Liz Truss urges official withdrawal from Stonewall diversity scheme

[BattyOrange]

Sorry, I don't have a share token but www.thetimes.co.uk/article/liz-truss-urges-official-withdrawal-from-stonewall-diversity-scheme-9df7pvsrn

Basically, Liz Truss "is pushing for all government departments to withdraw from Stonewall’s employment scheme following a row over transgender rights." because "she shared the concerns raised by the EHRC over the scheme’s value for money, particularly as the civil service has its own in-house workplace diversity programme."

Whether or not the reasons stated are true (I have my doubts) this is a good thing!

I disagree. This Government works by leaks, or rather carefully placed stories in the Times, especially when it comes to awkward subjects like this. It happened with stuff like the Self ID consultation and kicking it into the long grass and so on.

LGBT is a very delicate subject for the Tories. We can be certain that links will be made with Section 28. This is almost certainly why Teresa May got it so wrong in her enthusiasm to draw a line between her Government and the ‘nasty party’ of the past.

I am surprised about your public sector experience. When I was in the Civil Service we were careful to try to understand the direction of ministerial thinking. We would have heeded something like this and would have ensured that we were covered in a relevant submission by, say, ensuring that we had taken advice beyond that provided by Stonewall.

I’m not saying it’s not important or that it won’t be heeded. Indeed, I pointed out the fact that if it was placed at the weekend that ups it’s importance rather than the reverse (over a poster who was claiming that the intent was to bury the story). I am disagreeing that this is an ‘important announcement’; when I was in post ‘announcement’ had a very specific meaning and did not cover an off the record brief or leak to a newspaper, unless it was going to be followed up by an actual public announcement or policy paper (in which case it was known as a ‘trail’ of the main announcement).

@StealthPolarBear

I hadn't realised the chief exec of mental health first aid England is one of the trustees. I'd assumed MHFA would be neutral but presumably that isn't the case.

MHFA seems to be a self-appointed expert organisation entirely focused on selling courses to employers to have their staff trained as certified “Mental Health First Aiders”. I looked into it when my employer started talking about them. But it seems to be entirely about “we’ve sent our staff on this training so we can wear a shiny badge” rather than actually doing anything practical, or sharing any information or knowledge you haven’t paid them for.

I'd assumed MHFA were legit. How depressing

... paid for training supplant basic functions of respect / support / consideration / care.

It’s a similar business model to the diversity champions scheme (and now the NHS rainbow badge), and moves someone’s locus of responsibility or decisions about how to behave or what to do from inside themselves to outside. In general form. many of these schemes imply that you can’t be a “good / skilled” person unless you have been assessed and labelled by the scheme.

(Sorry that was in reference to the ‘mental health first aid scheme’)

It was a reasonable spread in the Times and I noticed that quite a few places had sold out, so plenty reading in the pub gardens and buying it for the Sport, nevertheless, not a 'light' weekend

Interestingly as well, the CEO of MHFA/Stonewall trustee is also a governor at Bath Spa University (busy chap), the university which blocked a PhD student from researching detransition www.bbc.com/news/uk-41384473

Stonewall did have it all sewn up. They managed to capture government organisations through their once legitimate and fair work in securing rights for LGB.

On the back of this they attached the T, (silently ditched the LGB) and got government to outsource their diversity management to them.

The rest followed easily as businesses felt safe with this as the government had 'legitimised' stonewall through using them.

Being a 'stonewall accredited' business / university etc made organisations look like experts for a seemingly small outlay. Not recognising or realising that the stonewall law they had allowed to infiltrate their organisations totally misrepresented the actual law.

Stonewall aren't experts at all. But they're damn good at marketing their product. And so many fell for it. I can see why the 'easy' way out in terms of managing diversity seemed like an attractive option. Especially with the lure of being accredited.

But really, what an incredible mistake to make.

Interesting reading, aren't they, the trustees and senior staff at Stonewall.

Great to read this, of course the various organizations can use the costs as an excuse, but still it’s welcome news anyway.The more , the merrier!

If Stonewall cared about diversity as they claim they'd have a D for Detranitioners. ie the minority group that they actively seek to marginalise and discredit.

[quote Cwenthryth]Interestingly as well, the CEO of MHFA/Stonewall trustee is also a governor at Bath Spa University (busy chap), the university which blocked a PhD student from researching detransition www.bbc.com/news/uk-41384473[/quote]
As a qualified and accredited BACP counsellor who spent many years training I find MHFA does more harm than good.

I've seen people do a couple of days training in MHFA and then go around 'diagnosing' students and colleagues with mental health conditions.

Fully qualified counsellors dont and couldn't (and would never) diagnose a psychiatric condition. It's irritating when people do these Micky mouse courses and think they are some kind of expert.

Interestingly the Bath Spa student is a fully qualified UKCP psychotherapist, which is not remotely like being part of the MHFA grift.

@MondayYogurt

If Stonewall cared about diversity as they claim they'd have a D for Detranitioners. ie the minority group that they actively seek to marginalise and discredit.

That's a good point actually. Why isn't there a D for detransitioners in the alphabet soup (for which there is a letter for pretty much everyone else) or a stripe for detransitioners on the flag?

TRAs are often superficially claiming how much they care for detransitioners, and detransitioners are a unique group who have specific needs, just like all of the other groups in the LGBTQ+ acronym. So why no representation for them?

From where I am standing it's because they are a problematic group. They need careful mention at particular times for the 'look, we do care about detransitioners' effect, but they mustnt be given a voice of their own in case they undermine anything at all about the ideology, and they definitely must not be framed as any kind of legitimate group.

[quote Cwenthryth]Interestingly as well, the CEO of MHFA/Stonewall trustee is also a governor at Bath Spa University (busy chap), the university which blocked a PhD student from researching detransition www.bbc.com/news/uk-41384473[/quote]
It's a gravy train...with many carriages.

This may not be going the way Dawn Butler wanted

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1399804339561107464?s=20

According to the Telegraph, Channel 4 has just cancelled!

It just gets better and better.

Channel 4!!

Channel 4???! I'm amazed by that one.

@HelpfulBelle

According to the Telegraph, Channel 4 has just cancelled!

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6417545/Channel-4-Trans-Kids-sparks-fury-psychotherapist-says-disagrees-transitioning.html

I just heard North Wales police as well, but don't have a link. Anyone else?

Four! [ducks]

Or is it 'fore'? I'm not a golfer.

Channel 4, crikey! 😳