Ruth Hunt in the Guardian

[merrymouse]

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/19/ruth-hunt-stonewall-moral-responsibility-fight-trans-people

The impression given is that she really didn’t think this through. No concept that there are consequences for women’s and gay people’s rights if you can’t define sex.

No questioning of whether the assumption that gender non-conforming = born in the wrong body is harmful.

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/19/ruth-hunt-stonewall-moral-responsibility-fight-trans-people

Fundamentally, if you can’t talk honestly about sex, you can’t provide services or protections for trans people. If you can’t accept that sex exists, you really are denying the existence of trans people.

Hunt finds the “intellectual stupidity” of the gender debate alarming. “There is a group of people who believe trans women are men and there is nothing that will change that. There is a group of people who believe trans women are trans women and it’s all a bit puzzling, can we have a chat about it? And there’s a group that think trans women are women and that’s the camp Stonewall supporters are in."

Anyone reading this who hasn't been engaged in the debate is going to think "transwoman" means post op transexual or at the very least someone on that pathway.

In fact what she really says is “There are a group of people who believe that a person with fully male anatomy and no intention of changing it is a man. There is a group of people who believe they can be a trans women and it’s all a bit puzzling, can we have a chat about it? And there’s a group that think a fully anatomical male who identifies as a women is a woman and that’s the camp Stonewall supporters are in."*

She makes no argument in support of this position. She gives no recognition that 80 percent of the public are in group 1, while Stonewall is training employers and judges etc ..to parrot the group 3 mantra. Then she says the "stupidity" of the debate is alarming!

Extremely poor journalism by the Observer just to write this stuff down rather than ask what the words mean.

It is so weird to me that she really can’t see the problem, and that she thinks transgenderism has anything at all to do with sexuality. The T has no place with the LGB.

"Intellectual stupidity"? Ha ha ha. Yeh that would be trying to convince yourself that a penis is a female sex organ and that lesbians should be having sex with men.

I just heard her being interviewed on R4. She agreed that there are differences between T and LGB, but said that she wasn't sure there was much in common for L and G either.

Her argument was that it's best to build communities despite differences similar to different Christian groups coming together.

Most interesting for me was her saying she's a catholic. A lot of women here have said transgenderism is a belief system rather than based on reason, so it's interesting she does also have a religious belief. She is used to not testing arguments using logic.

Sorry, the combination of The Guardian and Stonewall, I just... My blood pressure won't be able to take such a thing right now.
May as well throw in a bit from Mermaids, a picture of a sparkly rainbow, a bloke with a beard, and get it over with.

She's completely incapable of articulating her position on any of the points feminists make on self-ID, isn't she. She just says "that's not the question we should be asking" and then ignores the point and trundles on. Exactly what politics doesn't need more re of.

for proof, she points out that in her five years in the job, Stonewall has more than doubled in size, expanding from 75 to 160 staff, while its income has grown from £5.4m to £8.7m. “We’ve lost a few donors but we’ve gained a huge number

There's the rub. She thinks money is morality. Her tenure has reduced women's rights, massively increased transphobia, caused splits in and resentment towards the gay community- where previously there was only support; but Stonewall is richer, so it's OK.

I find it utterly infuriating that people say and write “will lead to rape [or sexual assault] of women” as if the likes of Katie Dolatowski and Karen White haven’t already happened. Maybe Hunt can join Sarah Pascoe on the couch of the 10 year old that Dolatowski assaulted and explain away her experience by saying “that’s not the real question” .

And then to say “men will always rape women”...

So why the fuck do you want to men in with women?

It is so weird to me that she really can’t see the problem

Oh, she can see it, she just doesn't care.

A microwaved lettuce leaf has more rigour than that article.

Isn’t the Guardian aimed at people with a level of education and intelligence? It’s insulting.

And there’s a group that think trans women are women and that’s the camp Stonewall supporters are in."

Translation And there’s a group that think a fully anatomical male who identifies as a women is a woman and that’s the camp Stonewall supporters are in."*

I find the non-intellectual stupidity of believing that alarming. No grasp of science or logic.

She is a traitor.

She's desperate to rewrite history, isn't she?

"Gosh, we were ready to 'have a chat about it' but people just got so CROSS!"

We won't forget your bullshit, Ruth.

Funny how she wants to talk only now that she is looking for a new job.

Isn’t the Guardian aimed at people with a level of education and intelligence?

I'd be interested to know what the split is in terms of what subjects the guardian readership is educated in. Roughly, those which allow for pomo ways of thinking versus those disciplines for which it's incompatible.

No grasp of science or logic

And that is who the current Guardian staff are aiming for.

I get tired of saying this but where is the analysis? RH uses the question 'why' but only as a rhetorical device, no answer given or apparently expected. Why were trans people obviously connected to lgb? There must be an answer so what is it? That would be journalism. Why is there a group that doesn't agree that transwomen are women? she makes it sound like the weather except a meteorologist would be able to explain the weather.

We get criticised for that. For instance, why haven’t we called what’s happening in Birmingham schools homophobic? Why haven’t we come out and said it’s because all Muslims hate gay people?

Here is the thing: Stonewall's MO on gay rights is not radical, it's softly softly. How can you think the Birmingham protests are democratic expression, refuse to boycott Brunei, but think GC feminists are all bigoted transphobes #nodebate?

1. Women (as a group) are not going to react the way Muslims would when some of their number are attacked.

1. There is much more money in trans 'rights' theses days. Gay rights is less profitable in the UK.

Stonewall [did] not join the boycott against the hotel chain: a move she now admits was “a fuck-up ... and a comms fail”.

No right, no wrong. Just good Comms and bad Comms. Hunt doesn't mind going now, she knows it's needed to sell the shift in PR strategy.

Her argument was that it's best to build communities despite differences similar to different Christian groups coming together.

She just doesn't seem to understand why we need protected characteristics or that some people do not have full human rights if they don't have specific protections and services.

Building community is making sure there are enough accessible toilets in every building. It does not mean that everybody should be able to use the accessible toilets.

Funny how she wants to talk only now that she is looking for a new job.

This. She's a liar and trying to rewrite history. I really can't stand people who won't admit to their mistakes.

The bit in the R4 interview that really got me was she said TW don't need a GRC to enter a women's toilet. No, but once they enter we have a right to question what they are in there for, she belittled the GC view "but oh yes let's talk about toilets".

The truth is that since Stonewall added the T they haven't campaigned as strongly as before for LGB as their focus shifted and she won't admit to the impact of that. Stonewall is responsible for all this, it could have been so different for everyone involved.

Sorry bold fail.

She's talking about intellectual stupidity? 😐😐😐 Stupidity and delusion are what this is all about. Not to mention hypocrisy, with politicians and careerists sacrificing women's safeguarding in order to look progressive and inclusive.