#DontSubmitToStonewall - suggested quick action by Legal Feminist

[stumbledin]

(From twitter post)

A follow up on the Stonewall long read: this one is a very short call for a simple (2-3 minute) action.

Please share widely. #DontSubmitToStonewall twitter.com/hashtag/DontSubmitToStonewall?src=hashtag_click

Please share and submit a request or two. Whatdotheyknow.com makes it very straightforward. If you don't dare ask your own public authority employer, maybe swap with a friend.

legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/02/04/shining-a-light-on-stonewalls-activities/?_thumbnail_id=451

I work for a charity that isn't on the list but has joined the diversity champions scheme. Cant list here as too outing but happy to PM anyone who is looking into charities . Wonder when it will start becoming a negative for charities to be publicly linked .

Appreciate charities aren't public bodies but they do use public money so maybe an interesting follow up action?

Are charities subject to FOI if they aren't public bodies?

Prob not. Sorry ignore me. It just riles me!

I’m curious as to the why there’s a preference for avoiding duplicate requests? In my view there are two legitimate benefits to a FOI: 1. You might find something if interest 2) it can be utilised to frustrate the organisation. This doesn’t work if the question is identical but a variation that asks a similar question and requires additional work could be extremely useful.

Organisations who become aware that their activities are being scrutinised and have to expend resources on responses may start coming to their own conclusions around whether being a champion is good value

Just been sifting through the FOIs. Not that many results yet. I like this reply to one of them though, so reassuring and refreshing that someone in a Police force hasn't got a clue who Stonewall are!!

Dyfed-Powys Police

^"Good Morning Robert,
I have received the attached e-mail regarding " Stonewall ". I have never had any dealings with " Stonewall ", - in fact I do not even know who/what they are ! Can you deal with this Robert, or forward it to the relevant person please ?

Keep safe,

ALUN."^

Looking forward to seeing more results, I've enjoyed being part of this activism. :-)

I have never had any dealings with " Stonewall ", - in fact I do not even know who/what they are !

The ultimate aim of the exercise!

That's interesting, because Dyfed Powys Police are on the Stonewall Diversity Champions list.

www.stonewall.org.uk/diversity-champions-members

I suspect Alun will be sent off for some re-education shortly.

This is my favourite response so far: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_495#outgoing-1117785

My irony meter just exploded!

@OldCrone

That's interesting, because Dyfed Powys Police are on the Stonewall Diversity Champions list.

www.stonewall.org.uk/diversity-champions-members

I suspect Alun will be sent off for some re-education shortly.

No way are they?! Yup, poor Alun is for it. He won't be innocent for long. 🙁

nothing that is brilliant

Nothingcomestonothing - what were they doing asking for the sex? They wanted the full name so they could look them up is my guess, but why ask it like that?

It's too funny - we can't answer a question re our paying £££ to people who want us all to pretend we don't know the difference between men and women, until you tell us if you're a man or a woman

It does imply they would respond differently depending on your sex which is a bit weird

Trying to get myself educated here, and hopefully help the cause too. Can anyone explain, for example, who is collating the info from the FoI requests and what will be done with the data?

I've started another thread about SW in schools as am aghast as to how they are infiltrating everywhere. But I can't think of what to actually do about it?!

@PegasusReturns

I’m curious as to the why there’s a preference for avoiding duplicate requests? In my view there are two legitimate benefits to a FOI: 1. You might find something if interest 2) it can be utilised to frustrate the organisation. This doesn’t work if the question is identical but a variation that asks a similar question and requires additional work could be extremely useful.

Organisations who become aware that their activities are being scrutinised and have to expend resources on responses may start coming to their own conclusions around whether being a champion is good value

But it’s not the organisation you’re frustrating, it’s the poor person dealing with the query. Anyway, if one request for an foi goes in via what do they know, and the answer to the next request would be similar enough all they have to do is point you to the previous one. Or if you email directly they can link you do that website as well.

Most of the time the person dealing with the foi query knows the tricks, they know where they can use an exemption or not. So you’d have to really change the request, also you don’t want things to be reported to the ICO as vexatious. What I’d be interested in seeing is the percentage of public bodies who are signed up but can’t be arsed to jump through the hoops

@nothingcomestonothing

This is my favourite response so far: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_495#outgoing-1117785

My irony meter just exploded!

That’s a bullshit response and if they’d read the guidance they’d know an initial and a surname would be sufficient and even that wouldn’t indicate sex or gender.

@WeeTorag

Just been sifting through the FOIs. Not that many results yet. I like this reply to one of them though, so reassuring and refreshing that someone in a Police force hasn't got a clue who Stonewall are!!

Dyfed-Powys Police

^"Good Morning Robert,
I have received the attached e-mail regarding " Stonewall ". I have never had any dealings with " Stonewall ", - in fact I do not even know who/what they are ! Can you deal with this Robert, or forward it to the relevant person please ?

Keep safe,

ALUN."^

Looking forward to seeing more results, I've enjoyed being part of this activism. :-)

I bloody love this innocent soul, Alun. May he keep safe too.

The FOI for my quite unwoke council is back. My jaw has dropped already and I'm only on page 3 of the written feedback they received from Stonewall last year. This is unbelieveble - there is clear language in the Equality Act yet here they are handwaving it away as well as the terms mother and father. The bastards.

Feedback from your marker
1.2.Clearer zero tolerance to discrimination on basis of sexual orientation and gender identity required and needed explicit mention of biphobic bullying and harrassment.
"Gender reassignment" is the legal term used in equalities legislation. However, it's a contentious term that Stonewall's Trans Advisory Group feels should be reviewed - it's advisable to use other terms, e.g.
"transition".
We recommend using the term "bi" rather than "bisexual". Bi is an umbrella term used to describe an emotional, romantic and/or sexual orientation towards more than one gender.
1.3.Some good use of gender-neutral language, particularly in adoption policy. However, these policies needed better clarity of access for same-sex couples and explicitly trans-inclusive language when referring to parents. Remove the terms "mother" and "father", to ensure that everyone within your organisation is covered by your policies. We"d recommend using gender neutral language, e.g. "pregnant employee"; "birth parent" and then "second parent"; "parent who has given birth" or "new mothers and
other pregnant employees". See Stonewall"s inclusive policy toolkit.
1.4. Whilst 'transexual' is still used by some members of the trans community, it's considered outdated and should never be used in place of "trans" or to refer to individuals/communities that do not explicitly self-determine as "transexual".

@Quadzilla

I’m so cross reading that!

I did one am not going to let this shit carry on.

I’ve already sent off several email to different places this week, including my MP. There’ll be more to come!

😡Remove the terms "mother" and "father", to ensure that everyone within your organisation is covered by your policies. 😡

🤬We"d recommend using gender neutral language, e.g. "pregnant employee"; "birth parent" and then "second parent"; "parent who has given birth" or "new mothers and other pregnant employees".🤬

🤮 See Stonewall"s inclusive policy toolkit.🤮

The DfE banned toolkits harming children.

Now it's time for the government to ban toolkits harming women, girls and same-sex attracted men and women, across the public sector.

By all means add more protections for transgender people, that's a good thing, but it makes my blood boil that they are being told to remove the words describing protected characteristics in the Equality Act 2010, and to pay for it with taxpayers money and go along with it to get a rating on the Equality Index of an organisation that has lobbied to remove sex based rights for 6 years.

I’m furious. Like Find I’m all for adding to language to make it more inclusive but Stonewall are actively promoting removing our language without our permission.
And worse of all, we’re paying for this!
I’ll post a link to the whole document as I think you’ll find it interesting. They point out the flaws in your organisation then encourage you to buy a loads of their in-house training at a zillion bucks to make amends.

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_your_dealings_47#incoming-1734120

Thanks Quad.

The Opportunities' sections on each page of the 'feedback' report; like buying £360 conference tickets' and 'Workplace Trans Allies and Workplace Role Models are empowerment programmes which can be booked to be run in-house for up to 36 delegates from Calderdale Council'

illuminating

"Feedback from your marker"!!! Who do they think they are?! What a racket.