Liz Truss urges official withdrawal from Stonewall diversity scheme

[quote Cwenthryth]Interestingly as well, the CEO of MHFA/Stonewall trustee is also a governor at Bath Spa University (busy chap), the university which blocked a PhD student from researching detransition www.bbc.com/news/uk-41384473[/quote]
As a qualified and accredited BACP counsellor who spent many years training I find MHFA does more harm than good.

I've seen people do a couple of days training in MHFA and then go around 'diagnosing' students and colleagues with mental health conditions.

Fully qualified counsellors dont and couldn't (and would never) diagnose a psychiatric condition. It's irritating when people do these Micky mouse courses and think they are some kind of expert.

Interestingly the Bath Spa student is a fully qualified UKCP psychotherapist, which is not remotely like being part of the MHFA grift.

If Stonewall cared about diversity as they claim they'd have a D for Detranitioners. ie the minority group that they actively seek to marginalise and discredit.

Great to read this, of course the various organizations can use the costs as an excuse, but still it’s welcome news anyway.The more , the merrier!

Interesting reading, aren't they, the trustees and senior staff at Stonewall.

Stonewall did have it all sewn up. They managed to capture government organisations through their once legitimate and fair work in securing rights for LGB.

On the back of this they attached the T, (silently ditched the LGB) and got government to outsource their diversity management to them.

The rest followed easily as businesses felt safe with this as the government had 'legitimised' stonewall through using them.

Being a 'stonewall accredited' business / university etc made organisations look like experts for a seemingly small outlay. Not recognising or realising that the stonewall law they had allowed to infiltrate their organisations totally misrepresented the actual law.

Stonewall aren't experts at all. But they're damn good at marketing their product. And so many fell for it. I can see why the 'easy' way out in terms of managing diversity seemed like an attractive option. Especially with the lure of being accredited.

But really, what an incredible mistake to make.

Interestingly as well, the CEO of MHFA/Stonewall trustee is also a governor at Bath Spa University (busy chap), the university which blocked a PhD student from researching detransition www.bbc.com/news/uk-41384473

It was a reasonable spread in the Times and I noticed that quite a few places had sold out, so plenty reading in the pub gardens and buying it for the Sport, nevertheless, not a 'light' weekend

(Sorry that was in reference to the ‘mental health first aid scheme’)

... paid for training supplant basic functions of respect / support / consideration / care.

It’s a similar business model to the diversity champions scheme (and now the NHS rainbow badge), and moves someone’s locus of responsibility or decisions about how to behave or what to do from inside themselves to outside. In general form. many of these schemes imply that you can’t be a “good / skilled” person unless you have been assessed and labelled by the scheme.

I'd assumed MHFA were legit. How depressing

I’m not saying it’s not important or that it won’t be heeded. Indeed, I pointed out the fact that if it was placed at the weekend that ups it’s importance rather than the reverse (over a poster who was claiming that the intent was to bury the story). I am disagreeing that this is an ‘important announcement’; when I was in post ‘announcement’ had a very specific meaning and did not cover an off the record brief or leak to a newspaper, unless it was going to be followed up by an actual public announcement or policy paper (in which case it was known as a ‘trail’ of the main announcement).

I disagree. This Government works by leaks, or rather carefully placed stories in the Times, especially when it comes to awkward subjects like this. It happened with stuff like the Self ID consultation and kicking it into the long grass and so on.

LGBT is a very delicate subject for the Tories. We can be certain that links will be made with Section 28. This is almost certainly why Teresa May got it so wrong in her enthusiasm to draw a line between her Government and the ‘nasty party’ of the past.

I am surprised about your public sector experience. When I was in the Civil Service we were careful to try to understand the direction of ministerial thinking. We would have heeded something like this and would have ensured that we were covered in a relevant submission by, say, ensuring that we had taken advice beyond that provided by Stonewall.

And hitting the Sunday papers was what we used to plan for strategically for the biggest stories - we always wanted them in the weekend press as this got bigger readership and was more likely to set the news agenda. We certainly weren’t trying to bury stories by putting them out at the weekend.

It wasn’t an announcement at all. It’s a single report in a newspaper (then picked up by others) as to what the Minister is supposed to have possibly said. It’s probably, hopefully, true, but it’s nothing on the level of an actual policy announcement.

When I worked in public sector comms if someone said, “The Minister said...” we’d always ask - where? In the bath?

There’s a big difference between, say, a major policy announcement made in parliament or by publication of a new document signed by the Minister, and an unattributed story in a newspaper about what the Minister has supposedly said at some point.

I don’t want to pour cold water on enthusiasm, but this really, really isn’t any form of ‘announcement’. What I hope is that it’s a strategic and authorised off the record briefing to the Times, but it could also be a leak or simply untrue (though I’d have expected it to be denied by now if untrue).

Justawoman, I think it is a big announcement, given it affects a very large number of public sector organisations. And hopefully a large number of marketing departments.

But it was a big announce that was announced quietly over a bank holiday weekend and in the form of leaks to the Times, and in the shadow of news about Boris’ wedding. Even the Mail response was low key.

There will be backlash. However the Government have delivered their news. The spotlight will be on the Leader of the Opposition.

I hadn't realised the chief exec of mental health first aid England is one of the trustees. I'd assumed MHFA would be neutral but presumably that isn't the case.

Not read the whole thread but Jesus Christ never thought I'd see the day I'd be cheering on Liz Truss.

I'm in a public sector comms FB group and today someone posed a question about how to refer to the LGBT community - the advice from all being "check with Stonewall". (Interspersed with 'I don't know anything, I'm cis!!')

Scary, to be honest.

The new head of stonewall said that those who think sex is a thing, and the two sexes have different needs etc

Are like anti-Semites.

I mean all the time. Using the experiences of other groups to make an argument. Totally inappropriate. Utterly crass.

I mean for fucks sake.

A new low tbh.

I know that 99.999% of the world agrees with me.

These issues are starting to get more attention with the general public. And shocker.

People in general.

Do not think males should be in women's prisons.
Do not think males should be competing against women with their times etc recorded as female
Do not think it's a good idea to allow males to access female only facilities etc
Do not think that lesbian means anything other than adult human females who are attracted exclusively to other adult human females. And that males saying they are lesbians is ridiculous
Etc etc

Because in the general public both men and women know the difference between men and women and who is at risk from who and that way too many men are creepy bastards who would do anything to be in places where women and girls are vulnerable.

No I'm not wrong.

And you know what. All this stuff about. People who don't say yay so brave for these rubgy players to play with the women!
Being
Homophobes
Christian fundamentalists
Russian bots
Puppet accounts
People who love proscribed gender roles
Dim women who are easily manipulated
Etc etc

It doesn't land. It doesn't give me pause.

Or many other women.

Because it's so far off the mark it's just laughable.

I love this guy. He's hilarious.

'A symptom of a psychological disorder is the perception that everyone is out to get them. They perceive all events as hostile actions deliberately aimed against them no matter how reasonable those events are. The disorder itself, makes them unable to relate to this delusion.

Applies to so many TRAs who fail to appreciate that standing up for women’s rights and child safeguarding is not in itself anti-trans. When will they realise this?!'

Thing is that the victim complex thing is used all the time.

Loads of groups are told that they are looking to be offended, thin skinned, taking stuff the wrong way, imagining things etc.

Women who talk about issues for women and girls are continually accused of being paranoid and playing the eternal victim. All the time. I've seen it on here a lot.

In the end I think that this whole trans business has been, for me, a really interesting lesson.

Arguments were freely taken from other groups, so many other groups! And often turned against them. Blatantly. And most people didn't notice or care.

Other groups were pushed to centre this issue. Loads of other groups. And they did! No questions asked.

Laws were changed and really bizarre stuff was done without any kind of oversight or transparency. That's an awful lot of people who could make the rules for eg police, prisons etc going along with things that are to the average person completely wrong. Male sex offenders in women's prisons??? I mean. What?!?! But it happened.

Stonewall - the most well known gay rights org in the UK. Redefined gay and lesbian to mean NOT HOMOSEXUAL. The fuck??!!

Sorry went off a bit sideways there!

The point is. That groups who have been discriminated against forever are told they have a victim complex.

There is enough to talk about here without using the arguments that have been used against us. Iyswim.

I agree people on this thread view this as a big announcement, most people don't give a shit, or still assume that Stonewall = good and dont think that much more about it.

Labour (and the unions) will not want to open this can of worms, they are up to their neck in shite. They have thrown so many good women under the bus it will probably be harder for them to roll back than stonewall themselves.

If Kier/ Angela issue a statement and double down like Nancy Kelley did, then I suspect it will be the end of him. Although if he says something more sensible then I suspect it could be the end of him also. He would be no loss. I suspect they will say sweet fa and let this one play put a bit longer.