Ben Cooper QC - Lawyer of the Week (in the Times)

If it's the case I'm thinking of, the mother survived but the baby sadly died.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7395710/

I did watch this documentary Hearache, please list exactly at what time a FEMALE who was brought over from Afghanistan by Stonewall is featured? Please stop with obfuscating language, it just makes you look ridiculous to continue to double down.

And absolutely a fool to mention a 'female' reporter. WTAF! You have really tried hard with this 'gotcha' but I suggest you stop posting about it now. All you are doing is highlighting the lack of females in those airlifts. That there seems no evidence that there was an equal balance between females and male. Females were NOT served well by Stonewall here, quite the opposite it seems.

Well done! Your doubling down and attempt at swivelling just further highlights that we can now say with even more confidence because you cannot bring evidence to support your weak arguments that:

Stonewall is homophobic, detrimental to women, and severely detrimental to lesbians.

Thanks Allison! Thanks Ben!

Stonewall used to be a great charity. It did great and very necessary work. Many of us used to see the name, and rainbow flags, with nothing but joy and support.

Now though, it's a curates egg. I'm sure it is still good in parts. But for many people, it's tainted by its regrettable current positions on issues alluded to many times already (I can c&p those parts again if you want).

ooops. Rushing to fit it into a break.

Sorry, hearache, you absolutely cannot ignore the reality of these changes. You absolutely cannot ignore the harm that can all too often happen.

Even if you try to, we can see that you really must hate females to continue to post as you do.

should be

Even if you try to ignore the harm to females to make it alright in your mind, we can see that you really must hate females to continue to post as you do.

Oh to be clear. They also change all their other ID too. So, even if they did not have a medical record in the country they are in, all their ID has a sex marker that is different to their sex.

How is that a good thing in the case of excellent emergency health care for females?

A transitioned female died because no one thought they were female and didn't check to see if they were in labour. This has happened, this is not made up.

So, you don't realise that trans people change their medical records too that reflect that sex marker?

They get a completely new NHS number and all. With their new sex marker.

Again, another 'gotcha' that fails Hearache.

It just again shows you are incapable to actually engaging on a feminist board.

And you have tried to swivel away again.

How very dishonest of you?

So, you are very supportive of the exploitation of females then? I can only assume that you are. Because you have pretended not to either understand or to ignore that exploitation in your answer.

Sorry, hearache, you absolutely cannot ignore the reality of these changes. You absolutely cannot ignore the harm that can all to often happen.

Even if you try to, we can see that you really must hate females to continue to post as you do.

"you are praising Stonewall for rescuing people. Great. It was a very great thing."

Yes it is a great thing and that's why I think they're a great charity.

I'm not sure you watched the documentary thoroughly because the reporter is a woman and one of the refugees is a woman who the Taliban threatened to kill. Thankfully, Stonewall managed to help her escape to Britain.

"this female is taken unconscious to A& E?"

Why would an unconscious person be taken to A&E with their birth cert?

"I haven't misunderstood at all hearache and it is great that lesbians can get access to IVF."

Indeed it is and I'm very glad Stonewall campaigned on this issue.

I see the LGB Alliance (who you brought up in this thread) did not say anything about this great news. I wonder is that because some of their prominent supporters do not approve of lesbian families?

Don't forget Mariah Carey!
You truly couldn't make it up. The movie is going to be fabulous.

While we are discussing the negative repercussions of Stonewall's actions for females, and in some cases, harm ....

Why don't you pop over to this thread and have a look at the dehumanising and very bizarre language they have directly influenced with their language guidance over the years (or are you going to deny that too?)

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4607642-people-who-bleed-new-guidance-about-periods?page=1

I am very glad that I will not be deleted for saying "that stonewall is homophobic, detrimental to women, and severely detrimental to lesbians" though.

We did used to! What a win!

But I really appreciate hearache that you give us so much opportunity to point our where the wider ramifications of Stonewall's action are, in fact, harmful to females. And you seem very proud of that.

Your twists lead us all different directions making this a rather informative thread in the end.

Couldn't tell you. You're welcome to email or do an FOI to the Home Office if it matters that much. What I would say is it'll be more than the 0 (zero) the LGB Alliance you admire brought into the country.

So, you are praising Stonewall for rescuing people. Great. It was a very great thing. But you are trying to use this, with its male centred reporting indicating that it was the majority of males on those planes and not a equal balance, as some kind of action to be praised on a Feminist thread.

You really do not think. Or listen. Or try to understand, do you?

Well done! Stonewall rescued a group which is wonderful.... where were the females? You know, the ones that are directly harmed every single day en-masse by having to live under the Taliban.

Well done! Hearache! This also just takes equal prize for thoughtlessness!

Perhaps Hearache while you are here, you can actually learn something.

Shall I link up the threads discussing the exploitation of females for their eggs for implantation into other females, and the threads discussing the hugely exploitative issues around surrogacy? I am so glad that you asked.

There you can find out about the very negative side-effects to the female bodies in the chemicals used to grow and harvest eggs. Horrifically, this can leave the donor with strokes, loss of their own fertility, incredible pain and agony and many many other health issues...

Shall we discuss those then?

And then the mental health issues as I mentioned, that children who are born using this process and surrogacy have started to report later in life?

Shall we discuss those too? Stonewall does advocate for this under the guise of 'fertility equality' of course.

And then... surrogacy - look here is a few to start you off with. They discuss all the above issues in some way.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4440005-To-not-understand-the-issue-with-surrogacy

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4239144-Surrogacy-ends-in-abortion-and-ends-a-friendship

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4478157-Why-surrogacy-should-be-banned

But maybe, just maybe, you will start actually thinking about what you are posting and stop posting things that really show you have never even thought about the issues.

Your gotchas quite often backfire. But don't worry, it is a good opportunity to learn something feminist.

Hear! Hear!

Oh dear. You're perfectly welcome to this win. I hope you have many more like it. I predict you will.

The belief that stonewall is homophobic, detrimental to women, and severely detrimental to lesbians is now legally protected.

C) they are keeping this thread up on the top, anyone who comes here will be able to read this and the other threads about allison's case and see which side requires support dogs and mothers and crashing into bins and receiving emails at 3am and social media experts not knowing how Twitter works and all the other absolutely hilarious things along with the serious and harmful stuff. Keep going earache, please, you are doing us all a favour.

To be honest, what Hearache is mainly doing is making my ears ache with their gloating, whining and extremely annoying misinterpretation of everything being said. It is probably the childish way in which they phrase their responses which makes it sound a lot like 'nahnahnahnah' in my head.

But the tone of those responses alone, not even taking into account the lack of any real debating on their side, is so off putting and shows the utter contempt the TRA side has for women in general. That is doing us a massive favour: anyone knows it is unreasonable to try and reason with children.

So I gave examples of how their campaigning benefited lesbians, gay men, a trans man (I could equally have just said trans women or trans people in general but I know the existence of trans women does trigger GC people) and bisexuals (gender neutral).

So 1 for women, 1 gender neutral and another 2 for men. Glad to see you recognise that trans men are men!

No, another dishonest post. And you are again crowing about it.

Your examples are male centric, they don't actually benefit females. Regardless of how that female identifies.

Are you actually going to engage with feminist issues Hearache or are you simply going to persist in doubling down on centring males?

There was an excellent piece in Holyrood mag the other day explaining why, here's a snippet:

"One of my friends had to marry as a man and now her marriage certificate doesn’t match her other documents."

Wow... what a dishonest post. Can you not answer it? There are significant ramifications for this action that you are celebrating.

That question again:

Could you please help us by telling us exactly how changing a birth certificate to male helps a transitioned female when their NHS details are changed (as they are currently) and this female is taken unconscious to A& E? Do you understand that there are well known cases, one where a transioned female died, where this change of sex marker has resulted in the wrong treatment ? Or not diagnosing the right health issue?

How is that a win for trans health?

Couldn't tell you. You're welcome to email or do an FOI to the Home Office if it matters that much. What I would say is it'll be more than the 0 (zero) the LGB Alliance you admire brought into the country.

No. This isn't an opportunity for you to sink the boot into LGB Alliance, even though that may seem to be a good opportunity. LGB Alliance is a new charity with limited resources vs Stonewall with decades of funding. You know this, we have discussed this at length with you on other threads.

Remember, where YOU couldn't come up with any activity that Stonewall had done within the first 2-3 years of existence, to directly compare to the successes already achieved by LGB Alliance? I can link up the thread if you like.

Even so you are on a feminist board centring males. Well done hearache. The message just isn't sinking in, is it?

You've misunderstood what the Government did. It provided lesbians and single women who are fertile with free IVF. Nothing about surrogacy. These women are trying to get pregnant themselves.

I haven't misunderstood at all hearache and it is great that lesbians can get access to IVF. You would be very foolish to NOT understand the other strand of 'fertility equality' though, or willfully ignorant.

Are you being willfully ignorant to ignore that surrogacy also is something that organisations such as Stonewall activate for? Under the guise of 'fertility equality'?

And are you also being willfully ignorant to ignore where donor eggs are harvested from? Females. Sometimes through exploitive and coercive means too.

So you know which sex gets exploited for IVF when a donor egg is needed and for surrogacy? Females. And in some instances, the children that result from these acts who don't know their biological parentage and suffer poor mental health because of it.

Maybe you didn't know. Maybe you have never actually thought about this.

But, hey.... you are on a feminist board, so we must assume you do know. And are just choosing to be ignorant of the wider picture of IVF and fertility equality.

"Anyone finding this a win for Stonewall should really examine whether their hopeless lack of credibility".

You know who found them credible? The judge.