Telegraph: Stonewall chief criticised for Uganda gay ban remarks

[ResisterRex]

In today's paper. Ends with calls for her to resign from WRN:

digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk/data/1288/reader/reader.html?social#!preferred/0/package/1288/pub/1288/page/16/article/NaN

"Nancy Kelley, the chief executive of the charity, lashed out at “anti-gender” and “trans-hostile” groups after the African nation passed a law making it illegal to identify as LGBT. In a tweet yesterday, Ms Kelley shared a video of the Ugandan parliament applauding the move, writing: “The anti-gender movement has been funnelling cash and strategy into countries around the world for decades. This is ‘winning’ for them. This is the world we enable with our complacency. Solidarity to our LGBTQ family in Uganda.”

She added: “Many trans-hostile individuals and actors like to pretend the UK anti-trans moral panic is a distinct phenomenon. It isn’t.”"

Part of the response to these comments:

"Bev Jackson, the co-founder of the charity LGB Alliance which formed in opposition to Stonewall’s gender identity stance, said Ms Kelley’s tweet was “utterly disgusting”. “Trying to equate LGB activists with fanatical and well-funded evangelical homophobes is really the lowest of the low,” she said.

LGB Alliance sponsored Uganda Pride last year and also invited Isaac Mugisha, the chair of the Ugandan Pride movement and the leading opponent of hostile laws in the country, to its London conference. It organised a meeting between him and an LGBT group of Parliamentarians."

Was 2014 the last year when Stonewall used the term "same-sex"?

LBGA write to UK government, specifically to "Minister of State for Development and Africa to express horror at Uganda's crackdown on homosexuality.
Guided by activists on the ground, we call on the UK to review investment in Uganda, impose sanctions on those responsible, and fast track LGB&T refugees."

Replies on

twitter.com/alliancelgb/status/1640744753250672640?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

On the same day, Stonewall retweet their Scottish branch, to champion the alleged "protecting and progressing LGBTQ+ equality", which recent history demonstrates will likely mean the destruction of safeguarding, and transing gay children:

"Congratulations to @HumzaYousaf on your election as First Minister of Scotland. As the first person from an ethnic minority to become First Minister, this is a proud moment for our country. We look forward to working with you on protecting and progressing LGBTQ+ equality."

Replies off.

twitter.com/stonewallscot/status/1640718379924455428?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Priorities, eh?

Out of interest:

Stonewall tweet: 4,345 Views, 6 Retweets, 0 Quotes, 46 Likes, 1 Bookmark

LGBA tweet: 40.1K Views, 187 Retweets, 12 Quotes, 624 Likes, 8 Bookmarks

And yes, only one was brave enough to have comments turned on...!

Wow the numbers around the comparative reach of the stonewall vs LGBA tweet are very interesting and not necessarily what I would have expected

Go and look up Iran and then try and develop a more nuanced, accurate understanding of what is meant by ‘religious’ and ‘right wing’.
Then maybe when you know some basics you can contribute to this discussion.

Yes, I was surprised, too.

The latest numbers:

Stonewall: 4,884 Views; 7 Retweets; 0 Quotes; 50 Likes; 1 Bookmark

LGB Alliance: 56.8K Views; 261 Retweets; 13 Quotes; 907 Likes; 11 Bookmarks

I don't think you've put much thought into your statment.

Some women want sex based spaces free from males. Other women are fine with mixed sex spaces.
Some women want sex based spportfree from males. Other women are fine with mixed sex sport.
For each individual person who believes they are trans the best outcome for that individual person should be decided on a case by case basis. Outcomes for all individuals should be recorded to assess which treatments are best in which cases.

There's very few religious or right wing people on mumsnet. It tends towards left leaning women and religion gets mentioned less than say spirituality.

I think your "not difficult to understand" refers to your own experience of finding it easier to understand if you believe that mumsnetters are religious right wing people, rather than putting the effort into thinking about why non religious left leaning people might be gender critical. In your case believing something that isn't true just makes it easier for you in not having to think too hard about it. You could of course choose to read what the mumsnetters are saying and thinking about what they say. It will take more effort but you will understand a lot better.