The Guardian: Three

Puzzled by the Guardian embrace of Transgender Ideology and lack of concern for the impact on women’s rights, I decided to have a look. As a lifelong Guardian reader the piece that prompted me to have a look was a campaign to move a ”transgender” prisoner to the female estate.

Marie Dean & Tara Hudson

I wrote a piece on that here 👇 below is a clip detailing the sexual nature of the offences.

Cognitive Capture at the Guardian. The Marie Dean Case

Coverage of Tara Hudson was similarly misleading while a campaign was ongoing to move Tara to the female estate. 👇

The Scott Trust

Following the above coverage I started to have a look at the Guardian Group’s ownership and oversight. This led to the Scott Trust and a bit of digging into the trustees. 👇

Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?

The Scott Trust have oversight of the Guardian Group’s editorial policy in the event of any disagreement. They also have hiring and firing control over the Editor.

One of the Trustees also sits on the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. This foundation funds a number of trans-lobby groups including Mermaids.

Thompson Reuters Foundation

For those of you familiar with the Denton’s document you will be aware that the above foundation supported its production. The document is provides to strategic advice on how best to embed Gender Identity Ideology in institutions, the media and the political elite. I wrote about this here:

That Denton’s Document

So, let’s take another look at the People who are trustees for the Scott Trust. 👇

As you can see one of the Trustees, appointed in 2021, also sits on the Thompson Reuters Foundation. She also used to work for twitter.

Open Society Foundations

I am indebted to Julian Vigo for this next section. I had been looking at the funding handed out by the Open Society Foundation. The OS Foundation funds many initiatives which are pro-democracy and many that , at least at a superfical level, appear to be laudable. At the same time they funnel money to organisations which are pro-prostitution and Gender Identity Ideology. Their database, of grantees, is on-line and searchable. This is what came up when I searched the Guardian.

OS grantees

However this was not the end of the story, here is what Julian Vigo uncovered.

Link to Julian Vigo’s article below.

Julian Vigo:

Sure enough you can find an acknowledgment on the Guardian Website. (Link below).

Open Society Funding

It would be interested to know if anyone else think the Guardian coverage crossed a line in coversge of ”transgender” issues in the run up to the consultancy on the Gender Recognition Act.

Here are some other foundations funding content at the Guardian.

Revolving door in the Charity Sector.

Just as an aside the other way this ideology gets embedded is the revolving door between posts in the Charity Sector. This is Nancy Kelley’s CV; MIND, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Refugee Council and Barnados.

Also Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Stonewall Champion.

You can support my work here. Only if you have surplus. Don’t prioritise me over the legal cases.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s detriments.

£10.00

Misgendering: Updated with new appeal November 2019.

As part of my trawl through legal cases I came across this one. Jersey: Suspended taxi licence.

The case was heard in Jersey and hinged on the case of a taxi driver whose licence was suspended following an altercation with a customer. The driver took the taxi firm to court to claim the suspension should never have been imposed. One of the grounds, for the claim, was that that it was motivated by discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment.

This is the not the only case involving this appellant an earlier case was also brought because the driver felt the suspension was motivated by discrimination Earlier case.

The appellant seems to be a serial litigator. Here is another case taken against the taxi firm where the claim was of employment discrimination, once again, on the grounds of their Gender Reassignment. Employment Tribunal. (The taxi firm was a not for profit collective where the owner seems to have assumed personal risk. As an aside, a model of taxi ownership I have often thought was the ideal model. Now gone out of business.
The cases all centred on a suspension imposed in response to an incident involving a customer. This was the incident:

The complainant raised a few other issues related to how the other taxi drivers treated them. Also mis-gendering was an offence that even occurred a bit closer to home: The court took a dim view of the appellant, who abandoned the passengers late at night, and made it clear the case succeeded on procedural grounds and not because their behaviour was acceptable. It also makes clear this was followed by abusive emails and phone calls to the regulatory body.

Compelled Speech:

The judgement did go on, see below, to suggest some re-education for colleagues. I would suggest that a better approach is to stop pretending that it is literally possible to change sex. People who head down this path need to have some reality based therapy. Clearly there are individuals whose mental fragility is a factor in this diagnosis. Mis-gendering, as we can see, is likely to trigger Narcissistic rage. However a systemic, legally compelled, or even morally mandated, truth denialism is a dangerous state of affairs.

{Not least for the trans community itself because sex matters for some diagnostic and treatment purposes. I would also like to see more long term tracking of health issues in the trans community looking at the long term impact of a lifetimes dependence on cross-sex hormones}.

Here is the advice to the taxi firm:

It is the thought police which will eventually make this ideology founder. Like many people I was formerly willing to extend the courtesy of desired “pronouns”. The political cost, however, is too high. I will not be legally compelled to do so. Maintaining a polite fiction is not the same as being coerced to deny reality. The, increasingly, authoritarian demands to accommodate this ideology are unsustainable. It is not about kindness it is about power. The power to compel women to deny the evidence of our own eyes. Of course it is also imposed on men but women have a specific need to recognise males. We need to be able to react and mitigate the risk males present to females. We can’t afford to let down our guard. And yes, I know….not all men…some of my best friends and all that…

Read this piece by a Mumsnetter… {The radicalisation portal that TRA’s love to hate}. It costs us way more than mere kindness : Pronouns are rohypnol.

Already a male teacher has lost his job because he refused to use mandated pronouns, for a female pupil who identified as male. He steered a careful course and opted to accept the new name. This was deemed insufficient adherence to the trans dogma. Only total capitulation is enough. Ironically during the ensuing court case the man charged with sacking him also “mis-gendered” the pupil.

Couldn’t happen in the UK though could it? Police called on Teacher

Our children are being indoctrinated in school to adhere to the preferred pronouns of their peers. My own son admonished me for misgendering until I pointed out that I will NEVER accept the phrase “her penis” for a male rapist. Son has a dysphoric female in his school and uses preferred pronouns, as per school policy. I asked him “Do you believe it?”. No, he agreed, “but I always call her “him” if she can hear me”. The linguistic contortions alone are mind boggling. This is what happens when the authorities teach you that 2+2=5. (On a more positive note he has come out full gender critical in recent weeks. With much thanks to Sam Smith and his non-binariness).

We are teaching our children to tell a blatant lie. We are compelling women to accept female pronouns for rapists. Our newspapers are using female pronouns for men who exhibit male violence. Organisations are perpetrating biology denialism by purging the word woman to reduce us to biological functions/parts. Check out “menstruator”, “cervix-haver”. Then do the same exercise for men. They are NOT being referred to as “prostate-havers”!

This is ideological totalism and it will destroy women’s rights without a significant fightback. If you can’t see sex you can’t see sexism. If validating your identity means invalidating my sex then…

Update: November 2019.

The serial litigant was back in court to contest a decision to revoke their public service vehicle licences. A further 7 complaints were made where “innocent” misgendering led to a tirade of abuse, in some cases, people ejected from taxis and a generally disproportionate reaction. Here is the court transcript Loss of Licence.

Allowing legislation to punish the crime of recognising biological sex is a dangerous move. Moreover we have to ask if it is in the best interests of the community it purports to serve. Compelled speech is not the same as a polite lie. Looking it at this individual it is hard not to conclude that their obsessive need for validation has handed power to people to hurt them consciously or otherwise. It’s not sustainable to build an identity so fragile it crumbles when it meets reality based pronouns.

Kindess I could have done. The moment you make it a matter of compelled speech a refusal becomes a political act.

Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?

Why is the Guardian so woeful on Women’s Rights these days when, arguably, we are facing the biggest attack on our sex based rights in my lifetime? Coverage of Marie Dean was a low point

Marie Dean (Article by Sarah Ditum)

It was this article which first confused and then outraged me. (You can find more on this case on my blog here.) The Guardian campaigned to facilitate a move of a convicted, male, burglar to the female estate because he identified as a woman. However their coverage, until shamed by angry readers, de-sexualised the nature of the “burglary” and thus distorted the risk to the female prisoners.

It was this article that inspired me to do a bit of digging. The Guardian has a history of exposing #DarkMoney & labyrinthine ownership structures, which mask influence or hide money. So this was where I started.

The Guardian itself reports that it has a unique ownership structure. Part of that structure is The Scott Trust. As you can see 👇 the Board of the Trust have ultimate editorial control & power to sack the editor

This is one of The Board members. He is also on the board of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation, which immediately looked familiar.

It was the Paul Hamlyn foundation that caught my eye because I had seen them referred to in the accounts of the Mermaids charity. The foundation have a search facility to see who they fund here Paul Hamlyn Foundation Grants

Sure enough 👇

Here is another beneficiary of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation. This is an organisation working with children as young as 11. If I was in charge of their branding I would definitely recommend a name change.

Naturally the Map Youth Fund also advise on “Gender” and have an interesting book collection including The Testosterone Files, Gender Outlaws, Transgender Voices. They have an entire section on Gender and this is not matched by other sections on the LGB.

The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund “Ditch The Label”. This is an anti-bullying charity whose CEO (Dr Liam Hackett) uses a misogynist slur (Terf) and who targeted a Lesbian, Feminist philosopher. He has blocked a lot of women who raised concerns at what appeared to be bullying behaviour. You might remember these. A lack of understanding about women’s dignity and privacy at a Breast Cancer Screening, and targeted abuse.

Another beneficiary is Gendered Intelligence. They are another key player in the debate women were told was not allowed to happen. I have seen them frequently referenced in Hansard. In particular as independent advisors on the management of trans prisoners

Here are a couple of those Hansard references. “Independent” Advisors on managing risk and safeguarding for “all” prisoners. Apparently , despite the lack of any representation from women, all stakeholders were consulted. (Cough…Karen White, Paris Green)

Some of you may remember the sexual health booklet, produced by Gendered Intelligence, and aimed at “trans youth”. Quote: “A woman is still a woman even if she enjoys getting blowjobs” . A celebration of diverse sexual practices. Remember no “kink-shaming” allowed.

This clip is the submission, by Gendered Intelligence, to the Transgender Equality Inquiry, courtesy of womansplaceuk.org. Marked up to make it clear their aim is the dismantle legal provisions which allow for same sex delivery of specific services.

Parliamentary Inquiries publish submissions and the ones to this inquiry are well worth a read. (You can find them here Hansard)

The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund another organisation “All About Trans” to enable them to employ a press officer and media trainer. They train “media professionals” from a number of different organisations. All About Trans website.

It is well worth looking at the media guidance emanating from groups like these. The definitions are highly contested and the re-shaping of language has significant implications for women and non-gender conforming children, of both sexes. You can see the resources they provide and who they work with here

After you look at the guidance it makes sense that they claim to have advised the BBC & Channel 4. Very noticeable increase in using “gender” where “sex” seems more appropriate. Also “assigned female at birth” & reductive references to women as “cervix–havers” etc seem to have emerged. There seems to be an excessive sense that female biology is inherently transphobic or that referencing women’s sex based experience as insulting to the trans community. This is, as an aside, not a good way to foster good relations between different protected characteristics. Further information below.

I first published this as a thread on twitter. Courtesy of some sleuthing by some mumsnet warriors I was sent some information on the founder of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. (No idea why it did not occur to me to start there!). Here goes:

Quelle Surprise: Lord Hamlyn & Madam Lash

I don’t share that just as some titillating story. Anyone following this debate needs to understand how BDSM (Bondage and Sado Masochism) figures in the fetishizing of sex stereotypes. Queer theory relies on maintaining women’s subordinate status so as not to ruin kink for our overlords! Well worth reading up on queer theory & Judith Butler, in particular. I recommend this. Dr Jane Clare Jones

So I singled out the Guardian because it was my daily paper for decades so the sense of betrayal runs deep. They are not alone but they do appear to be significantly compromised on this issue. (No disrespect to the women, working there, who are working to get women’s issues covered appropriately. I imagine it is not without some personal and professional cost).

Anyone watching Pink News coverage will be used to the lack of any balanced reporting from that outlet. Here is the CEO and his husband. Trustee for Mermaids Gender.

EA09835C-95ED-4CD6-A80F-C3FD147A3012 — Trustee of MERMAIDS

This does offer some clarity about why the media is out of step with the majority view by trying to erase biological reality. Women’s status in society is based on our sex. It is the epitome of privilege to identify into a marginalised group and then tell, your unwilling hosts they are YOUR oppressors. This is what women are being told when we are labelled “Cis” against our will and then told this means we have “cis-privilege”. Not enough privilege to resist a male-imposed nomenclature though!

I am unwaged so, if you are constrained from speaking out you can still play a part by supporting those of us free to speak out.

Documenting the biggest attack on women’s rights in my lifetime. Also fighting for the rights of LGB people. Nobody is born in the wrong body.

£10.00

Tag: Guardian

The Guardian: Three

Like this:

Misgendering: Updated with new appeal November 2019.

Compelled Speech:

Update: November 2019.

Like this:

Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Compelled Speech:

Update: November 2019.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: