More Girl Guides Gender Nonsense

[lcakethereforeIam]

In the Telegraph

https://archive.ph/IoU5d

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/09/26/girl-guides-divided-team-boy-girl-non-binary-identities/

The bit at the end from Stonewall is like a parody

“We commend any efforts to help support and encourage young people to be themselves, be kind and be happy.”

If they genuinely thought that they should be discouraging children from believing their bodies are wrong not encouraging mutilating and irreversible drugs and surgery.

Note the casual underlying assumption that being uncomfortable with toys typically coded for your sex goes with identifying out of your sex. No room for simply being a girl who doesn't like dolls and would rather play with cars. Or a boy vice versa.

I note, as does the article, that the information sheet is from 2019. At the very least, this shows a lack of care following the SC ruling, or a lack of interest in checking these things (which is more worrying). But, it reeks of activism still embedded in some of these individual groups, if not the entire organization. Parents with girls in GG will need to be vigilant, as apparently GG will not be.

The fact that Stonewall doubled down on support for "kindness" when they should have been commenting on why they are still allowing information that they contributed to in 2019 to be used in 2026, says quite a bit about them.

As we've pointed out before, non-binary is one of the only avenues left to activists, along with conversion therapy, and working to change the EA to include "gender identity" without clear definitions. (See also the current thread about Stormont "debating " gender identities in NI). Expect to see more "non- binary" as the "female" and "male" routes have now been closed down by law.

Sorting toys into ones associated with girls or boys! WHY? I thought we were trying to get rid of this incessant labelling in the 1970s.

I really thought society had moved forwards from telling girls who like cars that they are not really girls (ditto boys and dolls).

Liking things less commonly associated with your sex doesn’t make you “non-binary”. Neither should it then hurt and distress you to be called “she”.

It is all so desperately navel gazing and sad.

It really is regressive. It is the GG version of the GI Joe and Barbie continuum.

I am glad this has been publicised.

This tweet has the other side of the sheet

https://x.com/jan_murray/status/2103917166248726643?s=46

it is very concerning.

Schools have now been told that they must not teach children that gender identity is a fact (along with banning mixed sex undressing, sleeping and toileting) so transactivists will be desperate to get their gaslighting into other places where children gather.

Unfortunately that means that parents will need to ask a lot of questions

It just seems really confused.

Surely the conclusion is that most people have 'non-binary' identities, and that it's odd to identify as having either a boy or a girl personality.

In a world structured around binary definitions, what do you think could be difficult for people who identify as non-binary?

Is the world structured around binary definitions? You are certainly stuck with the consequences of being a mammal, but I don't think that is the fault of definitions. Gravity is also a bit annoying if you want to be able to fly.

How do you think someone who identifies as non-binary might feel choosing their clothes, toys or even toothbrushes if most things are gendered

Just like anyone else?

This from scouts too.

Sorting toys into ones the girls associate with one or other sex could be an excellent activity to demonstrate the harms of stereotypes - and their irrelevance. Guaranteed there would be girls who spoke up "But I like cars and football" etc. It would be a marvellous opportunity to explicitly encourage girls to explore activities that they may have felt excluded from in, say, a mixed school, or a strongly stereotyped family. After the toys had been sorted, the Leaders could show pictures of successful adults across every toy, whether they were all female, or some went against stereotype, such as male nurses and ballet dancers.

No need for genderwang. No need for sex ed. Just the best of Girlguiding: opportunities for girls.

oh ffs ( eyes roll around manically)!.

Yes! GG should all be about challenging stereotypes in a safe and supportive single sex environment.

Exactly!

Support is not encouragement.

The anger shown towards people trying to keep trans/nb kids alive is very telling.

Oh dear, oh dear, transparently fabulist reaching.

I think it's projection. I'm not angry, Stonewall have been pulling this shit for years, more sadly unsurprised.

"In a world structured around binary definitions…" that we have just helpfully reinforced with you in our ridiculous activity that cements the idea of binary stereotypes. FFS.

What would be brilliant is either some girls or a leader carefully explaining how none of the stereotypes actually apply and ipso facto, we are all non binary.

I genuinely feel bad for these organisations because these days having any kind of opinion can lead to being cancelled. I’m sure most of the people in the Girl Guides are genuinely kind and trying to do the best they can for all of the children.

I'm a Guide leader. I accidentally lost that card when it first came out.

The first part is great - it's challenging stereo types. Girlguiding has always done this it was first founded and girls did all sorts of activities that were outside their expected roles at the time (with a side of homemaking to make it vaguely acceptable to parents).

However the second part completely contradicts all that by suggesting that actually that the things you like means that you can't be female. The whole premise of Guiding is that girls can do anything be that football, rugby, using a sew or cooking and craft.

I have no idea what they were thinking of. Girls justified space to be girls doing whatever they want to do..

I presume, before FWS, the girls convinced by that card that they were actually boys would immediately be required to leave the Guides. Aside from all the other nonsense, it seems really bad for business.

This is quite an old resource it was produced 7 years ago and like the previous poster we mysteriously lost it in the depths of our cupboard.

That’s an appalling activity. I remember 15-20 years ago there was a Let Toys be Toys campaign (or something like that) that many Rainbow and Brownie groups did, encouraging girls to play with all sorts of toys. Why not go back to that?

HQ did try this I think but it was quickly reversed and policies stated that girls with a trans identity were able to stay as according to equality law they were able to be members.
To be honest while HQ has a few misguided or evangelical people who drove the old policy the huge silent majority of leaders are happy and relieved with our reversion to girl only.
Of course we are concerned about the welfare of boys who are confused about their identify but that does not mean that we need to solve their issues or that our Guides have a support role to their needs.

Great to hear from leaders reassuring us what we all know. That the vast majority of adults in the GG are 1. actively working to empower girls and 2. easily mislay any gaslighting material from Stonewall / HQ or anyone else not centring girls.

There was a 'Pink Stinks' campaign a number of years ago. Shocking how the stereotypes came back on steroids.

It is as if a whole generation, and even older people who should know better, have suffered a case of amnesia and have totally forgotten, or not even been aware that there was a women's movement decades ago that has already challenged gender stereotypes and has already fought these battles.

Why is it, do they think, that we now see women in all sorts of 'presentations', roles and professsions; likewise men. Who is actually saying that "girls must do this" and"boys must do that" - other than some parents, perhaps, and also some other cultures?

There are no legal restrictions in our society on what women/girls must wear, how they must cut their hair, or what job they can do ( with a few exceptions).