Nancy Kelley, new Chief Executive for Stonewall - women fighting for their rights compared to Nazis

[ItsLateHumpty]

Wow! First real post in the new role. Colours truly nailed to the trans mast. Is Stonewall all and only about the trans + now?

“Racists and fascists fighting with the police, urinating on memorials and throwing Nazi salutes, followed by hardcore stoking of an anti-trans moral panic with trans folks lives as the fuel. Never has the Twitter prompt "what's happening?" Felt so apposite.“

twitter.com/Nancy_M_K/status/1272065883997900800

She also wrote this blog, in which she says she’s all about the data, and I’m pretty sure the figures she’s quoting are misleading and / or out of context.

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/data-clear-most-people-are-supportive-trans-rights
PUBLISHED 14 JUNE 20

“ But, as Stonewall’s new Chief Executive, and one with a penchant for data, one thing (among many) that I want to unpick from this story is the idea that the Government may be planning to – and again this hasn’t been confirmed - disregard the results of its own public consultation. The Times report says:

‘More than 100,000 responses were received to the consultation. Insiders say that about 70% of those backed the idea that anyone should be able to declare that they are a woman or a man. However, officials believe the results were skewed by an avalanche of responders generated by trans rights groups’

So, what about that 70%? Did organisations like Stonewall and our allies really create an avalanche of responses that left the results skewed?”

continues...

Yeah. As comparisons go, that's about the level I'd expect of a not too bright Y9 child.

Here comes the new Stonewall boss, same shilling for the menz as the old one.

Is this Godwin’s law on steroids - cutting out the discussion and whataboutery and going straight to the nazis?

I’m pretty sure it’s not women peeing on memorials, because, you know, biology.

Good to see Stonewall taking such a proportionate and even-handed approach to a setback...

Seriously, though. If you look at yesterday's news in the Sunday Times, there was an interesting bit in there that talks about the number of responses the GRA consultation received that were simply copy-and-paste jobs from lobby organisations. I think that could mean bad news for Stonewall. They're supposed to be a charity, not a lobby group, and they've clearly overstepped the mark. Perhaps I am being over-hopeful, but I think it's possible someone in government is going to look at exactly what Stonewall has been up to in its training to schools, NHS etc.

I liked this description of the flag

Can't Stonewall "be better"?

Oh and FFS!

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/interview-nancy-kelley-stonewalls-new-ceo
PUBLISHED 13 MAY 20

What do you see as the biggest challenges facing the fight for LGBT rights at the moment?

“Like other liberation movements (feminism I think is in a similar place) we are at a point where the gains the movement has made aren’t equally felt, or even aren’t equally relevant across our communities.

Some of us have benefited far more from progress in LGBT rights than others. So thinking about how we are genuinely intersectional in our approach, and how we campaign passionately and effectively for the things that matter to distinctive minoritized communities feels essential.

Secondly, it feels like we are simultaneously at a point of great potential and great danger for trans and non-binary people.

Visibility is growing exponentially, and research shows us that the population as a whole has broadly positive attitudes to trans folk: there is real potential for positive change.

But at the same time not only are there huge barriers to trans and non binary people living their lives safely, there are worrying noises coming from government and from the legal system that have the potential to push trans rights backwards.

Those are the issues that are top of my mind as I step into this new role – I’m looking forward to having lots of conversations with colleagues, partner organisations and supporters over the next weeks and months to shape our strategy for the coming years.”

So a question re LGBT, is answered all about the T.

Guess we can pack up and go home cos homophobia is fixed! Boo ya y’all!

they're still not getting it are they?

Stonewall's tacit support for the "die in a grease fire TERF scum" brigade has alienated a lot of women and men who absolutely believe trans rights are human rights but do have questions e.g. what about prisons & refuges? what about male bodied people in sport?

their failure to engage with genuine questions around difficult issues is not only a failure of leadership, its piss poor tactics. Screaming at people who dont agree with you doenst make them agree with you, it just makes them angry and resentful

they could have adopted the tactics of engaging, listening, explaining; instead they shouted #nodebate, branded even questioning them "transphobic" and not once ever condemned the hideous misogynistic bullying of women on line

and it seems they still havent learned

Well, comparing women to nazis will do their credibility a whole heap of good, I’m sure. I think Ms Kelly should be taking note of the news. It might benefit her organisation to understand that #nodebate and flinging insults is so last year, and if they want to remain in any way relevant they might consider more constructive discourse.

they're still not getting it are they?

Nope, and when LGB Alliance congratulated her on the new role, then followed up to try and set up “... a constructive discussion with Stonewall for some two years...” it was met with crickets although she did acknowledge other orgs who offered congratulations.

twitter.com/ALLIANCELGB/status/1260491435184439300

followed by hardcore stoking of an anti-trans moral panic with trans folks lives as the fuel.

What is she referring to?

Also: urinating on memorials. Was there more than one incident of someone urinating on a memorial? And the guy photographed urinating next to Keith Palmer's memorial was doing it next to the memorial, not on it. But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a Twitter outburst.

Slightly off topic, has anyone else noticed how easily the media have managed to tell the difference between men and women lately, just by looking at a photo of them? The person urinating next to the memorial was described as a man, before anyone knew who he was.

And there was a story last week on the BBC website about a man who had been wrongly identified as the person trying to set fire to a flag on the Cenotaph. They were both wearing similar jackets and the BBC's take was that if anyone had bothered to look at the faces of the two people then it was clear that the fire-starter was a woman, not a man.

Unfortunately for Ms Kelly and colleagues, they’ll be in a no win situation whatever stance they adopt at this point. Take a more dialectic approach and the TRAs will pull them down in flames, maybe even a grease fire, or stick to their #nodebate stance and the TRAs will ensure they’re increasingly become viewed as the extremist organisation they are.

How much does she get paid?

I think just maybe she'll find Stonewall's time has passed, particularly as she seems to be using last year's tactics and not addressing the cat that's out of the bag.

That tweet is stoking the fires. Totally irresponsible.

This is gobsmacking. I’m lost for words.

FFS what is this person on about.
There is an important national debate even just in the last couple of days highlighted by JKR blogging about women being able define themselves () and the predicable misogynistic response she has had to that. Which also folds in key issues affecting lesbian gay and bisexual people’s rights to same sex attraction. Stonewall’s reason for being.

Why is Stonewall not joining into this discussion constructively then? If they think this a ‘moral panic’ , then say clearly why all the points raised including by LGB people directly negatively affected by genderism, are total nonsense if that’s their organisational view. Do spell out why LGB people and women are so wrong.

Don’t just try to shut things down by bringing in dog whistles about men pissing on memorials or whatever. It’s offensive and it’s making a nonsense of Stonewall which used to be a respected organisation. The people affected by this authoritarian dogma will carry on debating whether Stonewall is involved or not.

So, what about that 70%? Did organisations like Stonewall and our allies really create an avalanche of responses that left the results skewed?”

It's not a vote.

Whatever Stonewall did or didn't do, their arguments clearly lacked substance.

Obviously.

All the racists, fascists and urinators I have seen pictures of, had the common theme of being men.

And people wonder why women want safe spaces?

They spent all that time looking for a new CEO and ended up with someone who thinks that comparing women to nazis is a constructive and reasonable response to the current debate about women's rights?