Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

How to explain concerns about using Dentons as counsel objectively

17 replies

Noodlie · 24/07/2026 18:40

I am a lawyer, working internationally with a lot of different law firms, and although I knew about the whole playbook that Dentons had put together, I had never come across a Dentons lawyer in the wild, I am not in the UK.

Now my boss is asking me to do a transaction with potentially using them as our counsel, and I can’t do it. I don’t want to give them our money and I can’t trust their advice. I’ve already said I don’t want to use them as counsel, but he’s asked me why. How did I say this though? Can anyone give me a short, non emotional fact based summary of why this firm is utterly devious and anti women’s rights, since I know I will get too angry?

OP posts:
MrsTomRipley · 24/07/2026 18:53

Good luck I hope someone can advise you

LeftieRightsHoarder · 24/07/2026 18:54

I have no useful information, but I sympathise, Noodlie. Could you mention that the work Dentons did for the transgenderist movement has led many people to see it as biased, and associated with a controversial ideological movement?

IwantToRetire · 24/07/2026 18:56

I cant do this personally but found this from LGB Alliance.

UNDER THE RADAR: “DENTONS PLAYBOOK”
A highly influential international resource advises gender identity activists who want to introduce legislative or policy changes – especially in relation to youth – to do so quietly. It recommends avoiding any media coverage or scrutiny at all if possible. It also advises activists who are trying to get measures that might attract opposition onto the statute book to attach them to other, popular measures. The latter tactic serves as a mode of distraction. This dual strategy has been applied adroitly in multiple jurisdictions and organisations. In the Republic of Ireland, for instance, Gender Self-ID legislation was attached to the Equal Marriage bill at the very last moment and adopted with no public debate. At international level, all UN committees but one have switched to “gender” instead of “sex” – again with no wide-ranging discussion. The one exception is the Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Currently, activists are trying to insert “gender” even into CEDAW.

The report that recommends this strategy is called “Only Adults? Good Practices in Legal Gender Recognition for Youth”.[1] It was published jointly by IGLYO (the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex Youth & Student Organisation), the Thomson Reuters Foundation, and the global law firm Dentons.

The “Dentons’ Report” or “Dentons’ Playbook”, as it has become known in some circles, has acquired a certain infamy for its underhand recommendations.
The Dentons Playbook advises activists to avoid obstacles such as having to deal with different opinions, investigations of the unforeseen consequences of controversial legislation, and above all robust debate. In other words, they are advised to steer clear of many of the mechanisms of what would once have been considered a vibrant democracy. It is particularly shocking that the recommendations focus on children and young people, teaching them to find workarounds to normal democratic processes in order to achieve unpopular goals.

The journalist James Kirkup laid out the threat to democracy posed by this report in an article in The Spectator on 2 December 2019.[2] Kirkup was astonished by what he read – and no wonder, for the Dentons Playbook strategy has achieved rapid and radical change worldwide with very little opposition. Most worryingly, a huge medical scandal has arisen as a direct result of teaching children that they all have a “gender identity” and may have been born in “the wrong body”. Fundamentals such as the fact that humans are either male or female and that biological sex is immutable, that women and girls need their own spaces for safety, privacy, and comfort, that men cannot be lesbians, that puberty is a vital stage in the development from childhood to adulthood, and that homosexuality means sexual orientation to others of the same sex have all been overturned silently and – initially – virtually unopposed. In the UK the leading organisation promoting this new doctrine was Stonewall. We will describe Stonewall’s strategy and policies in some detail because they exemplify the point we are making: that sweeping changes have been introduced into society under the radar, without public scrutiny or debate.

While the “Dentons report” was not published until Nov 2019, Stonewall and others had been actively using the tactics summed up by their catch phrase “no debate” since 2015. Back door lobbying took place, and society was fundamentally changed with no consultation or democratic scrutiny.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/136246/html/

So is it possible to argue that because their reputation has publicly be challenged it isn't in the interest of your employers to be linked to them. Professionally better to be seen as neutral.

Minasama · 24/07/2026 18:59

I’m not familiar with this controversy, but I knew someone who trained with Denton’s years ago.

-What is your concern?
-Does the area where you have concerns affect their legal practice in the area in which you would be working with them?
-Who internally is appointing them and how important are they to your future career progression?

Edited to add I just read the prior comment and agree that the angle that they have attracted adverse publicity/scrutiny is a good one to go with.

MarieDeGournay · 24/07/2026 19:01

I'm in two minds about this:

I am as critical of the 2019 'Dentons Document' as the next person, but it could be argued that they were given a job to do by their clients, [the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex (LGBTQI) Youth & Student Organisation (IGLYO) and the Thomson Reuters Foundation], and they did it. 'Just doing my job, guv', and they would have done an equally thorough job if the Feminism: Sex and gender discussions board had commissioned a different report.

The most 'professional' thing I can think of saying is
'Isn't it a bit of a reputational risk for our company to be associated with Dentons?' That highly controversial report they did back in 2019 was officially entitled 'Only Adults? Good Practices in Legal Gender Recognition for Youth' but it is universally known as 'The Dentons Document', you know...'

MarieDeGournay · 24/07/2026 19:02

Analysis of the Dentons Document: A How to Manual - Women Speak Tasmania
This has a link to the actual document.

Lovelyview · 24/07/2026 19:02

As a starting point, I'd have a chat with AI about it. Put in your brief and ask AI for reasons for and against using Denton's for that brief. Ask it to recommend other firms which could be a better fit. Most law firms are sharks so your boss is unlikely to be impressed by you not liking them ( though I agree with you). Ultimately, to do your job well, you need to find the best solution for your company. Obviously, triple check anything AI says before putting it in a recommendation. Good luck!

ChippyDinner · 24/07/2026 19:03

Can You frame it as concern about how it looks to stakeholders? So “Dentons is a controversial choice….they’re strongly associated with transgender activism. I’m not sure whether we risk alienating stakeholders who might have different opinions?”

That approach avoids “outing” you as gender critical, if that’s a concern.

MarieDeGournay · 24/07/2026 19:12

ChippyDinner · 24/07/2026 19:03

Can You frame it as concern about how it looks to stakeholders? So “Dentons is a controversial choice….they’re strongly associated with transgender activism. I’m not sure whether we risk alienating stakeholders who might have different opinions?”

That approach avoids “outing” you as gender critical, if that’s a concern.

Not just 'associated with transgender activism', but with campaigning for the right to self-ID for young people .

The report was all about making transitioning/self-ID as easy as possible for young people. TBH I can't remember what the minimum age the report recommends, but it certainly finds 18 too high.

The introduction to the report laments:
Most self-determination laws exclude people under 18 or impose requirements that significantly limit their access to these important legal processes.

and later on there is this:
A final lesson from the campaigns we studied, is that activists should be wary of compromise; compromise can be a double-edged sword. For example, in Ireland, compromise on legal gender recognition for young trans persons was critical to getting the legislation passed, but it might take years to revise the legislation to render it more favourable to trans youth. [p21]

So Ireland - which has had full self-ID - still isn't doing enough because it doesn't extend to young people under 18!

So perhaps the most convincing criticism of Dentons is that the document that bears their name was focused on under 18s.

BettyBooper · 24/07/2026 19:19

I'm not sure if this is completely relevant, but the most recent This Isn't Working podcast focuses on big brands backing away from GI. It lists corporate reasons to explain to bosses why going in with GI is not a good idea for good business.

Might give you some ideas?

It's an interesting listen in any case!

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/0aweS_2qt7A?is=84bDW9ERM1cuc4lA

SadiraOfTyr · 24/07/2026 19:22

Lovelyview · 24/07/2026 19:02

As a starting point, I'd have a chat with AI about it. Put in your brief and ask AI for reasons for and against using Denton's for that brief. Ask it to recommend other firms which could be a better fit. Most law firms are sharks so your boss is unlikely to be impressed by you not liking them ( though I agree with you). Ultimately, to do your job well, you need to find the best solution for your company. Obviously, triple check anything AI says before putting it in a recommendation. Good luck!

FFS don’t do this. Although as OP is an international lawyer I assume she has enough sense not to use AI for anything of import.

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 24/07/2026 19:56

Now my boss is asking me to do a transaction with potentially using them as our counsel, and I can’t do it. I don’t want to give them our money and I can’t trust their advice.

OP, that's quite a strange dilemma! Would you have personal liability if you worked with Denton's and a problem arose later on? Surely, protection for your firm can be built into the contract. Lawyers don't do anything without a contract!

If there is no personal liability to you, why do you care who your firm uses? Is it really worth losing your job over?

If you really can't trust Denton's advice, and you've already told your boss you don't trust them, let your boss make the decision. That's what bosses are for. I personally wouldn't have said anything until I'd had alternatives ready to go. Bosses like solutions, not complaints with no reasoning attached.

I think Denton's involvement in everything is probably too extensive to condense into a pithy statement, but I think someone up thread has posted their document. You might be able to make something from that.

But, if it were me, I wouldn't waste my time or risk my job. Let your boss make the decision. If you were the boss, it would be your decision, but you're not.

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 24/07/2026 20:08

ps. just to add, I know a lot of lawyers. Obviously lawyers cannot bring their firms into disrepute, through action or through withholding information. But that's why firms do their due diligence before drawing up contracts. They would have done their due diligence on you before they hired you, and someone will have done enough due diligence on Denton's before suggesting that your firm work with them.

Which means they either already know about Denton's and they are satisfied that they're happy to work with them, or they haven't done their due diligence, in which case it's not your problem or responsibility if it all goes wrong!

Watertight contracts, is what I'd recommend! IANAL.

But of course you know all this already, because you ARE a lawyer!

poohbearhunny · 24/07/2026 20:25

As a pp suggested, they were just following their instructions from their client, as any good lawyer would do.

I would argue that it’s your role as a lawyer to be objective and focus on the task at hand. Presuming they are advising on nothing to do with gender etc then this should be easy to separate. In work you will often find people who you really don’t like or really don’t want to work with, you generally just have to get on with it anyway.

For what it’s worth, I’m based in the UK and they do not have any kind of egregious reputation with the general public.

If you really can’t stomach it, then as others have suggested you could base it on a potential adverse reaction to the work they have previously done. Whether your boss will go for that or not, given that their reputation is generally fine, I don’t know.

I would suggest it’s unwise to go into any kind of issue around women’s rights, as it’s possible that you will alienate your boss or risk landing yourself in some serious hot water based on their own views

IwantToRetire · 24/07/2026 20:29

re comments about Dentons just doing work for clients - this was pro bono work and as such I suspect far more along the lines for which they have been publicly criticised. How to present information to support the cause they think important enough to work free for, as opposed to taking money to do a proper, professional job.

Unless of course it turns out that Dentons have done lots of pro bono work for gender critical women's groups - or eve LGB Alliance.

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 24/07/2026 20:43

Can anyone give me a short, non emotional fact based summary of why this firm is utterly devious and anti women’s rights, since I know I will get too angry?

I've also never heard a lawyer describe another firm as "devious." Law firms such as Denton's have a lot of lawyers. Surely, they can't all be devious?

If you're going to get angry just discussing another law firm, I suggest that you just might be in the wrong profession. Every lawyer I've ever dealt with has been courteous and professional to the point of being cold and even bland. It's hard to be analytical when you're busy being furious.

Final point: why are you asking potential non-lawyers (like me) for advice, when most lawyers have colleagues, lawyer friends, and even their own attorney to ask advice? I find this odd. If you ask your personal attorney for advice, then your discussion would be covered by attorney-client privilege (depending in what jurisdiction you live). S/he might be able to advise about whether or not you might be risking your job. You'd probably get better advice as well!

Good luck!

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 24/07/2026 20:44

Given how successful their playbook has been, your boss might be very impressed with the results of their work and decide to hire them. 😡

New posts on this thread. Refresh page