Stonewall hides from answering questions about a child sex abuser's influence on their trans policy, while releasing propaganda to sway GRA consultation

[JoanSummers]

David Challenor is a child rapist who has been sentenced to 22 years for his sexual abuse of a ten year old girl. Aimee Challenor is his eldest child and employed David as Aimee's election agent, working closely with him to formulate Aimee's political goals while serving as a representative of the Green Party. Aimee also holds a role as an advisor to Stonewall. **

Aimee Challoner is an influential member of Stonewall's trans advisory panel, yet Stonewall remains silent about the scandal raging around Aimee, despite that the Green Party have suspended Aimee themselves and organised an external investigation.

Meanwhile Stonewall is running a propaganda campaign urging anyone "who cares about trans rights" and "wants to be a trans ally" to fill out the GRA consultation following their guidance, which was influenced by Aimee Challoner while they were being advised by a man being prosecuted for raping a child while dressed as a little girl and insisting he be called Lucy.

Stonewall should be, like the Greens, suspending Aimee and launching an external investigation. Instead they are pushing forward for policy that will dismantle safeguarding rules around single sex spaces by making it legal for anyone to "self identify" as the opposite sex and a hate crime for anyone to question ("misgender") any man who enters women-only spaces (e.g. changing rooms, refuges, prisons, women's sports teams, the Girl Guides..)

Stonewall are showing right now that they are an unaccountable organisation who are prepared to ignore safeguarding issues and women and girls voices, while elevating the voices of people like Aimee, a trans woman who has been advised and influenced by a child rapist who 'identifies' part time as a little girl. The scandal has also revealed that Aimee too has a part time identity as an "adult baby", which Aimee wears during sex play with other trans women, evidence of which has been found sprawled across the internet.

Should the entire consultation be halted at this time if it is being influenced by propaganda with these roots??

This is a great example of top-down policy-making by self-appointed, self-interested "experts" that never gets scrutinized by ordinary people who might be affected by it.

When ordinary people REALLY start asking questions about this issue they tend to go - "Huh?? Have they thought this through?"

In my opinion there was:
-No thought about the plurality of opinions within the trans community or how transsexuals might feel about being told their identity was going to be re-defined, and the legislation developed specifically for their small population/unique needs was now going to be opened up to any joker.
-No thought given to lesbians/gays who now seem to have their sexual orientations re-defined to refer more to "gender identity" instead of biological sex.
-No thought given to vulnerable people, such as those with mental illnesses or on the autistic spectrum, and whether they may be prone to develop identity issues that need to be carefully explored with experts rather than adopt an "always affirm" "Self-ID" model.
-No thought given to disproportionate impact on women or children.
-No thought as to actual practicalities of implementing their policies.
-No thought as to why we have single-sex provisions in the first place.
-No thought given to these new systems being massively vulnerable to abuse by disgusting actors exploiting the self-ID loophole for nefarious purposes.
-No thought given to the potential backlash against the whole trans community if there is significant damage from an unsafe system these activists and their colleagues created.

All the people involved just expect it all to go through, didn't care about basic liberties of any other group, felt that nothing bad would ever happen as a consequence of dismantling safeguards (or perhaps didn't really even care whether it did, because "it would happen anyway"?), and wanted all of us to accept it quietly.

In fact, I perceive an actual pre-emptive "calling out" of dissenting lesbians and gender-critical feminists as "anti-trans" in the document. I wonder whether that was communicated to decision-makers so that people would not listen to dissenting women.

As someone else pointed out, the public was broadly in favour of gay marriage [https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/05/20/voters-back-same-sex-marriage/]
But only 18% of the public supports self-ID [https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/07/03/exclusive-just-13-of-tory-voters-agree-with-governments-proposed-transgender-policy/]

People are broadly FOR trans rights: as are most of the posters on the FWR board. But I am personally much more invested in protecting the rights of transsexuals, not the cross-dressers currently under the Stonewall "trans" umbrella... I have no problem with fashion choices, but it's just not the same thing as having dysphoria about your sexed body that is so strong you can only alleviate it by permanent transition.

If politicians want to keep ordinary voters on-side, my advice would be to start thinking about the self-ID issue very carefully.

I reported my OP with the following message:

Hi Mumsnet. Please could you add the following paragraph to the beginning of my OP to make it absolutely clear that the title refers to David Challenor and not Aimee Challenor.

"David Challenor is a child rapist who has been sentenced to 22 years for his sexual abuse of a ten year old girl. Aimee Challenor is his eldest child and employed David as Aimee's election agent, working closely with him to formulate Aimee's political goals while serving as a representative of the Green Party. Aimee also holds a role as an advisor to Stonewall."

Thank you

This is a great example of top-down policy-making by self-appointed, self-interested "experts" that never gets scrutinized by ordinary people who might be affected by it.

Absolutely. There appears to have been no consultation with a broader section of the public than the group "trans activists" by any of these organisations, and no consideration of the impact on other stakeholders. No acknowledgement at all that other stakeholders even exist, actually. Didn't the trans centred legislation change in Scotland even claim that women would not be affected at all and therefore did not need to be considered as stakeholders?

@JoanSummers

I reported my OP with the following message:

Hi Mumsnet. Please could you add the following paragraph to the beginning of my OP to make it absolutely clear that the title refers to David Challenor and not Aimee Challenor.

"David Challenor is a child rapist who has been sentenced to 22 years for his sexual abuse of a ten year old girl. Aimee Challenor is his eldest child and employed David as Aimee's election agent, working closely with him to formulate Aimee's political goals while serving as a representative of the Green Party. Aimee also holds a role as an advisor to Stonewall."

Thank you

** We've edited your opening post now, as requested.

Many thanks DawnMumsnet.

This is a great example of top-down policy-making by self-appointed, self-interested "experts" that never gets scrutinized by ordinary people who might be affected by it.

It is. Disastrously so.

Update:

Aimee Challenor has quit the Greens and someone has now put their only elected MP, Caroline Lucas, on a "TERF" blocklist......

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1036692086475636737

Is this the behaviour Stonewall expects of its trans advisory panel?

I don't think Stonewall expects anything from members of its trans advisory panel. Sarah "suck my formaldehyde pickled balls" "vaginas are off-putting" Brown is a member too. Stonewall don't seem to care how these trans non-females treat actual females.

I saw in twitter today that Aimee Challoner is also a trans rep for the Open University:
www.oustudents.com/introducing-the-new-committee-for-plexus-our-lgbt-group

The OU is another organisation who should be having a good look at their relationship with Aimee Challenor.

We should keep an eye on the Stonewall website as, like TELI, they might just decide to discreetly edit it one day.

For the record, Aimee's name is there today (4/9/18)

www.stonewall.org.uk/trans-advisory-group

Aimee is a trans equality campaigner from Coventry. She came out in 2014 aged 16 as she left school. She speaks openly about her experiences as a young transgender woman. She’s previously had articles in the Guardian and the Huffington Post, as well as other websites from around the world. She’s also a Trustee of Coventry Pride and in her spare time enjoys photography, gaming and reading. Visit her website. Photo credit: The Oxford Union.

Also for the record, Aimee no longer appears to be a current trustee of Coventry Pride

beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1164035&subid=0

although she was listed in July 2017

apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends35/0001164035_AC_20170731_E_C.PDF