This morning’s* news that the LGB Alliance has won its case to retain its charitable status is a victory and a relief for everyone who wants to live in a free and progressive society. That status was challenged by Mermaids and Jolyon Maugham’s so-called Good Law Project. Their argument seemed to be that it was not acceptable for gay and lesbian people to set up a charity to promote gay and lesbian rights. If LGB Alliance had lost, we might as well have returned to the 1950s when same-sex attraction was practically unspeakable.
This dreadful case might hopefully mark a turning point against so-called Queer campaigners. Their aim, it seems, has been to hijack groups they can take advantage of in order to drive their own agenda. In their fantasy world, biological sex is a minor inconvenience that can be ignored at will.
For too long those fantasists or fanatics – call them whatever you will – have been imposing their will on the rest of the world. Witness the Holy Month of Pride that has just finished. Corporations were falling over themselves to put up the most rainbow flags and be the best LGBQIA+ allies. But behind the sparkles and rainbows there is a sinister movement that is a danger to some of the most vulnerable groups in society. Women and children are two of them, but lesbian and gay people are another.
The incessant attempts to publicly shame LGB Alliance have been both astonishing and appalling. How dare they exclude the T from the charity, we are told. Well I am a T – a transsexual who transitioned over ten years ago. I support LGB Alliance. I do not need it to campaign for trans rights, there are plenty of transgender organisations fulfilling that role, who don’t put same-sex attracted people at the top of their agenda. It is perfectly possible – as LGB Alliance does well – to keep the focus on gay people while holding out the hand of friendship to trans and heterosexual people.
The world needs contributions from everybody – including LGB people and trans people. Not because they have some special identity but because we are all human beings with our individual roles to play. It is a relief today that one of those groups no longer has to fight a rear-guard action to maintain its charitable status.
Congratulations to Bev Jackson, Kate Harris and the rest of the team at LGB Alliance. They have maintained their dignity and integrity throughout this dreadful process. In this culture war, they are the grown ups. Let’s hope the queer activists now retreat to their social media forums and leave LGB Alliance and the rest of us in peace.
Debbie Hayton is a teacher and journalist.
* This article was first published by The Spectator on 6 July 2023: Mermaids’ loss is a victory for a free society.
Debbie Hayton 
2 replies on “Mermaids’ loss is a victory for a free society”
Another good article, Debbie. It was on your site that I first read about this spurious law suit. I can’t imagine why Mermaids thought they had standing to sue. I mean, because LGBT people are lumped together in an initialism* doesn’t mean that the LGBs must include the Ts. Such reasoning just doesn’t make sense. (* The term “acronym” is only used when the initials form a word.)
Mermaids’ suit was clearly a SLAP suit meant to intimidate LGB Alliance. It’s a good example of the overreach that I am seeing from trans people every day. Everyone must agree with their ideas about gender. Everyone must use their special language. Everyone must use their pronouns. Women must step aside and allow trans women to become real women. Parents must allow their children to be herded into transgender body mills, et cetera, et cetera.
If everyone had your attitude, Debbie, this would be a much saner world.
I just read a couple articles about this decision. Mermaids has redefined “gay” to mean “same-gender attracted” instead of “same-sex attracted”. This is a sneaky attempt to harass gays into having relationships with people who have the appearance of the same gender but actually have the wrong genitals. I have never before seen such a small group make so many demands on society.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, the sense of entitlement and petulance of these people knows no ends. It shows in their response to the ruling. It was heard by only two judges in the tribunal, who dismissed Mermaids’ legal standing to challenge the Charity Commission’s original decision to register the LGB Alliance’s status as a charity. The two were, however, split on whether LGBA “is a charity within the meaning of the 2011 act.” https://archive.li/9b7GM
According to that Times article, Mermaids said, in effect, that it was thrown out on a technicality, and if they had decided we had legal standing, they might have agreed that LGBA shouldn’t have been made a charity in the first place. “We don’t know the details of their reasoning but we think [the disagreement] is a significant outcome. Had we been found to have standing, there is a chance that the tie would have been resolved in our favour and we would have won the case.”
Kind of like, “The sport’s governing body said I couldn’t take part in the women’s race, because I was AMAB, but if it had gone the other way I’d have definitely won.”
LikeLike