Investigation has discovered how we're STILL in the stranglehold of Stonewall

[IwantToRetire]

Yes this is a DM article, but it looks like most of the material is based on information published by Sex Matters and others.

To this day, despite many serious questions raised about its conduct, Stonewall continues to dictate policy to many of the country's key taxpayer-funded organisations and to politicians themselves — as well as to the world of business. In some ways, it has never been more influential.

Never-before-seen documents and new statistics revealed today by the Mail following a series of Freedom of Information requests uncover the sheer scale and extent to which this unelected body is still shaping plans and strategy.

From the NHS to schools and universities, politics to business, Stonewall is raking in millions of pounds from its £3,000-a-year 'Diversity Champions' workplace programme — and its influence over our most important public and private institutions remains as strong as ever. Critics accuse those signed up as paying to be indoctrinated by pernicious gender ideology.

And nowhere more so, arguably, than in healthcare, where, courtesy of recent 'diversity programmes' and 'rainbow badge' schemes — like the one that Bath's NHS Trust fell victim to — Stonewall has strived to eliminate mentions of biological sex, which is a 'protected characteristic' under the 2010 Equality Act.

Strikingly, we have discovered, many NHS trusts have removed the word 'woman' from their websites and information materials — so as to not offend a tiny minority of trans people.

The BBC pulled out of Stonewall's Diversity Champions scheme in November 2021, admitting that its participation raised questions about whether it could be seen to be impartial when reporting on debates that affected the charity.
Yet only this week, senior broadcast journalist Cath Walton told the Mail that the BBC remains in a virtual stranglehold of Stonewall dogma.

This, she explains, was one of the reasons she quit the Corporation, unable to tolerate what she describes as 'gaslighting' about gender ideology.

'Stonewall don't need to be [at the BBC] any more because the Stonewall influence is well established in HR,' she told us.

'There are people in key positions that take the Stonewall position as fact. Once you've done something, it's hard to undo it. For example, if they withdrew the advice on pronouns now, there would be a huge stink.

'Stonewall is now embedded with members of staff who are fully aligned with Stonewall views, and it's definitely influencing the BBC editorially. In an editorial meeting, people would be too scared to raise a gender-critical story. If you did, you know you would have a mark on your head.'

There seems no end to the nationwide bodies to have fallen in almost total thrall to Stonewall.

This month, it was revealed that the majority of High Street banks are members of diversity schemes run by Stonewall.

HSBC, which allows customers to register as gender-neutral, is the top-ranking bank in Stonewall's annual Equality Index. Barclays and Nationwide are also among Stonewall's top 100 employers.

Last week, it was even reported that the Bank of England had introduced a 'family leave' policy that included the phrase 'birthing parent' rather than mother.

As well as banks, healthcare and the broadcast media, the charity holds growing sway in schools. In particular, it exerts considerable influence in 'Relationships and Sex Education' (RSE) lessons, which are obligatory for pupils from the age of seven.

'Stonewall has an annual budget of £8 million, which is incredibly small by corporate standards. But it controls the policies of organisations and companies worth billions. It is dictating to both public and private institutions. It is a tiny organisation, but it has an enormous footprint in terms of its control of what other organisations do and the fear that they feel if any of their employees say anything that disagrees with Stonewall's stance.

'In medieval times only the Church had this level of control.'

In the next part of our investigation, we will reveal how Stonewall has infiltrated every major political party, captured the civil service — and is hard at work lobbying ministers to introduce controversial new gender laws.

Bits I have picked out from a much longer article. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12300665/A-special-Mail-investigation-discovered-Stonewalls-stranglehold.html

Will be interesting to see what they say about political parties and Stonewall

This. My vote goes to a bank or any other group that says we don't do politics, we don't take sides, we are equally interested in all customers and we just do high quality banking.

That's it. That's all.

I do not require them to be 'anti' anything, just professional enough to keep their political opinions out of the workplace

I am guessing that those chasing the ESG scores are not in the best financial situation anyway, as they are more desperate for credit, hence wanting to improve the credit scores.

I think it is really good to have this overview, and with enough acknowledgement that women's campaign groups have been organising and researching on this.

But ...

Dont forget that our 2 party mentality (and women aren't an agend issue) mean that a lot of people will simply ignore and or not believe it because it is in the Daily Mail.

And as the article points out most thought that Stonewall influence had peaked as some organisations started to disaffiliate. But as the BBC former employee says, it is too late. The culture in now embedded.

So very every small (and often individual) victory we hear 2 more of establishments being captured eg Bank of England.

I think in terms of politics and finance etc., at one time the Freemasons probably had as much influence. But what Stonewall has managed to do is build on the type of hidden networks similar to the Freemasons, as long before Stonewall went full on trans, people who had come out of 80s education full of the righeousness of queer politics were busy inserting themselves into influential committees, lobbying groups etc.. Effectively Stonewall reaped the benefit of that ground work, and used the foundation it gave them to go full on public influence. ie no longer a behind the doors quora at meetings and decisions makings, but a ramping of changing public opinion so that it would appear that most people were behind the trans agenda and erasure of women's rights. Added to which it gave TRAs a "legitimate" platform to spew their misogyny aided by the growth in incels.

If the BBC hadn't been captured, this would be the type of investigation for an episode of Panorama. But we know that will never happen.

Really looking forward to the follow up article promising a look at political parties.

But to go back to where I started how much influence will that have, as for too many the fact that the source in the DM means they will dismiss it.

None of the stuff they were marked down for was homophobic. In fact, it was the opposite. It was staff getting on with their jobs and being open about treating gay or trans patients the same as everyone else.
The idea that NHS staff should be 'routinely' asking patients about their sexual orientation is actually quite disturbing and has to go against GDPR and patient privacy laws. Why on earth would they need to know that to treat people?
Thrilled to see that they 'failed' such horribly homophobic criteria.

"Whereas the gay rights movement was about demanding more freedom from the state for people to determine their sex lives unconstrained by the law, the transgender movement demands the opposite: it calls for recognition and protection from the state in the form of intervention to regulate the behaviour of those outside of the identity group.

Whereas in the past, to be radical was to demand greater freedom from the state and institutional authority, today to be radical is to demand restrictions on free expression in the name of preventing offence"

On ideological hegemony:

"Currently, Gender Theorists have near total control of the institutions and there is currently a culture of fear around the issue, but that can be counteracted by an opposition gaining critical mass where people cannot be picked off individually"

"Gender Theory heavily relies on fear and indifference from the wider population. These forces are unsustainable in the long term. The process of metaphorically putting heads on spikes to keep everyone in line can work to silence establishment-reliant voices, but will ultimately force the wider population to confront the issue"

"I think in terms of politics and finance etc., at one time the Freemasons probably had as much influence. But what Stonewall has managed to do is build on the type of hidden networks similar to the Freemasons, as long before Stonewall went full on trans, people who had come out of 80s education full of the righeousness of queer politics were busy inserting themselves into influential committees, lobbying groups etc.. Effectively Stonewall reaped the benefit of that ground work"

That's a really useful comparison IwantToRetire. The Freemasons went from being an accepted respected group that worked behind the scenes with some public work to being viewed as a dubious group that corrupted democracy and endowed underserved privilege on certain individuals.

I think it's a good point but the Masons were never overt. They're certainly still active and they must get involved in things behind the scenes but it'll be certain things. Stonewall and co have tried to - and have become - involved in all areas of our lives in an explicit and overt way:

• education from 0-Uni age
• food shopping
• public policy covering everybody: civil service, local government, the lot
• banks
• our 999 services, health, police, criminal justice, even the supposedly impartial inspectors like the CQC
• grassroots and professional sports
• our FCO, and they've got a global index of employers to boot

They're everywhere and it's in your face. Comparisons with knotweed are not wrong.

It ought to be a case study in how network ‘soft’ power plays out. It can’t be just stonewall achieving these changes and the erasure of ‘women’ alone but also how trans / trans allies take up positions within these institutions in EDI roles then onboard SW ‘guidance’ and disseminate it to the hard of thinking in each organisation.

For example, I’ve just seen a LGBTQ+ presentation (presumably for pride month) in my place of work and 14 out of the 15 slides were exclusively on trans. The person presenting it was from the natural sciences.

Also I’ve finally read the agenda from the UCU Congress and was utterly shocked at the Ukraine motion, but also the FE Sector conference motions supported puberty blockers, are concerned about NHS move away from gender affirming care, and that a motion to change the wording from equality to equity (in the Equality Committee) should actually be the ‘Liberation Committee’ with the policy wording changed to ‘ liberation from oppression for all minoritised groups‘…

Gosh, soon we won't even be able to listen to that Blur classic...

Ironically we're not able to read what that classic was either 🙄

I used to work in Banking and 'being apolitical' was a corporate value almost, so I am not sure what has happened to change so quickly here.

My local vue cinema today was 'donation to stonewall' when I went to collect tickets.

I think it's a good point but the Masons were never overt.

I made it clear that the reference to the Masons was about convert infiltration into committees, etc., by those captured by queer politics in the 80s, if not earlier. They were very focused on creating a network of influence. And it is partly because this private networking was so sucessful that when Stonewall adopted trans (as a new revenue stream) they had inbuilt inhouse support that allowed them to gain the influence they now have.

Without this prior work by queer activists Stonewall would not have been able to get so many to subscribe to their new agenda. Institutions had already been softened up (with of course the added advantage of providing a politically acceptable basis for the backlash against women's liberation). It is telling that some years ago the editor of the Guardian said "queer politics influence my every decision".

It also suggests in materials aimed at younger children that when babies are born, they are 'labelled . . . boy or girl' and that when they get older some 'realise that the label they were given was wrong

I'm not sure there is a circle of Hell deep enough.

I am fucking delighted. Thank God all our words are not wasted. Thanks to those women that went to court to enable these responses.

I agree. But Stonewall has left a massive trail behind them. The Masons operate the exact opposite way. You don't know who's part of that network, but SW types are usually easy to spot: pronouns, progress flags in email signatures, documents changed to add NB, Twitter virtue signalling etc.

SW seem to have much more of a hold than the Masons...but how would you know with the Masons?!

It is a similar MO, but the SW one isn't as long-term clever IYSWIM.

I heard a senior NHS manager use the phrase ‘birthing people’ the other day, entirely unironically. The level of institutional capture in the NHS when it comes to trans issues is absolutely unreal, and I don’t understand why.

Thinking about the UCU motion changing the Equality Committee policy wording changed to ‘liberation from oppression for all minoritised groups‘…

Is so bloody clever because whilst equality affected women (wages, seniority, opportunity, caring responsibilities), we are not a minority. Whereas transwomen are in a minority. Needing ‘liberation’ is almost a call to arms.

And in one fell swoop a committee ostensibly working to support women’s equality would no longer applies to women. I wonder if the motion passed?

Liberate from what exactly?

Other people's rights and boundaries?

Women have actual problems in providing labour to the more powerful class, for less pay, for biologically related needs and challenges not equally affecting the other biological sex class.

What labour are TQ+ people providing? They're demanding labour from women in vast amounts: pronouns, handing over sex based rights, creating personal fictions on demand, putting the feelings and needs of a TQ person (by which really I do mean a TQ+ male, TQ+ female people really don't seem to be this demanding!) always above their own, convert from homosexuality, step back from wishing to protect their children in the normal ways....

women are being actively oppressed in this equation. No matter how many mantras and silly lies are chanted, reality does not go away .

"Girls and Boys"?

Girls who want boys
Who like boys to be girls
Who do boys like they're girls
Who do girls like they're boys
Always should be someone you really love

OMFG

The NHS is a religion.

People assume Drs don't make mistakes and they love hiding how inept they are. They are well known to have a God complex.

The reality is that the more educated someone is the a better liar they are and a manager is more likely to be personality disordered.I

Look at the NHS litigation bill and note most people never attempt to take the NHS to court. Truth is medics like teachers destroy many many lives that don't end up with a death, probably as many as they help.

Excellent post