Everyone knows their Guiding history, don’t they? The first ever time “Girl Scouts” were entertained as an idea by BP was at the Crystal Palace rally, the JB uniform was welcomed by all with open arms as a breath of fresh air and the old GO! and Join Us worked perfectly for years until the horrible new Go was foist upon us. The latters sadness is clearly demonstrated by the lack of exclamation point. Revisionism can be a complex term with several meanings, here I am using it very basically to describe reinterpretation or purposeful editing. This can be by both the members themselves or encouraged by central Guiding. It can be slightly different from simple nostalgia (of course thirty years ago each girl turned up exactly on time in perfect uniform and never forgot subs every single week) as it can actively impact on our Guiding experience and it can change what Guiding means. Some might say that the finer points of history don’t matter, it’s what we do now. We tend to romanticise the past regardless so does it matter if the Crystal Palace is used as a nice story of early members demanding to be recognised? It sounds more fun rather than the truth that BP was aware of female groupings and discussed exploring options for them before, and the admin of sorting it all out. Others might say continuing this story is unfair to the early leaders who faced criticism in their communities, battled with Scouting to get badges and who got their girls legitimate tickets. Do we easily forget the hard work of “ordinary” units and volunteers for the more flashy and radical? On to more recent history. Others say that experiences they had at a localised level in the past (being asked to leave/prevented from progress due to religion/sexuality/disability) are even more of a slap in the face with the “we’ve been for all girls and women forever in the past and forever in the future” type messages now. It’s really not so long ago (and for some leaders its still unofficially happening) they were forced to step down as GiC or hand in their leadership qualification either by social pressure or by a commissioner. It’s the lack of acknowledgement that it’s something that happened that hurts for them, because even if it wasn’t “official” policy they didn’t feel supported. What do you all think? Do we as members focus too much on how things were done, rather than looking forward? Is central Guiding too convenient with how they portray our history? Do you feel sometimes the past Guiding talked about doesn’t really line up with what you experienced?