So that's why Susie Green left

[DistantVworp]

Charity commission launches formal inquiry into Mermaids:
twitter.com/SexMattersOrg/status/1598666394610147329?s=20&t=x_Supvwk6lHkKBR7a-ESSw

About bloody time!

It means that first the report was commissioned, then Green resigned. Implying causality in an arch way without actually saying that's why she left.

Pink News Editorial Meeting this afternoon

I'm hoping Owen is made to write the Guardian's piece

Mermaids statement:

Earlier this year Mermaids decided to carry out a frank and honest appraisal of our internal culture and how we measure up in terms of equity, diversity and inclusion.

As part of this process, we commissioned an independent external report which highlighted a number of significant challenges for us.

We know we must do better and we are absolutely committed to doing so, and will be implementing the report’s recommendations as a priority.

The charity has an unwavering commitment to safeguarding which is, and always will be, our top priority.

We will continue to cooperate fully, openly and with complete transparency with the Charity Commission as its inquiry gets underway.

(I really really hope the internal report gets leaked)

I'm not sure that describing a Charity Commission enquiry as 'being under attack' is the best way to frame it.

Will if that's mermaids version of the report actual report is going to be a doozy.

he’d have to be a bloody contortionist 🤣

I'm hoping Owen is made to write the Guardian's piece

Id pay good money to read this

The Commission opened a regulatory compliance case into the charity in September 2022

But weren't pink news vehemently stating mermaids weren't under investigation 🤔

About bloody time!

Very excited for all PN coverage also

So green was investigated by someone hired by mermaids, found wanting, and kicked out.

That sounds like damage limitation to me.

I mean her judgement obviously was completely off, not just because of her child, but also forcing a spurious, personal and ideologically driven enquiry against the charity commission, the very organisation mermaids rely on for their existence.

Interesting that they're not coming across with all the information the charity commission has asked for, though. Presumably it's something they can't pin solely on Green, and therefore don't want to incriminate themselves.

Still, the can is so open, the worms don't know which way to turn.

Interesting statement from Mermaids. Possibly the first time they have admitted to doing anything wrong.

Other thoughts:

1. The Mermaids legal action against the Charities Commission must be one of the most counter-productive legal actions in history.
2. The Guardian's decision to run a fawning interview with Susie Green that played down the existing CC investigation and all the other problems now looks even more stupid than it did then.
3. Who's going to want the CEO role now?
4. Have Emma Watson et al embarked upon a mass delete of their tweets yet?
5. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Obviously the fact that this is happening means that mermaids have badly let down children.

BUT we all knew this already.

SO happy dance that the rest of the world is finally catching up that mermaids was not what they thought it was.

Let's have a moment to think about all the kids, and their families, who were conned, lied to, and damaged by this grim grim bunch. They will be feeling pretty wretched I bet

The numbers of meetings that have probably been called for this afternoon whilst various companies and celebrities try to work out how to back away from this reputation intact will be huge

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/681447/CC46.pdf

Statutory inquiries into charities: guidance for charities

Reading the Times article, it sounds like MM wouldn't/didn't engage with the compliance case so they were forced to do a full inquiry.

The commission said today that Mermaids’ response to the initial compliance case “has not provided the necessary reassurance or satisfied the commission at this stage

If they'd commissioned their own review (whatever that was/is), they might've said: no, we are looking and we will give it to you later. Which might not have held much water with the Charity Commission. But it's all guesswork

The charity has an unwavering commitment to safeguarding which is, and always will be, our top priority.

That is an incredibly 'read between the lines' telling statement.

From CC guidance document

YOU MUST
Act with reasonable care and skill

Can I go back to Starbucks now?

I want to see how Mermaids justifies talking to below the age of consent children without parental consent about body modification techniques, unauthorised drug use, recommending struck off doctors to children, discussing their bodies, sex and sexual identity and acting in secret behind their parent's back.
I'd also like to see how Gendered Intelligence, GIRES, Stonewall, Educate & Celebrate, Global Butterflies etc explain their actions in attempting to transition other people's children? Ideally in a court of law.

www.gov.uk/government/news/regulator-announces-statutory-inquiry-into-mermaids

The charity has an unwavering commitment to safeguarding which is, and always will be, our top priority.

interesting wording.

"Always will be". Not "Always has...".

All those pictures of erect penises, disembodied breasts, BDSM calendars, distribution of self harming paraphernalia, paedophile adjacent trustees and tweets asking for vulnerable teens with no parental support to come and find them, appear to be coming home to roost.

What a bloody shower.