Fuck Oxfam

It's like grouping pimps, prostitutes and punters together as part of the "sex industry" and having, I don't know, one of the biggest pimps in the country lobbying Amnesty international on behalf of sex workers https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/amnesty-and-the-pimp

Datun · Today 11:57

It's like adding B for burglars, to V for victims who have been robbed. And saying that the BV community are fighting for their rights to rob and not be robbed.

Oh, I like that!

The National Trust and other galleries, museums and arts institutions appear be very heavily invested in LBGTQ+ - eg this from the National Trust.

There's only so much money, and an awful lot of property to take care of, which is horrendously expensive to do. What should be the priority? It’s legitimate to ask whether quite so much time, effort and cash should go into these projects if the actual properties are crumbling while they explore 'the diversity of gender and sexuality that go beyond the ‘hetero-normative’ conventions'.

In a thread cross pollination I picked up a copy of the daily mail in a cafe today and read a two page spread of grumbles from the tenants at Lacock (Abbey and village bequeathed to the National Trust) about how the Trust are allowing the buildings to lie empty and fail into disrepair.

lots of DM type insinuation that all the money is going on rainbow lanyards and education about slavery instead

I don’t know how right that is, but as a NT member and frequent visitor I have had my share of earnest education from them. I would argue that is only the right use of funds if all of the buildings they hold in trust are in good repair

it seemed another (less egregious) example of a charity losing sight of what they’re actually for

Yeah, I can very well believe it, for that reason. Less sure they've got any good data on it though.

The nonsense part of all this is the trans ideology doesn't think homosexuality sexuality exists.

It's like adding B for burglars, to V for victims who have been robbed. And saying that the BV community are fighting for their rights to rob and not be robbed.

I think on a global basis it's plausible that LGBT people are more likely to live in poverty. Countries that that criminalise homosexuality will leave gay men and lesbians struggling to get good jobs because they have a criminal record. Countries where women are expected/mandated to be supported by a man and are unable to get well paid jobs (or work at all) leave lesbians with the choice of marry a man or starve. If there's no pension system and old people are supported by their children those without children are in trouble. Groups like the hijra who are quite literally out-caste and make a living by begging.

But as Gules says that's a separate issue from what most people see as Oxfam's core purpose. And is not helped at all by a flag in a shop window in Chipping Norton.

Unfortunately, actual right wingers are lumping LGB into the backlash against the T. The T can just change clothes back, have the hair dyed back to a natural shade and walk away. The LGB, not so much.

Nice move Stonewall. Well fucking done.

Still not clear how asking volunteers to download and use pronoun badges helps tackle poverty. Even those in the LGBTQ+ community experiencing poverty.

I genuinely believe that the Western pride movement is actively harming gay and lesbian people abroad by this point. If it had stopped at LGB, or rather if other groups hadn't jumped on board and re-purposed it, then it would have helped its counterparts in other countries.

This is my concern only I’d expand that to say that Western Pride, hijacked by the TQ+, is now actively harming the LGB in western countries as well as other countries. You see this in the US so clearly. The ‘no LGB without the T’ teaming has resulted in an immense backlash of frightening homophobia and restrictive laws that include LGB people eg Florida. If only there had been a more measured and thoughtful recognition that LGB is all about one’s sex and sexual orientation, and not about gender, in the first place.

I genuinely believe that the Western pride movement is actively harming gay and lesbian people abroad by this point. If it had stopped at LGB, or rather if other groups hadn't jumped on board and re-purposed it, then it would have helped its counterparts in other countries. I mean, it has helped but it's now been thrown into reverse. The reason is very simple. LGB rights used to have the messaging that "we're not different, we just want to love our partner and have a normal life". Well that's where gay and lesbian people still are in most of the world - trying to get people to just let them live a normal life. But every time they say this the rest of their country is seeing parades in the West filled with men in dog masks and leather thongs, children sitting in a circle around a man in drag or 12 year old on stage having dollars stuffed in a skirt he is wearing as he dances for a crowd of adults... and they say "Yeah, pull the other one, off the rooftop with you."

The Western pride movement is one of the most self-absorbed movements in the west. It's like some garishly coloured versions of the Pharisees in the bible giving money to the poor. 'Look at me, I'm kind and compassionate'. But then go to something like Pride in Bristol and you'll find more queer people than lesbian or gay. And by queer I mean Straight with a "bi cut".

But is Oxfam really concerned about Americans earning slightly less than average Americans rather than people in desperate poverty in other countries?

No they aren't. If you look at their "finances and accountability" pages, you can see where they are spending their money. https://www.oxfam.org/en/what-we-do/about/our-finances-and-accountability The "Pride Guide" which had the FAQs is unreferenced.

Top 5 countries where money is spent are: South Sudan, Iraq, Democratic Republic of Congo, Yemen, Syria. Now I'm sure that being a lesbian woman in Yemen or a gay man in Syria is not a bundle of laughs. And yes, gay, lesbian and transgender people are discriminated against in Syria/Yemen/Iraq and that is wrong, but as well as being discriminated against they are starving to death and have no clean water.

Pride month is a very developed world sort of thing. Europe, North America, Australia, Brazil. Quite how an Oxfam in Chipping Norton displaying a pride flag is making any difference to a gay/trans person in Iraq beats me.

The problem is that most volunteers and members of the public perceive Oxfam as a disaster relief charity, which raises money to improve the lives of people living in abject poverty in places like Syria. To be there when there's a natural disaster to provide clean water and food. Oxfam Head Office want to be a political campaigning organisation.

This article about a woman working as a doctor in a remote and desperately poor population is very good, and moving and shows how very badly the work that Oxfam do do/should be doing is needed in the world.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-64948453
Such a contrast to producing leaflets full of hatred with rainbow flags on them and talk about chosen families and breast removal. The little boy featured here who risks death because his family can't afford to travel for treatment should be where they focus they're efforts. I'm really angry at Oxfam over this leaflet because people are (understandable) questioning what they're doing and may tar all charities with the same brush, when their work is so badly needed in the world.

Have now had a bit of a Google and there does seem to be some US data (and some other UK studies too) that suggest gay people are more likely to be in poverty. They're not good though as they're not adjusting for family size and composition. This is something that everyone researching poverty knows should always be done - there's an agreed method for doing it whereby a baby counts for about half a person, an older child for 0.7, etc. Not doing it for a group who are obviously less likely to have children than the one you're comparing them to ("cis gender heterosexuals") is dubious. The studies seem to have found some evidence of lesbians earning less than straight women, which could suggest some workplace discrimination, but gay men earning more. Much less data on trans earnings.

But is Oxfam really concerned about Americans earning slightly less than average Americans rather than people in desperate poverty in other countries?

I find it so affirming when I see stickerperson has been out and about.

Seen at an oxfam near me

Such an interesting point.

I'd also be fascinated to know if Oxfam have hard evidence for this, or if it's just generalisations that suit a particular narrative and feel plausible to activists.

I'm sceptical of this claim that LGBT+ people are more likely to be in poverty. The only data I've ever seen on it was for the UK and showed higher salaries overall. It was dubbed the "gay pound" in the press. Likely explanations being that they're much more likely to be university educated, to live in London and less likely to have children to support. I've also heard theories that gay men in particular are less type cast in terms of jobs open to them so are freer to choose traditionally male or female jobs.

I guess Oxfam would argue that it's not so rosy worldwide where there's more discrimination. But I can't imagine how countries that persecute homosexually could possibly have any reliable data on poverty rates. We do know that children cause poverty though - there's really clear evidence for that worldwide and very obvious reasons why it's hard to support children if you're poor. And LGBT+ people are very much less likely to be parents. So it seems quite unlikely.

I'd be more comfortable with Amnesty supporting LGBT+ groups as they undoubtedly face discrimination, but would really like to see Oxfam challenged over this claim about the link with poverty.

I had read he had been not active in the role for a while and had stated at the time he was off until the end of the year. It sounded more like he went on ‘sabbatical’ and found another job in the meantime.

And no, the Chief Exec has not resigned over this, he's been in position 5 or 6 years and is moving on. Pre-planned.

The Express article doesn't suggest to me that he's resigning because of this. He's got another job lined up that he'd have applied for some weeks ago. I don't think he'd likely have known about the cartoon, and if he had and was bothered enough by it to consider resigning he'd have put a stop to it instead wouldn't he? Possible that he's fed up more generally with the intolerance within Oxfam but he's not said so.

I still have access to the Oxfam internal system for volunteers, the "Pride Guide" was sent out at the end of May to encourage stores to plan/display the Pride merch and maximise sales.

Some highlights:

• asking volunteers to download and use pronoun badges.
• Links to 8 other campaigning organisations including Stonewall, Mermaids, Peter Tatchell FOundation.
• encouragement to order different Pride flags and claim the money back through shop expenses

They are "trying" to address the main volunteer in their FAQ but I really don't think the answer is any good:

Q: What does Pride Month have to do with tackling poverty?

A: Around the world, LGBTQIA+
people are more likely that non-
LGBTQIA+ people to live in poverty
and to experience homelessness.
Tackling poverty means
supporting everyone affected,
especially those most
marginalised by societies. You can
read more about our
intersectional approach to the
work we do here:

I thought he’d been on gardening leave for a while. And had not been active in the post when this video was released. I thought I had read this somewhere.

I think some of them imagine they're going to win over new customers because of it. Not immediately obvious how the COO of Wickes came to that conclusion, mind.

I've just seen what's happened with Wickes. I just do not understand senior people running businesses saying to a tranche of potential customers, we don't like you, sod off.