Parents of teenagers. If you haven’t listened to all episodes of this yet then you are out of touch…

[Blessex]

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p09yjmph

Ofsted have left the diversity champions earlier this year I think. I know influence doesn’t dissipate just like that but that’s something at least.

Maybe sharing this podcast can push bbc to leave also.

Huh. It’s in chat now…it seems to have bounced around a bit.

Anyhoo, I haven’t managed to listen yet, but intend to over the weekend. Looking forward to it.

YANBU although things are moving round a lot

@BulletandtheBullseye

Ofsted have left the diversity champions earlier this year I think. I know influence doesn’t dissipate just like that but that’s something at least.

Maybe sharing this podcast can push bbc to leave also.

Ofcom has stayed with Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index scheme despite leaving SW's Diversity Champions scheme.

sex-matters.org/posts/updates/ofcom-leaves-stonewall/

And our kids will want their democratic freedoms that aren’t ours to throw away for them.

This is such a well made point.

Useful article:

lesbianandgaynews.com/2021/10/gary-powell-the-emergence-of-this-excellent-bbc-podcast-series-demonstrates-what-can-emerge-in-unexpected-places-when-we-resist-when-we-protest-and-when-we-persist-our-voices-are-at-last/

Some quotes:

If Stonewall were confident of the ideology they are promoting, and confident about being able to defend how embedded they are in public bodies, one might have expected them to jump at this opportunity to present their case and set the record straight on a BBC programme.

The lid is off, and readers are strongly encouraged to listen to this very well-researched and well-presented series on how ideological basement-dwellers have colonised some of our most important institutions.

Hadro - I was saying ofsted have left diversity champions. Because mrsover was talking about stonewalls and ofsted.

They may well also still enter into the work place index like ofcom but I think I’ll be asking secondary schools to consider why ofsted stopped paying disturbing amounts out to stonewall.

You're right BulletandtheBullseye about Ofsted. It's a relief as it suggests that there's at least one grown up organisation around schools.

It does defy belief that so many regulatory body have signed up to a political lobby group, yet so many of them have.

This seems to be back in s &g , though I thought it was in chat . Who the hell is so determined to not have it discussed by the general MN readership? Please move it back to chat or AIBU as we know what the thread is about here.

@YeOldeTrout

Oh FFS. More anti-trans paranoia from MNers. Plus evangelical " Mumsnetters must embrace my Agenda!" self importance soapbox.

Thanks for teaching me what I.Do.Not.Want.To.Listen.To.

Oh honey, no. We've moved on from this. Wake up.

@catzwhiskas

This seems to be back in s &g , though I thought it was in chat . Who the hell is so determined to not have it discussed by the general MN readership? Please move it back to chat or AIBU as we know what the thread is about here.

It's in Chat. It also seems to be in S&G for some reason.

Probably a glitch.

It's still in chat for me.

It's visible in both at the moment. I expect MNHQ will sort it out in the morning.

Haven't listened and have no plans to do so.

@DerAlteMann

Haven't listened and have no plans to do so.

That's the spirit!!

What you don't know can't trouble you.

Night night

I'm actually completely confused as to what I should be listening to/considering!!

@RufustheBadgeringReindeer
If you are following the guidelines you wont get deleted

Is there a specific prohibition against committing Contempt of Court in the guidelines? Given that was what HowardNoir got a recent deletion for.

@Ticksallboxes
Series of podcasts linked in the first post on this thread
Summary www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58917227
Article www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-bbc-s-relationship-with-stonewall-is-finally-being-scrutinised

Ticks - if you, or anyone, is reluctant or uninterested then skip to the episode with Dr David Bell. It’s very informative and it’s worth deciding if you want to listen to all of it, be more informed about this, based off of that episode.

This is an issue that effects all of other teens right now, will effect all our preteens when they get to secondary (or pshe year 6 judging by the plan I have from our school) and is also a much wider issue about how lobby groups are stealing our democratic freedoms, because as revealed on the podcast stonewall made bbc and ofcom sign NDA’s. And public bodies have no place using NDA’s. Public bodies should always be transparent and if this one is able to use public funds to force NDA’s then what can any other organisations do. So even if you don’t have teens/kids/don’t care about the gender ideology stonewall pushes, the democratic freedoms they are stealth sneaking away from every single person should matter.

Stonewall making anyone sign an NDA really is the equivalent of a toddler in a temper tantrum screaming shut up at the parents and the parents following the toddlers instructions.

It feels like ‘will the real grown ups please stand up’.

& I’m saying that as one of those obnoxious child led/breastfed toddlers until 3 year old/lets them eat mud in the garden for breakfast type of parent.

But even I expect to be the adult if they want to play chicken on the road.

So I’d be putting stonewall in time out if they were ‘nah nah I can use my magic wand and gag you’ @ me. (No pun intended mn).

There’s some power no adult should hand over to others and one is letting them gag free speech. Safeguarding always fails if people are not free to speak up. And there are plenty of people in the world, and here, who have their voice taken from them with no say in it. Willingly handing over our right to question and challenge organisations aims and methods is a bloody fucking insult to anyone whose been victim of that being forcibly taken from them. Anyone being ok with that is kind of like reverse appropriation, if that makes sense, throwing away our rights without any thought to how insulting and insensitive that is to anyone whose had no choice in the matter. Which is we sit back and go along with this includes our children.

Maybe stonewall thinking is they won’t miss the freedoms they never knew they had, the same way trans adults won’t miss being able to orgasm if they’ve been transed so young they never got to experience it. I’m pretty sure the reality is people can definitely feel the loss of never growing up if they have been prevented from normal development. I most definitely feel the loss of never having had a father. Nothing is as present as absence in my experience. Kids who have their normal human development stolen will feel that loss. And loosing freedoms may not be something they can identify or name as a loss, but the black hole in their futures will be ever present none the less if people sit back and let lobby groups stealth away the democratic right to challenge what they do with public funds.

I can just about understand Stonewall saying they wont debate trans issues, because they think TWAW #no debate.
I don't agree with that stance, and i think it has been a huge contributor to the toxicity surrounding this issue.

But i cannot see how they and the BBC can justify not responding to this. This is not about the trans debate, this is about how some of our national bodies abdicated responsibility for whole areas of policy to a political lobby group, shutting out other groups and individuals who may have different views. They have directly shaped the national discourse on this through totally non transparent means. The OFCOM stuff is proper shocking.

Not responding to this is not them taking a principled stance. It is them hiding. And if they are hiding, it means they have something to hide. I would not want to be one of their Trustees. Did i read that the chair of OFCOM is a stonewall trustee?

But school I recall English, modern studies, history all pushing us (with very harsh words and severe marking downs when we didn’t) to continually re-examine and evaluate our thoughts and beliefs. There were no right answers and it was the process we got to our conclusions that mattered

Derailing slightly, but thank you to the pp who wrote this. I've got an ongoing argument with my daughter about her insistence on having to have exactly the right answer, which must use the right terminology in her school essay work (sixth form). I had thought her school wasn't teaching them very well, when I have said that there isn't necessarily a right answer, as long as you can demonstrate a justifiable argument for that answer. We are mainly discussing literature and a bit of history and religion. But sadly it seems she may be right?

[quote GAHgamel]@RufustheBadgeringReindeer
If you are following the guidelines you wont get deleted

Is there a specific prohibition against committing Contempt of Court in the guidelines? Given that was what HowardNoir got a recent deletion for.[/quote]
You get deleted for quoting a post thats been deleted…before the original post has been deleted

I can request a deletion

Guidelines can’t cover my change of mind, going back in time or gross stupidity

But generally if you follow the guidelines you won’t get deleted.
People on this board have been deleted for ‘yawn’ ‘bless’ and , breaking the ‘law’ in your posts (and contempt can be a civil or criminal matter) making libelous claims or death threats or bomb plots or anything like that quite obviously will be deleted and MNHQ shouldn’t have to specifically mention those things

I would not want to be one of their Trustees. Did i read that the chair of OFCOM is a stonewall trustee?

I wouldn't care to be a trustee, either. Maggie Carver is the current Interim Chair and doesn't have Stonewall in her bio.

www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/how-ofcom-is-run/ofcom-board

Stonewall trustees: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_(charity)#Trustees
and recent appointments
www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/stonewall-announces-new-trustees

Dawes has been steeped in Stonewall for some time during her Civil Services days. I'm concerned that it seems unlikely that she neither carried out any due diligence as to the quality of SW's advice as an individual nor instructed others to do so. Dawes may perceive that she has some potential reputational harm at stake if she were to admit that now: I would, however, admire her for such a statement, especially if it were accompanied by a pledge that Ofcom will now explore the legality of the SW guidance that they have absorbed into their own policies.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4108274-Melanie-Dawes-and-Ofcom?msgid=102689963

I hope that all organisations are looking more closely at the influence that lobby groups have had on them and whether they need to take advice on any guidance that they have implemented.

breaking the ‘law’ in your posts (and contempt can be a civil or criminal matter) making libelous claims or death threats or bomb plots or anything like that quite obviously will be deleted and MNHQ shouldn’t have to specifically mention those things

GAHgamel, it is specially in the MN Chat guidelines that posts shouldn't break the law (as Rufus says: for obvious reasons!).

MN is a moderated forum and since they do delete posts that potentially break the law, they obviously take responsibility for the content they leave up. They aren't going to expose themselves to liability by leaving up a post that potentially amounts to contempt of court once they've been made aware of it.