Going where angels fear to tread
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/news/going-where-angels-fear-to-tread
It's awfully long waffle from Simon Blake about how great it is to be CEO of Stonewall, but has a few pointers as to where they are and what they are aiming for:
"...every day we are driving for social justice for all lesbian, gay, bi, trans+ and queer people." [first time I have seen lesbians and gays separated from the "trans+." At least we now know what Simon thinks "trans+" means, and it isn't "lesbian" or "gay" in the way most of us mean it]
"...Homosexuality was partially decriminalised in 1967 – less than sixty years ago....Contrast that to the women’s movement, which began with the suffragists, eventually securing the vote in 1918 and still a century later having to campaign for true equality across pay, parenting and more as well as freedom from men’s violence which affects all women."
[first of all, nice dig with that last phrase. We women who are actually genuine women don't really need the "all" thanks, Simon. We know that men's violence affects all of us. I somehow suspect that's not what you meant. bold, mine]
[And an on-point conflation with the suffragette movement will gain Simon some kudos with the kids - it's the flavor of the month.]
"But what does forward momentum looks [sic] like for LGBTQ+ people across the UK, for Stonewall, for our sector and for the wider world?"
[This is the part that really interests me]
"We are a movement continually learning about ourselves and understanding the similarities and differences between us. We are still generating the collective courage to show family, friends and our wider community who we really are and understanding what happens when we do – the good, the bad and the ugly....[interesting turn of phrase, bold mine]
In legislation and policy terms that means securing a ban on conversion practices....
Whilst gender reassignment remains a protected characteristic in the Equality Act there is a wide consensus from parliamentarians, activists and civil society that the legal framework is incoherent for trans+ people and will need to change...." [this also is nothing new to us: Conversion Practices ban and change the EA, bold, mine]
[BUT HERE'S THE KICKER: STONEWALL SEEMS NOW TO WANT... A DEBATE!]
"Solidarity, unity and courage do not mean we are all the same or we think the same. We will not agree on everything neither should we need to. Not within Stonewall, not across the LGBTQ+ community, not with our allies. Often not even within our own friendship groups.
We all have different needs, different priorities and differences of opinion. Pretending or expecting otherwise will not build unity or help us win. Even with differences of opinion we can still stand united to secure rights and freedoms for everyone in our community. To make that a reality we will have to learn to hold differences gently and disagree well.
Disagreeing well is an important discipline especially in the face of a well organised attack on our rights. Disagreeing well calls on us to stay in the room, to assume good faith before bad, to have robust discussions about ideas without shouting at those who hold them. A movement that can only survive if there is complete consensus is not really a movement. Real change, real progress, brings people in with generosity and kindness, however hard that might be...." [bold, mine]
Yes, ladies and germs, I suspect they have seen the writing on the wall, and are attempting to separate themselves from the less "salubrious" members of their beautiful rainbow collective.
They know that those undesirables are damaging their reputation, their chances of continuing as a respectable organization, and, therefore, their grift.
And they are afraid that Stonewall no longer has the power to control these unstable elements.
Simon and Stonewall, reap what you sow.