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

@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.

I agree with all of this, though really it shows the problem with a lot of these kinds of phrases. They don't really encompass the argument, instead they make it stupider.

The "Love is a human right" does, like a pp said, come out of the "love is love" catchphrase. Well, that's just as bad. We can make an argument that the love in homosexual romantic relationships is as good or harmless as in heterosexual relationships. Or you can make the argument that it's not socially harmful and therefor should fall under the umbrella of individual decision making. But neither of those things is the same as "love is love" where it is supposed to apply to romantic or sexual love.

A lot of these phrases are meant to be thought terminating I suspect. And then once people have just accepted them as true, they can be picked up and used in other ways and a lot of people will just accept it.

Being loved and nurtured is really important for children.
But loving someone doesn't make it a safe relationship for you. It is important for Amnesty to recognize that 75% of serious child abuse comes from people a child knows and loves.

Most of the children I've worked with who have been sexually abused by parental figures at least at first don't want the abusive family member to leave the home they just want the abuse to stop.

The deep shame and confusion that kids are left with after disclosing abuse but still loving the abuser and parts of their relationship with them often forms part of therapy.

Love isn't simple and it isn't always safe either.

People often aren't who they say they are and love isn't a right, either as an action or a thought.
Care, protection and safety are less catchy but more meaningful.

Love is not a human right and not everyone is who they say they are.

This is obvious to anyone who cares to think critically about those statements for a few seconds.

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. Same here. I have been very committed, part of a special writing group at one point pouring out letters.

Their email response to my cancellation was absolutely shocking. A conference about sexual violence, and all they wanted to do was ram down my throat trans ideologies about having the right to use single sex spaces. That they would choose this as a campaign priority rather than actual violence (against women in this case) is unforgivable. There wasn’t even a hint in their reply that they cared about those women inside the conference, let alone cared about being sexually threatened outside under their name. Shame on them.

@JojobaFromOctober absolutely. Anyone who knows anything about safeguarding and abuse of power, know that love is not a human right. It’s not Amnesty’s original premise either, so very very far from it, where just being able to exist is a human right. That is the Amnesty I respected.

LobsterNapkin

I was replying / agreeing to your post but I think I summarised too much

"they clearly don't believe that citizens should be free to make all kinds of political arguments. So maybe it seems less relevant."

Amnesty, in Ireland, have done a complete Uturn on supporting the right to express all kinds of political belief

Amnesty signed a public letter from a Trans lobbying orgnisation which publicly demanding that making a political argument eg supporting single sex spaces should result in that individual being exclusion from any political representation

Its Executive Director then did same tapdance: did you read the letter, if you did read the letter it did not say that and even if it did you misread/misunderstood the collection of words in the letter we did sign

Sort of like their signs

I am who I say I am* = And I demand my right to be treated as such even when it threatens and diminishes others and is at odds with basic reality.
Love is a human right = Everyone is owed sex**

*Unless I'm female in which case my opinions are systematically ignored or I'm accused of wrongthink

**From women

No thankyou

@trancepants and @LobsterNapkin it’s really not love that is good for a child, it’s security, respect, trust, safety, guidance, boundaries, routine, skill, care, bonding and nurture. Love is dressed up as so much and a good proportion is not good, especially for children where much of their mental hang ups can come from the parent who abuses / neglects but says they love them. Love must mean respect. Which is why a banner with ‘love is a human right’ on could then be used alongside such sexually violent threats, because it doesn’t preclude violence and entitlement.

Well, this is awkward.

Oh well, if they say so...

Unfortunate.

@KittenKong

Oh well, if they say so...

Yeah, they identified out of being present, which means they weren't, you bigot.

Love is a feeling. Even towards a child, it can't be compelled. Some therapeutic foster parents will say: they will unconditionally provide nurture, positive attention, care, routine, stability, approval, play and stimulation, listening and compassion - it is not the same as 'loving' a child. Even in the case of children, love is a two way street and it's a naturally occurring feeling between two people.

It isn't a right, it isn't an entitlement, it can't be provided by someone on demand; no one can 'make' themselves love on demand. It has to be broken down as to what 'love' is perceived to mean on these posters, and sadly yes, Amnesty's other messages imply a right to sex.

Which compels someone else to provide it.

If it's a right to unconditional self declaration and acceptance of identity for all - then Amnesty and the trans political lobbies need to recognise that this works only when reciprocal, and that means accepting women self declaring as adult human females and having an identity that requires male excluding facilities.

In this sense it's still 'you must do as I say and give what I want, but you don't have any right to anything from me'.

I can't find any definition of 'love' that fits with this kind of belief, it's not loving at all. It's more in the keeping of the Oliver Twist 'God Is Love' on the wall of the workhouse behind the birch rods on the wall kind of thing.

[quote NCBlossom]**@trancepants* and @LobsterNapkin* it’s really not love that is good for a child, it’s security, respect, trust, safety, guidance, boundaries, routine, skill, care, bonding and nurture. Love is dressed up as so much and a good proportion is not good, especially for children where much of their mental hang ups can come from the parent who abuses / neglects but says they love them. Love must mean respect. Which is why a banner with ‘love is a human right’ on could then be used alongside such sexually violent threats, because it doesn’t preclude violence and entitlement.[/quote]
Yes this is what I was trying to say. A child could (probably theoretically, as these things tend to engender and arise from love) have a good upbringing without actually being loved but with these things in place. Conversely children who are loved sometimes have abusive chaotic terrible childhoods which leave them terribly damaged courtesy of those who love them most.

Love is a human right - reminds me of incels, men who can't take being told no from a woman without lashing out, men who think they can buy a woman for sex or buy a foreign wife from a poor country because of the imbalance of power, or of any abuser who uses the word love to get away with abuse.

I am who I say I am - reminds me of all the times my mum would tell me not to talk to strangers, even if they said they knew my mum and dad, even if they said they were friends and they'd been sent to find me or bring me home, or those Charlie Says adverts about not going with someone who offers to show you some puppies or kittens or buy you some sweets.

There's real danger in these slogans. The first is basically stating that you have a right to anyone else, regardless of their feelings or boundaries, the other is telling you not to trust your own instincts and to just 'be kind' to anyone who tells you anything.

And I think we all know which sex would mostly benefit from the first statement, and which sex will mostly suffer because of the second.

I am who I say I am...
And when I say say I’m a copper from the met you should believe me, or perhaps women should be “more streetwise” and ask check with my control room.
Make up your mind, or perhaps just stop lecturing us

@secular111

Well, this is awkward.

Oopsie.

I am who I say I am.
CEOP ( Child Exploitation and Online Protection command) spend a lot of time, effort and money explaining to children and young people that people sometimes aren't who they say they are.
This is an important safety issue that is being undermined by this kind of idiotic statement.

@SolasAnla

LobsterNapkin

I was replying / agreeing to your post but I think I summarised too much

"they clearly don't believe that citizens should be free to make all kinds of political arguments. So maybe it seems less relevant."

Amnesty, in Ireland, have done a complete Uturn on supporting the right to express all kinds of political belief

Amnesty signed a public letter from a Trans lobbying orgnisation which publicly demanding that making a political argument eg supporting single sex spaces should result in that individual being exclusion from any political representation

Its Executive Director then did same tapdance: did you read the letter, if you did read the letter it did not say that and even if it did you misread/misunderstood the collection of words in the letter we did sign

Sort of like their signs

Ah, right, I see - I totally thought you meant something else!

And this is a little awkward. I notice Amnesty UK aren't refuting this;

twitter.com/PlaceSteph/status/1449473898446266371

So either Amnesty or Steph are lying, and as Amnesty provided the posters, I'm inclined to believe Steph.

'Agree with everything we agree with or we will protest against you nasty independently thinking women'.

I mean, I assume all other abuses in the world had been solved by last weekend.

Good point

The snag is, Steph has been busy making sure Amnesty are associated with the protest they organised, and they documented the support Amnesty provided.

The effort to associate FiLia with fascists is perhaps just an additional indication that Steph is a little tone-deaf to what actually FiLia does. But their words are clear; violence at the FiLia conference was being considered as a possibility by her, and she manages to drop Hampshire Police in it to.

www.stephsplace.uk/fly-the-flag-the-inquest.cfm

It’s very odd that the posters have been used in this specific context. I can’t see the link between ‘love is a human right’ and anything that has been discussed at the conference, except perhaps lesbians saying they are only same sex attracted.

Amnesty must have known why the demonstration was happening - are they really so stupid that they wouldn’t see the message the signs appear to be sending re: the cotton ceiling?

Amnesty must have known why the demonstration was happening - are they really so stupid that they wouldn’t see the message the signs appear to be sending re: the cotton ceiling?

I suspect they didn't know. I suspect that Steph told them that they were going to protest a gathering of transphobes, and amnesty didn't enquire further.