28

21 comments

Can't access the article, but sounds rather typical. Stonewall seems to have placed themselves in a position of regulating the government, rather than vice versa, and the incredible thing is how much the government has allowed this to happen. The moment the government does anything but immediately acquiesce to their demands, they can't handle it; have they not yet figured out that if they take their ball and go home, the game can continue on very well without them? They haven't been elected, they have no real authority beyond what is assumed of them, they're just loud and entitled.

Stonewall seems to have placed themselves in a position of regulating the government, rather than vice versa, and the incredible thing is how much the government has allowed this to happen.

Chilling.

Awesome. The gov have already issued a directive prior to this saying that all EDI had to be brought in house for all civil service, so sw et al were already effectively kicked to the curb by the gov. But now they flounced too!? So they won’t continue to try and Denton’s playbook the government? That’s even better!

If these 80 organizations were so closed off to exploring the arguments, pro and con, surrounding gender affirmation treatment, perhaps they should not have been invited in the first place?

What is EDI for those of us that can’t see the article?

[–] hufflepuff-poet wytch babe 6 points Edited

Equity Diversity and Inclusion dept, ie the priests of wokeness

Oh it’s much better to bring it in house! It could still go very wrong, but I imagine it will be a little less fanatical if people in it also have other things to do…

If they just copy the current sw et al policies it will be problematic. But it also means when we challenge those, the buck stops with the civil service dept we challenge. And many have began listening already, that’s why the DfE updated the RSE guidance to get sw out of schools, which means ofsted updated their assessment criteria on this and are grading schools down (by a lot in some cases), which slowly causes change in how policy are written and implemented.

With civil service not forced to leave outside EDI schemes, then every mistake in policy is there’s. Dept of the gov not following gov laws will cause push back here, by a lot judging by how long issues about MoJ, DfE, DfH following sw law have been all over msm. And the one good thing about the Tories is they do their polling. So voters saying they’d not vote their way based on civil service ignoring laws, will hold impact.

(Tories do this so they can look good on the surface, so they can keep giving kick backs to their cronies. But it’s better than the alternative at present (and likely for a long time sadly)).

priests of wokeness

Love that. They really are the clergy of this religion, and they should be adressed as such.

Can someone eli5?

[–] SecondSkin 6 points Edited

There was a consultation to ban LGBT+ conversion therapy. The gov listened to many of us saying trans is gay conversion therapy, so they dropped plans to ban ct for t. The tra’s threw a tantrum and flounced.

Only the gov already announced last month that they’d be bringing all EDI in house (so dropping paying sw etc, or giving them any influence). So it’s a lot like the kid in the playground whose saying ‘I didn’t want to play with you anyways’, when the other kids developed healthy boundaries and already told him to do one.

The government has had an affirmation stance on trans identities for a while, and the conversion therapy ban would have added to it, meaning that anything that doesn' t affirm trans identities would have been considered conversion therapy and punished. That includes alternative treatments of dysphoria such as "wait and see", therapy to discourage surgery and hormones and so on.

However, there was a huge criticism about it, so the government is thinking to move forward with the ban of conversion therapy, but they are removing trans identities from the categories that the ban would reach: that means that those alternative treatments for dysphoria would be allowed instead of made illegal.

Some trans organizations (and trans-led LGB organizations) are protesting about it by removing themselves from the conversation. These organizations include Stonewall, which is a group that in the past few years has invaded pretty much every corner of social, political and legal spaces and "advised" those fields how to treat trans individuals (basically, they were paid to tell people to shut their brain and mouth and accept and worship trans identities). Luckily, in the past year or so, lots of orgs (like the BBC, for example, and there is talk about political parties as well) have decided to stop paying them for their "work", so their influence is slowly diminishing.

It's so infuriating for TRAs to call standard mental healthcare for struggling children "conversion therapy" when "gender affirming" therapy ends up converting homosexuals into pretend heterosexuals a lot of the time. They're calling it the opposite of what it is in order to confuse liberals.

There is already a gov directive for all civil service (so DfE, DfH, MoJ etc) to leave all outside EDI schemes/organisations training. That was last month, officially done. So it will have to happen within the next year.