Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Scope is punishing women for wrongthink - Whole choir cancelled from London Marathon because of personal GC views of one person

315 replies

singthing · 24/04/2026 16:18

Choir dropped from London Marathon over founder’s ‘gender-critical views’
Charity cancels singers who raise runners’ spirits owing to Janet Murray’s opposition to gender ideology

A choir has been dropped from the London Marathon over a member’s gender-critical views.

The Singing Striders are frequently booked to stand on the sidelines and raise the spirits of runners, and the group had been invited to support the upcoming marathon by Scope, a leading disability charity.

However, the amateur ensemble was dropped because a single member had been critical of gender ideology.

This is the view that gender is defined by self-identification, rather than biological sex, meaning that those born male can become women.

Janet Murray, the choir founder, was informed that her opposition to this worldview went against Scope’s “commitment to diversity and inclusion”.

Charity bosses also told her “we are concerned about your views because we don’t agree with your views”.

As a writer and journalist, Murray has publicly expressed concerns about the inclusion of biological males in women’s sports and organisations such as Girlguiding.

It is understood that the decision to cancel the choir, which was to perform for no fee, came after Scope received two anonymous complaints about these opinions.

The charity has since defended its stance as it is “committed to the equality and inclusion of trans and non-binary disabled people”.

Janet Murray, the writer
Murray says it is ironic that Scope should bring politics into a space that was simply about supporting charity runners Credit: Belinda Jiao
Ms Murray told The Telegraph: “When cancel culture finds its way into something as joyful as a choir singing for marathon runners, it’s a sobering reminder of how insidious it can be.

“My choir exists to lift people up, helping them through the hardest moments as they raise money for charity. I’ve run the London Marathon myself, and I know how much that support means.”

The writer said that while she did have gender-critical views, they did not enter into her work with the choir, adding: “I leave politics at home when I’m with the choir – and so does everyone else.

“Ironically, it’s Scope that’s brought politics into a space that was simply about supporting charity runners – effectively silencing a choir in the process.”

The cancellation came despite the Singing Striders performing for Scope at past marathons without incident.

The London Marathon has several “cheer points” along the route to boost the morale of runners, and Scope has two dedicated spaces this year, at Tower Hill and Woolwich

The London Marathon will take place on Sunday
The London Marathon will take place on Sunday Credit: Karwai Tang/WireImage
The Singing Striders were set to raise a chorus at the mile-three cheer point in Woolwich, performing from 8.30am to 1pm, with minor expenses for travel covered by Scope.

The choir had practised for months ahead of the marathon, and members were understood to be surprised and disappointed by the decision, and hopeful that an organisation might come forward to offer them a space at the event on Sunday.

Critics of gender ideology have been subjected to cancellation since the issue of transgender identities emerged into public consciousness, with figures such as Graham Linehan, the Father Ted co-writer, being an early victim of censoriousness.

Graham Linehan on the trans debate and new Father Ted material
Read more
In 2024, the debate shifted again when the Cass review cautioned against rushing children into life-changing gender transitions, particularly with the use of potentially harmful puberty blockers.

Scope has defended its decision to cancel the marathon choir, stating that the move “reflects where we stand as an organisation and our commitment to our colleagues, volunteers and supporters”.

John McLachlan, Scope’s chief executive, said: “Concerns were raised to us about the views of the founder and director of Singing Striders, a choir who were due to volunteer to perform for us at the London Marathon. After consideration, we took the decision to not have their choir perform on our behalf.

“We understand and respect the right for people to hold different views about inclusion. At Scope, we are committed to the equality and inclusion of trans and non-binary disabled people. We have trans and non-binary colleagues, volunteers and supporters.

“Scope is committed to equality and inclusion. Our EDI policy sets out our commitment to be an inclusive employer and inclusive charity.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/24/choir-dropped-london-marathon-founder-gender-critical-views/
https://archive.ph/LXP0N

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/04/24/choir-dropped-london-marathon-founder-gender-critical-views

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 02/05/2026 21:40

Their serious issues with equality and diversity right there in their own words. With no awareness whatsoever.

And that's before you get into the huge issues of this being an extremist political position incompatible with safeguarding, when it's a charity specifically to do with the highly vulnerable.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 03/05/2026 06:48

JellySaurus · 02/05/2026 20:29

So Scope said“Gender-critical views are highly polarising and we are sensitive to the fact that for some of our valued members, supporters and colleagues, gender-critical beliefs may be deeply upsetting and alienating.”

Clearly they have never considered that transgenderist views are highly polarising. Clearly they are insensitive to the fact that for some of their valued members, supporters and colleagues, transgenderist beliefs may be deeply upsetting and alienating.

Clearly they have never considered that transgenderist views are highly polarising.

A good point, they seem to start of with the premise that GI is the majority view and then along comes the GC view which is the minority view, and that is causing division and polarisation.

Where's as in fact the GC view is the norm and GI is the invading view, it's all part of the 'normalisation' ethic of Queer Theory.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 16/05/2026 08:37

Me too, her views are grounded in fact and law, so she has a good case. At the very least I'd like Scope to sack the Alphabetty who's responsible for cancelling the choir.

AlexaStopAlexaNo · 16/05/2026 08:57

Ah good for them! If Scope face real, public consequences for their actions other organisations might think twice.

KnottyAuty · 16/05/2026 09:11

lcakethereforeIam · 16/05/2026 08:28

Superb!
I would hope this will be a win - and a warning shot to the charities sector that this wholescale discrimination against women/GC beliefs is unacceptable.

We just need a few more idiotic organisations to get their insane beliefs out in the open so that a few more cases can be brought and get this genderist supertanker turned on to a more sensible course

PrettyDamnCosmic · 16/05/2026 09:11

At the very least I'd like Scope to sack the Alphabetty who's responsible for cancelling the choir.

It was the interim CEO who was responsible so I think it unlikely.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 16/05/2026 09:11

Bloody well done Janet - the charity sector also needs its moment in the spotlight as it's completely captured with this nonsense too

mrshoho · 16/05/2026 09:29

Best of luck to Janet bringing this claim. These large high profile charities must take responsibility for abiding by our Equality laws. Pandering to a minority that leads to ignoring the law and trampling over the rights of the majority makes no sense morally or financially. I wonder how this ridiculous situation has already affected their income stream? Charities having to spend resources on these totally avoidable legal fights is such a kick in the teeth for their donors.

MassiveWordSalad · 16/05/2026 10:02

Go on Janet and friends, good for you. At this point it seems that legal action is the only thing that makes organisation take note. Best of luck 🤞🏼

Datun · 16/05/2026 10:56

I don't see how she can't win. They said they don't like her views. Full stop.

Of course, it's not their bloody money, is it. It's the donors, ours. So they don't care.

I wonder how many charities will not give a flying fuck about losing, as long as they virtue signal. You'd think, economically they'd stop, but ideologically, who knows.

RoyalCorgi · 16/05/2026 11:48

Datun · 16/05/2026 10:56

I don't see how she can't win. They said they don't like her views. Full stop.

Of course, it's not their bloody money, is it. It's the donors, ours. So they don't care.

I wonder how many charities will not give a flying fuck about losing, as long as they virtue signal. You'd think, economically they'd stop, but ideologically, who knows.

I don't see how she can lose, either, unless they manage to prove that her expression of her views on social media was particularly offensive. But Janet's posts are usually very measured - especially in comparison to posts from trans activists - so I think they will struggle.

And even if they did try to argue that her expression of her views was offensive, it's unfortunate for them that the CEO initially told Janet the choir was being cancelled for her views, not her expression of those views. It looks as if the line about her 'language' or her 'expression' came afterwards, as a fairly desperate attempt to stay within the law.

Theeyeballsinthesky · 16/05/2026 11:48

Datun · 16/05/2026 10:56

I don't see how she can't win. They said they don't like her views. Full stop.

Of course, it's not their bloody money, is it. It's the donors, ours. So they don't care.

I wonder how many charities will not give a flying fuck about losing, as long as they virtue signal. You'd think, economically they'd stop, but ideologically, who knows.

Having read the article about the bbc and how it was captured, you could easily transpose that to the charity sector (and the NHS and the civil service)

MrsOvertonsWindow · 16/05/2026 12:06

Datun · 16/05/2026 10:56

I don't see how she can't win. They said they don't like her views. Full stop.

Of course, it's not their bloody money, is it. It's the donors, ours. So they don't care.

I wonder how many charities will not give a flying fuck about losing, as long as they virtue signal. You'd think, economically they'd stop, but ideologically, who knows.

They won't stop until people are personally held to account for their prejudice and illegal behaviour. How many of the swathe of people giving testimony in courts about their bullying and often illegal treatment of women and men have ever been held to account by their employers?

IdaGlossop · 16/05/2026 12:27

Janet, who I met through work years ago, has just asked me to send her my email exchange with Scope. I emailed them on the weekend of the marathon, using sarcastically the words 'very inclusive' ie discriminatory. Earlier this week, I received in reply the stock response Janet has shared on ?LinkedIn. I have replied, saying I do not accept their explanation that the ban was about the language Janet used as I have been at events where she has spoken; she speaks in a professional way and none of her writing about trans issues has used inflammatory language. I conclude by saying that I hold to my view that Scope did not like the content of what Janet wss saying and that I do not buy the language argument they are using.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread