Mermaids versus LGB alliance in court today??

[GrabbyGabby]

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/09/trans-charity-mermaids-appeal-lgb-alliance-status

Not sure if it is today or next week. Do we know if this is open like the tribunals?

I think that Mermaids etc are right (ha, never thought I would type those words) that LGBA have focused disproportionately on fighting the TRA narrative rather than supporting LGB people generally...

You could say the same about Stonewall and Mermaids themselves, from the opposite direction. Are LGBA not permitted to consider TQ ideology harmful to LGB people in and of itself and offer a space free of it? Why would that mean they couldn't be a charity?

@ZombieMumEB interesting point - the trans ideology cannot exist without the definitions society provides - ‘transwoman’ (and non-binary) don’t mean anything without an understanding of ‘woman’, even though the ideology then reduces the meaning to nothing at all. Same-sex attracted stands on its own, it doesn’t rely on the rest of us to be different to support it

Yes, I agree. I am a bit disappointed in LGBA, and think they could have done a better job in pursuing their charitable objectives, but that doesn't disqualify them from charity status IMO.

(I do think Mermaids should be stripped of their charitable status - sterilising confused teenagers is very far from being a legitimate aim.)

I'm not sure why 'focusing on the T' was considered a legitimate point of criticism by mermaids in the first place. If yesterday's session showed anything, it's that the 'T' is a direct threat to homosexuality.

Surely fighting to stop the very meaning of homosexuality being erased is a powerful and justified mission in itself?

And the two opposing sides are in no way equal. Homosexuality is protected by law. Trans ideology supporting charities cant just re-write the entire concept of sexual orientation!

The surprising part, to me, is that there aren't more organisations publicly opposing trans ideology. Its a hostile takeover. It should be being challenged by everyone, including the government whose laws it's flouting.

I think that Mermaids etc are right (ha, never thought I would type those words) that LGBA have focused disproportionately on fighting the TRA narrative rather than supporting LGB people generally

But actually, there's a good reason for fighting the TRA narrative, because trans activism is now the biggest threat to lesbian and gay people. Lesbians and gays have full legal rights now, including the right to marry, to have a sexual partner at age 16, to join the armed forces and so on. Their rights are protected in the Equality Act.

The people who are hellbent on attacking lesbian and gay people are trans activists. They do it in two ways: 1) by insisting that lesbians in particular should accept opposite-sex sexual partners, and that to refuse to do so is 'bigoted" and "transphobic" 2) by persuading lesbian and gay children and teenagers that they are "straight" members of the opposite sex, and leading them down a route that ends in sterilisation, infertility, a life-time of dangerous cross-sex hormones and the inability to orgasm.

What could be more homophobic than that?

Quite.

How are homosexual people supposed to voice concerns that many young homosexual kids may be caught up a trans narrative that leads to life damaging surgery and medication - with a number of regretful homosexual adults trying to be heard as they talk about how this happened to them - without this offending TQ+ politics?

How do they argue for the right for lesbian only groups and spaces that are female only without fundamentally offending TQ+ politics?

How do they stand up for those LGB people experiencing significant problems because of the clash with TQ+ politics in a naice enough way not to cause offense while still being some bloody good, when there is zero reciprocal respect or care or manners?

By their sheer existence wishing to be the voice of homosexual people who are not believers in gender ideology they were a target from the moment of conception.

There's a quote in that article from an interview with someone from Mermaids in 2013:

I spoke to Linda at Mermaids, a support group in London formed in 1995 by parents of transgendered children. She told me that this group supports parents who have children who do not ‘fit in’ with ‘gender roles.’ I ask what she meant exactly by ‘fitting in’ and Linda explains, ‘If you are a little girl who behaves like a boy, you will want to have your hair short, to play with the boys. Even at play group they will be different…they will be picked on and those are the problems.’ I tell Linda that many little girls will have short hair and play with boys—I was one of those little girls. She says, ‘I have known a lot of girls in my time and they don’t like rough and tumble..they don’t like playing with boys. They like to play with dolls, dressing up, playing in the Wendy House, to grow their hair…’ Linda emphasises that it is important that these children ‘fit in,’ a phrase she often repeats in our discussion.

Is this still an accurate description of Mermaids' aims? Are parents aware that the charity wants to make children 'fit in' with regressive gender stereotypes by altering their children's bodies? Is this an appropriate focus for a charity?

And I forgot another main point - some of those setting up the LGBA were the original Stonewall and they saw their own organisation colonised and turn actively homophobic against its original members.

Of course they are angry and resentful, it would be insane to expect them not to be! The whole 'we must be naice' thing is a massive buy into this crap, it enables it. It's why we're all sitting around naicely dissecting exactly what might be a leetle bit offensive about the cotton ceiling. Ffs a group set up by males for males to brainstorm how to get sex from non consenting homosexual women - literally how to get their pants off them! The answer should have been 'what the actual fuck are you on!!!!' Not 'let's talk about why this may be problematic'.

I am a bit disappointed in LGBA, and think they could have done a better job in pursuing their charitable objectives, but that doesn't disqualify them from charity status IMO.

(I do think Mermaids should be stripped of their charitable status - sterilising confused teenagers is very far from being a legitimate aim.)

LGB A has faced such opposition that it's been fighting to exist at all in a charitable context and then to continue since the start. Very few organisations would be able to achieve much in the face of that.

Actions like this should prompt a re-consideration of the status of Mermaids and their legitimate aims. That said, who would be left standing. Controversial lobbying organisation Stonewall has been culpable in promoting bad relations between groups with protected characteristics by privileging one above all others.

One of my main take from yesterday is that there should now be no definition for different sexual orientations at all. We are all allowed to call ourselves whatever we wish to and have that respected by everyone else.

I would like to ask Paul Roberts why we have LGB groups at all now in his view. What is his purpose specifically?

How does a charity ignore being dragged into a tribunal to have its charitable status removed?

One of my main take from yesterday is that there should now be no definition for different sexual orientations at all. We are all allowed to call ourselves whatever we wish to and have that respected by everyone else.

I would like to ask Paul Roberts why we have LGB groups at all now in his view. What is his purpose specifically?

YY. It struck me as well.

It's very difficult to get on with pro LGB activities when lesbians are unable to organise alone except in secret.

Yes, it's mind-boggling. I can't see how he can run a network of LGB charities if he thinks lesbian and gay people don't exist as coherent, well-defined categories. He is literally erasing lesbians and gays – the very thing these people accuse their opponents of doing to trans people.

Is this still an accurate description of Mermaids' aims? Are parents aware that the charity wants to make children 'fit in' with regressive gender stereotypes by altering their children's bodies? Is this an appropriate focus for a charity?

Then there was Fox Fisher doing a video for Mermaids where FF said that it was better to avoid connection to the LGB as it was perceived by people as "deviant". I think that was maybe around the same time.

twitter.com/lilylilymaynard/status/1276983032495460357?s=46&t=zx37jeifz-UmHrNEVoZdzw

Thread 2 started on rollonfriday:

www.rollonfriday.com/discussion/mermaids-v-lgb-alliance-day-2

It's got a useful header explaining the case.

They're pulling ahead on thread count, but we'll catch up today.

I guess its to promote the 'queering' of everything.

But I'm not an expert.

"But actually, there's a good reason for fighting the TRA narrative, because trans activism is now the biggest threat to lesbian and gay people. Lesbians and gays have full legal rights now, including the right to marry, to have a sexual partner at age 16, to join the armed forces and so on. Their rights are protected in the Equality Act."

Transactivism is certainly a threat to lesbian and gay people, and a massive threat to younger lesbians. But old-fashioned homophobia has not gone away and there are still large numbers of LGB people who feel unable to come out because of prejudice in the families, communities or workplaces. Homophobia remains a MASSIVE issue in schools. Lesbians and gay men showing affection to each other in public are still often mocked or attacked. Yes it's great that our laws have been modernised, but it's not everything. (And in many countries, of course, LGB people are still imprisoned and even executed.)

I think the narrative that TRAs are the major risk to LGB people is a bit naive.

Is there any chance LGBA might have costs awarded to them?

As far as I can tell that won’t happen unless there is deemed to have been “unreasonable conduct”(1) which is probably a high bar… but then this case is unreasonable.

So, is it a possible outcome? I want to know what to keep my fingers crossed for!

(1) info on costs from here publiclawproject.org.uk/content/uploads/data/resources/79/PLP_2013_Hannett_Costs_in_the_Tribunals.pdf paragraph 13, I think this is the General Regulatory Chamber.

LGBA have been also been stymied in their ability to do the work they want to do by the fact that pretty much all the charitable trusts they would be applying to for funding have been stonewalled. If they do manage to get past that the moment they announce any funding, mermaids, stonewall , lgbt foundation et al immediately bombard the funder with demands the funding be withdrawn because they’re transphobic.

any publications carrying their ads get bombarded in the same way.

They are being actively prevented from carrying out their charitable objectives by the actions of mermaids et al

See this for example

Funding withdrawn

Bloody hell. I hope that comes up in court.

Homophobia remains a MASSIVE issue in schools. Lesbians and gay men showing affection to each other in public are still often mocked or attacked

I think that's a fair point, and I'll defer to your knowledge. But of course trans activism leeches on that - it takes existing homophobia and exacerbates it. You're a butch lesbian teenager being bullied in school? Why, you must be trans. Here, come and take our lovely hormones and have a double mastectomy.