Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups

956 replies

IwantToRetire · 09/07/2026 17:01

Quote:

Anti-rights actors seek a society in which women and men have fixed and distinct roles, based on what they view as ‘natural’ and ‘traditional’. These actors perceive the idea that gender is socially constructed as a threat because it suggests that gender roles can, and do, change across societies and over time. In fact, progress in the rights of women and LGBT+ people has been underpinned by changing understandings of gender and social roles.

Anti-rights actors refer to this perceived threat as ‘gender ideology’, portraying it as an attack on national traditions, family structures, marriage and religious freedom. These narratives often seek to generate fear and uncertainty and rely on misinformation or exaggerated claims.

The term ‘gender ideology’ emerged in the context of debates within international institutions, particularly the United Nations, about gender equality and sexual and reproductive rights.

In 1964, the Holy See became a Permanent Observer at the UN General Assembly, the only religious body with this status. As a permanent observer the Holy See can participate in processes at the General Assembly as well as other UN bodies. It cannot vote but it has the possibility to co-sponsor resolutions if a member state requests a vote. Although it cannot vote, the Holy See can participate in UN discussions and processes and has played an influential role in debates on women's rights and LGBT+ rights.

The term ‘gender ideology’ gained prominence in response to progress on gender equality and Cairo in 1994. These conference were a landmark moment for the global women's rights movement. The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action is widely regarded as a key international framework for advancing women's rights and gender equality, and states continue to report on its implementation through the Commission on the Status of Women.

While opposition to sexual and reproductive rights predates the Beijing conference, the term ‘gender ideology’ became a particularly important response to the advances achieved there. The phrase was coined to explain the growing influence of gender equality agendas and to mobilise opposition to them.

Although the term originated in debates at the international level, it has since become a broad political narrative used by a wide range of anti-rights actors. Today, it is often used to connect campaigns against gender equality, sexual and reproductive rights, and LGBT+ rights across different countries and contexts.

From intro to report at
https://media.amnesty.org.uk/documents/Report_-_A_growing_threat__the_anti-rights_movement_in_the_UK_July_2026.pdf

See images of the list of 51 groups Amnesty is claiming are right wing.

A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups
A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups
OP posts:
Thread gallery
84
EdithStourton · 10/07/2026 08:38

Thank you for that detailed breakdown, @RedToothBrush

Amnesty isn't the only charity that has taken on politically-aligned causes in the past few years. I'm not sure what the Charity Commission is doing.

RedToothBrush · 10/07/2026 08:26

KnottyAuty · 10/07/2026 08:23

Very interesting annual report. Lapsed subscribers… I’ll bet my boots that the demographics are a particular older female? I know 💯 that people heard Amnesty’s CEO on Woman’s Hour after the Supreme Court ruling and immediately went to cancel their long-standing direct debits… They might be targeting trans rights for social media clicks but if the baseline subs dry up they’re done for. Sounds like a campaign to me “Amnesty International - Destroyer of Women’s Rights”

It would be fascinating to know the demographics on lapsed subscribers wouldn't it? I wonder if Amnesty themselves have looked at it.

RedToothBrush · 10/07/2026 08:25

Arran2024 · 10/07/2026 08:17

Thanks, that's very interesting.

I think that trans rights is a strategic decision for the likes of Amnesty because it's a clearly defined group which is relatively easy to target through attending events rather than paying to advertise on social media.

They aren't going to drop this target audience and all the work that has gone into reaching them. So they need to keep positioning themselves as pro trans rights to keep the target audience engaged.

And so many charities are doing this. There is no group easier to reach beyond social media than LGBT+.

Show quote history

Just at a time when I'd argue that trans rights as a cause is starting to wane in the public at large in terms of creditability and traction.

The trans money making bandwagon has passed. Amnesty didn't get the memo.

KnottyAuty · 10/07/2026 08:23

Very interesting annual report. Lapsed subscribers… I’ll bet my boots that the demographics are a particular older female? I know 💯 that people heard Amnesty’s CEO on Woman’s Hour after the Supreme Court ruling and immediately went to cancel their long-standing direct debits… They might be targeting trans rights for social media clicks but if the baseline subs dry up they’re done for. Sounds like a campaign to me “Amnesty International - Destroyer of Women’s Rights”

Arran2024 · 10/07/2026 08:17

RedToothBrush · 10/07/2026 08:06

Amnesty clearly don't understand equality and human rights anymore.

They've officially disappeared up their own arses .

This is AFTER a bunch of court rulings which effectively say they Gender Ideology is sexist and homophobic in various ways. And have found the rights of women have been infringed.

Women clearly are not worthy of safety, dignity and privacy according to Amnesty. They should undress in front of males, they should stay in abusive marriages, they should accept female cocks if lesbians and they should reframe their trauma from rape.

Can we close these grifters down? They seem to be failing in their charitable aims.
Activities - how the charity spends its money
promotion of human rights throughout the world, including by: monitoring abuses, assisting the victims of such abuses and eliminating infringements; research into human rights issues and providing technical advice; contributing to the sound administration of human rights law; raising awareness of, and promoting public support for, human rights issues; and international advocacy of human rights.

Official aims.
TO PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD BY ALL OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS: MONITORING ABUSES OF HUMAN RIGHTS; OBTAINING REDRESS FOR THE VICTIMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE; RELIEVING NEED AMONG THE VICTIMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE (AND IN PARTICULAR MEDICAL, REHABILITATIONAL OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE); RESEARCH INTO HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; PROVIDING TECHNICAL ADVICE TO GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS ON HUMAN RIGHTS MATTERS; CONTRIBUTING TO THE SOUND ADMINISTRATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW; COMMENTING ON PROPOSED HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION; RAISING AWARENESS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; PROMOTING PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS; PROMOTING RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AMONG INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS; INTERNATIONAL ADVOCACY OF HUMAN RIGHTS; ELIMINATING INFRINGEMENTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION PROCURING THE ABOLITION OF TORTURE, EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTION AND DISAPPEARANCE.

If you are misrepresenting this subject to this degree...

But here's the interesting bit.

Look at this graph. And when you look at the finer details boy are they unstable financially. Their donations are all over the place. They are reliant on legacy donations to keep the books looking good. Not general donations.

They are chasing wealthy older people. They aren't interested in vulnerable women with little or no money. They don't leave oodles of money to Amnesty. There's a massive conflict of interest here in their financial model.

Hang on a second. This all sounds a bit hmm ultra capitalist. Isn't that right wing?

Remember Amnesty International states that it is independent of any political ideology, economic interest, or religion. Errrr.... About that.

Then we have this gem.
Recruitment of new members was challenging in 2025. We invested less than we had allowed for in
our budget in this area, primarily as recruitment costs remain prohibitively high on paid digital media.
The number of lapsed Memberships exceeded the number of new recruits, leading to a reduction in
Members during 2025.
At the end of December 2025, the number of individual members of the UK Section stood at around
76,100. In comparison at December 2024, there were around 79,600 – a decrease of 4.4% which has contributed to a £0.3m decrease in income from members compared to 2024.

Fascinating stuff this.
Set out below are some of the key outcomes we will be working towards in 2026.
1- Narrative Shift - Human rights are part of everyday life in the UK, with most of the public
seeing them as essential and rejecting anti-rights agendas at the ballot box
Brand – Builds a strong, recognisable identity that positions human rights as positive,
essential and relevant
Persuading the Passives – Targets the 30% of the UK public who are neutral or
disengaged, shifting their attitudes toward supporting human rights
Persuading Young Men – Focuses on the demographic most vulnerable to anti-rights
narratives, reframing rights as aligned with their values

Hmm. Again fascinating. Especially given single sex and feminist groups are currently on Amnesty's hit list and gender ideology is a Men's Rights movement.

The accounts show a deficit of £6.2m for the year, a larger deficit by £4.4m from the £1.7m deficit in
2024

Hmm. It carries on

Income has decreased by £2.4m on 2024 levels to £12.1m in 2025. This is primarily due to a decrease
in Grant income from the Trust of £1.9m. The Trust had budgeted to sell the freehold former London
Head Office in 2025. A delay to that sale reduced the funding available to the Trust and its ability to
make grant payments. The Trust did complete a sale on 2 February 2026. The grant from the Trust is restricted to areas of the UK Section’s human rights work which aligned with the Trust’s charitable
objects, spanning our goals of: changing attitudes to human rights, building a powerful movement of
human rights activists and winning human rights victories. The Trust grant supports all aspects of the Section’s human rights work.
Income from other trading activities decreased by £0.1m from 2024 at £1.4m. The shops again made
a significant deficit of £0.8m despite stable income levels, after taking into account the allocation of
overhead costs such as bank charges, IT costs, human resources and other central services associated with supporting the shops. Around £0.3m in donations was raised by the UK Section for the Trust as part of the retail Gift Aid scheme, with the benefit of a further £0.1m in Gift Aid. We will continue to focus on increasing profitability of our retail portfolio during 2026.
Staff costs in the UK Section increased by £1m in 2025. The increase in staff costs was driven by some additional posts added in the year, and by increases in pay rates reflecting inflation-based cost of living adjustments negotiated with our recognised trade union. The budget for 2026 included plans to reduce our cost base, including in staffing. A cost reduction programme was concluded in March 2026 which will enable the UK Section to achieve surpluses and start rebuilding its free reserves.

Note
A key part of our approach to everyday rights is supporting grassroots groups to lead changes in their communities. At the end of 2024, Amnesty UK launched a small-grants programme and training for such organisations.

What's interesting about the list of groups they are actively attacking is just how many are grassroots led.

SOCIAL MEDIA KEEPS GROWING
By mid-2025, Amnesty UK’s digital reach had already exceeded our 2024 reach, showing more people are seeing – and interacting with – the Amnesty message.
June 2025 was our best month in a decade, with 700,000 plus engagements and 10.5 million views on posts about Glastonbury, the Media Awards, Protect the Protest, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, social security cuts and trans rights. We also acquired 17,761 new followers in June alone – 45 per cent of social growth for the whole of 2024.
We had 43 artist-led posts, from people such as singer Kate Nash and presenter Gary Lineker. Several topped 1 million views and had more than 600,000 engagements on Instagram.

And there's your rub. Omni-cause. You don't get to call yourself a non-political organisation and have that written in your annual report. I'm sorry but that bloody laughable.

Amnesty aren't focused on rights. They are focused on social media hits and engagement to generate income. They are actively attacking grassroots organisations they don't like. The more cynical amongst us might say that they are attacking their financial competitors. And the irony is that despite having more social media hits - virtue signalling - they had a decline in membership - the active activists who do stuff rather than just virtue signal.

It's almost as if they are so focused on social media, they are out of touch with the general population.

It's also interesting how they seem to be so reliant on Glastonbury. This year there is no Glastonbury so next year's report will be interesting. They will struggle to match 2025s social media engagement. It would strike me that going for something round about June/July to shitstir on social media and whip up a fuss would be part of your strategy for a non-Glasto year.

Weirdly social media is heavily tilted to young people whilst legacy donations will come from old people. There's a bit of a problem here. And I would suggest there's a bit of an identity crisis going on within Amnesty and definitely a loss of direction in terms of rights.

They are chasing social media rather than promoting understanding of human rights. This way lies madness. Engagement does not mean follow up action. It leaves you vulnerable to fads and trends rather than substantial foundations in the stuff you are supposed to be campaigning on. It's whole model being centred on a Glastonbury demographic is slightly hilarious tbh in terms of how seriously they should be taken as a charity.

I think like Stonewall, this is a potential 'watch this space' in terms of relevance. It feels a little like when Mermaids tried to take on the LGB Alliance in mood.

These fuckers are not interested in women's rights. They clearly spend too much time on Reddit and Instagram. And think it's reflective of real life.

They are a marketing campaign not a serious human rights champion.

Edited

Thanks, that's very interesting.

I think that trans rights is a strategic decision for the likes of Amnesty because it's a clearly defined group which is relatively easy to target through attending events rather than paying to advertise on social media.

They aren't going to drop this target audience and all the work that has gone into reaching them. So they need to keep positioning themselves as pro trans rights to keep the target audience engaged.

And so many charities are doing this. There is no group easier to reach beyond social media than LGBT+.

RedToothBrush · 10/07/2026 08:06

Amnesty clearly don't understand equality and human rights anymore.

They've officially disappeared up their own arses .

This is AFTER a bunch of court rulings which effectively say they Gender Ideology is sexist and homophobic in various ways. And have found the rights of women have been infringed.

Women clearly are not worthy of safety, dignity and privacy according to Amnesty. They should undress in front of males, they should stay in abusive marriages, they should accept female cocks if lesbians and they should reframe their trauma from rape.

Can we close these grifters down? They seem to be failing in their charitable aims.
Activities - how the charity spends its money
promotion of human rights throughout the world, including by: monitoring abuses, assisting the victims of such abuses and eliminating infringements; research into human rights issues and providing technical advice; contributing to the sound administration of human rights law; raising awareness of, and promoting public support for, human rights issues; and international advocacy of human rights.

Official aims.
TO PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD BY ALL OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS: MONITORING ABUSES OF HUMAN RIGHTS; OBTAINING REDRESS FOR THE VICTIMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE; RELIEVING NEED AMONG THE VICTIMS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE (AND IN PARTICULAR MEDICAL, REHABILITATIONAL OR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE); RESEARCH INTO HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; PROVIDING TECHNICAL ADVICE TO GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS ON HUMAN RIGHTS MATTERS; CONTRIBUTING TO THE SOUND ADMINISTRATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW; COMMENTING ON PROPOSED HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION; RAISING AWARENESS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES; PROMOTING PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS; PROMOTING RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AMONG INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS; INTERNATIONAL ADVOCACY OF HUMAN RIGHTS; ELIMINATING INFRINGEMENTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION PROCURING THE ABOLITION OF TORTURE, EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTION AND DISAPPEARANCE.

If you are misrepresenting this subject to this degree...

But here's the interesting bit.

Look at this graph. And when you look at the finer details boy are they unstable financially. Their donations are all over the place. They are reliant on legacy donations to keep the books looking good. Not general donations.

They are chasing wealthy older people. They aren't interested in vulnerable women with little or no money. They don't leave oodles of money to Amnesty. There's a massive conflict of interest here in their financial model.

Hang on a second. This all sounds a bit hmm ultra capitalist. Isn't that right wing?

Remember Amnesty International states that it is independent of any political ideology, economic interest, or religion. Errrr.... About that.

Then we have this gem.
Recruitment of new members was challenging in 2025. We invested less than we had allowed for in
our budget in this area, primarily as recruitment costs remain prohibitively high on paid digital media.
The number of lapsed Memberships exceeded the number of new recruits, leading to a reduction in
Members during 2025.
At the end of December 2025, the number of individual members of the UK Section stood at around
76,100. In comparison at December 2024, there were around 79,600 – a decrease of 4.4% which has contributed to a £0.3m decrease in income from members compared to 2024.

Fascinating stuff this.
Set out below are some of the key outcomes we will be working towards in 2026.
1- Narrative Shift - Human rights are part of everyday life in the UK, with most of the public
seeing them as essential and rejecting anti-rights agendas at the ballot box
Brand – Builds a strong, recognisable identity that positions human rights as positive,
essential and relevant
Persuading the Passives – Targets the 30% of the UK public who are neutral or
disengaged, shifting their attitudes toward supporting human rights
Persuading Young Men – Focuses on the demographic most vulnerable to anti-rights
narratives, reframing rights as aligned with their values

Hmm. Again fascinating. Especially given single sex and feminist groups are currently on Amnesty's hit list and gender ideology is a Men's Rights movement.

The accounts show a deficit of £6.2m for the year, a larger deficit by £4.4m from the £1.7m deficit in
2024

Hmm. It carries on

Income has decreased by £2.4m on 2024 levels to £12.1m in 2025. This is primarily due to a decrease
in Grant income from the Trust of £1.9m. The Trust had budgeted to sell the freehold former London
Head Office in 2025. A delay to that sale reduced the funding available to the Trust and its ability to
make grant payments. The Trust did complete a sale on 2 February 2026. The grant from the Trust is restricted to areas of the UK Section’s human rights work which aligned with the Trust’s charitable
objects, spanning our goals of: changing attitudes to human rights, building a powerful movement of
human rights activists and winning human rights victories. The Trust grant supports all aspects of the Section’s human rights work.
Income from other trading activities decreased by £0.1m from 2024 at £1.4m. The shops again made
a significant deficit of £0.8m despite stable income levels, after taking into account the allocation of
overhead costs such as bank charges, IT costs, human resources and other central services associated with supporting the shops. Around £0.3m in donations was raised by the UK Section for the Trust as part of the retail Gift Aid scheme, with the benefit of a further £0.1m in Gift Aid. We will continue to focus on increasing profitability of our retail portfolio during 2026.
Staff costs in the UK Section increased by £1m in 2025. The increase in staff costs was driven by some additional posts added in the year, and by increases in pay rates reflecting inflation-based cost of living adjustments negotiated with our recognised trade union. The budget for 2026 included plans to reduce our cost base, including in staffing. A cost reduction programme was concluded in March 2026 which will enable the UK Section to achieve surpluses and start rebuilding its free reserves.

Note
A key part of our approach to everyday rights is supporting grassroots groups to lead changes in their communities. At the end of 2024, Amnesty UK launched a small-grants programme and training for such organisations.

What's interesting about the list of groups they are actively attacking is just how many are grassroots led.

SOCIAL MEDIA KEEPS GROWING
By mid-2025, Amnesty UK’s digital reach had already exceeded our 2024 reach, showing more people are seeing – and interacting with – the Amnesty message.
June 2025 was our best month in a decade, with 700,000 plus engagements and 10.5 million views on posts about Glastonbury, the Media Awards, Protect the Protest, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, social security cuts and trans rights. We also acquired 17,761 new followers in June alone – 45 per cent of social growth for the whole of 2024.
We had 43 artist-led posts, from people such as singer Kate Nash and presenter Gary Lineker. Several topped 1 million views and had more than 600,000 engagements on Instagram.

And there's your rub. Omni-cause. You don't get to call yourself a non-political organisation and have that written in your annual report. I'm sorry but that bloody laughable.

Amnesty aren't focused on rights. They are focused on social media hits and engagement to generate income. They are actively attacking grassroots organisations they don't like. The more cynical amongst us might say that they are attacking their financial competitors. And the irony is that despite having more social media hits - virtue signalling - they had a decline in membership - the active activists who do stuff rather than just virtue signal.

It's almost as if they are so focused on social media, they are out of touch with the general population.

It's also interesting how they seem to be so reliant on Glastonbury. This year there is no Glastonbury so next year's report will be interesting. They will struggle to match 2025s social media engagement. It would strike me that going for something round about June/July to shitstir on social media and whip up a fuss would be part of your strategy for a non-Glasto year.

Weirdly social media is heavily tilted to young people whilst legacy donations will come from old people. There's a bit of a problem here. And I would suggest there's a bit of an identity crisis going on within Amnesty and definitely a loss of direction in terms of rights.

They are chasing social media rather than promoting understanding of human rights. This way lies madness. Engagement does not mean follow up action. It leaves you vulnerable to fads and trends rather than substantial foundations in the stuff you are supposed to be campaigning on. It's whole model being centred on a Glastonbury demographic is slightly hilarious tbh in terms of how seriously they should be taken as a charity.

I think like Stonewall, this is a potential 'watch this space' in terms of relevance. It feels a little like when Mermaids tried to take on the LGB Alliance in mood.

These fuckers are not interested in women's rights. They clearly spend too much time on Reddit and Instagram. And think it's reflective of real life.

They are a marketing campaign not a serious human rights champion.

A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK says Amnesty who claim over 50% are Gender Critical groups
Lumpycat · 10/07/2026 06:35

Irritating and pointless organisation who appear to spend their time on pontificating on behalf of people who already have recourse to the law in stable societies.
I used to support them when they were trying to be a voice for the mass of people around the world in desperate situations with nothing and nobody to speak for them.
It’s just easier to focus on existing domestic squabbles than go out and campaign for those who don’t already have a voice.

Wadsworthy · 10/07/2026 02:58

Someone needs to give the folks at Amnesty a seminar in Feminism 101.

Feminists want to dismantle 'gender roles' or sex-based stereotypes. We want to contest the assumptions that being in a sexed body must determine our life patterns and behaviours, and that children should not be socialised or conditioned into patterns of behaviour (femininity and masculinity) which are limiting or oppressive.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 10/07/2026 02:24

KnottyAuty · 09/07/2026 23:22

Just to be clear - they intervened on the side that wanted to erode or remove women’s human rights

that would be in opposition to their own charitable objects… no idea why that intervention didn’t immediately spark a charity commission investigation…?

ETA @Ereshkigalangcleg im sure you know. Im clarifying for anyone who’s unsure/new

Edited
Show quote history

It’s a very good point.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 10/07/2026 02:19

I think you will find that Amnesty, like Liberty (formerly NCCL) has always had a problem with women, and certainly women who are feminists. This is 16 years ago:

I was hired as the head of the Gender Unit as the organization began to develop its Stop Violence Against Women campaign. I leave with great sadness as the campaign is closed. Thousands of activists of Amnesty International enthusiastically joined the campaign. Many hoped that it would induce respect for women’s human rights in every area of social and economic life. Today, there is little ground for optimism.

The senior leadership of Amnesty International chose to answer the questions I posed about Amnesty International’s relationship with Moazzam Begg by affirming their links with him. Now they have also confirmed that the views of Begg, his associates, and his organization, Cageprisoners, do not trouble them. They have stated that the idea of jihad in self-defense is not antithetical to human rights; and have explained that they meant only the specific form of violent jihad that Moazzam Begg and others in Cageprisoners assert is the individual obligation of every Muslim.

Full statement here https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2010/05/13/statement-gita-sahgal-leaving-amnesty-internationa/

A Statement By Gita Sahgal On Leaving Amnesty International | Gita Sahgal

Gita Sahgal is a longtime human rights advocate and founder of several women's rights organizations who joined Amnesty International in 2002. In early

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2010/05/13/statement-gita-sahgal-leaving-amnesty-internationa/

OP posts:
KnottyAuty · 09/07/2026 23:22

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/07/2026 21:04

As Maya said on Twitter, they intervened in the SC case, and the SC were not persuaded by their arguments.

Just to be clear - they intervened on the side that wanted to erode or remove women’s human rights

that would be in opposition to their own charitable objects… no idea why that intervention didn’t immediately spark a charity commission investigation…?

ETA @Ereshkigalangcleg im sure you know. Im clarifying for anyone who’s unsure/new

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 09/07/2026 21:39

Dominoodles · 09/07/2026 21:29

Yess. I am pretty left wing in every political view I have aside from this one, which I would still argue is a left wing view as it's focused on women's rights, but it's the only way in which I don't 'toe the party line' and apparently makes me a bigot 🤷🏼‍♀️

Show quote history

TBH I'm not sure where I fit anymore! I know I'm a single-issue voter now, if needs must, and that's women's rights. Everything else is a very distant second to that. It's depressing. If we can't get the basics right, if even charities like Amnesty are finding it "cooler" or more lucrative to jump on these niche bandwagons, how will we ever tackle the really crucial stuff? I can't fathom at all the cognitive disconnect that Amnesty must have to create a stupid list like this!

Dominoodles · 09/07/2026 21:29

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 09/07/2026 21:25

If you just say 'this person is bad and aligns with bad people because I say so', then you never need to stop and actually listen to the words they're saying.

It's just another tactic, isn't it, designed to confuse and redefine terms so that we don't have the words to describe what our rights are and why we need to defend them.

I often wonder how "genuinely right wing" people feel about being lumped together with a bunch of Original Lefties Who Believe In Reality? It's possible that the only thing all of us agree on is that sex is immutable.

Show quote history

Yess. I am pretty left wing in every political view I have aside from this one, which I would still argue is a left wing view as it's focused on women's rights, but it's the only way in which I don't 'toe the party line' and apparently makes me a bigot 🤷🏼‍♀️

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 09/07/2026 21:25

Dominoodles · 09/07/2026 21:17

It is so frustrating to see them completely and utterly, and I think intentionally, misunderstand every single argument gender critical people have.

None of us are set on super ultra traditional roles. I'm pretty sure most of us are on board if a man wants to wear skirts or makeup. The issue comes when a man who likes to wear skirts is told by everyone that this means he is a woman, a female, and thus can go into all women's spaces, take it forcibly change womens language, or ignore a woman's no. We have no issue with kids playing with whatever toys and wearing whatever clothes, we take issue when a girl who likes trucks and having short hair is presumed to actually be a boy, and placed on body altering medication that they are far too young to understand or consent to, which has all kinds of potential harms down the line.

TRAs are often determined to hold these views are far right, when in truth they couldn't be further from it. In the same way they tell us we're not real feminists. If you just say 'this person is bad and aligns with bad people because I say so', then you never need to stop and actually listen to the words they're saying.

If you just say 'this person is bad and aligns with bad people because I say so', then you never need to stop and actually listen to the words they're saying.

It's just another tactic, isn't it, designed to confuse and redefine terms so that we don't have the words to describe what our rights are and why we need to defend them.

I often wonder how "genuinely right wing" people feel about being lumped together with a bunch of Original Lefties Who Believe In Reality? It's possible that the only thing all of us agree on is that sex is immutable.

EdithStourton · 09/07/2026 21:17

SockPlant · 09/07/2026 19:06

i am very fucking cross that i spent so many hours writing postcards for Amnesty (back in the day)

I console myself with the thought that it was a very different Amnesty then.

The current version has completely lost the plot.

Dominoodles · 09/07/2026 21:17

It is so frustrating to see them completely and utterly, and I think intentionally, misunderstand every single argument gender critical people have.

None of us are set on super ultra traditional roles. I'm pretty sure most of us are on board if a man wants to wear skirts or makeup. The issue comes when a man who likes to wear skirts is told by everyone that this means he is a woman, a female, and thus can go into all women's spaces, take it forcibly change womens language, or ignore a woman's no. We have no issue with kids playing with whatever toys and wearing whatever clothes, we take issue when a girl who likes trucks and having short hair is presumed to actually be a boy, and placed on body altering medication that they are far too young to understand or consent to, which has all kinds of potential harms down the line.

TRAs are often determined to hold these views are far right, when in truth they couldn't be further from it. In the same way they tell us we're not real feminists. If you just say 'this person is bad and aligns with bad people because I say so', then you never need to stop and actually listen to the words they're saying.

EasternStandard · 09/07/2026 21:12

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/07/2026 21:04

As Maya said on Twitter, they intervened in the SC case, and the SC were not persuaded by their arguments.

It’s good the U.K. still has some process and strong voices from women but these organisations are fighting it with male centric tactics.

And it’s just wrong, it’s a misrepresentation of what women are saying.

Very concerning.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/07/2026 21:04

As Maya said on Twitter, they intervened in the SC case, and the SC were not persuaded by their arguments.

teawamutu · 09/07/2026 20:59

StSpiridian · 09/07/2026 17:40

@SockPlant The summary is that Amnesty has listed any sex realist/ gender critical group as 'anti rights' if a group doesn't prioritise the demands of men who say they're women over women/ children/ gay people. The groups Amnesty are picking on include any support groups for women or children that don't include 'transwomen' /men (eg due to supporting rape victims , or children abused by men who say they're women).

Amnesty has totally lost its way- they used to speak up for vulnerable people and abused women/ children- now they're targetting groups that support the victims (!) for bullying. Amnesty's list targets any (mainly female led/ feminist but also LGB ) group that doesn't believe men can be women- ie are sex realist/ gender critical.

The Amnesty list even includes Beira's Place (the female only rape support org that was set up I think by JK Rowling as there wasn't anything single sex ) and Children of Transitioners (who are a tiny grass roots, unfunded, group of volunteers who support others with a transparent). Can't think how these are anti rights groups- Amnesty is lying! @backformoreofthesame is being very generous in saying maybe they don't understand.

(maybe the Cots group got targetted because the courts recently upheld the fact that Children of Transitioners have human rights that by law transparents can't remove ( there's a mumsnet thread about the ECHR decision last week - here's a previous background link https://childrenoftransitioners.org/paperwork/

Hugely disappointing to see how far Amnesty has fallen- I used to be part of an Amnesty group at Uni, before they started on the trans madness/ hating women and girls....

Same. Spent a fair chunk of my teenage years fundraising, writing letters in support of Death Row prisoners and shelling out my Saturday job money for the stamps to post them.

They've completely and utterly beclowned themselves. Are they widely seen as still the same Amnesty, or more like Stonewall?

Thingybob · 09/07/2026 20:57

Surely that document is libelous?

EasternStandard · 09/07/2026 20:41

DeflatedHeliumBallonz · 09/07/2026 20:01

Sorry, are they saying that gender critical people have problematic beliefs like men and women having traditional roles whilst supporting gender ideology that encourages young girls to transition to boys if they like short hair and cars 🫤🫤🫤

How are these people this off

Boiledbeetle · 09/07/2026 20:14

Shortshriftandlethal · 09/07/2026 19:54

As usual based on a fundamental lack of understanding of the GC proposition.

Mainly down to a total inability to think critically and understand the actual premise of any argument. Plus most people now get their news, and hence their opinions, from social media, and very few actually go to the first source material themselves; plus people don't engage with anyone outside of their tribe in any genuine way. Group think stupidity.

Edited

As usual based on a fundamental lack of understanding of the GC proposition.

And we've had quite enough of that over on the Tempest Tribunal thread this week!

Augarden · 09/07/2026 20:08

Lmao! What a joke. Why is it SO HARD for these people to have an honest, good faith look at what other people believe? (Careful though, it might start looking sensible!)

DeflatedHeliumBallonz · 09/07/2026 20:01

Sorry, are they saying that gender critical people have problematic beliefs like men and women having traditional roles whilst supporting gender ideology that encourages young girls to transition to boys if they like short hair and cars 🫤🫤🫤

Shortshriftandlethal · 09/07/2026 19:54

As usual based on a fundamental lack of understanding of the GC proposition.

Mainly down to a total inability to think critically and understand the actual premise of any argument. Plus most people now get their news, and hence their opinions, from social media, and very few actually go to the first source material themselves; plus people don't engage with anyone outside of their tribe in any genuine way. Group think stupidity.