Stonewalled: Simon Fanshawe in the Daily Mail

[BoreOfWhabylon]

Telling it like it is. Thanks Simon

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9638119/Stonewalled-aggressive-new-leaders-gay-rights-group-helped-launch.html

I just came to post the same.

I was really surprised at some of the information in the article though - Stonewall was only formed in 1989. I had thought it had been around much longer than that.

The ‘T’ was included in 2014. Again, in some ways it seems longer than that.

My god, what a RELIEF to read.

Very clear article, wholly rational as he sets out the problems with self-ID. Pity those originally involved in creating Stonewall have been ostracized. I am aware Michael Cashman is heavily TRA, but had he sat down with the other founders, I bet they could have had a rational discussion even he might have listened to, given it was coming from his fellow gay men, and not women.

As soon as the case against self-ID is set out rationally, it becomes insurmountably obvious why it can’t work. All the more remarkable how many governments have instigated it without a forwards glance regarding the effect on women’s rights.

Looks like #nodebate is going to bite them in the ass. Once this gets properly picked apart there are going to be some very red faced people. Like most of the cast of Harry Potter. It will be interesting to see if any of them issue an apology to JKR. I suspect one will go and the other sheep will follow them back over the fence.

Thank goodness for that. Thank you Simon.

Good to see more and more of these articles. Particularly in the mail considering how large it's readership is.

this is not a minor chapter in the culture wars, but something that affects every single person living in the UK today.

and FWRs know it. For a long time this was the only place you could find out what was going on.

Like usual with the Mail, this is quite inflammatory and fear-mongering without a lot of journalism. No big surprise there, of course, just needs to be said.

But the impact of Section 28 had laid bare what we lacked: an ability to change the law not through placards but through calm and professional lobbying of Parliament and government. Stonewall set out to address that.

And now it's groups like FPFW conducting calm and professional lobbying of Parliament, government, sporting bodies and more. And these grassroots organisations were started by women hearing about injustices on FWR. Injustices like 'cotton ceiling'.

Sadly, Stonewall has entirely lost its capacity to listen or discuss

Stonewall refusing to listen or discuss is where it went so horribly wrong. See this KATE HARRIS COMMENT:

I wrote to Jan Gooding, chair of the board of trustees. We had a correspondence which went on for two years that included me offering a possible meeting between former trustees and present trustees. It included the offer of a meeting that would have an independent mediator.

And because we couldn't make any progress in opening up a dialogue, we made the decision to form the LGB Alliance.

Kate Harris

Excellent article.

Did you read the article Concerned?

Similar message in another article by Kathleen Stock today:

"People have taken it on board uncritically, because Stonewall has a stellar history of standing up for gay people. I also think a lot of people just don’t understand what this gender-identity stuff is about. They think it’s something to do with being gay and it’s something to do with sticking up for vulnerable people – so it’s commendable. They trust what Stonewall says."

"https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/05/31/biological-sex-is-real-not-psychological/

without a lot of journalism

It's a comment piece by Simon Fanshawe.

Ideally the Mail wouldn't have applied any "journalism" to it.

What sort of journalism did you have in mind - removing offensive words like "male", as per that USA Today farce?

Simon sets out the issues so clearly. Cashman is such a disappointment, is it that he still just doesn't understand or is it that he just doesn't care?

Sadly, Stonewall has entirely lost its capacity to listen or discuss

No debate as a tactic has been disastrous for stonewall and a good example of how not to try to influence public opinion or introduce change.

Fantastic article. He sets everything out so clearly so that even those who don’t really “get” the implications of Self ID, will understand.

Whoever thought the “no debate” policy would work, are bullying idiots.

@ConcernedMum0

Like usual with the Mail, this is quite inflammatory and fear-mongering without a lot of journalism. No big surprise there, of course, just needs to be said.

Where's the scare-mongering? Honest question.

I feel really sorry for the people who worked so hard to get equal rights for our gay and bi community. It must be devastating to watch what they built be dismantled so quickly.

Great to see it put out there so clearly.

Excellent article. It's desperately sad to say this given how much good it did in the past, but Stonewall needs to disband. I hope it will lose its diversity champions revenue. That will make it over £3 million down. Maybe that will make it focus but I suspect not. Either way #nodebate is a terrible slogan and a worse policy. Keep shining that light

Good to see such a calm, intelligent and rational article on the topic. I notice the comments are overwhelmingly supportive.

It's a comment piece by Simon Fanshawe

answering a rather predictable comment about 'journalism' from one of our usual suspects yawn.

It's actually an extract from a book written by Simon called 'The Power of Difference' and published by Kogan.

So does anyone know how many of Stonewall's founders still actually think it's doing a good job?

As a bi woman I have quite a few LGBT friends and I don't think I know anyone who supports Stonewall. In fact it was one of my trans friends who alerted me to how rubbish Stonewall has become.

@ConcernedMum0

Like usual with the Mail, this is quite inflammatory and fear-mongering without a lot of journalism. No big surprise there, of course, just needs to be said.

What exactly is inflammatory in this piece? What is inaccurate? Please elaborate on your comment because it would seem that he might know what he is talking about. Do you think he doesn’t understand what is going on?

@PronounssheRa

Simon sets out the issues so clearly. Cashman is such a disappointment, is it that he still just doesn't understand or is it that he just doesn't care?

Sadly, Stonewall has entirely lost its capacity to listen or discuss

No debate as a tactic has been disastrous for stonewall and a good example of how not to try to influence public opinion or introduce change.

I have to disagree... no debate as a tactic has given Stonewall a free run for 3 to 5 years.

Given they have literally ZERO in terms of argument ("trans women are women, full stop, anyone who wishes to delve into the issues further is a bigot who deserves nothing but abuse" is not an argument) I cannot believe that they would have got further using arguments.

@ConcernedMum0

Like usual with the Mail, this is quite inflammatory and fear-mongering without a lot of journalism. No big surprise there, of course, just needs to be said.

And a post like this actually does nothing to progress debate at all. Which seems to be an all too common tactic, and highly relevant to what Simon Fanshawe has said.

So, ConcernedMum, please tell us where Simon has got it wrong in your eyes. And did you read Matthew Parris's article last weekend . He was another of the original fourteen founders of Stonewall. Did he get it wrong too?

Or would you only read an investigative journalist report on it? I take it too that you would similarly discredit any trans person's 'opinion' piece as well, even if they were one of the original founders of Stonewall and only recently left the organisation.

Are we to assume you would discredit ANY person's opinion piece as irrelevant despite working in the organisation for decades?