Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence & Fox killer launch appeal against Charity Commission over LGB Alliance charity status

[FindTheTruth]

www.scotsman.com/news/people/lgbt-charities-launch-appeal-against-charity-commission-over-controversial-groups-status-3257923

"In April, the LGB Alliance was made a charity after the commission decided the group benefitted the public through its educational and awareness-raising activities about discrimination based on sexual orientation."

"On Tuesday, transgender children’s charity Mermaids launched an appeal against the decision at the first tier tribunal, supported by other charities and groups including Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence, and the Good Law Project."

Good to see Jolyon on the right side of history again

This should be very interesting to watch.

Interesting. Wonder what the chances of success are?

And whether Mermaids et al have considered they might, y'know, end up facing questions about their own activities?

The "Good Law" project is crowdfunding for this - we'll need to keep an eye out for an LGBA crowdfunder...

So it's OK for there to be a charity that advocates purely for trans children but not ok to have a charity that acts fir the lgb. When are mermaids tagging adding the.lgb to theor work.then?

Wonder what the chances of success are?

Absolutely fuck all. It's not the charity commission's job to decide which causes are worthy- there would be no basis in law to do so.

The "Good Law" project is crowdfunding for this

Which I rather think is the point. Some mugs will love the idea of this and chuck their money at the grifters. Joylon et al must know there is no chance of success.

Charity commissions decision www.gov.uk/government/publications/lgb-alliance/lgb-alliance-full-decision

Decision

2.The Commission accepted that LGB Alliance is established for exclusively charitable purposes, in accordance with the legal framework and based on the evidence received, and should be entered onto the register of charities with objects as follows:

2.1.To promote equality and diversity for the public benefit, in particular by:

• the elimination of discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation;

• advancing education and raising awareness in equality and diversity in respect of lesbian, gay and bisexual people;

• conducting or commissioning research on equality and diversity issues and publishing the useful results to the public; and

• cultivating a sentiment in favour of equality and diversity for lesbian, gay and bisexual people.

2.2.To promote human rights (as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent United Nations conventions and declarations) and particularly the rights and freedoms of those who face discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation,

3.The full analysis and reasons for the decision are set out below.

[quote Whatwouldscullydo]So it's OK for there to be a charity that advocates purely for trans children but not ok to have a charity that acts fir the lgb. When are mermaids tagging adding the.lgb to theor work.then?[/quote]
Exactly! Surely this is the fundamental point.

I think this image sums it up:

mobile.twitter.com/dottys_friend/status/1399805948131262476

Wonder what the chances of success are?

The crowdfunding page for GLP acknowledges that this is a very difficult case.

It's astonishing that GLP want to prevent LGB people having a charity that represents them.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Good to see Jolyon on the right side of history again

This should be very interesting to watch.

Oh dear. This doesn't at all look like a tactic to silence and discredit the founder of LGBA who is suing stonewall for trying to silence and discredit her.

Oh dear. This doesn't at all look like a tactic to silence and discredit the founder of LGBA who is suing stonewall for trying to silence and discredit her.

Stonewall are supporting the case, the optics are dreadful to anyone outside the Stonewall bubble.

What a silly thing to do

Makes for very bad optics

Oooo cross post

What on earth is wrong with them?

They disagree with the aims of the LGB Alliance. Fine, great, knock yourselves out. Call them all the names you want. And when you’ve got that out of your system, perhaps you could calmly walk me through the logic of why is it right and proper to have organisations and lobbying groups that focus only on trans issues (GIRES, Gendered Intelligence, Mermaids, Press for Change, Scottish Trans Alliance, UK Trans info, The Beaumont society, Trans Lifeline being a selection that I’ve found on a cursory search), because trans people need specific support that excludes other groups, but it is not acceptable for those other groups to mobilise to provide specific support for only themselves, for those areas that they feel provision is not available?

Trans only groups - fine, laudable, necessary, required to address deficiencies in trans support.
LGB only groups - hateful, exclusionary, can only be covers for transphobia.

How? That makes no sense at all. Either the LGBT has to be United in all things, or it does not. You can’t play that both ways.

2021, where a white, straight, privileged man trying to get an LGB charity stripped of it's charitable status is 'progressive'.

I can't wait to see them have their arses handed to them, the spiteful, petty children.

How? That makes no sense at all. Either the LGBT has to be United in all things, or it does not. You can’t play that both ways.

My guess is that it's not in the slightest bit united. Anywhere, anyhow.

But it's only LGB Alliance who explains why. And it must be stopped.

This looks really bad on so many levels. However, the sunlight will be blinding

When I heard that Maugham had a potential route to challenge the LGB Alliance, I have to admit I was expecting more. I think this claim has a very slim chance of success.

To be a charity, an organisation has to establish two things per the charities act 2013. They have to show 1) they benefit a class of the public (not just an individual.) and 2) they have to demonstrate a 'public benefit' (that is, the ends of the charity are actually beneficial.)

I've looked at the grounds and they are weak.

1. Mermaids says they do not offer a 'positive' (public?) benefit to the public. But as per the charities act, something is in the public benefit If it campaigns for human rights or for the protected characteristics in the equalities act. The charities commission will have examined the public benefit very carefully before letting LGB Alliance become a charity. Mermaids will have to actively prove that, despite appearances, the LGB Alliance does not confer a public benefit despite being in a recognised charitable category. This will be very difficult to do.

2. An organisation which campaigns to change the law cannot be a charity. However, an organisation can still be a charity if at least PART of what it does is charitable. So long as it doesn't wholly aim to change the law that is fine. Furthermore, if the charitable aim is to stick up for protected characteristics as per the equality act it would be very surprising if the charity were not permitted to campaign to keep that group in the equality act, or to strengthen the equality act.The LGB Alliance is just as political as stonewall and mermaids in that regard.

3. the third point is that the LGB alliance only operates for the benefit of gay and lesbian people (missed out the bisexuals) who are not transgender and share their beliefs. First, operating for the benefit of non transgender gay and lesbians (and bisexuals, they are always forgotten!) is a large enough chunk of the population to benefit anyway. Mermaids is just for trans children and their families, which I imagine is a similarly sized group (if that.) The bit about beliefs is not the case. The charity is NOT just for people who share their beliefs. For example, religious organisations like churches aren't just for religious people. they are for everyone. The LGB Alliance can easily argue that they are for all LGB people.

Susie Green from Mermaids then says 'trans kids face overwhelming hostility because of who they are' which is very sad, but not an argument or to the point. Green then says 'the work of the LGB Alliance is to divide the LGBTQ+ community to undermine and isolate trans people,' seemingly not being aware that charities are allowed to focus on specific groups, particularly those in the equality act. 'sexual orientation' is a distinct protected category from 'undergoing gender reassignment.' Not everything, astonishingly enough, has to include trans people.

My guess is that it's not in the slightest bit united. Anywhere, anyhow

But it's only LGB Alliance who explains why. And it must be stopped

Agreed.

God, I hate double standards. And shonky logic. And bullies. Got a full house on those with this shameful piece of theatre here

They really need to learn to read the room…

It’s like throwing kerosene on a burning building to see if it helps.

Anyway the sunlight is excellent as always.

Nutters.

I’m not on Twatter so can’t directly share the link, but I had to laugh at the post underneath the dotty’s friend pic.
It was a reproduction of the “who do you trust more” tweet:
Stonewall. 2%
Richard Nixon,PT Barnum, Charles Ponzi, Wile E Coyote. 98% !

something is in the public benefit If it campaigns for human rights or for the protected characteristics in the equalities act. The charities commission will have examined the public benefit very carefully before letting LGB Alliance become a charity

thanks for clarity @WeeBisom

I am learning a lot about silos from watching this unfold.

They believe they are right, because they have never had to examine their rationale.

This is what #nodebate got us. Ruth Hunt did a LOT of damage and I will be very sad to see Stonewall crumble as they did important work and improved society for the better. However, they are now fucked. It is such a shame.

The other organisations appear to be day schemes for idiots.

Good, bring it on, the more publicity and open discussion of all this the better.

What this in effect boils down to is that the TQ focused organisations:

• do not agree that it is ethical or acceptable for LGB people to openly state that they are homosexual and therefore will be recognising biological sex rather than gender identity

• do not agree openly homosexual organisations are ethical or acceptable

• do not agree that it is ethical or acceptable that homosexual people should have a right to organise or have independent groups of their own that reject TQ presence, supervision and rules.

Its an interesting position. Very similar to the one about female people and sex based rights in many ways. And it absolutely needs open examination, discussion and legal analysis.