Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Why are trans activists not spitting chips at Stonewall?

41 replies

Taytoface · 19/08/2025 08:32

First off, they hitch their LGB to the T wagon in what could be interpreted as a cynical ploy to prop up their ailing fundraising. Then they give out incorrect legal advice which led trans people to believe they had more rights than the law actually said they had, and then, when it came time to defend their interpretation of the law to the Supreme Court, they were a no show. Didn't apply to submit anything and now clowns like the Fox Killer are leading the charge.

Stonewall are an incredibly effective campaigning organization, but they have really gone awry here. I don't know why anyone on the T side would donate to them.

OP posts:
EmpressaurusKitty · 19/08/2025 16:55

I remember listening to a talk by Simon Fanshawe at the LGB Alliance launch. He said that one reason Stonewall were so successful originally was that they were so good at finding points in common with other groups & then agreeing to work together on those points, even if they disagreed on almost everything else.

It made a lot of sense. And then came the purity spiral.

Account734 · 19/08/2025 17:01

Helleofabore · 19/08/2025 09:22

Sadly, I am not sure Stonewall will recover from the reputational damage. Court cases have shown that Stonewall law and some significant policy advice was flawed to the point of putting organisations at risk.

The Cass report was similarly damaging to Stonewall. As was many soundbites said by Nancy Kelley.

Then the USAid disappeared.

The impact of those contracts that will be not renewed has already had impact and will be devastating over the coming year or two. I am not sure what Stonewall can do but I suspect to survive they will have to pull something out of the hat very soon.

I sincerely hope Stonewall don't recover. The positive legacy they had has been destroyed and there is no bringing it back. I will celebrate on the day Stonewall ceases to exist.

NeverOneBiscuit · 19/08/2025 17:11

The TRAs & their allies are ‘all in.’ The whole ideology & movement is a house of cards, pull one away and it all begins to collapse.

They can never countenance that the mighty Stonewall might have been wrong, because then what else might be seen or said to have been wrong. The protectors of the sacred caste must be protected.

Arran2024 · 19/08/2025 17:18

Christinapple · 19/08/2025 16:21

I donate to Stonewall

You might want to read this https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/04/17/stonewalls-hour-of-reckoning-has-finally-arrived/

SabrinaThwaite · 19/08/2025 18:06

Archive version of the Telegraph article. Well worth a read.

archive.ph/vkVMZ

Toseland · 19/08/2025 23:08

Because for the ones in the know, they expect Stonewall to fall, they know it's a matter of time. They already knew Stonewall would be able to take them so far. Stonewall is only one part of a much bigger machine.

EmpressaurusKitty · 20/08/2025 05:27

Toseland · 19/08/2025 23:08

Because for the ones in the know, they expect Stonewall to fall, they know it's a matter of time. They already knew Stonewall would be able to take them so far. Stonewall is only one part of a much bigger machine.

Useful idiots?

ParmaVioletTea · 20/08/2025 06:17

Isn't it also that TRAs got everyone thinking they're the most oppressed by hooking themselves into the L & G narrative - "forced teaming" ? Persuading well-meaning people who don't want to be bigots that being trans is the same as being gay - you're "born that way" and can't help it. And that we all should #BeKind

So the lesbian & gay activist approach to liberation eg. equal marriage, equal age of consent, so on & so forth worked quite well for the transactivists.

To disown Stonewall would be to unharness themselves from the "we're just like gay people" narrative, and wouldn't allow them to continue to ride on the broad acceptance of homosexuality as a normal sexuality.

ParmaVioletTea · 20/08/2025 06:23

And to add:

of course the HUGE difference between the gender extremist ideology of TRAs and gay & lesbian liberation is that gay & lesbian liberation doesn't require heterosexuals to change their fundamental practices, beliefs, or identities.

Same sex/equal marriage doesn't require heterosexual marriage to change. Brides can still be called brides; grooms can still be called grooms.

Nominating a same-sex partner as Next of Kin doesn't require every heterosexual NoK to change language or beliefs.

And so on.

Charabanc · 20/08/2025 07:27

fromorbit · 19/08/2025 08:54

The more radical TAs are already sceptical of Stonewall and critical of them.

Stonewall were incredibly effective at pushing gender stuff. However for them it is multifaceted it is about gaining in their institutional power. They love government, big corporations, NHS, academia anywhere they can gain influence. This means they were good at gaining and using power. They have a huge income.

This leads to a conflict when gender stuff is seen as divisive, unpopular and unprofitable. Stonewall now have a big problem. They are part of the SYSTEM they depend and thrive on it. Yet now genderism is falling apart because it is built on unpopular lies.

So Stonewall are kind of trapped. They can't denounce gender stuff, but there is no real way forward. They can stick with it and remain on the margins. However there is no way back for them in government in the UK. Even the SNP has given up.

The next few years will be interesting. The science is moving towards reality. By 2028-30 the gender medical industry in the US will be collapsing it is already starting to go down so the money will start to dry up. More medical scandals will break. For Stonewall profit was a big motivation so them flipping sides is not out of the question. We shall see.

Yes, a lot of TRA's are spitting chips at Stonewall, but not for the reason the OP assumes.

They are fewmin, for instance, that Stonewall went to Keir Starmer's Pride-washing event at Downing Street, which was organised once it was clear that public Pride parades were not a safe space for Labour politicians this year.

I think a lot of them have just given up on Stonewall, and some have even changed history to decide that Stonewall never supported the T.

Which is true up to a point, of course. Because until Stonewall realised there was money in supporting the T, once same-sex marriage had been achieved and their income was in danger of decreasing, they didn't mention the T at all.

https://bicommunitynews.co.uk/2025/07/18/lgbt-groups-defend-downing-street-visit/

LGBT Groups defend Downing Street visit

Four large LGBT charities have issued a joint statement explaining key figures from each attending a 10 Downing Street party with the Prime Minister. The event marked London's main Pride festival, but given the government's record in its first year in...

https://bicommunitynews.co.uk/2025/07/18/lgbt-groups-defend-downing-street-visit

BundleBoogie · 20/08/2025 09:44

Christinapple · 19/08/2025 16:21

I donate to Stonewall

So what are you hoping they will do with your money?

LeftieRightsHoarder · 20/08/2025 11:39

SabrinaThwaite · 19/08/2025 18:06

Archive version of the Telegraph article. Well worth a read.

archive.ph/vkVMZ

Thanks for the link!

logiccalls · 20/08/2025 14:25

GallantKumquat · 19/08/2025 09:33

The only acceptable position in the trans community is that TWAW from the moment they identify as trans. When FWS went to the SC it was already decided that TW were men, from a legal perspective, except for the small number that held a GRC.

It would have been totally unacceptable for stonewall or any other TR organization to weigh in on the case from that perspective.

In the broader view, Stonewall is a trans rights organization, not an LGBT rights organization. This is understood in the organization itself and in the trans community, so, while there is great consternation at the ineffectiveness of Stonewall, generally, no one is under any doubt it's captured by the TR lobby, which, TBH, is a surprisingly mature, realistic and strategic view of the situation, something the community is not famous for.

Edited
Show quote history
  • Agreed, except for the mention that if 'transwomen' have a bit of paper (G,R,C) saying they are women, that makes them women. It does not.
  • By analogy, they are not and never will be chickens, even if a vet implants a plastic beak and they wear feathers, and even if a deranged/ gullible/ bribed or fetish-loving Parliament is tricked* into declaring that Chicken Change Recognition Certificates will be legally valid. The Act should be changed and the suggestion anyone can change sex should be deleted.
  • *There was a blurring (presumably calculated) of the vague public and general goodwill towards gay men, especially after AIDS, especially in USA, and especially after the great work done by the original, pro-gay, Stonewall. In UK, there was nothing left to do: Being gay was decriminalised, same-sex marriage was already legal in most parts of UK, with the final region having agreed to follow suit, within months. Yet Stonewall managed to persuade Parliament that the only way a man could marry another man would be if one of them 'changed sex'. It was already a falsehood.
GallantKumquat · 20/08/2025 15:26

logiccalls · 20/08/2025 14:25

  • Agreed, except for the mention that if 'transwomen' have a bit of paper (G,R,C) saying they are women, that makes them women. It does not.
  • By analogy, they are not and never will be chickens, even if a vet implants a plastic beak and they wear feathers, and even if a deranged/ gullible/ bribed or fetish-loving Parliament is tricked* into declaring that Chicken Change Recognition Certificates will be legally valid. The Act should be changed and the suggestion anyone can change sex should be deleted.
  • *There was a blurring (presumably calculated) of the vague public and general goodwill towards gay men, especially after AIDS, especially in USA, and especially after the great work done by the original, pro-gay, Stonewall. In UK, there was nothing left to do: Being gay was decriminalised, same-sex marriage was already legal in most parts of UK, with the final region having agreed to follow suit, within months. Yet Stonewall managed to persuade Parliament that the only way a man could marry another man would be if one of them 'changed sex'. It was already a falsehood.
Edited
Show quote history

Yes, it was badly stated. What I meant to say was that by the time the case got to the SC it had already been decided that trans identified people without a GRC must be treated as their biological sex. What was in question before the SC was whether GRC holders had some recognition of their 'registered' sex with respect to the EA. The supreme court found that they didn't. Organizations like Stonewall could have added their voices to the case, but no TR organizations wanted to be put in the position of arguing the narrow case of whether GRC holders had some standing because they would be seen to be saying that those without it had no standing.

Binglebong · 20/08/2025 15:51

My cynical mind thinks they don't want to draw attention to the fact that Stonewall got it wrong as then organisations might look into it a bit more. Right now they are happy with Stonewall law, they don't want it questioned.

EmpressaurusKitty · 20/08/2025 20:08

I’ve just finished listening to https://thisisntworkingpodcast.co.uk/inside-the-stonewall-conference-what-didnt-work/ . The conference didn’t allow questions or photo taking, & people wore green, amber & red stickers to show if people were allowed to talk to them.
It all sounds very strange.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page