In which Amnesty jumps the shark

[WrongKindOfFeminist]

A report on 'anti gender actors' from Amnesty appears to be a puzzling work of jumbled nonsense and overwrought fiction.

Either they completely fail to grasp what 'gender critical' means, or they are deliberately trying desperately to bundle it in with Xtian rightwing US organisations. Maybe both.

Trans activists have been accusing UK feminists of being rightwing Xtian US fundamentalist funded for years. Sometimes it's funny, more often it's just fucking tedious.

Anyway.

'An organised anti-rights movement targeting the rights of women and LGBT+ people is growing in the UK. Over 60% of the organisations mapped have emerged since 2017, the vast majority gender critical organisations'

What the everloving fuck do they think they mean, here?

Feminists 'target' the rights of women? In terms of - feminists have fought long and hard for the rights of women? Yes, well done, Amnesty.

Then they whang on a lot about abortion and well funded US rightwing organisations, including religious groups, etc.

And then ...

'In fact, gender critical organisations only account for 2.5% of total expenditure but have been remarkably successful in realising their agenda through strategic litigation and campaigning.'

Will you ever actually use your brains, Amnesty?

The list at the end should give them a wee clue. Dozens of feminist organisations, almost all listed as 'informal', yet lumped in bizarrely with massive US anti abortion groups.

Idiots.

www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/report-a-growing-threat-the-anti-rights-movement-in-the-uk-july-2026/

It's quite bizarre that they think JKR will leave it there.

I mean she might, but from everything she said I highly doubt it

They’re probably currently dreading Bash Back.

"I never thought the leopards would eat my face!"

• final quote of member of Leopards Eating People's Faces Party

I hope you're right.
My best guess is that getting through the difficulties she has faced in her life has given her enormous resolve, and a very deep hatred for bullies. You could possibly change her mind on a topic through debate, but I doubt there's a force on Earth or under God that could change her mind through threats or intimidation now.

In this context she's standing up for women's rights and on that she's unwavering. It's possible she shows mercy and backs off, especially since they've capitulated to every point she asked for. But it feels like there's a much bigger issue at stake here. Organisations that once stood for good, being fully corrupted and rotten from the inside out. Turning into the polar opposite of the moral values they originally stood for, and using the tactics JKR I assume hates the most ( bullying & intimidation ) to try and force their new dogma on society without debate or consent. I'm almost certainly projecting here, but I think that probably gets JKR's hackles right up. She has the hard earned good fortune of being in a position to do something about it. Personally I hope she does bring them into a court to face the legal consequences of their actions. Pour encourager les autres. Let's see if they have even half the spine she does.

Totally agree, but this doesn’t do what they needed to do to avoid court.

It also simply isn’t true that this was some kind of wildly rogue report outside their usual position.

They know it's not enough to avoid court. They know they are screwed and it's just the best they can do now to plead in mitigation when they get their arses sued off.

Edit for clarity.

Not promoted. Huh. It was handed out (paper copies) to a group of funders on 8th July.

I think you misquoted them. I read their thingy as saying that "fundamental human rights' of trans people is under attack.

Gawdelpus, they have got so turned around by the they/them pronouns that they no longer know plural from singular!

Amnesty boss vows to continue ‘gender justice’ fight despite apology

https://www.thetimes.com/article/27274e03-3e33-4656-8969-f6176555837e?shareToken=b02ca66797401a6bdfc9a21da7965674

I think the journalist has the same idea as many on this thread.

They are already on the ropes because - as the 2nd letter points out - there is a public and therefore difficult-to-deny pattern of defamation.

I look forward to seeing how that plays out in court.

'if Amnesty feel moved to apologise for their apology, it doesn’t indicate that the original was issued in good faith.'

Quite.

I've taken screenshots of a bigger version that hopefully works and is a bit easier to read.

There is also this by JKR.

Well, I'm afraid the trans activists are all calling Ai 'transphobes' for even that mealy mouthed apology.

Is bonkers how they think the money behind a court case is the thing. Instead of the actual court case.

This deserves to be amplified. So the report made it into not only at least two podcasts but also a Parliamentary Briefing. "Not promoted' my arse.

They have had their ideology and worldview pushed by massive top down initiatives and coercion - genderism runs on bullying as a form of conversion. Foundational concepts like fairness and equality are like kryptonite to genderism. I am not surprised that the root concepts of law, which include others.also having rights even if they disagree, are so incomprehensible.

We could look at the whole genderist enterprise as a kind if terrifying test of various systems.

Trans activists are still actively sharing Amnesty's defamatory reports.

Evidence that the damage continues.

Archived:

https://archive.ph/qMYZu

https://bsky.app/profile/mimmymum.bsky.social/post/3mrxl44ozrk2a

At this stage I would line to see an unbiased report on the state of trans-rights.

It would help me understand what specific human right that trans people require to live those lives and what the current blockers are.

For example if the legal analysis was correct on the the Equality Rights Act it would have noted that that there is no human right to use the toilet of your choice, but there is a right to access a toilet where there is reduced risk. I think this is a better starting point to grow a more inclusive society rather than permitting males to use female spaces and fingers crossed they don’t attack people.

I think the Human Rights Commission and other commentators like AI have lost a lot of respect since they didn’t acknowledge the conflict between males who think they are women and women. Sadly it took 2 men punching women in the face and winning Olympic medals for it to become obvious that it’s bollocks.

Of course, it is going to continue to be shared because reinforces this group’s need to be seen as the progressive ones. The power of having AI on their side and using the absurd meaningless language of ‘anti-rights’ is high for them.

That the language and political intimidation that AI have used looks remarkably like DARVO never seems to occur to them.

Likely because their boundaries are so diminished that they cannot recognise DARVO when they see it.

It shows that their apology is nowhere near meeting what is needed to mitigate the damage done.

This was the Amnesty I thought I knew.

2016
“We have learned from so many mistakes in the past that women are at a greater risk for sexual assault and violence if they don’t have separate bathrooms,” says Amnesty International’s deputy director for Europe and Central Asia.

2010
The focus of the campaign for the next year is access to sanitation, safe and private bathing areas for women and improved policing in slums. The recommended actions below call for adequate protection for women from gender-based violence and for more
bathrooms and toilets to be provided for
slum residents. This work is part of Amnesty
International’s Demand Dignity campaign
which aims to end the human rights
violations that drive and deepen global
poverty.
https://www.amnesty.org/ar/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/afr320062010en.pdf

Too often, it is, because if one side hasn't got enough money to go to court or to defend itself in court it will lose the actual court case. And if one side hasn't got the money to appeal against an unfair judgement it will have lost that court case. So in that much, they are right.