Have we petitioned Stonewall directly?

[heresyandwitchcraft]

Stupid question. I was thinking with the momentum of Stickerwoman that perhaps we could start a direct petition to Stonewall UK just to engage in dialogue with women's groups/set up a public neutrally structured debate?
Does anyone know if we have recently tried directly petitioning the LGBT groups to even just TALK to us? I know there have been ones to the government, but I really think it's more than a little crazy that we can't even speak with the so-called "other side."
Maybe if we get enough signatures to them they can stop pretending this is just a minority concern?
What do you think?

Always follow the money.

I'd be wary about trying to engage with Stonewall. They would publish your details and have you doxxed before you got on the tram home.

SturdyPyjamas makes a good cautionary point there. Given that the current stance is so incredibly scornful of any dissent, I should think they wouldn't blink about consequences for those who challenge them, whatever carefully chosen polite language was used.

Stonewall won't debate with anyone who they say questions the right of trans people to exist. If you question them at all you are questioning their right to exist. Nice Catch 22.
www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans#trans-panels
If you find it too much to read all the word salad it is here;
www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans#trans-panels

The public won't buy their nonsense which is why the strategy was to avoid debate and effect change by directly lobbying organizations.

But good luck trying. Just remember their starting point is TWAW.

Urgh.
Now I am really glad to have sought your advice first.
How did we land ourselves in this completely RIDICULOUS situation where we can't even talk like rational adults?
This is so stupid.
If they really think we are so evil, then why not let gender-critical ideas be disinfected by the sunlight? Wouldn't that be the smarter thing to do?

(Don't worry, I think I know why we are being "Stonewalled." It's exemplified by the negative reactions they received when condemning all violence after the Hyde Park attack...
twitter.com/stonewalluk/status/909017177252089856?lang=en )

A brilliant idea. I was just wondering today - is there nowhere that everyone can rationally, calmly, respectfully discuss the issues involved? Otherwise we're all just shouting over each other, refusing to listen ... I have lots of questions I'd like to ask, but I barely dare even raise the subject.

Looks like all the negative tweets have been erased. What a happy shiny world they live in.

Stonewall won't debate with anyone who they say questions the right of trans people to exist. If you question them at all you are questioning their right to exist. Nice Catch 22.

Dude... Of course trans people exist. Why would we even be talking about this issue if they didn't?
The question is: does Stonewall acknowledge that sex exists?

I so don't get the accusation that I'm saying trans people exist by saying sex is reality.

I know trans people exist and I accept that - the existence of sexed bodies is surely the basis for someone being trans?!

I don't believe gender exists beyond a social construct and a quasi-religious belief, but that doesn't mean I don't believe there are people who hold to it with everything in them.

I think forcing them to show their hand by getting them to clearly state they think same sex orientation is homophobic, that men who find dressing in women's clothes are sexually aroused are just as true trans as gender dysmorphic etc is the way to go.

*sorry, urgh, same sex attraction is transphobic.

I like the idea of a petition, a letter, advert in a national newspaper.

Didn't Jonathan Best try to contact Stonewall several times this week and they blanked him?

They said he needed to quote sources that were MSM

Brilliant post Stopthisnow.

Once we to refer to men as if they are a type of woman, we loose the ability to define woman

I will die on the hill of men are not women.

Is there a third party who could facilitate? Ideally the office of an MP. Given there is a consultation out. If not, would someone like the Quakers have time and space and will to try to set something up? At least in theory- I firmly believe #nodebate is partly because TRAs know this is really a faith based argument they are pushing for- whereas gender critical people can call on rather a lot of hard evidence as well as our political objections to the TRA dogma.

If not, would someone like the Quakers have time and space and will to try to set something up? At least in theory- I firmly believe #nodebate is partly because TRAs know this is really a faith based argument they are pushing for- whereas gender critical people can call on rather a lot of hard evidence as well as our political objections to the TRA dogma

I would not trust that any attendee list would not be made public.

You are talking about people here that cannot take anyone, but anyone, questioning their mantra.

You know, like a cult.

That is why there is #nodebate. And why they give no shits about what happens to women who question them. Or their families, including their children.

Which is why it is so obvious it is a MRA thing.

I agree with you Sturdy- it is like a cult. Just trying to think of ideas for way for gender critical women who want to extend a meaningful offer of dialogue to any one on the anti-woman side to be able to find a third party to help facilitate this.

Idea being that in theory a convening third party could be less likely to release names and etc etc to permit TRA harassment and going via a third party could allow women to give views with anonymity but you’re right that ultimately information can be leaked whoever is organising.

Personally I don’t believe the TRAs want dialogue because they know how poorly their position stands up to examination, but it could be helpful to have that offer and any refusal on the record that they refuse that during a time of consultation..

Also could use as a tool (depending on Stonewall response) to say- Fine of course Stonewall if you don’t want to meet.

But surely Stonewall you'll publicly and strongly condemn all the threats and harassment of women and anyone else who DOES want to discuss this that there have been ... during a time of democratic government consultation on legal change- there type of thing people tend to want to discuss when it affects them and there are multiple interested parties and groups potentially affected?

*these are the types of thing that

Thanks again for the feedback. I will keep thinking, but your warnings and the apparent futility of the exercise have definitely given me pause.
The practicalities involved are obviously also an issue.
I would like something where other people could easily join in, because one voice is not going to get through. But everyone must be safe. If hell froze over and there actually was the possibility for dialogue, I would obviously want to nominate some of our media-savvy feminist heroes to speak.

If they gave up this cause, they would have no other reason for existing and they would have no money.

Exactly.

The women being mean vibe - means the money keeps pouring in to address the completely non-existent issue.

If they really wanted to sort out the issue of a third space...there would be debate.

Another stupid question:
What about a postcard/letter campaign or something directly to Ruth Hunt?
Perhaps we could do it as a way of directly reporting the hateful rhetoric meted out at gender-critical people to Stonewall - given they claim to stand for this:
We will work alongside the government to ensure they are not complacent about the rights of lesbian, gay, bi and trans people, and to ensure everyone, everywhere is free to be themselves.

Every message could include an example of the abuse that especially lesbians and women, but also transsexuals/any other party have gotten for just acknowledging that biological sex matters (but obviously not write anything that is meant to attack Ruth Hunt herself or the trans community).

Sign it with "Acceptance without exception?"

AAIK postcards shouldn't be directly traceable to people (and if you are literally quoting someone else's homophobia, how could this be counted as anything to investigate?), so anyone could hopefully safely get involved.

Maybe we could attempt to collate messages somewhere online for everyone to read...
I don't know, just thinking out loud. Feeling very powerless, and frustrated by the state of this all.

Hi… Who's the "we" of the title please?

Not at all stupid heresy. These are great campaign ideas.

-finding a high profile ‘neutral’ elected person/organisation to invite Stonewall for dialogue (so they can’t just pettishly say they don’t debate with ‘TERFs’ etc) would be great. Maybe Brian Paddick would do that in the Lords- he said he wanted to hear from ‘both sides’.

-a postcard/letter writing/Twitter campaign to ask Stonewall to condemn the intolerant silencing of women (-well, anyone at all ) who wants to talk to about this would be brilliant. Is there a snappy # we could use?
I wondered if the address might be to the Trustees of stonewall collectively rather than any one individual (even the CEO). Afaik the Trustees are legally responsible for the charity afaik - Trustees then employ the CEO of a charity as their executive to do the work that fits the legal charitable objects that the charity was set up to carry out.
The charity staff are just meant to follow the lead set by the Trustees. The Trustees are shown here:

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/who-we-are-1