Ruth Hunt & Stonewall, "do not and will not acknowledge that there is a conflict between trans rights and ‘sex based women’s rights’

Stonewall Trans Advisory Group = STAG. Stags are males.

Acceptance without exception.

Except...if you are a woman or girl.

As always, follow the money.
Ruth appears to be a professional trans ally. If your income depends on something you might defend it against all odds.
If stonewall changes tack they will lose funding and support.

The petition also calls for respectful debate on this issue. That is something we can sign up to wholeheartedly: the debate as it stands is not respectful. It has become demonising, divisive and shaming.

Ruth should tell all the anti-woman campaigners to stop telling us to 'die in a fire' and all their other threats of violence. They could also stop calling us transphobic for wanting a debate, that they keep shutting down with #nodebate.

It's an obvious DARVO manoeuvre to claim that trans people are being erased.

There is only one class of people being erased her and it isn't them. It's the cervix havers, pregnant people, menstruators, bleeders and non men.

Formerly known as women.

debating whether gay people exist, or whether people of a certain faith should be able to access services, would rightly not be tolerated. It is the same for trans people.

But not for women, apparently.

'same rights' is a very vague term. Same rights to needs-based health care, civil liberties, protection by the law, right to vote, own property, earn money etc etc Yes, of course.

Rights to over-rule women's current sex-based rights sounds a bit different, doesn't it?

Well that's very clear then Ruth isn't it. I've signed the petition and am glad that there is a high profile petition running with lots of measured, intelligent comments from all types of people that Stonewall claims to represent. It's plain as day that Stonewall doesn't represent them anymore. I believe that there is a conflict between trans rights and women's sex-based rights, and so do many of your constituency (except maybe they're not your constituency anymore?)

I really can’t take any more. I naively thought they would listen.

They won't listen. Even if they take us into a far right backlash that takes out trans people, the L and G, and women, they still won't listen.

I find it interesting that this entire movement rests on telling a few central lies, such as: "There have been daily articles and social media threads that question trans people’s right to exist." That isn't true, and Ruth Hunt knows it isn't true. But she has no compunction about saying it. Same with the fake suicide stats. Same with the repeated statement that concerns about self-ID demonise trans people, when in fact they're about stopping men from abusing women and girls. It doesn't matter how often we point out what the real issues are, or that the stats are fake, they persist in repeating the same lies.

But what she has written is nonsense!

Doing so would imply that we do not believe that trans people deserve the same rights as others
I think she has mistakenly written 'the same rights as others' when what she means is 'more rights than others'. Forgive my ignorance, but what rights do Trans people not have that every one else does?

However, we are unequivocal in our support of trans people’s – and everyone’s – right to equality (except actual women)

That George Orwell has got a lot to answer for! Never mind 1984 and newspeak, this is more Animal Farm : All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

In support of their statement Stonewall say:

A recent poll by the Thomson Reuters Foundation asked 1,000 women in Cairo, London, Mexico City, New York and Tokyo: "Should transgender women have the same rights as other women?" Women across the world overwhelmingly agreed, including 87% of women in London (and New York).

If they asked a random selection of women that question, I wonder how many thought that by "transgender woman" they meant someone born female who was transgender? It's not the usual way to refer to a male born transgender person, and I've noticed in newspaper comments people thinking "transwoman" means a female born person. Even I would have to ask for clarification if someone used the term "transgender woman".

I find 'Acceptance without Exception' really inappropriate.

Without exception? Really? So a trans person who is unfortunately also a paedophile or a rapist or predatory is welcomed into their gang with open arms right alongside the vulnerable teenage girl who desperately wants her breasts removed?

No one on the board sees any issue at all with that slogan?

As linked on some of the earlier Ruth Hunt threads on here it seems obvious that the majority of support for her tenure as CEO early on came from the T and trans lobby groups.

She was not popular with gay men when she took over (in part due to some early decisions and rhetoric and also possibly due to good old sexism on their part). As time has gone on she has now also alienated a growing number of lesbians.

Seems like the trans part of the LGBT is her most vocal and supportive base and is probably what is keeping her in post.

Answering has shot Stonewall in the foot.

Well she would say that, wouldn't she?

We are in the middle of a consultation. Stonewall have everything to gain (and the backing of powerful, rich officials and politicians), but Stonewall has even more to lose if there is a backlash.

She may see think that Stonewall will be a key player in the next phases, and that the government will continue to value their expertise/standing.

It does demonstrate why they're called 'Stonewall' though doesn't it?

There are very few people involved in these debates who 'deny the existence of trans people'. Indeed, the entire arguments around sex-based rights depends on there being non-sex-based rights to also consider.

Stonewall are being logical (in their eyes). If you believe that TWAW (including Jacinta Brooks & Huntley & Karen White & all the flashers and fetishists who are currently parading under their umbrella), then they can't say any different.
Where that leaves the rest of society who see the conflicting rights and the risks to others (especially women and children) from this I really don't know. They are supported by some very powerful people and lots and lots of money - and money evidently matters to Stonewall.

I really can’t take any more. I naively thought they would listen.

I think Hunt is doing immense damage to Stonewall.

It really annoys me.

Human Rights are not top trumps. Sometimes rights conflict and it's down to the courts.

The fact that sometimes rights conflict doesn't mean someone has no rights, it doesn't mean one side is a bigot and the other a vulnerable victim.

We all have rights and we all have the right to assert them.

The whole thing is destructive of self and others, an evil religious belief.