"Like a snowball: the growth and impact of the gender critical movement in the UK" - if you wanted a very good reason to never give Amnesty a penny, this is it. But a lot of people will read and believe.

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/like-a-snowball/

"Over the past ten years the situation for LGBTI+ people in the UK has deteriorated. In particular there has been an organised backlash against trans people’s rights starting in 2017/18. This report maps the gender critical movement in the UK and the role of the media in normalising anti-trans rhetoric.

Our research shows that an organised gender critical movement emerged as a response to proposals to reform the Gender Recognition Act in 2017/18 and has gained huge influence in public and political discourse since then.

Between January 2020 and April 2025, media coverage of issues about trans people has been excessively high compared to the size of the trans population, their role in society, and public interest in these topics.

Four outlets examined in the research published 17,000 articles between January 2020 and April 2025, an average of 9 articles per day and ‘gender critical’ framing became common over this period of time while the voices of trans people have been almost completely absent."

while the voices of trans people have been almost completely absent

Are you kidding me?

I mean I have never heard one, so, maybe they don't exist?...

OK Mr Menno, here's your starter for ten, to the tune of Madonna's Like A Virgin:
🎶'Like a snowball...'
😁

Do not dehumanise trans people, e.g. by asking gotcha questions such as ‘can women have a penis’.

That's a "gotcha question"? In the olden days it used to be called "a question".

Edited to add: No, I take that back. In the olden days, that wasn't even a question!

I’m not entirely sure how anyone could look at news pieces since 2017 and comment on the absence of trans voices. Constant presence maybe. What outlets and publications did they review? Certainly not the BBC and the Guardian.

From the report:

The first part presents the findings of a Corpus Linguistics Analysis into how the British press typically presents issues related to trans people, and whose voices are given prominence. The Corpus Linguistics Analysis considers the reports of four major outlets, the Guardian, the Sun, the Telegraph and the Times & Sunday Times between January 2020 and April 2025. The methodology is explained in full in the technical explainer.

The second part is a mapping of GC actors based on analysis of websites, social media accounts, press mentions and records held by the Charity Commission and Companies House.

My God, these bloody women wanting rights such as to not have to get undressed in front of a bloke.

Amnesty: another once great group turned absolutely batshit by activists

Key findings
• Between January 2020 and April 2025, media coverage of issues about trans people has been excessively high compared to the size of the trans population, their role in society, and public interest in these topics.
• Across the four outlets, a total of 17,000 articles were published between January 2020 and April 2025, an average of 264 articles per month, or 9 per day.
• Most media reports about trans people have a negative sentiment, while trans people are hardly seen in stories. When they do appear, it is as criminals or murder victims.
• For each year analysed, the UK Prime Minister, the leader of the opposition, and the Scottish First Minister appear consistently, suggesting that issues of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ have been elevated to top political priorities.
• Since 2017, a diverse and coordinated GC movement has appeared in the UK. Of the 51 organisations Amnesty International UK mapped, only 3 were established before 2017.
• Except for three registered charities, Sex Matters, FiLiA and LGB Alliance, well over half of the groups mapped are informal (32), followed by registered companies (17, one of which is now dissolved).
• Analysis of available accounts for FiLiA, Sex Matters and LGB Alliance for the financial years 2019 to 2024 shows a combined expenditure of £3.6 million.

Between January 2020 and April 2025, media coverage of issues about trans people has been excessively high compared to the size of the trans population

I would hazard a guess that this is because a small number of trans-identified men have been making a huge, and disproportionate, negative impact on women, who are, collectively, over 50% of the population

and

The detriment caused by said men is disproportionate in its impact due to the nature of said actions (see urine protests, threatening women with rape and decapitation, doxxing and hounding people out of their jobs, etc. )

And, despite these things, media coverage has been nowhere near proportionate to the seriousness of some of these actions.

And here was me thinking it was women's voices that weren't heard when our spaces were handed over to these men without us being asked so much as how we felt about it or how it might affect us.

I'm so disappointed in Amnesty. As someone who supported them since I was a teen in the Amnesty group at school, it's so sad and infuriating to see what they've become.

So there’s simultaneously too little coverage of trans issues and also too much?

It’s obviously written by an activist.

And trans issues should be ‘top political priorities’ but also it’s a problem that they are?

I'm so disappointed in Amnesty. As someone who supported them since I was a teen in the Amnesty group at school, it's so sad and infuriating to see what they've become.

Yes it is, Duane. I really thought they were doing good work years ago.

When asked (by me) whether Amnesty supports toilets for women in developing countries, Mr Amnesty Chugger was happy to preen and say "of course". I then asked him why Amnesty didn't support toilets for women in the UK. He had no answer.

Didn’t they do an advert where people were supposed to celebrate the idea that males could be lesbians? Makes you wonder why anyone would want to push back on that!

They obviously haven't looked at the Metro. They publish about 5 trans joy stories a day.

Shrodinger’s coverage.
Too much sunlight, not enough amplification, perhaps.

Simultaneously, ‘no one can tell because I pass’, and ‘no one minds because they never say anything’.

🤷‍♀️

Tbf Amnesty haven’t always been a great group - as in their support of the Paedophile Information Exchange back in their Liberty days.

"Like a snowball: the growth and impact of the gender critical movement in the UK"

Wow, from the headline, I assumed they were saying this was a good thing. Women are working to protect their sex-based rights.

Then I realised that it was Amnesty.

For fucks sake, I used to be a supporter and do all their letter-writing campaigns (usually to highlight the plight of political prisoners) - what happened?

I guess that's a rhetorical question.

I found this report hiliariously po faced.

Remember when AI used to campaign on actual issues? God, the amount of unpaid work I did for them.

Fucking risible.

I'd bet a large number of the news stories mentioning trans people, especially as murder victims, reference Brianna Ghey. Would they have been happier with less coverage? It was an awful, cruel crime. The perpetrators being children and their victim a trans-identifying boy, these are facets that are bound to catch the attention of the public and hence the press. Brianna's mum going forward with her campaign also kept the story in the media.

As for the rest, perhaps a few people with trans identities should tone down the crimes they commit and go quietlyto the jails that align withtheir biological sex to serve their sentences. Don't go all Isla Bryson, then politicians won't make more headlines by talking absolute mince when asked a question...sorry...a gotcha.

Eta correcting an unfortunate autocorrupt I'd missed.

Yeah, I wish I'd known about that way back when.

How tf do these organisations manage to just blithely continue after things like this? See also, Harriet Harman's career.

The report analysed that and compared with mentions of Isla Bryson.

A surprising angle to take, imo.

Here's their recs;

'Amnesty International UK recommends the following:
•
Seek advice from trans-led organisations with communication and media expertise to improve editorial guidelines.

Reduce coverage to evidence-based reporting of issues that do affect trans people directly, and when doing so, ensure the voices of those affected are front and centre.
•
Do not dehumanise trans people, e.g. by asking gotcha questions such as ‘can women have a penis’.
•
Cover positive stories about trans people, their lives and contributions to their communities and society.
•
Do not frame reporting as a ‘debate’.
•
Provide nuance when discussing legal issues. When mentioning that GC belief is protected under the EA, clarify that the expression of such belief is not protected if the manner of expression constitutes harassment or discrimination. For example, misgendering trans people or creating a hostile environment through repeated or offensive conduct can cross the line into unlawful behaviour under the EA.
•
Increase the representation of trans people in reporting, both as authors and as respondents.
•
Ensure trans people can represent themselves on their own terms and do not ask them to justify their own existence and human rights.
•
Qualify GC and explain that it is an ideological stance that seeks to restrict the rights of trans people held by some lobby groups.
•
Do not imply that GC views represent women’s views.
•
Do not attribute expertise to GC campaigners when they are not qualified to speak on a specific issue, such as gender affirming care.'

Do not dehumanise trans people, e.g. by asking gotcha questions such as ‘can women have a penis’.

DO NOT ASK DIFFICULT QUESTIONS