Trans Swimming sessions

[DaveDave]

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 [email protected]. 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

www.rainbow-project.org/donate/ or there will be a donation bucket available at the event.

(redacted)

I saw it advertised on the public Facebook site where anyone can see it (including contact name and e-mail). I'm in Belfast, it said Belfast (I think) but that's not really the point. I'll ask Mumsnet to delete that part though if it worries you, and I apologise for that.

If it's Belfast you're talking about, yes lots of pools offer women only sessions, but if you enquire, there are open to trans-women too. I have never seen any that are only open to natal women. Let me know if you find any!

Actually, on reflection, I do think these sessions are a good idea so I'm not against them. Swimming should be for all, no matter who you are. However, also there should be sessions for natal women if we want them - would you agree with that? You asked what I want - that all people, Muslim, trans, women, men, children can swim in an environment that is comfortable and safe. The problem is that when sessions for natal women are organised we are accused of being transphobic. But there is a huge population of women worldwide, for religious regions, that this is extremely important for.

Yaniv's swim party

The booking is private but the attendees are not necessarily known to anyone present. There are safeguarding issues that should be highlighted.

That's always the case with private swim parties though? My now teenager attended one thrown by a classmate "s family approx the age of 10 ,- I didn't get in the pool and didn't know anyone in it - still let my child attend the party though there was classmates adult family members inn(the Dad was in there swimming too)

Are all private parties a risk, better do away with kids swimming parties too if so?

Really? You are comparing organisations that should have appropriate safeguards in place.

And should have ability for a parent to check on their child’s welfare when needed.

Do you understand that school, afterschool, summer camps, sports camp. in the UK require appropriate DBS checked staff? And that many of these facilities do not allow any person off the street access, and maybe not even parents unless accompained by a staff member.

Maybe I have misunderstood, in which case I apologise, but something seems to be not consistent here.

Someone upthread was talking about what happens at THEIR pool, not what happens at THIS pool.

I personally wouldn't like that

So you accept this makes you uncomfortable for your children? You’d let them go? And you’d stay in the changing rooms? Or you wouldn’t?

If you're not comfortable letting your child swim alone though, surely you just wouldn't let them anyway? Regardless of what session it was.

I am comfortable letting my children swim alone. I am not comfortable letting my children swim with a group of adults I don’t know behind closed doors. I wouldn’t let my kids anywhere near this event.

How do you propose that children whose parents don’t see any concerns are protected, and the staff themselves are protected?

And you think for some reason the charity and the pool that are organising this don't have to have those same safeguards in place?

I'm pretty disgusted that people are so adamantly suggesting a swimming facility and a registered charity are colluding to provide access to children in this way.

Not necessarily colluding, but either dangerously naïve or deliberately disingenuous.

Transpeople are allowed at everyday mixed sessions anyway. So it’s not a comparison between unaccompanied 8 yr olds is fine with cis people and bad with trans people. That isn’t the debate here.
The comparison is 8 yr old proven swimmers being allowed (not encouraged or required) to swim without parent or other supervising adult present during normal operating hours and conditions vs This event advertising itself as being ´open to all ages’ but requiring cisgender parents to sit in the changing rooms,
First big issue - who is liable for the safety of any minors present? Obviously lifeguards are there to help prevent drownings in the pool. I’d imagine they aren’t actually legally liable though or no one would do the job. In normal operating hours there will be policies about how to deal with minors in case of all sorts of issues - say if they get asked to leave early for poor behavior. This might include asking them how they are getting home and offering the use of the office phone or a safe space to wait for someone to pick them up. Normal operating conditions means the front door is open and unaccompanied children can leave whenever they wish. If it’s a public pool this may well mean it’s consider a public place which helps with legal responsibility (or lack of it). Normal operating conditions often includes changing rooms segregated by sex (perhaps not in a changing village type set up) and staff other than the lifeguards floating around. So cleaners regularly going in to the changing rooms for example, which acts as a deterrent to people doing odd things like sitting waiting in the changing rooms.
With this event, the door to the leisure centre will be locked and reception presumably unmanned. The space has been privatized. So not a public space anymore. Lifeguards will be present but will the pool manager be there? Will anyone be out of the water and obviously in charge in case of issues? Presumably the organizers are in loco parentis? Who is legally responsible for children attending without parents (or with parents out of sight and earshot of the pool). This is a proper legal question that the organizer’s need to know the answer to.
It’s pretty obviously not an event suitable for children. Teens perhaps. So the advert should give a clear minimum age. ´all ages welcome’ doesn’t even cover the minimum requirements of the pool during normal operating hours. There is nothing in the advert to suggest a 5 year old can’t come and have their parent stay in the changing rooms. Clearly that’s a stupid idea but when you advertise an event, particularly one with a element of danger (i.e. a pool full or water) you need to assume common sense doesn’t exist.
The parental permission form is a good start but it’s totally insufficient. By far the easiest way of dealing with the liability is to exclude children altogether.

Goodness, reading some of the responses….🤦🏻‍♀️

Yes.... this oh so liberal, open minded, sensible, modern and above all believing in the good thing is what permitted Mermaids to roll to - what are we on? 5 separate safeguarding disasters so far? And they are very, very far from alone in this, people being kindly open minded has been very thoroughly helpful in a number of distressing outcomes.

It’s a registered charity organising it, not Bob and Sue from Number 10 down the road.

This stood out to me too.
Developmental disorders have nothing to do with trans.

As tends to be the way in these threads the assumptions made are that there is no safeguarding, no safeguarding policy or safeguarding lead (which all charities will have) and no enhanced DBS for the organisers/charity workers. It’s just another pile on without establishing any facts. The responses are not just about this, they’re also about trans people having their own session.

I’m sure that anyone with parental consent that has to be given will not give it if they are not comfortable with how this is being organised, just as any of us do with any events organised for our DC.

Now now @nnilsmousehammer

Pointing out the obvious is itself transphobic. You really don't have to compound that by adding a reminder about the shit show that is Mermaids.

Pshaw!

I'm pretty disgusted that people are so adamantly suggesting a swimming facility and a registered charity are colluding to provide access to children in this way.

No one is adamant this is the intention. They're pointing out that where this is even a possibility, organisations need to demonstrate an understanding of the possibility of that, the possibility of false allegations, the possibility of harm on their watch.

That's what safeguarding is. Thinking the unthinkable. No one beyond reproach. Consistently applied policy.

Our school doesn't let anyone help listen to reading/on trips/crafts without a DBS. Even though these are the children's parents, even though they have small children at home, even though they often themselves work in schools/healthcare, even though they are never alone or unsupervised with any children and have no keycodes to move around freely in school. No one minds. No one is offended. No one argues that the suggestion of potential harm is offensive.

I’m sure that anyone with parental consent that has to be given will not give it if they are not comfortable with how this is being organised, just as any of us do with any events organised for our DC.
Exactly, you just wouldn't go! Like would be the case at any session.

Well what was the relevance of you talking about sending your son to school then? Unless your son attends a school where he is encouraged to be in a pool in his swimwear surrounded by unchecked strangers who specifically do not want you attempting to be anywhere nearby then it’s a totally irrelevant situation.

From the information in the OP, the lack of safeguarding information/policy on their website, what gives you the confidence that safeguarding has been considered?

As is Mermaids!

So…. Those swim parties dictated parents were not allowed to be there on the side watching? Really? Fuck. That is crazy.

I remember my child and their mate having to be hauled from the floor of the pool at a pool party at someone else’s house by my husband because no one even noticed they were mucking around holding each other down. There was about 5 adults in the pool with the kids and others watching from the edge.

Both kids had been in swimming lessons most of their life. My child had been in swimming lessons since 18 months old.

Yes. All pool parties are a risk.

Maybe because I come from a country where pools in backyards are common, we don’t muck around with pool safety. Ever.

So let me get this straight. I can hire a pool, invite anyone including children but not their parents and that's fine. If not why not? How is this any different from this trans event? And I'm transphobic/bigot/pearl clutcher for saying I think this is a safeguarding issue?

I think the event in itself is a good idea but I also think the criticism is valid and the accusations being thrown in defence are rather typical of what we have come to expect.

Of course you can have women only sessions. Our local leisure centre has done for as long as I can remember. My gym has a women only room too with weights, cardio equipment, etc.

Ah, do you remember back in 2022 when it was revealed Mermaids hosted webchats and camps with little regard for safeguarding? Funny how that leads us to skepticism that other organisations just automatically do it and don’t need to explicitly state they do appropriate checks.

No organisation should be afforded the presumption of good safeguarding practices. That in itself is a failure of safeguarding. If this organisation does it properly, then they should state as such clearly. But they don’t. So I’m going to assume they don’t until they clear things up.

But they are not, they are for anyone who identifies as a women (I bet).

Absolutely! If Girl Guides can't get that right then we cannot presume any other organisations do!

But we all share responsibility for safeguarding in the wider sense. We all need to be prepared to speak up for those children who do not have advocates and are not protected by parents who critically analyse these situations. We all need to point out the situations where safeguarding failures appear to be possible. This is not just to protect children but also to protect those being asked to work in these contexts. I would not want my 17 yr old to be out in a position of lifeguarding an event where the potential for allegation and fall out had not been thought through and mitigated for example.

Just voting with our feet for our own is well and good but ignores our corporate social responsibility for others.