Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

So that's why Susie Green left

877 replies

DistantVworp · 02/12/2022 13:27

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

About bloody time!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
28
WarriorN · 03/12/2022 09:25

Thanks rethinking. Yes I agree, encyclopaedic.

There's some sort of hoo har over an American navy seal on twitter at the moment who's detransitioned - I've seen clips of his wife describing the ideology as a cult, and commenting on the trap that parents are in.

Unfortunately I fear that because it's the q anon crowd adopting this view too that most leftists will ignore / dismiss the descriptions.

RedToothBrush · 03/12/2022 09:28

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 09:00

Interesting thought MrsJamin.

I also know there's been speculation Mermaids is another Kids Company but as it goes on, I don't see that at all. For one thing, the government is not throwing £££ at them.

I don't think its like kids company.

That was much more restricted in its problems: they were primarily financial and arguably the beneficiaries of the charity were those employed by it. Its one of those charities which existed for benefit of the charity not its end users. This was highlighted particularly because of the lack of study on the outcomes for those the charity was supposed to help and the deliberately misleading inflation of figures about how many they helped which were very clearly false.

I think that's more reflective of generalised problems of this nature within the charity sector, but because it was high profile, attracted celebrity support without question, involved children and went bang in spectacular fashion thats why parallels are made. That then was compounded by police investigations into safeguarding fails that never produced anything.

Mermaids differs in that we clear and obvious safeguarding fails before questions about financial impropriety surfacing (i suspect they will eventually follow). Mermaids has actually been found guilty of a data breach by the relevant authority and you have a court case where Mermaids were told by a judge to stay away. Even Mermaids supporters are largely critical of the Breslow failure in recruitment.

The lack of follow up of outcomes (both within Mermaids and on a wider level with treatment) is much more significant as it involves advocating physical intervention rather merely social. That goes against medical ethics protocols. So raises huge questions about other institutions and agencies who have actively ignored their own rules following an organised campaign. That has ramifications way beyond the charity.

I do think this one is more about bubbles of social pressure which have gone unchecked and run riot through the use of social media which have neglected traditional checks and balances on power.

This is a lesson for our age which goes through every single institution.

Kids Company was about kids company. It carried warning signs about how far this could go, but the scale of Mermaids influence far outshines it.

#Public Inquiry now.

WarriorN · 03/12/2022 09:29

My thoughts are very much with you boiled. Flowers

I was only juggling catching up on mn with 4 yr olds protesting that their brother removed calendar chocolates with his teeth and husbands who were un characteristically awake and chatty at 6:30 on a Saturday morning.

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 09:32

From Maya. With evidence of messages to her:

twitter.com/mforstater/status/1598970262187147265?s=46&t=9lXzq7elTBy_CvSUaZ8ukg

"So the external outfit that @ mermaids_gender got in to help sort out their issues is co-led by the woman who was leading EDI at Scouts at the point where they shrugged this off, and who when at Stonewall called Transgender Trend's guidance dangerous 🤨"

Birdsweepsin · 03/12/2022 09:42

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 09:32

From Maya. With evidence of messages to her:

twitter.com/mforstater/status/1598970262187147265?s=46&t=9lXzq7elTBy_CvSUaZ8ukg

"So the external outfit that @ mermaids_gender got in to help sort out their issues is co-led by the woman who was leading EDI at Scouts at the point where they shrugged this off, and who when at Stonewall called Transgender Trend's guidance dangerous 🤨"

So, even the Mermaids-friemdly "external" investigators found they were dodgy?

Or, the CC didn't think this bunch were independent enough. They have seen through Mermaids marking their own homework

SidewaysOtter · 03/12/2022 09:52

So, even the Mermaids-friemdly "external" investigators found they were dodgy?

If they think Mermaids were on dodgy ground, Mermaids really are fucked.

As for “the issue with Green is that she wasn’t trans”, that’s just doubling down as a desperate last roll of the dice, isn’t it? It’s not that the ideology is flawed, it’s that it wasn’t pure enough.

RedToothBrush · 03/12/2022 09:57

WarriorN · 03/12/2022 09:25

Thanks rethinking. Yes I agree, encyclopaedic.

There's some sort of hoo har over an American navy seal on twitter at the moment who's detransitioned - I've seen clips of his wife describing the ideology as a cult, and commenting on the trap that parents are in.

Unfortunately I fear that because it's the q anon crowd adopting this view too that most leftists will ignore / dismiss the descriptions.

I think the likes of QAnon making ground in the US is an inevitability, at least for the time being. It comes down to how far the lefties liberals will be prepared to let that go though. There will be a tipping point eventually.

The point I've made this week on the WEP thread about this accusation about 'women's rights groups being aligned to the far right stands'.

Women's rights groups haven't changed their political positions. They've stood stock still and their messaging is consistent and unwavering throughout this merry shit show - Centre women and children and understand safeguarding principles.

Traditionally they shared the same political space as lefties and liberals.

What happened was they were abandoned and subsequently attacked for not shifting from this position in the name of 'progress' by woke progressive who adopted a hierarchical understanding of identity politics based on ideology rather than practical applications.

When weaknesses in this ideology were exposed, rather than addressing problems the lefties and liberals chose to shout down the women and demonise them for pointing out a problem.

But the problem doesn't go away and it has real world impact. This creates a political vacuum due to a dereliction of duty of care.

This gives rise to right wing opportunists to move unto this political ground as the sense of injustice is ripe to be exploited.

Most women's rights advocates can see this for what it is and they have no desire to change their political allegiances but are forced into a position where they can no longer support their traditional political alignments because they've been abandoned and their concerns dismissed.

A minority will be swayed by far right moves but this can not be blamed and left as the responsibility of women's rights advocates. That firmly rests with the left and liberal power centres which have failed in their duty of care.

This failure of duty of care is real and will persist and won't go away, so there will be an eventual reckoning. Because that's simply how society works. There maybe a cover up, but that still requires an affirmative action by the left and liberals and centres of power to remove the far right squatting on this area of political ground.

This squatting is actually the thing that these politicians are concerned about. Not the actual harms. Because that's how politics works.

Just how and when this all plays out is difficult to know. The US has a bigger problem in terms of how identity is linked to politics. What seems likely to happen in the US to me, is 2 years of the Republican party ripping itself apart with Trump v Desantis for the heart and sole of conservative politics with control of the House being something of a poison chalice. But equally the inability and fear of Desantis will focus Democrats minds.

If Desantis is able to sideline trump sufficiently the Democrats have a problem in 2024. This issue then becomes very central. Especially if lawsuits start to pile up and you have Biden associating with liabilities and parody characters during that time.

What happens with Mermaids in the UK will also send ripples and focus minds in the US despite this rhetoric we currently see.

Mermaids won't change the US dynamics but it certainly will eventually make people start to ask questions. And thats all you need to break the dam (cult), to foster critical thought.

This has some years to run yet as a high profile issue but I think it will start to fade - in part because it will represent such an embarrassing episode, there are vested interests who will seek to ultimately Bury gender identity as something high up the political agenda. Once that starts to happen the social contagion lessens...

I think we have now passed the height of the madness and we are now into the fallout stage though.

We may have a 'relapse' phase yet though (look at all the children who have no support and are now doing x to themselves) with the use of emotional guilt tripping but that will fizzle out if legal proceedings start.

RedToothBrush · 03/12/2022 10:01

The frogs are starting to got hot as the water boils.

RethinkingLife · 03/12/2022 10:24

When ULOs became much more of a thing, I don’t think anyone thought that there could potentially be ULO orgs that would promote lifelong medicalisation to children

It was probably considered as a theoretical but tiny risk. It's a little reminiscent of the people who warned about the potential abuse of a loose definition of hate incidents at the time of the Macpherson report. And today, we have non-crime hate incidents and serial litigation by people who somehow don't meet the bar for vexatious litigant status.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3241727-Weaponising-of-the-Complaints-Process

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 10:25

The Telegraph view:

archive.ph/2022.12.03-065633/www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2022/12/03/charity-commissions-new-inquiry-mermaids-long-overdue/

"Such stories, and the Charity Commission’s forthcoming inquiry, will help to shine a light on the workings of an organisation which, like the <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/u0TWZ/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/07/28/tavistock-transgender-clinic-shut-nhs-review-finds-not-safe/" rel="nofollow" target="blank">Tavistock clinic before itt, has managed to assert what its critics claim is an extraordinary grip over mainstream health policy. Yet that light will prompt many to ask why questions were not asked earlier. Indeed, those who have allowed it to play such a leading role in the transgender debate should also be required to reflect on their actions."

nauticant · 03/12/2022 10:29

I do actually support organisations being led by the people who should benefit from what the organisation does. Who understands better the needs of e.g. Deaf people than someone who is Deaf?

True, although if the choice was between someone who claimed that a person was not deaf if they didn't identify as hearing impaired, or someone who recognised the material reality if being hearing impaired, it's clear the latter would be the better choice. (All other things being equal.)

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 10:38

I do actually support organisations being led by the people who should benefit from what the organisation does. Who understands better the needs of e.g. Deaf people than someone who is Deaf?

Difficult in this case because it's children. No one is going to argue the NSPCC should be run by an 8yo.

Though I guess, you never know...!

Birdsweepsin · 03/12/2022 10:40

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 10:38

I do actually support organisations being led by the people who should benefit from what the organisation does. Who understands better the needs of e.g. Deaf people than someone who is Deaf?

Difficult in this case because it's children. No one is going to argue the NSPCC should be run by an 8yo.

Though I guess, you never know...!

Newly-appointed Chief Executive of Battersea Dogs Home

So that's why Susie Green left
RedToothBrush · 03/12/2022 10:41

nauticant · 03/12/2022 10:29

I do actually support organisations being led by the people who should benefit from what the organisation does. Who understands better the needs of e.g. Deaf people than someone who is Deaf?

True, although if the choice was between someone who claimed that a person was not deaf if they didn't identify as hearing impaired, or someone who recognised the material reality if being hearing impaired, it's clear the latter would be the better choice. (All other things being equal.)

A trans organisation that mainly deals with teenage girls can not be lead by a teenage girl.

We know there is a demographic issue and that late presenting males are different and there is the accusation that teenage girls are being used to justify the behaviours of middle age men as if all trans people are an homogeneous singular group despite the evidence to the contrary.

Do we really think a late transitioning male who retains their penis and thinks that public displays of sexuality, that males can be lesbians is appropriate to lead a children's charity 'cos trans'?

These are questions that should be highlighted.

Also service users would suggest you also need to involve detransitioners....

Clymene · 03/12/2022 10:48

Social Justice Collective the EDI company has also taken down its page about who is in the business.

Luckily, the internet never forgets: web.archive.org/web/20211105163225/socialjusticecollective.co.uk/about

Ex-Stonewall etc.

And despite it being called a collective, the director, Pari Dhillon is the only owner listed on Companies House.

GrabbyGabby · 03/12/2022 10:59

Fuck me, this isn't a charity, it is your worst LGBTQIA staff network run rampant topped by a narcissistic loon of a CEO, overseen by a board of nonces and gender puritans.

Not a relevant professional credential between them (except Mew seems to have been proficient with phototshop, which may have come in handy for the annual report).

I mean, what could go wrong?

At some point someone suggested that Stonewall has helped them on the way to their self destruction, perhaps to draw fire away from themselves for when the inevitable shit hitting fan happened. It is the only explanation i can think of for MM taking the LGBA to court, it was such a spectacular own goal

EndlessTea · 03/12/2022 11:00

Clymene · 03/12/2022 10:48

Social Justice Collective the EDI company has also taken down its page about who is in the business.

Luckily, the internet never forgets: web.archive.org/web/20211105163225/socialjusticecollective.co.uk/about

Ex-Stonewall etc.

And despite it being called a collective, the director, Pari Dhillon is the only owner listed on Companies House.

Reading through their bios, I can’t help getting the impression that their buzzwords and word-salad-iness are euphemisms for oppressive practices. My mind kept adding in scare quotes as I was reading.

littlbrowndog · 03/12/2022 11:02

This from article

On Friday night, Miriam Cates, a Tory MP and member of the Commons education committee, told The Telegraph: “It is clear that Mermaids has been responsible for multiple safeguarding breaches - including encouraging children to harm their own bodies - which is why I called in Parliament for a criminal inquiry.

“It is important to let the Commission get on with the investigation, but at the same time, we should urgently consider how Mermaids has for so long been allowed unfettered access to vulnerable children, been funded by taxpayer cash and promoted by celebrities despite multiple warnings from whistleblowers. We must learn lessons from this failure of safeguarding.”

littlbrowndog · 03/12/2022 11:03

Criminal inquiry

TheYummyPatler · 03/12/2022 11:13

RethinkingLife · 03/12/2022 09:09

However, wouldn't that also align with the increasing demand for user-led organisations and services? (ULO)

The thing about services for vulnerable children and young people is that within children’s rights discourse the primary consideration should always be the best interests of the child. Participation rights must be judged according to capability and a broader assessment of the best interests and balanced against the need to protect children (even, and often especially, from themselves!).

sadly lots of advocates of participation rights seem determined to pretend that this is not the case and that participation is the key thing. That identity is the primary (even sole) criterion against which an opinion or claim to expertise should be assessed, and that subjectivity is simultaneously all important and not if any consequence at all. That is, individuals have full and perfect knowledge of themselves and their circumstances. This perspective could not possibly be skewed by their subject position. Their subjective experience is the only possible way of understanding their lives. Anyone not in their identity category could not possibly have anything useful to say on it. Precisely because their perspective is skewed by and defined by their subject position.

subjectivity is all important insofar as is convenient for the argument and utterly meaningless when it isn’t. 🙄

HugHeart · 03/12/2022 11:18

Birdsweepsin · 03/12/2022 10:40

Newly-appointed Chief Executive of Battersea Dogs Home

🤭😀😂🐶🐾

TheYummyPatler · 03/12/2022 11:19

Also, the meaning of participation shifts from taking part in some way to bring entirely in charge of.

its bizarre. And is incredibly entrenched in activism around children. The Scottish government have been uncritically wedded to this stuff for nearly 2 decades now. So of course the idea that gender identity might not be fixed or that young people experiencing dysphoria related to it may not be ‘experts in their own lives’ for multiple reasons is heresy.

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 11:23

littlbrowndog · 03/12/2022 11:02

This from article

On Friday night, Miriam Cates, a Tory MP and member of the Commons education committee, told The Telegraph: “It is clear that Mermaids has been responsible for multiple safeguarding breaches - including encouraging children to harm their own bodies - which is why I called in Parliament for a criminal inquiry.

“It is important to let the Commission get on with the investigation, but at the same time, we should urgently consider how Mermaids has for so long been allowed unfettered access to vulnerable children, been funded by taxpayer cash and promoted by celebrities despite multiple warnings from whistleblowers. We must learn lessons from this failure of safeguarding.”

Yes. I've never understood how procuring, giving or even directing children and adults in charge of them to:

  • puberty blockers
  • CSHs
  • breast binders

AT THE VERY LEAST - in all of the stuff pushed on kids - isn't an offence under this Act:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/23-24/12/part/I

Somehow, these things must be an offence.

RedToothBrush · 03/12/2022 11:28

littlbrowndog · 03/12/2022 11:03

Criminal inquiry

Hallelujah!

Still needs to be a public inquiry though because this is not about Mermaids in isolation.

Without a public inquiry there is a likelihood of burying this and lots of centres of power not being held accountable.

Its about who enabled and encouraged Mermaids and then bought Mermaids services to 'educate' staff in both the private sector and in the public sector (which also has its own safeguarding responsibilities).

We have seen a pattern repeat: outsourcing safeguarding responsibilities to a separate body leaves you vulnerable to your own safeguarding fails.

This needs to be spelt out as unacceptable practice.

That was Asda when it decided to do a promotional aimed at children that featured promotion of pornographic resources in the name of inclusivity.

That was Mermaids when they believed that Breslow had been properly vetted and was suitable as an employee because he worked at reputable LSE.

That was Garden Court Chambers when it outsourced its legal obligations to Stonewall.

It was the Tavistock when it outsourced ethics by capitulating to lobbying pressure from Mermaids.

And so on.

Organisations need to be very aware that duty of care and legal responsibilities remain the responsibility of themselves and if you do get advice you need to ensure the reputable nature of that advice and question what you are told rather than taking it at face value as sufficient.

ResisterRex · 03/12/2022 11:44

So many incidents. Not sure who could even head a public inquiry

twitter.com/wearefaircop/status/1599000834485927937?s=46&t=9lXzq7elTBy_CvSUaZ8ukg

"In 2019, the police recorded criticism of Mermaids as a Hate Incident. Don’t let them forget. @ Humberbeat @ CollegeofPolice"