Organisations Leaving Stonewall: The List

The uni had also recently tweeted about a meeting with Stonewall! So someone somewhere is lying.

Hopefully it will be reported to ICO. (Though they are also SW members ).

For anyone who wants to avoid Twitter:

Someone sent a DontSubmitToStonewall FOI request to the University of Bedfordshire, who didn't respond.

Eventually the requester sent a request for an internal review, the next step before complaining to the ICO.

The University's Interim Data Protection Officer then send a belated response to the original FOI request saying that the University has no dealings with Stonewall. Except in the letterhead at the bottom was the Stonewall Diversity Champions logo.

This was posted into Twitter. The Uni Press Team Twitter posted saying the letterhead was out of date, that the current one didn't say Stonewall, but that they were looking forward to getting it back on the letterhead!

So the Uni lied about not having dealings with Stonewall, gave the game away through using the wrong letterhead, then gave the game away again on Twitter!

[quote Leafstamp]Uni of Beds has made a right hash of their response to a FOI request:

mobile.twitter.com/karenovirus19/status/1400754125135089668[/quote]
Thank you. I did wonder.

Uni of Beds has made a right hash of their response to a FOI request:

mobile.twitter.com/karenovirus19/status/1400754125135089668

The University of Bedfordshire is liable to have an Acting Interim Data Protection Officer soon...

I'm surprised that they'd flat out lie on an FOI response! And then the Uni press team responding to the tweets

So what has that remit to do with Stonewall? I hadn't noticed them doing much for "poor and disadvantaged" people.

I dunno...just a hunch that a certain TV Doctor is feeling quite "poor and disadvantaged" right now

Comic Relief. OK. Founded to help with the famine in Ethiopia in 1985...

The charity states that its aim is to "bring about positive and lasting change in the lives of poor and disadvantaged people, which we believe requires investing in work that addresses people's immediate needs as well as tackling the root causes of poverty and injustice".

So what has that remit to do with Stonewall? I hadn't noticed them doing much for "poor and disadvantaged" people.

Two of my daughters are in the 'LGBT+ community.' Both of them would argue that they don't require any additional support from Sainsburys, thanks very much. And that the assumption that they do, in itself, has a whiff of homophobia about it. ('Hey - you're welcome to shop here, just in case you were worried that you weren't, because of - you know - your sexual preferences!)

Comments are excellent, particularly the description of Fox-killer as a "preening fool".

Just got back from the weekly shop at Sainsburys - can’t see them leaving Stonewall anytime soon: rainbow bunting everywhere complete with “LGBTQ+“ branded flags.

I guess it is just too craven to admit its shameful part in joining and promoting this racket and will quietly let membership lapse in August under the guise of a 'budget review'. Cowards.

We really, really need a public enquiry.

'But Frances Coulson, the firm's Senior Partner, told RollOnFriday that Moon Beever had relinquished its membership.

"After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme", she said.

"This in no way detracts from our commitment to diversity and equality, but in common with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Departments we no longer feel that we can support Stonewall", said Coulson.'

I like the cut of her jib - not only expressing her own disquiet but highlighting the fact that the EHRC and government departments are on the move too. Nicely put.

Also fab name for a law firm

The rollonfriday article is good. Pleased to see a law firm being truthful about being disquieted with Stonewall rather than hiding behind 'budgetary limitations'.

Swim England crossed off the list makes .e very happy :)

twitter.com/firestoned5/status/1400352543813750788?s=21

This is glorious

Screenshot for those who avoid Twitter

Concerns from erstwhile supporters over Stonewall's direction have grown since it pivoted to encompass transgender issues in 2015, when it began campaigning for male-bodied people to be able to self-identify as women, and for the abolition of exemptions which can currently prevent males from using single sex female spaces such as women's changing rooms, refuges, hostels and prisons.

It still amazes me that anyone, anyone at all, finds at least the latter part, anything other than crazy.

As usual those in support of SW merely resort to slurs, even if you vehemently disagree with what is currently happening you must surely notice the difference in how the two sides put their point across.

So Stonewall invent new language and terms, and re-invent the meaning of well established and understood terms (without consulting those who the terms refer to), are a result of this merry go round, employers are so bamboozled they don't have a hope of keeping pace, and are so afraid of making a 'mistake' that they need the 'experts' to advise them. This is MLM surely?