Professional Judy: “Charities like Mermaids and Stonewall have used our well established organisations as a Trojan horse to push a deeply homophobic ideology.”

Last week it appeared that something was up with the Stonewall orthodoxy. They were being scrutinised a little more robustly than normal and people in the press seemed to be less inclined to give them a free pass. But as we all know from bitter experience, this means next to nothing on this rollercoaster ride and with Pride Month starting I expected everything to die down and for it to be business as usual.

And then Nancy Kelley described people who reject the pseudoscience of gender identity as the same as those who are anti-Semitic live on the BBC, and in a terribly offensive but at the same time rare moment of honesty from the embattled charity confirming what we’ve been saying all along: Gender identity is a faith-based belief system. Presumably one that Nancy feels should have the same entitlements and protections in law as Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism?

It’s an interesting pivot that appeared to slip under the radar for most people. Was it a mistake or was it a deliberate attempt to shift the narrative? Was Nancy moving the position of Stonewall from one that had previously centred on the idea that gender identity is as innate as one’s biological sex to one that now conceptualises gender identity in much the same that Judaism conceptualises the internal and everlasting soul?

Like all religious dogmas, a lot of time and money is spent fighting the infidels, heretics and sinners. Take for example Stonewall’s further fall from grace as it teams up with other former LGB rights charities, and Mermaids, to challenge the Charity Commission’s decision to grant LGB Alliance’s charitable status on the basis that LGB Alliance seeks to in the words of (Jewish woman) Bev Jackson: “Challenge the dominance of those who promote the damaging theory of gender identity.” This aim is hardly something LGB Alliance has sought to keep secret. It’s something that’s been very clearly laid out on their website since it was launched.

The Good Law Project’s Crowd Justice page for Mermaids really is bizarre. It reads to me like it was written by a conspiracy theorist who has had one too many late nights rather than a legal expert or charity seeking to project professionalism:

“Whatever sweet nothings the so-called “LGB Alliance” whispered into the ear of the Charity Commission…”

And of course, like all things from those who promote the damaging ideology of gender identity it is high on projection:

“Their purpose is the denigration of trans people and the destruction of organisations that support them, in particular through political lobbying and campaigning for law change.”

LGB Alliance is seeking to keep the law as it is and is simply seeking to challenge the dominance of gender identity that has gripped our former organisations. It is fascinating that this has been hysterically and hyperbolically warped into LGB Alliance seeking to denigrate trans people (which only works if you conflate the pseudoscience of gender identity with being trans) and destroy the organisations that protect them, which they’re not. They’re only concerned with representing those of us who are same sex attracted and our rights in law based on the reality of sex.

I guess in some ways this was to be expected, charities like Mermaids and Stonewall have dined out on the backs of LGB people and have used our well established and formerly well-respected organisations and structures as a Trojan horse to push a deeply homophobic ideology.

As questions are increasingly being asked about their motives, their funding and their malign influence over the lives of everyday people through their own overly comfortable relationships with policy makers and government departments, it’s only natural that they seek to protect what has become a very lucrative business for them.

Stonewall are being paid by the Government as Stonewall seek to influence the Government to change laws on things like sex based protections in law, some forms of sexual assault and data collection for public service planning. Nice work if you can get it, huh? 

If we just take Stonewall as an example; should – as Liz Truss would like – the 250 Government organisations pull out of the organisation’s diversity scheme it’s set to lose £650,000 funding each year. Stonewall are being paid by the Government as Stonewall seek to influence the Government to change laws on things like sex based protections in law, some forms of sexual assault and data collection for public service planning. Nice work if you can get it, huh? 

As I have said, the scrutiny is piling on, questions are being asked, and the whole sector has a lot to lose, so of course they’re going to go for the people brave enough to stand up and point out that the emperor has no clothes. You do have to admire the cheek of these incredibly well funded organisations getting out the begging bowl to ask for money for this rather bizarre legal action.

The problem as far as I can tell is that Mermaids (who are nominally leading the challenge with the claimed backing of Stonewall and the so called LGBT+ Consortium) are reaping what they’ve sown with the “No Debate” mantra. It hasn’t worked. The attempts to shame people who believe in same sex attraction hasn’t worked. The smears haven’t worked.

So now, one way or another, they’re going to have to put their money where their well-funded mouths are. They are going to have to prove that trans does in fact equal gender identity, but moreover they’re also going to have to answer the following questions: Does gender identity exist and is it innate like other biological parts of the human condition? Do they have the peer reviewed research evidence to back up their claims? Is this a settled or is it a contested claim? Or is gender identity a faith-based belief system? If so why can’t LGB people push back on its homophobic teachings like we’ve been pushing back for centuries on the homophobic teachings of other more established religions?

And maybe we’ll finally get a coherent answer to the question, what is the definition of the word woman?

See you in court.