Nathaniel Knight (partner of Aimee Challenor); worrying twitter admissions

I think we need to follow FPfW and challenge the source of policies etc across Government, the Private and third sectors.

I am planning to write to the BBC, and to Barclays. The Barclays rainbow app on my phone is irritating - when does Pride month end. Last year I got some way with Virgin Money when they endorsed a Stonewall poster on the GRA, where they acknowledged there was a conflict of rights. Better still I think my correspondence caused them to review their initial knee-jerk reply.

My sense is that at the moment they are only hearing the voices of Aimee and Stonewall pals. The more that hear different rational voices, voices of people who actually use their services, the more they may question their sources.

My guess is that policies in these firms are made by people from equalities and diversity, who read the Guardian and may have career links with Stonewall. Many many more people in the organisation will read the Times and Mail and have sympathies that reflect middle England. They will keep quiet unless their diversities policies are causing a problem. Hence my desire to tell Barclays why I think the rainbow flag no longer reflects innocence, or indeed the acceptance of same sex attraction, and why they should not be promoting it.

There was a suggestion on Twitter that we now only have two season. Pride and Christmas. The pp is right. Aimee's real power is via Stonewall and its influence within the corporate world. I dont think we can cause Stonewall to look at itself. But we can cause organisations to review who influences them

The Stonewall connection is scandalous. Aimee, as part of the trans advisory board, and obviously heavily influenced by David Challenor (made David their election agent after charges were brought) has sought changes to policy which will roll back safeguarding for children.

This should be a media scandal - why isn't it? Why isn't the NSPCC rubberman?

The only reason I can think of is that organisations pushing LGBTQ+ /gender identity centred policy-making are somehow seen as untouchable.

Our Spero was told "no media outlet will touch the NSPCC rubberman story." Why not???

I have never met Aimee. And so, I am aware that this is a judgey and unfair statement...but...

Hell mend Stonewall for not applying critical thinking and taking advice from Aimee and the myriad other clearly dim, or not very bright advisors they have lauded and paid.

I feel sorry very wary and disturbed by, but, mostly, sorry for Aimee. That must have been a helluva childhood.

I don't think, though, that lived automatically experience makes you an expert or someone to advise the government.

Ruth Hunt turned Stonewall into a cult. "Acceptance without exception" should have been a red fucking flag in itself.

Stonewall is doomed, and is an abomination because the organisation has done amazing things in it's time.

Can't help but feel it's AMy's Stonewall connection that should be getting highlighted.

I agree Probably but I can't see how that can change, Stonewall will batten down the hatches and protect their own. How do we tackle Stonewall?

I agree that people with dangerous or inappropriate obsessions can be vulnerable,

Not as vulnerable as the children they want to target though

Can't help but feel it's AMy's Stonewall connection that should be getting highlighted.

Amy is a member of the Lib Dems - she might even have some post in the Local party ( which will consist of three other people and their dogs)... and they don't even have an MP to lobby. Really they are negligible.

Meanwhile

Aimee is on the Trans advisory board of multi million budget corporate sponsored listened to by government and educators...'charity' Stonewall.

And she is showing more red flags about child safeguarding than a Moscow may Day parade...

It's in Stonewall that AC is having an impact - and its Stonewall that are making an impact on child safeguarding/ sex based rights/Eq Act issues.

If AC's patent unsuitability for any public role is to be targetted - and it should (it's nigh on inconceivable that her partners paedophile interests are a surprise) - It's Stonewall that should be the focus.

I will not engage in any sexual interaction without consent from a person with a mature mind and understanding of sex
Worded with an intention to justify underage sex with a consenting mature child.

Just wandering through twitter and saw separate profile shots of the happy couple. I know I’m looking on a small screen but... could it be the same one person?

You can set Roblox and all those games to block all contact from strangers? Childrens games are an actual magnet for perverts. Mine wont even get Snapchat because, in his words" its for Nonces"..

Hmm, how about a much shorter version... #BollockPhobia ...?

#BollocksToTransphobia is a... really unwise and ill-thought-out slogan

#BOLLOCKSTOTRANSPHOBIA?

Oh what a doofus.

Or, actually, what a shame that someone who does talk a lot of sense on many issues is prepared to call others 'hateful' for not threatening people, not removing their rights, not making life impossible for the disabled, but simply not believing men are women.

It's so weird.

We could have a discussion that said
'People with autism have a disability.'
'Well, I'd call it a difference, and in some cases an advantage, but a difference that makes life very hard in an NT world'
and she presumably wouldn't respond with 'DisabilityPHOBE! Eraser of Autistic People!'

But try it this way:
'Transwomen are women.'
'Well, I'd call them men who live according to their idea of a woman, and that can cause difficulties in our very gendered world...' and boom.

(Is she taking the piss with the 'Bollocks to Transphobia' tag? I mean, the bollocks are quite central to the problem, really.)

Just in case anyone had any lingering hopes that the Lib Dems are going to see sense of this issue, Jo Swinson has recently tweeted a video about transphobia, that has Sarah Brown in it.

twitter.com/joswinson/status/1151189885929365506?s=19

"Sarah, the support of someone so brave and so committed to fighting for equality means so much. Thank you! #BollocksToTransphobia #EndorseJo #JoinJo t.co/mlACjxOhoh"

No replies to all the screenshots showing the nasty things Sarah has said from Jo yet, but a Lib Dem Councillor had this to say:

"Thanks for the assumption that I can’t do my own research. Sarah brown is a strong woman and I have a lot of time for her. I’ll have no TERF action on my profile please"

twitter.com/HannahPerkin/status/1151424498471768064?s=19

My DM was a LibDem activist from the 1960s until her death five years ago. She always described it as a party that attracted misfits, and as the party was so keen for any support, nothing was done to stamp it out.

Where are the press in all this?

The press are up to their eyeballs in all of this. They have promoted and encouraged all of this. Even those few notable exceptions that bother to report at all on the endless list of 'things that never happen' still use wrong sex pronouns for convicted paedophiles, rapists and other known to be highly dubious characters. The press are largely cowards and/or enablers.

Where are the press in all this? They are happy to lift stories from MN all the time.

What are the Lib Dems THINKING?

I have come to the recent horrifying realisation that the Lib Dem’s have always been a natural home to perverts.

Sorry! Should have refreshed before posting!

Jeremy Thorpe? I think it was the attempted murder to silence his gay lover, mainly. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Very_English_Scandal

My daughter, at 11, was persuaded on animal jam to role play sex acts. It was a lesson for us both. Luckily it was quickly stopped.

They are everywhere online. Scum

In May 1979 he was tried at the Old Bailey on charges of conspiracy and incitement to murder, arising from an earlier relationship with Norman Scott, a former model. Thorpe was acquitted on all charges, but the case, and the furore surrounding it, ended his political career.

Married man, secretly gay. That part is not unusual for the times. His response was.

Ha ha, I'd forgotten that. His poor dog was shot, wasn't it? :(

That could be the lib-dems new slogan: "a certain lack of moral rectitude."

It would play well in today's political climate. Long enough words that they sounded clever, without too many people cottoning on to what it actually meant.

Thorpe attempted to have Norman Scott murdered, which may indicate a certain lack of moral rectitude.

Hang on, what did Jeremy Thorpe do? I thought he was gay, not pervy.