Thank you stonewall - now I know who to avoid

[Kit19]

136 businesses come together to support corporateWall sorry stonewall on trans ‘rights’

Like everyone on fwr I fully agree trans rights are human rights but what they are not is women’s rights. They are reserved for biological women

Also they must be rattled if they’ve got the city bods on their board to do a ring/email round to do a show of support

@jj1968

I guess to cut to the chase why would Google and Sky lobby in favour of Self ID as opposed to lobbying for a more gender critical approach?

Because it's easy and they haven't thought about it. It was a brilliant move by whoever thought to attach 'T' to LGB, because now people who haven't given this any thought think that 'trans rights' are just like gay rights.

But by not thinking about it they miss the very important difference that gay people having rights doesn't affect anyone who isn't gay, but that men having the right to be legally recognised as women does have an effect on women.

Yes you're right of course escapeplaning, but by perceived advantage I meant a perceived economic advantage, perhaps they are mistaken and this will cause economic harm, but they certainly don't seem to think so, and the boards of these companies are not beardy Goldsmith wokesters. So why do they think that?

So why do they think that?

Maybe you should try asking them. On here you'll mainly find people who think they've got it wrong. I'm baffled as to why so many people who are seemingly intelligent in other respects seem to have lost their minds over this particular issue.

If you get an answer from them, be sure to let us know.

JJ

A question.

The reason given for trans women needing to use female facilities is because they are at risk of violence in the gents.

In a large corporate (I've worked for some) there is little to no risk of colleagues beating you up in the bog.

They also tend to have generous facilities for people with disabilities which are unisex. (Which tend to be used by men who want a crap, IME).

So there are options. Men's, no risk. Disabled bog. Free for all. Why use the ladies?

Because it's easy and they haven't thought about it. It was a brilliant move by whoever thought to attach 'T' to LGB, because now people who haven't given this any thought think that 'trans rights' are just like gay rights.

They will have signed up to a meaningless pledge that doesn't get into the weeds of any current issues.

Stonewall is making increasingly dodgy claims on twitter (e.g. about decision by World Rugby and Caster Semenya), but these won't have been mentioned in the pledge and these organisations won't care. Even if Stonewall collapses in a couple of years, it's not as though anyone remembers which corporate donors supported 'Kids Company'.

The bigger threat to Stonewall is that by becoming so focused on corporate donors, they are increasingly alienating people who (leaving the trans issue aside) can see that Stonewall is more of a money making machine than an organisation designed to support LGB people.

@MichelleofzeResistance

The message those companies have in fact given is "we support the removal of sex based rights from females for the better happiness of males, and we're unmoved by the severe impact this will have on many females, their access to public life and services, and their quality of life".

@MichelleofzeResistance I hope you don't mind but I copied your text used it on Twitter. It was so well put.

Stonewall and other trans advocacy groups have been successful because they have billionaire funding as lobby groups. Always follow the money. It's not because the world suddenly went, oh hang on, what about all the downtrodden transgender people, let's help them! You're an idiot if you believe that.

They already are protected from discrimination, these "rights" we keep hearing about (but they never seem able to clearly identify) are really about giving men with fetishes access to female spaces.

I don't know how they can argue simultaneously that
a) trans people have been using the toilet that matches their chosen gender without any problems, and
b) we need legislation that allows them to do this

Why? If there are never any issues (which we bloody well know they're lying about), why the big fuss?

Frenchfancy not at all, I'm not on Twitter so am glad you are and can say what I would like to!

@MichelleofzeResistance

The message those companies have in fact given is "we support the removal of sex based rights from females for the better happiness of males, and we're unmoved by the severe impact this will have on many females, their access to public life and services, and their quality of life".

This statement summarises things nicely Michelle

with your permission I'll be using in when I write to some of those companies providing services to explain why I'm moving my business elsewhere and I hope others do as well

Marie Stropes Aus had to remove their offensive poster due to the number of women objecting. We're all going to have to do more to complain directly to the companies who don't respect women's rights so they see how many of us there are.

Useful list of Unilever products btw www.unilever.co.uk/brands/?page=1 Up to now I've still been buying a few of those products but no more

Marmite :-(

The lovely small charity that I work for are about to sign up. We have a D & I team, and they have started asking for pronouns on emails, which I’ve ignored so far. I’m not sure what signing up to this campaign will mean to us as employees but I’ll be monitoring.

Can I just point out that the list of companies have not signed up to support Stonewall, they signed up to support an 'event' and statement put out by a different organisation, Trans in the City

www.transrightsarehumanrights.co.uk/

Trans in the City collaborated with another organisation, Intermedia UK and some of these companies, but not all, signed an open letter to the Prime Minister yesterday.

www.intermediauk.org/post/trans-rights-open-letter-update

The letter is urging the government to act on the GRA consultation and contains this (false?)statement

Trans people have always been able to use single-sex facilities that match their gender, and the Equality Act 2010 codified this

and the Equality Act 2010 codified this

There is nothing specific in the EA which gives special rights to MTFs to use female spaces. There are six single sex exemptions where all males, even those with a GRC can be excluded if proportionate and legitimate.

That's a nice vague statement isn't it.

What do they mean by 'facilities'? It's often a euphahism for bogs.

Have they really written a whole letter of support about toilets?!

So if my organisation do sign up to support this campaign, it's not just about being an ally? It's actually asking the government to support self-ID?

I wonder if our D & I Team are aware of what their actually signing up to.

It's concerning, as a charity, our very existence relies on public support and money - if we were to lose some of that support because of our position on this, it could be really damaging.

@findyourbacon

So if my organisation do sign up to support this campaign, it's not just about being an ally? It's actually asking the government to support self-ID?

I wonder if our D & I Team are aware of what their actually signing up to.

It's concerning, as a charity, our very existence relies on public support and money - if we were to lose some of that support because of our position on this, it could be really damaging.

I would flag this with your D&I Team. My company was one of many on the Metro ad at the end of 2018, thinking it was about supporting trans people. Instead the link in the ad led directly to the Stonewall submission on the Eq Act and was clearly very political.

Whilst my company is still a "Stonewall" company there has been a lot of distancing going on since and they are noticeably absent on this latest list.

@findyourbacon

So if my organisation do sign up to support this campaign, it's not just about being an ally? It's actually asking the government to support self-ID?

I wonder if our D & I Team are aware of what their actually signing up to.

It's concerning, as a charity, our very existence relies on public support and money - if we were to lose some of that support because of our position on this, it could be really damaging.

Would it help to point out the backlash ActionAid got where many donators (who are mainly women) cancelled their direct debits and looked to support other charities instead?

As in donators in general are mainly women not the donators who cancelled

@CranberriesChoccyAgain

Stonewall and other trans advocacy groups have been successful because they have billionaire funding as lobby groups. Always follow the money. It's not because the world suddenly went, oh hang on, what about all the downtrodden transgender people, let's help them! You're an idiot if you believe that.

I think I must be an idiot then. I don't believe this is down to lobbying by Stonewall, who in the general scheme of things have very little funding and are a small charity. I didn't really think social change on this scale is driven by groups of people plotting behind the scenes but is more a consequence of material conditions and changing social attitudes. I think trans people have become more visible, more people know a trans person, and as such more people empathise with trans people and a lot of the old smears and fears about gender nonconforming people have really fallen away. In addition transition has become easier, people are transitioning younger and are more likely to 'pass', kids at school have trans friends, soemthing that was unheard of in my day and most people seem to be okay with it. Perhaps thats because they dont understand all the issues, but I can't really see things going backwards, grumpy middle aged people don;t have a particularly good track record of influencing the errant youth after all. And who knows what treatments are in the pipeline as gene and stem cell therapies become more advanced. In 50-100 years the idea that humans can;t change sex may seem somewhat archaic.

But speculation aside, I think this is the reason corporates have got on board, they aren;t going to swim against the tide, there's no money in that. I don't think it's down to woke lobbyists or naive diversity officers. Paypal didn't pull a processing centre from North Carolina because of some woke diversity officer. Nike and Apple didn't try take the state to court because they were seduced into it by Stonewall. And I don't believe that 70 companies, some of the biggest in the UK, have written to the government supporting Self ID because they've been brainwashed or are naive. These are hard hearted board level decisions made by big business, with one thing on their mind, profit. For whatever reason, these companies really support trans inclusion, and as I said earlier I think that's because anything else risks turning the UK into a bit of an international pariah and would make it very difficult for global organisation, with trans staff, to do business here. It's all about money, and maintaining stability, and I suspect the reason there seems to have been a rollback since Truss' initial statements is because the corporate sector has told Boris in very certain terms they don't want anything to happen which internationally would be perceived as an attack on trans rights because that would be economically harmful to them as businesses and the wider UK economy which lets face it, has enough problems at the moment..

Yeah, capitalism will be making profit and loss decisions on the basis of how popular mixed sex toilets are at work. On the money there.

Haha 😹

thefederalist.com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

I don't believe this is down to lobbying by Stonewall, who in the general scheme of things have very little funding and are a small charity.

Depends on which charities you're comparing them with. An income of £8m p.a. isn't insignificant.

I think trans people have become more visible, more people know a trans person, and as such more people empathise with trans people and a lot of the old smears and fears about gender nonconforming people have really fallen away.

Can you explain what you mean by 'gender nonconforming people' here? Are you using this as a synonym for trans people or something else?

In addition transition has become easier, people are transitioning younger and are more likely to 'pass', kids at school have trans friends

As I've said before, the recruitment of children, like the tagging of 'T' onto LGB, has worked very well for people who want to promote the ideas that people can be born in the wrong body and can change sex.

I can't really see things going backwards

Going backwards to a more scientific viewpoint?

grumpy middle aged people don;t have a particularly good track record of influencing the errant youth after all.

Do you really think this movement is driven by young people?

And I don't believe that 70 companies, some of the biggest in the UK, have written to the government supporting Self ID because they've been brainwashed or are naive. These are hard hearted board level decisions made by big business, with one thing on their mind, profit.

Really? You don't think it's a just bit of mindless virtue signalling? Appears to cost nothing, they don't have to do anything or make any changes to their business, and they get praise for being so 'progressive' and 'inclusive'. Most people who haven't thought about this think it's 'just like gay rights'. Stonewall encourages that view. These organisations haven't thought about how they're making their companies a more hostile and less inclusive place for women.

I suspect the reason there seems to have been a rollback since Truss' initial statements is because the corporate sector has told Boris in very certain terms they don't want anything to happen which internationally would be perceived as an attack on trans rights

Why would leaving trans people with all the rights they have already, which are the same rights as everyone else has (but not giving them any extra ones) be perceived as an attack on trans rights?

The number of trans ppl is vanishingly small so no it’s not about profit. No company other than a pharmaceutical company is going to make money out of trans people. They might make money out of being perceived as ‘nice & inclusive’ but I doubt most ppl buy on that basis

The idea that other countries immured as they are in Covid (everyone) Brexit (us & the EU), climate disaster & civil unrest (America) are telling the British government that the thing they’re concerned about is trans rights is laughable, it’s going to be about the millionth priority in their list

This article spells out how business along with pretty much every public body, charity & government dept got captured

www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists

It’s been years of behind the scenes lobbying, piggy backing onto LGB and most of all by not saying the quiet part out loud I.e. dong mention the impact on women only spaces

not the FT!