Get the violins out - Stonewall is "in crisis"

[IwantToRetire]

Our biggest LGBT charity is in crisis. Are we just going to let it collapse? LGBT people need armour; an organisation like Stonewall to act as a first line of defence

Stonewall, Britain’s largest LGBT organisation, is in crisis. It’s plummeting financially, with rounds of redundancies as funding cuts hit. And its credibility and influence is plunging amid a national and global backlash against LGBT rights.

This matters. If someone asked you to name the first LGBT organisation that comes to mind, I would bet my cat you’d say Stonewall. Since it was founded more than 35 years ago, the charity has become entwined in our country’s psyche, Parliament, schools, sporting and business sectors. But for how much longer?

However you feel about Stonewall, we need a conversation about the state of the biggest charity defending LGBT people. And we need to ask ourselves a question as the opponents of all kinds of human rights lie in wait: are we just going to let it die?
...
To highlight one recent example of Stonewall’s seemingly waning influence, I asked the Government several times recently whether it has consulted with Stonewall over a proposed ban on conversion therapy since taking office. A spokesperson from the Cabinet Office declined to confirm whether it has even had any meetings with the charity about it, instead offering vaguely: “We will engage further with a broad range of stakeholders.” I asked Stonewall three times, but they did not provide a response.

Perhaps both sides are being coy or don’t want the public to know that they’ve met. But either way, this is as bizarre as it is concerning. Stonewall was once the charity that lobbied every MP in the country to help pass the same-sex marriage law in 2013. Now, it is unclear whether they’ve even had a meeting with the new Government over the psychological torture of LGBT people
...
Should it die, many will dance on Stonewall’s grave. But then many would happily see the rights of LGBT people revoked too – thereby exposing how much a strong, influential organisation for this community is still needed.

If you think it should return to only representing lesbian, bisexual and gay people, then you’re ignoring not only the plight of trans people but also how intertwined all these rights are and how many government’s incarcerate people for laws that oppress every letter in the acronym – or pass laws like the Equality Act that protect everyone (until that is chipped away).
...

Complete article at https://inews.co.uk/opinion/biggest-lgbt-charity-crisis-stonewall-3645337
Can also be read in full at https://archive.is/yGTYs

(If LGB people can set up their own Alliance, why cant trans people do the same?)

From what I've seen only if the conversation is a grovelling apology and TWAW.

Hahahahahaha - pause - hahaha haha

well cry me a fucking river! They have behaved utterly appallingly and even now show no remorse over what they have encouraged

of course we need a strong LGB charity & separately a charity for TQ ppl but the forced teaming of sexual orientation with gender identity needs to stop

stonewall need to take a long, very long hard, look at themselves!

How come they've got no money? They didn't spend millions in Goverment grant, donor and Corporate scheme income on sevices for the LGBTQ blah blah people. So where did it go?

Why am I reminded of astrology sites that have a disclaimer saying THIS SERVICE IS PROVIDED FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY

I remember hearing Ruth Hunt talk about her background on a faith podcast, where she was speaking about Stonewall's pivot to trans. I suppose I'd been expecting strident dogma, but she wasn't like that at all, she was extremely impressive. She's a phenomenal communicator and always very conciliatory, and cognisant of others' perspectives. You couldn't imagine meeting her and not finding some common ground.

But the weird thing was that, when it came to describing the actual pivot, there was nothing there. The actual pivot process, the way she described it, was no more than having reached a point where Stonewall had achieved its LGB aims, and then talking to some T supporters and accepting 'okay, it's their turn now'.

There was no explanation as to why the issue was right or appropriate for Stonewall, and indeed there was no indication that she'd given the issue any thought at all. Normally you'd assume that there must have been some philosophical reason for such a change, but she was so open and reasonable about everything else that the absence of any sign of a core belief was really striking. Someone so capable couldn't possibly have missed an opportunity to put one forward; it would've been a moment's work to ground everything, had it occurred to her. It would have been so easy to do. But no, instead it was just a vacuum.

That conversation has haunted me ever since. It was like this nightmare mix of Blairism and Blade Runner/Terminator or something like that. An indestructible bot, furnished with empathy and compassion at levels advanced way beyond human capabilities, programmed to roam the earth in search of Third Ways to impose.

I haven’t got time to list the amount of untrue statements in this hyperbolic, entitled, pile of shite.

The funny thing is, I can see the need for a lobby group to represent trans people, and the early years of Stonewall would be a pretty good model for that. How Stonewall recruited beloved cultural figures to be their public face, distanced themselves from extremists who had given gay activism a terrible image, and concentrated on building good will.

Ben Summerskill was one of the most effective political operators I've ever seen, and a lot of that was his innate conservatism - Ben wouldn't take up a cause unless it (a) had overwhelming support in the community and (b) he judged that public opinion was ready for it.

I don't see any evidence that the trans community is in a place where it could support that kind of operation. The noisiest voices are the maddest voices, I can't see any moderates emerging, and the nearest we've got to a gauge of opinion in the community is the trans UK subreddit with its demands for cutted up pear.

I do feel for any organisation trying to navigate the crevasses in this situation. I don't think Stonewall is the one to do it. They were a provocative and demanding campaigning organisation, working at high levels to get publicity and legal change, which worked because there was already a consensus that the law was way behind public opinion. Clause 28 was shocking to most of us back then, it was the late 80s after all and it seemed like the dinosaur twitch of a dying body of opinion. Incredible that it took over a decade to get it repealed. They acted as if the GRA was the same, when in fact it was and remains quite far ahead of the public opinion curve. The old Stonewall would talk to anyone, appear with anyone, encompassed a big range of political voices, would take on hopeless legal cases for the publicity. The self protecting cats' bum mouth of modern campaigning (won't talk to you, you might contaminate me, ooh did you click on the wrong thing, go away, have you ticked the right boxes on this form, have a certificate) quite clearly achieves nothing. They're amazed that people will join forces with people they disagree with to achieve a common goal.

The other thing is that being trans is never going to work as some kind of training programme with certificates anyway. It's a personal matter. I hope we move way beyond the sexist, 50s/60s obsession with passing and medicalisation and legal status that the GRA represents.

Any good NGO or lobby group or charity should have making itself redundant as its top priority. That means the problem it was set up to address has at last been overcome- mission accomplished.

I'd say part of Stonewall's failure was that it didn't want to make itself redundant.

Instead it found a cynical way to artificially extend ts life, the consequences of which went on to harm the very people it was set up to help.

Nancy Kelly called lesbians sexual racists. That was the final nail in the coffin.

Stonewall's "some people are gay, get over it" is/was brilliant - succinct, accurate, memorable and really just cut to the heart of the issue. They've tried to do the same thing with trans but it's a whole different beast that people will probably never be able to just "get over". It's too complicated.

Oh I see what you did there. Very nice!

Stonewall would not be the first charity to fold should that happen nor the last. In my view given the way its conducted itself over the last few years folding seems for the best.

So sad that an organisation that was such a positive and powerful part of expunging section 28 and securing LGB people equality before the law, especially in employment, housing and family law courts, has this as it’s epitaph. So many fine campaigners who worked with them have their legacy tainted. Maybe the law needs to change regarding charities where once their stated, founding objective has been achieved, they must close. Stonewall should never have attached itself to trans rights.

The money tap was turned off when the US stopped funding it via USAID.

Stonewall played an absolute blinder. How many other lobby groups have the savvy to frame themselves as expertsin the field, resulting in institutions falling over themselves to be accredited "on the good guys list" and paying ££ for the privilege?

And, there's a place for a pro trans organisation. For many, it must be v hard to be trans

But, Stonewall over reached, misleading society about the law and inciting hatred against people who disagreed

I said all along (quietly) that it was "emperor's new clothes". We all know fine well what a woman is. Finally, the scales have fallen, people have more confidence to speak freely, MPs see voters leaving, and Stonewall are left naked

They have such a bad reputation now, I imagine institutions are quietly coming off the accredited list. Therefore, less money and oxygen

No sympathy for Stonewall in this house, although I respect their historic work for LGB community

One concern I have....... For Women Scotland were unsuccessful in Court of Session. I believe we only have the Supreme Court ruling thanks to JK Rowling funding their appeal. So, it occurs to me that, if she had chosen to support the trans lobby, then we'd be in a very different place. I find that quite chilling

its credibility and influence is plunging

I think that ship sailed quite some time ago, especially the credibility bit 😂

This debacle unfolded on Ruth Hunt's watch.

I was incensed when she was awarded a life peerage by Teresa May (another one who owes women an apology imo).

I would imagine they're being bombarded with complaints from all the organisations who they've misled into falsifying the law.

Ha

Im not sure why the government has to be so cagey either, the answer to the question is 'no we havent consulted with them'. End of sentence.

They adopted positions they themselves didn't really believe in and then used "No Debate" to evade being questioned.

It left them in a hopeless position when they were put in front of people like judges who are allowed to ask questions and when a few journalists - like Beth Rigby - actually dared to question the narrative a little.

The only way trans organisations can work effectively is to go out and test their arguments against the people who disagree with them. But they won't.

The university I work for disassociated itself from stonewall two years ago thank God. While some didn’t support the removal, most did including senior leadership.

Or if they aren't yet, realise that they will be soon.

They should really have had the "This is not legal advice" disclaimer prominently displayed a lot sooner. Plus a warning "You proceed on its basis at your own risk".

Yes. Stonewall had become a grift. The swindle has now been exposed.

Stonewall became the Del Boy of charities. Loveable but completely untrustworthy!