Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

First Direct and Natwest closing bank accounts for political reasons inc being gender critical

698 replies

Snorkers · 30/06/2023 15:47

Apprently First Direct have closed the account of the Wings over Scotland founder for his beliefs (He's Gender Critical), and Coutts, owned by Natwest, closed Nigel Farage's account.
Whatever you think of Nigel Farage he is entitled to a bank account.

This is really worrying.

I bank with First Direct. I am gender critical. Do I need to hide my beliefs to keep my bank account? Will tey stop me getting access to my money?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12249755/Nigel-Farage-claims-three-loved-ones-bank-accounts-closed-Brexit.html

Are banks shutting accounts of customers with anti-woke beliefs?

Mr Farage has not named the bank who plan to shut his personal and business accounts this summer, but is understood to be Coutts, the famous 327-year-old private bank whose clients include the Royal Family.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12249755/Nigel-Farage-claims-three-loved-ones-bank-accounts-closed-Brexit.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
78
BestBadger · 06/07/2023 12:09

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 06/07/2023 09:54

Aren't jokes supposed to be funny?

Not necessarily, if you subscribe to Bakhtin's theory of the carnivalesque for example, where it's enough to subvert the dominant style through humour, irreverence or chaos.

You might be more Michael McIntyre than Mikhail Bakhtin, and that's fine, it'd be a dull world if we were all the same. Have a great day.

DerekFaker · 06/07/2023 14:03

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

That wasn't my point. You said

I said I didn't fight in two world wars...

which you clearly didn't.

You're getting pretty patronising and goady now. Which isn't in the spirit, you know.

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 06/07/2023 14:59

It never fails to amaze how desperate some posters are, to distract from the discussion of how women's rights are being diminished.

BestBadger · 06/07/2023 15:37

DerekFaker · 06/07/2023 14:03

That wasn't my point. You said

I said I didn't fight in two world wars...

which you clearly didn't.

You're getting pretty patronising and goady now. Which isn't in the spirit, you know.

Really? I think you'll find that was you. As for Lucy, I answered her question (which was clearly a dig) as though it was a genuine question. Quite politely I thought.

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 06/07/2023 17:22

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 06/07/2023 14:59

It never fails to amaze how desperate some posters are, to distract from the discussion of how women's rights are being diminished.

I was thinking today that if you want to promote an ideology and neuter its opponents then going for the banks and building societies makes absolute sense when you consider the power they have over our lives. They know who we send money to, who sends money to us, and they lend us the money to buy our property. Life would be impossible without a bank account. Block a bank account and the holder can't pay bills, can't receive salary payments, house gets repossessed, life ruined...all for thinking the wrong thoughts.

HSBC, incidentally, has already done this in Hong Kong at the behest of the CCP to pro-democracy activists. And if this doesn't freeze your blood, then it should -

“When we get a specific legal instruction by police authorities in Hong Kong, or anywhere else, to freeze the accounts of somebody under formal investigation, we have no choice but to comply. Disobeying such an order would be a criminal offence.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/feb/08/hsbc-urged-to-unfreeze-accounts-of-hong-kong-activist-china

Get the police and the banks onside. Sound familiar?

dcbc1234 · 06/07/2023 19:01

'Professor Lesley Sawers, 64, the Equalities and Human Rights commissioner for Scotland'

If they can close down an actual Equalities and Human Rights Commissioner who is an equalities official, no body is safe not even King Charles or Rishi Sunak. The Tories need to get a grip of this and fast.

dcbc1234 · 06/07/2023 19:04

I remember a lady from Singapore telling me once that the Singaporean Government used to bankrupt the accounts of people they didn't approve of. This is not so very far removed and we are supposed to be a 'real' democracy.
Also if politicians are so vulnerable, along with all the abuse on social media, who on earth in their right minds going to want to go into politics?
There are some dark forces at work across the West right now.

fiftyandfat · 06/07/2023 19:08

We should all be very, very worried about this.

IcakethereforeIam · 06/07/2023 19:15

And angry 😠

BestBadger · 07/07/2023 13:17

dcbc1234 · 06/07/2023 19:04

I remember a lady from Singapore telling me once that the Singaporean Government used to bankrupt the accounts of people they didn't approve of. This is not so very far removed and we are supposed to be a 'real' democracy.
Also if politicians are so vulnerable, along with all the abuse on social media, who on earth in their right minds going to want to go into politics?
There are some dark forces at work across the West right now.

This sort of thing has always gone on. From the formation of the Economic league in 1919 through various anti-Union acts enacted by government and the secret service and with the full support of the banks. The establishment uses any power it has to silence what it perceives as a threat, and we've allowed it to happen.

I've no doubt there's a lot of dark money funding those grifters working amongst the brexiteers, the flagshaggers, the anti-vaxxers, the GC movement etc but I can't see how it's any worse than what passes through Tufton street, or the "lobbying" and cash for access that's endemic in our parliament or the monstrous sums of money laundered by our banks.

Meanwhile, we sit by as our rights are whittled away, our environmental protections binned, our food standards trashed & our public services stripped of cash as it's funneled into private hands.

Not a single major party has indicated they have any intention of reversing this trend, so yes, we should be afraid when instead we're distracted by culture war nonsense, consumerism & the Royal soap opera.

lechiffre55 · 07/07/2023 13:38

@BestBadger
This sort of thing has always gone on. From the formation of The Economic League in 1919

There's a name I haven't seen for a very long time. I remember as a kid watching a TV program about the Economic League. How they held a blacklist of people not to be employed.
Sneaky buggers they were too. When computers first started being used there was some law about holding information on people on electronic format/computers. This was many decades before the data protection act, around the 80s I think. Anyway The Economic League got around this law by deliberatley keeping the employment blacklist in paper form only, so it wasn't covered by the law.
If you suspected you were on the blacklist there was no way to check, no way to see if you had been mistaken for another person, no way to get removed from the blacklist, it was judge jury and executioner of careers with no oversight whatsoever. It was a private organisation that didn't even answer to the government. Very Kafkaesque. Banks closing accounts for reasons they won't disclose is very much in line with the dirty, dark, and undemocratic tactics of The Economic League.
I found this bit in Hansard recording them being mentioned in Parliament in 1989.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1989-05-17/debates/4f599e5e-3989-4027-97d7-280906bfb4b5/NewClause11

lechiffre55 · 07/07/2023 13:39

Even then the banks were at it. From that Hansard link:
"Donations to the Economic League can be large. In 1987, Lloyds Bank gave £5,600, Hawker Siddeley gave £6,700 and National Westminster Bank gave £8,960."

BestBadger · 07/07/2023 19:06

Still far less intrusive than the information the DWP requires from claimants. This issue does seem to have been exaggerated as a means to remove UK banks from their duty of oversight on corruption.

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 07/07/2023 20:39

Still far less intrusive than the information the DWP requires from claimants.

What l has that got to do with anything? Giving someone public money as benefits is not the same as allowing someone to store their own money.

Another pathetic bit of whatabboutery.

BestBadger · 08/07/2023 08:25

Thatgirl1981 · 07/07/2023 23:05

Spiked are part of the problem. They're part of the Tufton street, Atlas network, libertarian underbelly. Funding by shady foreign agents is a direct threat to our democracy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Network

Atlas Network - Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Network

BestBadger · 08/07/2023 18:49

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 07/07/2023 20:39

Still far less intrusive than the information the DWP requires from claimants.

What l has that got to do with anything? Giving someone public money as benefits is not the same as allowing someone to store their own money.

Another pathetic bit of whatabboutery.

The peer complained that he was asked intrusive questions about his family by his bank. That's what it has to do with it. If something is clearly analogous to something else, that isn't whataboutery.
Did you even read the Telegraph article?

ResisterRex · 08/07/2023 18:56

Isn't the Telegraph article about peers saying this is unfair on their children? Rather than them complaining they (the peers) were asked intrusive questions?

BestBadger · 08/07/2023 22:21

ResisterRex · 08/07/2023 18:56

Isn't the Telegraph article about peers saying this is unfair on their children? Rather than them complaining they (the peers) were asked intrusive questions?

You'd think so from the headline, but no it isn't really.

ResisterRex · 09/07/2023 07:04

You'd think so from the headline, but no it isn't really.

If you read it, it is about peers describing what's happened to their children, in the main. One peer talks about having to provide pay slips of her long-dead husband which she calls "intrusive and silly".

It's the MP at the end who rather more characterises it all as "intrusive", following a quote from another who calls it "Kafkaesque".

Yes there are other things in there but the bulk of the article is definitely about the impact on children.

BestBadger · 09/07/2023 12:41

ResisterRex · 09/07/2023 07:04

You'd think so from the headline, but no it isn't really.

If you read it, it is about peers describing what's happened to their children, in the main. One peer talks about having to provide pay slips of her long-dead husband which she calls "intrusive and silly".

It's the MP at the end who rather more characterises it all as "intrusive", following a quote from another who calls it "Kafkaesque".

Yes there are other things in there but the bulk of the article is definitely about the impact on children.

I don't agree with your interpretation and I think my point stands. Their experiences aren't as bad as many people's dealings with the DWP. It's quite noticeable how quickly there are plans for removing banks obligations to check politically exposed persons, yet year on year the failings of the DWP carry on with hardly a murmur.

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 09/07/2023 12:46

Their experiences aren't as bad as many people's dealings with the DWP

Except we're not talking about the DWP, are we?