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."

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I just saw that article too - what's the significance of Wintemute?

"signatory of the 2007 Yogyakarta Principles (but who is now critical of Principles 3 and 31) "

This is why he's interesting. The YP is endlessly quoted as 'international best practice' & used by keen self ID zealots (like the Scottish government) as justification for pushing through GRA reform. The LGBA have appointed him as a trustee.

I think that's quite the scoop.

@yeahbutnaw

I don't understand your point really. The LGB Alliance are going to say things that trans people don't like by default as their purpose is to offer an alternative to the belief in identity. Obviously the only alternative is something that is upsetting to people that want to believe that they are the opposite sex.

It's only controversial if you hold that these things can't be said by the LGB people that believe them.

Do you think a lack of belief must be suppressed by LGB people to avoid offense? I don't.

A charity can promote the rights of one or more specific groups, but may not do so whilst demeaning or denigrating the rights of others, including on social media

I can think of a couple of charities that demean and denigrate the rights of others, and indeed one of them is actively seeking to remove rights from others, LGB Alliance is not one of them.

It's quite obvious that one particular charity spends all it's time and energy on trans issues to the detriment of everything else it claims to stand for, and that charity is not LGB Alliance.

It's not LGB Alliance or the people who support it who are indefensible.

@SmokedDuck

I can think of any number of charities that say inflammatory things. Not to say that is great but it's common. It happens a lot in the environmental sector.

I personally find many of the tweets from SW and Mermaids to be offensive and inflammatory. Do they have similar codes to LGBA and hold themselves to a similar high standard?

Can I complain to the Charity Commission?

It's quite obvious to anyone not being facetious that LGB Alliance spend their energy on trans issues, particularly on the erosion of trans rights and acceptance.

No. Gender identity theory creates a conflict between trans rights and gay rights, because it makes it impossible to describe same sex attraction.

Plenty of charities have goals that conflict with other people's beliefs and wishes. A charity set up to build a playground may conflict with a charity that wants to protect wildlife on the same site. Humanists UK has goals that conflict with people who would like the state to continue to fund religious education.

The fact that the commission had to specifically state this condition is evidence in its own right.

The Charities Commission is going to have its work cut out if it starts striking off charities every time people are offended by the activities of a charity. Again Stonewall would need to watch its back, given recent comments. However, the Commission obviously couldn't find remarks that met a threshold that would have threatened the LGBA's status.

particularly on the erosion of trans rights and acceptance

You're framing that as if trans rights and acceptance requires the ending of the acceptance and rights homosexuality.

And therefore anyone defending those things or saying no, this doesn't work for us is 'eroding' rights for trans people. Rather in the way that women having rights is increasingly being framed as eroding and harming trans people.

Honestly, if trans rights and acceptance cannot exist alongside other people's rights and acceptance without affecting them then it needs to be faced up to that what they are framing as rights and acceptance may in fact be something else.

Saying "transwomen are women" is hugely offensive to me and many other women. Mermaids are also campaigning to undermine the rights of other protected characteristics. I don't understand why they think LGBAlliance should be held to a different standard?

Honestly, if trans rights and acceptance cannot exist alongside other people's rights and acceptance without affecting them then it needs to be faced up to that what they are framing as rights and acceptance may in fact be something else.

That's it in a nutshell Artichokeleaves, it's an inescapable fact which is why there is a refusal for those promoting trans rights and acceptance to face up to it lest the whole house of cards falls, hence the exceptionally aggressive 'no debate'.

I'm afraid I also think if the worst thing that can be levelled is being a bit rude, offensive and defensive on social media, then really that's stretching it.

I'm willing to be there's been no likes for tweets about going to 'fuck' someone 'up' for their beliefs, bloodstained t shirts, barbed wire wrapped baseball bats, threats to punch, rape or kerb stomp, attempts to exclude others from events like Pride or making dummies and signs about lynching people for their beliefs, or referring to anyone as scum. And lets face it, social media is rife with such things about anyone daring to hold sex based beliefs, particularly lesbians, and it's supposed to be regarded as hyperbole or wholly acceptable LGBT+ culture. The baseball bats and bloodstained t shirts even went to an art exhibition ffs.

Standards aren't a one way thing.

A poll...what is it with polls this week?

twitter.com/rita_rake/status/1400036786248859649?s=08

I'm agender. I therefore have no idea if Stonewall or yeahbut consider me gay or straight.

In case people didn't click on the tweet linked further up, the Crowdjustice page initially named Stonewall as part of the case against, and then had it removed. I wonder why?

Maybe they remembered they're being sued by one of the lesbians who helped form LGBA, and putting their name to this nasty little campaign against LGBA won't make them look too good in their upcoming court case?

Just speculation, of course 🤷‍♀️

I hope someone in LGB Alliance is monitoring twitter and archiving those tweets by people who have been emboldened by this legal case to make misogynistic attacks. For example:

twitter.com/DeclanDecke/status/1400088060960948227

twitter.com/soft_burrito/status/1400112832075677705

Are the unholy alliance trying to bankrupt LGBA before they get off the ground? They believe their own fantastic tales but one hopes they'll take a careful look at what they're doing and the potential, very, negative impacts

They're aiming for 3 things:
to raise the public profile of the narrative LGBA = transphobia
to get a legal outcome to spin as "see, we told you LGBA = transphobia" or in the alternative "look, even the CC and the courts are transphobic, we are terribly oppressed"
to get LGBA to waste its limited financial resources.

to get LGBA to waste its limited financial resources

Will it though? It is the Charity Commission that is the Respondent, not LGBA. And hopefully they can utilise their initial decision making report to cut their costs a bit.

If the LGBA don't try to intervene then the Charity Commission could simply fold for their own reasons/convenience which would be a complete nightmare for LGBA.

What do they think it looks like? Stonewall, according to Allison Bailey, wanted to target her because she founded LGBA. Now they want to take away its charitable status.

And all because LGBA are representing those unable to be represented by Stonewall.

Do they have absolutely no idea how this is going to be read? By everyone? The charity commission, the newspapers, the public?

It's desperate stuff.

@nauticant

If the LGBA don't try to intervene then the Charity Commission could simply fold for their own reasons/convenience which would be a complete nightmare for LGBA.

Good point. Although I'd hope that the CC wouldn't simply fold given the amount of pressure they've already been under, and the detailed scrutiny they did initially.

Stonewall, according to Allison Bailey, wanted to target her because she founded LGBA. Now they want to take away its charitable status.

Presumably this is why Stonewall is no longer involved?

[quote nauticant]I hope someone in LGB Alliance is monitoring twitter and archiving those tweets by people who have been emboldened by this legal case to make misogynistic attacks. For example:

twitter.com/DeclanDecke/status/1400088060960948227

twitter.com/soft_burrito/status/1400112832075677705[/quote]
Given that burrito is self-described (and possibly also self-identified) as, inter alia,

"leftist shitposter guy | terminally online | politically incoherent | adhd haver | he/they/any | alt:"

no surprises there!

I suspect that Stonewall is involved behind the scenes ItsAllGoingToBeFine and either no one realised that revealing its involvement would be terrible for PR reasons or someone messed up and revealed this briefly before this was noticed and hasty deletions ensued.

Times is on the ball:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/2db3626e-c3b1-11eb-8601-6a2ece3e4634?shareToken=d7d4fc16d949353cafd4cdbef3fa5b8b

I haven’t got a share token sorry but The Times are reporting on this:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stonewall-backs-legal-battle-at-heart-of-trans-row-bkbz5ljkq

lesbianandgaynews.com/2021/06/extraordinary-legal-spectacle-in-pride-month-as-multi-million-pound-trans-focused-charities-try-to-silence-the-only-lgb-charity-writes-lgn-legal-commentator-dennis-kavanagh/

Great summary