Amnesty International Statement on FiLiA

[OhHolyJesus]

"Amnesty International UK did not organise any protests at the FiLiA conference in Portsmouth which took place on 16 and 17 October 2021.
We have a long history of campaigning against violence against women and this continues to be a vital part of our work.

We are equally committed to campaigning for the rights of transgender people to live freely, authentically, and openly, and to have their gender legally recognised without having to go through a dehumanising, long and costly procedure.

Amnesty International has clear guidelines on how we campaign. We will only support protests by any individuals, groups or communities which are in line with Amnesty’s core values, including not using or advocating violence, hatred or discrimination while protesting; and that the protests themselves should be consistent with international human rights law and standards.

We were approached by the organisers of a Fly the Flag event in Portsmouth at the weekend, who requested that we supply materials which reflect Amnesty International UK’s campaigning positions on the LGBTQ human rights.

Two sets of placards were sent. One set of signs stated the slogan “I AM WHO I SAY I AM: Amnesty International”. The second set of signs stated the slogan “LOVE IS A HUMAN RIGHT: Amnesty International”. The organiser of the Fly the Flag event stated that their protest would be respectful and celebratory and that she would seek dialogue with delegates to the conference. We were happy to support the Fly the Flag event in this way.
However, the event was not an official Amnesty International UK event and a sign that was displayed describing this as an official Amnesty International UK protest event was incorrect.

We have investigated events from the weekend. There were several separate groups holding events and protests outside the Guildhall in Portsmouth. Our understanding remains the case that the Fly the Flag Event was respectful and appropriate and was not connected with the threatening and aggressive language and images that were present in other parts of Guildhall Square that weekend. Photographs of the threatening and aggressive language and images displayed by other protestors present at the Guildhall have been shared with us and we are shocked by it.

We recognise that the FiLiA conference was attended by a number of women who have been the victims of violence and harassment. Amnesty International UK believes there should have been absolutely no place for the use of any threatening or aggressive language or imagery towards any of the attendees of that conference, or indeed towards any women."

www.amnesty.org.uk/statement-section-following-portsmouth-conference-october-2021

Amnesty International need challenging on those slogans, neither of them are ok. I would be prepared to write to them but I stopped donating to them years ago. The whole charity sector stinks to high heaven, it’s very depressing.

So the best they've got is 'some bigger boys did it and ran away'.

No. Done with alternative facts, I think most of the western world is. Amnesty are part of the problem now and not anything to do with a solution.

I was an Amnesty member, supporter and regular donator from sixth form until the age of 40. I cancelled my DD when I heard their views on single sex spaces and their insistence that women are just wrong if they have concern or objection.

I was really sad about it. I've always identified as an AI kinda person. I was never contacted about my cancellation or my views.

Things like this show me how far wrong they have gone, and make me glad to be able to say they're not using my money and don't have my support.

Their name is all over this. They should be being much clearer about their apology and loss of direction.

But "I am who I say I am"? That is incredibly sinister; I can't believe any adult can't see it.

It's the linguistic sleight of hand in this statement (and in 'love is a human right') that's problematic.

On the surface, these statements appear perfectly reasonable, because the converse of this is that people shouldn't have the right to be themselves, and that the government should be allowed to dictate people's inner worlds and the way they express their personality. Similarly with 'love is a human right' - the notion that people shouldn't be free to love whoever they want sounds unpalatable and totalitarian.

The sleight of hand is the fact that being who a person is is about freedom of though and expression, but when used for the purpose of campaigning to be included in the definition of another marginalised group, people aren't s talking about who they are at all - that's about what they are, and the characteristics they would need to possess in order for it to be reasonable to be considered indistinguishable from another member of that marginalised group which has already been deemed in need of protection.

Obviously, it's reasonable to support trans-identifying people in being free to express their personalities however they like without fear of persecution.

But it is completely unacceptable for Amnesty to knowingly allow their messaging to be used to mean "I am whatever I say I am" in the context of the protection of vulnerable women, and I shall be complaining to both them and the charity commission about this.

Up until now, I thought that vocally boycotting Amnesty was enough, and I didn't think I could be shocked by the blatant misogyny that seeps through in everything they do any more. But this has moved me to realise that I personally need to do more, as their statement shows just how far above the law and common decency they believe it's acceptable to be.

FiLiA runs the largest annual grassroots feminist conference in Europe. We are a Women-led Volunteer organisation and part of the Women’s Liberation Movement. Our vision is a world free from patriarchy where all women and girls are liberated

This is what you are protesting, Amnesty.

The fact that you are sending a mealy mouthed apology that some of your protesters threatened women doesn't alter the fact that you are protesting against feminism. You knew you were protesting against feminism. And you are happy to protest against feminism.

Is it true they think women should be prostituted in order that men with a disability can get sex?

Love is a human right and I am who I say I am.

For fuck's sake it's just sick. Do they have any idea what they sound like?

It’s sad with amnesty because I do see them backing good causes - then it seems like the ‘youth wing’ are backing the worst types of campaigns. Could there be separate elements within?

Wayne Cound "I am who I say I am"
Jimmy Saville "I am who I say I am"
'Microsoft technical department' cold caller "I am who I say I am"
Individual knocking on an elderly lady''s door ostensibly to 'check the meter' - don't ask for I'D as "I am who I say I am"
....

It is dangerous nonsense.

*Wayne Couzens

I do understand the phrase 'love is a human right' in terms of babies and children. If you were organising a campaign against situations like Magdalen Laundries, Ceaușescu's Romanian orphanages, children being removed from political dissidents in fascist regimes. Even, maybe, the current situation in some countries where children are losing the right to be with their loving parents because their parents object to them being given puberty blockers.

All of those babies and children had a right to be loved. Children in the care system have a right to be loved. Children in neglectful homes have a right to be loved. Children who don't conform to gender stereotypes deserve to be loved, exactly as they are. There aren't always easy answers about how to make sure all children are loved. But as a society, we should always be aiming to be a society where children can be raised by people who love them.

So 'love is a human right' I believe to be true but only in specific contexts. Adults do also generally need and deserve to be loved. But we can't force others to love us. And tbh, I think in many ways the largest section of adults in our society who are not loved, are women in abusive marriages. So if we were going to aim 'love as a human right' at anyone, maybe it should be at women sacrificing themselves for men who are not actually capable of loving anyone. Women who need to start exercising their human right to love themselves more than the people who actively prevent them from being loved.

@Lovelyricepudding

Wayne Cound "I am who I say I am" Jimmy Saville "I am who I say I am" 'Microsoft technical department' cold caller "I am who I say I am" Individual knocking on an elderly lady''s door ostensibly to 'check the meter' - don't ask for I'D as "I am who I say I am" ....

It is dangerous nonsense.

And also dictator who suppresses dissent “I am who I say I am”. Head of a corrupt police force “I am who I say I am”.

What on Earth are Amnesty thinking?

Maybe so that when they say ‘we are the good guys’ we will alllll be conditioned to say ‘yessir’. Not.

@trancepants

I do understand the phrase 'love is a human right' in terms of babies and children. If you were organising a campaign against situations like Magdalen Laundries, Ceaușescu's Romanian orphanages, children being removed from political dissidents in fascist regimes. Even, maybe, the current situation in some countries where children are losing the right to be with their loving parents because their parents object to them being given puberty blockers.

All of those babies and children had a right to be loved. Children in the care system have a right to be loved. Children in neglectful homes have a right to be loved. Children who don't conform to gender stereotypes deserve to be loved, exactly as they are. There aren't always easy answers about how to make sure all children are loved. But as a society, we should always be aiming to be a society where children can be raised by people who love them.

So 'love is a human right' I believe to be true but only in specific contexts. Adults do also generally need and deserve to be loved. But we can't force others to love us. And tbh, I think in many ways the largest section of adults in our society who are not loved, are women in abusive marriages. So if we were going to aim 'love as a human right' at anyone, maybe it should be at women sacrificing themselves for men who are not actually capable of loving anyone. Women who need to start exercising their human right to love themselves more than the people who actively prevent them from being loved.

Hmmmmm. See I think that's simplistic and a bit woolly tbh.

Lots of birth parents of children in the care system love their children very very much but are simply unable to look after them. What those children need is a whole raft of things we associate with love (attention, empathy, food, safety, shelter, boundaries, good socialisation etc etc etc) but not love per se. So no, I don't agree that this means that 'love is a human right' in this context.

'Appropriate nurture is a human right' isn't very catchy though...

@trancepants

I do understand the phrase 'love is a human right' in terms of babies and children. If you were organising a campaign against situations like Magdalen Laundries, Ceaușescu's Romanian orphanages, children being removed from political dissidents in fascist regimes. Even, maybe, the current situation in some countries where children are losing the right to be with their loving parents because their parents object to them being given puberty blockers.

All of those babies and children had a right to be loved. Children in the care system have a right to be loved. Children in neglectful homes have a right to be loved. Children who don't conform to gender stereotypes deserve to be loved, exactly as they are. There aren't always easy answers about how to make sure all children are loved. But as a society, we should always be aiming to be a society where children can be raised by people who love them.

So 'love is a human right' I believe to be true but only in specific contexts. Adults do also generally need and deserve to be loved. But we can't force others to love us. And tbh, I think in many ways the largest section of adults in our society who are not loved, are women in abusive marriages. So if we were going to aim 'love as a human right' at anyone, maybe it should be at women sacrificing themselves for men who are not actually capable of loving anyone. Women who need to start exercising their human right to love themselves more than the people who actively prevent them from being loved.

Even love as a human right framed in terms of love from a parent to a child can be problematic.

I don’t want to get this deleted so won’t post the name, but the case in Ireland currently where the now 18 year old transgender (m to f) prisoner is a good example. While that child, like all children, deserved love and nurturing at birth from his (as he was a him at birth) then parents, at the point when he was ten and brutally attacked his mother and was taken into care for this and for continuing to threaten to rape and murder her I’m not sold it’s reasonable to say he has the right to be loved by his mother.

@MultiStorey

Love is a Human Right is used by Paedophiles to frame their abuse of children as a gift and a good thing.

Absolutely it is, the fact that Amnesty are promoting this is repulsive as is the 'I Am Who I Say I Am' line - paedophile grooming children on-line claiming he is a 13 year old - he is who he say he is, eh Amnesty?

Amnesty need a different tag line, I'd be banned if I put down what I think it should be based on their current ethos.

So the official position of Amnesty International is that they are happy to support protests against a women's rights conference.

Because that is what they are saying. Their only concern is how that protest against a women's rights conference is conducted.

I'm really pleased they so openly clarified this. Amnesty = actively opposes women meeting to discuss women's rights.

I've just emailed Amnesty about this,. How dare they call themselves a human rights group when they officially endorse protests against women meeting to discuss our own rights?

The speakers and the topics being discussed at the FiLiA Conference were readily available and Amnesty still chose to support a protest against it, which says it all.

There is absolutely no evidence that this would happen. In countries where self-identification is already the process (Argentina, Ireland) the policy has had absolutely no impact on anyone other than trans people, making their lives easier.

Well this isn't true for a start. Do Amnesty think that women don't have access to the internet?

Also, what the hell were they doing endorsing a protest against a women's conference?

I am who I say I am

Some years ago after we moved to a modest house we started receiving post addressed to "Earl XX" "Lord YY" "The Earl of ZZ". Also phone calls. One day a plain clothes police woman came looking for the Earl. I explained about the post and she said it was one of the pseudonyms of the partner of the woman we had bought from. Turned out he wasn't who he said he was at all! Who'd have guessed it!

The slogan is basically a vote for Walter Mitty. It's nonsense.

Though I did sometimes wish I was capable of adopting a totally different persona and accepting the invitations to the launch of a new super yacht. But I'm not very good at not being myself.

There is zero chance that the Amnesty members at Filia would have been unaware of the other messaging towards those attending. But even if the worst of those messages were somehow unknown, at what point did it become acceptable for the focus of protest - by a supposed human rights organisation - to be women at a feminist conference hearing about sexual abuses, children being pushed into prostitution, lesbians persecuted in their home countries etc

That is your focus now?

I paid towards and campaigned for Amnesty for 20 years, helped run a local group for most of that, but now to give them a penny would be to fund a group that no longer cares one bit for women and girls. Certainly not those up for 'thought crimes' in attending Filia. The joke is one of the first campaigns I was involved with was Stop Violence Against Women.

@RepentMotherfucker Hmmmmm. See I think that's simplistic and a bit woolly tbh.

Lots of birth parents of children in the care system love their children very very much but are simply unable to look after them. What those children need is a whole raft of things we associate with love (attention, empathy, food, safety, shelter, boundaries, good socialisation etc etc etc) but not love per se. So no, I don't agree that this means that 'love is a human right' in this context.

'Appropriate nurture is a human right' isn't very catchy though...

Of course. It's why I stated that it's not something that's easy and is something that we as a society need to work towards. If it was just something simplistic and wooly, we'd never have to think about it because all children would just be safe and loved. But they aren't. So we do need to acknowledge how important it is for children to ensure as many children who aren't in safe loving homes, can be.

It's veering off topic anyway. But the reality is that we are prosocial mammals. Love isn't so much a human right but an essential part of our evolutionary development.

That's an awful lot of waffle words, just to say 'It wisnae me! I didn't do nuffink!'.

Go and ask those declaiming it if non compliant females who call themselves females have a human right to love, and how loving they are being towards them?

And then you'll start hearing the next bit of terrifying political Titanicking that human rights should be exclusively reserved only for people who think like them and are the Right Sort.

So when sorting the world into those entitled to service and those not: you've handily created your enforced service providers.

Plantations in the deep south would have agreed heartily with all this, just with a difference on the characteristic that created the right served sort and the wrong service enforced sort.

WW2 was supposed to have ended all this crap, how did we raise this generation to be this ridiculous?