Members pay Stonewall a fee and allow it to vet their internal policies, such as who can use their toilets and changing facilities.
Love this! They make it sound utterly mundane!
I suspect the more attractive product was actually reputation. The scheme was so popular, that not signing up was perhaps seen as odd and could lead to rumours of phobic attitudes.
And, it would appear from the recent University revelations that such access allowed Stonewall to promote their version of the law, or (as I’ve seen in person from my own professional body, as another example of their reach) social media policies that centred protection of “trans-identity” instead of “a process of gender reassignment” and missed out sex altogether, replacing it with “gender”, an action that would definitely have a chilling effect on freedom of speech of women who are critical of transactivism..
And once that valuable product of “reputation” begins to look a bit threadbare, it becomes apparent that the actual product sold can be described in very banal terms indeed.
Thanks BBC. Finally!