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/

Most of the respondents in the various ETs & other court cases have effectively bottomless purses e.g. NHS, Scottish Government, Police, Prison Service etc

Yes. Whereas Sandie Peggy hadn't, and nor had many other victims of vexatious litigation by that ex-cop whose alias I can never remember. Many, many women dipped into their pockets to help them. And thank the Lord for JKR doing the same for them now.

I agree.

Unfortunately you are correct. It's our money they use to pay out on stupid policies that conflict with the law. They do things against our interests with our money, and when they lose in a court of law we have to pay.

I really think the law needs changing here. The lawyers who work for public organisations should be held to a code of conduct where they follow set legal guidelines and observe the law irrespective of how they feel about the law. When they advise senior public sector management "what you are trying to do is against the law" at that point the management should become personally liable if they ignore the legal advice. Lose a court case? If there's a record of them ignoring the legal advice, any payment comes out of their own pockets. Sell their house to make the payout if necessary. Legal costs they become liable for those too on both sides.
It would take for that law to be enforced exactly once before all public sector senior management decided to be a lot less moronically creative in their decisions and follow the law. If the lawyer who advised didn't give the correct legal advice, they become liable too. Again the legal advice would be rock solid and follow the guidelines after a single instance occurred.

The police (in the US ) have a thing called "qualified immunity". They generally can't be held liable for doing their job, but that word qualified at the front means "as long as they are doing their job the proper way and following the guidelines". Some officers have lost that immunity and ended up in severe legal trouble because of that qualified word. It should be the same for management, qualified, ignore the guidelines and you are personally on the hook for any payouts.

@lechiffre55 as a fairly lowly and very frustrated public sector worker, I would welcome this. Just follow the sodding law. Although I might change my mind if I think more about unintended consequences and laws that may be made in the future, sigh. Just for a minute, though, it was a beautiful dream.

Somebody should embarrass Amnesty by putting that 2016 quote (duly attributed) on billboards where lots of people will see it.

Hear Hear!

It would be great if JKR tweeted it

Yeah, it's more that they believe there's no foundation for taking, in this case Amnesty, to court. There's hinting that it's a transaction. And that's if there was no money involved, Amnesty would be right.

I'd love that. Let's hope she does.

When they advise senior public sector management "what you are trying to do is against the law" at that point the management should become personally liable if they ignore the legal advice. Lose a court case? If there's a record of them ignoring the legal advice, any payment comes out of their own pockets.

Hear, hear. (Or here, here, I can never decide!)

SwirlyGates
Hear, hear. (Or here, here, I can never decide!)

It's a translation of "oyez", which means "hear" (or "attend" or "listen"). Used to be shouted by town criers, and for all I know still is but I haven't ever heard one do it.

When they advise senior public sector management "what you are trying to do is against the law" at that point the management should become personally liable if they ignore the legal advice. Lose a court case? If there's a record of them ignoring the legal advice, any payment comes out of their own pockets. Sell their house to make the payout if necessary. Legal costs they become liable for those too on both sides.

It would take for that law to be enforced exactly once before all public sector senior management decided to be a lot less moronically creative in their decisions and follow the law. If the lawyer who advised didn't give the correct legal advice, they become liable too. Again the legal advice would be rock solid and follow the guidelines after a single instance occurred.

Hear, hear from me too. It's our taxpayers money they're pissing away on the luxury beliefs of unaccountable managers that are breaking the law. I'm very, very sick of it and it's breaking the social contract.

I'd vote for any party that had this as a policy and a reasonable route to doing it.

A development that is not helpful to anyone.

Trans activists have now created a database, which names specific women.

'A record of the gender-critical and conversion-practices organisations named in Amnesty International UK's report on the UK anti-rights movement, which Amnesty withdrew days after publishing. The archive keeps the report's findings available and documents each organisation from public records.'

Archive: https://archive.ph/9wlw5

Given Amnesty's role in encouraging this targeting of women, I think it actually looks like incitement as well as defamation.

I wrote a polite letter to the CEO of Amnesty International UK over the weekend.

Billboards would be nice but it would also be pleasantly ironic if Amnesty received lots of postcards with @Keeptoiletssafe 's quote which should fit nicely:

“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,” 2016, Amnesty International.

I have a blank postcard and will enjoy getting my coloured pencils (stood down since NLS) out to decorate it.

That's an excellent idea.

I'm also just wondering whether any of the women in Amnesty's report may want to make charges of malcomms, stirring up hatred, etc.

Plan International, WaterAid and Amnesty have all had programmes related to increasing toilet provision for women. It is well known that Western aid agencies have built toilets that women have stayed away from as they are unsuitable around men.

I don’t want to be attributed to any cause other than discussing safe toilet designs for everyone.

I didn’t link the quote above to a source as I was trying to keep the individual spokesperson out of it.

However seeing as this has blown up a bit, here’s some links. I believe the Amnesty quote about ‘mistakes’ was also mentioned in a book ‘Invisible Women’ though please double check as I haven’t a copy to hand.

“At a minimum, this would include setting up single sex, well-lit toilet facilities and separate safe sleeping areas. These women and their children have fled some of the world’s most dangerous areas and it is shameful that they are still at risk on European soil,”
https://www.amnesty.nl/actueel/female-refugees-face-physical-assault-exploitation-and-sexual-harassment-on-their-journey-through-europe
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.
https://qz.com/692711/the-radically-simple-way-to-make-female-refugees-safer-from-sexual-assault-decent-bathrooms
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
https://www.amnesty.org/ar/wp-content/uploads/2

This is a video from WaterAid about why separate women’s toilets are needed for biological and safety reasons and why women’s toilet needs are overlooked because women aren’t involved in the planning process. Exactly the same the world over.

I have loads of examples of these.

There is also this one from Amnesty in 2016 too:

“Imagine living in a refugee camp where you are too scared to go the toilet, or being subjected to sexual harassment on a daily basis in your host community because of your gender or identity. This is the terrifying reality for hundreds of thousands of women and girls and LGBTI refugees around the world, and the shameful inaction of wealthy governments is prolonging it,” said Catherine Murphy, Acting Director of the Gender, Sexuality and Identity Programme at Amnesty International.”
“At an absolute minimum, this means ensuring that safe, toilet facilities and sleeping areas are provided for women and girls, and LGBTI refugees, as well as ensuring access to services and healthcare for those who have suffered gender based violence.”
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2016/11/refugees-are-in-urgent-need-of-protection-from-sexual-and-gender-based-violence/

Thank you kindly for the links and sources @Keeptoiletssafe I agree we should not name individuals, as long as a representative of Amnesty said it in public and it's clearly something Amnesty have supported for a long time. One of the groups - FWS ? - mentioned in their response letter that Amnesty supports separate toilets for women in other countries.

It's the bit about learning from the "many mistakes of the past" that I especially like.

Though based on your extended quotes Amnesty do seem to have been getting confused about sex, gender and sexual orientation for at least a decade!

Yes.

Toilets are a really difficult situation that men will exploit. There are cases where men have said they were transwomen and assaulted women in women’s toilets. Afaik they were men as they entered the women’s toilets and were arrested as men.

There’s some really unpleasant stories from women and girls from many different countries.

It’s long been said that there aren’t enough studies on toilet behaviour and misuse. Indian academics have studied rape and sexual assaults in unisex toilets in schools. Girls would rather go out in the open than use unisex toilets.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014292125000030

https://voxdev.org/topic/health/protecting-girls-school-how-sanitation-infrastructure-can-reduce-sexual-violence

The good news this year for schoolgirls in India:
https://healthpolicy-watch.news/more-girls-will-finish-school-if-indias-supreme-court-ruling-on-menstrual-health-is-implemented/

Men are twice as strong as women.

The strength advantage that a man has on a woman is maintained after transitioning.

Therefore women cannot defend themselves if assaulted by a transwoman.

Men commit nearly 100% of violent assaults against women.

Men commit most violent assaults against women in private spaces including toilets.

There is no evidence that males commit less violence to women when transitioned.

Therefore toilets for females must always be single sex.

Agree, but also the original 1975 legislation on exceptions for single sex spaces referred to men being embarrassed by a woman’s presence.

I’m furious that 50 years later suddenly women who want privacy are just ‘obsessed with other people’s genitals’.

I am absolutely for single sex toilets. I campaign for them here because they are safer by design. Only single sex toilets within a single sex environment can have door gaps above and below the door (the latter a maximum 15cm). These door gaps are advantageous for cleaning, ventilation, preventing misuse within the cubicle (sex, drugs, vandalism) and supervision in an emergency if someone collapses due to choking, heart attack, stroke, seizure or hypo. I have many real-life accounts of where these door gaps saved lives and where people died in an enclosed toilet in public areas. And also of toilet assaults. I saved a life because of a door gap - a young woman had (probably too much to drink) gone to the toilet, choked on her own vomit and stopped breathing. I want provision to be the safest designs for safeguarding anyone at their most vulnerable.

If you have a mixed sex environment, in this country the door gaps go. Therefore you are creating a more dangerous environment if the user is in danger.

The situations in refugee camps is dire and many women there, and in dangerous home situations (with no home toilet) will go inside their tent/home for example go inside a bag/pot and fling it out rather than venture outside.

Sorry that’s a rushed last post as trying to work. Hopefully though I am showing how lucky we are in this country to have proper sanitation. Most people have access to a toilet. They should be built for health and safety as a priority. Yet in this country, especially in schools, the amount of provision that are mixed sex designs have increased, leading to problems.