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?

But it doesn't matter if there is another large LGB organisation or 563 smaller ones. There is more than one large autism charity and hundreds of smaller ones yet I can still set up such a charity. There are masses of charities supporting children including many large ones. That doesn't stop me setting up a new one - and a new one just for Christian children explicitly excluding beliefs held by muslim children if I want.

I would think much of Mermaids' actual beef (and the united beef of the TQ+ political lobby in all its various groups) is that the LGBA splits the voice of the LGB community, and reduces the political clout and control of said lobby.

If they do not speak for all LGBT+ people then their power is reduced and the government/law makers' ear is hearing representation from conflicting beliefs saying they do not speak for us, this is not representative of all LGBT people, this is actively homophobic to some LGB people, there are many issues here

And it is less likely that the laws/political influence will continue in their uninterrupted favour with everything framed in line with their narrative.

The LGBA threaten the success of the political agenda. In a nutshell.

But it doesn't matter if there is another large LGB organisation or 563 smaller ones. There is more than one large autism charity and hundreds of smaller ones yet I can still set up such a charity.

Quite. And those focused on the best interests and care of Autistic people would say great! The more the better, the more funding the more support.

Unless the focus was not the best interests of those people, but holding a monopoly of power and messaging control. So that other charities were a threat.

Think about it: do they want the LGBA training schools that actually the law doesn't say what they've been misled to think, that sex is fixed and dimorphic, that no one changes sex or has the wrong body, that girls have rights too and that inclusion is nine characteristics equally catered for? They really, really bloody don't. It's a devastating threat to their agenda.

The weirdest thing is that Mermaids isn't even really an LGB charity, but they seem to be arguing that LGBA isn't needed/isn't really a charity on behalf of Stonewall, which (purportedly) is an LGB charity. As a turf war it would make more sense if Mermaids were taking Stonewall to court because there is overlap between them. Maybe Stonewall are supporting Mermaids behind the scenes or financially but don't want to be seen to be involved directly.

Also, on Meermaids' "About" page in their website, they claim to have "evolved into one of the UK's leading LGBTQI+ charities" but everything else about what they do references trans/gender issues, especially for kids. Mermaids being for gay kids and young people is news to me, but perhaps I haven' been paying attention. Am I being cynical in thinking that the reference to being an LGBTQ+ charity has been stuck on recently for effect?

mermaidsuk.org.uk/about-us/#

But surely even then, does it matter? There are lots of different cat charities and shelters for e.g. They don't all have to close because there's more than one .

I don't think that's cynicism.

I think Mermaids got given lots and lots of funding too quickly and struggle to justify it for - what do they do, run a helpline? Summer camps or something?

Mermaids seem to have rebranded into being for ‘Gender Diverse Kids, Young People and Their Families’

which is weird and worrying and seems to illustrate Colin Wright’s recent sub stack re: widening the ‘trans umbrella’ so wide it covered a load of kids who would never have described themselves as trans or as having gender Dysphoria under say, 2012 definitions.

www.realityslaststand.com/p/the-transgender-umbrella-casts-its

Presumably ‘gender diverse’ is a wide enough umbrella that Mermaids could start claiming to be for proto gay or pre gay kids.

blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/is-your-child-a-prehomosexual-forecasting-adult-sexual-orientation/

(and making them medical patients for life… so Mermaids may be getting dangerously close to saying the quiet bits out loud here!)

Thank you for that link. I read it ages ago but was good to read again. In Miranda's case (not brought by Mermaids but Helen Islan very closely linked to Mermaids) the judge said it should never have come to court because it was politically motivated. Obviously we would need to go back to the original court ruling to confirm this, but very interesting given Mermaids is accusing LGBA of being political. What is the definition of political?

I think, welcome a correction if I'm wrong, the case was originally brought as a private prosecution but the CPS took it over.

Mermaids entire strategy depends on promoting and encouraging the exploitation of the bodies of gay and/or autistic adolescents.

And even the wishy washy National Lottery commented on the “significant difference in outcomes between GIDS patients and children who have gone to Mermaids for support:

”There appears to be a significant difference in the longer-term outcomes for children who use the services offered by Mermaids as opposed to those of the GIDS service and some of the figures suggested in the research. Mermaids say that the vast majority of young people they see will continue with their gender reassignment process whilst the GIDS outcomes appear to be the opposite. It is not clear why this might be the case but there is no evidence to substantiate the inference that this correlation is because of Mermaids support. For example, it is possible that the self-selecting nature of families and young people who choose to access the Mermaids service is a contributory factor.
Robust and trustworthy information as well as mature and insightful ongoing discussion is required. The key driver must be the desire to have the very best outcomes for children and young people who experience issues with their gender identity. It is without question a complex area and there is still a great deal to learn. In this respect transparency is really important and where data is available this should be shared more widely.

Nevertheless, all organisations delivering support to vulnerable children and young people have a duty of care to do this in a safe and protective way whilst respecting individual rights, needs and aspirations. It is vital this is done in a highly responsible manner and is not in any way misleading or prematurely advocating a particular outcome. Mermaids should work with an academic partner/evaluator to explore the reasons why their longer term outcomes may differ from other services such as the Tavistock. The findings of this should form part of the Big Lottery Fund grant management activity.”

www.tnlcommunityfund.org.uk/media/documents/Mermaids-UK-Review-Report_February-2019.pdf?mtime=20190219142027

Is it possible to FOI the National Lottery? That report has quite a few actions which would be interesting to have an update on.

organisations delivering support to vulnerable children and young people have a duty of care to do this in a safe and protective way whilst respecting individual rights, needs and aspirations. It is vital this is done in a highly responsible manner and is not in any way misleading or prematurely advocating a particular outcome. Mermaids should work with an academic partner/evaluator to explore the reasons why their longer term outcomes may differ from other services such as the Tavistock

Wow. I missed that at the time.

What is the definition of political?

I dunno. But Mermaids have a whole 'Legal and Policy' section on their website.

'Mermaids legal and policy department’s core aim is to work to ensure strong equality and human rights law for transgender and gender diverse young people, to use the latest data and research that helps advance equality and improve policy'

mermaidsuk.org.uk/legalandpolicy/

Ffs. If they want undeserving charities to be stripped of their status, why don't they start with public schools and Oxbridge colleges (where the charitable status allows tax free sale of college cellar wines to fellows, among other things). Nasty idiots.

In case anyone’s interested, in charity law charities must satisfy the “public interest” test. Their services must be substantially in the public interest.

For example, a community centre built only for the use of members of a church is not charitable, and neither is a school for fee paying students only. But they become charitable if the community Centre is also open to the public and if the school is used by poor students on scholarships (or if local kids get to use the pool, for example).

A charity cannot be actively harmful and damage the public interest. So a group dedicated to eradicating all animal testing wasn’t in the public interest so wasn’t a charity because ending animal testing would be bad for humanity.

the public interest has been construed very broadly. So even if a service benefits people in one town only it can still be in the public interest so long as everyone in the town can use it (like a bridge).

with all this in mind, I find it very hard to see how mermaids can succeed in arguing that the lgb alliance doesn’t act in the public interest. Even if we accept their argument that the charity is only for lgb people who agree with them, this is still a wide enough section of the public to qualify as in the public interest. It isn’t just a group for employees of one company, for instance. Lgb people are quite clearly members of the public as someone pointed out earlier.

but I also think it can’t be sustained that the charity is only for people who agree with them. The film the lgb alliance made can be watched by anyone. They don’t have to believe in the aims of the lgb alliance.

The mention was regarding whether any documents had been shared with GLP, as LGBA have specifically asked for documents not to be shared with them. Mermaids stated that no documents had been shared.

So let me get this straight (no pun intended), a charity named after a mythical fish/woman creature is challenging the accuracy of the name of a charity that calls itself an alliance?

Ok.

Thanks, WeeBisom, that's helpful.

I also think it can’t be sustained that the charity is only for people who agree with them.

Where as it can very much be substantiated that Mermaids and Stonewall are certainly only for people who agree with them. The defining membership characteristic is political belief. Not to be LGBT+.

These double standards have to start being called out, they are increasingly bizarre.

I think, welcome a correction if I'm wrong, the case was originally brought as a private prosecution but the CPS took it over.

I might be wrong myself, but I think you're thinking of the case brought by TRA Giuliana London against Linda Bellos and Venice Allan, as that is what happened with that one.

Guiliana Kendal?

Yes, exactly. They used to be on Twitter as "Giuliana London"

I did a Google, found a summary on Peak (MN, it's the name of the blog) Trans. There's lots of links that I'll look at tomorrow. Case was taken over by the CPS and discontinued. Does the CPS carry out an (for want of a better word) inquest on cases it doesn't win? Taxpayers money an' all.

www.peaktrans.org/linda-bellos-3/

Yes tw Guiliana Kendal.

I'm not sure I'm wrong about Miranda Yardley's case being taken over by the CPS, but I'd like to be.

Thanks for the thread
This is going to be interesting...

Good one. Totally heartbreaking, what they have done... Off the scale horrendous...

I am a 34 year old educator on a career break. I stand wholeheartedly with the LGBA. I am hoping this case brings to light the harms of gender ideology on women's / LGB rights. I am also hoping this inadvertently highlights the unnecessary medicalisation of gender non-conforming youth.