Comments on: Gay charity boss Ben Summerskill to receive OBE in New Years Honours List

By: the other half

the other half — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:12:54 +0000

mike: did stonewall listen to the people who critisised it offering an award to a journalist who advocated violence against Queer people?

Report this comment to us

By: mike

mike — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:32:04 +0000

This is not correct, Jess. Stonewall supporters are canvassed as to the charity's annual priorities. Details of these are on their website.
Stonewall clearly does have to "answer to" people because the thousands of those like Mary who give it money can stop if they wish to. That's one of the really good tests of the charity world.

Report this comment to us

By: Jess

Jess — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:46:20 +0000

Mary, I really doubt that Stonewall has much idea what LGB(TQ) people in this country actually want. The organisation is completely unrepresentative and doesnt have to answer to anyone. Its supporters who give it money every month actually have no say in what the organisation does, even if they do fund it. (compare this to Amnesty International, where people who pay get the chance to vote on policy). the only people who have a say what actually happens in Stonewall is its 'members' – an exclusive list of staff.

Do you not think that a organisation that is seen as the voice of LGB (and often the wider TQ community) *should* be shouting loudly, championing our issues, making demands for liberation?

Report this comment to us

By: the other half

the other half — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:33:18 +0000

ursus:

friends of mine have been atacked, I have been denied acess to shops restaurents and bars (and can not turn to the Provision of Goods and Services Act as Stonewall stabbed Trannies in the back to get it through.)

You don't want radical Queer politics? You are smug, self satasfued and self centred. I take it I am one of the 'meen spirited' people? I'm not the one sitting back and saying that as long as I'm fine then screw everyone else. Meen spirited? Youre the one ignoring OUR cries for help, OUR issues.

To paraphrase Sylvia Rivera: it's not my Pride, it's your Pride. You havn't alowed me to have my Pride yet.

Report this comment to us

By: apYrs

apYrs — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:47:51 +0000

Ursus262

radical queer politics is one method in allowing us to live our lives in safety by putting issues forcefully on the agenda, rather than politely waiting to patted on the head.

Report this comment to us

By: Ursus262

Ursus262 — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:28:12 +0000

My goodness, there are some mean-spirtied people about aren't there? The gay world is no longer the suffocating and excrutiating world it once was. Try visiting XXL or try sampling the Bears' hangouts. They are far from middle-class I can tell you! I was once a member of the excrutiating Gay Bikers Motorcycle Club back in the 1980s and it was a truly dreadful experience: snobbish, narrow-minded and intolerant. Such attitudes would not be acceptable today because our society has changes. And change comes about through playing by the rules. It always has and always will.

We don't want radical queer politics. We just want to get on with our lives in safety and, in general, that is exactly what most of us do now.

Report this comment to us

By: the other half

the other half — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:38:26 +0000

mary:

the goods and services act? The one Stonewall stabed Tranies in the back over? Don't make me laugh.

This orginisation should just call itself 'new labour LG sociaty' as it insults the Gender Trash who fought at the Stonewall bar, at Comptons, who have been fighting for years.

He deserves his award for selling out Queer People.

Report this comment to us

By: mary

mary — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:37:33 +0000

Shouldn't Stonewall just do what its supporters want? Half its income comes (not from public funds at all) but from tens of thousands of individuals who give it £5 or £10 a month, like me and my partner. It speaks on behalf of people like us, even though we don't shout as loudly as Jess and others.

Report this comment to us

By: Jess

Jess — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:13:44 +0000

Stonewall *should* be at the forefront of radical queer politics, not 'legitimising' government by this "tolerating" government of ours. Stonewall was named after a *riot*, remember? It should be more demanding and representative of the wider Queer movement (ie. not just middleclass lesbians and gay men), not ostracising like it is now. When they nominated the transphobic jounalist Julie Bindel for a equality award, it made it clear that Stonewall is only interested in looking after its own (corporate, middleclass, homonormative) interests. All Stonewall seems to do is take public money away from more deserving organisations and make a 'list' of not overtly homophobic companies that would like to use us. That, and schmooze with MP's. Down with this undemocratic, unrepresentative organisation!

Report this comment to us

By: mark

mark — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:43:04 +0000

There is a lot of talk here about Stonewall and THT being london-centric, this is because the vast majority of LGBT people live in the city (or should i rephrase that to OUT Gay People) closely followed by Brighton. Stonewall have offices in Scotland and Wales and are trying to make sure that these offices work just like the London one. I moved to London from Scotland because I can be more openely OUT in london at work and in general and Scotland is a few years away from reaching the same level of tolearnace.

Whilst I don't always agree with what both organisations do at times. Then that is my personal opinion of it, I am glad that people are being recognised for their work, maybe not the right people being recognised but its a start, hopefully Peter Tatchell and others will be recognised for their great work.

One of my colleagues got an MBE for his services to our work place in the summertime and also his work with LGBT Youth through AKT… it wasn't as high profile as this but that's maybe because he doesn't work for an LGB charity.

Report this comment to us

By: Martin

Martin — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 08:01:18 +0000

It's a good road mark for Stonewall, and hopefully will help them get their presence better known and out into the provinces, although from where I live they made a good hit with the Priddis affair.
Good luck to Ben, his colleagues and volunteers. In a time where we stand to benefit as a community most from having gay faces on the honours lists, it is hardly 'brave' to carp on about this small advance for our community and those of us that dare to stand above the trenchline.

Report this comment to us

By: Ursus262

Ursus262 — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:32:26 +0000

I echo what Mary has said above. THT is not a quango. Its status is as a charity and is registered with the Charities Commission.

THT is not funded by the DoH, and does not hold a contract with the NHS. In fact they lost both of those contracts earlier this year. It was reported upon in Pink News.

Report this comment to us

By: Rehan

Rehan — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:14:10 +0000

Rod: BTW stands for 'by the way', which usually doesn't signal a major argument.

Your claim that Stonewall policies collude in the breakdown of the 'traditional' family unit is, frankly, bonkers, and only furthers the impression of paranoid hysteria. I hope you get some satisfaction out of saying such things, but I'd say for most of us it's realy rather tiresome, though also mildly amusing.

Report this comment to us

By: mary

mary — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 10:53:57 +0000

I wanted to fact-check before commenting further yesterday. In FACT, the last Chief Executive of Stonewall was NOT made a Labour peer as one of the small number of very aggressive detractors above claimed.
As for being middle class and Londono-centric,I have also fact-checked. The big employment court case Stonewall took last year was on behalf of youth worker John Reaney. He is not middle class and he lives in north Wales, almost as far from London as it's possible to be.
As well as fighting New Labour over goods and public services protections, I recall Ben Somerskill and others fighting this government hard over the inclusion of public sector pensions in Civil Partnerships. I know because my partner like thousands of other LGB public sector workers eventually benefited from this. She was not "well-paid" or "middle class" and she got helpful, timely and sympathetic advice from Stonewall although her employer was in Humberside!

Report this comment to us

By: Rod

Rod — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 06:41:16 +0000

Actually, ursus262, the substantial part of THT's £14 million a year or so of funding it receives comes from the tax payer, and is awarded on a sliding scale depending on the number of HIV services it provides. The more people to contract HIV in any given year, the more money THT applies to the government for to finance its portfolio of servives. Isn't it ironic, in fact downright morally corrupt, that a charity that grows fatter the further the virus spreads should also be awarded the NHS HIV prevention contract for London for the next three years? So in fact you are totally wrong Ursus; THT for one is predominantly funded by the tax payer via the Department of Health, from which it also receives its guidelines and hoops to jump through. No longer a charity in the strictest sense of the word, THT is one of hundreds of "quangos" (quasi non-governmental organisation) that operate in the UK today, all financed largely by central government and all doing New Labour's bidding, and resulting in the systemic erosion and collapse of the fabric of our now "broken" society. I do not know the extent of government duplicity in Stonewall, but its policies bear the hallmarks of New Labour interference to a tee and chimes, particularly in its efforts to undermine and destroy all concept of the traditional and functional family unit comprising a male father and a female mother, which above all else has given rise to a new underclass of hopeless and purposeless people dependent on the state. And quite honestly, Rehan, if your major argument with me is over a few words I misquoted but which say exactly the same thing, then frankly you are plucking at straws.

Report this comment to us

By: Rehan

Rehan — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:48:52 +0000

Rod: unfortunately, in your post above you sound both hysterical and paranoid and, either way, impossible to take seriously.

BTW, the Stonewall campaign was SOME PEOPLE ARE GAY. GET OVER IT, not 'Yes, I'm gay etc.' It really would help if you got your facts right.

Report this comment to us

By: ursus262

ursus262 — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:02:37 +0000

What utter nonsense! Your contribution is no better than a rant! Firstly, the two men work for charities, not in the public sector. Therefore they don't have a public pension pot. Secondly, these charities are not funded by the taxpayer. They may have contracts to provide some services to the public sector, but that is not the same thing as to state that they are funded by them, is it? In any case, THT lost a major contract to provide educational services to the public sector over the last few months or so.

The recent publicity campaign entitled "Some people are gay – get over it" is one that I have supported and would welcome its return because it tackles the issue of homophobia head on. Your assertion that this campaign alone has contributed to an increase in violence towards gay people is not based on fact. Actually, my OPINION, is that gay people will meet with violence as they become more visible. It happened to ethinic minority groups a few years ago, and it's happening to us now. It is my opinion that there are those for whom low self-esteem and sexual ambiguities will feel resentment at the sight of those who are open about their sexuality, because actually they see a part of themselves. This is a painful period in our struggle for equality and it must be gone through if we are to get to that "promised land". To blame Stonewall or THT for that is simply wilful ignorance!

Our culture has been eroded and coarsened through the type of lasse faire capitalism that was implemented by the Tories nearly thirty years ago. Whole generations of people have been abandoned to the markets. What New Labour tried to do is to make it work better for people, but they failed. The recent credit crisis and forthcoming depression is evidence of it's weakness, because it lacks basic morality and ethical jurisprudence but you can't blame New Labour for inventing it! This isn't simply something that has happened over the last eleven years.

Finally, the Tories were busy dismantling our rights long before NL got elected: restrictions on the right of assembly and protest all came about as the result of their criminal justice acts.

Report this comment to us

By: Rod

Rod — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:21:32 +0000

apYrs is spot on. The likes of Summerskill and Partridge are careerists first and foremost, or 'Professional Gay Men', clocking up time in their posts in order to build up their insulated gilt-edged public pension pots.

"Ben Summerskill has been instrumental in influencing policy in government. Surely this is what we want – isn't it?" asks Ursus626. Actually, Ursus, if you infiltrated the upper echelons of the likes of Stonewall and THT you would find it is actually the other way around – New Labour is instrumental in influencing policy within gay-led organisations via diktats and directives, upon which these charities' tax-payer funded income depends.

Nick Patridge is supposedly awarded his MBE for leading the fight against AIDS stigma – but in alignment with New Labour-designed politically correct protocols! What positive discrimination of HIV has actually achieved is to normalise the virus and accelerated transmission rates to record levels as people now perceive HIV to be a minor nuisance and one that the government will pay the pharmaceutical giants hundreds of thousands of pounds for the rest of their lives in order to keep it at bay. Considering that THT is also part-funded by Glaxo, no wonder they are on such a major crusade right now to encourage all gay men to get tested!

Meanwhile Summerskill is turning the gay community into the thought police with his Stasi-like zeal against all things perceived to be even faintly homophobic or politically incorrect towards gays. At one time we used intelligent debate and actively demonstrated our worth to society to win the fight against such ignorance. Now, Stonewall resorts to plastering tube trains with posters screaming "Yes I'm gay, get over it!" which only serves to stir up anti-gay sentiment further and has undoubtedly contributed to the rise in anti-gay violence this past year. You CANNOT force such a message down the throat of a psychotically-deranged homophobe who is forced to read this message staring across at him in a train carriage. Result? The manifestation of yet more homophobia on the next victim he comes across who he perceives to be gay. Indeed there was a case this year of a straight man being viciously attacked for being assumed to be gay. More homophobia, not less, is what Stonewall's policies are achieving! Yes, Stonewall also thought long and hard for the right for gays to enter into civil partnerships. Call me a cynic, but this provides the government with rather a useful database of gay people, which could come in handy if a future fascist government rises to the fore…

Let us not forget how government policy has eroded just about every other major aspect of society it controls: New Labour has decimated the NHS, the education system, the police force, the financial system, immigration, a welfare system that rewards unmarried mothers to spawn the very delinquents who grow up batter "poofs" as a sport… So why should its long-term objective for gay men be any different? Look closely at gay culture today and you will in fat see that it too has been coarsened, eroded and dumbed down to the same level as everything else New Labour has touched these past 11 years.

Yes, the entire system stinks to high heaven, but so long as the establishment prevails there will always be jobs for boys like Summerskill and Partridge who are prepared to sell the rest of their community down the river in order to keep their snouts in the trough!

Report this comment to us

By: Ursus262

Ursus262 — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:49:42 +0000

Oh, and another thing. Ben Summerskill is not a New Labour Stooge. He gained influence by playing the game and abiding by the rules. Sometimes in life it is no good just playing victim politics. Instead you just have to knuckle down and do the groundwork.

Report this comment to us

By: Rehan

Rehan — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:47:08 +0000

I'm glad to see a number of measured and positive responses following the initial flurry of surprisingly mean-spirited comments.

What exactly has been the "cop-out" over CPs? Same-sex couples in and out of London can now own and inherit property AS couples: what's wrong with that?

I don't think Stonewall has ever WANTED to represent "radical queer thought", and I doubt it'd have achieved as much if it had. Good for both the organisation, and Ben Summerskill – and it's a good thing his efforts have been given public recognition.

Report this comment to us