Jo Bartosch: The Fall of Stonewall

[Malahaha]

I don't know if this has been posted elsewhere; I didn't find it, so:

4w.pub/the-fall-of-stonewall/

As ever, it's "follow the money":

In the years between 2003 and 2013, Stonewall had gained charitable status and grown to an income of £4,334,054, triple what it had been a decade earlier. Whilst the promotion of "good practice" had long been embedded in Stonewall’s work, it became clear that if the charity were to continue to grow a new cause was needed.

"In the year after the T was added to the LG and B Stonewall’s income rocketed, most notably with a donation of $100,000 from the Arcus Foundation"

*mic drop.

Love Jo's work. I always think her words should be more widely available.

ballotpedia.org/Arcus_Foundation
A quick search brings this up. A lot of money is being pumped into this ideology

A really good article. thanks op

Good article. IME Stonewall was never interested in real, on-the-ground lesbians. We used to hold Stonewall fundraisers, patronisingly referred to by the lesbian who ran Stonewall in our region as 'your little lesbian discos'. And Stonewall were flirting with Queer and Non-Binary a long time before the official announcement of of adopting T. Back in the mid noughties they had Queer straight people on committees.

@Runnersos

‘ We work with experts and advocates for change to ensure that LGBT people and our fellow apes thrive in a world where social and environmental justice are a reality.’

What a weird mission statement. Their aims read to me like one rich person’s pet project.

Damn, that's a good article. That's the sort of writing that wins awards.

Fearless, calm, packed full of data, with consecutive points that lead you to the same, inevitable conclusion.

Any change needs to be led by the trans community... we are very open to taking whatever direction will be in the best interests of that community.” The first meeting was held in August with fifty trans campaigners, the Chair of Stonewall Jan Gooding, Ruth Hunt and independent facilitator Caroline Ellis. ... In the course of the consultation, Stonewall claim to have "talked to over 700 trans people"; those Stonewall were originally founded to advocate on behalf of, lesbians and gays, were not consulted.

Whilst Stonewall have never pretended to promote a feminist analysis, until recently, the charity did not actively oppose the rights of women. Today, thanks to the inclusion of the ‘T’, Stonewall is campaigning against the Equality Act (2010), positioning themselves in opposition to feminist aims. With the meaningless strapline, "acceptance without exception" Stonewall has been very successful at positioning "trans inclusivity" as the liberal default for the bien passant. The result of this has seen Stonewall turn its attention to actively dismantling women’s rights in the UK; promoting the acceptance of men who identify as women in not only women’s single-sex hospital wards and prisons, but also women’s sports. Stonewall have even recently begun to lobby World Rugby to make the women’s game single gender rather than single sex; despite the fact that an independent report showed an increased risk of injury to women of 20-30

Damning stuff.

From another Google search, "Stonewall’s income has grown from £5.4m to £8.7m during Hunt’s time in charge, while its staff team has more than doubled to 160 people over the same period."

This both spells out the problem and shows why the T is so important to them - but it also shows their disproportionate power. That doesn't feel like a lot of income compared to some charities, yet they are a main UK institutionalised sacrosanct brand who seem to get consulted on policies and are considered to be an official voice of guidance.

Back in the mid-naughties lesbians started questioning when Stonewall quietly but tacitly supported the introduction of Q to the mix. In the mid-noughties new LBG projects in my area started to become LGBQ+. It was particularly noticeable in youth groups. There'd were several LGB youth groups in my region and each time they came to the end of their funding/ contract, they'd either disappear or be revived as LGBQ and then fairly quickly LGBTQ+ Lesbians complained to Stonewall, challenged the queering and resigned from committees and the organisation as a result. Stonewall knew, absolutely no doubt, that there was a massive conflict between lesbian rights and trans rights and they chose the T. It's why so many lesbians spit when Stonewall is mentioned.

I was talking to another lesbian who was involved with Stonewall in those days and she said she feels as if she's been yelling 'Fire!' for the last 15 years and everyone ignored us because we were only lesbians. I'm currently involved with a new group of mainly straight women who've come together in the last couple of months and aim to challenge policy capture. Most of them have only fairly recently come to this cause and I have to bite my tongue a lot of the time because I've been talking to people and complaining and writing letters and petitioning and FBing about this for more than a decade and it's only now the straight women (and men) have arrived that anyone seems to be taking notice. It's a constant reminder that we are at the absolute bottom of the pecking order.

Stonewall knew, absolutely no doubt, that there was a massive conflict between lesbian rights and trans rights and they chose the T.

It seems that lesbians don't have enough money to bring to the table. Bloody excellent article.

this is sooooo good!

as always follow the money

i also note their move into 'intersex' as stated by new CEO the other week, can only assume they think there is money to be had there too

CoolYourBeans, we can only assume that there was no money in Q and no victim status because no one knows what Q really is, apart from blue hair and an insistence on being different, even if they are just like everyone else.

Whereas with Transgender you can have heartbreaking stories of confused teens finding happiness with a double mastectomy and a lifetime's supply of testosterone or glamorous ladies trapped in the bodies of burly men.

Ruth Hunt mentioned in an interview the other day that businesses had lobbied Stonewall to take on the T. She's never mentioned that before and I assumed she was just rewriting history, but perhaps it was Arcus she was talking about? Arcus lobbying Stonewall to adopt the T. Very damning to think that what until then had been a rock solid organisation was influenced into a disastrous decision by a large donation from Big Pharma.

I'd love to know what Ben Summerskill, who piloted Stonewall all the way through to Equal Marriage and then left because his job was done, makes of this. His sister, Claire Summerskill, used to be well-known in lesbian circles — she's a talented and very funny musical comedian. I don't imagine she'd have thought much of TWAW No Debate.

i also note their move into 'intersex' as stated by new CEO the other week, can only assume they think there is money to be had there too

I'm not so sure. I think it's purely to prop up the T. Men can be women because intersex shows that sex is a spectrum has been incredibly effective as a propaganda line. It works really well with the uninformed public.

I'm not so sure. I think it's purely to prop up the T. Men can be women because intersex shows that sex is a spectrum has been incredibly effective as a propaganda line. It works really well with the uninformed public.

Agree. Using a perceived exception to the binary to demonstrate through whataboutary that the binary doesn’t exists.

But we are still binary.

Shameful.