Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Organisations Leaving Stonewall: The List

508 replies

Barracker · 29/05/2021 19:50

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
MrsMidClegs · 30/05/2021 09:26

@Helen8220

I’m pleased to say that my employer is renewing its membership for another year. I’d be concerned what it would say about their commitment to LGBT+ inclusion if they didn’t.
A few lesbians I know would be overjoyed if their companies left Stonewall. They've been to EDI training run by Stomewall where lesbians were mentioned ONCE in a half day workshop. They don't see themselves as part of the workplace LGBTQ+ group and avoid their networking events like the plague. If you think this is okay then you're as equally as bad as Stonewall. Companies might want to have EDI training that does NOT exclude lesbians.
Wandawomble · 30/05/2021 09:27

A few points - the Tik Tok kids are the university students of the very near future who will cancel the teachers backed up by Stonewall’s rhetoric.

LESBIAN women - are they allowed to say they are same sex attracted Helen? Are you able to say in your workplace that lesbian and gay people are same sex attracted?

Surely as a lawyer - words must be precise?

MrsMidClegs · 30/05/2021 09:29

@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?
Because Legal Feminist raised FOIs to most of the public sector agencies in the U.K.

legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/02/04/shining-a-light-on-stonewalls-activities/

SirVixofVixHall · 30/05/2021 10:10

@WalkthisWayUK

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.
I completely agree.
EmpressWitchDoesntBurn · 30/05/2021 10:18

A few lesbians I know would be overjoyed if their companies left Stonewall.

I’m extremely grateful that my company never joined.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 30/05/2021 10:38

@picklemewalnuts

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.
Quietly doing the work* and looking to make meaningful progress.

*I'd like to see an audit as I'm to my back teeth with firms that praise themselves for diversity and inclusion in their annual reports yet have some of the worst figures for employees with disabilities, the number/seniority of people from minoritised ethnic groups etc.

highame · 30/05/2021 10:39

Just a reminder. I read upthread someone's organisation was converting to Gender Neutral lavs. They are behind the curve on this one. The Housing Minister Robert Jennrick announced that all loos in the Public sector must be single sex and those that have already converted to self i-d must now have a partition in place. It appears that businesses etc will have to follow, so any thinking of making changes now will have to revert back.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stonewall-suffers-fresh-setback-in-trans-advice-row-j3p79gb2k

highame · 30/05/2021 10:40

Not a derail btw

CatherinaJTV · 30/05/2021 10:41

@Helen8220

I’m pleased to say that my employer is renewing its membership for another year. I’d be concerned what it would say about their commitment to LGBT+ inclusion if they didn’t.
This! It is a worrisome sign if employers are not actively committing to LGBTQ+ inclusion.
EmpressWitchDoesntBurn · 30/05/2021 10:45

This! It is a worrisome sign if employers are not actively committing to LGBTQ+ inclusion

But in practice, LGBTQ+ inclusion - as far as Stonewall are concerned nowadays anyway - is all about the TQ+ and nothing to do with the L. I know that in my workplace, I’m not going to get accused of bigotry for saying that as a lesbian, I’m only attracted to other biological women.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 30/05/2021 10:46

This! It is a worrisome sign if employers are not actively committing to LGBTQ+ inclusion.

You've read the PPs on this thread about lesbians who note that they're scarcely mentioned? And that Stonewall has not given accurate advice or guidance?

Is your apprehension that all workplaces that are not members of the scheme are not inclusive?

AfternoonToffee · 30/05/2021 10:51

This! It is a worrisome sign if employers are not actively committing to LGBTQ+ inclusion.

They don't have to be signed up to Stonewall to actively commit to inclusion, what a strange conclusion.

FindTheTruth · 30/05/2021 10:51

I think it is quite dangerous for large organisations to hand over their equality legalities to a charity.

Agree. Especially a 'charity' that erases the people it claims to represent

Whatwouldscullydo · 30/05/2021 10:57

They don't have to be signed up to Stonewall to actively commit to inclusion, what a strange conclusion

Yes what does this inclusion look like.

I mean everyone is protected by the protected characteristics /employment laws. What else is needed of you deal with work.place bullying etc

I've seen some.of the paperwork.on.the FOI responses. It's literally just page after page of how to remove restrictionsrights for one protected characteristic.

What is actually needed in these work.places. most people wbyts want to show up , do their job and go home don't they?personal.lives remain just that surely? How involved in eachotgers lives are work.colleguees ?

EyesOpening · 30/05/2021 11:06

Helen8220 Sat 29-May-21 23:09:40
my organisation is about 60% women

are those women aware that one of SW's aims was to get the government do away with single sex exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces, in the Equality Act 2010?

I also noticed the dates on the SW links you provided and wondered how much of that was still what SW advocated for

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/05/2021 11:42

Given that a court recently held that a non-binary person was protected from discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment

Not actually a precedent setting decision, and I think it's a misrepresentation of the issue. That person was clearly an MTF, not "non binary".

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 30/05/2021 12:06

Not actually a precedent setting decision, and I think it's a misrepresentation of the issue.

Exactly - I do wish people it were easier to prevent this level of misinformation/disinformation even if it is inadvertent. I regularly see exchanges between people where they're mistaken about who is unaware of what is happening (too regularly the people they lambast as "wicked and stupid" who are more across the issues than they are).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4257181-stonewall-defends-its-direction-to-bbc?msgid=107761421

C8H10N4O2 · 30/05/2021 12:15

[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]
Its worth looking at the dates on those pieces. The research relating to lesbians and lesbian support were done on Summerskill's watch. Its all at least 11 yrs old. Stonewall is unrecognisable from that period.

WalkthisWayUK · 30/05/2021 12:50

This is totally the wrong way for organisations to run in my view - be ‘signing up’ to lobbying groups. Lobbying groups are exactly what they describe, they are one issue pressure groups and are furthering their own cause. Often, as charities, they are not robust policy makers or researchers. They are not set up to do this kind of work and lack the skills.

They are placed to further their own groups interests and therefore have no place being followed blindly by a place of work. When I sign up to a job I do not sign up to following a pressure group as part of my job.

I do, however, expect that my work organisation will be non-discriminatory, healthy and safe. I expect it to follow national good practice for the environment.

All of this good practice is influenced by lobbying groups, however they need to go through a robust third process in order to adequately weigh up policy. So, for example, an environmental workplace wouldn’t just sign up to ‘X charity save the trees’ - and only do things that save trees - it would follow robust national guidance which has gone through various stages of peer review and a fair balance of interested parties.

So the workplace then would have a much better environmental policy which was about not only saving trees, but energy usage, car use, buildings.

It’s the same with Stonewall. Why on earth would organisations, especially public ones, be dictated to by a lobbying group over discriminatory practice - one which has not gone through that stage of being weighed up with all discminatory practice, of being peer reviewed, or going through robust policy process?

It is most definitely not a good way to protect staff.

HecatesCatsInFancyHats · 30/05/2021 12:58

Some of these organisations are no doubt much happier urging staff to use pronouns in their email bio and stop using the word woman than they are forcing themselves not to overlook women for promotion once they've been off on maternity leave, or offering job shares at the senior management level, or being truly flexible about ways of working so that women can continue to make progress in their careers once they've started a family. I even imagine that some of them - shock horror - are still making decisions about who to promote based on who is happy to have a round of golf at the weekend. Stonewall have set the cause of genuine equality and equity for women back by misrepresenting the law so that the focus falls on a tiny minority with very particular needs, meanwhile record numbers of women lose their jobs because of COVID. Their work is a hindrance to equality, not a help.

AlfonsoTheMango · 30/05/2021 13:07

Excellent news. I look forward to hearing that more organisations have decided to give Stonewall the old heave-ho.

FannyCann · 30/05/2021 13:18

Why on earth would organisations, especially public ones, be dictated to by a lobbying group over discriminatory practice - one which has not gone through that stage of being weighed up with all discminatory practice, of being peer reviewed, or going through robust policy process?

Honestly I think it's sheer laziness. Let's outsource that boring side of fulfilling our duties and get a gold star while we're at it. Little realising how much it will cost over time as fulfilling the demands of the champions scheme becomes more and more onerous, and the true cost begins to reveal itself in the mountain of paperwork generated. I have no doubt many organisations will breathe a huge sigh of relief as they quietly absent themselves from the roll call.

It will be up to hardworking women mostly, I suppose, to continue to monitor and challenge the paperwork legacy in the policies now revealed to have been unlawful and to turn the stonewall juggernaut around.

FannyCann · 30/05/2021 13:19

Also what @HecatesCatsInFancyHats said.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 30/05/2021 13:22

record numbers of women lose their jobs because of COVID. Their work is a hindrance to equality, not a help.

Agree with all of this - and it's notable that a record number of people with disabilities are losing their jobs/having their employment taken from them.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/05/2021 13:32

Honestly I think it's sheer laziness. Let's outsource that boring side of fulfilling our duties and get a gold star while we're at it. Little realising how much it will cost over time as fulfilling the demands of the champions scheme becomes more and more onerous, and the true cost begins to reveal itself in the mountain of paperwork generated. I have no doubt many organisations will breathe a huge sigh of relief as they quietly absent themselves from the roll call.

It will be up to hardworking women mostly, I suppose, to continue to monitor and challenge the paperwork legacy in the policies now revealed to have been unlawful and to turn the stonewall juggernaut around.

Exactly this.