Jess Bradley - a government advisor on women's rights suspended by NUS over indecent blog. Part iii

[MipMipMip]

There doesnt seem to be another part 3 coming up si here goes.

And I would add the Scottish Transgender Alliance and James Morton to the mix of longer-term activists.

It's not conspiracy theorist to recognise that males with political clout have always developed partially or wholly secret societies to extend and maintain their power. That is what this is. This is one of the most central male privileges in politics - creating impenetrable and mostly secret networks to reproduce their power.

This thread is really interesting, as well as flagging up all the links it highlights how some trans women and their allies have some very concerning views while others haves fetishes both of which are damaging for women.

What strikes me is that a number of these people have influence with government or media in order to push through changes to GRA which gives them access to single sex spaces. This should set off some big fucking alarm bells but it hasn't.

Now if a bunch of people on MN can join these dots and flag up these concerns why have they been allowed such influence.
Is it because the Government and media were just a bit crap and didn't do their research or do they just not care about the safety of women and children and have chosen to prioritise the feelings and proclivities of people born male

I overhead my daughter and her friends (all early twenties) discussing this very issue and was heartened to hear that they are finally beginning to question things.

I get the impression that people have been bullied and threatned into agreeing with things -fear of losing their jobs or being labelled transphobic, and are paying lip service to going along with things, but privately are thinking very different things.
People are beginning to join the dots. A lot don't feel comfortable voicing those concerns just yet, but they will.

Project Fear isn't working as well as they'd hoped.
They can't police what people are thinking

if a bunch of people on MN can join these dots and flag up these concerns why have they been allowed such influence.
Is it because the Government and media were just a bit crap and didn't do their research or do they just not care about the safety of women and children and have chosen to prioritise the feelings and proclivities of people born male

It's a bit of both, but mainly the second part.
The feelings of born males trump the safety and feelings of women and children.

And yes, Stephen Whittle as pretty much the only not male person in the mix, but I'm not sure if they are part of this particular network or just a convenient ally.

Think about it - a transman is the most important ally in the cause. Their presence enables tw to distance themselves from autogynephilia (it doesn't even exist, right?) - if women are transitioning then it can't be a fetish because generally females aren't thought to be fetishists. It legitimises what people are saying when they position themselves as oppressed.

(I hate writing the above and I apologise to those small number of people with severe gender dysphoria who are only trans because they are struggling with genuine distress with their physical bodies)

And amazing work on this thread - I couldn't have done such brilliant detective work.

They appear to have connections to Antifa and the radical far left

This makes sense. I've been thinking recently that all this activism seems to be heading one way, and that's the destabilisation of society.

This sounds dramatic, but when you consider what the outcome of all this pressure would be, you end up looking at a society where women are silenced, forced to accept crazy notions that make no rational sense and operate in unsafe environments. You've got children in the mix with treatment pathways that harm, and policies that advocate separation between child and parent. You've got males at odds with government that has passed laws that make their wives, sisters and daughters vulnerable in public space, and their boys in danger of being persuaded that anything other than overt masculinity is feminine and requires "treatment". You've minorities at odds with government over the same things.

It would be chaos. And it would lead to violence. The backlash against government would be immense.

And this is what the hard left want. It's the precursor to revolution in their eyes and the only way they can bring about their utopia.

That's why rad fems are being treated in the way they are: like the "bourgeois." Rad fems, in their eyes, are symptomatic of the old order that must be crushed. That's why we are getting notions like "the wrong side of history".

I am of the mind, more and more, that this activism is about spreading chaos and creating laws that are unacceptable to the majority of the population in order to disrupt society.

I am of the mind, more and more, that this activism is about spreading chaos and creating laws that are unacceptable to the majority of the population in order to disrupt society.

I agree. And I think if it is being bankrolled by rich patrons it is because it suits their own narcissistic desire for power.

One reason why a group can gain influence is surely because when the government is looking round for experts on something that they admit that they don't know much about (such as trans issues) they go to the group that appears to have presence and clout and is willing to engage with them. I've said it before, but there are parallels with the government engagement with the Muslim Council of Britain, who were instrumental in shaping government policy for years and years before someone pointed out that they were arguably part of the problem themselves

I agree. And I think if it is being bankrolled by rich patrons it is because it suits their own narcissistic desire for power.

I'm not convinced of this. I think it's more to do with the extremely widespread desire for access to women, children, porn and sexual 'freedom' (aka perversions of a wide range) that permeates so much of society, especially the rich and powerful. I reckon that's why they're bankrolling it.

Regarding JB's 'qualifications as mentioned above: apparently you were able previously to do a qualification online through NHS Scotland

elearning.healthscotland.com/enrol/index.php?id=5,

There also seem to be short 2 to 5 day courses available on other websites. What prior qualifications he might have needed to sign up to these is I don't know. But he would obviously be aware that being able to say he had a 'qualification' would sound impressive, and many people would assume it means more intensive than it apparently does.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet but this is Jess Bradley's manifesto for NUS Trans Officer:
nusdigital.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/document/documents/41448/2046f848c527468fbe37013012bde35f/PDF_Manifesto.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJKEA56ZWKFU6MHNQ&Expires=1533477204&Signature=WNp4YF0%2F3JGfLWYe%2FmiNXXI71OA%3D

Jess Bradley is:

• A founding member of Action for Trans Health, the UK’s largest campaign for democratic trans healthcare.
• A founding member and Prisons Co-convenor of the Trans Equality Legal Initiative, a network of trans activists and human rights lawyers delivering justice for the trans community.
• An organiser with Books Beyond Bars UK, a project which sends books and other resources to incarcerated LGBTQ people.
• A director of Manchester In Common, an organisation devoted to providing cooperative welfare at scale.

Who was responsible for deciding which organisations and individuals would be invited to advise?

This is a key part of the role of special adviser role in supporting select committees in inquiries like the one which resulted in Maria Miller's transgender report.

The special adviser is a vital role which helps parliament consider a balanced and appropriate range of evidence, to ensure an unbiased process. It is critical this person is someone who can bring an open, unbiased perspective to the role, so much so that including something along those lines would usually be included in the job description for the role.

The specialist adviser for the transgender inquiry was: Stephen Whittle.

Interesting, Wanderabout

SW is on MN occasionally, BTW

"See TELI Co-founder Tara Hewitt's report for UHSM which records data on 'gender' and 'trans' as 'protected characteristics':"

Gender and trans are NOT protected characteristics under the EA2010
Gender reassignment is.
As is sex.

Extract from the Guardian article linked above:
"Christine Burns is one of a generation who vividly remembers reading about Ashley in the papers when she was a young child. (Ashley appeared in a six-week special in the News of the World: "They were one of the very few who paid me and they behaved impeccably. I was very sad when the News of the World closed," says Ashley.) The existence of someone like her in the public eye was a great comfort for Burns. In the 90s, when she was chair of the Women's Supper Club of the local Conservative party association in Cheshire, she quietly joined Press for Change. Even then, the new activists dared not be openly trans. "The thing that held us back in the 1990s campaigning was that fear of being out," admits Burns. Eventually, she came out in 1995; she jokes that she realised she was more embarrassed to be a member of the Conservative party than openly transsexual.

Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press". In popular culture, the activists became more forthcoming in their attempts to increase popular understanding of trans issues." (continues)

I am of the mind, more and more, that this activism is about spreading chaos and creating laws that are unacceptable to the majority of the population in order to disrupt society

I don't think we need to get too conspiracy-theory about this. This is a wide-reaching topic and there are many actors with different agendas. Identifying who they are and what their likely agendas are is useful. But I think looking for a single reason behind all this is a red herring (apologies if I misunderstood and that's not what you're saying!).

So my questions are:

Who was responsible for making Stephen Whittle the special advisor to the transgender inquiry?

What was the process for selecting such a person? Was it an open recruitment process?

What were the terms of Whittle's engagement as special advisor? Who do they report to, what is their job description? Is it a paid role?

Who in the Women and Equalities department is responsible for checking the bias of the special advisor and those that the special advisor nominates as other advisors and witnesses?

How do they ensure that they are not "plants" for special interest groups and lobbyists? What checks are made in this regard?

From Wikipedia:

"Stephen Thomas Whittle, OBE, FAcSS is a British legal scholar and activist with the transgender activist group Press for Change. Since 2007, he has been professor of Equalities Law in the School of Law at Manchester Metropolitan University"

Who are Press for Change?

Also, if Stephen is a Manchester-based TRA, did he and JB know each other personally prior to JB being invited to advise government?

DISCLAIMER - I haven't checked that's the same Stephen Whittle, I'd better do that, one sec!!

Press for Change and Stephen Whittle's influence described by Leo
(9:30 onwards)

CBBC My Life Series 6 Episode 1 - "I Am Leo"
"Leo is 13. He loves hanging around with his friends, beat-boxing, playing football and doing all the things you'd expect a 13-year-old boy to do. But Leo was born a girl. He was named Lily by his mum and dad, who thought they had another daughter. However, from an early age, Leo knew he wasn't a girl. He is a boy but born in a girl's body. In this intimate documentary, Leo tells his story. He shares poignant moments from his video diary with CBBC viewers to detail his journey to get his first male passport and be accepted as a boy".
First shown on CBBC 17th Nov 2014 (UK)

OK, yes it is the same Stephen Whittle.

raisinsarenottheonlyfruit
The Guardian article is really worth reading to understand better the context that prompted the formation of 'Press for Change' and to better understand some of the formative experiences of those involved in advocating for transgender rights.

www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

Interesting criticism of Stonewall in a TRA review of the Maria Miller report:

"They mention that “before commencing the inquiry, we consulted informally with representatives of two key stakeholder organisations, Press for Change and Stonewall”. PfC is a long standing champion of transgender legal rights, and Stephen Whittle (who founded the organisation) acted as Specialist Advisor – quite appropriately as he is both trans himself and a professor of law! The fact that Stonewall only began considering trans issues less than three months ago makes me wonder if there weren’t more experienced groups that might’ve assisted, and whether Stonewall somewhat rode on the coattails of its recognisability due to its sexuality based work."

From this page

Which links to Pink News announcement of Stonewall setting up trans advisory board in Oct 2015.

So it really hasn't been long that Stonewall have been trans champions. They've certainly embraced it wholeheartedly though haven't they? And enjoyed the new funding streams.

Yes I've read before TRA articles from 2014 complaining that Stonewall don't support them.

"The special adviser is a vital role which helps parliament consider a balanced and appropriate range of evidence, to ensure an unbiased process. It is critical this person is someone who can bring an open, unbiased perspective to the role, so much so that including something along those lines would usually be included in the job description for the role."
How is Stephen Whittle open and unbiased given he is " an activist with the transgender activist group Press for Change"
Does that signify "open and unbiased" ?