It’s been argued, for instance by Andrew Doyle on GB News, that when Great Britain legalised same-sex marriage in 2014, Stonewall had achieved everything it had been created to achieve, and was therefore faced with an existential dilemma.
I saw that post and thought she was on mushrooms or drunk - they have done zero to help any Afghans just virtue signalling cos the empty headed will believe anything..
My question always is -- because I'm an American, the home of the drunk and the drugged -- what meds is she on? They tend not to help one think clearly and a huge number of American women are on antidepressants.
It is very strange indeed that they haven't released any details of their work helping people to leave Afghanistan and are refusing to answer anyone's questions. If they were genuinely helping people I'd be applauding their work.
I'm sure if they genuinely helped they'd be highlighting it clearly. I'm sure I would! They have an awful lot of income and a lot of clout; you'd think it could be used to charter a few flights and to get people onto them.
It is paining me that genuinely busy people, actually doing things, working hard, anonymously and at risk, would have to field calls and respond to emails and social media posts from Nancy Kelly and those who are expert at 'shouting loud'. That letter is dire virtue-signalling after the fact. Where was she in April or perhaps even last year?
Is there a way we can agree some kind of ceasefire deal, so instead of fighting it out to the death, they get to come out of this, tail between their legs but we can all move on and back to sanity? Some are so viciously wedded to this and have established lives, profiles and careers on the back of it, so I can't see them backing off gracefully, if ever.
The sunk costs fallacy at work. Years down the road I bet very few of them are going to admit they were wrong. They'll just say "the science" has changed and pretend that we've only just found out about human sexual dimorphism.
I’ve been wondering about the parallels between sterilising kids & lobotomies. When that went out of fashion as a cure all, some of the big proponents had died or retired. But everyone else seems to have just quietly walked away from it. Leaving wrecked people on back wards.
Yes, these are medical interventions, who, how and why. And fashions. It seems an inherent part of several professions, and even new disciplines or upstarts within those, that they are the special holder of magical knowledge and power and they protect it and wield it, and their ego, over others who don't know any better. Co-production, consultation, engagement and working as a team to achieve goals with the users of their services is anathema. I know this is studied by those professions themselves as a lovely circle-jerk, but it's only very slowly changing. You beat 'em or join 'em as being heard outside of professional silos is tough. When I address someone as a colleague of an insititution, and they are made aware, there is a remarkable difference. Trouble is, how do we get to that esteemed position to be valued enough to be heard.
Core is the concept of consent and ability to consent that is often so woolly as to be meaningless in many instances. People aren't given or encouraged to make any, enough or key, good, informed, thoughtful decisions about their own lives and health. It's this issue here too. Who decides if it's for your own good to enact an intervention or not? Do you have capacity? Who establishes that? It's paternalism I suppose, but that gets shouted down. Professional paternalism.
With the confused state our health, and mental health system is in, I can't help thinking that's directly related to all this.
Stonewall has done sweet fuck all to help anyone but themselves. Happy to be proved wrong, but I'll donate £100 immediately if they can offer credible evidence they have done anything other than make noise inside their own echo chamber networks about 'siblings'. The grift is up. Pivoting to international humanitarian aid comes over as opportunistic, self-serving brand management, and we see it for what it is. I'm appalled and upset at the plight of women and LGBT people in countries like Afghanistan, but I'll direct my money to organisations with the infrastructure and personnel who can actually help them.
I saw that post and thought she was on mushrooms or drunk - they have done zero to help any Afghans just virtue signalling cos the empty headed will believe anything..
She even used the phrase "tired and emotional", which is a euphemism for "drunk".
My question always is -- because I'm an American, the home of the drunk and the drugged -- what meds is she on? They tend not to help one think clearly and a huge number of American women are on antidepressants.
If I was in her position I’d need antidepressants.
Nice pug though.
Yes of course!
Excellent, nutmeg! 👍👍 Me thinks Stonewall/Uk is 🤥 lying, biiiigtime!
#YouKnowWhenYouveBeenStonewalled
It is very strange indeed that they haven't released any details of their work helping people to leave Afghanistan and are refusing to answer anyone's questions. If they were genuinely helping people I'd be applauding their work.
I'm sure if they genuinely helped they'd be highlighting it clearly. I'm sure I would! They have an awful lot of income and a lot of clout; you'd think it could be used to charter a few flights and to get people onto them.
I can see why they chose the name "Stonewall". "Stubborn Cash Goblins" just doesn't have the same ring to it.
HAHAHAHAHA!
Good call nutmeg! It’s almost as if they’re virtue signallers desperate for cash.
I’d be glad if the existence of LGB Alliance actually spurred Stonewall to do something good for LGB. I kind of doubt it though.
Meanwhile, Baroness Nicholson is working (actually working) to get women judges out of Afghanistan. Some of them have made it & are safe.
It is paining me that genuinely busy people, actually doing things, working hard, anonymously and at risk, would have to field calls and respond to emails and social media posts from Nancy Kelly and those who are expert at 'shouting loud'. That letter is dire virtue-signalling after the fact. Where was she in April or perhaps even last year?
Bit odd.Last weekend was a bit late seeing as the British cleared out Saturday night?
The walls of secrecy/smoke & mirrors are collapsing around them. People are on to them and they know it
Is there a way we can agree some kind of ceasefire deal, so instead of fighting it out to the death, they get to come out of this, tail between their legs but we can all move on and back to sanity? Some are so viciously wedded to this and have established lives, profiles and careers on the back of it, so I can't see them backing off gracefully, if ever.
The sunk costs fallacy at work. Years down the road I bet very few of them are going to admit they were wrong. They'll just say "the science" has changed and pretend that we've only just found out about human sexual dimorphism.
I’ve been wondering about the parallels between sterilising kids & lobotomies. When that went out of fashion as a cure all, some of the big proponents had died or retired. But everyone else seems to have just quietly walked away from it. Leaving wrecked people on back wards.
Yes, these are medical interventions, who, how and why. And fashions. It seems an inherent part of several professions, and even new disciplines or upstarts within those, that they are the special holder of magical knowledge and power and they protect it and wield it, and their ego, over others who don't know any better. Co-production, consultation, engagement and working as a team to achieve goals with the users of their services is anathema. I know this is studied by those professions themselves as a lovely circle-jerk, but it's only very slowly changing. You beat 'em or join 'em as being heard outside of professional silos is tough. When I address someone as a colleague of an insititution, and they are made aware, there is a remarkable difference. Trouble is, how do we get to that esteemed position to be valued enough to be heard.
Core is the concept of consent and ability to consent that is often so woolly as to be meaningless in many instances. People aren't given or encouraged to make any, enough or key, good, informed, thoughtful decisions about their own lives and health. It's this issue here too. Who decides if it's for your own good to enact an intervention or not? Do you have capacity? Who establishes that? It's paternalism I suppose, but that gets shouted down. Professional paternalism.
With the confused state our health, and mental health system is in, I can't help thinking that's directly related to all this.
This is mortifyingly embarrassing. How could anyone possibly capitalize on such a tragic situation? 😞
Show me the MONEY 💰
Nice one nutmeg. We can't let them get away with bullshitting us.
Stonewall has done sweet fuck all to help anyone but themselves. Happy to be proved wrong, but I'll donate £100 immediately if they can offer credible evidence they have done anything other than make noise inside their own echo chamber networks about 'siblings'. The grift is up. Pivoting to international humanitarian aid comes over as opportunistic, self-serving brand management, and we see it for what it is. I'm appalled and upset at the plight of women and LGBT people in countries like Afghanistan, but I'll direct my money to organisations with the infrastructure and personnel who can actually help them.
Oh not GB news. They're so awful!!
On paper yes but they have some excellent contributors e.g. Andrew Doyle and in this he is correct.