PETER TATCHELL

Featured

First of all kudos to GB News for tackling the issue of Gender Identity Ideology and having a, desperately needed, public debate. In this programme the perspectives of a Trans-Identified male, a Women’s rights campaigner (Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall A.K.A Posey Parker), Beverley Jackson (LGB Alliance), Gary Powell (Gay man) and Peter Tatchell (Human Rights campaigner) were interviewed. The U.K Charity, Stonewall, were invited to participate but, to no great surprise, declined to participate.

Today I want to unpack the contribution of Peter Tatchell. You can watch his contribution below.

Peter Tatchell : Gender Debate

Transcript here:

PETER TATCHELL GB NEWS

Peter Tatchell is a, self-styled, Human Rights campaigner, best known for his Gay Rights Activism. His more high profile arrest in Putin’s Russia for protesting against draconian, anti-gay legislation garnered headlines across the world. He also known, especially in Zimbabwe, for attempting a citizens arrest of Robert Mugabe. Latterly, he is better known, in some circles, for situating himself at the centre of conflict between Trans rights & the rights of Women. He has also attracted criticism from Lesbians and Gay males for his stance on “trans-rights” and for ignoring the impact on homosexuals.

Peter seems quite keen to speak on this issue. Since so many Trans Lobby groups, refuse to debate the issues it is, perhaps, unsurprising that his views were sought. What is less clear are his motives. Why is he inserting himself in the middle of such a controversial topic? He is, however, especially keen to dispel any notion that he has anything to gain.

A2E62B4F-548B-4F01-B0DD-8C9408EE118D

Perhaps it is an elaborate penance for a letter he signed, defending free speech, on the controversial topic of Trans Rights? This resulted in, by his own account, the worst abuse he has had in decades of campaigning: Article below 👇

Peter Tatchell and the Trans Backlash

Perhaps he is driven by an ideological commitment to disrupting /queering social norms? Whatever the reason he does seem overly invested in an issue which is unlikely to impact him, personally.

Tatchell is keen neutralise criticism that he is elevating his voice above trans-people. It is noteworthy he does not show a similar concern about speaking over women. This latest intervention comes after he withdrew from a debate, with Kathleen Stock, on this very topic. Trans activists were vocal in their condemnation of him for agreeing to debate Professor Stock. They did not want him lending any credibility to Kathleen’s (quite moderate) stance on this issue. Many women were also unhappy about debating the issue, specifically with Tatchell, but his withdrawal from the debate was driven by Trans Activists, not the pesky women folk. 👇

43C59D11-EF4D-437B-8108-98992CEA7327

Alex, the interviewer, opens the debate with two questions. Both relate to the practical implications of biological sex denialism; it’s impact on women’s privacy and the medicalisation of children who display “Gender” non-conforming (GNC) behaviour. I would describe being GNC as a perceived failure to perform sex stereotypes. He doesn’t respond to the question about medical interventions on children.

[Both proto-gay males and lesbians can present,early, with atypical expressions of femininity/masculinity, sadly that issue was not explored in this segment. This was a shame because I would like to see Tatchell oppose the Gay Conversion Therapy on his doorstep but he probably knows the headlines would not be as good].

Tatchell opens with a (nervous?) statement about the capacity in which he is speaking. He is, emphatically, not there to speak on behalf of the trans community. He is there as a Human Rights campaigner to speak up for the rights of both women and transwomen. By which, he means, for the rights of males to be included in the category of women.

He demonstrates his neutrality, beautifully, by directing his ire at the previous speaker, a woman. Kellie-Jay, made it abundantly clear that the category of woman is based on SEX not Gender Identity. Tatchell used the, common, tactic of associating women, defending the colonisation of our existence, with homophobia. He also accused Kellie-Jay of whipping up hysteria about the dangers posed by “transwomen”.

Firstly, Gay men did not demand to be re-categorised as “women” and granted access to spaces where women are undressing, or merely associating, in a female only space. The legal recognition of same sex attraction had ZERO impact on the protected characterstic SEX.

Secondly he has no data to suggest males, who identify as transwomen, present a lower risk to women than other males. It is perfectly possible this category houses more predatory males because it includes those with the paraphilia “autogynephilia”. Also because of the queering of the boundaries between males and females we are being asked to accept the notion that some women have a penis . He is defending an ideology which promotes the idea of be-penised women and that a Lady Dick can be distinguished from the average penis. This kind of Phallus in Wonderland, magical thinking, sadly, was not exposed in this interview. I suspect the interviewer may be unfamiliar with the more radical claims of the Gender Identity Ideologues. Or, she may believe the general public are not quite ready to deal with the more outlandish claims. Sadly these beliefs are gaining traction among the political and Chattering Classes.

The various segments were not done in a format that allowed a right of reply so Kellie-Jay was not able to respond to the claims, made above. I wonder if Tatchell knows he is echoing the #NotAllMen phallusy of Men’s Rights Activists? Women exclude males, as a SEX class, because we know that some males are sexual predators. We should not, however, have to invoke fear of sexual violence to demand a right to exclude males. We should be legally protected because we have a right to bodily privacy. We should be, legally, able to congregate, in female only spaces, to discuss issues that affect our sex and only our sex. We don’t want to include males in these discussions.

6ADC687C-FCF1-464C-BF91-E0C514AD133D

The “handful” argument is belied by the increased media reports of sexual offenders gathering under the Trans Umbrella. When we finally get actual data monitoring this category of males, specifically, I fear it will confirm women’s worst fears. Presently, the prevalence of trans sex offenders is difficult to ascertain. It is only possible to get information by trawling through mis-leading media reports which consistently report Male crimes as if they were commissioned by Women.

Thanks IPSO! It is IPSO who produced the media guidelines which encourage the media to hide male crimes. Below is a short piece on these guidelines 👇

#TheseAreNotOurCrimes

Below is another diversionary tactic; the substitution of arguments about race to imply they are analogous to the issue of trans rights/women’s rights. By using this argument, Peter, tries to associate feminist arguments with racists. Instead of falling into this trap journalists should demand the interlocutor remain on topic. Argue the merits of your own case directly rather than implying that society needs to throw off the shackles of our backward Sexual Apartheid because it is bigotry akin to racism. For the avoidance of doubt, I don’t care what colour your dick is, for the purposes of women’s single sex spaces:

#AllDicksMatter

Tatchell then deploys another strategy. He claims the thing that women are complaining about has been going on for years and dismisses the “fuss” women are making. This is mendacious. The Transgender Lobby have just LOST (in the U.K) a very public campaign to allow any male to self-declare he is a woman. The new tactic is to claim males have been using women’s spaces for decades and we just didn’t notice! Sadly, for Peter, testosterone packs one hell of a punch and passing remains a pipe dream for most trans-id males, even those with resources to undergo significant surgery. Women are socialised to #BeKind but we do, in the main, recognise biological sex, evolution is such a Terf Bitch. Our safety depends on knowing if we are in a space with a male. Do we say anything thing? No! I refer you to #BeKind and our personal safety. We have all seen the Narcissistic rage of TRAs called “sir”, our lives depend on silence. Peter may interpret this as #Kindness but he is wrong to equate our silence with consent. It is more likely a result of #BeKind/ Doormat feminism or good old fashioned FEAR.

All the countries which have passed Self-ID legislation did so without holding a public debate. It was the public debate that did for this legislative change in the U.K. Grass roots resistance, led by a new group of women’s organisations, alerted ordinary women and we fought back. Women in Ireland, Malta and Argentina and the other countries were less prepared and this legislation was passed by stealth/ tacked onto popular causes. Professional women’s rights organisations were complicit and, consequently, women in these counties are only now waking up to the nightmare scenario the political classes have unleashed on women.

8070E478-5F08-4475-8DA4-954D57315B49

I have written extensively about the current process for obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) in the U.K. We have already given them to fully intact males, even where they have convictions for sexual assaults. For this reason I am not a defender of the status quo but allowing self-declaration would remove any gatekeeping. I would repeal the GRA and provide any protection needed, for refugees from masculinity, on some other basis. I would not allow males to identify into the legal category of woman, because it has been a disaster for women’s sex based rights.

Nobody can just declare they are “trans”

I assume Tatchell is here 👇 talking about the proposed changes to enact a self-id regime in the U.K, or the process in other countries. Here he is saying nobody can just “declare” they are trans by er, checks notes, outlining the process by which anyone can just declare they are trans!

Genius!

I do like his confidence. It seems such a shame to interrupt his confidence with some FACTS. Let me think of a few. Men in women’s sports, a man running a rape crisis centre and telling rape victims, afraid of ALL males, they need to unlearn their transphobia! Rapists in women’s prison, men taking a disproportionate number of places on the Women in Leadership (Jo Cocks) programme…I could go on.

Oh No! He said “Trans Women are Women”

Chanting a thought terminating cliche is beneath an intelligent man. I don’t doubt there are many issues faced by males who adopt the prescribed social norms for women. I don’t doubt they face sexual assault and harassment. Peter may not be aware that Hate Crime legislation doesn’t include the category of SEX, but does protect the category of “Transgender”. So, yes, he can produce the Hate Crime stats and all I have to counter it is a list of, not of the dead-named, but of the actual dead women. Misgendering is the least of our concerns.

EC6CA749-2769-4841-8B5C-46F7B51A18D3

This next bit is some forced-teaming from Tatchell. Come on girls, expend your energy being support humans to my undercover brothers, you know you want to! There is a concerted effort to invert the privilege hierarchy and place white males at the bottom of the pile, rhetorically speaking. To convince us black is white transperbole is deployed and, once again, he leverages the much discredited hate crime statistics. Not buying it.

FC1F0079-8D5D-4BDF-AF54-78FA0AB332DC

The interviewer interjects at this point to thank Tatchell for his cogent and rational arguments. I instinctively bristle at a man being called rational. Fairly or not, what I hear is, rational as opposed to the hysterical women. Another pet peeve is the way this “debate” is portrayed as #BadOnBothSides. It is a War on Women. We are defending ourselves from the neo-colonialism that is Trans Activism. It is playing “nice” that has allowed the #BeKind Brigade to be, well “brigaded”. Women have been trans-jacked and fighting back is what you do when your rights are under attack. Additionally, anyone paying attention would see the threats of violence, much of it sexual violence, comes from the male people. Women’s counter “attack” is, at its worst, refusing to use female pronouns or commenting on masculine features.

So let’s hear more from a man white-knighting for this most marginalised community. Fact free assertions about inner identity, parroting the authentic selves narrative, bla bla bla, hate crime, marginalised etc etc. Also Peter is a libertarian dontchaknow. If people want to be lifelong medical patients they should be allowed. (I don’t think many people have argued for an end to all surgeries, though I would argue it should be a last resort AND still not grant access to spaces set aside for another sex) Peter is tilting at windmills.

Breathtaking arrogant assertion is his next gambit. People (by which he means women) are making a mountain out of a molehill. Women objecting to having our sex redefined to admit any male are over-reacting! These hysterical women are projecting onto a vulnerable community. So vulnerable they have managed to roll back gains women made over a hundred years ago. So marginal they have captured, nearly, the entire political class.

Safeguarding 101

Also👇the central plank of safeguarding is the need set to a bar high enough to protect vulnerable groups from the BAD APPLES! That’s 101 of safeguarding, design your policy with a focus on the BAD APPLES! Because predators will migrate to where the loopholes exist and this ideology is dismantling safeguards left, right and centre.

A92782BC-9135-4162-BF05-40078717B29F

He can’t get any worse can he? Yep. He can. 😳. No we don’t ban cars Peter. We do make you pass a test, we make learners wear an L Plate, we fine people for motoring offences, we can ban you from driving and even imprison offenders. We also have social norms (and laws) against drink-driving. This is not the gotcha you think it is.

821D80C8-B3F3-44D3-851D-4F2C3B4C154D

I like to think Alex had enough at this point. Here the interview should end, and it nearly does. I don’t think it’s a shame the debate is polarised. When someone proposes to socially engineer society, based on a toxic ideology, there is no compromise to be had. We can’t let men have some of women’s rights. The answer is NO! It is a shame that women are being forced to concede our hard won gains in 2021!.

C516B3BD-12BD-43B6-90E4-741A2992EC88

Does Peter go gentle into his goodnight. No! he carried on and makes it, if you can believe it, much, much, worse.

His heart is breaking!

Gloves are off now. How FUCKING DARE you! I will decide who my sisters are thank you very much! We are not SUPPORT HUMANS, there to tend to those males you can’t bear to have in your sex class. YOU DO THE WORK! Maybe have a bit of a think about why you can’t tolerate variant masculinity in your spaces?

We are all Biological Essentialists (apparently)

Next up the old accusations of “biological essentialism”. The argument, he is making, is that Women are allowing ourselves to be defined, and limited by our biology. No, Peter, the “Biology is not Destiny” was an attempt to resist being defined ONLY by our reproductive functions. It did NOT mean we deny the basis of sex based oppression, which originates in our ability to gestate babies. Hence a significant amount of feminist activism has been about controlling our fertility in case you hadn’t noticed.

We were not marching for the right of Laurel Hubbard to lift weights with us!

69561A8D-76F1-4617-8DEE-985DB5B8CF9E

Hijacking statements about women’s liberation to re-purpose them for trans idealogues is a tactic we have seen before. It lends credence to your argument, at a superficial level, if you can use our words against us. Way to put the MAN in HuMAN rights Peter.

Tactical Obfuscation

Next up he is claims being a woman is a psychological / emotional state. The last bit is nonsensical. No males are members of the sex class of women, irrespective of their intake of artificial hormones. The bit about reproductive capacity is nonsensical. What is he trying to say here? Even if the franken doctors manage to develop artificial wombs to validate a trans ID male, it STILL won’t make them a woman.

AEEE055C-FCF1-426E-86B2-DC369B3CC2FD

He surpasses himself with his sign off. He doesn’t mean hate us, he just knows better than we do. It is the smug, holier than thou, tone that is really enraging.

F9517847-3DB6-4FDC-8E14-A2EEC7AE9150

Thanks Peter. I feel I may be in danger of adding to the toxicity of this debate because all I have to say to you is FUCK OFF and when you get there FUCK OFF some more. (And I rarely swear on here but everybody has their breaking point.)

paypal.me/STILLTish

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.

£10.00

ARCUS FOUNDATION GRANTS

Featured

The Arcus Foundation is heavily invested in the dissemination of Transgender Ideology. To learn more about this you can do no better than reading Jennifer Bilek on this topic. This article here is a good summary.

https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

Here is another one by Jennifer Bilek which is specifically focussed on the Arcus Foundation. 

ARCUS

The Arcus foundation has an online tool to check its grantees which you can find here:

ARCUS GRANTEES

Some foundations have a tool to extract the data to an excel spreadsheet which facilitates analysis. Unfortunately the Arcus Foundation don’t have an obvious way to do this so I manually populated 400 + lines of data, so I could pivot table and analyse where their Social Justice fund was allocated. I tracked from 2016 to April, 2021. I only looked at the Social Justice category but Arcus Foundation funds across many other areas. The scope of their largesse, arguably, means many organisations, who don’t propagate Gender Identity Ideology, may, nevertheless, be compromised by the financial benefits they derive from this association . (Bear in mind this is a live database so I noticed even historic descriptions of activities seemed to change. )

As you can see there was a total approaching $74 million dollars spent promoting Social Justice issues, during this period.  The majority had some aspect which promoted Gender Identity Ideology.  Where there was a focus 
2021-04-22 (7)on a particular region I noted it.  Where the project stated it’s aim was global I coded it to identify this ambition.  Where the project  identified international activity for specific regions I badged it “international” . I also noted the countries, identified as the focus, in the comments.  Note that many of the Arcus grantees  in turn, are also dispensing grants.  Thus, if a country you are interested in, does not appear to be a direct recipient it may, nevertheless, have received monies indirectly. 

For convenience I badged the funding as LGBTQ but, in reality, some of the grants omit the Q and others emphasise an I (for intersex). Some project detail is clearly focussed on sexual orientation but the project is still badged as variations of “LGBT”. I assume the Q is dropped, in some projects, because “queer” doesn’t have any currency in the countries where they are funelling funds.

Here is the spreadsheet.

ARCUS FOUNDATION GRANTEES

A notable feature of the grants illustrates the tactic of forced teaming. This is where Trans Ideology proponents feign (?) alliances with established movements to establish “common cause” and piggy back on their reputations. The most obvious one is gay rights. Indeed Arcus donated $142,000 to Stonewall (Former Gay Rights Charity in the UK). This was just before Stonewall added the T to LGB and expanded their remit to cover Transgender issues. This was one grant. They also provided an additional $42,000 to support a project called “Rainbow Laces” to bring the LGBTQ into sport.

Arcus also gave Stonewall $75,000 to be involved in roundtable discussions to convince Business to back the LGBTQ because it was “good business strategy”. The aim was to “swing” these countries to their agenda.

2021-04-20

At the time Stonewall changed direction it may have appeared, to their organisation, that the battles had been won in the United Kingdom.  I disagree.  The homophobia directed at our proto-gay youth has not gone away.  It may not have been as lucrative a cause but they could have done some good work in the U.K. They could also have campaigned to fight for the rights of Gay Men and Lesbians abroad.  They could have worked to stop the horrendous abuse of Gay men and Lesbians, in Iran, who were not accepted as homosexual but could have their surgery funded if they adopted a Trans-Identity.  Instead they opted for a more lucrative (?) path. 

It does not seem to have occurred to the bigwigs at Stonewall that the fight to defend same sex orientation depends on acknowledging that sex is a material reality. Transgender Ideology denies the reality of sex and therefore sex based attraction. That’s one of many conflicts between Trans rights and those of other groups.

But back to the Arcus Foundation:

Looking at the detail of these projects it was rare to find one that focussed on sexual orientation exclusively. Even where the project looked at same sex orientation the project was still labelled a variant of “LGBT” or “LGBTQ” to, effectively, join the causes together. By contrast there was a sizeable sum spent on exclusively “transgender” issues.

2021-04-21 (6)

9 million dollars allocated to exclusively Transgender causes. Interestingly if you search for the mention of “transmen” specific projects you will not find any. However some of the projects detailed do focus on “Transwomen” usually Transwomen of colour.

As I have noted before “transmen” tend to get deployed when they are pregnant or when it is easier to argue aganst the, sex based, rights of biological women. Their omission from any specific projects aimed at the needs of “transmen” screams good, old-fashioned, sexism to me!

It appears another tactic was to join with women Fighting for reproductive justice. This means that women’s fight to control their fertility is hijacked with trans organisations hitching their wagon to these long running campaigns. This grant is pretty transparent about its “strategic collaboration”.

683B7DAB-254F-4BB8-A9E6-A48616231C7B

2021-04-21 (1)

Another surprise, to me, is how much of a proportion is going to religious organisations including Evangelical Christians and Muslim organisations. Next time anyone tells you that you are in an alliance with religious groups heres a screenshot to share! Over $10 and a half million to religiouis organisations. These organisations were not simply those who you might have expected to hold liberal, progressive views on homosexuality or Gender Identity. Instead many in the United States were explicity Evangelical Christian Organisations deep in what we may have come to know as Trump supporting territory.

A couple of examples appear below from Atlanta, Georgia and Texas.

You will find similiar examples of “forced teaming” if you look at the grants focussed on racial justice or homelessness. There are also lots of grants to organisations looking at strategic litigation in the area of LGBTQ or exlusively “Transgender” organisations. A few projects are also engaged in educating/lobbying employees of the United Nations.

Many of the entries also talk of funding to “grow grassroots” activists. Somebody should explain that grassroots movements emerge organically. When you are targetting millions of dollars of funding to “grow” a movement you are engaged in Astro-turfing not grass roots activism.

The media narrative also comes in for some skilful manipulation. These are the organisations involved in journalism or documentary film-making who are taking the Arcus Cash. The explicit aim is to ensure media coverage is shaped by the Trans Lobby.

2021-04-22 (9)

This is an example of the way these grants are described: To “ensure that coverage is either neutral or positive”. Also to be organised to ensure a response to any negative media coverage. Journalism? or Advocacy?

B22411DA-8641-4011-AD44-F333C30E940A

As many of us are trying to point out to radical leftist groups who are screaming “transwomen are women” ,or other mindless mantras, mainly at feminists of the left, you are being manipulated by billionnaires. This is not a grass roots movement its an elite project and there is a lot of money to be made in fostering a bodily dissassociative condition that unmoors us from our sexed bodies.

If you can support my work it would be greatly appreciated. If you can’t please share.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income) but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a relevant legal case, a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News or Safe Schools Alliance

£10.00

Barings Foundation 2

Featured

Barings Foundation 1  is here if you want the background. 

This foundation not only funded the administrative support for the All Parliamentary Group for LGBT they also supported salary costs to embed a Stonewall employee in the Department for International Development. Curiousity piqued I resolved to have a look at what else they fund. I looked at all 163 grants given in 2020 but, for the purposes of this blog, I started drilling down to the funding allocated under the label “International Development”.

The issue is not one of a lack of transparency. All their grants are searchable. Guidance to setting up a Private, charitable foundation highlights the advantage of this vehicle for philanthropy: it allows the foundation to have complete control in terms of their funding priorities.

From 2013 this 👇 became the focus of Baring Foundation’s allocation for “International Development”.

“This programme aims to support civil society organisations to address discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) individuals and communities in sub-Saharan Africa. It focuses particularly on lesbian and transgender communities”.

Prior to 2013 the foundation had spent over ten years targeting issues of “gender” and many of the grants were available to women and girls. This is their new focus as the above quote illustrates.

This is a list of all the grants. All of them are either entirely focussed on Transgender causes or at least reference Gender Identity Ideology. Only the Forum for the Empowerment of Women seem the most focussed on actual lesbian issues. Looks to me as if they were included because it is transphobic to imply that Lesbians can’t be “transwomen”.

3E6E8CAD-6CD4-4025-AF6B-D2292EBE34D2

I have examined every one of these organisations via their websites. Even those that appear to be about Lesbians seem to have rather an elastic definition of what constitutes a “lesbian” and talk of diverse sexual identities.

Social, Health & Empowerment: Feminist Collective

Let’s look at the Social, Health and Empowerment , Feminist Collective. This group, they advise advocates for African transgender and intersex women and claims to employ a feminist framework.

D23F4D5C-B6B0-4C97-A89E-05421AADE5A6

Centring themselves in a discussion of women’s reproductive rights: Check ✅

Making sure the feminist message is rammed home by celebrating er, Beauty Pageants. 😳

642F86F1-0C4B-4057-8E49-058954DA4DDB

Of course no self-respecting feminist group would be complete without undermining the rights of the same sex attracted people. This is how they redefine homosexuality.

1145DB88-77FA-478E-B71D-2E02920BDE3F

The idea that a London based organisation is funding a group who are denying sexual orientation, on a continent where it remains illegal in many countries, should concern you. See my earlier post for the state of play re Lesbian and Gay rights on continental Africa.

Lesbian & Gay Rights in African countries

Website here for S.H.E here 👇

S.H.E

Let us look at another the Forum for the Empowerment of women. This website mainly focuses on black lesbians but nods to the Gender Identity Ideology with a reference to SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity). It is difficult to ascertain if this organisation takes the money and does the bare minimum to demonstrate allegiance to any conditions attacked to their grants. Fair play to them if they do!. Website below. Most of the initiatives relate to Black Lesbians and are concerned with violence against this community and forging networks and up-skilling women to gain a footing in the corporate world. Website below. 👇

F.E.W

The largest sum went to Uhai.Eshari. They have a very unresponsive website but Barings published a case study on their organisation. Here is a clip. They have been given £760,000 since 2018. All to support queer and gender diverse communities.

000C3DD6-199F-4F3F-98C3-C19269090980

Every one of these organisations promote Gender Identity Ideology. Projects are in Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo and this is by no means an exhaustive list. This is what the are doing in Kenya. Maybe there are some more pressing needs in these communities than rolling out “Gender Affirming Care” to some of the poorest nations on earth?

Kenya is often hailed as a success story in terms of its economic development over the past decade. It is not the poorest country on the continent. Here a couple of issues highlighted by Oxfam Kenya.   Gross inequality and 40% are without access to basic health services. C73C523C-F54E-44D8-B9BB-9E4F930F0FA6

Sexual violence remains a significant issue and has surged during the Covid Pandemic. AE07F33B-CCC8-48EA-BF61-D2D525E618C6

Another organisation funded by Barings Foundation is  Gender Dynamix.

They also focus soley on Trans and Gender Diverse Communities. What struck me about this organisation was the link to a consent form for accessing masculinising or feminising treatments.

You can see the document here:

Consent Form Feminising 2019.pdf – Google Drive

Here are some clips which jumped out at me.. First up the possibility that your sexual orientation may change temporarily or permanently. This is reminiscent of Gay Conversion Therapy.

A723754B-54DE-4ECF-9A1A-6C6006F5CAA5

Secondly a list of side effects from feminising treatments. These list the impact of hormone treatments only. 

788C195D-A306-4E2D-A17E-B6DD3ABDABF9

Arundhati Roy called charitable foundations a way to “parlay wealth into power”. We should look at what those badging themselves pro-social justice with as much suspicion as any wealthy individual/group forcing through social change on the basis of their own ideology.

Is it wise to export this ideology to countries with no, or only recent, acceptance of homosexuality?

2021-04-04 (3)

I am unwaged so any support much appreciated.  If you are in a similar position a share is just as good.  Thank you! 

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income) but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a legal case or a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News.

£5.00

Barings Foundation 1

Featured

For those too young to remember Barings foundation was linked to Barings bank, who were ruined by the combination of an expansion to Asia and the reckless speculation of an employee: one Nick Leeson. The foundation, however, survived and allocates funding which it identifies as Arts based, Strengthening Civil Society and International Development. Barings is a private charitable foundation so whilst this gives them control over the allocation of their funds it does have obligations, as a charity, to submit information to the Charity Commission.

This is legal advice about the responsibilities of charities 👇

A16EA939-0E6B-4D79-9CFB-433815A40A59

This is the link to the Baring Foundations website where the information about its priorities is available. 👇

Baring Foundation:Grant Making

The inspiration for my inquiry was the revelation that Barings Foundation fund the All Parliamentsry Group on LGBT issues. This group is chaired by Crispin Blunt and its vice chair is Michael Cashman. Crispin is an MP who came out, as a gay man, relatively late in life. Cashman is one of the original founders of Stonewall, a once great organisation now better described as a controversial lobby group.

Crispin Blunt was recently sanctioned for attempting to broker a back room deal on the controversial proposals to reform of the Gender Recognition Act. This despite opposition from feminist organisations concerned about the detrimental impact on women’s sex based rights. You can read an account of this here 👇. (You can also sign up as a supporter Sex Matters to defend sex based rights on the same site)

Sex Matters

3210C2CE-A96A-4A78-8B3D-38C8D350ECCF

So I determined to have a look at the funding Barings made to this APPG, Stonewall and the Kaleidoscope Trust since they all figure in this story.

Barings have been funding Kaleidoscope Trust since 2015. 👇 (CHOGM is the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting).

31BDEAF7-2B7A-41C5-94DE-8B45DDF1D628

They also provided £40,000 to the Kaleidoscope Trust to fund administrative support for the APPG LGBT. In addition they provided a further £148,415 direct payment, to the APPG LGBT+ group, to cover coordinator costs from 2020 to 2023.

This makes it clear that Stonewall were closely linked to APPG LGBT from the beginning. Also take a look at the origins of the person providing the support!

32928DEF-824A-47A6-B7F9-5E5C4373D7B7

Anna Robinson was co-chair of the youth wing of IGLYO. You can learn more about this group in an earlier blog I did on The Denton’s Report

That Denton’s Document

A quick look at the links ,the Barings Foundation has, with Stonewall shows the international reach of its activity in embedding LGBTI issues in government infrastructure.

Funding for Stonewall ,from this Foundation, also allowed them to embed a Stonewall advisor in what was then the Department for International Development. (DFID).

34A76389-354C-4290-8B7C-CBC4D0EF56F6

Paul Twocock reports on the project. Paul was interim CEO of Stonewall after the departure of Ruth Hunt. The funding allowed them to lobby the government to further their agenda.  A4396DAC-3F70-4503-B318-496ADEF57875

Arundhati Roy called charitable foundations a way to “parlay wealth into power”. Charitable Foundations, with a pro-social justice agenda should be subject to as much scrutiny as any wealthy individual/group. When they are working with Lobby Groups who are committed to social engineering, on the basis of their own ideology, they should be investigated with as much vigour as #BigPharma.

Many former supporters of Stonewall are extremely concerned about the impact of Transgender Ideology on our gay youth. I cannot begin to imagine how this might play out in an International context where the rights of Gay males and Lesbians are fledgling or non-existent. Organisations working across different cultural contexts should be aware of the perils of this neo-colonialism.

Next up I will scrutinise all 163 grants from the Baring Foundation but, in particular, I will be looking at what they are funding under the heading International Development.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a legal case or a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News.

£5.00