In the first part of a major three-part investigation, the Mail reveals how Stonewall, the LGBTQ+ charity, continues to exert significant influence over taxpayer-funded organisations and politicians, dictating policy and shaping plans. From healthcare to education, its ideology-driven campaigns and diversity programs have raised questions about the prioritisation of gender identity over other protected rights and the impact on public institutions. Here’s an excerpt:
Last year, officials working for an NHS Trust in Bath, Somerset, received the results of an assessment they had undergone a couple of months earlier.
Alas, they had not done well.
Out of a possible 159 points, they had been awarded just 49, meaning they failed even to qualify for an entry-level ‘bronze award’.
Many reasons were given for this lamentably low score, among them: clinical staff at the Trust had failed to avoid using ‘gendered language’ such as ‘mother’, ‘father’ and ‘husband’; the majority also failed ‘routinely’ to ask patients their sexual orientation or if they were transgender.
The shamed Trust was further marked down for its failure to put sanitary bins in all toilets — irrespective of whether they were the Gents or the Ladies — although it did gain some credit for the fact that some of its staff chose to wear badges displaying their preferred pronouns.
The report further asserted that many employees had ‘homophobic’ or ‘transphobic’ views. But on closer inspection, these did not seem particularly egregious.
For example, one person stated that their colleagues’ sexuality or gender identity was ‘not relevant’ to their job. “Like everyone else they should come to work, focus on their patients, do their work and go home at the end of the shift,” they had declared.
Another concerned staff member admitted: ”When I enter the hospital and see the rainbow flags, road crossings and full-size rainbow-badge poster boards, I feel fearful and anxious. It gives me the impression that the hospital is prioritising trans rights over all other protected rights.”
In light of the report’s blistering conclusions, the Trust felt the need to issue a cowering response.
”We are very aware and there is huge willingness from the whole team but at the moment we just don’t have the time or resources,” they spluttered. “We do what we can. We have discussed this survey as a team. It is a bit demoralising for us not to be able to do more.”
Which organisation had struck such palpable fear into the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust? Was it a Government department? A supervising body responsible for budgets? An official regulator?
No. It was Stonewall, the LGBTQ+ charity, which — as the Mail reveals in the first part of a major three-part investigation — has successfully weathered years of controversy to remain a powerful political force.
To this day, despite many serious questions raised about its conduct, Stonewall continues to dictate policy to many of the country’s key taxpayer-funded organisations and to politicians themselves — as well as to the world of business. In some ways, it has never been more influential.
Stonewall began with laudable aims. Founded in 1989 by a small group of people who had been active in the struggle against the notorious Section 28 of the Local Government Act (which banned the ‘promotion’ of homosexuality), it grew into a powerful body advancing the cause of equality for disenfranchised groups.
Its campaign for equal rights helped to bring about the Civil Partnership Act of 2004, which allowed same-sex unions to be officially recognised for the first time and helped pave the way for gay marriage in 2014. Stonewall also secured the equalisation of the age of consent, lifted the ban on gay people serving in the military and secured legislation allowing same-sex couples to adopt.
In recent years, however — and in particular since 2015, when the charity extended its remit from fighting for the rights of gay and bisexual people to cover trans people — its fight has pivoted to more ideological territory.
And no more so than when it comes to gender identity, which disregards the immutability of biological sex to suggest that the gender a person ‘believes’ themselves to be is more important — and possibly different from the sex they were ‘assigned’ at birth.
In 2021, it seemed as though Stonewall’s relentless march to conquer Britain’s public bodies had been halted.
Following a ten-part podcast by BBC broadcaster Stephen Nolan and his producer David Thompson, called Nolan Investigates: Stonewall, as well as a raft of negative press coverage, the precise nature of Stonewall’s dogmatic campaigning was laid bare.
In the ensuing furore, the BBC and Ofcom pulled out of the charity’s programme. The same year, Liz Truss, then the equalities minister, called for all Government departments to withdraw. MP Miriam Cates wrote in 2022: “Stonewall’s decline now appears to be rapid and terminal.”
Stonewall’s income has taken a hit. It received a total income — from grants, donations and fees from the diversity scheme — of £7.8 million last year, down from £11.5 million in 2021. Yet in other ways it has gone from strength to strength.
Never-before-seen documents and new statistics revealed by the Mail following a series of Freedom of Information requests uncover the sheer scale and extent to which this unelected body is still shaping plans and strategy.
From the NHS to schools and universities, politics to business, Stonewall is raking in millions of pounds from its £3,000-a-year ‘Diversity Champions’ workplace programme — and its influence over our most important public and private institutions remains as strong as ever. Critics accuse those signed up as paying to be indoctrinated by pernicious gender ideology.
And nowhere more so, arguably, than in healthcare, where, courtesy of recent ‘diversity programmes’ and ‘rainbow badge’ schemes — like the one that Bath’s NHS Trust fell victim to — Stonewall has strived to eliminate mentions of biological sex, which is a ‘protected characteristic’ under the 2010 Equality Act.
Strikingly, we have discovered, many NHS trusts have removed the word ‘woman’ from their websites and information materials — so as to not offend a tiny minority of trans people.
The extent of Stonewall’s looming influence is illustrated by new data from the campaign group Sex Matters. This organisation was set up by Maya Forstater, who was one of the first to fall foul of ‘gender ideology’ when she lost her job as a researcher at a think tank after tweeting that people cannot change their biological sex.
Forstater’s group has scrutinised the membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme, discovering that no fewer than 86 NHS trusts out of 215 are still signed up, alongside other crucial healthcare bodies including the General Medical Council (GMC), National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE), the Nursing and Midwifery Council, the Royal College of Midwives and the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
Also among them is the Royal College of Psychiatry (RCP), recently named in Stonewall’s ‘top 100 employers’ list.
Last year, the RCP called for the Government to reverse a reported decision to exclude transgender people in the planned ban on ‘conversion therapy’ — the controversial practice of trying to ‘change’ a person’s sexuality. This despite widely voiced fears that such a ban could deter psychiatrists and therapists from helping a troubled person to explore their desire to change gender.
Chilling? Dr Louise Irvine, GP and co-chair of the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender — a group of healthcare professionals now questioning gender ideology — certainly thinks so.
“Stonewall’s ideological influence has been profound,” she says. “As a doctor, you see it everywhere. Remember, these are very important organisations. The GMC is the regulator for doctors. The CQC is the regulator for healthcare providers. Healthcare Education England oversees all healthcare training for all healthcare professionals.
“These are organisations at the top of the pyramid that give direction to everything else in the NHS below them. They tell us the language and concepts we should be using. The leadership of the NHS has completely bought into Stonewall ideology. It’s frightening that medicine seems to be bending to unevidenced ideology that could cause harm to patients.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Required viewing for all NHS staff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhxkY9adDCg
The prevalence of “Stonewall” cannot be viewed in isolation. It is one division or platoon in an army of bureaucrats, tame billionaires, corrupted political figures, media personalities and academics who are conniving at the end of freedom and the imposition of thought control. They are doing so in the name of a neo-communist programme and they are carrying it out in plain sight. They have a flag, which people refuse to fly or wave at their peril; they have a policy agenda unaffected by election results and it is becoming more and more apparent that any such results which get in their way are either distorted or ignored. Their tyranny is both intimate and unending because it aims at nothing less than the reformulation of “reality”, by which they mean “perception” – for they confuse the two. Their paths to power have been both gradual and various but their ideologies have fused into “woke”. Heaven knows what it might require to dislodge these people from their positions – but I know one thing: letting their preferred party – Labour – into office would be a terrible – indeed, a suicidal – own goal. With parliament under their immediate, complete control the last restraints on their programme will have been undone. Our current, “Conservative” parliament is Livia to the deep state’s Tiberius: odious, unpleasant and destructive she may be, but once dead her repellent son will do as he likes and – my – how we shall miss her.
Well I can totally see how it can be likened to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein when you see what these plastic surgeons do to mentally ill ( the vast majority anyway ) patients when they perform sex-change surgery. I mean, how on earth can doctors be struck off, losing their medical license ( which is what Dr Trozzi is going through in court in Canada atm ) for speaking up about the harms of mRNA novel jabs or prescribing Ivermectin but go ahead and butcher these vulnerable, mentally unwell patients ( whom have a legit psychiatric disorder, after all ) by all means! Let’s compare the damage done by having a patient take Ivermectin vs chopping off their testicles and inverting their penis to make a neo-vagina shall we?? FFS! No coming back from that one is there?? Medical ethics? Who gives a f*ck?! So last decade!! Here is one such surgeon, no f*cks are given regarding his Hippocratic oath and he even admits to the harms!
”With those boy-to-girl transitioners, he said, surgeons ‘don’t have enough tissue’ to build the neo-vagina and must graft skin from elsewhere.
‘We’re kind of learning and figuring out what works,’ said Dr Peters.
Patients frequently have problems after surgery, added the doctor.
They can suffer ‘rectal injury and urinary incompetence,’ he said. Others struggle to achieve ‘sexual satisfaction’ from altered body parts and have worse chances of ‘future childbearing.’
Some have a ‘really demanding post-operative care process,’ he added.
Pretty much every male-to-female genital surgery recipient sees their neo-vagina canal shorten over time, he said.
‘We’ve seen patients coming back even 20-plus years out from a vaginoplasty that have something happened in their life, that they just don’t dilate, and aren’t having sex for a year, and they will lose a lot of a lot of depth,’ said Dr Peters.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12299393/Portland-surgeon-dubbed-Dr-Frankenstein-reveals-drawbacks-genital-ops-trans-adolescents.html
It is grotesque beyond belief. These people are being sold a lie and the short hand for that lie is “transition”. In fact there is no such thing. There is just a raft of painful mutilations, no more. The drugs and hormones intended to assist in the process just mess up the patient’s head. And the subsequent shrill insistence, increasingly backed by our perverted legal system, that these pathetic victims are “men” or “women” – even though the word “woman” is increasingly erased – is messing up the minds of a whole generation. Words are incapable of expressing the condemnation which should – and shall, one day – be directed towards the moral filth who lurk behind and profit from these lies.
What I don’t get at all is that the harms post-surgery are *known*. They are acknowledged by the surgeons themselves. These patients need a lot of after care and repeated revisions of their ops alongside the many complications that are not uncommon. So how in the world do they think such butchery is going to serve a person who is a mentally ill fantasist in the long-term? There is total contradiction here. Gender affirmation = physical problems that weren’t present pre-op and worsening mental health caused by said issues and/or the fact you cannot resolve a mental illness with surgery.
And what about this ‘gender-nullification’? Well if you hate your genitals ( and haven’t sought the help of a shrink! ) then maybe transitioning to the groin of an Action Man/shop mannequin might be right up your alley?
”For his gender non-conforming patients, Dr. Davis also performs gender nullification, also known as male to eunuch or “smoothie” procedures. The procedure includes a complete penectomy, orchiectomy, a reduction of the scrotal sac, and shortening of the urethra. The goal is to leave the area as a smooth unbroken transition from the abdomen to the groin. Although, an inconspicuous midline scar and shortened urethra will still be present.
Dr. Davis does also offer the option of retaining the highly sedate distal penile tissue (which normally makes up the clitoris in a typical gender reassignment procedure), which he “buries” in the deep tissue of the lower mons above the urethra, akin to a “hidden” clitoris. This area does not affect the final smooth appearance of the area but does offer significant extra sensory tissue to aid in orgasmic stimulation. Of course, this option is left entirely up to the desires of each patient.”
https://www.davisplasticsurgery.com/services/gender-nullification/
And speaking of genitals, this is a study cited by Dr McCullough looking at the problems encountered by women transitioning to men who undergo surgery for the creation of a phallus. The surgeon needs to harvest muscles from the patient’s forearm and skin from the thigh in order to build the thing. **WARNING** Very real and graphic pics! ( Which apparently illustrate what ”gender affirming” actually is. )
”Robinson et al, reported on 129 women who underwent attempted surgery to either create a penis or make a sensitive phallus structure for sexual pleasure. 129 patients underwent genital reconstruction surgery. Seventy-nine patients (61 percent) underwent phalloplasty only, 32 patients (25 percent) underwent metoidioplasty only, and 18 patients (14 percent) underwent metoidioplasty followed by phalloplasty.
Patients reported 281 complications requiring 142 revisions. The most common complications were urethrocutaneous fistula (n = 51, 40 percent), urethral stricture (n = 41, 32 percent), and worsened mental health (n = 25, 19 percent). The average erect neophallus after phalloplasty was 14.1 cm long vs 5.5 cm after metoidioplasty (P < .00001). Metoidioplasty patients report 4.8 out of 5 erogenous sensation, compared to 3.4 out of 5 for phalloplasty patients (P < .00001).”
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/failed-surgical-creation-of-phalli
If theres a definition of mental illness, voluntarily undergoing what you have just discribed must certainly be it
I meant ”gender affirming care”, because all of the above just smacks of ”caring” for the physical and psychological wellbeing of your patient doesn’t it? And the thing is, if people were so satisfied with the outcome of transitioning, whether they underwent surgery or just the hormone meds, there wouldn’t be so many detransitioners. These are the folk, usually teenagers and young people, that realised too late that what they were experiencing was mental health issues or it was because they were diagnosed/undiagnosed as autistic. These people are ripe for being groomed and indoctrinated, even by therapists, by the trans extremists. They think transitioning will make them feel ‘normal’ and take all of their issues away but sadly the literature shows this isn’t the case.
Stonewall no longer constitutes a charity. It’s a business consultancy that imitates BlackRock’s ESG system and it’s a political lobbying firm. It should be stripped of its charitable status.
Well said. The large banner at the protest says it all, “Acceptance without Exception”, trans-lates (sorry for that) to “Thou shalt do, as you are told”
Stonewall is the enemy, committed to destroying the family.
Fight them.
Not paying them would be useful. The right to sexual freedom was technically won decades ago, which removed the necessity of this organisation. However to perpetuate the narrative, and the money tree, the need to add another letter to the original principles of L & G is required to perpetual the money flows. They won their battle but are unable to come to terms with that victory, or themselves for that matter.
The NHS is not owned by Stonewall, and it is not a Corporation with shareholders. What exactly is the power that Stonewall has then over the NHS? the ability to close hospitals perhaps if they feel offended by women being treated as women as opposed to men dressed up as women complaining of period pains?. Imagine a Hospital forced to close because Stonewall decide they don’t like it. Is that the power they have? who gave them ownership of the NHS?. But its not the power they have it is an illusion created by their bullying and frankly gangster sstyle tactics. Stonewall did a great job on ensuring the rights of Gay people, but that battle has been won in the West, and so in order to justify its continuing existence they have jumped on the Trans train its after all another lucrative way of making money.
Time for Stonewall to be returned to being a self funded charity, time for Politicians and Corporations to return to serving the best interests of the country and the shareholders by focusing on the job, not focusing on pleasing a group that will not be satisfied until the biological female and the nuclear family is erased.