of being transphobic. "Been hoping for a swimming event that's only for trans, non-binary, and/or intersex people? Well, here it is! To ensure privacy we have booked an entire public pool so it's just for us! Apart from the lifeguards, the rest of the building will be empty too, so there's no need to worry about which changing room to use or people staring. Whether you want to swim laps, float about, or just hang out, you're very welcome. We want these sessions to be accessible to as many people who need them, so if you need a carer who is cisgender to attend with you they are welcome to come along. Parents/guardians are welcome to come and wait in the changing rooms but will not be allowed in the pool or on the poolside. VENUE: The venue will be given to you during booking to ensure privacy. Please do not advertise this information. You can arrive 15 minutes prior to our swimming session starting, but please note that if you arrive more than 15 minutes late you may be locked out. There is very little phone reception by the pool so you may not be able to get in touch with anyone to let you into the building. CHANGING FACILITIES: The changing room is gender neutral, wheelchair accessible, and has individual changing and shower cubicles. Before swimming you'll have 15 mins to get ready, and 30 mins at the end. AGE RANGE: This event is for all ages, but if you're under 18 you'll need to get a consent form signed. Just let us know when you're booking and we'll send you one to bring filled in on the day. Please bear in mind that we do not currently allow cisgender parents and guardians to be in the pool or on the poolside. DRESS CODE: As always, genitals covered. If you have [insert word you're comfortable using for your chest/boobs/breast tissue] you'll need to have your chest covered too. A rash vest would be best, but if you don't have one or can't afford one a light weight t-shirt is also acceptable. BOOKING: To book, or ask any questions, contact ren@rainbow-project.org. If you are disabled and need a cisgender carer to attend with you please let me know during booking. COST: This event is free to attend but as a charity we welcome donations. You can donate on our website [[http://www.rainbow-project.org/donate www.rainbow-project.org/donate]]/ or there will be a donation bucket available at the event. (redacted)

Noname99 · 02/01/2023 12:45

CriticalCondition

Every event that is age restricted has children who may attempt to access it without this permission. Kids do it at the cinema every day …. are you shouting about the safeguarding risk there?

Datun · 02/01/2023 12:47

Noname99 · 02/01/2023 12:41

Datun

No you don’t - that is a ridiculous way to go about risk assessment and leads to the utterly ineffective ones that I reject all of the time as generic “anything you can think of” nonsense. Risk assessment is that …… an assessment of risk specific to the activity and rules it has stated.

I won’t give the name of body of which I am chair of as it would be outing but let’s just say I’m as highly qualified in safeguarding (in the us) as it is possible to be. And if you are too, then you’ll know likely what.

The activity here is VOLUNTARY event that requires parental consent for under 18s to attend. So parents know what they are agreeing to. It’s not a secret. The name and email address of every participant is likely known. There are lifeguards in place. Parental supervision is allowed during changing which is likely the only time a child could conceivably be alone with an adult although there are other people in close proximity. It is has more checks than a child being allowed to go swimming without their parents which no one would shriek “safeguarding risk” at.

The event is entirely VOLUNTARY so if you feel that your child should be supervised by you at all times and they never go anywhere without you being on hand then they wouldn’t be going would they?

Is your risk assessment that the advertised lack of parents at poolside increases the likelihood that a sex offense will take place at a closed invitation only group where you have to supply your name and email address and where the only likely private contact place is supervised? If you do, then don’t send your child.

There is absolutely no specific safeguarding risk here at all other than the usual background societal risk that all parents undertake whenever their child goes anywhere unaccompanied. Unless you believe that this group of people present a higher risk …… which is really what this is about….transphobic nonsense. This is the reason why so many of us are angry with the group of self titled GC ‘feminists’ who claim to speak for us but don’t (because we are apparently too stupid and they know better. Most of us want a sensible debate and conclusion to this issue; it is threads and nonsense like this that is undermining the rest of us with ridiculous transphobic scaremongering of which this is a fine example.

Ffs - they even state that they have single cubicles….

You can be as angry as you like. I don't give a flying fuck.

Perhaps you can tell me what the reason is for forbidding parents from joining their children? What is the actual reason? No age limit, parents not allowed to see their children during the session.

BedTaker · 02/01/2023 12:47

RedAndBlueStripedGolfingUmbrella · 02/01/2023 12:43

Parents/guardians are welcome to come and wait in the changing rooms but will not be allowed in the pool or on the poolside.
Yes, parents are allowed in the changing rooms with them.
They're not allowed poolside which is usually the case in swimming pools up and down the land.
As for not being in the pool with them you wouldn't send them into a pool by themselves if they weren't competent to swim alone.

I have never taken my kids to a pool for lessons or public swim where there was no way of being able watch them while they were in the water?

Ramblingnamechanger · 02/01/2023 12:48

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 12:49

Ah, we’re on to quoting the great lamented Lang Cleg to GC-splain safeguarding time me.

Have at it Datun.

I’m still here, seeing the whopping great holes in this concerted attack on this third-space activity set up by trans people.

MN: trans people should make their own third spaces and leave cunty women their privacy and dignity

Also MN: trans people are not to be trusted (because trans) and are endangering children by making a third space to leave cunty women their privacy and dignity

It’s no surprise to anyone that you won’t see it that way. But just every now and again, it’s worth the time and trouble to point out in here that the GC emperor has no clothes on.

BedTaker · 02/01/2023 12:49

Also stating the no nudity rules clearly means anyone who might have thought this was anything other than a swim session is set straight from the outset and anyone breaking the rule can be removed easily.

Why would anyone think it was anything other than a swim session?

NotBadConsidering · 02/01/2023 12:52

Yes why, specifically, is important that parents of children attending are not allowed to be in the pool or poolside?

And why should we give this organisation the benefit of neutrality of opinion on their safeguarding practices when they want children to be with stranger adults without their parents, have no safeguarding policy on their website nor a dedicated member of staff for it?

Think of it as a questionnaire. Who genuinely thinks that on a scale of 1 to 10 where 5 is neutral, 1 is proven perfectly safe and 10 is red flag 🚩 🚩🚩🚩city, that this organisation is still sitting at a 5?

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 12:52

Perhaps you can tell me what the reason is for forbidding parents from joining their children? What is the actual reason?

This has already been answered multiple times, and it’s the same policy as for many childrens swimming lessons all over the country.

Again, will you be taking the fight on this to public pools? If not, perhaps consider you may be allowing your prejudice towards trans people to govern you more than is reasonable.

RedAndBlueStripedGolfingUmbrella · 02/01/2023 12:54

Tell me then, what is the reason for not allowing parents to view their children during the session
Do you ask this of all those children swimming every day in the pool, 9, 10,11, 12 year olds etc regularly swim competently by themselves?
Or is it just trans sessions you're wary of?

BedTaker · 02/01/2023 12:54

Also stating the no nudity rules clearly means anyone who might have thought this was anything other than a swim session is set straight from the outset and anyone breaking the rule can be removed easily.

Surely if the chance of your event attracting people who think it's somewhere you can get your genitals out is so high that you have to state that genitals have to be covered, then it's immediately not a place for kids?

I can't think of another event for kids where it has to be stated that genitals must be covered?

dizzydizzydizzy · 02/01/2023 12:54

@Soontobe60 the sort of reasons your pool would not allow over 8s unaccompanied would be additional hazards eg flumes, waves, unusual shape, very large pool maybe or perhaps very deep water. All the leisure centres I have worked in allow over 8s to be alone. This is pretty standard RLS guidance.

RedAndBlueStripedGolfingUmbrella · 02/01/2023 12:55

Forgot to add not all pools have viewing areas

Datun · 02/01/2023 12:55

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 12:49

Ah, we’re on to quoting the great lamented Lang Cleg to GC-splain safeguarding time me.

Have at it Datun.

I’m still here, seeing the whopping great holes in this concerted attack on this third-space activity set up by trans people.

MN: trans people should make their own third spaces and leave cunty women their privacy and dignity

Also MN: trans people are not to be trusted (because trans) and are endangering children by making a third space to leave cunty women their privacy and dignity

It’s no surprise to anyone that you won’t see it that way. But just every now and again, it’s worth the time and trouble to point out in here that the GC emperor has no clothes on.

So you disagree that if you have a certain group of people with loopholes in safeguarding, that predators will flock to that that group?

Do you genuinely think that priests are born with an unhealthy sexual interest in little boys? Or scoutmasters?

Don't you think it would be eminently more effective to attempt to close all the loopholes, and then enjoy everything with a clear conscience. Why are you arguing that there are no loopholes, instead of arguing to close them and then relax about it?

ResisterRex · 02/01/2023 12:55

If not, perhaps consider you may be allowing your prejudice towards trans people to govern you more than is reasonable.

Interesting. What's a "reasonable" amount of prejudice? I'm not sure I've seen a measure, as such, or an agreement that being prejudiced only X amount on a scale is alright.

NotBadConsidering · 02/01/2023 12:55

This has already been answered multiple times, and it’s the same policy as for many childrens swimming lessons all over the country.

So it’s swimming lessons you think are the same now? Not swimming sessions? Name any other occasion where parents are specifically told they can’t be in or around the pool and have to hide away until the mixed kids/adults session is over.

Datun · 02/01/2023 12:55

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 12:52

Perhaps you can tell me what the reason is for forbidding parents from joining their children? What is the actual reason?

This has already been answered multiple times, and it’s the same policy as for many childrens swimming lessons all over the country.

Again, will you be taking the fight on this to public pools? If not, perhaps consider you may be allowing your prejudice towards trans people to govern you more than is reasonable.

No, no, no. Likening it to somebody else's policy isn't a reason. What is the reason?

Flounder2022 · 02/01/2023 12:56

Noname99 · 02/01/2023 12:41

Datun

No you don’t - that is a ridiculous way to go about risk assessment and leads to the utterly ineffective ones that I reject all of the time as generic “anything you can think of” nonsense. Risk assessment is that …… an assessment of risk specific to the activity and rules it has stated.

I won’t give the name of body of which I am chair of as it would be outing but let’s just say I’m as highly qualified in safeguarding (in the us) as it is possible to be. And if you are too, then you’ll know likely what.

The activity here is VOLUNTARY event that requires parental consent for under 18s to attend. So parents know what they are agreeing to. It’s not a secret. The name and email address of every participant is likely known. There are lifeguards in place. Parental supervision is allowed during changing which is likely the only time a child could conceivably be alone with an adult although there are other people in close proximity. It is has more checks than a child being allowed to go swimming without their parents which no one would shriek “safeguarding risk” at.

The event is entirely VOLUNTARY so if you feel that your child should be supervised by you at all times and they never go anywhere without you being on hand then they wouldn’t be going would they?

Is your risk assessment that the advertised lack of parents at poolside increases the likelihood that a sex offense will take place at a closed invitation only group where you have to supply your name and email address and where the only likely private contact place is supervised? If you do, then don’t send your child.

There is absolutely no specific safeguarding risk here at all other than the usual background societal risk that all parents undertake whenever their child goes anywhere unaccompanied. Unless you believe that this group of people present a higher risk …… which is really what this is about….transphobic nonsense. This is the reason why so many of us are angry with the group of self titled GC ‘feminists’ who claim to speak for us but don’t (because we are apparently too stupid and they know better. Most of us want a sensible debate and conclusion to this issue; it is threads and nonsense like this that is undermining the rest of us with ridiculous transphobic scaremongering of which this is a fine example.

Ffs - they even state that they have single cubicles….

👏👏👏👏

FrippEnos · 02/01/2023 12:58

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 12:52

Perhaps you can tell me what the reason is for forbidding parents from joining their children? What is the actual reason?

This has already been answered multiple times, and it’s the same policy as for many childrens swimming lessons all over the country.

Again, will you be taking the fight on this to public pools? If not, perhaps consider you may be allowing your prejudice towards trans people to govern you more than is reasonable.

This is not a children only session and in most cases parents would still be allowed to view.

NotBadConsidering · 02/01/2023 12:59

For other reasons, where children aged 10, 11, 12 or whatever swim unsupervised, if their parent wanted to swim with them or supervise them, they could.

But in this event, they are being told specifically they can’t. Why?

Datun · 02/01/2023 12:59

Do you ask this of all those children swimming every day in the pool, 9, 10,11, 12 year olds etc regularly swim competently by themselves?
Or is it just trans sessions you're wary of?

Again, will you be taking the fight on this to public pools? If not, perhaps consider you may be allowing your prejudice towards trans people to govern you more than is reasonable.

And there is. This is the creation of a sacred cast in action. From two separate posters, as well!

Not answering any questions. Not addressing the safeguarding issues, just deflect, deflect, deflect from the one group who is organising the session.

AltitudeCheck · 02/01/2023 13:01

Everyone should be able to access sports facilities and exercise without being gawped at, judged or made to feel 'other'. We wish this for women so why would we want to deny it to another group of humans?

There are significant barriers for trans/NB adults & children (specifically post-pubescent children) to swim in general sessions so this offers them that opportunity. I suspect allowing parents to supervise the changing was to try and prevent any accusations of poor behaviour in the more private areas of the pool. Likewise the clear no nudity message.

I can understand why they don't want a non-trans people in attendance poolside or in the session. I wouldn't want the father of a female child lurking about a women only swim 'supervising' either.

You can't make something exclusive and fully inclusive at the same time. Yes, this might mean some trans kids can't go because they need supervision or their parents won't let them. Same as some other sports or activities. How many do you think are actually going to miss out because of this?

Theeyeballsinthesky · 02/01/2023 13:03

I still don’t understand why this event needs to be mixed age 🤷🏻‍♀️

why do trans adults need to be able to swim with ‘trans’ children? (I don’t believe children are trans)

What is the purpose of enabling that? I can see why trans adults want to swim together and socialise as part of that and no problem at all with it. It’s the third space we ask for. What I don’t understand why they need children or teenagers to be there too

Noname99 · 02/01/2023 13:03

Datun

What is the actual reason?

what’s the actual reason that women want to be able to swim with no men present?

They would like to have a swim session free from prejudice and the gawping transphobic bollocks that they put up with day in and day out so they are limiting the access routes for transphobic activists who might disrupt and people who get off at gawping at people who have different bodies. Yes there still might be people who claim to be trans / non binary but aren’t who gain access but they are trying to limit the possibilities.

can you explain why you feel that if a child did sneak in without permission, they’d be anymore at risk than in any other activity that kids routinely sneak into underage.

Your portrayal of “its secret, they are locked in and there are no phone” shows your prejudice. Are you really suggesting that they are locking the doors for a private session with a start and end time is anything other than normal. When I hire a venue that can be accessed by the public, I do the same unless there is a receptionist or how else would I participate? Phone reception in a pool are notoriously shit.

Your “risk assessment” is that it’s dangerous because it is likely that this group are planning to lock in children with no phone access and do what exactly?

NotBadConsidering · 02/01/2023 13:04

Flounder2022 · 02/01/2023 12:56

👏👏👏👏

Show quote history

You realise the post you’re applauding is saying “if you’re a parent and have zero confidence in the organisation’s ability to safeguard your kids, just don’t send them!”

StrawberryFieldsForEveryone · 02/01/2023 13:07

Datun, you’re back at making stuff up that no one has said, and more specifically that I have absolutely not said.

That’s not how discussion and debate work. It’s just a low tactic to chase off people who are disagreeing with you, and I decline to play that silly game with you or anyone else.