The (large/wellknown) org I work for just joined Stonewall

Not sure that this is that well expressed but talks about employers striking a balance.

https://www.jmw.co.uk/services-for-you/employment-law/blog/what-does-decision-forstater-v-cgd-mean-employers

I've emailed a number of organisations saying I can no longer support them/ buy from them. Also got the will drafted by one of the worst captured charities and didnt include a donation to them. So not only do they not get a donation I've cost them money and they can see the donation to sex matters.

Does joining Stonewall mean that we are no longer apolitical/non partisan?

I disagree with definitions given!

A political means not having a political wing that campaigns (some charities have got into trouble with this)

Non partisan means not taking sides.

And in this instance your employer is taking sides.

Stonewall promotes a set of beliefs that impinge on the beliefs of other people (women and same sex attracted people).

Recent legal cases specifically about employment rights say that employers should not promote one set of beliefs above another.

I think in fact this is probably your strongest arguement about why they are wrong to sign up to Stonewall, unless of course they are going to sign up to Sex Matters (or some other GC group) to balance the bias / partisanship of Stonewall.

Dont have time to search for the ruling just know, but maybe if someone has the link to hand re Maya's case they could share?

I echo the others who have recommending contacting Sex Matters.

If you can find out who might be behind this decision (HR quite possibly?) then that could be useful/interesting. Often these people have skin in the game, eg trans relative.

If nothing else, just stay VERY vigilant over the coming months for any changes to policies etc.

The Labour Party hired the ex Chair of Trustees of Stonewall last year.

https://www.itv.com/news/2023-02-13/iain-anderson-former-government-lgbt-business-champion-defects-to-labour

To my mind, Stonewall behaves more recently as a lobby group than a charity in the usual sense. They espouse a recogniseably Left-wing set of beliefs. They take a particular view informed by Gender Identity Ideology on many issues about which they lobby governments, public and private sector organisations, and other charities.

This article is a few years old but it describes some of the discussion surrounding Stonewall:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars

That’s how I would define the terms too 👍

I always think it's good to muse aloud to less informed but well meaning types that it seems rather shocking a black lesbian and victim of sexual abuse would feel Stonewall had leant on her employer to discriminate against her because of her opinions.

Apolitical means not interested in politics
Non-partisan is politically engaged but not supporting a particular party

I think

OP: can you check your company diversity statement as it exists now? Get a screenshot and save it for future reference. You never know when you might need it.

Is there going to be a Champions company brought in for every protected characteristic?

I work for an executive agency as a civil servant. I was shocked to receive an invitation to celebrate Pride Month, attached to a fundraising effort in favour of Stonewall. I was shocked that Stonewall hadn’t been outlawed for such events. I guess some branches of society are oblivious to the criticisms from Nolan and others.

Same as me: I preferred it when charities and NGOs were either apolitical or non-partisan in their politics.

I refuse to fund a charity or NGO that is signed up to queer theory-inspired boundary-destroying aims.

Both disabled and elderly people in our society have not seen decent improvements in support, care and funding despite the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) and the Equality Act, and it frustrates the hell out of me that charities, NGOs, government, public transportation, shops and corporations are more happy to throw money at organisations like Stonewall than they are to seriously address proper reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities or to fund decent care for the elderly.

I used to have a monthly budget for charitable donations. I now spend half of it on supporting crowdfunders instead (including donating to LGB Alliance) because the charity that mostly benefited from the other half went overboard with its pride display window. I dont boycott all captured organisations but I use them as little as I can,. Also I'm in the process of redrafting my will now Sex Matters is a charity, just need to tweak it a bit and get it witnessed.

If you search for the National Trust and Stonewall, or Oxfam and Stonewall, you can see the kind of problems that major charities have faced. eg. https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/backlash-over-oxfams-trans-guidance-hjmz0f86c
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/14/national-trust-tells-volunteers-wear-rainbow-face-paint-glitter/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hundreds-of-national-trust-members-quit-in-protest-over-gay-pride-campaign-a7878131.html

Had this thought that if you had the time and inclination you could start a blog or twitter account or something and chart the progess of a charity being Stonewalled!

And it could be called "Bath of Beans"!