Ever the optimist that a post Stonewall world may be on the horizon I want to get on record the role its current CEO has played in besmirching the reputation of a once great organisation. I will begin with this interview, from two years ago, which she did with Linda Riley of Diva Magazine.
You can watch the interview here: 👇
For those of you unaware, Riley has somewhat of a reputation herself as covered by Private Eye. None of these revelations concerned Dawn Butler, who appointed Riley as LGBT advisor to Labour.
The interview took place four weeks into Kelley’s tenure as CEO of Stonewall and Riley selected questions, put to her from Diva readers.
One of the earlier questions related to a question on whether Kelley had intended criticism of her predecessor, Ruth Hunt, in a Guardian interview. She had stated Stonewall would no longer insist everyone needed agree with their stance on “trans” rights. I am confident that this was the interview in question and the comment Riley singles out for questions is linked below: 👇
Kelley is keen to dispel any notion that she is being critical of her predecessor:
She proceeds to outline her own position which reflects the Stonewall dogma, right down to forgetting about ”trans” men, I might add.
She, then, professes to accept that not all feminists will be intersectional and it is these people she would like to reach. It all started so reasonably.
The next question asks if she can elaborate about her impressions on taking up the role and the thing that surprised her the most. Her answer is very revealing and somewhat ironic at this point; as we watching Stonewall’s influence drain away.
Later she follows up the issue of Stonewall’s influence, revealing that they are acfively lobbying the NHS over healthcare issues and why they are uniquely placed to be successful; because of the high number of NHS trusts in their protection racket, oops, sorry, I mean their Diversity Champions scheme.
Asked to let the audience know what she is currently up to she says the quiet bit out loud about her liaison with Stella Creasy and the attempt to class misogyny as a hate crime. Of course they are trying to make sure it covers trans-identified males; no doubt making some litigious trans activist salivate over the prospect of the maximum validation attainable in prosecuting a woman for the crime of misogyny against a “transgender woman”
She also reveals she has been doing a bit of Northern outreach to address concerns they are too London centric. This would be the same Andy Burnham who has remained studiously silent about the aggressive “trans” (men’s) rights activists in his city.
Nancy’s conciliatory tone didn’t last as illustrated in a superb article by Jo Bartosch.
The BBC finally covered some research about Lesbians being pressured to have sex with trans-identified males.
Nancy responded with an astonishing outburst about Lesbians who are ”gender critical”. i.e. think being a Lesbian means you can refuse to date men who identify as Lesbians (Nancy, is not vulnerable herself, as she is in a long term partnership with an American woman).
It then emerged that Stonewall had attempted to suppress the report on Lesbians being sexually harassed.
Five Year Plan.
I was disappointed that Nancy didn’t acknowledge Stonewall’s intention to indulge in a bit of historical revisionism about the riots which inspired their name. Pretending the entire Gay rights movement was kickstarted by ”Transgender Women” and ignoring the role of Lesbians and Gay men would have made even Stalin blush. This 👇is abject capitulation from a once proud organisation. She is bending the knee to a Men’s, sexual, rights movement and throwing the gay community, particularly, Lesbian under the “transgender” train.
Lest Kelley tries to airbrush herself out of the trans debacle and the fall of Stonewall she condemned herself with this statement.
You can support my work here. Only if you have surplus after all the worthy legal cases. Every penny helps but I know everyone is feeling the pinch.