Organisations Leaving Stonewall: The List

[Barracker]

Thought it would be handy to keep a running list here of organisations who have done 'budget reviews' or similar and have subsequently decided that Stonewall are 'not value for money'.

EHRC
ACAS
House of Commons
DVLA
Dorset Police
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

Do feel free to update the thread as more join the exodus.

@TrainedByCats I have expressed my personal views very candidly on various threads here, so I don’t think it would be appropriate to say who my employer is. Particularly given the hostility that some people here seem to have towards Stonewall and anyone who supports them.

@Wandawomble they’ve undertaken a fair bit of research and published guidance on issues that affect gay and bisexual women over the years (as well as their campaigning on issues of more general relevance to all L, G and B people, eg on gay marriage and hate crime). Eg
www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/Double-Glazed_Glass_Ceiling.pdf

www.stonewall.org.uk/resources/pregnant-pause-guide-lesbians-how-get-pregnant

www.stonewall.org.uk/system/files/Domestic_Abuse_Stonewall_Health_Briefing__2012_.pdf

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/groundbreaking-research-lesbian-bi-and-trans-exclusion-across-21-countries-out-margins

I don’t know why any organisation needs to subscribe to a lobbying group? That is bias from the outset. Unless they are completely squeaky clean and absolutely without bias, I think it is quite dangerous for large organisations to hand over their equality legalities to a charity.

they’ve undertaken a fair bit of research and published guidance on issues that affect gay and bisexual women over the years

Are the lesbians in your workplace allowed to state that a lesbian is a same sex attracted female whose sexual orientation is a protected category, and does not involve or include anyone with a penis regardless of how a male identifies, or would they be called a bigot and phobic for that?

Does your workplace use the exemptions in the Equality Act to provide single sex toilets and/or changing rooms for staff?

I really can't stand the gaslighting training and the whole 'ally' bollocks because it's ONLY ever about the 'T'

[quote Helen8220]@ArabellaScott I wasn’t aware of this incident, I’ve just been looking into it. It seems the basis of the criticism related to the following:
“The policy said it was unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 to discriminate against someone because of their gender identity or trans status. But Reindorf’s report said this did not accurately state the law, since “gender identity or trans status” were not protected characteristics; rather, the protected characteristic was gender reassignment.”

This feels like a fairly minor semantic issue. Given that a court recently held that a non-binary person was protected from discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, surely anyone whose gender identity is different from their sex at birth must share this protected characteristic, so the policy statement doesn’t sound that misleading to me.[/quote]
But someone who has a gender identity which is congruent with their birth sex does not have a pc of gender identity, because the pc is gender reassignment. So, I think the clarity is important.

Haha Dorset Police. I’d leave that one out it looks a bit pathetic tbh.

I’m still not sure what the big deal is with all this Stonewall stuff. I’ve missed a step obviously. Does it really mean anything?

Twitter is suddenly full of various GC types claiming (as usual I guess) that the tide is/has turning/turned but I’m a big baffled tbh. Some kind of ‘win’? Shrug.

The Trans/NB kids you come across on TikTok and Instagram don’t give a f/ck. There’s thousands of them and I’d be astonished if even one of them had heard of Stonewall.

@Leafstamp

So we have the following confirmed:

EHRC
ACAS
House of Commons
DVLA
Dorset Police
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire CCG

Brilliant thread OP. Leaf thanks for the update

any more names?

[quote Helen8220]@ArabellaScott I wasn’t aware of this incident, I’ve just been looking into it. It seems the basis of the criticism related to the following:
“The policy said it was unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 to discriminate against someone because of their gender identity or trans status. But Reindorf’s report said this did not accurately state the law, since “gender identity or trans status” were not protected characteristics; rather, the protected characteristic was gender reassignment.”

This feels like a fairly minor semantic issue. Given that a court recently held that a non-binary person was protected from discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, surely anyone whose gender identity is different from their sex at birth must share this protected characteristic, so the policy statement doesn’t sound that misleading to me.[/quote]
It's not a minor semantic issue, it's literally what the debate is about. What is a gender identity? What is sex? What is a woman? The wording of the act was clearly written to protect what we traditionally used to understand as transexuals - people who genuinely wanted to pass as the other sex and were taking or were planning to take steps to transition. When society is organised using categories those categories need to be defined and the definitions have actual real world consequences because they determine who is allowed into the categories and who is excluded.
Being included may bring important legal protections and being excluded may mean losing rights, as in this case. Part of the problem is that one side of the debate seem to think that they can change the categories as they please without any debate or consideration of other stakeholders in the debate around those categories. And then they deny and minimise the importance of that and aggressively accuse any other attempt to discuss the categories as transphobic. It's all classic abusive tactics:. define the terms yourself, attack anyone who disagrees, deny you are doing it, minimise it's importance, deny the impact on the other, accuse the other of abusing you and position yourself as victim, get others to support you in your victim status and get them to attack the 'abuser'. Stonewall refuse to even have the debate, and anything that 'can't be discussed' is a red flag that somebody's rights are being bulldozed. When someone refuses to have the debate it means they aren't interested in how their stance impacts others, they just want to get their own way.

Stonewall help us make sure our policies are as LGBT+ inclusive as possible and prepare staff training (eg on being a good ally), puts us in touch with other organisations to share best practice, offers discounts on training and conferences.

There are lots of LGB people, myself included, who would not want to work for a Stonewall organisation because they have redefined our sexual orientation, and now tell us that if we want a female-only space to recover from the trauma of sexual assault or we only want a female providing intimate care we are as bad as anti-Semites. I would bet that being in the scheme is disproportionately excluding lesbians (unless you count lesbians with penises of course ).

I'm sure Thames Valley Police used to be, but I can't see any evidence of them being now. No idea when they left though.

@Lisz

Haha Dorset Police. I’d leave that one out it looks a bit pathetic tbh.

I’m still not sure what the big deal is with all this Stonewall stuff. I’ve missed a step obviously. Does it really mean anything?

Twitter is suddenly full of various GC types claiming (as usual I guess) that the tide is/has turning/turned but I’m a big baffled tbh. Some kind of ‘win’? Shrug.

The Trans/NB kids you come across on TikTok and Instagram don’t give a f/ck. There’s thousands of them and I’d be astonished if even one of them had heard of Stonewall.

I doubt you're a good faith poster but, just in case you are, it's great that so few young people have heard of Stonewall, given what it has become. It's also great that, thanks to the efforts of those tedious 'GC types' you see on Twitter, under 18s are now being left to work out their gender identities, instead of starting a fast-track to lifelong medication, infertility and loss of sexual function.

EHRC
ACAS
House of Commons
DVLA
Dorset Police
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire CCG

I won't shop at Tesco until they remove themselves from SW

[quote Helen8220]@Wandawomble they’ve undertaken a fair bit of research and published guidance on issues that affect gay and bisexual women over the years (as well as their campaigning on issues of more general relevance to all L, G and B people, eg on gay marriage and hate crime). Eg
www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/Double-Glazed_Glass_Ceiling.pdf

www.stonewall.org.uk/resources/pregnant-pause-guide-lesbians-how-get-pregnant

www.stonewall.org.uk/system/files/Domestic_Abuse_Stonewall_Health_Briefing__2012_.pdf

www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/groundbreaking-research-lesbian-bi-and-trans-exclusion-across-21-countries-out-margins[/quote]
Look at the dates on most of those, though. They’re nearly all from the time when Ben Summerskill was in charge and Stonewall was still about the LGB.

Look at the dates on most of those, though. They’re nearly all from the time when Ben Summerskill was in charge and Stonewall was still about the LGB

Yes. No one disputes that Stonewall used to do good work. But, @Helen8220, can you not see the difference between that earlier work and the lunacy of arguing that gender critical views are analogous to antisemitism?

Nottinghamshire police force left because of the impact of the paperwork. It was taking too long to prove you'd met the criteria, when they were confident in their inclusivity.
They are also the force tackling misogyny. I can't remember the wording, but misogyny is treated as a hate crime here.

Do feel free to update the thread as more join the exodus.

How can we find out?

@Lisz

Haha Dorset Police. I’d leave that one out it looks a bit pathetic tbh.

I’m still not sure what the big deal is with all this Stonewall stuff. I’ve missed a step obviously. Does it really mean anything?

Twitter is suddenly full of various GC types claiming (as usual I guess) that the tide is/has turning/turned but I’m a big baffled tbh. Some kind of ‘win’? Shrug.

The Trans/NB kids you come across on TikTok and Instagram don’t give a f/ck. There’s thousands of them and I’d be astonished if even one of them had heard of Stonewall.

Pathetic?

That would be Dorset police who charged at least 5 ‘women’ with rape in the last few years and arrested at least one women for tweets that were not against any law.

Don’t the let the door hit you on the arse on the way out Stonewall; Dorset women are glad to see the back of you and can’t wait for the police to get back to understanding that rape is committed with a penis.

Do all these companies who value inclusion make sure they've got the equivalent inclusion marks for disability and autism and other neuro diverse people?

Dorset police who charged at least 5 ‘women’ with rape in the last few years and arrested at least one women for tweets that were not against any law.

Yup. not kind. not inclusive. part of the problem.

[quote Helen8220]@ArabellaScott I am a lawyer, and I’d say the precise words used are sometimes crucial, but sometimes a distraction from substance and meaning.

It’s particularly difficult to use language clearly and precisely when talking about sex and gender in the context of the law, because the legislation in this area is not entirely consistent or clear in its use of the terms. The Gender Recognition Act mostly talks about gender, and makes clear that a person can change gender, but does also talk about a person changing sex. Similarly the Equality Act, in the context of gender reassignment, talks about a person’s sex being reassigned.

So in that context I’m not sure how much I would criticise Stonewall for using the terms in the way it did.[/quote]
Well, again, I have no expertise in this area, but I think the potential consequences affect all of us, so it's important that terms are clearly defined.

I agree that the language can be confusing. I think the GRA should be rewritten entirely and any overlap or intersection between the EA and GRA carefully examined, discussed and assessed. (By people who are not lobbyists and who have expertise but not a personal agenda).

I would expect an organisation that has positioned itself as an adviser to - what - 20% of the UK's large companies? Would be crystal clear on the law and how it works and the precise terms. I would expect them to be able, willing and consistently up to the task of explaining the legislation, particularly the EA.

Yet Stonewall have clearly not done this.

This is not a minor failing.

This is a lobbying organisation trying to push a particular ideology - that 'gender' matters more than 'sex' - and misrepresenting the law to others whom it purports to advise.

To openly try to remove the single sex exemption within the EA is an act of such jaw-dropping misogyny and dismissive contempt for women that I can't quite grasp why anyone would still support Stonewall.

I understand that they may have done some good work in the past.

For me, the overarching aim of this organisation seems to have gone very badly wrong. They need to go.

The Trans/NB kids you come across on TikTok and Instagram don’t give a f/ck. There’s thousands of them

You know how you see thousands of emo kids but few emo adults ...

The Trans/NB kids you come across on TikTok and Instagram don’t give a f/ck. There’s thousands of them and I’d be astonished if even one of them had heard of Stonewall.

Until the trans/NB kids on TikTok are dictating policy in major public institutions and influencing the culture of some of our biggest employers I'm not too bothered. Hopefully as Stonewall is exposed as the toxic Trojan horse it is those kids will come to know of it as the org that set their cause back a decade with policies such as #nodebare, 'Acceptance without Exception' and their self-declared intention to dismantle women's right to single sex spaces and services.

How do we know these organisations are no longer part of it? I'm aware of ACAS and EHRC from the news reports, but hadn't heard of the rest. Is it from FOI requests?

@Chrestomanci3

How do we know these organisations are no longer part of it? I'm aware of ACAS and EHRC from the news reports, but hadn't heard of the rest. Is it from FOI requests?

Telegraph article that's on various threads. The journalist doesn't say but it looks like they've approached several organisations that responded to the FOI requests.