If you were Stonewall WWYD?

It seems to be lobbying for social engineering. Not it’s original purpose at all.

It’s not really a human rights organisation any more, but it’s a militia in the culture war isn’t it, and war rewards the generals and destroys civilians This is interesting forgotthebins I think militia suits SW well.

I really wanted to comment on 2 things. Firstly SW is only at the beginning of this crisis and there will be lots of twists and turns so I wouldn't personally want to be thinking too far ahead. I wouldn't take one of the media jobs, minefield and secondly

I think if I were Allison Bailey, I would agree to settle so long as they didn't insist on a non-disclosure agreement. I can't see Allison accepting anything that would expect her to shut up!

They could change the diversity champions scheme to a tiered scheme with different costs and levels you can achieve, kind of like the 'disability confident' levels - although that's free.

If I was stonewall I would currently be hiding in the cupboard under the stairs trying desperately to figure a way out.
What stonewall will in fact do is go out in a huge blaze, blaming everyone and anyone.
It will be a spectacular fire though, well worth watching.

I would campaign for:
Acceptance of transwomen as transwomen, and transmen as transmen;
For people to be able to be out and proud about both their sex and their gender

This! Why didn't they do this! What's wrong with being out and proud to be trans?

Even leaving aside the whole dismissal of womens/ girls' rights and safeguarding, the damage they have helped to do to the mental health of gender questionning/ trans people is horrendous! Why encourage to people, especially children, to believe that people hate them? Why tell people that they are psychologically unable to recognise their sex whilst living as whatever 'gender identity' they wish to? Its unforgiveable that they have encouraged people they are psychologically weak and incapable and that the whole world needs to change or they will be suicidal.

Its not just mad its cruel.

But the other option is to make themselves representatives of the trans community only, by current definitions.

The absolute inability to see female people as equals is written all over the 'they don't need it' 'only bad women ever say this stuff' 'you're using your trauma/rape/desire for privacy/care for women with disabilities, culture as a mask for transphobia

It’s not just men saying that. Yesterday, on here, I asked whether a female rape victim at my child’s school should have a right to guaranteed single-sex facilities, or whether a newly trans, male child in the same year took priority. I had some bizarre responses including that my hateful daughter should stop asking about people’s genitals. I hadn’t even mentioned my daughter except to say it was her school.

People go very odd about all of this.

I should have specified homophobia in men's football of course, women's sports by and large not having a problem with this. Which is in itself worthy of interest surely.

Stonewall should have reviewed its mission after the Coalition (led by those awful Tories) efficiently and undramatically legalised same sex marriage with minimal fuss. They could perhaps have downsized (a charity no longer needing funding as it's completed a core aim is a Good Thing surely? Wouldn't it be fantastic if Oxfam no longer existed as everyone on planet had sustainable food sources and clean water?) and focussed on cultural issues, the biggest being homophobia in football perhaps.

Or imagine if Stonewall had had a major rehaul, and put its powerful resources behind some of the less glamorous causes, like disability and age discrimination?

Not at all sure. I do know if they wish to remain respected amongst many in the LGB community they need to start to listen. To their core ‘constituents’. Listen and think. Communicate. Work out why they haven’t been doing that for years.
If the result of that is continued divergence then they may need to rethink their name (I personally think it degrades the memory of the Stonewall riots) and their mission statement etc.

I think settling with Alison Bailey would be an excellent strategy although who knows if Alison would be amenable to settling, I would imagine it would take a lot for her to give up her case

If they made a reasonable settlement offer which she refused and she continued to litigate, she could end up facing a costs order. However, the main benefit Stonewall would want to get out of a settlement would be an agreement for her to gag herself and I can't think that this is something they could compel. So they could save some money but still be facing a PR nightmare.

safety in male spaces is not the key issue for the most powerful parts of SW. … Many under the umbrella wish to be in female spaces with female people. … Ensuring safe, welcoming male spaces won't meet the real issue that women are facing with this agenda.

Sadly true. That’s why kindness and third spaces are not enough. The loudest SW voices are those who want to break women’s barriers, at any cost to us.

I suspect that if more of the significant government offices leave this week, that there will be an announcement that they will be looking for a new CEO. One that doesn’t say the quiet bits out loud. One that wouldn’t garner complaints to the charities commission about demeaning and demonizing other groups.

I’d be saying trans women are men who choose, or who need, to live their lives outside of male norms and who should be free to so within men’s spaces, protected from assault and abuse.

But they can't say that because the middle-aged transitioners (can't use the A-word on here without being deleted) who have been largely involved in spreading gender ideology are the ones who got Stonewall involved in this in the first place. It wasn't teenage lesbians who approached Stonewall and asked them to take on the T, it was the older married transwomen. It's too early for my coffee to have kicked in effectively: names will pop up later. Those people seek access to all women's areas because they need to be validated. Feeling safe in male spaces won't interest them. They want the thrill of accessing women's space, of being transgressive.

I think settling with Alison Bailey would be an excellent strategy although who knows if Alison would be amenable to settling, I would imagine it would take a lot for her to give up her case

Yes I keep thinking how catastrophic Alison’s case will be for Stonewall. Shame it’s not til next year.

I saw a quote from SW saying they had a net gain last year of 30 new diversity champions. So even if some high profile government departments are leaving, the money is still coming in, and the bright, ambitious, but badly managed staff they recruit will keep inventing new policies for diversity champions that they will then have a safe job to monitor. It’s not really a human rights organisation any more, but it’s a militia in the culture war isn’t it, and war rewards the generals and destroys civilians. The bright ambitious staff want to be generals, not among the civilians. Shedbuilder I am sorrowful that the LGBT movement has betrayed so many lesbians. Joolz I am sorry that SW does not support you either.

I’d be saying trans women are men who choose, or who need, to live their lives outside of male norms and who should be free to so within men’s spaces, protected from assault and abuse.

Who wouldn't support that? That would be a real step forward in all parts of society and be real progress.

However there are many groups under the umbrella SW has created, and while this would help some of the most vulnerable and probably those the GRC was created for in the first place, safety in male spaces is not the key issue for the most powerful parts of SW. It's a useful human shield, it raises sympathy, where facing that many under the umbrella wish to be in female spaces with female people and don't see female people as having a right to boundaries, privacy or saying no to them is a position with much less support. The absolute inability to see female people as equals is written all over the 'they don't need it' 'only bad women ever say this stuff' 'you're using your trauma/rape/desire for privacy/care for women with disabilities, culture as a mask for transphobia' front and centre information.

Ensuring safe, welcoming male spaces won't meet the real issue here that women are facing with this agenda.

@Theeyeballsinthesky sensible plan.

Go back to my roots, drop the T, and support LGB rights.

If only. But I think they’ve gone too far and still have too much male supremacist backing.

There's no reason that Stonewall shouldn't support trans rights - I'd hope we all do.

It depends what you mean by 'support'?

It's very difficult to support two or more groups of people where what one group sees as 'rights' involves taking them away from another group.

I think they will double down, sit tight and hope this all blows over, while smearing all criticism as transphobia. It's worked for them so far

This. Plus accuse the current Tory government of being behind a right wing smear campaign, Truss is transphobic etc, putting pressure on government departments to ditch Stonewall. This will appeal to all their leftwing Guardian reading supporters
All the gay people I know are totally in the TWAW camp, fully supportive of Stonewall and all but one of them are lesbians, it's always suprising to read on MN that many gay people are not happy with Stonewall. I've had a real roasting over my GC views, only two people in real life are supportive of them, and unfortunately one is super religious and intolerant. Suprisingly the other is an adult transman.

I suspect they will go down calling everyone cunts