They disagreed with the dogma
An exchange:
So let’s talk about Lucy Bannerman’s article:
Stonewall has been accused of using a workplace equality scheme to “coerce” publicly-funded organisations and companies to lobby for changes to the law.
The missing agent again. Accused by whom? I guess that’s a newspaper convention, because the lede is supposed to be very stripped-down and grabby, so if the “by whom” is complicated it gets put off until later. Anway –
Documents show how the charity seeks to control what NHS trusts, government departments and local councils say on their social media accounts, demanding public support for its controversial views on gender identity, in return for points on its Top 100 Employers index.
I’m still wondering how Stonewall managed to corner the market on this. Why can’t NHS trusts and the rest just tell them to fuck off?
The Times can disclose that the charity is using the index to force organisations to lobby on its behalf, rewarding them with higher rankings if they bring their own policies in line with Stonewall’s agenda, and dropping them from the Top 100 if they do not.
Which is probably how any such arrangement works – if you flatter us we will flatter you back; if you don’t, we’ll leave you and find someone who will. The question is why everyone needs to be flattered by Stonewall. Are there any other subordinated groups that have this kind of lock on public bodies? Is there a feminist group that gets to make demands this way?
It reminds me of the lock the Muslim Council of Britain used to have on the BBC and other news media; I wonder if it was this explicit.
Simon Fanshawe, one of the original founders of Stonewall, told The Times: “[The index] started out as a way of helping employers ensure their lesbian and gay staff were well looked after, so for example, that they got compassionate leave if their partner was ill or died. It was a kind of kitemark.
“But what it has turned into now sounds more like coercion — a way of coercing employers in their language and structure, instead of encouraging them to embrace the different needs of their LGBT staff.”
So basically all about the propaganda.
More later. I need to grab a walk before it gets too hot.
Brava to Lucy Bannerman. Sometimes it seems that Stonewall has become an emblem, and it’s more important to defend Stonewall and their actions than to stand for the people they are supposed to be advocates for. Well, except they’re advocates for different people now.
“The Missing Agent”: a new spy novel written almost entirely in the passive voice.
I think it works like this:
Whether you’re an employer in search of “diversity training,” or a media organization in search of guests or sources for quotes, you want to bring in an organization that is seen as having expertise on the subject.
But there’s no real objective standard for expertise on LGBTQ issues or Muslim issues. People can more or less declare themselves experts and, if a sufficient number of others buy into it, it is deemed to be true. (Ok, I suppose you could say that a degree in Queer Studies, etc. is an objective measure, but that’s going to lead to the same problem I’m about to describe.)
Who becomes a (self-declared) expert on these issues? People with more… aggressive/extreme/choose-your- adjective views. That’s who is going to devote their lives and careers to it. That’s who’s going to draw donations that pay for those “experts.” Note that this can be extremes on either end — no doubt you can find conservative religious groups who pronounce themselves experts on LGBTQ issues — but they’re not seen as credible.
Hence the trans debate in the public is dominated by those with aggressive views of trans rights, with a small bit of attention paid to those detransitioners who are vocal in their own way. But trans people (and other LGBTQ people) who have “moderate” views (e.g. “let’s not discriminate, let’s call people by the names and pronouns they want, but maybe there are serious issues around women’s-only spaces, etc.”) are not likely to form or financially support advocacy groups, so they never make it onto the radar of journalists or executives.
Actually, this is true on so many issues. People and groups who hold themselves out as, and are described in the media as, “Christian leaders,” don’t represent a true cross-section of Christian belief. It’s the evangelical, social conservatives who are disproportionately represented, because the moderate, mind-their-own-business Christians don’t form or donate to advocacy groups by and large. (They just pop up in the comments section of atheist blogs to whine about “militant atheists” and how moderate Christians are ignored in religious discussions. *waves at them* Look, I’m not ignoring you!) When the media wants to run a story about animal rights or veganism, they go right to PETA, even though many vegans and animal rights supporters consider them to be ineffective and extreme.
Why are feminist groups often left out of the debate? I guess it’s not seen as “their issue” on which they have applicable expertise. Trans rights are an LGBTQ issue, ergo you need experts on LGBTQ. This is why TRAs fight so hard on the “there is no conflict between trans rights and women’s rights,” because it’s how they keep women out of the discussion. I suppose I’m just restating the problem here.
This looks like a great step forward in reporting language. Use of both “demanding” and “controversial” puts the focus where it should be. Not too long ago, this could not have been said.
Or, we’ll tar and feather you with accusations of “transphobia.”
It’s interesting though, how rainbow-washed police departments are so (over)zealously, over-reaching in going after alleged “transphobic” thoughtcrime.” It’s so much easier to do this, and win woke cookies in the process, than to do the real work of investigating and prosecuting actual misogynistic crimes. They get to look like they’re doing important things as they police tweets, stickers and ribbons, without having to look at or address the structural, systemic mysogyny with their own departments and within the broader criminal justice system itself. It’s bitterly ironic that in their eagerness to do the former, the police are targeting women who are trying to elucidate and defend their rights against the latter. To top it off, they chalk up crimes committed by TIMs as having been committed by women, and send these men to serve their time in women’s prisons. If you made it up, you’d be laughed out of the room.
Imagine if these police departments had put the same degree of effort and vigor in their pursuit of the perpetrators of rape, assault and harassment of women.
No, I can’t either.
This is also why TRAs are so desperate to prevent LGB groups self-organize without the T, even though trans activists have pretty much dropped any concerns for LGB people, appart from trying to redefine homosexuality as same gender attraction. They’re like a barnacle on a whale, dependent upon the energy and exertion of its larger, more powerful host to take it to places it could never get on its own. When the whale tries to dislodge it, because it has become an irratant, the barnacle cries bloody murder and demands continued free passage, and unconditional support.
I didn’t know barnacles could do that!
Screechy – just restating maybe, but from a different angle etc. Always useful. This issue needs all the help it can get.
YNNB:
One could describe this as a protection racket, if one was feeling uncharitable.
Sometimes it operates more as “rainbowwashing” — an organization that has been the subject of complaints about LGBTQ discrimination hires Stonewall, which then gives the organization absolution for its sins. It’s not unlike how American corporations that got themselves in racial messes would make a big donation to a group headed by, e.g., Al Sharpton, and after a high-profile photo op with the good reverend, would be deemed to have done its penance.
These barnacles are brave and stunning! They can do ANYTHING!
But if you question them on anything they will kill themselves.
Not only are the barnacles brave and stunning (and fabulous, of course), they are the MOST OPPRESSED GROUP EVER.
Yes, especially if they are being sat upon by a whale. All the rainbow glitter in the world cannot save you, then.