Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Fair Cop dropping hints on Twitter

931 replies

teawamutu · 24/07/2020 08:38

About something big about to happen to a red organisation beginning with 'S' that they won't like.

V unfair to vaguetweet IMO Grin - anyone else seen it?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
SophocIestheFox · 31/07/2020 08:29

@DadDadDad

In their annual report, they discuss their risk management and list their three key risks:

Economic climate and change in political landscape leading to loss of income.
Increase in complexity of the regulatory environment.
Increase in anti-LGBT rhetoric in the media, politics and the wider public sphere.

hmmm...

Interesting.

The last one seems as much an opportunity as a risk, surely? If intolerance is rising, then Stonewall can ride to the rescue and fulfil its raison d’etre. I’d be interested in what they see as a rise in intolerance, as I suspect I might have a different take on where it’s being directed (I think to lesbians, but I suspect they believe it’s to trans people).

SerenityNowwwww · 31/07/2020 07:54

@womanaf

I believe Women’s Aid is a mixed-sex organisation now.
And the WEP
StrangeLookingParasite · 31/07/2020 01:36

[quote MorbidMuch]Article in The Spectator now: www.spectator.co.uk/article/network-rail-s-cowardly-decision-to-remove-a-jk-rowling-poster[/quote]
"...suffocating spasm of intolérance "

Lovely.

Binterested · 30/07/2020 23:21

Increase in the anti-TRA rhetoric more like. And about time too.

Stonewall cannot last in Its current guise. It’s toxic.

ErrolTheDragon · 30/07/2020 23:18

Increase in anti-LGBT rhetoric in the media, politics and the wider public sphere.*

With significant amounts of the anti-L rhetoric (or worse) coming from the T...

womanaf · 30/07/2020 23:14

I believe Women’s Aid is a mixed-sex organisation now.

DadDadDad · 30/07/2020 23:03

In their annual report, they discuss their risk management and list their three key risks:

Economic climate and change in political landscape leading to loss of income.
Increase in complexity of the regulatory environment.
Increase in anti-LGBT rhetoric in the media, politics and the wider public sphere.

hmmm...

highame · 30/07/2020 22:57

thanks @ThePurported I was getting worried

ThePurported · 30/07/2020 22:51

highame Women's Aid does.

highame · 30/07/2020 22:40

Could someone tell me of a women's organisation that gets that much money or the opportunity to earn that much from government. I can't think of any, but someone might know

DadDadDad · 30/07/2020 22:37

Expenditure exceeding income does not mean they are bankrupt.

If they keep spending more than their income then eventually they will bankrupt themselves. The accounts linked to above show they have reserves of £4m, so they could be in trouble in the next few years, but they could cut expenditure to avoid this.

Their report does say on reserves that they have a policy of holding reserves equal to 6 months of expenditure, but at September 2019 their reserves were only equal to less than 5 months expenditure. So they must be under pressure to cut expenditure unless they can get a generous grant from somewhere.

Needmoresleep · 30/07/2020 22:27

My theory was that Ruth was quietly moved 'sideways into the House of Lords.

In the past few months Stonewall have both a new Chair and a new CE. Hopefully they come with a new vision which allows for debate rather than Ruth's appalling #nodebate.

OldCrone · 30/07/2020 22:01

Stonewall accounts are here (click on the documents tab):
beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regId=1101255&subId=0

Last year they had over £700,000 from government sources (DfE, FCO, Scottish government, Welsh government) plus a further £46,000 from NHS Scotland.

They also received fees of over £3m from organisations in their Stonewall Diversity Programme, and from schools and LEAs.

Fair Cop dropping hints on Twitter
EmpressJKRowlingSpartacus · 30/07/2020 21:50

Oh my word, Stonewall have somehow managed to bankrupt themselves?!

Oh, how sad.

Dreeple · 30/07/2020 21:47

WhatKatyDidNot IIRC, Stonewall moved into swanky new offices a while back and took on an enormous lease. Could they have got ahead of themselves, I wonder?

Ideal time to stop their Govt money.

ThePurported · 30/07/2020 21:35

You can read their financial statements on the Charity Commission website.
From 2018 to 2019, donations were up (although down from corporations). Grants were down as they had a whopping 1M from some trust in 2018.

Oh and Stonewall was registered as Stonewall Lobby Group until 2004. I didn't know that. It's amusing considering how offended the TRAs are when someone calls them lobbyists!

NeurotrashWarrior · 30/07/2020 21:07

Wow. That's not the fair cop hint though is it?

or have I missed that

BitOfFun · 30/07/2020 21:04

I thought that Stonewall was regularly getting insane donations from woke celebrities etc?

ScrimpshawTheSecond · 30/07/2020 19:05

Oh my word, Stonewall have somehow managed to bankrupt themselves?!

What a terrible shame.

Overreach isn't free, I suppose.

boatyardblues · 30/07/2020 18:52

Good article - thanks for the link Morbid.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 30/07/2020 18:52

[quote MorbidMuch]Article in The Spectator now: www.spectator.co.uk/article/network-rail-s-cowardly-decision-to-remove-a-jk-rowling-poster[/quote]
Good piece.

I'm going to repost the link in case the post gets deleted www.spectator.co.uk/article/network-rail-s-cowardly-decision-to-remove-a-jk-rowling-poster

(I'm an idiot and hit report instead of quote Blush)

MorbidMuch · 30/07/2020 18:43

Article in The Spectator now: www.spectator.co.uk/article/network-rail-s-cowardly-decision-to-remove-a-jk-rowling-poster

Floisme · 30/07/2020 18:07

I wonder sometimes if clunkiness in language isn't a reflection of lazy or unexamined thinking.
Yes and I also think it's a sign you don't understand what you're writing and so reached for the Copy & Paste function.

nauticant · 30/07/2020 18:03

^So you can't say "I

Gwynfluff · 30/07/2020 16:31

Did Ruth go under a cloud, then? Wasn’t there a lag to appoint a new director?